Germany as the “pay master”

Germany is also often articulated in the position of being a net contributor or pay master, not only in the crisis but beyond. This role is also sometimes described as something that Germany or the Germans are not pleased with.

(6) Wer die Auktion griechischer Staatsanleihen durch Überweisungen aus Brüssel[Source1] oder Frankfurt[Source2] ablösen will, der lädt zu weiteren Spekulationen gegen den Euro ein, der überschätzt die Finanzkraft Deutschlands[Possessor] und der riskiert das Scheitern der Währungsunion.

(Wer den Euro rettet. FAZ February 25th 2010)

In this excerpt, Brussels and Frankfurt are used in a metonymic fashion for the EU and the German Bundesbank respectively. The text makes the claim that whoever wants to redeem the auction of Greek government bonds through transfers from either the EU or from the Bundesbank (i.e. Germany), will overestimate the financial strength of Germany and risk the failure of the Monetary Union. The implication is therefore that neither is Germany able to pay for everything nor is it necessarily desirable. The next excerpt makes this claim more explicitly:

(7) Deutschland[Agent] als wohlhabendes Land[Role] kann und muss seinen Beitrag leisten. Aber alle Lasten des Zusammenhalts kann es[Agent] nicht stemmen, dazu reicht seine Kraft nicht mehr. (Normales Deutschland.

FAZ April 3rd 2010)

Germany is here in the Agent position with the verb “make a contribution” (Beitrag leisten). This verb is however modified with the modal verbs kann and muss, which denote ability and necessity respectively. These modality expressions are linked to the identification of Germany as a “well-off country” in the Role position, although this link is not necessary: the sentence would function well without the identifying als construct. In its current form, the sentence carries the implicit meaning of “because Germany is a well-off country, it can and must make its contribution”. Both the ability

and the obligation of making a contribution follow from the identity as a well-off country. The next clause is an extension, however, which restricts the scope of this contribution: Germany cannot bear all the burden, because it runs out of strength. This latter idea is expressed in the following excerpt:

(8) Denn der Euro scheitert sicher, wenn aus der Währungsunion eine Haftungsgemeinschaft und Transferunion würde, die[Range] selbst Deutschland[Agent] nicht bezahlen könnte. (Im Sumpf. FAZ April 21st 2010)

Here the articulation is not as explicit as in the preceding examples. Like before, Germany is in the position of an Agent, with the verb bezahlen (to pay). The verb takes the words “liability community” and “transfer union” as its Range. These close synonyms denote the concept of a monetary union where financial burdens, including debts, are shared by all the members. It is this kind of monetary union that “even Germany would be unable to pay”.

The word “even” has a special importance here, because it carries a similar idea as the preceding excerpt in a condensed form: Germany is able to make a big financial contribution, but even Germany cannot pay for everything. The following excerpt from a later part of the corpus also expresses the idea of Germany as a net contributor and the country’s ambivalent stance towards this role:

(9) Seit Jahrzehnten zahlt Deutschland[Agent] mehr ein, als es[Beneficiary] aus den diversen Beihilfetöpfen ausgezahlt bekommt ̶ mal bereitwillig, mal murrend[Manner]. (Die politische Währungsunion. FAZ September 1st 2010)

In the first clause Germany in the Agent role with the verb einzahlen (to pay, make a contribution) and in the second clause it takes the role of the Beneficiary (ausgezahlt bekommen, to be paid something). The relationship between these clauses is comparative, whereby the contributions are described as exceeding the amount of

payments received. This sentence is modified by the adverbials of manner mal bereitwillig, mal murrend (sometimes willingly, sometimes grudgingly). This is an insofar untypical expression for the corpus in that it portrays a country undergoing an affective experience, whereas usually it is the people who are described as feeling subjects (e.g. Deutsche, Bürger: see the next excerpt for an example of this).

In the context of the crisis, the reason for Germany having to pay is because of Greece’s and others’ reckless accumulation of debt (Schuldenmacherei), and it is often questioned why Germany would have to do this. Germany is also identified as Zahlmeister ¹⁵ (pay master) Geberland (contributing country) ¹⁶ or Einzahler (contributor)¹⁷, or otherwise linked in the Agent position with the verbs haften (to assume liability)¹⁸ and zahlen (to pay)¹⁹, always with modal verb soll denoting obligation.

