Why I’m glad Germany defeated England
This was a victory for the social market over Anglo-Saxon capitalism.
By Peter Wilby Published 02 July 2010 15:34
Rejoice, rejoice at Germany's emphatic World Cup victory over England!
Stefan Szymanski, an economist, NS contributor and co-author of a book called Why England Lose, pointed out in the Times that the English Premier League, from which most England players are drawn, is "the child of the Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism": highly priced, barely regulated, controlled by plutocrats, marketed worldwide, full of extravagantly remunerated foreigners.
The Bundesliga, on the other hand, comprises highly regulated clubs (subject to strict national rules on what they spend) owned by local fans. The players include a large proportion of home-grown products.
The World Cup match, concluded Szymanski, was a contest between "the liberal British model" and "the German model of social democracy". Thank God our side won. The left doesn't have much to celebrate these days.
This news commentary appears in Peter Wilby's First Thoughts column in the current edition of the New Statesman.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















14 comments
Actually, it was very credit crash. Incompetent or corrupt regulator bamboozled by a cheat.
Wrong Toque. It was NOT a game between two nations (come on!) it was just a football match and it looks like the best team won. At least in Germany the man in the street can afford to go to a match, unlike here if your team is Arsenal or Man U. The players in the English clubs have the pay and status of celebrities but they are really just common garden football players. It is time England stop letting unfettered Capitalism have it's way with our football and put in some social justice rules. Then a better team would have a chance.
Why are incredibly ignorant people coming to this post and talking about football instead of politics, when they clearly know nothing about football.
I'm talking to you, Dorotheen. 'Common garden football players'? You're both ignorant and arrogant - the England team has some of the best players in the world. I'm going to run with a wild guess that this is the first world cup you've shown any interest in (if you even did).
England is a quality middle ranked footballing nation who actually on occasion punch above their weight.
Unfortunately the English media have the tendency to portray their team as being on a par with Germany or Argentina.
This delusion nearly always leads to a disappointing outcome in the World Cup or European Championships.
The very best the English should expect of their team is a Quarter Final place against a major power like Germany or Brazil. Anything above that is gravy.
Yes, England always produces quality players. However they are seldom in the same league as top players from Brazil, Germany or Argentina.
I mean Rooney and Lampard are good players. However are they as good as Messi or Kaka?
I've reported maverick's comment to the NS and I hope they'll delete it shortly.
monkee - say whatever you want, but I know simple man management. Do you want me to try it on you? no, hold on, I am. NNegghh, said Chandler,from Friends.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he1rYR_8T4s
Monkee is right we have the world's best footballers-only problem is the others win. Great stuff English logic.
Stupid. This British model (which only applies to Club level football) is successful at Club level football - hence Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool. All of which, incidentally, are unrivalled by German teams.
'Anglo-saxon capitalism' takes the prize, then.
I appreciate you're proud of your victory, but to try and use it to suggest political superiority, either of Germany or the left in general... Just no.
the kraut was right, if England had Bobby Moore and ten Indians, they would have won it. But that was the genius of Ramsey, he knew what is what.
Moronic. England vs Germany wasn't a contest between two leagues, it was a contest between two nations.
Although I have to say that if the English Premier League ran the England team (instead of the Football Association) I bet the England team would be far more successful than it is now.
no Toqu, it would hav made you players more power mad.
I made a point that if they fail, relatively, they had to be strung up outside the Tower of London. Well, not acshually strung up, pelted by otten tomatoes from the borough market, or something. Just something seriously demeaning.
EhtchTee, your points are entirely irrelevant, particularly considering the stress comes from
a) the public
b) the media
and not from our football management.
I was immediately annoyed by your heading, but reading further, I understood what you were really saying.
I would dearly love the FA spend more money encouraging and training youngsters in England, than they do on training youngsters in other nations - yes, they really do.
Just one point, though - don't conflate English with British. You wouldn't do it for the Scots, would you? And why not celebrate that the Scots and Welsh didn't even make it to the first round? The England bashing gets a little tiresome for us. From "the English don't exist" [guadianistas], to "the English are crap" - all the media.
“Capitalism is a simple game where competing interests battle it out and in the end social democracy wins.” If only.