from Tim Foyle
Why do otherwise perfectly intelligent, thoughtful and rational people resist the claim that sociopaths are conspiring to manipulate and deceive them? And why do they defend this unfounded viewpoint with such vehemence?
History knows the machinations of liars, thieves, tyrants and narcissists and their devastating effects. Even today, there is ample evidence of corruption and extraordinary deception.
We know without a doubt that politicians lie and hide their connections and that corporations routinely display an utter disdain for moral standards - that corruption surrounds us.
We know that the revolving doors between business and politics, the lobbying system, corrupt supervisory authorities, the media and the judiciary mean that abuses are practically never brought to justice.
We know that the press occasionally reports on these things, but never pursues them with any real vigor.
We know that misconduct in the secret services and law enforcement agencies is commonplace on a breathtaking scale and that justice is never served here either.
We know that governments repeatedly ignore or trample on the rights of the people and actively abuse and mistreat the people. None of this is uncontroversial.
So what exactly is it that conspiracy deniers refuse to acknowledge with such fervor, self-righteousness and condescension? Why, against all evidence, do they derisively and contemptuously defend the crumbling illusion that "the great and good" are up there somewhere, have everything under control, have only our best interests at heart and are conscientious, wise and sincere? That the press serves the people and the truth and not the crooks? That one injustice after another results from mistakes and oversights and never from the dreaded word "conspiracy"?
What sensible person would continue to live in such a fantasy world?
The disagreement here is only about scope. Someone who is genuinely curious about the plans of powerful sociopaths will not limit his curiosity to one company or one nation. Why would he do that? Such a person assumes that the same patterns evident at the local level are likely to be found throughout the food chain of power. However, conspiracy deniers claim this is absurd.
And why?
It is painfully obvious that the pyramidal social and legal structures that humanity has allowed to emerge are precisely the kind of dominance hierarchies that undoubtedly favor the sociopath. A human being operating with a normal and healthy cooperative mindset has little inclination to engage in the struggles necessary to climb a corporate or political ladder.
So what do the conspiracy deniers imagine the 70 million or more sociopaths in the world do all day, born into a "game" where all the wealth and power is at the top of the pyramid, while the most effective attributes for "winning" are ruthlessness and amorality? Have they never played Monopoly?
Sociopaths do not consciously choose their worldview and are simply unable to understand why normal people put themselves at such an incredible disadvantage by limiting themselves with conscientiousness and empathy that are as incomprehensible to the sociopath as a world without them is to the human.
All the sociopath has to do to win in this game is to lie publicly and conspire privately at the same time. What could be easier? To continue to believe in 2021 that the world we live in is not largely driven by this dynamic is bordering on reckless naivety and verging on insanity. Where does such an unintentionally destructive impulse come from?
Infants have an innate trust in the people they are with - a trust that is justified in most cases. The infant could not survive otherwise.
In a rational and healthy society, this deep instinct would evolve with the development of the psyche. With the development of self-awareness, cognitive and logical abilities and skepticism in the individual, this innate impulse to trust would continue to be understood as a central need of the psyche. There would be shared belief systems to consciously develop this infantile impulse further, to consciously place this belief somewhere - in values and beliefs of lasting importance and value to society, the individual or ideally both.
Reverence and respect for tradition, natural forces, ancestors, reason, truth, beauty, freedom, the innate value of life, or the initiating spirit of all things could be considered valid resting points in which we consciously place our trust and faith - as well as those derived from more formalized belief systems.
Regardless of the path one has taken to develop a personal faith, the point here is to bring one's awareness and realization to this innate impulse. I believe that this is a profound responsibility - to develop and cultivate a mature faith - that many are understandably unaware of.
What happens when there is a childish need within us that has never developed beyond its original survival function of trusting those around us who are simply the most powerful, the most present and the most active? If we have never really explored our own psyche and deeply questioned what we really believe and why? When our motivation to trust something or someone is unquestioned? When philosophy is left to the philosophers?
I submit that the answer is simple, and the evidence of this phenomenon and the havoc it wreaks is all around us: the innate impulse to trust the mother never develops, never meets its counterweight, reason (or mature faith), and remains forever on its "default setting" as a child.
While the immature psyche no longer depends on its parents for its well-being, the powerful and motivating rationale I have described remains intact: unchallenged, unconsidered and undeveloped. And in a world where stability and security are but a distant memory, these survival instincts, rather than being well-honed, considered, relevant, demanding and current, remain literally those of a baby. One trusts in the biggest, loudest, most present and undeniable force, because instinct says survival depends on it.
And in this great "world kindergarten", the most omnipresent force is the network of institutions that constantly convey an undeserved image of power, calm, competence, concern and stability.
In my view, this is why conspiracy deniers can cling to and aggressively defend the completely illogical notion that corruption, deceit, malice and narcissism somehow - above a certain undefined level of the social hierarchy - mysteriously disappear. That, contrary to the maxim, the more power a person has, the more integrity they are bound to display. These poor deluded souls basically believe that where personal experience and prior knowledge cannot fill the gaps in their world view - in short, where there is a barred door - mommy and daddy are behind it, figuring out how best to ensure that their little treasure is forever well, happy and safe.
This is the core, the comforting illusion that underlies the conspiracy deniers' way of thinking, the dilapidated foundation on which they build a towering castle of justification from which they pompously mock and deride those who see it differently.
This explains why the conspiracy denier attacks any suggestion that the caretaker archetype is no longer there - that sociopaths are behind the barred door, despising us all or ignoring us completely. The conspiracy denier will attack any such suggestion as viciously as if his survival depended on it - which, in a sense, is the case in the structure of his unconscious and precarious psyche.
Their sense of well-being, security, comfort, even a future at all, is fully (and completely unconsciously) invested in this fantasy. The infant has never matured, and since it is unaware of this, except that it is a deep attachment to its personal security, it will fiercely attack any threat to this unconscious and central aspect of its worldview.
The tiresomely frequent refrain of conspiracy deniers is: "There can't be such a big conspiracy".
The simple answer to such a self-proclaimed expert on conspiracies is obvious: how big?
The world's largest "medical" companies can treat settling lawsuits as a mere cost of doing business for decades, for crimes ranging from suppressing unwanted test results to multiple murders resulting from undeclared tests to colossal environmental crimes.
Governments carry out the most heinous and unimaginable "experiments" (crimes) on their own people without any consequences.
Politicians habitually lie to our faces, without consequences.
And so on and so forth. At what point exactly does a conspiracy become so big that "they" can no longer get away with it, and why? I suspect it's the point at which the conspiracy deniers' cognitive abilities begin to wane and their unconscious survival instinct kicks in. The point at which the intellect is overwhelmed by the magnitude of events and instinct leads one to retreat into the familiar, comforting belief that one has known and cultivated since the first moment one's lips found the nipple. The belief that someone else cares - that where the world becomes unknown to us, there is a powerful and benevolent human authority that we need only trust unconditionally to guarantee eternal emotional security.
This dangerous delusion could be the central factor that puts the physical safety and future of humanity in the hands of sociopaths.
To all those who have a habit of dismissing people who question, investigate and are skeptical as aluminum hat-wearing, paranoid, anti-science Trump supporters, let me ask you: What do you believe in? What do you put your faith in and why? How is it that while no one trusts governments, you seem to unquestioningly trust nascent global governance organizations? How is this to be understood?
When you place your trust in such organizations, remember that in the modern global age, however extraordinarily well they may present themselves, these organizations are simply larger manifestations of the local versions we know we cannot trust. They are not our parents and show no loyalty to humane values. There is no reason to believe any of them.
If you have not yet developed a conscious faith or asked yourself in depth why you believe the way you do, such an attitude may seem misanthropic, but in truth it is the opposite. These organizations have only earned your trust with PR money and glossy lies. The real power still lies with the people.
There is a reason why Buddhists strongly advise putting one's trust in the Dharma or natural law of life and not in persons, and that similar sayings are common in other belief systems.
Power corrupts. And in today's world, misplaced and unfounded trust could be one of the greatest sources of power of all.
There are huge criminal conspiracies. The evidence is overwhelming. The extent of current conspiracies is unknown, but there is no reason to believe that in the new global age the sociopathic quest for power or the possession of the means to achieve it will diminish. Certainly not as long as dissenting opinions are ridiculed and censored by gatekeepers, "useful idiots" and conspiracy deniers who are in fact working directly with the sociopathic agenda by relentlessly attacking those who seek to expose the wrongs.
It is the urgent responsibility of every human being to expose sociopathic agendas wherever they exist - and never to attack those who endeavor to do so.
Now more than ever is the time to put aside childish things and childish impulses and stand up as adults to protect the future of children who have no choice but to entrust their lives to us.
This essay has focused on what I believe to be the deepest psychological driver of conspiracy denial.
There are certainly others, such as the desire to be accepted; the avoidance of knowledge about and confrontation with the inner and outer shadow; the maintenance of a positive and righteous self-image: a generalized version of the "flying monkey" phenomenon in which a self-interested and vicious class protects itself by rallying around the bully; the subtle unconscious adoption of the sociopathic worldview (e.g. The subtle, unconscious adoption of the sociopathic worldview (e.g., "humanity is the virus"); outrage-seeking/superiority complex/status games; a stunted or unambitious intellect that finds validation by maintaining the status quo; the dissociative defense mechanism of imagining that crimes and horrors committed repeatedly in our lifetimes are somehow not happening now, not "here"; and plain old-fashioned laziness and cowardice.
