by Peter Löcke //
Are you a man who likes to experiment? Then start an experiment at home. As the decision-maker, as the head of the family, which you are or at least imagine you are. Appoint representatives in your family and remunerate them for their work. As the client, you alone decide exactly which assignments to give and which possible grievances to uncover. You therefore determine the choice of topics.
For example, you can appoint your wife as the nicotine and alcohol officer, your somewhat vain daughter as the hygiene and tidiness officer and your hyperactive son as the sports and nutrition officer. Assign important-sounding titles such as Head of Health or Chief Controller of Consumption. This increases the value of the task and the self-esteem of the person in charge. In addition to the pay.
Command back. You'd better not do that, because for many men the experiment would be an own goal to suicide command. You won't want to read the weekly reports of the TFF, the Task Force Family. The family council, which meets at the dining table in the kitchen at the weekend, will tear you apart. At least that would be the case for me.
Nobody is going to tear me apart, because the example is made up out of thin air. It's academic because it's unrealistic. After all, the family is a discontinued model, a relic from times gone by. The modern micro-living community is a flat-sharing community consisting of equal Persons of Color with diverse sexual identities and inclinations. No more dining tables in the kitchen, all the more fetishes in other rooms. The experiment is also unrealistic because in the remnants of the traditional family, the woman wears the pants. But that's not the point of my limping example.
The key point is that perception can be steered. Problems can be artificially created. Simply through the choice of topics. Do you think you are a tolerant person? If I put a representative at your side today who looks for intolerance in your behavior and language, you will be surprised in a week's time how intolerant you actually are. If the tolerance officer accompanies you for a month and makes regular reports, at some point you will believe it yourself and think: "I am an intolerant scoundrel."
Germany in the stranglehold of the commissioners. Starting at the highest state level, through the federal states down to the municipal level. Representatives also in every medium-sized company. Yes, even in the economy. There, the contract killers are hidden in the quality management and compliance departments. Julian Reichelt, for example, was not dismissed because he was incompetent or even broke the law. He was officially dismissed and violated by Springer because he had breached compliance, because he had violated company morals in line with the zeitgeist. Reichelt had sex with women who were below him in the pecking order. Guilty in the sense of the moral indictment of the otherwise highly moral BILD. Guilty in the sense of the compliance officers. In other words: If Reichelt had only had sex with Friede Springer or consensually with a gay intern, Reichelt would still be in office today. Why? Because according to Springer's compliance logic, gay sex is a sign of tolerance and Reichelt, as a man, was only allowed to have upwardly compatible sex. And that left only Friede Springer. I apologize for the digression and the unpleasant images in my head. I do not apologize for the ambiguity of the word pecking order. Away from the private, back to the state appointees.
Representatives everywhere you look. Thousands of equality commissioners, commissioners against right-wing extremism and for anti-discrimination. Transatlantic trans and queer commissioners. Supposed language and justice policemen, all on the move on behalf of the Lord. On behalf of the state master. Every stone is turned over. Seek and ye shall find. And therein lies the problem. Agents are paid to find. Regardless of how big, small or non-existent the problem is. Or do you as a reader know a person who goes to his boss and suggests that his own job could be rationalized away because his work is superfluous? The problem has always existed, just not as pronounced. When health authority employees turn a clinic or a restaurant upside down, they will find what they are looking for. Guaranteed. And if it's a coffee machine that's too close to a sink. You think your car is in top condition and will pass the MOT without any problems? If the MOT mechanic doesn't like you, he will find faults. Guaranteed.
There is another problem with the expert's little brother, the phenomenon of the commissioner. Where there is no commissioner, there is no problem. Language creates reality, speechlessness ignores reality. How many state commissioners are there to investigate the encroachment of the state? Are there commissioners for fundamental rights issues? And who do I ask these questions? Perhaps Nancy Faeser. Then I won't get an answer, or an answer that leaves me unconvinced. It is more likely, however, that the government's humor commissioner will answer me in future. Nothing could be further from my mind than asking delegitimate questions or violating the Pointen-Reinheitsgesetz.
Articles identified by name do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the publisher.
English 
German 
Spanish
7 Responses
I don't quite know how to put it. I would like to put a question to our "echo chamber", even if it is taken out of the context of the column. I'm not getting an answer (or an assessment) from the "Corona Committee"; they probably now believe they are confronted with enemies even when they ask well-meaning questions. So, I still can't really make sense of the fact that, despite the (allegedly or obviously) now available findings of the so-called alternative media, scientists and experts and also data, practically everyone in the world still believes the "narrative" of the globally threatening virus and all the announced consequences, and that measures for the fall etc. are still to be decided etc. etc. etc. K.L. is still appearing on Maischberger, the MET in New York won't let anyone over the age of 12 into the concert hall for concerts without "full immunization", the "facility-based vaccination obligation" is still being enforced, to name just a tiny fraction. I say to myself, it can't be that such a power exists that can corrupt all areas of life practically all at once... And that for years.
