War by demandside

Marc Batko

From:marc1seed@yahoo.com

To:marc1seed@yahoo.com

Sat, Apr 6 at 6:24 AM

CDU politician Roderich Kiesewetter is not content with a supposed defensive battle against Russia - he's ready to go on the attack.

It's embarrassing when you're almost only known for a single sentence in public and then it's horribly wrong. In Roderich Kiesewetter's case, this sentence is: "The war must be taken to Russia." If the suggestion is taken to its logical conclusion, this would mean entering into a major Central European conflict that could cost thousands, if not millions, of lives. To call Kiesewetter a "hawk" would therefore be a very unkind act towards this impressive bird species. Certainly, the CDU politician was a soldier - but members of this professional group are often characterized by very reasonable, moderate views on war - precisely because they know what they are talking about. Not so Roderich Kiesewetter. He blithely rants on and risks not only his own life and limb, but that of us all.

by Uwe Froschauer

[This article posted on 4/5/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.manova.news/artikel/gern-wieder-krieg.]

Every war is a defeat. From a humanist point of view, there is no winner in a war, because war destroys lives. Warmongers must be seen for what they are: Destroyers of life and the livelihoods of people in the future. In my view, Roderich Kiesewetter, a member of the Bundestag, is one of these warmongers.

Waging a war against wars is justified, just and more necessary than ever before. Doves of peace - such as Pope Francis - have a hard time fighting the drums of war, which are just as hollow as the brains of the war drummers. At the moment, the war rhetoric of the hawks prevailssomething that seemed unthinkable a decade ago - as they try to make people "ready for war" with seemingly factual arguments. They usually point to who started a war without shedding light on the background of how it came about. The USA, whose loyal servant the CDU man Kiesewetter is, is unbeatable at provoking the first move, as the long series of illegal wars it has staged proves. It is not those who take the first step who are the real aggressors, but those who force others to do so.

Those who cannot find peace within themselves find it difficult to make peace with their environment. I attribute this lack of peace within and without to the "zeros" that I have written about in this series and will continue to write about. This, my last and future articles are also intended to help restore the "peaceability" of many people who have gone astray, as well as to question people who provoke war and their actions.

Kiesewetter and the Ukraine-Russia conflict

The war rhetorician Kiesewetter, oblivious to history and eternally yesterday, slipped out the following words: "The war must be taken to Russia!"



Former Colonel Roderich Kiesewetter (CDU), the defense of Ukraine - which would no longer have been necessary at the end of March 2022 due to a negotiated solution in Istanbul - is not enough. The "pacifist West", or more precisely the USA and the UK, was not yet ready for peace at that time, which a few hundred thousand people paid for with their lives, and not Russia, as Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, who apparently suffers from short-term memory loss, recently announced.

In Kiesewetter's opinion, Russia must also be attacked from Ukraine with the help of German weapons. Kiesewetter also called for a 200 billion euro increase in "special funds" for the Bundeswehr and the delivery of Taurus cruise missiles as well as the bombing of military facilities and oil refineries on Russian soil.

Are you still there, Mr. Kiesewetter? Have you forgotten the meaning of the words "never again"? World wars start with the war rhetoric of warmongers like you.

And where do you want to get the extra 200 billion from? Cut social spending, as Finance Minister Christian Lindner is already considering?

Roderich Kiesewetter told Deutsche Welle on February 9, 2024, verbatim:

"The war must be taken to Russia. Russian military facilities and headquarters must be destroyed. We must do everything we can to enable Ukraine to destroy not only oil refineries in Russia, but also ministries, command posts and command posts. It is time for the Russian people to realize that they have a dictator who is sacrificing the future of Russia. Who is sacrificing the future of Russia's youth, including its ethnic minorities. That this is a country that is basically bringing war to the world instead of becoming a force for peace."

Mr. Kiesewetter, the USA is bringing war into the world through its imperialist, unipolar aspirations. The USA is practicing what people like you accuse Russia of! NATO - aka the USA - has broken most of the agreements, not Russia. I see you, Mr. Kiesewetter, as a vassal of the USA, which, with 470 military conflicts since its existence, is unsurpassed at the forefront of aggression in world history. You support this.

I also don't believe this gentleman that he is interested in democracy and freedom in Ukraine. On December 2023, Kiesewetter spoke about the raw material deposits in the embattled DonetskLugansk region in "Bericht aus Berlin extra". Europe is dependent on the lithium reserves there if it wants to "complete the energy transition". "A possible compromise line would mean giving up territory. And that would be victory for Putin," said Kiesewetter. The German government would therefore have to deliver Taurus cruise missiles to Kiev. That's the soldier's heart talking! For him, peace seems to mean the absence of war. "If Ukraine falls apart, the consequential costs will be much greater than if we go in much stronger now," said Kiesewetter.

Well, at least he leaves no doubt as to the true intention of his stance. Perhaps securing raw materials is also more important than avoiding further, unnecessary bloodshed, isn't it, Mr. Kiesewetter? Among other things, it's about raw materials - no question - and these are not only

available in eastern Ukraine, but also in Russia. The USA in particular wants a slice of that.

"War

Am I going to war over your land?

Do I want your water?

