Logo
Cover

The Trojan horse is now called Merz

In the book “Demokratie versus Parteienherrschaft”, the" Gemeinschaft für Frieden und Gerechtigkeit " (community for peace and justice) also questions overpowering lobbyism.

Friedrich Merz’s ambitions to play a significant role in the CDU could lead to what is likely to be the biggest political accident that could happen to Germany. We support the opinion of Jens Berger (editor of the reflection pages) that Merz is the personified Trojan Horse Of Wall Street and the transatlantic networks – a political curbside Swallow who always sells her skin to the highest bidder. He is BlackRock’s representative in Germany and chairman of the Atlantik Brücke Board of directors, and he has always squandered the interests of the Citizens for a Jewish wage, according to Berger. Friedrich Merz has always been a Lobbyist. Before becoming a professional politician in 1989, he was already a Lobbyist for the Chemical Industry Association. Numerous other donors followed suit and, at the latest, since his defeat in the duel for the group chairmanship against Angela Merkel in 2002, all dams broke at Friedrich Merz. Merz was a politician for a long time, but whether he ever worked full-time or rather part-time in the party and Bundestag remains questionable.

We want to deal more closely with the Vita of Friedrich Merz, because lobbyism as well as the so-called revolving door effect and its consequences can be very well represented by the example of his work.

Merz was a Partner of the international law firm Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP from 2005 to 2014 (until 2009 still in addition to the Bundestag mandate) – a heavyweight in the industry with an annual turnover of billions, which incidentally is one of the 20 largest law firms in the world and mainly represents Wall Street companies.

( … ) As a representative of this law firm, Merz was commissioned in 2010 as a lawyer by the special fund for financial market stabilization (Soffin) to find a buyer for the ailing WestLB, after the law firm Mayer Brown had already managed the outsourcing of the junk securities of this Bank with a value of 77 billion euros into a Bad Bank financed with taxpayers ' money. For Merz and Mayer Brown, this Deal was definitely worth it: Friedrich Merz, who always points out in his political speeches that the state is not a self – service shop, received a fee of 5,000 euros for his services-not per month, but per day! By the way, this “dream fee” was indirectly paid by all the nurses, parcel delivery men and craftsmen, i.e. the taxpayer. By the way, his commitment was quite a success; just not for the taxpayer, but for the banking house HSBC Trinkaus & Burkhardt, which was involved in the takeover of WestLB’s assets. As a thank you, Merz was able to assume the chairmanship of the board of Directors of HSBC, which he still holds today. On the other hand, the destruction of WestLB cost the taxpayer 18 billion euros. According to the proverb, according to which money never goes away, but now only where it is different, one always wonders who the profiteers of this billion-dollar bust were: Friedrich Merz is one of them. It would go beyond the scope of this article to list here all the “part-time” activities of Friedrich Merz. The financial sector in particular seems to have found a willing representative of its interests in Merz. The political-lobbyist Jack-of-all-trades has sat and sits on the boards of AXA Konzern AG, DBV-Winterthur Holding AG, Deutsche Börse AG, Ernst & Young AG, ROCKWOOL Beteiligungs GmbH, WEPA Industrieholding SE, Commerzbank AG and HSBC Trinkaus, among others. However, his biggest career step was certainly the appointment as chairman of the supervisory board at the German offshoot of the world’s largest asset manager BlackRock.

BlackRock is the largest asset manager in the world with an investment portfolio of almost five trillion euros. BlackRock is not only the largest single shareholder in almost all Dax companies, but also the largest shareholder in Google, Apple, Microsoft, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Nestlé and many other large corporations whose interests are anything but charitable. The idea that the highest German representative and Lobbyist of this company, which is committed like hardly any other against the interests of the general public and for the interests of big finance, should play a dominant role in the party and politics in the future, is downright grotesque. The fact that some media support him with the Argument that he has expertise seems strange. One thing Merz cannot be accused of: that he makes a secret of his market-liberal beliefs. He is a founding member of the neoliberal think tank Initiative Neue Soziale Marktwirtschaft and sits on the boards of the neoliberal network

Stiftung Marktwirtschaft. Merz does not need to be convinced by Liberal business lobbyists, he is one himself. Merz has always been a supporter of privatisation, deregulation and cuts in social policy. There is probably no politician in Germany who could hold water for Merz when it comes to neoliberalism.

Its second core characteristic is the unconditional transatlantic orientation. He sits on the boards of the council on Public Policy, the Aspen Institute, was CEO of Atlantik Brücke from 2009 to 2019 and a member of the German section of the Trilateral Commission. Here, too, Friedrich Merz is probably one of the most exposed politicians in Germany, who places not only the financial but also the foreign and security policy interests of the USA above the interests of its own citizens without reservation.

The return of a Friedrich Merz would not only be a political catastrophe for Germany, but above all a sign of poverty for our democracy. In this context, we must address the questions of the meaningfulness of democratic order:

What is wrong with this social order in which

In particular, the example of the exceptional lobbyist Friedrich Merz characterizes democracy-damaging behavior, which not only severely damages confidence in politics, but virtually abolishes democracy through economic vassals. It is clear evidence of the need for radical change in the legislative process.