The text was first published in English on March 12, 2021 in the Off-Guardian published.
Thank you for your Support of independent journalism in Germany.
English 
German 
Spanish
58 Responses
Thank you for your article.
Here is a very good preparation of the data:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgbG3mdF1pc
Thanks for the article! Unfortunately, the author is right. Most people have never grown up. And the education system doesn't encourage this growing up either. Not even at universities any more. Education ("training") - yes, independence - no.
The effects can be clearly observed: As soon as the "incidence", and therefore the scaremongering, rises, the poll ratings for the governing parties also rise again. It is a blessing for them that it is now autumn and the incidence of colds is rising again, as it does every year, just in time for the elections.
Unfortunately, the article is hopeless. Because if the majority of people are so easily manipulated by insecurity and fear, then democracy makes no sense. Only people who think for themselves can make informed decisions. Everyone else is being manipulated.
An article that is right, but hopeless.
Thank you for this beautiful, soothing article! May I just point out a small translation error? In the 8th paragraph, the original English reads "scrupulous". In the German version, this is translated as "scrupulous". But it means the opposite: "scrupulous, conscientious". That also makes more sense in context. - Otherwise, as I said, it's great that this article exists. Thanks for translating and providing it.
Dear Mr. Mumm, thank you very much for your kind comment. It has now been corrected. Best ML.
I don't think that this can only be explained by naivety, but often by character. It is often the "bacon belt" of power, corrupted to maintain power, which, out of concern for its own (however small) sinecures, bends over backwards in front of the authorities and wants to preserve the system at all costs, which inevitably goes hand in hand with ignoring and denying system-inherent conspiracies and crimes.
Thank you for these constructive contributions, especially Mr. Dittmann's. It's encouraging that so many people think like us because we are among the unvaccinated.
The so-called "democratic conditions" will only really come into play after the federal elections. A statutory vaccination requirement will certainly be introduced.
Kind regards Greetings Elke Müller
I would say so, also because I have been observing this for decades:
The more supposedly "intelligent", because the educational dictates of the system are strictly followed (i.e. without even thinking for themselves), the more "intelligence" is directly associated with imposed artificial "intelligence", and thus linked to supposed education,
the less truly intelligent these educated people are.
The would-be philosopher Richard David Precht is a glaring and shining example of this! - Not a trace of intelligence, if only because philosophy, which presupposes a certain intelligence, should be based on freedom alone.
Since February 2020, this starting signal for actual conspiracies against us all, I have been happy to quote a person who is actually uneducated according to these patterns, without a TV, cell phone or PC, whom I meet here in the forest from time to time and is called "Waldler-Sepp" -
" Af oamal sans alle deppert worn ! " - he said, back in February 2020.
Yes - the man is intelligent!
He immediately recognized this conspiracy with a clear "uneducated" mind.
I don't even want to start talking about most of them, who even count themselves as intellectuals.
I associate intelligence more with an ability to understand humanity, which would inevitably mean that one immediately recognizes conspiracies against humanity as such...
but how the supposed intelligentsia in this country, in their educated stupidity, blindly follow the destroyers of freedom and justice and humanism, and even defend dehumanization.
Or as a former landlord of my favorite pub used to say:
"We have two girls in our village and one is as blue as the other".
And let's take a look at these psychopaths and sociopaths who govern us - they are teeming with academics and I beg your pardon, where is there a single intelligent person among them?
Thank you very much,
It also has something to do with "facade democracy". In the USA, I have noticed how many people, some of them intelligent, are now dismissing the possibility that large-scale electoral fraud could have taken place. Anyone who thinks such a thing is possible is already "questioning democracy". This is obviously also about having to believe that everything is ultimately good - or more precisely: that those up there (at least the "right people" who "belong there") are ultimately good. The façade must be maintained because people need to believe in it in order to function. Bad times for criticism and debate.
Dear Mr. Foyle,
I was impressed by your profound, complex and multifaceted contribution and
Your view of the conspiracy deniers has broadened my horizons once again.
Thank you for that.
( not even a hundred people would be able to grasp the depth of your contribution )
I am convinced that initial (Davos, software company, shipping, internet platform, search engine, etc.).
pursue an agenda of monetary interest or are driven by megalomania.
This was not the first attempt, but they have learned from their incompetence and organized it better strategically.
Yes, and then there are the rank and file, greedy, sociopathic, envious or complex professional politicians, doctors, publicists, etc.
who are often paid handsomely and certainly also cowardly followers.
At this point, I differentiate on the question of where the journey is going.
Many countries have returned to a sense of proportion and reason.
A few years ago, I didn't understand why professional politicians are poison for a democracy.
Respectfully
Veit Hartung
The masses of Michl-Germans are obviously badly brainwashed...
With decadent pleasure, people wallow in the eternal guilt trap of the historical past in a servile, simply masochistic manner and submissively worship the idol of multi-culti.
On their knees, dishonorable, undignified, without pride and character, the mass of German sleeping sheep vegetate hunched over and perfectly politically correct.
We are obediently trying to satisfy the whole world and even save the global climate (which cannot be influenced by humans), as dictatorially ordered by our establishment politician clique of the CDU/CSU/SPD/GREENS/LEFT/FDP parliamentary group.
So: Deutsch-Michl, pray and work, don't be lazy, pay your taxes and shut up.
Germany has been overwhelmed for years. Its own people are degenerating. Look at the (embellished) Hartz4 and unemployment figures, the mini-pensions that people have to make do with even though they have worked hard all their lives. There is also the deplorable state of health care, the financial misery in nursing homes, the local homeless people on our dilapidated streets, etc.
Meanwhile, small pensioners here are even searching for returnable bottles in garbage bins so that they can survive everyday misery better with a few more cents. Many of the worst abuses in our own country are crying out to be remedied.
There is undoubtedly sufficient tax revenue available. It's just that they are being misallocated - see the endless, gigantic payments all over the world, which are also the result of a failed European and euro policy. We are the paying oxen of Europe.
This is how you gamble away Germany's future.
Anyone who points out these facts, and that we are being lied to and deceived by politicians and willing kipper journalists of the mainstream and the state GEZ rip-off broadcasters (you can also lie by omission, by withholding reports!) and that laws are being broken and hard-earned tax money squandered all over the world, is defamed as a "CONSPIRACY THEORETIC". In any case, anyone who doesn't listen to the authorities and sign off on all "public service" announcements as if they were truths fallen from heaven is an evil "right-wing extremist", "racist" and Nazi.
The impudence with which our clique of politicians in Berlin and Brussels, who reside in cloud cuckoo land and are fat-fattened (with salaries and additional income), bully and exploit the German people is unbelievable. Dictatorship of opinion and censorship of opinion are used to keep citizens docile and servile.
The Basic Law and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of December 10, 1948, Art. 19, are suspended: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold and hold opinions without interference of any kind and to seek, obtain and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
Plain text:
But freedom of expression - which differs from the opinion of those in power - is no longer tolerated in the Federal Republic of Germany (BananenRepublikDeutschland). Unwelcome expressions of opinion are deliberately censored.
No one here is allowed to make a fuss about the dictatorship of opinion in communist countries. The incarnate misfortune for our country, the former communist Merkel, who autocratically controls the fate of Germany, has seen to that. And numerous willing paladins are eagerly assisting her.
Only a few media outlets, such as thankfully here, are still able to publish politically critical texts and commentaries.
But apparently all the warnings about this dictatorial sham democracy, the FRG, are "talk to the wind" and "for nothing".
Because the masses of the people, obedient to authority and brainwashed as if under hypnosis, constantly vote for the aforementioned old parties - no matter how often they are kicked in the ass and terrorized by these political luminaries of incompetence. This will certainly happen again at the federal elections on September 26, 2021.
Want to bet?
In the meantime, there is even a growing suspicion that our country is being deliberately and intentionally steered into the abyss. Surely the brains of our political bigwigs cannot be contaminated with so much stupidity, or filled with total stupidity?
We are a country that no longer has a single spark of pride and honor!
A bag land that only serves the purpose of paying, delivering and accepting.
To be borne, endured and tolerated.
I feel sick when I think about it all.
It disgusts me and makes me feel ashamed.
However, the MASS of the German-Michl people is probably somehow in their genes to simply sycophantically follow the respective leaders (here the neologism gender gaga "inside" fits) and their vassals into the abyss. Unconditionally.
And this over and over again - until, in the not too distant future, this Germany of ours will no longer exist.
"Happy slaves are the bitterest enemies of freedom," is a quote from Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach. Unfortunately, a variation of this applies to Germany: the most bitter enemy of freedom is the slave who does not know that he is one. And so the lies we believe become the truths we live with.
I would like to express my highest appreciation for the post and the comments and the cultivated interaction with each other. The thought of not being alone is really good, because it's getting lonelier and lonelier around me.
Thank you for this article. I read it with satisfaction, despair and tears.
I would love to send this article to my son, who is actually a "critical spirit" but is almost completely on the mainstream side of the pandemic issue. Unfortunately, in the articles that I can underline in terms of content on 100% - including on other independent platforms - I keep finding passages that more or less don't take "the other side" seriously. If my son were to read the article, he would be offended in some places because his good faith in the correctness of his convictions is described as "unreflective". He doesn't see it that way because he can't see it at all. Just like many people around me. They also "mean well" when they campaign for vaccination and thus, according to their convictions, for saving lives.