Will I get your oil?

And if you don't give it to me, then there will be war, then I'll take it!"

(Helga Schäferling, German social education worker)

The Russians - not the West - ended the Cold War. They were rewarded for this conciliatory act with the eastward expansion of NATO, which was never supposed to happen: "Not an inch eastwards", said the then US Secretary of State James Baker after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Ending the Cold War was more of a thorn in the side of the USA, as an imperial power needs an enemy. The Maidan coup staged by the USA in Ukraine in 2014 was a major step towards rebuilding the old enemy image. On February 2022, the time had come: the Russian invasion provoked by the USA. The raw material deposits in Russia are simply too tempting for the Deep State, which has the strings of puppets like Joe Biden and Roderich Kiesewetter firmly in its hands. Of course, people like Vladimir Putin, who strangely doesn't even like the planned US raid for raw materials, are disturbing. Not everyone keeps quiet when their raw materials or lifesustaining infrastructure, such as the pipelines needed for energy supply, are taken away or sabotaged. More on this in the following articles: Weakening, Russia.

From your point of view, Mr. Kiesewetter, it would be "unthinkable if the whole thing failed", because then "the German peace order" and the "European Union" would be history. Moreover, Germany would become a "party to the war". Regardless of how Kiesewetter and his ilk define "war party" - in my opinion, Germany has already reached this stage since the delivery of the Leopard 2 tank. The Kremlin probably also sees Germany as a party to the war, at the latest when Olaf Scholz gives in to the domestic and foreign warmongers and Germany delivers the Taurus cruise missile to Ukraine directly or via detours.

In an interview with the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper at the beginning of March 2024, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron suggested a ring swap in which Germany would deliver Taurus cruise missiles to the UK and the United Kingdom (UK) could in turn deliver more Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine. This should allay Scholz's concerns. What a game of hide and seek! Thank God Scholz also said no to this charade. Good and keep it up, Mr. Scholz, please don't fall over in front of these short-sighted warmongers!

Roderich Kiesewetter commented:

"A ring swap is only the last measure. It is about the survival of Ukraine and the fear of the people in Ukraine of a sham peace. The Chancellor is not even aware of the consequences of his misconduct."

Such misconduct can only be attributed to warmongers like you, Mr. Kiesewetter, and not to politicians like Olaf Scholz who are trying to de-escalate. And you and your ilk are not aware of the consequences of moronic Taurus deliveries to Ukraine: a possible third world war, worst case: nuclear!

Annalena Baerbock does not rule out the possibility of exchanging rings. She said on this subject in her well-known bad German:

"The ring swap was one of the German inventions, so to speak. That would be an option, and we did it a long time ago with other material."

What was meant was the delivery of German Leopard tanks to Slovakia, which in turn passed its tanks on to Ukraine.

In February 2024, Kiesewetter said, among other things, that once Russia had annexed Ukraine, other parts of Europe might be next in line. Ridiculous!

Russia already has difficulties in taking an inferior opponent by force - the war with Ukraine has been going on for two years now - and Mr. Kiesewetter and many German citizens believe that Russia could spread into Europe?

Russia will win the war in military terms, no matter how much money and weapons the "Western values" waste on it. And Europe afterwards? What nonsense! Russia has only 150 million inhabitants and enough to do to secure its own borders in view of NATO's continuing stranglehold. On the day Sweden joined NATO, the "defense expert" Kiesewetter said on the ZDF talk show Maybritt Illner:

"The Chancellor is putting nuclear sharing at risk. He is also sending a signal to Trump that we Europeans can no longer rely on the Americans. We must refer to the nuclear umbrella and not be deterred by Putin individually. Sweden is a member of NATO as of today, they were threatened with nuclear weapons. They were not interested. Finland was threatened with nuclear weapons. Romania was threatened with nuclear weapons, Bulgaria because they supplied certain weapons. Only the Federal Republic of Germany believes it has to stay out of it. We are and will be a target of war, and Russia has seen us - he said quite clearly - as an enemy since November. We would rather be a strong enemy than a weak enemy. And that is the core argument as to why Taurus is necessary - not as a single system, and five of them won't help either - but to send a clear signal to Putin and give Ukraine confidence. Ukraine has the chance that it will no longer be attacked by Crimea if the supply lines are destroyed. Scholz lacks this courage (...)."

When did Putin threaten Sweden, Finland, Bulgaria, Romania with nuclear weapons? Please prove it! If you can't, this claim is an infamous lie and should lead to you vacating your seat immediately! Can you actually do anything other than pour oil on the fire? Germany does not deserve you! And with Olaf Scholz, it's not a lack of courage, but reason - a quality you lack, Mr. Kiesewetter!

"We will be and are a target of war, and Russia has seen us - he said quite clearly - as an enemy

since November."

Russia has always reached out to us and still does. When has Russia ever waged a war of aggression against Germany? It definitely hasn't, but we are in the process of getting into one against Russia if we give in to the ill-advised demands of people like Roderich Kiesewetter.

In any case, I prefer highly intelligent doves of peace like Sahra Wagenknecht to eternal, mentally mediocre hawks like this Kiesewetter.

