Archive
Categories

Archiv für die Kategorie „Translation“

They Kissed His Hand and Called Him A Friend: Berlusconi, Sarkozy, and their Friend Gaddafi

[Original title: „Berlusconi, Sarkozy und ihr Freund Gaddafi“, Korrektheiten, november 8, 2011]

Let’s remember who was a friend Gaddafi had when he was still in power. For example Mr. Berlusconi who kissed his hand

or Mr. Sarkozy who called him a friend:

It is hard to decide what is most disgusting: the servility of those greasy guys who called the criminal Gaddafi a friend when it seemed to be politically adequate – or, when this was no longer opportune, their lack of character when they dropped him, hunted him with their air force, and left him to his murderers.

Cognitive Dissonance and Political Correctness

by Manfred Kleine-Hartlage

[Original title: „Kognitive Dissonanz und Political Correctness“, korrektheiten.com, april 19, 2011]

 

The most striking feature of the socially dominant leftist ideology is the glaring discrepancy between its doctrines and visible reality:

It is obviously true that intelligence is heritable, that Islam is anything but a religion of peace, that men and women are by nature different, that western nations owe their wealth above all their own creativity and intelligence (and not „exploitation of the Third world“), that multiethnic societies bring about ethnic conflicts, that normal families are more stable than patchwork families, etc., and everyone – if honest – knows it is true. And yet all these assertions are marked as „evil.“ „Good“ is just the opposite of all this, i.e. the bare nonsense.

How is it possible that a system of thought of such a surreal remoteness from reality whose absurdity even a fool can see through does not collapse under the weight of its own ridiculousness?

This has to do mainly with the fact that it does not operate with the distinction of true and false, but of good and evil. Nobody even claims that one of the above statements is untrue, but everyone is taught that they are evil:

That’s what we learn in kindergartens and schools, from newspapers and TV, in the diversity campaigns of our employers, in the gender-studies courses in universities, from European Union directives and resolutions of the UN; that’s what we are taught by pop stars and athletes, and what we are told from church pulpits and read on propaganda posters (which are in Berlin almost as ubiquitous as they were in the eastern part of the city before 1989). Not even in the football stadium we are spared – there is simply no propaganda-free zone in our life.

Spoken in Freudian terms, the superego is ideologically manipulated to internalize the affirmation of certain dogmatic assertions of fact as a moral norm, and thus even as a part of one’s own self-description, because of course nobody would like to describe himself as evil.

At the same time each person is confronted daily with information that contradicts this dogma, and is even forced to act accordingly (e.g. by avoiding to confront noisy yobs with immigrant backgrounds in public transport, even though there would be no reason to do so if the dogmas of Political correctness were correct in an empirical sense).

The manipulated citizen is living in a state of permanent doublethink. At a certain level of his consciousness he knows things which he must not admit at another level. He is living in a state of cognitive dissonance; to reduce this dissonance he has to struggle against one of the two components of his worldview, either against the learned and internalized or against the actually perceived.

To the ruling ideology, this cognitive dissonance means a latent danger: The citizen will be persuaded not to trust his eyes and to prefer to adhere to political correctness only as long as the PC social monopoly of morality is not challenged. The more gets around that you are by no means an „evil“ person when rejecting the leftist doctrines and defend an alternative description of reality, the greater – from the perspective of the ideologues – the risk that the cognitive dissonance will be dissolved to the other side: i.e. that the dogmas are thrown overboard in favor of one’s own perceptions rather than vice versa. This is the reason why alternative, particularly rightist descriptions of social reality must not be effectively articulated. They are noticed only in the distorted form in which they are portrayed by their opponents, who do anything to stamp them „evil“. The stronger the tension between visible reality and the leftist dogma system, the more grimly the monopoly has to be defended. The militant intolerance we encounter every day is an expression of weakness, not strength of our opponents.

As long, however, as this tension does not lead to an overall breakdown of political correctness, its absurdity, from the standpoint of the ideologues, is quite functional:

It forces people to fight against their own better insight. Yet sometimes this insight gives vent to itself: At the latest after the third beer when they are alone and believe no one is listening to them, even liberal high school teachers complain about the „fucking wogs, don’t get anything“, and in a small circle a green top politician says she would „like to throw a bomb at Neukölln“. (Both quotes were reported by trustworthy sources.) Such breakthroughs of reality, however, do not lead to a change of attitude, but (because of the bad conscience about the fact that such realities at all perceived), to increased penitential exercises (at the expense of third parties), and therefore a intensifying of the „fight against the Right“. The hysterical fanaticism with which the remote-controlled gooder fights „against the Right“ is psychologically easily to decode as a fight against the own challenge by reality. In the „Right“ they fight what they fear within themselves.

On the other hand, it is just the absurdity of leftist ideology that allows a clear distinction between friend and foe: Since it is not based on arguments, but at a priori set moral claims, it cannot be discussed. You can submit to it or not. Whoever affirms the ideology has to make this affirmation known through appropriate behavior: gender-neutral language, distancing oneself from the „Right“, i.e. any people and opinions labeled as evil, avoiding words that are on the index, such as „Negro“, using ideological vocabulary. Such submission rituals are the equivalent of the Gesslerhut or the Hitler salute or the Islamic headscarf requirement: They differentiate the subjecting from the nonconformist and expose the latter to the firing.

And finally, it is just the ideology’s remoteness from reality that allows its use as a means of manipulation:

Since facts do not matter, and the ideological description of reality cannot be challenged with reference to facts, there is no standard for individual judgments. People who have been conditioned to confuse true/false with good/evil, are literally unable to make use their own reason.