This means that we speak "different languages" in so many places in our society. I would like to see more articles that name all the critical points and other views without discrediting those who (so far) see it differently in any way.
This is certainly not easy, but would be better accepted by people who do not already share the author's opinion.
Nor is it a lack of reflection. As Watzlawick, often quoted but rarely fully understood to this day, correctly described, we only ever know something exactly when something is wrong. We see the actions of people and events, but what we interpret into things is mostly a highly subjective "opinion", a belief, not knowledge.
The view that you would protect others by getting vaccinated or wearing (largely) useless face coverings usually comes, put simply, from a lack of knowledge, which in turn is partly due to a lack of courage to acknowledge knowledge. As for this, you might send your son the following quote. It makes it clear, both rationally and on a deep emotional level, why this narrative is simply nonsense. If you search for it, you will find the full quote. Best wishes to your son!
"Now I've finally understood it. Just by living, we hurt something or someone. That is life. It's the hurting itself. That's why we have to be able to forgive each other. Forgive those who share this world with us. ... "
We also have a son like that.
He would never read this article either.
Communication with him is not possible.
He refers to my concerned emails as hate emails.
He doesn't seem to lack intelligence, he's a doctor.
He moves in a circle of highly qualified people who
believe everything the mainstream says.
He will also be vaccinated twice, if it will be possible to vaccinate our
have her little grandchild vaccinated.
Where have we got to?
I know this very well from my daughter and my wife. However, there is no article that would satisfy them because they would always find somewhere to attack in order to defame the writer and not have to take note of the content. They don't want to leave their comfort zone. Their childhood self is stronger. In the end, it's always about strong or weak people. Only the strong can withstand the pressure of the 90 percent weak.
...the narcissistic reaction of the perpetrators to denigrate their victims...the result: even more division, aggression and anger...on both sides, right?...With what legitimation does one actually allow to prescribe an inner attitude?...At the latest in NRW and RP is satt/clean/safe ad hoc passée...
Dear Verena,
You could just scream. Now R. Brinkhaus is blaming the unvaccinated for the fact that the vaccinated have not yet regained their full freedom. What kind of madhouse are we living in here? You could ignore such messages if they weren't so insistent. Fortunately, at least France is taking to the streets.
Hello Mr. Lisner,
in case of doubt, the unvaccinated are more likely to fall ill - who does Mr. Brinkhaus want to protect? "I'll help you up the tree, otherwise you'll drown" said the bird to the fish...politics is getting carried away with medicine...as if it were about Smarties. What liability risk does a politician actually have who overtakes the Stiko on the right and whose causal connections appear to be irrationally constructed? And certainly neither Mr. Brinkhaus nor Mr. Habeck knows the individual reasons for not getting vaccinated. Unfortunately, the political if-then logic largely lacks a technical basis... The statement by the Lower Saxony Health Minister sounds more refreshing by comparison...
The question of whether man is good or evil by nature is probably as old as mankind. There is no doubt that we are capable of conspiracies. After all, this term is not a new neologism, such as aluhut or conspiracy theorist, which are generally used by people who have long since lost control of their thinking. It is not without reason that these new neologisms are appearing more and more frequently in the press and media at a time when the lower middle classes and, of course, the rich and powerful have taken control of the industry.
History has shown that good has always triumphed over evil. It can therefore be assumed that, on average, people are more good than evil. This also corresponds to our life experience. As I said: on average! The problem seems to be that this insight gained from history cannot easily be transferred to the future. Why? This dispute between good and evil presupposes a certain equality of arms. French citizens had the opportunity to stop exploitation because the possibilities of the powerful were limited. For some time now, this relationship has been shifting further and further to the detriment of the common people. The powerful have more and more opportunities to control their citizens and, as we can see from the coronavirus example, to bully them. The motives may be different, but the possibilities are not. Digitalization provides the powerful with tools that are bringing this relationship between the people and the powerful, which has been balanced on average since time immemorial, into a dangerous imbalance. If people whose evilness is obvious take these tools, e.g. cameras with facial recognition, into their hands, resistance is made massively more difficult or even impossible. The opportunities for those fighting for freedom and human rights to defend themselves are marginalized. We all know a current example: there are ways and means to fight against a paper vaccination card that classifies people as free or unfree. A digital vaccination certificate, which is automatically checked by Jens Spahn's ministry in each individual case, i.e. with every request for admission to an event with the help of an app on the smartphone of the person controlling admission, makes it almost impossible to circumvent. We now know that unscrupulous people, including without a doubt Helmut Kohl's former "girl", who ruthlessly pushed her mentor out of the way at the first opportunity, accept the "invitation". But she is definitely not alone and is probably not uncoordinated internationally in this respect. Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, Recep Erdoğan, Jair Bolsonaro, Donald Trump and probably his successor Joe Biden as well as many other politicians these days are also part of this breed of people, who are not united by stupidity, as some people here assume, but by ruthlessness and unscrupulousness.
AI, i.e. artificial intelligence, will further increase the possibilities of controlling and patronizing the population. This is probably the reason why powerful people around the world are focusing massively on digitalization, autonomous driving, electricity as the only source of energy, the abolition of cash, etc. All of these processes have one thing in common: they increase the power of the powerful to an almost irreversible level. Because all these processes have one thing in common: they increase the possibilities for surveillance and thus the power of the powerful to a level that can hardly be reversed.
In addition to the powerful in politics, yet another dubious clientele is now rising above the people: entrepreneurs such as Jeff Bezos, who until now has not been particularly sensitive in his dealings with the competition, his own employees or even his customers (see Alexa), Bill Gates, Elon Musk and a few others are telling people the nice story of saving our future. Jeff Bezos has founded his own organization for this purpose, behind which a 3-digit number of corporations (see https://www.theclimatepledge.com/us/en/Signatories), including such well-known companies as Mercedes-Benz, Nestlé and Microsoft. These largely international corporations are even more dangerous to our freedom in their activities than the nationally active powerful ever were. These companies are so spoiled by success that they cannot imagine being wrong. And yet they are probably just as wrong in the fight against corona as they are in the fight against climate change. If the former is more of a gut feeling, the latter is slowly but surely becoming a certainty. Jeff Bezos' organization "The Climate Pledge" lets children advertise wind turbines, a technology that undoubtedly endangers landscapes and nature and has long been suspected of endangering the climate itself. Anyone who takes a close look at the subject will realize that the scientific debate about the harmfulness of this technology will probably end to the disadvantage of wind energy. This type of energy generation is so harmful because it has a negative impact on the climate in more ways than scientists suspected a decade ago and as measurements now prove. And this applies both qualitatively and quantitatively, the latter with an unbelievable factor that Harvard scientists put at a factor of 100, but which could also be significantly higher. In the blog Annalena & Armin (see https://clubderklarenworte.de/annalena-luftpumpe/) I went into this in detail in "Example 2".
The involvement of these global corporations is also so dangerous for us all because it effectively undermines freedom of expression for many employees around the world, while at the same time these corporations buy or even own the sciences as well as politics and the media, either directly, e.g. via research projects and funding, or indirectly, e.g. via future prospects for retired politicians and researchers. This clique will probably divide the profits of digitalization and AI in particular among themselves and offload the losses onto the community. Just how dangerous the ambitions of this clique of the super-rich are is manifested in such endeavors: https://www.zeit.de/wissen/2020-08/neuralink-elon-musk-gehirn-chip-verbindung-smartphone-funktioniert?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.de%2F#comments
All in all, humanity is currently treading on very thin ice in several dimensions. If we do not stop these desires of the rich and powerful decisively enough, if we fail to say NO while we still can, the danger increases immeasurably that we citizens will lose our freedom and self-determination, perhaps even the sovereignty over our thoughts (see linked ZEIT report) for a long time, perhaps forever. It is already five to twelve. Corona has moved the clock forward considerably. We are probably already close to an irreversible tipping point.
Dear Dr. Aßmann.
They pose the question of whether man is good or evil.
I can't remember where I read a sentence about this that
does not make us despair of humanity altogether:
All people are good, but not always.
Yes, it's sad but true, very few people question anything anymore. They're all little schoolchildren. But I don't agree that good has always triumphed. For the last 2000 years or so, if not longer, evil has always triumphed over good. Faith is the hostage of humanity to this day. Only when it turns away from religion will it be free and recognize its true enemies. There is no supreme guru as the representative of the God who was. Knowledge is power and makes you free, but belief is a sign of ignorance. All religious preachers know this and enslave humanity in the name of God.
