Merkels U-turn on the nuclear
Aspects of the current nuclear phase-out decision
Maria Weiß May 31, 2011
in our country is going on an incredible circus, called the phase-out of nuclear
energy. Germany is the only country in the world in which this withdrawal takes
Bravo, one can say. It is not the first time in history that Germany makes itself
a pioneer of hegemony in this form, mind you at the expense of their own population,
Significantly, the Chairman of the so-called "Bund" expressed himself in this direction, namely that it might be crucial to this whole issue that we must reflect on energy saving. Saving energy? The harassment of its own people, especially that part of the population whose course is not "better-off", by high energy prices to the max-no-more? What else does that mean anyway? That is perfectly clear. There were already some indications of massive price increases and even power cuts.
"Germany is drawing consequences of Fukushima” as the only country in the world. Although it is only 10,000 miles from Japan and the likelihood of earthquakes in this country being low - but no, here it must be accomplished. The Chancellor makes a fool of herself, as a physicist and as a connoisseur of the matter by declaring recently, Fukushima had her told wrong. Clearlyer one can not express it, one`s opportunism and sycophancy before the financial capital.
Despite the criticism from abroad, Germany is on his way to phase out nuclear power, no matter what it costs and no matter what the impact will be on the economy in this country, that seems to be not so important in the eyes of these forces. It has indeed tens of billions of debt, but you think you can afford it, get it paid rather. Let's see if the public is willing to do that.
Even the Bavarian commentator this evening in the “tagesthemen” had to admit that the exit has a social side. In fact, it has. But of course - he had to say - that it is still correct – even what is just expected as submission from this country. Since, you can apparently just do nothing, they do not have willed otherwise. But for the consequences they will be held fully accountable.
There is evidently no matter what happens in other countries, that there masses take to the streets for legitimate social demands, for prospects for the youth, etc., etc, they do not care. What is taking place in Germany, that`s anti-nuclear demonstration. That is what is called for here.
These forces do also not care that there is still tens of nuclear warheads in the U.S. store, it's not obviously dangerous, that's earthquake-proof and otherwise safe and therefore you need not drum to mind. It is important above all things, that the nuclear power plants are shut down here, and that as soon as possible.
In the evening news here, a Jürgen Trittin is to be listend endlessly with his drivel. But this is not the only one. There are more circuses running here. After the disaster with the so-called swine flu is now "EHEC" lifted out of the baptism, as a means to irritate the people. That's all nothing. We can afford it. But that can also be a very big mistake.
The current government is simply intolerable. The question is: what is the alternative? As an alternative, however, do offer even larger ecological fantasists. It raises the very practical question, as in Germany, the reasonable and such people interested in the progress can join together to force a change. Even the trend in recent state elections has shown that even nearly 50 per cent of all are not participating at the vote. There is a reason. But these (non) voters do have a voice and they certainly have ideas too. The question is how you do bring that together.
It is interesting that
a French representative recently characterized this exit decision as a "political
decision". In fact, there is something in it. But what is the policy behind
it, what kind of political decision is it? Is the political pressure here so
great that nothing else seems possible? And who does exerce this pressure? That
should finally be raised.
How then did the policies of the last federal government look like, which had decided with the so-called "consensus" to phase out nuclear energy That was the policy which sets out the nuclear energy in Germany still to go into further dependence on foreign countries. And in this case it was first of all Russia, with the Gazprom Group. How does it look now? It could be heard already, that to satisfy the energy demand in Germany there would rise many small gas power plants. Who does be interested in that? That's completely obvious.
And in that respect you can recognize too, what sort of policy that actually is and which are the forces bowed to between international varieties. It is no random that one can read, for example, that in Moscow Angela Merkel is celebrated as a star. Why that? Certainly also plays a role that one is imagining, that on energy supplies in this country, the heartland of the EU, there might be a way of putting it in a function. This is definitely a strategic goal of certain forces. And that certainly has a political significance.
But that do certain people, above all the so-called left or better revisionists, by SPD to so-called Left Party, which call themselves left, but right in reality , do not see and they stir vigorously with the drums in the so-called "nuclear fear ".
Certainly, consequences should be drawn from this disaster in Fukushima. So does everybody. But Germany does it in a way that it says, it has "fear" and it creates the "turning point" in the energy issue. What is that for a "turn"? The so-called renewable energy sources are not in an aproximate position at all so that they could even remotely meet the power needs in this society. This is emerging at all. And especially not for a growing energy demand, which is natural for an evolving society.
It was also mentioned that the gaps must then be filled from abroad, which essentially is a fact of hypocrisy, because if this nuclear fear is stoked here and you have to rely simultaneously on imports from abroad, then there is somewhat contradictious. Or you might can just run back on other things. There is also no matter whether you have to build more coal-fired power plants. CO2 emissions, climate change, all this is suddenly of no importance. This is put away as "collateral damage". And all this is sold to the population here as supposedly "reasonable." Principles? What is it? At the same time it makes you more dependent.
Countries such as Russia, China, the U.S. views not to mention, do not even think about abolishing its nuclear power plants. On the contrary, they build more. And they are happy of course, if a country like Germany makes it different and they can benefit. Thus, for example, recently, arrosed once more the question that China would like to invite more nuclear experts from Germany, so they can support China in developing its own nuclear power plants. But here, we do the exit!
We've seen that once, in autumn 1978, under Hua Kuo-feng, shortly after the coup by Deng Xiaoping and others after the death of Mao Zedong. High-level Chinese government officials visited Germany, visited nuclear plants with the intention to buy one, while simultaneously supporting the anti-nuclear agents in Germany massively. [Note] The contradiction was just as obvious as today as well as the consequences of it are shown up until today. In Germany, no one has benefited as much of this ambiguity as the fake left. And a consequence to this day is that it was tremendously difficult to build a truly revolutionary left in our country. Something more favorous for the the capital may not exist.
Our organization has held all the time on defense of this important productive force and does it still, against all odds and against a whole society Tsunami in Germany, which is opposing us at the moment again. And we see ourselves in this respect quite in agreement with the international development and the vast majority of people around the world.
Consequently, it seems absolutely vital that those people that do not want such a barrier in science, such a barrier in further development of science and progress realize to unite, irrespective of the question of social order. This is necessary in order to resist to this perishable trend. An (allegedly) "socialism" based for example on the hegemony of certain powers is fraud from the outset and perpetuated slavery and exploitation of man by man. A "socialism", based on perpetuation of exploitation, enslavement and impoverishment of the masses is worse than a capitalism, which continues to develop and thus inevitably opens the doors to historical law of its overcoming in the future.
[Note] See the pamphlet of 10 October 1978 "What to consider when the current Chinese leadership - to purchase of nuclear energy and the simultaneous support of the notorious anti-nuclear campaign in this country"in: New Unit No. 2/77/78, as well as "other aspects about China - Nuclear energy, "ibid.
(Translation by the author herself)