The impression of a well-oiled football team winning the 2014 FIFA World Cup was definitely very positive. But as I tried not to be swayed by beliefs and stereotypes, I was overrun by the images of victory celebration: the frantic festivities of German fans for the overwhelming victory of their team over Brazil reminded me of quite similar massive festivities in Germany of the 1930s. Hands raised to the sky in a coordinated way and facial expressions of arrogant superiority were so different from the disorderly dancing reactions of Argentine fans when they celebrated their victory over the Netherlands. Even the statement made by the German team that “we decided at halftime break not to dishonour the Brazilians completely” – what else can it express other than arrogance and scorn for the loser?

Since antiquity, the societies of the various Germanic tribes carried some common features (which I call Societal DNA) that are still present: aggression of warriors/hunters, collective action, mutual support amongst the members of the team, discipline, reliability, lack of flexibility and clemency, looting of their neighbours and a tendency to dominate rightfully on the others as being ‘superior’ have not changed. They do not accept anyone else as an equal. They respect and esteem only those who have beaten them (see Romans, Americans). Contemporary Germans continue to be more ‘subjects’ than ‘free citizens’, as their compatriot Heinrich Mann (Der Untertan) notes.

Their society therefore has all the features for coining a strong and rigid group with trends to impose on others. They scorned and avoided manual work and this might be one reason why they engaged intensively in engineering producing ‘mechanical slaves’ and war machinery, where they excel on a global basis. And as the US imposed the dollar and introduced globalisation to plunder others peacefully, so the Germans adopted the euro in its current form as a Trojan horse to dominate economically and politically without resorting to war. They are thrifty with money and beyond. They shamefully refuse even to discuss what they owe to us since the time of WWII. They act with cold logic just like the systematic and chilly way they conquer step by step our country together with the Americans: with the cooperation of our ruling class, they aim to bring Greece to its knees so they can control it politically and buy the country’s wealth at a bargain price. They sent us ‘consultants for technical assistance’, who, in parallel, take an inventory record of everything they can for obvious reasons.

Many Germans covet the relaxed lifestyle of the South, which, however, their elite sees as a bad example and ensure that it is demonised, lest their own nationals attempt to adopt it. In the case of Greece, they even try to quash it (see suggestions by the Troika for wild taxes on property, fuel, summer houses and the cries by some German media: “Sell us your islands”).

Today their state guarantee shelter, work, education and social welfare for all Germans in exchange for full compliance with many restrictive rules and their
prompt obedience whenever their leadership deems it necessary (see e.g. their recent austerity decade).

Unlike all these, the less disciplined South follows its own societal DNA pattern of individualism, looseness, flexibility, light, freedom of imagination, lack of realism and passion. Surely the societies of the South are not as smooth and efficient, hence the massive migration to the north in times of poverty. Here again, the Germans have learned how to exploit these traits to their advantage by attracting at no cost the unemployed or badly paid talents of the weak South.

If we focus on the characteristics of the Greek society we find that its societal DNA has not changed considerably either over the centuries and from 1830 (Independence year) onwards it has not changed at all. Societal DNA therefore does not change quickly and easily. We will therefore continue to witness Germans, Greeks, French, Italians, Spaniards and Gypsies in the near future bearing the (positive and negative) traits that characterise them.

Is it then possible that the South and the North coexist harmoniously and equitably?

I believe that close cooperation of dissimilar societies is imposed by desire, interest and need. It’s like marriage of two different beings: of man and woman.
For the marriage to succeed, there is a continuing need for self-improvement and understanding, mutual acceptance and respect and generally a state of balance and not one of ‘having the upper hand’. Marriage is a difficult task that is being tested on a day-by-day basis. If it fails then the relationship becomes stressful and usually leads to divorce. By analogy, the South – North relationship will have good prospects only if each side accepts the diversity of the other and each Member State invests in its positive aspects and feels that it contributes and profits equally. Otherwise the future of the European Union seems bleak. May the clouds accumulating on the EU horizon not portend unpleasant developments led, once again, by Germany and with the USA again in the role of moderator of European affairs.

*Dimitris A. Kazis is a class A researcher for the Centre of Strategic Planning and Economic Research