"Mr. Kiesewetter seems to be out of his depth," Sahra Wagenknecht rightly complained to the Berliner Zeitung.

"Anyone who wants to take the war to Russia by destroying Russian military facilities and ministries with German weapons will take the war to Germany."

In an interview with Deutsche Welle, Kiesewetter went on to say: "(...) Ukraine deserves EU membership and, moreover, NATO membership. This is also part of supporting Ukraine, preparing for membership of the European Union and NATO and also relocating the arms industry to Ukraine so that production can take place directly on the ground (...)."

In order to join NATO and/or the EU, certain conditions must be met. Membership of both the European Union and NATO requires a democratic attitude and the rule of law, Mr. Kiesewetter, criteria which Ukraine undoubtedly does not meet. You can find out more about these conditions at

bmvg

German Federal Government

Major General (ret.) Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof spoke out in February 2024 in a remarkable letter on the subject of "Ukraine and democracy", among other things:

"Ladies and gentlemen! I did not serve as a soldier for 37 years to keep the peace in Germany and now watch without comment or action as Germany is slowly but probably heading towards active participation in a foreign and senseless war. Our 'Three Wise Men', Chancellor Scholz, Minister Lindner and Minister Dr. Habeck all initially refused to do military service in their younger years for Germany's justice and freedom and the preservation of our democracy. They are now spending well over 10 billion euros of taxpayers' money per year on 'justice', 'freedom', 'democracy' and 'Western values' in a foreign state that is neither a democracy nor does it represent Western values. They are using our tax money and the blood of foreign conscripts to prolong a war that has now become pointless.

Ukraine is by no means a democracy and its values are not ours. 11 opposition parties are banned in Ukraine. Zelensky has banned the presidential elections scheduled for March 2024 - which are taking place in Russia. In Ukraine, all the media have been brought into line. No reports by German journalists critical of Ukraine are permitted from Ukraine - comments by German

journalists critical of Russia are quite common from Moscow. Political murders are the order of the day in Ukraine, according to the 3-week protocols of the Federal Agency for Civic Education until the beginning of the war. Ukraine and Russia are together the two most corrupt states in Europe, according to Transparency International. Buying off military service is just as common in Ukraine as it is in Russia. Ukraine's record of breaches of state treaties and violations of UN conventions and international charters is in no way inferior to that of Russia in terms of frequency and severity. The type and frequency of Ukrainian war crimes are equal to those committed by Russia, with the exception of the misuse of humanitarian facilities protected under international law of war as shields for fighting troops, which only occurs on the Ukrainian side (according to the OSCE report of June 29, 2022).

This Ukraine is neither a democracy, nor does it stand for our values, as the German media and the majority of our political parties would have us believe. The interpretation presented to us by the official side that Ukraine would co-defend our values is as foolish as Struck's "Germany's defense in the Hindu Kush" was (...)."

In my eyes, these are true words. You can find out more about Ukraine and democracy here.

Pope Francis also spoke true words. In an interview with Swiss television published in advance on March 9, 2024, the Pope said

"When you see that you are defeated, that things are not going well, you must have the courage to negotiate."

Without directly naming one of the two parties to the conflict, Ukraine or Russia, he added that without negotiations, the situation could get worse, which is why we should not be ashamed of it. In the interview, Pope Francis is also asked about calls from Ukraine for "courage to surrender, to the white flag", which others see as legitimizing the stronger side. The Pope replied:

"That is a question of point of view. But I think that the stronger side is the one that recognizes the situation, that thinks of the people, that has the courage of the white flag to negotiate."

This is how a "dove" thinks: better an unjust peace than a just war. Reactions of outraged "hawks" to Francis' statements: Roderich Kiesewetter in an X-Tweet:

"Unbelievable, the head of the Catholic Church sides with the aggressor. How sad! Pope calls on UKR to 'raise white flag + negotiate an end to Russian war of aggression'. He is providing Putin with a blueprint for further action."

"It is "unbelievable" that your party has the "C" in its party acronym and shoots against the supreme earthly representative of Peter. Unbelievable and intolerable are people like you who are not prepared to "negotiate an end to the Russian war of aggression" and prefer to spill more blood! You are unbelievable, or rather untrustworthy!

When the warmongering becomes too much even for the pontiff, war-drunk people like you should start thinking about the nonsense they are making and spreading - which is of course

difficult for a drunk person. You should be ashamed of yourself!

Try - also for your own good - to banish the bellicose thoughts from your brain and heart and turn your attention back to peace. With luck, you'll stay in purgatory in Catholic hell. If you can't do that, then why don't you and your two children volunteer to go to the Ukrainian front?

Selenskyj has an acute shortage of personnel because young men who have been killed - who have people like you on their conscience - don't grow back indefinitely. War is when young people who don't know and don't hate each other kill each other because old people like you, who know and hate each other, want to do so for base motives.

Ms. Strack-Zimmermann is even ashamed - as a Catholic - of the statements made by her highest religious leader. I am ashamed for Germany that the former nation of poets and thinkers has once again produced such politicians.

Bundestag Vice President Katrin Göring-Eckardt (The Greens) told the newspapers of the Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland (RND):

"Anyone who demands that Ukraine simply surrender is giving the aggressor what it has illegally taken, thereby accepting the obliteration of Ukraine."

