And they are indeed caused by state interventionism.

But, alas, the protestors mostly demand EVEN MORE state interventionism.

This is tragic.

Your comment about the Israeli protests is like the splash of cold water in the face in the morning.

And it has the ring of truth.

I’m sorry Nuke this is at best superficially and more importantly wrong.

Europe is in a mess because a EU currency union fixes interest rates in effect for Germany alone who operate a policy of mercantilism. The periphery who have their own problems were hollowed out even more.

In the case of Greece there are no welfare programs of the scale of the UK and overall debt compared to the EZ is small.

What Greece does have is a blatantly corrupt political class, with no choice for the voter. It is not unknown for government minister to trouser literally millions while in office. Hence no one believes that paying taxes is a “good thing” and allegiance is towards the family not to the state.

I find it amusing irony that on a would be libertarian blog people are talking of welfare, where in several aspects the Greeks are by the virtue of their bloody mindedness and history are more libertarian in outcome of action (though not necessarily by consciousness) than many here.

Kind regards
H

All of the above is not to say that the demonstrations are not going to influence Israeli politics and economic policy – they will, and not necessarily in a good way. However, it will not be due to Israelis’ inherent communism, but to simple old ignorance on economics.

Forget about the economics of communism, if the people of the USA ever came to believe that Isreal had turned communist how do these demonstrators expect to survive in the middle east? Are they planning to convert to Islam as well?

Yes – when the people advocate evil or stupid policies (the slave traders of Bristol or the wild government spending “social justice” protestors in Israel) it is right and proper for a politician to vote AGAINST their demands.

However, if a majority of people are corrupt then no politician can save a nation (corrupt politicians can be removed by the people – but how can an honest politician remove a corrupt people?).

Let us hope that most people in Isreal have not really turned to madness and evil.

In short that the, Soros funded, protestors (with their demands for more houses and apartments turning into snarls of demented rage when the govenrment suggested selling state land so that apartments for rent could be built upon it) do not really represent most people.

The problem with the decision of the German parliament isn’t that it ignores the wishes of the people, but that it ignores economic reality. Maybe if they framed the plan as a plan to save German banks, which it is, rather than a plan to save Greece, people would have been less opposed to it. It would still be wrong.

You are right on the mark! which is to consider when, and under what circumstances may (or should)Representatives deviate from the immediately perceived objectives (or avoidances) of their electorate.

Are there factors (other than anti-bailout sentiments) that need be considered in passing judgments on representative actions? Probably – at least considered.
["sentiment" may not be the right word]

Perhaps someone who knows their political science better than I do can tell us if there is any significance in the fact that the country has six parties in the Bundestag, five more in the state parliaments and at least twenty-five more trying to get a toe-hold on power.

I know they have a proportional representation voting system, but thirty-odd parties seems excessive to me.

However, yes, they were within their rights to kick him out.

But remember a central idea of Edmund Burks – that a party should not be a “faction” that a “party” should be a group of people united by clear PRINCIPLES and that people should be able to see these principles in advance of an election and carried out after the election.

The Rockingham Whigs held to just principles (so Burke believed) while Rockingham lived – but under the influence of Fox (again from the point of view of Burke) the party dishonoured those principles – so Mr Burke and his friends left the Foxites (and it was not “just” the French Revolution – it was the confusion of Parliamentary reform with “freedom”, they are diffferent things, and it was hostility to free trade with Ireland).

Which political party in Germany has followed just PRINCIPLES?

So how are they followers of Edmund Burke?

They (the political parties) reject both libertry (civil society – private property), reject it with their bailout, and they reject national independence.

They have acted like a collection of vermin and (tragically) are discrediting themselves.

Germany has been here before.