Posted on 09/29/2009 8:15:55 AM PDT by Nikas777
EUROPE'S CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATS
Monday, May. 25, 1953
ooking out over devastated Europe at war's end in 1945 the journalists of the world—plain reporters and exalted pundits—considered the future and, to a man, came to the same conclusion: Europe would go left and socialist. The right, dishonored by the Petains and Papens, and by its devotion to 19 century capitalism, was doomed. The center, caught between the stridencies of right & left, and forced to choose, would have to go left. Communists and Socialists had made a name in the undergrounds and concentration camps. And in the end, Socialism, the wave of the future, would triumph, as it had in Scandinavia long before, and in Britain only recently.
The experts were wrong. Instead, postwar Europe's dominant force turned out to be Christian Democracy. Today, Christian Democrats govern or share heavily in the governing of every war-torn country of Western Europe; most of their Premiers and all of their foreign ministers (except The Netherlands') are Christian Democrats. All are disciples of European unity, all share an overall philosophy, all—perhaps by political accident—are Roman Catholics. When Italy's De Gasperi, West Germany's Adenauer and France's Bidault sit down to negotiate a treaty or discuss the future, they draw from a common religious inspiration that sees Europe reunited as it was before Europe burst asunder in post-Reformation strife. They share, too, the paradox of having come to power frankly religious men, in a Europe heavily influenced since the Age of Enlightenment by secularistic and often anti-religious political doctrine. In such a scene, the Christian Democrats have learned not to accent their sectarian differences, but to stress what they have in common.
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
I post this to correct the political misconceptions many have.
Merkel’s party is the Christian Democratic party and is part of the Christian Democratic movement (not to be confused with the American party of the Democrats).
The Christian Democrats are responsible for creating the German economic miracle of the post WW2 era.
Yes, in America people like you would call them “socialists” but they are really not socialists but rather “harmonists” as in harmony or “Sphynocists” as in symphony.
They follow the Catholic philosophy that all classes in a society should work together to avoid conflict so there is for example trade unions and private enterprise and the govt making sure the Union demands are not destructive and the company not unfair in treating the working.
It is not the American way - but I have to ask - the USA has been gutted of its industrial base these last decades or the crazy trading on Wall Street, so whose model is better from an economic standpoint? The German Christian Democratic Social Market one or the American one (known in economic circles as the Anglo-American model)?
Germany’s SPD is socialist. CDU are more right but the really conservative & pro-business party is the CSU or Christian Social Union and the FDP or Free Democratic Party.
CDU 31.2%, FDP 15.0% and CSU 7.2%.
The nice thing about Germany is they do not have a Muslim running the country.
BMW, Porsche, Mercedes, Audi and other auto workers are proud of their work and cars. They are union but not filthy gangster blood suckers like the UAW.
In Germany, thanks to the Christian Democratic model the govt acts like a referee between unions and business owners to make sure they reach an equitable agreement. Also, Europe has the tradition of guilds to influence how a union should view itself and behave.
They came up in the 1950's with "Social Market Economy" and created a vast welfare state.
During this election Merkel nonstop reiterated that they want a "social market economy" and had constantly to refute suggestions that they would "cut back on welfare".
The Bavarian sister party of the CDU, the CDU ("Christian Social Union") understands itself as economically even more "social". Their platform this election was anti-capitalist welfare rethoric.
The only real pro-capitalism party in Germany is the FPD... the "classic liberals" (not in the US liberal meaning). They are free-marketeers but also socially liberal (pro-gay agenda etc.) Every other party is more or less etatist and socialist to some degree.
The Christian Democrats in Germany after WW2 were Socialist? Well then Socialism works then because my uncle’s family lived through that miracle economy.
Typo correction: Bavarian sister party of the CDU, the CSU.
Well then Socialism works then because my uncle’s family lived through that miracle economy.
Perfect... so everything that works is not socialist by default?
That there was an economic boom in West Germany doesn't alter the fact one bit that the Christian Democrats were pro-Welfare and created a "middle way" between socialism and capitalism with their trademark "social market economy". It's something they insist on to this very day.
And a look upon their "Ahlen program" of 1947 shows their transparent socialism.
the really conservative & pro-business party is the CSU or Christian Social Union
The Bavarian sister of the CDU, the CSU is socially more conservative than the CDU, but it is economically more leftist. Seehofer, their head, during this election positioned himself as pro-Welfare and "social" (as in the CSU name) and attacked repeatedly the FDP as "heartless".
The FDP clearly is the only real pro-capitalist party. Too bad it is socially liberal.
The nice thing about Germany is they do not have a Muslim running the country.
But they can "pride" themselves to have the first openly homosexual foreign minister and vice-chancellor.
That's part of it. The other part -- the more recent part -- is that as successful unions accumulated vast sums of money in their retirement funds, it was bound to attract all manner of attention from the less savory elements of society, like the Mafia.
No, I was being sarcastic.
Calling Christian Democracy 'socialist' is ignorant in my estimation.
The US had it already... and still does. Now it increases again. It's called "corportatism"... is a toned down aspect of Fascism and was branded in the US as Roosevelt's "New Deal".
What the US, the West and the entire world needs is not more "Corporatism" or toned down version of socialism/etatism.
What we need is a more real laissez-faire economy and a level-headed monetary policy.
It is the perpetual interference of the government that is skewing the economy into disasters via loose monetary policy and regulation.
A true free market means also no "bailouts"... investors should get the rewards but also the risks. No taxpayer cushion. That way there will be true self regulation. And without the "free money" inflationary madness that is haunting the US, investments would be more reasonably placed and speculative bubbles averted.
Sorry that the facts conflict with your fantasy version of "Christian Democracy". The historical reality (as anyone with some basic knowledge of German post-war history knows) is that the post-war German "Christian Democrats" were pro-socialist. They called it "Christian Socialism". They toned it down a bit. As I said, originally they even wanted to nationalize industries. Please do yourself a favor and read the link I gave above.
In the 1950's and 60's they firmly established Germany's current system of a "social market economy", which is essentially a welfare-scheme that is collapsing in Germany.
Germany is ageing rapidly, while their population (workless and elderly) are increasingly dependant on goverment handouts. They have increased the working age to 67, among much clamor and will force in future the working young (a shrinking group) to support the welfare of the increasing number of elderly.
Adenauer thought that "Germans will always have children". It's not the case and the welfare system of Germany is an anchor around their neck.
So we really don't have a functional free market and we have a retarded social democratic model.
We have the worst of all possible combinations.
It was an emergency situation -and they looked at the possible outcomes and they did not. So why is that non event a count against them?
When you mention something like that please also take into account that life expectancy did go up you know and old by today's health standards is not the same as it was a generation ago.
Case in point is the hero pilot of the Hudson River landing flight who at his age is at his peak and not declining though mandatory FAA rules will force him to retire.
PS: I am enjoying this conversation and I hope you are as well in the give and take - I mean nothing in my remarks to be taken as personal and I am not in any way feel your remarks are a slight on me. Healthy conversation even of abstracts is very enjoyable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.