Thank you for the article, which I have now come across for the second time on your platform. I would classify myself as a conspiracy skeptic. To claim that there are no conspiracies is indeed naive and childish. In this respect, I think the article's analysis is apt. I also think it makes sense to keep an eye on "the powerful", because yes, there are sociopaths and psychopaths and, yes, power can corrupt. I myself am a physics student and live with a refugee from Eritrea. The latter makes it impossible for me to deny the existence of conspiracies. Of course, there are many more examples of conspiracies - the tobacco industry, ExxonMobil, pharmaceutical scandals, wiretapping scandals, etc. These conspiracies have been and are still being "fought" by scientists (e.g. Naomi Oreskes) and critical journalists, who can have little critical stance on "fighting the pandemic". From my personal experience of the "scientific scene", I cannot imagine that hundreds of laboratories and scientists are stupid or corrupt and would actively support a conspiracy. However, some conspiracy theories seem to have one of these premises. If anything, I observe a politicization of science. There are unofficial restrictions on what is politically correct to publish or think in terms of the pandemic, e.g. the long-term physiological safety of mask-wearing in children. In my view, many of the authoritarian developments of recent months are better characterized by the concept of ideology, as used by George Orwell in his essay "On Nationalism". This usually involves a struggle for the good and against the bad of this world. The book gives examples of such ideologies such as nationalism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, pacifism and anti-Semitism. Even National Socialism actually has ideological roots and sought to counter the perceived threat of a conspiracy by the Jewish elites. It was about the extermination of the Germanic race. Unfortunately, some of the conspiracy theories circulating today have similar elements (but also differences) in terms of both rhetoric and content. In my opinion, this is the core message of the media-creating people who speak out against conspiracy theories. You are welcome to form your own opinion by reading the editorial of issue 52, 1934 in "Der Stürmer": https://archive.org/details/derstuermer1934nr.5210s.scanfraktur_201909
I think it is important, and Orwell's essay basically boils down to this plea, to remain skeptical even when conspiracies are suspected and to critically reflect on one's own assumptions. Conspiracies should not be denied, but neither should the possible negative effects of conspiracy ideologies. Furthermore, there are other concepts, such as ideology, which can also explain some negative developments. I think it makes sense to weigh up (or supplement) other concepts on an individual basis.
Dear Max,
Thank you for this intelligent, nuanced contribution. Nevertheless, please allow me to make one criticism.
I agree with you in parts. That hundreds of laboratories are stupid, corrupt and part of a conspiracy is, of course, nonsensical. If people assume that, I think it's a crackpot idea. The criticism here is about something fundamental. It's about whether what these laboratories/scientists seriously (!) determine (supposed verification of an infection/disease via PCR test) has any relevance at all. It is about the meaningfulness of the PCR test. As a physicist, which you are, you can use a measurement method seriously and at the same time it is serious if other physicists question this measurement method and reject it.
Where I would like to disagree with you is the conclusions you draw with the comparison to the Nazi regime. Does this really confirm how dangerous conspiracy ideologies are? In my opinion, it proves how dangerous ideologies themselves and propaganda are. It was part of Nazi propaganda that Jews were conspiring against the German people. You're right about that. As you can see on the cover of your linked pdf of the Stürmer, this was sold in the swastika as "enlightenment". It was also part of the "Enlightenment"/NS propaganda that Jews were second-class people, sick people, unworthy, degenerate life. This was also "scientifically proven". And many people believed these scientists. The RKI and the Charité, among others, played an inglorious role in this.
Like you, I see frightening parallels. Only completely different ones. Which people are currently being described as "sick" in increasingly aggressive rhetoric (Merkel, Söder, Brinkhaus)? Macron just described the 200,000 or so demonstrators as "sick". Which people are being increasingly marginalized and attacked?
As an ordinary citizen - when did it become dangerous for you then, when does it become dangerous for you now? Back then it was dangerous if you contradicted the alleged conspiracy, if you said there was no Jewish conspiracy. Today it becomes dangerous for you if you speak of a conspiracy. So the signs are reversed.
ARD has made a "documentary" about "lateral thinkers" aka conspiracy theorists. Case studies are used in a pseudo-empathetic tone to show how people from the center of society slip away, chase after crazy ideas and become radicalized. Here, too, the core message is "they are sick". In my opinion, this stigmatization is extremely dangerous, it is also an absolute distortion and does not correspond to reality.
"I think it's important (...) to remain skeptical and to critically reflect on your own assumptions."
A very nice sentence from you, which I try to live by. I am always open to counter-arguments, so I am the opposite of an ideologue. I am a skeptic and a head person. Like probably almost everyone, in March/April 2020 I listened exclusively to Drosten's words, the words of the RKI at the daily PKs. I noticed how often Drosten contradicted himself and how much the RKI relied on fear rhetoric, even before it became public that this was exactly what was wanted. I realized how manipulative and false the RKI's statistics are. I have found that the RKI does nothing and even prevents answers being found to questions about lethality and infectiousness. This was done in complete self-observation. Afterwards, I rubbed my eyes in amazement as to why no mainstream media was making an issue of this. So I did my own research and found thousands of people/scientists online who rubbed their eyes in similar amazement. This "career" is typical, as I know from many conversations, not what this ARD documentary suggests.
As a head person, I go by the exclusion principle, by falsification. There were only two possibilities.
1) The RKI has a level of incompetence that should not really exist at this level (for example, a mocking statement by Prof. Gerd Bosbach, a luminary in the field of health statistics, about Wieler and the RKI: "I would prefer to take away the camera and microphone from such scientists"). I consider this widespread incompetence to be unlikely. Ergo, the only option is
2) "Intention". But what intention can that be? So you start to put forward hypotheses. No more, no less. You would do the same as a physicist. If you measure a phenomenon for which you have no explanation, you put forward hypotheses and go in search of the truth.
You have to talk about that. I didn't see one Reich flag at the two demos I was at, but I often saw the placard "Let's talk". Where do you see ideological fanaticism? In people who make an offer to talk or in people who threaten those who think differently and defame them as sick, crazy and radical?
Thank you for your contribution and best regards
Dear Peter Löcke,
Thank you very much for your nuanced and appreciative criticism. I am delighted that you have dealt with it in such detail. People like to discuss things in this way!
I would like to tell you how I developed my position. In March/April 2020, I invested a lot of time trying to reconcile the study situation and the RKI's statements with my prior knowledge of epidemiological simulations, statistics and genetics. I found good points and points worthy of criticism both on the part of the RKI and on the part of the critics. I was also at one of the first lateral thinking demonstrations in my town at the time, which the mayor had previously described as a gathering of nutters. I didn't really see any right-wing ideas there, just fear of vaccination and concern for people's dignity and democracy and maybe something about Gates. The expression dance seemed a bit weird to me, but that was okay. There were also counter-demonstrators with aluminum hats back then. The subsequent media response to the demonstrations unsettled me and I tried to become active in other ways. Unfortunately, this ultimately came to nothing. In the last few months, my research focus has ultimately been limited to cross-checking the news I received and analyzing the background of a few Telegram groups and Youtubers. I came across statements such as "the Protocols of the Elders of Zion should be seen as a guide to interpreting the world", "the elites are baby ritual killers and Satanists" (Adrenochrom), illustrations of an impending civil war with paramilitary groups of freemasons, "Darwin developed the theory of evolution to confuse humans and degrade them to apes", nanobots in vaccination (Attila Hildmann), "There is no peace treaty, they all know it up there" (e.g.e.g. Heiko Schrang), "Genetics has been disproved for 20 years" (Stefan Lanka). Stefan Lanka writes articles on corona for Samuel Eckert (from Querdenken), for example. Many of the above statements are either misquoted, are ultimately demonstrably based on fiction (e.g. a novel) or are ideological per se. I have to say, however, that I have also cross-checked the statements of fact-checkers and found astonishing errors there. There are also misquotes, logical fallacies, confirmation errors, etc. I tried to evaluate every verifiable statement, no matter how absurd it seemed to me, with an open mind using primary sources.
I would like to add that I do not exclude or value anyone less because of their political views, regardless of whether they wear a mask in their car, are a vaccination fanatic or a believer in QAnon or whatever. Nevertheless, I do see social risks and would like to address them in a forum like this.
I think we both agree that there are several forms of conspiracy theories, perhaps even a spectrum from the uncertain conspiracy conjecture to the conspiracy theory to the conspiracy ideology that constructs its world view around a conspiracy idea. My criticism is directed at the ideological side of the spectrum.
After this very long introduction, I would like to respond to some of your really good arguments.
As far as PCR is concerned, I am certainly open to critical arguments. The test cannot indicate an existing infectiousness, I believe this is now generally recognized. Statistically, however, I think the test is relatively meaningful for indicating trends. The positive rate of the tests can reach very low values in summer, which indicates that the specificity of the test for viral RNA is very high. False positives with animal-pathogenic coronaviruses can occur with Tönnies, but are otherwise not the normal case. Otherwise, such a test is designed to exclude other human-pathogenic coronaviruses. Whether the test can justify a quarantine is, in my opinion, a political question that can be discussed. I've often heard that the labs run too many cycles and thus constantly produce false positives, but the only alleged evidence I've seen so far was a misquote from Gunnar Kaiser (and the comments showed that only a very small proportion of commenting readers noticed the flaw). I must confess that I didn't really look for further evidence. However, with the above explanation on specificity, in my view the only thing left to do to maintain the thesis of excessive cycle numbers is to engage in widespread systematic fraud. As I said, I think this is unlikely. I am open to counter-arguments or evidence.
You say: "In my opinion, it [the NS comparison] proves how dangerous ideologies in themselves and propaganda are." I agree with you 100%. Ideologies have an expansive and exclusive character - they must spread through "enlightenment" and "expel" those who contradict them. I also agree with most of your arguments that make the NS comparison in the other direction. However, I don't see this as a contradiction, but rather a complement. There are various theories around the last two US presidential elections. One side (Republicans) talks (2020) about election fraud, the other side (US Congress) talks (2016) about the Russian Internet Research Agency, which is said to have promoted conspiracy theories in the social networks to politically destabilize the USA and thus helped Trump to win the election. Regardless of whether any of these statements are true, I think that political destabilization through propaganda in social media can certainly pose a risk. Today, propaganda can be created relatively easily using deepfake technology or Photoshop. At least I have come across Photoshop propaganda several times. I have experienced that propaganda and ideology do not only come from one side. I really don't want to excuse the defamation campaigns of politicians here. Nor do I want to defend the RKI or the DIVI.