Ukraine's negotiating position has deteriorated considerably since the failed negotiations - caused by the West - in Istanbul at the end of March 2022. So much for "making peace with weapons", this absolutely idiotic "strategy" - more of an indictment of the mentally deficient than a strategy! The proponents of even more arms deliveries to Ukraine are particularly to blame for Ukraine's poor negotiating position and the further senseless bloodshed.

Kiesewetter and the wiretapping scandal

"Unfortunately, there are increasing indications that a Russian participant dialed into the Webex and apparently did not notice that there was another dial-in number. The key question is, why is such a sensitive topic being dealt with via Webex at all, why does the Federal Office for Information Security not have low-threshold access to corresponding protected information and video conferencing systems? This is a question that also needs to be clarified. Well, these are sources that deal with this professionally, but there are already initial indications of this on the Internet, and I believe it is a matter of state policy to make it clear that this makes us all aware of how easy it is for Russia to gain access to such conference systems. We need to clarify how they obtained the dial-in numbers and how they were able to gain access to this conference. This is an espionage matter where we also need to strengthen our own counterintelligence considerably more (...)."

Notice something, dear readers, in this video I transcribed, Mr. Kiesewetter does not go into the content of the conversation at all, in which scenarios of an attack on targets on Russian territory are discussed! According to Article 26 of the Basic Law (GG), these were unconstitutional attack plans that should be made a punishable offense! Russia is already considering and discussing which bridges it should target in the event of the Crimean Bridge being destroyed or damaged by German weapons in Germany!

The recorded and published audio file deals, among other things, with the question of whether Taurus cruise missiles would be technically and theoretically capable of destroying the Russianbuilt bridge to the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea. In this recording, four high-ranking Bundeswehr officers discuss the capabilities of the Taurus cruise missile and the challenges that would be associated with a delivery to Ukraine. More on this in my last article.

The Frankfurter Rundschau newspaper reported:

"Kiesewetter considers the content of the conversation to be quite probable, as the destruction would be a great success for Ukraine."

Mr. Kiesewetter, German officers discussed how the Crimean Bridge could be destroyed with German weapons. The realization of such a project would be tantamount to Germany declaring war on Russia. And you are talking about a success for Ukraine in this context? Can you still be saved?

Kiesewetter also said:

"But of course Russia wants it to appear that Germany is already planning a concrete operation. Anything that makes Germany look like an active belligerent is likely to deter Scholz."

Mr. Kiesewetter, if this conversation did take place - as you yourself say - then it is undoubtedly clear that these officers at least thought through their plans. Planning means the mental anticipation of future-oriented action. One phase of planning is forecasting, in which the scenario technique is often used as an aid. And this scenario played out in conversation is the predecessor of a possible action with the result that Germany would be a party to the war. In this respect, the Kremlin may not just be making it "look" like that.

Russia is also collecting the material "to prevent arms deliveries to Ukraine, to put pressure on decision-makers or to manipulate public opinion," says Kiesewetter.

Weapons do not create peace, stop supplying weapons to Ukraine, that is also my opinion, and I am no friend of the Kremlin! The suffering of the Ukrainian people and the Ukrainian and Russian soldiers can only be ended at the negotiating table.

You and all the other warmongers should finally admit to yourselves that your bellicose policy of strength and your policy of sanctions against Russia was simply garbage and had the opposite effect of what you propagated. Don't let innocent people continue to die just because you and your ilk don't have the courage to admit your misjudgements. Your support for further arms deliveries is a testimony to your patheticness - you are poor in soul!

Kiesewetter told ntv.de on March 2, 2024:

"Espionage is part of the toolbox of Russia's hybrid warfare, so it is in no way surprising that such a conversation was intercepted. It is equally unsurprising that the recording has become

public. We must assume that the Russians have more material of this kind."

I can only repeat myself: The fact that the Russian secret service has relatively easy access to secret information - which is only of secondary interest to me - is nowhere near as striking as the content of this conversation.

The ex-officer went on to say:

"With the leak, Russia wants to prevent Germany from finally supplying Ukraine with the Taurus cruise missiles it so desperately needs after all" (...).

"Chancellor Scholz has only just made it clear that he intends to continue blocking the Taurus delivery, but has used blatantly false information with which he is now coming under pressure."

Kiesewetter was referring to the fact that in the wiretapped conversation, the four officers discussed, among other things, ways in which Taurus cruise missiles could be deployed in Ukraine even without the Bundeswehr providing specific target data. Olaf Scholz argued that his rejection of Taurus deliveries was particularly "technical", as the use of Taurus cruise missiles by the Ukraine would require the involvement of German soldiers in target control. Chancellor Scholz quite rightly fears that Germany could be indirectly drawn into the war in Ukraine through the delivery of Taurus. In my opinion, not only indirectly, but also directly.

In the Berliner Tagesspiegel, Kiesewetter criticized Chancellor Scholz for ruling out the deployment of German ground troops in Ukraine. Wow! With bellicos like Macron and Kiesewetter, it's definitely hopeless, what else can you say about such dangerous nonsense? Kiesewetter and the Middle East conflict

CDU foreign policy expert Roderich Kiesewetter said in an interview with "Berlin direkt" shortly after the renewed outbreak of the Middle East conflict:

"Yes, that also means that we are prepared to defend Israel's security with our lives."

