The Biden administration and its NATO allies have scrambled out of Afghanistan in the most chaotic and irresponsible way: Weapons fell into the hands of the enemy and, in an attempt to not embarrass the now exiled government, the level of security was misrepresented leaving thousands trapped. During the preparation of the withdrawal no time was spent to identify those who could have moved to other places, non-Western countries, and in the rare cases of highly skilled and highly freedom-oriented individuals, to Western countries. Now, thousands of unknown passengers are transported to Western nations and nobody can identify who is deserving and who merely seeks their financial luck.
Was the war a mistake? After the initial revenge for 9/11 it seems to have grown into one. NGOs and many a military officer saw an opportunity to elevate their status and income. They did not honestly report the (lack of) progress to the citizens at home while more and more money sank into the swamp. Afghanistan was not ready to run its own affairs and won’t be anytime soon. It is a place where small advances can be encouraged, but large civilisational jumps can’t be imposed. The same holds true for immigrant populations. It is not enlightened to expect more of people than they can achieve. The individual can be advanced if he is open to it. Masses of people or entire countries will have to take their time.
Germany has got a confusing election system for the lower house of the parliament. Half of the seats are reserved to electoral lists, proportionally allotted on the basis of the percentage the parties won through a second ballot. Additional off-set seats are also drawn from those electoral lists.
Markus Söder has announced that his party will send women only to fill fifty percent of its list mandates. But is that even constitutional? If at least 50% of the parliament is filled on the basis of lists, the composition of those lists become a part of the parliament election process itself. Legally the selection of candidates of the list is termed a ‘character of the action’ of the federal election (Tatbestandsmerkmal).
If everyday citizens are free to pick and shed party memberships in order to take part in how at least half of the seats are filled, how can a party leadership predict that fifty percent of the positions on their electoral list are going to be women?
The sources are in the description boxes of the video platforms.
Germany will soon have a law which demands that executive boards must include women. Time has moved fast. What would have been an innocuous or irrelevant piece of legislation a decade ago tastes very badly with this entire culture war backdrop in 2021. There are already women quotas for the dubious supervisory boards and it looks like only a matter of time until we are in an affirmative-action jungle where everything is rewarded but merit.
little correction: I said 1 in 3 board members. Yet it’s 1 if a board is larger than 3. The mistake is immaterial for the overall discussion.
source (also for the thumbnail quote):