I think the exclusion principle is a very good approach. My feeling, however, is that the "ideology theories" receive too little attention in the shadow of the "conspiracy theories", but together they can give a more complete picture of the complex situation. Very often these days, reference is made to Orwell's 1984 (where ideology also plays a role), and sometimes to Animal Farm. I discovered "On Nationalism" by chance and wondered why this book does not receive the same attention. Is it because it's not a novel? I really don't know.
Your final question obviously only allows for one answer. However, I personally cannot gauge how widespread some of the above beliefs are. I've only been to one demo and that was at the very beginning. The confrontation with people who really still refer to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (which is also referred to in the Stürmer article above or in Mein Kampf), even if they are otherwise so nice, prompts me to make the direct Nazi comparison and to say that one should not forget the negative historical consequences of the orientation towards conspiracy ideologies. That seemed to me to be an appropriate addition to this article.
I hope it has become clearer what I am getting at. Thank you for your comment and for stimulating the discussion. Best regards
Hello Max G
I would just like to comment on this point of yours, as I find the underlying "logic" - unfortunately I can't resist the quotation marks - and its distracting effect offensive:
> "As far as PCR is concerned, I am certainly open to critical arguments. The test cannot indicate an existing infectiousness, I believe this is now generally recognized.
> Statistically speaking, I still think the test is relatively meaningful for indicating trends."
So the test cannot show what it is used to show - and yet you consider it to be "statistically relevant"?
Yes, meaningful in what, for heaven's sake? If, as you yourself assume, it can't say what it's supposed to say, then the figures collected with it are simply meaningless. The test is not valid for infectiousness (probably not even for infections). Period.
All other statistical derivations, considerations of specificity (for what?), false-positive rate (for what??), trends (of what???) are just a bunch of numbers games.
And yet here we are once again jumping over the proffered stick and dealing with the meaningless test results and figures and are correspondingly less or not at all concerned with what is going on in the shadow of the "fight against the pandemic" ...
But at its core, it is simple:
If the PCR test is not valid for what it is currently being misused for, then all conclusions drawn from PCR test results are not conclusions, but fantasy and speculation or - nasty insinuation - deliberately induced fallacies.
In particular, to consider sick or dead people as COVID sick or dead solely on the basis of a positive PCR test.
In particular also incidence calculations (incidence of what?).
Not to mention calculations of the incidence as it is currently done (no reference to the number of tests!).
On the connection with conspiracy or non-conspiracy:
The PCR test was apparently used for the first time at the beginning of 2020 and a pandemic was claimed as a result of this misuse and misapplication. Incidentally, the definition of a pandemic seems to have been significantly changed beforehand: a disease only has to spread widely and it is already a pandemic, which allows drastic measures to be taken. According to the new definition, it doesn't matter whether the disease causes mass death and destruction or just an itchy bottom. As if tailor-made for the use of a test that detects something, even without a disease.
So the whole world is being victimized, cheated, barracked and exploited on the basis of a non-valid test in conjunction with a definition made to fit.
And we continue to deal with the sticks held out of "incidences" and "conspiracy or not" ...
Best regards
Hello Percy Payne,
I would like to answer the following question from you:
"So the test cannot show what it is used to show - and yet you consider it to be "statistically relevant and meaningful"? Yes meaningful in what, for heaven's sake? "
Yes, I still think the test is statistically significant in detecting the frequency of the viral RNA segments tested in the human throat. This is not synonymous with infectivity, the detection of which requires cultivation of the virus. By the time this has been completed, infectivity may no longer be present. With my explanations above, I explain why I consider it plausible that the true-positive detection of the viral RNA segments in the human throat using PCR is very likely accompanied by the presence of the entire viral RNA of the Sars-Cov-2 virus. This in turn means that there is a "high probability" that such an active (now "killed") virus was once located there, or that there are still active viruses there, or that the test sections of the viral RNA have integrated into the human genome. The fact that you cannot tell the difference with a single yes/no result of the PCR test is precisely the reason why the test cannot detect infectivity. I therefore consider the statistical trends (with a constant test strategy and test number!!!) to be meaningful with regard to the fact that there was a Sars-Cov-2 virus in the throat of the tested persons in temporal connection with the test. Statistical uncertainties are given by possible rare outliers of these conclusions, by the proportion of "recovered" persons who produce viral RNA themselves, and by false-positive test results.
Another statement you made is:
"If the PCR test is not valid for what it is currently being misused for, then all conclusions drawn from PCR test results are not conclusions, but fantasy and speculation or - nasty insinuation - deliberately induced fallacies.
In particular, to consider sick or dead people as COVID sick or dead solely on the basis of a positive PCR test."
I absolutely agree with your last sentence in this quote. Infected does not equal infectious does not equal sick etc. Sending someone into quarantine because of a positive PCR test is not a decision based on 100% knowledge.
I hope that my "logic" is now more comprehensible. I think what is "essential" is a personal decision. For me, the question of "conspiracy yes/no?" is a very important one in my professional environment. As is the question of what the incidence really says. I personally can't see the red herring you suggest. That doesn't mean that I have to share all values and political actions. When the WHO changed the definition of a pandemic, I also have my doubts as to whether this was a serious decision or (as I suspect) had other reasons. I certainly have less knowledge than you about processes in the background because I am more concerned with questions about incidence etc.
Best regards
That sounds plausible in theory, but religions have been holding humanity hostage for around 2000 years. They are the supreme conspirators (with the Roman Catholic Church at the very top). This papacy that presumes to be the representative of God is hair-raising. This association (or this company) registered in the commercial register, is the richest company in the world and they will be unassailable until man realizes that they are the evil of all.
"Why do otherwise perfectly intelligent, thoughtful and rational people resist the claim that sociopaths are conspiring to manipulate and deceive them? And why do they defend this unfounded viewpoint with such vehemence?" .......... because they themselves are sociopaths who would love to manipulate and deceive to such perfection! And they think they are so clever: "Pah, nobody does that to me!"
Dear Mr. Langemann, not only because I really like your polished language, but it always gets to the heart of what IS. Polished, sharpened, written with the sharpest pen. Thank you for that! I also find the commentators (Assmann, Löcke) very interesting and remarkable.) If it weren't for journalists like you, I would be close to despair. I need this as vital input at this time!
Christine Müller
The article is, of course, a nice response to being called an "aluminum hat wearer".
What I got to know as conspiracy theories many years ago: Chemtrails, Haarp, 9/11, Hollow Earth, Nibiru, Illuminati, sublime messages in car license plates etc shone above all due to their lack of intelligence, facts and arguments. And I stand by that: it's nonsense.
But times have changed, and not for the better. And in view of the damage that the Chancellor, politicians and the media are causing with incomprehensible malice, it is difficult not to believe that there is evil intent and a plan behind it, or even to argue against it. But I maintain that we are not witnessing a conspiracy but stupidity. A government that first makes the population's mouth water for vaccines with the wildest promises and is then too stupid to procure this vaccine is simply stupid. And these people are supposed to pursue a precise and perfidious plan consistently and secretly for years? No, they are too stupid for that.
Let's just keep our heads down. We have a chancellor who will do anything to maintain her own power, regardless of the common good. She has used the excessive time at her disposal to push through the entire country and the entire apparatus with people who could not pose a threat to her. In other words, with idiots and failures. And once she had achieved this, she mutated into a red-green chancellor in order to take the wind out of the opposition's sails. Successfully. What remains is a country inspired by red-green visions and fantasies and led by idiots in key positions.
Even if it hurts: we have not become the tragic victims of a grand and perfidious plan, but of a woman's lust for power and the stupidity she has installed. And our own complacency, with which we allowed ourselves to be lulled instead of thinking things through and putting a stop to it in good time.
Dear Mr. Wolfgang A.
I tend to believe you for the reasons I have described below. However, Mr. Löcke has some very good counter-arguments in his comments. And it's not just Germany, we're experiencing the same thing in Austria, France, Italy, even Australia and New Zealand. Are they all just stupid? I would hope so.
Incidentally, I know from acquaintances who emigrated to Iceland a long time ago and who have both been vaccinated that there is no "apartheid" there. People are simply surprised that some people don't get vaccinated, but they have no social or other disadvantages. People shrug their shoulders and accept it.
First of all, it would have been helpful to define the word conspiracy more precisely. The author obviously has a slightly different understanding of this word than I do. I doubt that the conspirators in the sense of the article have a precise plan and agree on this plan. I think the people described have a more or less diffuse goal: simply to expand their power and influence and use every available opportunity to do so. Certainly, many smaller circles also have certain plans. But I don't believe in a grand master plan. There are too many different interests in the details for that. If the term conspiracy is viewed a little more softly than I do, then I mostly agree with the author. However, he overlooks the fact that even the "conspirators" continue to harbor their baby-like confidence, at least in rudimentary form. On the other hand, every person also has a bit of the bad side (abuse of power towards weaker people, petty corruption, etc.) that can come through on occasion. In short, we do not have a group of pure conspirators and a group of pure ruled. Everyone is more or less a bit of both, although there are of course the extreme cases of 99 to 1% and 1 to 99%. That doesn't make things any easier.