Mr. Kiesewetter, who do you mean by "we"? Yourself, your family, your party, the Bundestag? I am absolutely not prepared to do so - neither for Israel nor for Ukraine and certainly not for the USA, which has its imperialist fingers in every pie and pulls the strings and to which people like you are in thrall. You are welcome to go to Israel to fight with your life for Israel's security. As a former colonel in the German army, you certainly have experience in such matters. And have you already been on the front line? Of course, you can also provide humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip and search for children's bodies in the rubble there.

Don't you also think that Israel is guilty of genocide? Have you campaigned for appropriate sanctions against Israel? And what about the thousands of murdered children in Gaza? Is that okay with you, or is that collateral damage that you have to accept as a "soldier" in a well-paid chair?

Conclusion

The statements and actions of war expert Roderich Kiesewetter - who would like to take the war to Russia, who is a flaming advocate of the delivery of the Taurus cruise missile to Ukraine, who calls the Federal Chancellor a risk to security, who is more concerned about the leak than about the content of the conversation in this leak - suggest that Mr. Kiesewetter is not an ambassador of peace.

Mr. Kiesewetter, with your bellicose attitude, you are an enormous risk to world peace. You should resign your post immediately for the good of humanity. Pack up your numb militarism and leave, please!

Uwe Froschauer studied and graduated in business administration at the Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich. He was particularly interested in business psychology. He worked as a management consultant, gives seminars at vocational training institutions, is the author of several books and runs the blog wassersaege.com. His passion for worldwide travel has made him sensitive to the cultures and problems of other peoples. He is close to nature and loves animals and plants.

The eradicated hope for peace

Even after a Chancellor Scholz, we are not immune to further decline. Friedrich Merz could become the black rock on which Germany crashes.

30.03.2024 by Uwe Froschauer

Current article

The elixir of life

The peacemakers

Corona: These politicians defamed the unvaccinated - now they are silent about their statements

During the pandemic, politicians from all established parties outdid themselves with demands to make life difficult for the unvaccinated. Today, many no longer want to know anything about it.

[...]

The Left Party and the FDP are calling for the establishment of a commission of inquiry to investigate the pandemic. Economics Minister Robert Habeck (Greens) announced to the Bild newspaper that there would be a period of reflection "on the difficult pandemic period with all its effects". An opportunity to look back: What did politicians say about the lockdowns and vaccination? How do they categorize their demands at the time today? What would they say again, what would they take back?

Source: Berliner Zeitung

also: The three monkeys of the Corona era

If there is no thorough reappraisal of the pandemic, this is damage to the future by omissionand entry into the next phase of self-inflicted immaturity. [...]

Whether it is really wise and whether it really brings luck if the Bundestag, Bundesrat and

Federal Government do not want to take care of a thorough reappraisal of the corona pandemic is, of course, more than doubtful. It is a case of the state refusing to learn. It is damage to the future by omission. Especially after the publication of the so-called RKI files with the heavily redacted minutes of the Robert Koch Institute's deliberations, which have been the subject of heated public debate, it is more important than ever to come to terms with and clarify the situation.

Source: Heribert Prantl in the Süddeutsche newspaper

Aufarbeitung der Pandemie: die drei Corona-Affen

https://www.sueddeutsche.de/meinung/corona-aufarbeitung-rki-files-kolumne-von-heribertprantl-1.6516484

On our own behalf: Why journalism is not a conspiracy theory and Multipolar is not a "rightwing" magazine

The RKI protocols exposed by Multipolar have triggered a broad political debate on coming to terms with the coronavirus era. Some media outlets are now trying to attack our credibility. Multipolar is "right-wing" or "conspiracy theorist", according to SPIEGEL and Süddeutsche Zeitung, for example. A reply. [...]

The last name mentioned by the SZ is more interesting: Andreas Anton. The doctor of sociology is one of the few top-class researchers in the field of conspiracy theories. An expanded new edition of his standard work "Konspiration. Sociology of Conspiracy Thinking", supplemented by a chapter on corona. Multipolar asked Anton whether he was being interpreted correctly by the SZ. His answer should give the editors of more than just this newspaper food for thought: Source: Multipolar

https://multipolar-magazin.de/artikel/rki-protokolle-4

"Power belongs to those who can place their interpretation in the public eye"

Censored book

Time and again, we hear that people in Germany believe they can no longer speak freely. The corridor of opinion is narrow, cancel culture is everywhere. Who benefits from this?

Roberto De Lapuente in conversation with Michael Meyen.

[This discussion posterd on 4/5/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://overton-magazin.de/dialog/macht-hat-der-der-seine-interpretation-in-der-oeffentlichkeitplatzieren-kann/.]

De Lapuente: In your new book "Cancel Culture. How propaganda and censorship are destroying democracy and society" about "censorship without a censor" - are we experiencing a kind of dehierarchization of censorship here?