The puzzled citizen thus depends on the changing provisional patterns of explanation offered by various „authorities“ – media, politicians, scientists. He grabs these patterns of explanation, even considers them to be his own, because otherwise the world that he believes to know would slip away. He is in the situation in of a lost wanderer, being offered a (wrong) map. Even if the map seems odd, he will suppress his doubts, because the mere existence of the map gives him a false sense of „safety“ he would lose once he soberly and clearly states that it shows a completely different area than the one where he actually is. The human mind is constructed to accept any interpretation pattern, and be it absurd, rather than none.

He will, for example, rather believe that a terrorist assault commited by a man shouting „Allahu Akbar“ has nothing to do with Islam (and has therefore to be attributed to poverty, mental illness, discrimination, special local tribal customs in the Thingamabob desert, or whatever ad-hoc explanation the media currently offer), rather than to accept the „evil“-stamped statement that Islam is possibly a jihad system.

But do not forget: As much as this helps cement leftist ideology, it is, at the same time, its Achilles heel. This Achilles‘ heel is what we have to target at.

Original Sound Islam

This video shows a Flamish islamist on a panel discussion with Filip Dewinter, leader of Vlaams Belang, an identitarian anti-immigration party. It is particularly interesting because of the effrontery with which this Muslim declares that you are either a democrat, or a Muslim, and that both is inconsistent and incompatible – something that is called „Islamophobia“ when stated by a European conservative:

Thorsten Hinz: State of Emergency

by Thorsten Hinz

„Ausnahmezustand“, october 16, 2011, jungefreiheit.de

Translation by Google, revised by MKH

The question of the future government practice in Europe, recently raised by Heino Bosselmann, has found a first response with the bailout Act,  approved on 29thSeptember : We are in an undeclared state of emergency! The state of emergency includes the total or partial suspension of civil rights. Having pledged the German welfare state,  the Bundestag has actually suspended our property rights. Moreover, the state of emergency means transferring legislative powers from parliament to the executive (government). The current special feature is that the government is instructed directly by the „financial markets“.

If in case future bailouts the federal government requires a „special urgency“ to be declared, „(…) the participation rights of the Bundestag and the Budget Committee will be exercised by a small commission of Budget Committee members  to be elected by the Bundestag for a legislative period. The number of appointees is the smallest possible allowing  each fraction to nominate at least one member and maintaining the majority ratios. In the case of an emergency measure requiring the purchase of bonds on the secondary market in order to prevent contagion, a particular urgency is regularly to be supposed. “

Budgetary rights shrinking to pro forma competence

De facto, the government has a constant breakthrough right bypassing the Parliament. Its „sovereign right“ – the budgetary right – shrinks to the pro forma competence of  constitutional monarchs. These have the right to be informed , to be heard, to advise, and to warn. But the latter (see the Pofalla-Bosbach controversy) please not too loud! A special committee of nine members shall take the place of the Bundestag. CDU / CSU and SPD are represented by three, FDP, Greens and Left by one representative each. As top officials of the party state they themselves belong to the executive rather than to legislature. They are welded together by the „Operation maintain power.“ Together and with criminal negligence, they have pushed through the disastrous €-concept, now they are united by their interest to obfuscate the disaster and their own responsibility.

The substitute body is much smaller than the „Joint Committee“, which takes over in case of emergency or in a war nuclear bunker as deputy of the Bundestag and Bundesrat. This includes 48 members. In the SED Politburo at least 22 comrades were involved, and a handful of candidates were added. The concentration of power now agreed upon shows how serious the situation is considered!

The Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, in 2003, published  the writing „State of Emergency“. It was written under the impact of the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, an area of legalized lawlessness. In all Western democracies, he writes, „the official declaration of the state of emergency is increasingly being replaced by an unprecedented expansion of the security paradigm as a normal technique of government“. Supplementing the safety paradigm by the banking paradigm, we have formulated the current and future government technique.

Convulsions of the financial markets decide on the measures

For Carl Schmitt, extensively quoted by Agamben, the state of emergency was actually still an exception. It was imposed if the legal order could no longer be saved by lawful means.  But it remained the reference point and the goal of policy. Agamben goes beyond Schmitt, forecasting an undeclared state of emergency in permanence. The „permanent bailout“ to be established from 2013 confirms the prognosis. The law state needn’t be overridden, it is simply reshaped by the measure state. Previously there were racial or social utopias, which defined the specific measures, now there are the convulsions of the financial markets.

Leafing through the books of the G.D.R. civics lessons, I noted that their caustic remarks about the illusory character of bourgeois democracy and the dependence of the politics on the financial oligarchy may contain much more truth than I ever would have admitted. And I find myself a little bit regretting Erich Honecker: Because he didn’t live long enough to see this happen!

Interview with Junge Freiheit: How does Islam work?

Interview of the German weekly Junge Freiheit with Manfred Kleine-Hartlage, 25th february 2011

How does Islam work?“ This question is asked Manfred Kleine-Hartlage. For the first time a social scientist dissects the deep structure of the Islamic culture.

Interviewer: Moritz Schwarz

Mr. Kleine-Hartlage, how does Islam work?

Kleine-Hartlage: It is a comprehensive system regulating all areas of life. There is no separation between religion here,  politics there,  law there – therefore none between Islam and Islamism, either. Islamism is not an abuse of Islam, because Islam is different from our worldview.

[Read more on Gates of Vienna….]