Maas and Scholz are not an unfortunate accident of the Social Democrats

The patriarchal, Bismarck social laws were always unconditionally accepted by the German social democracy: large parts of the wages of the dependent employees are transferred to the social funds and administered by the political class. These wage shares are added to the federal budget and a part is given back as alms. Only a relatively small part of the amount paid into the unemployment insurance fund is returned to the unemployed in case of unemployment after decades of work. First the war in Afghanistan must be financed, the excessive number of members of the Bundestag must be funded and the circles that have not paid child benefit into the social funds must also receive it. German social democracy has always been eagerly involved in defending this distribution mechanism.
Finance Minister Scholz’s saying that there is money for everything, but not for everything at the same time, is only one variant of the somewhat clumsier post-election language rule common among right-wing parties to explain that there is not money for everything through the economy of the previous government.
Willy Brandt and his advisors had recognised that there were great opportunities for market expansion and the exploitation of capital in Eastern Europe and created the political conditions, while Helmut Schmidt was already looking at trade with China and globalised expansion. However, he was replaced by Helmut Kohl, who promised faster profits and greater obedience to American wishes. Maas has understood that social democracy, as the Fischer Greens have shown, can only hold its own in government if it submits to American wishes and does business with the East only as long as American interests are not impaired. Germany must purchase American gas, freeze trade with Iran and of course support the regime change in South America. The access to Venezuela’s oil is too tempting, perhaps the German industry can also profit a little from it. The mass media take great pains to describe the attempted coups as humanitarian action and feel so confident that they risk making themselves look ridiculous. And Maas makes himself a puppet and supports the Quisling of the USA. But the media thank him: the threat of a Chilean massacre is concealed.