Meyen: That is the idea behind the book, yes. There is no Ministry of Truth that says who is allowed to appear in which arena and who is not. And yet that is exactly what is happening. The Internet is being deleted for all it's worth. Organizers disinvite artists. Banks are terminating

accounts, as they just did with Apolut and Manova. Publishers are kicking out authors and having books rewritten because someone might feel offended. Instead of a central authority, we have lots of censors with completely different job titles and even more little helpers.

De Lapuente: Who are the "little helpers" specifically?

Meyen: Today, censorship comes from the leading media and from the institutions that the digital corporate state has either created for this very purpose or has subjected itself to in recent years. It is based on an intellectual precariat that vies for paid positions in editorial offices, universities and NGOs, and on party companies that divert a considerable proportion of tax revenues into propaganda and thus secure their sinecures.

"What we are currently experiencing in the name of the rainbow is a smokescreen"

De Lapuente: So you're talking about journalists, scientists, politicians and activists.

Meyen: Exactly. May I describe the whole thing from above, from a bird's eye view?

De Lapuente: Go ahead!

Meyen: Every government wants to control what is said publicly about its work and about the reality in the country. Germany is no exception. Power belongs to those who can place their interpretation in the public eye - where everyone can see it, in the leading media. Tagesschau, Spiegel, Zeit, Süddeutsche Zeitung. The power of definition includes suppressing or marginalizing everything that could endanger one's own position. Propaganda and censorship are two sides of the same coin. If you want to assert your point of view, you have to eliminate the competition. Today, both only work if you contain the digital corporations. You can see this interplay in the Twitter files or, of course, in the Digital Services Act, which since February has allowed providers to be taken offline if the EU Commission deems "public safety" or "public health" to be at risk.

De Lapuente: That's aimed at wars and pandemics, okay. What other issues could the German government feel threatened by?

Meyen: Mass immigration. Russia, climate and corona, still. You can see for yourself what Paul Schreyer and Multipolar have triggered with the RKI files. At the moment, social inequality, which has reached an all-time high worldwide, is certainly at the top of the list alongside the bridge across the Atlantic. What we are currently experiencing in the name of the rainbow is a smokescreen and is intended to distract from this, along the lines of: What do you want? We are fighting for justice. This fight makes invisible those who earn their money with physical labor and often enough literally struggle to survive.

"You then find the magic words that everyone who wants to enter the coffers of the subsidized state must speak"

De Lapuente: Heine was at least still able to call the German censors "fools". Who can we use that term to describe today?

Meyen: The fish stinks from the head. Wir schaffen das, Klimanotstand, #allesindenArm, Russland ruinieren, #gemeinsamgegenrechts: topics and morals are dictated from above and underpinned with what the hungry Bologna children are looking for just as much as the big companies: Tax money. Here research pots, scholarships, jobs and there subsidies, economic stimulus packages, friendly laws. As a civil servant, I can hardly speak of "fools" when it comes to my employers. That's not the right word either. The machine is already running pretty well.

De Lapuente: Prescribed from above - that's too abstract for me. Who exactly do you mean?

Meyen: In case of doubt, the Chancellery. Just take a look at Angela Merkel's speeches. In 2016, she spoke of "post-factual times" and in 2019 of fake news as "part of hybrid warfare". From there, it wasn't far to her lockdown invocation on October 29, 2020, in which "lies and disinformation, conspiracy and hatred" seemed almost more threatening than what had been declared the most dangerous disease of all time. Olaf Scholz then put a slight spin on this in his first government statement, finding the "enemy" on the right and opening the hunt for a "small extremist minority" that has allegedly "turned its back on our society, our democracy, our community and our state" and "not just on science, rationality and reason".

Do you still peddle your opinion or do you tend to be cautious when expressing it?

If it suits me, I'll say what I mean.

I'm cautious and keep a lot of things under wraps.

I don't allow myself to be censored.

I'm afraid of the consequences and prefer to keep quiet.

My opinion is close to the government and is therefore not a problem.

Results

De Lapuente: But it's still a long way from there to censorship ...

Meyen: Scholz has provided the memory aids for all the little cancel chancellors in editorial offices, NGOs, authorities, corporate headquarters and waiting loops: "denial of reality", "absurd conspiracy stories", "willful disinformation". Note the adjectives and then find the magic words that everyone who wants to enter the treasury of the subsidized state or is already there must speak. I don't need to repeat that here. The important thing is that the same buzzwords lead to the exclusion of anyone who can be accused of a violation.

"1933 is always the point of reference and the claim to be better than the Germans back then"

De Lapuente: Cancel culture is a bit like the mafia. Everyone talks about it, but those who are associated with this practice are quick to explain that there is no such thing as censorship. Do you think that the majority of people in the country know that such censorship exists? Or is the majority more likely to believe those who deny censorship?

Meyen: Majorities have recently become something of a thing. In Switzerland, 38 percent of

adults try to avoid any contact with the leading media. It's probably pretty similar in Germany. Many of these people also no longer take part in surveys. Research is therefore pretty much in the fog.

De Lapuente: That still doesn't answer my question.

