Feelings and responsibility

[LigH]

It's all disguise. Names of parties have little meaning. Nazis are as socialistic as our Christian {Democratic|Social, depending on the federal state} Union is Christian or united. Furthermore: Our "Social Democrats" are hardly social, they invented "Hartz IV" (combined unemployment and welfare aid with oppressive restrictions) and "private retirement provision" to ensure that poor people will stay poor forever, to protect those who are not much affected by poverty and social contributions (including themselves, among clerks and other wealthy people). They are responsible for the imminent poverty of the elderly in one of the richest countries in Europe. Most of all: Gerhard "Gazprom puppet" Schröder!

Marc-Uwe Kling: Wer hat uns verraten? (Who betrayed us? Social Democrats!)

By the way ... I wish I knew anyone who is both competent in language science and has a little time to discuss this matter with me. I found that there are some terms which have only little meaning on their own, you always need to put them into an additional context. One of the most obvious examples is "freedom", or related: "liberty". What does freedom - on its own - mean, at all? Is it a positive term per se? I doubt; I can imagine a negative context easily: When someone takes more liberty than he deserves, thereby limiting the freedom of other people. This is the kind of context I see for our "Liberal Democrats": I am afraid that they only care for their economic and legal liberty, to reduce governmental control and restrictions. And turning social economy into free economy always happens at the expense of the people who are already too poor to spare money for investments.

[Rigwyn]

Names of parties have little meaning.

+1

These days "Liberals" hate free speech if it disagrees with their own opinion.
They call Trump a "fascist" without really understanding what fascism is, and many want "socialism" just to be rebellious.

Liberals react violently to Milo Yiannopoulos speaking at their campus ( note: they invited him )
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/01/uc-berkeley-campus-protest-milo-yiannopoulos-breitbart/97378104/

Liberals freak out at thought of hearing Ann Coulter's speech ( She too was invited )
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/04/26/ann-coulter-speech-canceled-at-uc-berkeley-amid-fears-for-safety/?utm_term=.d211227267eb

... for your amusement:

Liberal Democrat Explained:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32hdl8Pb_m4

Conservative vs Liberal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYNukv5rWCY

[gonger]

Doesn't the term "nazi" come from he national-socialist party? I mean, it's right there in the name, socialist. And I'm sure you support your country one way or the other. So, technically speaking...

In German, Nazi is pronounced exactly like the first part of National, so the socialist part is not directly reflected there. It is implied, of course.

[gonger]

By the way ... I wish I knew anyone who is both competent in language science and has a little time to discuss this matter with me. I found that there are some terms which have only little meaning on their own, you always need to put them into an additional context. One of the most obvious examples is "freedom", or related: "liberty". What does freedom - on its own - mean, at all? Is it a positive term per se? I doubt; I can imagine a negative context easily: When someone takes more liberty than he deserves, thereby limiting the freedom of other people. This is the kind of context I see for our "Liberal Democrats": I am afraid that they only care for their economic and legal liberty, to reduce governmental control and restrictions. And turning social economy into free economy always happens at the expense of the people who are already too poor to spare money for investments.

Maybe, as a trained linguist (Dipl.-Ling.), I can be of help there.
You almost got it right - no term on its own has much meaning, the real meaning always comes from the context. The reason is that natural languages (as opposed to artificial languages like programming languages or logic languages) are full of ambiguities. Natural languages evolve over centuries and millennia, without much external control: People talk how they wish to talk.
These ambiguities start on the lexical level, and go up to (and sometimes beyond) the use of whole sentences.
And, of course, many people have their own definitions of terms like liberty or freedom.
Please feel free to ask more specific questions. I have a tendency to lecture people  , so I tried to keep my answer short this time. 

[LigH]

That was already helpful, gonger. A certain level of ambiguity as universal attribute of all language elements... less like Boolean logic (true or false), but rather like fuzzy logic (more or less fitting). Now I wonder if there is a "technical term" in linguistics for words with a rather high level of ambiguity. Something like "inherently vague".

Specifically regarding "freedom", there are a lot of fixed terms as complex phrases to make the context clearer. Many will have heard about the "freedom of speech" (although possibly often not understood its consequences, as it does not include a license to kill those who don't agree with your opinion). Being born in the GDR, we often talked about a "freedom of travel" (though not to be confused with "freedom of movement", or "labor mobility", as this was more related to vacation trips). The common concept seems to be any kind of "freedom from oppression"; a difference between several types of freedom will be how much granting a freedom to some will take some freedom from others (e.g. supporting a strong economy by removing state control does not guarantee increase in public wealth: there is no "trickle down effect" as much as promised).

[Volki]

Insulting a supporter of left (= pro-social) politics as nazi ... can it get more paradox?

Not an insult. An accusation. I'd say it's becoming clearer and clearer Merkel is trying to strongarm the EU into a state (empire) led by Germany. Surprised you haven't heard this before in reference to the EU.

[gonger]

I'd say it's becoming clearer and clearer Merkel is trying to strongarm the EU into a state (empire) led by Germany. Surprised you haven't heard this before in reference to the EU.