Very nicely described, this world kindergarten. It must be very painful for people to excommunicate themselves from the group dynamics of the believers in the state, especially as this makes it known that they have allowed themselves to be deceived for their entire lives. And that by complete idiots. I imagine this step to be very difficult indeed. Trump (because his name appears in the text) is also a fraudster. But the public will learn that too. Very soon and quite painfully.
Dear Mr. Puchert,
I can well understand your contribution. As far as D.T. is concerned, for example, it was clear to me from the moment that something couldn't be right with this "president" when he publicly mimicked disabled people. From that moment on, this person was no longer open to discussion for me.
Otherwise, unfortunately, I still have a certain problem categorizing current events. Some time ago, I was in private e-mail contact with Dr. Matthias Burchardt, and we discussed the question of what background the current agenda, if any, might have. Dr. Burchardt presented some ideas that I can no longer reproduce off the cuff, but one point was that the Corona Committee may be wrong. Even if we considered this last resort to be the least likely. However, I still can't really get my head around the idea that almost all governments in the world will suddenly mutate into serious criminals who want to wipe out their own middle classes and reduce their populations. I like to take Iceland as an example, which I would least believe capable of this, and even there almost everyone is now "vaccinated". Perhaps it will remain an eternal mystery, a kind of putative self-defense against an imaginary danger, I don't know. Everyone should remain vigilant and only do what their heart tells them to do.
Hello Mr. Linsner,
"But I still can't really get used to the idea that almost all governments in the world are suddenly mutating into serious criminals who want to wipe out their own middle classes and reduce their populations."
1) On the first point, the eradication of the middle class (and entire economic systems) by governments. This is not inconceivable to me at all. What has to happen if something new is to be established? The existing must first disappear. This can happen slowly and naturally. Or by slash-and-burn.
There was already a stock market crash in November 2019, comparable to that of 2008. Interestingly, there was also a pandemic immediately after the 2008 stock market crash, just like this time.
"History teaches us that humanity only develops significantly when it is truly afraid (...) The incipient pandemic could trigger one of these structuring fears. Then we will be able to lay the foundations for a real world government much faster than would have been possible for economic reasons alone." (Jacques Attali in a guest article, L'Express, May 3, 2009)
Attali was Mitterrand's highest advisor and celebrated himself for having discovered Macron for politics.
In other words: If governments and the decision-makers behind those governments see a collapse of existing economic systems as inevitable, a pandemic can be used as an accelerant.
Where should the journey go? My humble opinion? Which country is by far the most successful in the world in purely economic terms and is therefore becoming an increasing threat to the USA as a global power? China. Can China achieve this with a liberal system? No. China treats its citizens with a reward system, a social credit system. Rewards for obedient citizens, sanctions/punishment/deprivation of liberty for critics. This is exactly what is happening in Germany and worldwide with the green passport, with rewards for the vaccinated and punishment for the unvaccinated.
The two most powerful chief lobbyists of the German economy, Mario Ohoven (President BVMB) and Franz J. Klein (Head of Dehoga), saw it as the death of the German SME sector if there was a November lockdown in 2020. Both announced their intention to take the matter to the Federal Constitutional Court. From the ranks of the governing parties, there was only one (!) prominent politician who simultaneously warned loudly against this third Civil Protection Act in November. He warned in a print interview that power urgently needed to return to parliament. His name was Thomas Oppermann.
All three of them died shortly afterwards "completely unexpectedly" and under mysterious circumstances.
2) Intentional depopulation? Like you, I don't want to believe that there are people who are planning something like this. I would like to be wrong. Do I think it is impossible? No. There are quite a few examples in human history of powerful psychopaths who perceived genocide as an act of "cleansing" and responsibility in their sick self-perception. There were concentration camp wardens who were "cultured" loving family fathers in the morning and evening and gassed thousands of people during the day and saw no contradiction in this.
The problem of the world's exploding population while natural resources are constantly decreasing cannot be proven out of hand. In contrast to climate alarmism, this is much more real, provable and measurable. Interestingly, the problem of the growing world population tends to be played down and the forecasts of how high the world population could be in 2030, 2050 or 2100 are remarkably defensive. It is hardly discussed in the media. This is in stark contrast to the issues of C02 and global warming. As a rule, the forecasts always point towards the end of the world.
Put yourself in the psyche of the most powerful people and elites, for whom one or ten billion dollars more in their bank account is no longer an incentive and for whom power is the only remaining thrill. Who experience that entire world organizations dance to their tune and would not even exist without them. Who can eliminate or initiate entire laws and boast that they can call a chancellor around the clock (Ms. Gates once boasted about this with regard to Merkel). And these people see the world as a company that now needs to be saved. Just like their own company, which must necessarily cut jobs in order not to jeopardize the big picture. And in their hubris and fantasies of omnipotence, these people think: 8 billion people on earth today, 10 tomorrow, 20 billion someday? That's not possible. Rationalization is essential.
Is this kind of thinking sick? Yes. Do I think it is impossible for people like Gates and others to think like this? No.
Two quotes in this context.
"Those who decide are not elected, and those who are elected have nothing to decide." (Seehofer/2010) Self-explanatory.
"Ultimately, we will administer the vaccine to be developed to 7 billion people." (B. Gates/April 2020 in the Tagesthemen)
Why "only" 7 billion people and not the entire world population? Who exactly did Gates mean by "we"? What global import quota do these 7 billion actually correspond to, if I take a world population of 7.8 billion as a basis? Oops. Just under 90 percent. Exactly the quota that is becoming increasingly necessary thanks to Delta.
I can't look into anyone's head, I can only look in front of it. There are old recordings of speeches in which Gates "warns" of a new pandemic, in which he says it's not a question of "if", but only when it will come. Did I see worry in his gestures, facial expressions, posture or hear it in his tone? No, the opposite. What I saw and heard was euphoria. And that scares me.
Dear Mr. Löcke,
Thank you very much for your time and commitment in writing this "lecture" here, which I am sure will be of interest not only to me but also to many other readers.
What can I, as a single, powerless person, do about it? Probably just to use what little freedom I have by saying no. At the cost of all the consequences. Nevertheless, Gates and co. can actually demand whatever they want. They are dependent on people joining in and following them. And the incredibly frightening thing is that there are so many of them, especially doctors and scientists all over the world. Raising awareness, against all odds, as the Corona Committee is doing, shaking people up, I don't know if it will help. Perhaps the only way to turn things around is for the vaccination campaign to end in a real catastrophe. Then the baby will be in the well, but the "rest" can do the reconstruction work. But we already had that after WW1 and WW2, and it doesn't seem to have had any real lasting effect either.
We'll see, maybe creation will have the last word at some point after all...
Dear Mr. Linsner,
Writing is an outlet for me in these times. It helps me.
Sometimes it's just individual sentences or words that make me ponder. Here again. They refer to the war.
War, real suffering, hunger, "history" at all? Every German, regardless of whether they are 20 or 70, now only knows this indirectly, only as an observer, but not from the inside. We know it from history books, we know it from TV. What we know from TV is often "pre-washed". It all used to happen in Germany, it generally happens elsewhere - in the Arab world, in Africa. The fact that something historic is happening right on our doorstep is unimaginable for the "wadded up" average German because it is not "tangible". We don't know it, we hardly know anyone personally who does. That is why there is a lack of sensitivity. It is no longer in our "emotional memory".
The fact that my posts degenerate into lectures is due to my weakness of not being able to get to the heart of things. Far be it from me to lecture. I have far more questions than answers.
Have a nice weekend
Dear Mr. Löcke,
the term "lecture" was meant exclusively as an acknowledgment and in no way as a criticism 😉 By the way, I have copied out your post to use the content as an argument if necessary.
There are also enough people who still know the war from the inside and still accept and implement everything that happens and is demanded without any criticism. My mother, for example (98), who doesn't understand at all how I can think the way I do. And she is not even remotely mentally impaired. Or a former doctor we know (84) who is a happy and staunch supporter of vaccination, even for her grandchildren who are just 18.
Best regards.
Thank you very much, a "hammer article", a top-class article!!! Thank you!!!
Thank you very much for this beneficial article and also for your other important and, in my view, valuable work in these sometimes unspeakable times.
A small donation you have just made is intended to support your cause, mine and probably that of many other people.
Today, employees dependent on the state in politics, the media and the judiciary have had Tim Foyle confirmed by the ruling of the Federal Administrative Court on broadcasting funding.
In a kind of conspiracy against the parts of the population particularly affected by coronavirus, these people who are not personally affected by the coronavirus crisis are arrogating to themselves the right to intensify the forced exploitation of this vulnerable group of people by highly paid editors of the ÖRR. In return, the scaremongering of the ÖRR, which brought the affected group of people into this precarious situation in the first place, is intensified. The reason given by the BVG is interesting: ÖRR is needed to combat so-called deep fake news. And this one day after the ARD Tagesthemen described the corona vaccinations as a small "prick" in a fake formulation that almost got under the skin and the commentator talked about coercing the population by making vaccination compulsory as the means of choice. Instead of providing open and honest information about the risks of vaccination, including by mentioning the number of deaths after vaccination, viewers and young people in particular are being led around by the nose, contrary to the STIKO's recommendation. The political interests that are probably behind the corona hysteria are not even mentioned.