While the use of the terms Einzahler, Geberland and especially Zahlmeister all carry a more or less negative connotation, not to mention the more subtle negative connotation attached to the modal verb soll in connection with verbs denoting payment, nowhere is dissatisfaction with the net contributor role expressed so strongly as in the following two excerpts:

(10) Apropos Nettozahler[Matter]: Es gibt nicht viele andere Themen, bei denen die Empörungsbereitschaft der Deutschen[Experiencer] so hoch ist. Und es war der zum Populismus neigende Kanzler Schröder[Sayer], der gegen das

“Verbraten” deutscher Gelder[Patient] in Brüssel polemisierte. Deutsche Politik und Öffentlichkeit[Counteragent] lassen sich nur noch mäßig von dem Argument beeindrucken, das "Schmieren" der europäischen Milieus – die Fortsetzung der alten Zahlmeisterrolle – diene auch künftig deutschen (Export-)Interessen.[Beneficiary] (Normales Deutschland. FAZ April 3rd 2010)

15 In Haftung, FAZ May 7th 2010

16 In Haftung, FAZ May 7th 2010

17 Hilfe und Strafe. FAZ March 26th 2010

18 In Haftung, FAZ May 7th 2010

19 Griechische Wette, April 25th 2010

(11) Die übliche Methode, Risse und sich auftuende Abgründe in der EU[Locative] mit deutschem Geld[Instrument] zuzuschütten, ist nunmehr, da es um den Bankrott ganzer Staaten und das Aufeinanderprallen von Kulturengeht, jedoch an ihre Grenzen gelangt. (Im Namen Europas. FAZ May 7th 2010)

In the first sentence of excerpt 9 we find the word Nettozahler (net contributor) as the Matter, signaled by the word apropos (Speaking of which, on the subject of). The double colon makes it clear that what follows is an elaboration. The next sentence features Deutsche as Experiencer with a nominalized adjective signifying the quality of being ready to anger, Empörungsbereitschaft. What causes them to anger is the fact of being a net contributor: the word “theme” (Matter) is linked to “net contributor”

(Reason) by means of the colon.

The former Chancellor Schröder appears here in the Sayer role, who is described as having highlighted Germany’s net contributor role in a polemical way. We also see the use of two metaphoric expressions related to money, which are both placed in quotation marks: “roasting” and “lubricating”. The verb “roasting” evokes the image of a wasteful use of money, at least from some perspective; the verb “lubricate”, on the other hand, is another word for bribing. This “lubricating”, as a nominalized process in an Agent role, is here equated in a supplementary clause with the continuation of Germany’s alte Zahlmeisterrolle (old pay master role) also in the Agent role. This role would (allegedly, indicated by the subjunctive mode) serve German (export) interests (deutsche (Export-)Interessen).

It is this equation of Germany playing the pay master and in turn getting a boost for its exports that is described as being no longer convincing for “German politics and public life” (deutsche Politik und Öffentlichkeit). These are in the position of Counteragent and the object of the verb beeindrucken (to impress). Making this kind of distinction between “politics” and “public” is typical for the corpus, and we will meet variations of this as we go on. It can be argued that this is a way to “split” a country into state and the

nation, the “elite” and the people, and to emphasize their alignment, like in this case.

This is because the country name Deutschland can have connotations which refer only to the government, but here the text is zooming into the country, highlighting its layers and emphasizing their uniform view.

In excerpt 10 Germany does not appear as an Agent in a nominalized form; rather, German agency is hidden in the adjective deutsch, collocated with the word Geld (money) and in the role of an Instrument. The use of this “instrument” to “stitch the cracks and gaping rifts in the EU” becomes identified as a “common method” and is given the circumstantial attribute of “being at its limits”. The same ideas are thereby expressed as in previous excerpts: although Germany is well capable of taking on the pay master role and has done so in the past, there are limits to that role.