German president says US is destroying world order
1d 21h ago by lemmy.today/u/CityPop in world@quokk.au from www.reuters.com
Nothing but a distraction. Steinmeier himself did anything but reduce Europe's unilateral dependence on the US when he was vice-chancellor and foreign minister. Now, as president, he holds a symbolic office with no political influence whatsoever. Merz, the acting chancellor, is a US lobbyist and wants to introduce Palantir across Germany, for example.
Hi. Welcome to 2026. You must be new.
Ya think?
Amerikkka: New World Order
Invite him to a banquet honoring his greatness, then arrest him.
Tbf, if they can’t stop him how much order where was there really?
At least some plus some illusion. Now there is none.
New World Order, complete disorder!
☢️💥🎸
The main win here is the message being sent. We can echo and amplify this message and have the conversations via social media or in person.
What will Germany do about it?
see to its own affairs primarily. but it's still important to say it out loud.
but it's still important to say it out loud.
Why? Is there a risk that someone in power might not know it? This is not news, it’s PR.
because it works against normalization.
Normalisation will happen based on whether someone is going do something about it, not whether we talk about it.
That's not right. The Overton window shifts based primarily on political discourse. Politicians saying things has an (often measurable) effect.
Overton claimed that politicians typically act freely only within the "window" of those seen as acceptable. After his death, his Mackinac Center for Public Policy colleague, Joseph Lehman, further developed the idea and named it after him.[7]
The most common misconception is that lawmakers themselves are in the business of shifting the Overton window. That is absolutely false. Lawmakers are actually in the business of detecting where the window is, and then moving to be in accordance with it.
The core claim I'm making is that political discourse is the primary means of moving the Overton window. Now politicians operate within it, sure. And they form a part of the discourse, too. And if you think politicians aren't interested in the power of shifting the Overton window then I wonder how you interpret the existence of propaganda for example?
Politicians pay for polls and then respond to the public sentiment. If they go against public opinion it’s usually to benefit the rich so there’s little bandwidth for other things. You’re thinking of influencers, entirely different profession. Some politicians are both, the president of Germany isn’t.
Do you think politicians would influence public opinion if they could? I believe politicians would pay nearly any price to be able to do that. I also think that anyone telling you that politicians are not in the business of influencing public thought are either very naive or lying to you, your link above notwithstanding. I'm not thinking of influencers, I was thinking of propaganda, which is when a politician attempts to influence public thought. Sometimes it's very clumsy, sometimes it's very slick. Some times it's ineffective, others not so much.
Think about how many representatives you have in your parliament wherever you live. How many can you name? That’s your regular politicians. Do they influence or are they there to vote per party line?
President of Germany has about as much power. He represents the country in terms of diplomacy and that’s it. This news piece is essentially „Germany concerned with the way world is changing”. Will this change anyone’s opinion on the matter? No.
Will this change anyone’s opinion on the matter? No.
I guess that's where we differ. I don't agree. If even one person's mind is changed by what Steinmeyer said then you are wrong in what you say.
He is the president of Germany, his words are important enough to make it into Reuters, and therefore a great many people are going to hear what he says. For some of them this might be the first they're hearing about the US efforts in Vietnam/Greenland/etc. and they will realise that the US is indeed destroying the world order, and that will be thanks to Steinmeyer speaking about it, and news agencies reporting on what he says. That's just one feasible example of how this might have an effect. There are infinite other possibilities.
Reuters does a lot of political press release publishing like reprinting Russia foreign ministry verbatim without commentary. It’s not really a matter of newsworthiness because it’ll bring ad clicks anyway. This is one problem with media.
Media these days exist mostly to confirm people’s bias, not to inform and this is just one example. Can you walk me through a hypothetical scenario where what’s being reported here is going to change someone’s mind?
Someone will say I’m unnecessarily butthurt about spreading awareness of how evil Trump is. My point is that it’s irrelevant. Politicians sending words of concern is a smoke screen for doing nothing. The only way to stop this decay is to stop engaging with it. There’s no accountability if there’s no actions to judge, just words.
Can you walk me through a hypothetical scenario where what’s being reported here is going to change someone’s mind?
I literally. Just did that. Did you read my comment?
For politicians, words are actions, because that is how the law works. When a politician "takes action", they just move some words into a document, and start the process of whatever policy they are enacting. They use words to tell the treasury to release funds to the local council which can be spent on road improvements, they don't dig up the potholes themselves. Now, before they can take these actions, they have a lot of discussion about what needs to be done, this might include saying something like "I think we need to address potholes in our roads," and that is an important part of the process. Similarly, denouncing Trump is an important part of the process of divesting from the USA.
Also - I'm afraid this doesn't work as an example of media enforcing biases. This is a specific report about a specific thing a specific person has said. The tone of the report is neutral and the report is factual. I think seeing bias here may be, ironically, a result of your own confirmation bias.
Your conflating political speech with general communication, is this on purpose to derail?
I think the difference of opinion comes from me describing the state of things as they are right now while you describe what you wish to be true (a state which is possible but not a reality right now).
Similar to speaking, wishing things into existence doesn’t work. This is something that seems to affect liberal left discourse the most. Voters ain’t dumb, they see how impotent that is and vote for the strong-men like Trump because that’s all that’s left. It’s like a panic button labeled „can the elites wake up please”.
There's no conflation there because there isn't a defined boundary between the two things you think I'm conflating.
You're describing how you think things are, I'm describing how I think they are. Dismissing my perception as fantasy before considering it is the root of the difference of opinion. Have a go at the argument.
Nobody is saying that wishing or speaking things into existence is effective. I think you must know that nobody is saying this? I'm trying very hard to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but you'll have to convince me at this point.
Sounds as though your position is "words do not mean things" to me.
Just that professional speakers can be very good at using lots of words while saying very little, which can also serve the purpose of doing nothing.
that's a good thing to be concerned about, i agree. words and actions must go together. lets make sure we let our governments know that we want them to cut off the US.
that's a bit reductive. there's a time for action and a time for words. also important for recording what is happening.
it's no one elses job to save America from itself. we just need to decouple and look after our own interests and be prepared to act if America crosses the line with us (cf. Greenland.)
I think we had enough of time for words. Will there ever be a time for action? If not, then maybe we didn’t need as many words.
i get it. i'm frustrated too. but while the US admin are fascist assholes, they haven't done anything to us YET to warrant too hard of a response.
what we should be doing is aggressively decoupling. no more US weapons, stop favoring US companies, independent EU tech stack, local defense buildup, things like this.
US is destroying the world period
Keep whining until its owner gives it a firm kick so it shuts up.
Danke, Captain Offensichtlich.