I have therefore written the following letter to ARD today, including two addenda:
"Dear ARD editorial team,
do your panic propaganda women and men - in the Tagesthemen (see tagesthemen - broadcast of 04.08.2021, 22:15 | tagesschau.de) and elsewhere in the program - dare to repeat their slogans and questions about vaccination to the relatives of these victims of the vaccination campaign? Or do they not have the courage or the impudence to do so? Have you ever called for a criminal investigation into the events surrounding AstraZeneka? If not, why not? The fact that the commentator thinks it's good that vaccines that have failed in our country are being passed on to third world countries fits the picture. Apparently she thinks that one human life more or less doesn't matter there. That is pure racism and nothing else. This garbage belongs in the hazardous waste garbage can and not in the third world!
https://www.focus.de/gesundheit/coronavirus/mutter-klagt-an-32-jaehrige-nach-astrazeneca-impfung-gestorben-viele-wollten-davon-nichts-wissen_id_13243167.html
https://www.shz.de/deutschland-welt/panorama/32-Jaehrige-stirbt-nach-Impfung-Mutter-und-Anwaeltin-aeussern-sich-id32085197.html
https://www.echo24.de/welt/astrazeneca-corona-impfung-tod-zwettl-impfstoff-vakzin-charge-oesterreich-lungenembolie-krankenschwester-zr-90232682.html
https://rp-online.de/nrw/staedte/goch/kreis-kleve-36-jaehriger-aus-goch-stirbt-wenige-tage-nach-impfung-zusammenhang-mit-astrazeneca_aid-57084617
Anyone who talks stupidly and naively about a little pie should apply somewhere to sweep the yard instead of spouting such nonsense on an inflated salary at the expense of our compulsory fees. Unfortunately, the reality is completely different and is consistently and literally hushed up by the ÖRR:
https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/paul-ehrlich-institut-1028-todesfaelle-nach-corona-impfung-in-deutschland-li.172421
https://www.echo24.de/welt/deutschland-corona-impfung-tod-pei-moderna-johnson-ursache-thrombose-biontech-astrazeneca-bericht-90574215.html
Dear ARD editors, sorry, your faith in authority and naivety are reminiscent of the darkest chapters of our history: In Belarus, bagpipers are arrested for making music for freedom and democracy, in Berlin, guitar players. You don't notice anything, but you don't notice anything anymore. Please don't ever discuss the silence of the Third Reich again. Your accusation of these people has lost all credibility.
It takes courage to speak the truth - more so then than now. And you definitely don't even have that courage today. You would never have had it under the circumstances back then.
The heroes of our time are Hubert Aiwanger, Prof. Mertens, Prof. Streeck - people with backbone and understanding. ÖRR broadcasting, on the other hand, has degenerated into untrustworthy government propaganda. This has not gone unnoticed even by renowned media researchers: see https://clubderklarenworte.de/regierungs-pr-ersetzt-journalismus/
Your long-distance commentator and environmental sinner probably doesn't even realize how she is slowly degenerating into a criminal herself, presuming to decide over the lives and health of others. Because coercion is no trivial offense. Certainly not in this serious decision about the life and death of each individual. It is enough for our Minister of Health to stare at us wide-eyed and stupidly and proclaim truths that are not truths and, like the RKI, is incapable of answering the simplest questions despite being reminded several times (see attachment - note: questions are to be answered in reader comments). https://clubderklarenworte.de/deutsche-wirklichkeit/ published and to date, despite three reminders, completely unanswered - although I have received written confirmation from the Federal Ministry of Health that they have been read by Jens Spahn).
With every provocation and increasing pressure from politicians and the media, my determination not to be vaccinated grows - in line with Hubert Aiwanger's insight. After all, why should I risk my health for outrageous contemporaries like you? After all, my wife and I have demonstrably lived together with a family member suffering from coronavirus for two weeks under quarantine conditions without taking any further precautions, eating together, etc. Neither she nor I have been infected. Neither she nor I were infected. All 3 corona tests, some of which were ordered by the health authorities, were negative. Contrary to general reports, a healthy immune system is obviously important. In any case, our federal minister Spahn, who wants to turn healthy people into sick people for the profit of the pharmaceutical industry, is doing his utmost to ensure that our immune system degenerates over the years.
I defied the attempts of the old Nazis in the Bundeswehr to train me to kill on command for seven years, so two or three years of resistance against the neo-autocrats in Berlin, Stuttgart and Munich are no longer important.
Yours sincerely
Roland Aßmann
And a few more comments on the topic:
Finally discuss the political dimension of the issue openly on ÖRR. Anyone who considers the following 3 topics as belonging together can guess what the artificially fueled global corona hysteria is really about:
1. statement by the German Chancellor on April 22, 2021 on ZDF's 19:00 heute news on the subject of the "great transformation", which, according to Angela Merkel, will affect "our entire way of life and economy". This statement in the immediate context of a meeting with the world's most important leaders is particularly thought-provoking as it reveals what was discussed behind closed doors with dictator Xi Jinpeng, autocrat Putin, coronavirus high-risk patient Biden and others.
2. following report on Deutschlandfunk: https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/pandemie-klima-umwelt-die-grenzen-der-persoenlichen-freiheit.976.de.html?dram:article_id=492606
3. the planning games in the Ministry of the Interior at a time when supposedly not much was really known about Corona. The RKI file, published here in the CdkW: https://clubderklarenworte.de/exklusiv-rki-schriftverkehr/
Anyone who is not as stupid as the government, RKI and ÖRR seem to think people in the country are and is used to reading between the lines can guess which way the wind is blowing.
There is another aspect that should not be underestimated. The health risks for smokers could only be proven beyond doubt because there is a large group of non-smokers. The same applies to coronavirus vaccinations. If significant health risks of the vaccination are subsequently identified, these can only be proven beyond doubt with a correspondingly large group of non-vaccinated people. In any case, I will contribute to ensuring that this proof is possible at any time, and hopefully as many people as possible will contribute with me. If the ÖRR were to report every day on the number of people who have died in connection with the vaccination instead of talking about a small blip, people would wake up today. And even more so if people were informed that regular boosters are necessary and that nobody can say exactly how risky the third, fourth, fifth, ......... vaccination will be. It is already clear today that most deaths occur after the second vaccination.
What is currently happening in our country, and not just here, is a socio-political tragedy, and it is fitting that the origin of the virus is of no real interest. On the contrary, the ones worthy of condemnation are those who do not believe the government propaganda, including controlled scaremongering, and not those who are causing the problem.
Addendum 2:
Last Monday, ARD broadcast the TV movie "The Collini Case". The background is the shooting of 20 Italian villagers by the Waffen SS during the Second World War after two Wehrmacht soldiers fell victim to a partisan attack. Anyone who now expects young people or even children to be vaccinated, where the risk exceeds the personal gain in safety, is following the same abstract and ultimately insane logic as the Waffen SS. Human lives cannot be set off against each other. Article 1 of our Basic Law does not allow this! You cannot explain to the mother of a 32-year-old that the death of her daughter was a heroic deed that extended the lives of so and so many old people in old people's and nursing homes by a few months or years. Anyone who engages in this kind of thinking is not only betraying our free and democratic basic order, they are also betraying our constitution.
What can be learned from this: if you lack intellectuality, you can watch such TV films and documentaries as often as you like, you will not understand the socio-political mechanisms behind them any more than the little boy who had to watch helplessly as his father was innocently murdered in front of his eyes can be forced to understand that the Wehrmacht soldiers may also have had mothers, fathers, wives and children and that the death of the 20 innocent villagers was intended to prevent further attacks, following a sick logic of sick brains. also had mothers, fathers, wives and children and that the death of the 20 innocent villagers was intended to prevent further attacks, following a sick logic of sick brains.
Dear ÖRR, dear politicians, just keep it up, then you will bring the horror of such insanity of past times back into our everyday lives, without which social processes would not have been possible that led to witch hunts, the enslavement of Native Americans and Africans, the murder of Aborigines, exaggerated racism in the context of colonialism, apartheid policies, the persecution of Jews, the Killing Fields, Verdun, Stalin's "purges", the Gulag Archipelago, etc... etc. Behind all this is the herd instinct of stupid, indifferent or ruthless people who gather behind one or a group of psychopaths with sick logic who lack either the courage or the insight to say NO when the time comes.
As Helge Braun has already said (see attachment), at some point the "point of no return" is passed. After that, the repression becomes self-perpetuating. This downward spiral cannot be studied more perfectly than at present. But how can you explain this to a politician like Helge Braun, who lacks the intellect to keep his own health under control but wants to tell others how to deal with their health? Or all the followers in the press and media, science, business and society?"
Incidentally, in connection with vaccination, it is worth recalling this interview, which is over a year old:
https://clubderklarenworte.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Neue-Impfstrategie-Transkript-.pdf
In retrospect, it seems even more monstrous and unbelievable what an insider in vaccine development is giving us here in terms of detailed information. And it makes politicians such as Jens Spahn, Karl Lauterbach, Markus Söder, Norbert Walter-Borjans, Helge Braun, Robert Habeck and some others seem even more irresponsible when they ignore or even defame the risk assessment of STIKO & Co for children and adolescents. I can hardly imagine that many parents read up on this knowledge before deciding to vaccinate their children. There would probably not be too many people willing to be vaccinated.
