I do have to agree that the comparison to Nazi propaganda isn’t worthy of the Economist’s otherwise reserved style.

I would like to add another link that I happened to read a couple days before seeing this thread. It’s an essay by the always interesting Paul Graham on VC:

http://www.paulgraham.com/venturecapital.html

Also, I’m surprised nobody has invoked Godwin’s law yet, anyone her remeber Usenet?

http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/g/GodwinsLaw.html

or

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin‘s_law

Ok, pardon a naive question, but after reading comments like this in this thread and those links mw posted, I have to ask: are you guys saying that, because Germany had nazism, which used powerful rhetoric for racist purposes against people, Germans today are echoing nazis when they use powerful rhetoric for political criticism against companies, financial systems and investment models?

Is that because genuinely believe that they’re bashing foreign venture capital investors simply because of being foreign, rather than because of something specific they criticise in their venture capital investment approaches?

To me, that amounts to saying that because of having had a dictatorship, Germany today cannot have an open political debate because even totally non-neonazi uses of rhetoric (say, unlike the real neonazis attacking foreign people or immigrants or minorities etc.) can be accused of flirting with nazism. That’s quite a paradox, no?

It’s also paradox to me that companies, or even entire financial systems, should be equated with people or ethnic groups… I really don’t get it. To me, whether I agree with it or not, it sounds perfectly legitimate to accuse a group of investors, with a completely different model than the one that Germans prefer, of wanting to wreck that model for profit. Or is what is under criticism only the use of the locusts image? What if he’d used only ‘greedy’ – that too could have been connected to nazi rhetoric… So what should he have said, to support his view?

http://www.games.de/content/view/1993/1/

PS: I only say previews for comments, sigh… ;-)

http://www.games.de/heuschrecken/

What is the German model of capitalism? I think that’s the debate that is actually happening.

More also on the other thread.

I was familiar with the Wolffsohn quote, but didn’t want to bring it in, for fear of leading to an overheated debate (while I disagree with you and think that it was pretty bad form for the Economist to open its lede as it did, the debate I wanted to have wasn’t over whether accusations of anti-Semitism were justified, but over whether the German model of capitalism is worth saving). More generally, while you may well be right about the cynical motives of Müntefering and other SPD types, it looks to me (as I skim German newspapers) as if there is a real debate happening in the public space, and that is something new, whether it was the intended consequence or not. On Streeck – there was a crack in an earlier Economist article at sociologists being appointed to government commissions, which I’m fairly sure was aimed at him. On Streeck again – thank you Edward Hugh – I hadn’t seen this most recent paper (I usually check the MPIfG website every couple of months, but have been laxer than usual this spring).

“Unsurprisingly, they’ve had very pleasant consequences indeed for the CEO-equivalents of German firms. Profits are beginning to surge again. Equally unsurprisingly, their effects for ordinary workers have been nowhere near as enjoyable. Unemployment remains high, and, as even the Economist is forced to admit, real wages are stagnating.”

http://medienkritik.typepad.com/blog/2005/05/goebbels_would_.html

http://trans-int.blogspot.com/2005/05/locust-round-up.html

Britain’s polity still can’t decide whether to join Europe, although, it should be noted, the exchange rate between its currency and the US$, and the Euro and the US$, has been similar over the last few years. Britain is part of Europe whether or not they like it.

http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3954817

Incidentally Henry, have you actually read the full article? It isn’t apparent.

Those interested in some informed reflection on the state of play with ‘reform’ in Germany could try this paper from Wolfgang Streeck:

http://www.mpi-fg-koeln.mpg.de/pu/workpap/wp05-2/wp05-2.html

“Not true. First, as the Economist’s editorializers know quite well, Müntefering isn’t flirting with anti-Semitism; his ideas aren’t even actually anti-business.”

I must have totally misunderstood this, since in a later post you then say,

“I don’t say anywhere that the Economist accused Müntefering of “flirting with anti-Semitism,” nor do I say anything that even hints at this.”

Please help me with this!

By the way (not that this is very productive, but I dislike being misrepresented as much as you seem to), the part of Katherine’s statement I agreed with was “Comparing people to cockroaches, insects, rats, vermin or otherwise making them out as subhuman is a line I never, ever, ever cross”—I should have been clearer in my post. Sorry about that.

The general point I’d like to make here is that while it is nice that we’re having a serious debate about varieties of capitalist models here, we hardly needed a campaigning German politician to do that. I simply fail to see how calling people (or companies) locusts contributes to a serious debate. “I just wanted us to discuss this” is a lame excuse for someone who incites public opinion for cynical reasons.

Uh, and one last point, again for Henry (and thanks for not being impolite): you say, “And I’ve lived for three years in Germany, and studied the German political economy in extenso, so I do have some idea of what I’m talking about.” I wasn’t in any way doubting your qualifications for talking about this. Demanding qualifications would make a site like this one pointless. Rather, mentioning that I lived in Germany was intended to signal that my assessment of the “German model” is not based on a theoretically-informed analysis but on simple, everyday observations (about how difficult it is to hire people, how inane the tax forms are, etc. etc.) In other words, I was trying to present my credentials since I don’t have any beyond my residency status.