this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2025
38 points (91.3% liked)
Asklemmy
52068 readers
472 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Germany is also an imperialist country, and is declining.
Where does it say imperialist is a no-go?
"Equal and just" to me sounds like it shouldn't be imperialist.
"equal and just", "low-crime"
You can be equal and just within a country and imperialist outside of the country. I'd say there's a huge difference between inner and outer politics and policies.
The amount of crime also depends on what the country sees as a crime. Since Germany likes to not prosecute tax evaders if they do it with millions of Euros, and lots of Germans are victims of scams and fraud, I'd say crime there is bad in terms of monetary crime.
In contrast to that, physical harm is more rare than financial harm in German crime, so I'd say if you value not being financially sucked dry by the rich go somewhere else, but if you mostly value your physical safety and health and don't care if you're fleeced by the super rich Germany is pretty good.
but OP didn't specify that they only care about low-"interior"-crime, so what are you talking about then? "interior", physical crime might be your first thought when you read those words, but OP is very obviously concerned with the overall progressive & ethical situation of the country that they move to, so while the distinctions that you're drawing are real and could be relevant in some context, they definitely aren't in this thread.
They didn't specify anything, that's why I was trying to discuss and differentiate things. I can't read minds. It seems that you have a better grasp on the situation, so I'm sorry I provided another, objectively wrong, viewpoint.
In which way is Germany declining? Which country is better than or equal to Germany in regards to the criteria posted above, and improving?
Germany is currently trending towards the far-right due to the decay in imperialism, and is going through large expansions in millitary expenditure. Like all imperialist countries, the rise of the global south has damaged its economy, and as a capitalist country disparity is of course rising.
Again, being imperialist means it should be disqualified from "equal and just" countries, IMO.
Ah, I see. Sure, international policy and the strengthening of the military industrial complex are shit. That's mainly an issue if you don't live in Germany, though.
Depends on what they mean by "equal and just". I doubt you'll find any country where society is completely equal and just. Germany isn't that bad in terms of gender equality, disability rights etc, but its imperialist past and support of war and famine (and leaders which shit on gender equality, disability rights etc) are obviously not equal and just in the sense of global justice.
Thank you for your clarification. Did you downvote my comment? If so, why?
It isn't just that Germany has a strengthened millitary industrial complex, it's that Germany is an active and willing participant in imperialism today. The west in general super-exploits the global south for super-profits, relying on financial domination of the global south and processes of unequal exchange. Germany in particular is especially predatory towards lesser developed European countries like Greece, and due to having a huge amount of influence over European finance and banking is one of the major beneficiaries of European imperialism towards African and other global south countries.
The reason I downvoted is because it seems that your comments are caping for this ongoing process, seeing it as a relic of the past and not a driving factor of Germany's economy today. Anyone that tries to minimize imperialism is caping for a brutal system of exploitation, intentionally or not.
https://www.dw.com/en/german-welfare-state-can-no-longer-be-financed-merz/a-73742270
Well, Merz is a rich right wing politician most Germans didn't vote for who is fearmongering to pin it on the poors, disabled people and foreigners, instead of the rich ruling class he's actually part of.
That guy voted against parts of legislature which made rape within a marriage illegal (especially an "oopsie don't want to press charges" clause) in the 90s. Women are organising a strike against him and similar people on the 9th of March 2026. He made some remarks on the cityscape being ugly, insinuating he wants to eradicate foreigners and homeless people to make the cities look nicer. Just some of his "achievements" to undermine my opinion:
I'd never trust anything this snake spits out before verifying with at least ten different sources, even if he's telling me water is wet.
This is not about the Right ruling Germany. It's about the rich elites. And again, Merz is not representing a majority of the country.
Germany isn't ruled by the majority, but by capitalists, same as the rest of the west. Merz directly stating that they are cutting welfare and implementing austerity is because imperialism is decaying, and the capitalists can't give out some of their spoils as bribes any longer. The solution is socialism, not trying to keep imperialism going strong.
No, actually Merz is just fearmongering. They have the money to solve lots of issues in education and healthcare, but choose to spend it elsewhere (on war and tax cuts).
The German economy is doing great compared to how it should've tanked under rampant mismanagement in most companies, it's actually just rich people, inequality, incompetence and bureaucracy standing in the way of the welfare state.
But surely you know more about Germany than me, I'm just a local lobbyist, not a federal one π
One thing you actually got right: the solution is socialism (not communism, that never worked so far, maybe in a few hundred years). We need to tax the rich until there are no rich people left, only wealthy ones.
Merz is explaining that they are going to cut welfare. Why? Because wealthy capitalists run Germany, and their gains from imperialism are drying up, so they force austerity to keep their own rate of profit while making the working class pay for it. This is the nature of late-stage capitalism. The inequality, wealth disparity, incompetence, and bureaucracy are all intrinsically tied to the mode of production, imperialist capitalism.
Yes, Germany could have welfare without imperialism, this requires socialism. Socialism isn't taxation under capitalism like you seem to think it is, though, it's a fundamentally different mode of production. Where capitalism is a mode of production characterized by private ownership as principle and capitalists ruling the state, socialism is a mode of production characterized by public ownership as principle and the working class in charge of the state, like the GDR.
In capitalism, you cannot simply "tax the rich until there are no rich left," because the system is dictated by the rich.
Communism is a post-socialist mode of production where the contradictions within socialism have been resolved into a stateless, classless, moneyless society. Communism as a mode of production has never existed, only socialist states guided by communist parties working towards communism. Socialism absolutely does work, and is guiding the largest economy in the world, the PRC.
It seems the problem is most people can't begin to imagine what actually existing socialism looks like from the inside, without suspending their belief in generations of propaganda fed to us for several generations by our own states, and while we may be able to imagine how to work differently within the framework we have, can't imagine discarding that framework without something better to replace it. We can imagine bending the framework, but not building a different one before or during the process.
I wouldn't be surprised if most people imagine a socialist replacement looking a lot like what DOGE did, but here's a thing: we already have a blueprint for reimagining the existing framework ala New Deal, while we can also work toward building and implementing a new framework based on blueprints from AES states. Nobody is talking about taking a chainsaw to the current framework on day one.
Maybe what I'm saying isn't realistic, either but I'm open to having it picked apart.
The major difference between the New Deal and what socialists want is the replacement of bourgeois rule with proletarian, which does require axing the state and replacing it. The Party for Socialism and Liberation has a book called Socialist Reconstruction that goes over what that would look like in the US, including nationalizing the top 100 companies immediately.
Well I'm good with immediate nationalization of top companies, and cutting away bourgeois rule, too. I was offering a gentler transition, but now that I am thinking about Trotsky, that's a poorly thought idea.
Yep, the jump from capitalism to socialism is a qualitative leap before gradual quantitative buildup to a qualitative leap to communism. History progresses by leaps and bounds.
That's what I get ~~even~~ when posting while still being sleepy.
Haha, fair!
I never said that.
This is what I have to go off of.
Ah, got it. That's oversimplified. Obviously the money needs to go to education etc, and money isn't the only instrument of class warfare.
I suppose, but just so we're on the same page, you understand socialism to be when public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working class in control of the state, right?
Yeah, I think that's mostly it, isn't it?
Yep, that's correct, it's just that it pretty much requires revolution.
Well, this is why I suggested we'd start to eat the richβ’ globally.
Sure!
Lol
Thank you for this meaningful and insightful contribution! π