Meyen: Sorry. I'm sure you're familiar with the Allensbach figures on the "wall of silence" from 2023. Of course, it is an alarm signal when only 40 percent of Germans over the age of 16 "feel" that they can "freely express their political opinion". Everyone else is obviously aware of the censorship. I find the study fascinating because it also allows us to take a look at what you call the mafia. A-levels and university degrees obscure the view of cancel culture. People who work in the awareness industry or in a government agency are much more likely to believe that they can "speak freely" in this country. As many as 75 percent of Green Party supporters say this.

De Lapuente: What do you say to those who maintain that censorship is nothing other than a "defensible democracy"?

Meyen: That is the latest cry, yes. First we had Karl Popper's "open society", which paradoxically wasn't open at all because it had to constantly seek out "enemies" that it supposedly had to fight. And now the word "defensive". 1933 is always the point of reference and the claim to be better than the Germans at that time. Who made Hitler Reich Chancellor and for what reasons no longer plays any role at all. History is canceled just as much as the power structures. When government politicians such as Olaf Scholz speak of "our democracy" in a corporate state, this is to be taken quite literally. It's about class warfare: us up here against you down there.

Dr. Michael Meyen has been a professor of communication science at Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich since 2002. He is the author of the books "Die Propaganda-Matrix" and "Wie ich meine Uni verlor".

Why Mr. Meyen is no longer involved Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is spouting the most nonsense in the whole country?

"I would be rather irritated if everyone always agreed"

"The parties have completely hijacked the public broadcasters"

"A lateral thinker is someone who has their own opinion"

CCS: the accelerated path to climate catastrophe

By Reinhard Knof

[This article posted on April 05, 2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.isw-muenchen.de/online-publikationen/texte-artikel/5224-ccs-der-beschleunigteweg-in-die-klimakatastrophe-2,]

CCS stands for Carbon Capture and Storage,

i.e. capturing and storing carbon.

In reality, however, carbon dioxide is to be captured and stored in landfills. So it is neither about carbon nor about storage. The wrong terms are being used to pave the way for "business as usual" in the fossil fuel industry.

With "CCS", 50 years of misinformation from the fossil fuel industry are entering the next round. As the current legislative plans reveal, CCS is primarily about the long-term use of natural gas. The German government plans that the planned new gas-fired power plants in Germany should be built to be CCS-ready, i.e. they would be the main suppliers for the CO2 landfills. The companies that have deliberately led us into the climate catastrophe for 50 years are now to be given a fig leaf for the continuation of their business model and lead the earth further into the abyss of climate catastrophe.

Natural gas consists of methane. Methane is the second most important climate-active gas and is responsible for around a third of man-made global warming.

One, if not the main source of methane emitted by humans is the oil and gas industry[1]. Fracked natural gas from the USA, which we are currently importing to Germany in increasing quantities as LNG (liquefied natural gas), is significantly more harmful to the climate than the use of hard coal[2].

CCS plus LNG form a dangerous combination that will further accelerate the climate catastrophe.

CCS is a failed technology that does not deliver what it promises

In 2018, the European Court of Auditors found that all 12 CCS projects funded by the EU failed to meet their targets[3].

CCS is also characterized by failed projects worldwide[4] or has been used primarily to extract even more oil and gas[5] and further fuel the climate catastrophe[6].

While CO2 reduction targets have been missed, costs have exploded[7].

Waste incineration is cited as one of the "unavoidable" sources of CO2 that would make CCS absolutely necessary. The fact is, however, that the plant with the highest capture rate of a waste incineration plant has captured just 11% of the CO2, i.e. emitted 89% CO2.[8] As the composition of waste varies greatly, it is hardly possible to optimize CO2 capture. Precisely where CCS is supposedly indispensable, it has so far failed technically.

CO2 landfills are neither safe, nor is CO2 permanently captured

Earlier assumptions that findings from individual CO2 landfills could be transferred to others have not proved to be true. A recent study on the "flagship" landfills in Norway shows the considerable problems and the lack of predictability and transferability of findings on landfill properties[9].

There are probably around 1,800 leaking boreholes[10] and individual blowouts in the fields in the North Sea intended for the construction of CO2 landfills.

There is no systematic monitoring, nor are leaking old wells sealed.

There are still no established procedures for sealing leaks from CO2 landfills in the North Sea.

An additional 300,000 tons of methane are released every year from the 1990 blowout off Scotland[11], where the serious effects of leaks on the environment and species composition can also be observed.

It can therefore not be assumed that the CO2 landfills will be leak-proof. The CO2 would move through the sediments and massively affect the species composition there,[12] further acidify the seawater and partially re-enter the atmosphere.

The injection of millions of tons of CO2 underground year after year could lead to upwelling and earthquakes, similar to the incident on 22 November 2022 in Alberta, Canada[13]. It has been known since 2015 in the USA that the injection of fluids triggers earthquakes[14]. This endangers CO2 repositories, wind farms, natural gas and oil platforms and the North Sea.

The sandstone formations of the North Sea and the North German Basin lack the minerals that would be required for mineralization. For this reason, only a very small proportion of the CO2 is converted into rock and is not firmly bound underground. The CO2 will remain largely mobile there even after thousands of years[15].

This means that CO2 repositories will remain ticking time bombs for the climate. However, the costs of monitoring will be passed on to the general public after just a few decades, if these repositories are monitored permanently at all.