Some interesting facts:

• Germany is the biggest payer in the EU (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union)
• Germany and France have always been the motors of the EU (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union)
• The influence of a country in no way relates to the size of its population, or its financial contribution (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament)

Even though there are some serious problems in/with the EU, it is the most stable zone on this planet (no major conflicts since WWII). Most countries are doing well economically, and those who are not are unsurprisingly on top of the Corruption lists.
I hope Macron will do well during the Parliament elections. He is clearly in favour of the EU, but also wants to improve it. That's the best attitude.

[MishkaL1138]

I come to these forums to complain about a laggy game, not to diss a talking Cheeto with a bad fake hairdo.

[LigH]

You don't have to; nobody forces you.

And of course, Germany has its own issues now. First the Autobahn network, now the schools, will be rent to investors in so-called "Public-Private Partnerships". That's the reason why we need a road charge for passenger cars too (how else could investments in roads generate profits, eventually?); now try to imagine how investments in schools may pay (we already have schools with cracked walls and broken bathrooms, how much worse could it get when profit gets optimized?).

P.S.: Not to forget current accusations of embezzlement in the management of Toll Collect, the company which handles the road charge for freight vehicles on Autobahns already.

[Volki]

I'd say it's becoming clearer and clearer Merkel is trying to strongarm the EU into a state (empire) led by Germany. Surprised you haven't heard this before in reference to the EU.

• Germany is the biggest payer in the EU (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union)
• Germany and France have always been the motors of the EU (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union)

[/list]

I'm aware of these, and this is why I wish Le Pen had a chance in France. Also, lacking conflict doesn't immediately equate to a good thing. I'm actually shocked that your countries haven't revolted against their respective governments and the EU, but that's probably due to a lack of liberalism within your cultures.

[Rigwyn]

I was under the impression that people were divided over the EU especially in light of the forced acceptance of refugees and the problems that some of them caused. My question is, will the EU bend to the will of it's members or will it remain rigid and snap?

[netforce10]

I'm aware of these, and this is why I wish Le Pen had a chance in France. Also, lacking conflict doesn't immediately equate to a good thing. I'm actually shocked that your countries haven't revolted against their respective governments and the EU, but that's probably due to a lack of liberalism within your cultures.

I think there's actually some conflict in Europe, but I don't think the people from most countries in Europe have a strong tendency to go on the streets to protest. What we do see is that more extreme parties have formed. And I'm actually quite shocked you would revolt over things like those happening in Europe, for me personally it would take a lot before I would revolt against my government, something in the order of them abolishing our freedom of religion or our democracy would be needed(to name just two things). I may have missed a large issue in some country however as I dont track news as much as I should let alone that of other countries.

As towards the Europa lacking liberalism within our culture, I strongly disagree with that but that most likely comes from different definitions and opinions.(I'm from the Netherlands btw and can't really speak about the culture in other countries.)

Lastly, small note/question Gonger, the influence of countries in the EU does depend on the size of their population as countries with a larger population hold more seats in parliament than those with small populations. Or am I missing something?

[gonger]

Lastly, small note/question Gonger, the influence of countries in the EU does depend on the size of their population as countries with a larger population hold more seats in parliament than those with small populations. Or am I missing something?

I am German, living and working in Luxembourg, so let's take these countries for comparison.
Luxembourg has roughly 600,000 inhabitants, and 6 seats in European Parliament.
Germany has 82,000,000 inhabitants, and 96 seats in European Parliament.
So it is 16 times the number of seats, as opposed to 136 times the population. Therefore the size of population is not really reflected there. In absolute numbers of course there is a difference.

[gonger]

I'd say it's becoming clearer and clearer Merkel is trying to strongarm the EU into a state (empire) led by Germany. Surprised you haven't heard this before in reference to the EU.

• Germany is the biggest payer in the EU (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union)
• Germany and France have always been the motors of the EU (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union)

[/list]

I'm aware of these, and this is why I wish Le Pen had a chance in France. Also, lacking conflict doesn't immediately equate to a good thing. I'm actually shocked that your countries haven't revolted against their respective governments and the EU, but that's probably due to a lack of liberalism within your cultures.

What do you mean there? You are in favour of racism in France? And Germany and France should take up their century-long wars again?
And why revolt against something that most people appreciate?
Let me repeat what you did not quote from my previous post:
Even though there are some serious problems in/with the EU, it is the most stable zone on this planet (no major conflicts since WWII). Most countries are doing well economically, and those who are not are unsurprisingly on top of the Corruption lists.

Most people I know are in favour of the EU, and since I am German living and working in multi-national Luxembourg (the EU country with the highest percentage of foreigners), I meet people from many different countries. There is room for improvement, of course, but without the EU there would be no common currency, many different trade regulations, and less peace.
Trade and travel in Europe have never before been so easy.
And there is this enlightening 1:09 minute: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Oor7fAmmiQ

[netforce10]

I disagree, seeing as you marginalized it to nothing originally. Germany as a whole still has 16 times the influence of Luxembourg. and if you look at it from a citizens perspective then a citizen from Luxembourg has ~8.5 times the influence of a German citizen.

The amount of votes are not directly proportional to the amount of seats but the amount of a country's seats does relate to its population. That said, there's also the European council which evens it out even more so in the end its quite close to even for every country but not completely so.