It indirectly confirms my statement above that it must be in the vital interest of those politically responsible to prevent any evidence of harmful after-effects from a 100% vaccination of the population in order to be able to evade their political and private legal responsibility if necessary. This is probably one of the reasons why this penetrating campaign against so-called vaccine hesitants is currently underway.
Great description of the current situation, thank you very much!
Incidentally, to avoid any misunderstandings, vaccination is a blessing for many risk groups particularly affected by coronavirus. That is why vaccination can, indeed must, be recommended for these groups. Anything else would be negligent. But as long as the health risk, which is not fully known, outweighs the benefits for some groups, and STIKO also notes nothing else, there must be neither a general vaccination obligation nor an artificially created compulsion on healthy people to be vaccinated, which is conjured up by politicians and the media or even based on an abuse of power and not justified in the matter, or even those who decide not to be vaccinated after an individual risk assessment should be punished. The time of human sacrifice for the good of society - some younger people have already paid for the vaccination campaign with their lives (see above) - should be over for good.
Dear Dr. Aßmann,
I have one question about this otherwise excellent article.
I'm not a doctor, but why are vaccinations a blessing for at-risk groups? The "vaccines" are emergency approvals and have not even been tested on animals. Why should they be the solution for risk groups of all people? Incidentally, there are drugs that can be used to treat C......
Rainer, every drug has side effects and risks. With a successful drug or vaccine, the benefits far outweigh the risks. That's why we get vaccinated again and again over the course of our lives and take medication - hopefully only depending on our state of health - again and again and more or less regularly. However, the controversy surrounding AstraZenecka has made it clear that knowledge about the coronavirus vaccines is at a level that actually prohibits their use outside so-called risk groups. Within the risk groups, everyone who can should decide for themselves whether to be vaccinated. No matter how much the vaccine reduces the risk, it certainly does one thing: it reduces many people's fear of coronavirus - whether justified or exaggerated - to a tolerable level. That is why everyone must decide whether or not they belong to a risk group. In any case, the blanket administration of coronavirus vaccines to healthy people is negligent and has already cost the lives of some young people. The fact that politicians such as Karl Lauterbach, Markus Söder, Jens Spahn and Norbert Walter-Borjans are nevertheless unconditionally in favor of it shows what a brainchild they are. I leave it to others to judge whether they are too naive, too stupid, too bought or too unscrupulous to see the consequences of their actions.
i'm not a doctor either and have various pre-existing conditions (lungs and plenty of allergies) and also an advanced age.
but i think my immune system is well looked after and i've always been able to rely on it. now i'm supposed to let an experimental vaccination mess that up? after everything i've read and the terrible experience after my only flu vaccination, i'm not going to take this recommended experiment under any circumstances, because i feel very healthy and well able to cope with a possible virus visit.
Dear Dr. Aßmann,
I would like to expressly thank you for your commitment and your constant attempts to argue against this madness. And, don't worry, you are not alone. I will also say NO, even if I have to stay at home for the next three years.
Thank you very much!
Just a word about it:
Grandiose!
Dear Dr. Aßmann
It would be very nice if you could publish a possible reply to your letter to ARD here. It is certainly very interesting and amusing to see how the editors react and look for excuses. However, I don't think they will get an answer. What a pity.
However, I can certainly understand your train of thought and conclusions.
There will be no answer. Unfortunately, the only education that the editors of ARD and ZDF still know is that of the diversity of opinions. There has rarely been such a downfall of a renowned institution like public broadcasting. What is most concerning is not the state, but the speed of the decline. But it is not just the press and media that are affected. When a former board member of the FDP publishes the following statement on social media, it makes you salivate:
"No opponent of vaccination will be treated like an enemy of the state. They are just, hopefully soon, no longer allowed to go out among the people because they are a dangerous social pest. But he has the freedom to be vaccinated. But he doesn't have the freedom to endanger me." (Rainer Stinner)
My written response to Mr. Stinner, but also to the FDP leadership, will probably not be answered either.
However, I am happy to refrain from explaining the thoughts of people who have obviously learned nothing, absolutely nothing, from the twelve darkest years of German history and who are not above rehashing the vocabulary of the National Socialists. The German government's fear campaign, with the active participation of the public broadcaster ÖRR, is having the same effect as it did eighty years ago: formerly dear fellow human beings are being turned into fear-driven brutes, labeling fellow human beings who do not allow themselves to be infected by the general hysteria as pests in order to subsequently banish them from the world. No nation knows better than ours how this works most effectively. Then as now, irrationality is the fuel and accelerant of oppression and deprivation of liberty, if not worse.
As suspected, there were no answers. The honest answer to these legitimate questions would be all too revealing for our coercive state media.
If you want to know what a subterranean level our media has sunk to, I can only recommend the following sequence of the HEUTE-SHOW broadcast last night: s. https://www.zdf.de/comedy/heute-show/heute-show-vom-10-september-2021-100.htmlfrom min 33:00 onwards. Reminds me somehow unpleasantly of the German newsreels of the National Socialists, in which mentally handicapped people in slums were publicly paraded as alleged prototypes of the Eastern European subhuman and sold to the viewers as representative of the people of Eastern Europe.
I think it's wonderful that the two most frequently used fighting terms are combined and reflected back to the mockers as "conspiracy deniers". Having not only been attacked and ridiculed since March 2020, but now patronizingly psychoanalyzed, I think it's wonderful that Tim Foyle turns the tables here and analyses typical character traits of the attackers.
When I hear or read a word, I associate something with it. This happens to everyone and it can be controlled. The best example is "lateral thinker" - at the beginning of 2020, the word still had a positive connotation, but today? I take a breath to say something critical of the government and people immediately foam at the mouth and say "Are you a lateral thinker?" As a German, I associate the word (corona, climate, science) "denier" with what? Holocaust deniers. That's the worst thing you can accuse a German of. Nobody wants to have anything to do with people like that. Me neither. That's exactly why it's used. "Conspiracy theorists" (-mystics, -ideologues, -fanatics)? The average German associates it with weirdos who believe in lizard people and a flat earth. Who wants to listen to people like that? Nobody. That's exactly why it's used. "Destroy the messenger's reputation and people won't listen to his message." It works. The method is devaluation and repetitio, i.e. constant repetition.
Merkel, Drosten and most recently Richard David Precht (the Christian Drosten of German philosophy) were asked how to deal with "such people" (i.e. people like me)? The identical answer and message: "It's not worth it. They are sick." Pathologization and dehumanization are already taking place here and that scares me. How did Söder react to Aiwanger's criticism, which I found to be very objective? Söder not only maneuvered Aiwanger into a right-wing corner, he even said in a patronizing tone that he was "seriously worried". Söder even mocked Aiwanger on camera as he stood next to him. All the dams of decency have been broken here.
Anyone in favor of measures who still believes that this is only about health protection should ask themselves the following: Why are those responsible so panicked about publicly confronting dissenters in their weight class? It should be a feast for a Drosten to expose a Bakhdi. It should be a feast for a Lauterbach to expose Wodarg. And surely it would be in the interests of Merkel, Spahn and co. if the lack of alternatives to their policies were revealed to an audience of millions? It's nice to be here in a forum that knows the answer.
Conspiracies already existed in ancient Rome and before. I think it would be worth clarifying how long the word "conspiracy theorist" has been used as a defamatory term. When did the average person start to associate the term conspiracy theory with "crackpot" and the like? As with the word "lateral thinking", it has a history. It has to do with the Kennedy assassination. There were two versions, aka theories, surrounding the murder. The official assassin theory (Oswald as a lone perpetrator) and the critical conspiracy theory (state conspiracy). I state this without judgment as to what really happened at the time. Both the US government and the CIA had a major credibility problem because almost one in two Americans did not believe in the lone assassin theory and also distrusted the government investigation, the Warren Report. Ironically, a certain Allen Dulles, the ex-CIA chief dismissed by Kennedy and suspected mastermind of the conspiracy, was part of this commission of inquiry. So the PW/CS (psychological warfare intelligence) department developed a propaganda strategy to discredit these "conspiracy theorists". Even if much of the Kennedy assassination is still under wraps, this is proven by documents that have since been released. I find the techniques described remarkably similar to those used today.
https://www.siper.ch/assets/uploads/files/dokumente/CIA%20(1967)%20-%20Countering%20Criticism%20of%20the%20Warren%20Report.pdf
Top notch article, I've seen it this way for a long time. 9/11 opened my eyes ~ since the so called deadly virus came on the agenda it is devastating to watch the WEF, Bill Gates to name a few have free rein ~ people want to get absolution from science with the shot that has come in the place of a real adult's self-acquired and nurtured spirituality or faith.
May the next catastrophes to come shake the core of the children's people awake.
A very good presentation of the characteristics of conspiracy deniers.
It is all the more strange that even students of sociology or political science are hardly prepared to talk about these topics. It gives the impression that they also find it difficult to position themselves.
"The innate impulse to trust the mother never develops further, never meets its counterweight, reason (or mature faith), and remains forever on its "default setting" as a child."
In principle, a cab driver I was traveling with recently anticipated the above sentence. In conversation, she suspected that a lot of people follow "Mutti" (Dr. A.M.) because it is a kind of self-conception that a mother is never up to no good, and that this basic instinct is perhaps the reason why so many people follow the so-called "government actions" more or less uncritically.
The so-called "simple people" often show the clearest minds.
Very apt ....
Very great class outrageously good what this person has put on paper many thanks