To be honest, I don't know who else I can believe. I know a Jewish doctor who has been "vaccinating" all his people for years, and apparently everyone is still doing well. All the senior citizens in my circle, some of whom have already been "vaccinated" four times, are enjoying their lives and are still traveling around Europe. I myself am still not taking part, but there are still some doubts. According to all human judgment, if the warning information is all correct, every halfway normal person in a responsible position should have pulled the ripcord long ago? I can't imagine anyone having the courage to ignore everything. What's going on? I can't find an answer, at least not from the outside.
Mr. Linsner, you want ONE (the) truth about corona and vaccination, which in my opinion does not exist. Just as there is no such thing as "climate policy", whereby I do not mean climate change as such, but the appropriateness of our (German, European) policy.
Your individual examples, according to which the vaccinations have not harmed your friends, are useless in my opinion. My wife and I have decided not to get vaccinated, my wife as a former doctor and personally affected by immune disorders, I as a scientist with statistical and epidemiological experience. The ratio of Covid-19 risk to vaccination risk is not correct in my opinion. Everything I have read about the approval studies seems dubious. The countries with the highest vaccination and booster rates now have the highest PCR figures (- I don't call them "infections" because the PCR test is also dubious). And in the clinics, the "vaccinated" outnumber the Covid-19 patients.
A fourth and fifth vaccination is being propagated, when Steeck, for example, already warned in autumn 2021 that this repeated mRNA administration reduces the immune system's ability to defend itself (NB: In order not to be confronted with compulsory vaccination, we moved abroad in the hope that the vaccination and mask and contact ban totalitarianism would not manifest itself there as it does in Germany).
Most of my former circle of acquaintances were believers in the state, they were afraid, spent two years sitting almost exclusively in their homes, and even today quite a few go shopping wearing masks. Some close relatives refuse to meet up with us unvaccinated people. That's bitter, but such restrictions also existed in the GDR (- someone had contacts in the West and was avoided because a friendship would be harmful). That's how life is now in the free West too.
And there are an increasing number of vaccinated people who have become critical, who have indignantly withdrawn from the boosters, including some who went on the walks as vaccinated people. "What is too much is too much."
One final argument: Why are critics, seasoned doctors and virologists, persecuted in this way? Why are their debates on YouTube and Twitter etc. blocked? Why are there no controversial debates on public television? Only cautiously do individual contributions on vaccination damage ... no: "Post-Vac Sytrome". That stinks to high heaven. Cui bono? The number of billionaires has increased significantly since 2020, millions worldwide have been impoverished by coronavirus policies. And governments have expanded their power, freedom of opinion has been restricted and the state-media complex has gained enormous power. None of these are scientific arguments for or against this coronavirus policy, but rather indications. I don't trust "those up there".
Kind regards, without a clear name.
Thank you, Northern Lights,
We're together, but I'm losing track at the moment. Because so much is so incomprehensible...
PS: My wife was just in Denmark. The only people there wearing masks were German tourists...
Thank you too, Northern Lights.
In your last paragraph in particular, you have summarized the overwhelming 'evidence' very well! They are so overwhelming that all the characteristics no longer merely suggest a criminal background, but are so obvious that anyone with political responsibility must now be labeled a 'truth denier'.
If a legal system is ever reintroduced here, there will inevitably be an acute shortage of doctors, executive civil servants and, above all, politicians, because ... those who are not on the run are either on trial or have already been convicted and are serving time.
It's quite simple: are our government and its advisors lying? Yes. That's the end of the matter for me, they first have to prove that they're not lying. How do you recognize lies? By the fact that there is deliberately no monitoring of success. The measures were justified with deaths, but are measured in positive test results. Not even a 5-year-old would get involved in something like that.
A great article. The motto of life that I love and live by, "live and let live", is threatened with extinction by the state-imposed woke madness. The same applies to "common sense". The more tolerance is imposed, the greater the intolerance becomes. It's an endless loop in which someone will always feel discriminated against and disadvantaged. A little more self-reflection would do the majority of the population good. Whether I feel discriminated against, marginalized, disadvantaged etc. is primarily down to me and my own self-image and self-esteem. With a greater sense of reality, you could also recognize that you can't and shouldn't be everyone's darling. Conflict is part of life and shapes character and personality. Expectations of politics today are high. The state should regulate as much as possible and a large part of the population expects to be constantly "pampered". At the same time, there is a demand for self-determination. How self-determined am I if, as an adult, I am constantly calling out like a toddler for the state to sort things out for me? Consequently, the many representatives for "everything possible" are just the outward sign of an increasingly comfortable, unfit for life and unrealistic society whose life takes place predominantly in social media. In order to gain votes, many politicians are jumping on this bandwagon and celebrating an outrage mentality. Pragmatism and a focus on core tasks can no longer win a flower pot in our prevailing zeitgeist.
I motivate everyone, everyone, everyone ... in short, every person who feels addressed, to renounce this nonsense of minorities, and simply not to MENTION it anymore, just as if it were predetermined by God - as an authoritarian majority factor, so to speak!
If one, one, 'something'... starts to break out of the disastrous stream of followers, then there is always the chance that 'quite a few' will follow suit.
Take courage !