The only CO2 research landfill in Germany, the Ketzin project, was only monitored for 5 years after the end of the injection phase[16]. Since then, there have been no more findings on the fate of the CO2. Nevertheless, in the absence of other projects, this research project is being used as a "demonstration" project for the Carbon Dioxide Storage Act and is being described as a success.

Water problems due to CCS

The amount of water required for the planned scale of CCS could be roughly equivalent to the water consumption stated by the Federal Environment Agency for the entire agricultural sector in Germany.

In addition, it is to be expected that the pressure exerted during the injection of CO2 will displace salt water from underground over a wide area. This could endanger our groundwater resources even 50-100 km away, as illustrated by a map of the two CO2 repositories planned in SchleswigHolstein in 2009. In any case, the displacement of saline formation waters by CO2 will inevitably lead to extensive salinization of higher freshwater levels[17].

CO2 pipelines

A new CO2 pipeline network of around 4,600 km in length is currently planned for Germany. This would require the construction of a wide construction site over a width of around 45 meters, which would leave behind a significantly degraded agricultural area or destroyed environment[18].

There is experience of CO2 pipeline accidents, particularly in the USA.[20] The more densely populated the area through which the pipelines run, the more people are harmed by accidents. [21] In Germany, CO2 pipelines are also planned for the most densely populated areas, so it is not a question of whether fatal accidents will occur, but only when, how often and with what consequences. Accidents involving CO2 are also so dangerous because vehicles with internal combustion engines stop suddenly, often preventing emergency vehicles from reaching the scene of the accident in the first place[22].

CCS would permanently increase energy costs

Almost all technologies become cheaper and cheaper as they are used.

CCS is an inglorious exception here.

The costs per captured and injected tonne of CO2 have not decreased significantly in the last 50 years[23], but have actually increased in the case of direct capture from the air. The costs for a relevant capture and storage of CO2[24] would not be affordable even in a rich country like Germany. CCS would certainly not be a solution for the world because of the costs.

This means that politically induced, permanently high inflation is looming, which will primarily affect the poorest, both in Germany, the EU and the Global South.

Conclusion:

The energy transition can only succeed without CCS. CCS would accelerate the climate catastrophe at the expense of the poorest, minorities and the environment in particular.

Notes on the author:

Dr. Reinhard Knof

Citizens' initiative against CO2 repositories e.V. https://keinco2endlager.de

[1] https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/3033/2019/

[2]https://www.research.howarthlab.org/documents/Howarth2022_EM_Magazine_methane.pdf

[3] https://www.eca.europa.eu/de/publications?did=47082

[4] https://ieefa.org/resources/carbon-capture-has-long-history-failure

[5] https://www.desmog.com/2023/09/25/fossil-fuel-companies-made-bold-promises-to-capturecarbon-heres-what-actually-happened/

[6] https://energyandpolicy.org/department-of-energy-analysis-says-coal-carbon-capture-projectwould-emit-more-greenhouse-gases-than-it-stores/

[7] https://ieefa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Gorgon-Carbon-Capture-and-Storage_TheSting-in-the-Tail_April-2022.pdf

[8] https://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/BECCS-report-2022-final.pdf

[9]https://ieefa.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/Norway%E2%80%99s%20Sleipner%20and %20Sn%C3%B8hvit%20CCS-%20Industry%20models%20or%20cautionary%20tales.pdf

[10] https://www.geomar.de/news/article/neue-studie-bestaetigt-umfangreiche-gasleckagen-inder-nordsee

[11] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erdgasleck_in_der_Nordsee

[12]https://www.mpg.de/11936761/kohlendioxid-ccs

[13]https://phys.org/news/2023-03-oil-industry-triggered-large-alberta.html

[14]https://www.americangeosciences.org/geoscience-currents/induced-seismicity-oil-and-gasoperations

[15]https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.2014.0853

[16]https://www.lbeg.niedersachsen.de/energie_rohstoffe/co2speicherung/co2-speicherung935.html

[17]https://keinco2endlager.de/geologische-kurzstudie-zu-den-bedingungen-und-moeglichenauswirkungen-der-dauerhaften-lagerung-von-co2-im-untergrund/

[18]https://api.yooble.com/uploads/703565_1525680274_nCwaj.jpg

[19]https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/lueneburg_heide_unterelbe/LNG-TerminalStade-Rund-60000-Kubikmeter-Gas-muessen-verbrannt-werden,aktuelllueneburg10050.html

[20]https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0950423023001596

[21]https://www.npr.org/2023/05/21/1172679786/carbon-capture-carbon-dioxide-pipeline

[22]https://www.wz.de/nrw/moenchengladbach/gas-unfall-mehr-als-100-verletzte-inmoenchengladbacher-lackfabrik_aid-31503165

[23]https://www.focus.de/earth/news/ccs-technik-retten-co2-staubsauger-unser-klima-einrealitaetscheck-der-wunderwaffe_id_228126796.html

[24]file:///tmp/mozilla_nutzer0/kostenschaetzung-fuer-ein-ccs-system-fuer-die-schweiz-bis2050.pdf

CCS: the accelerated path to climate catastrophe

Reinhard Knof CCS stands for Carbon Capture and Storage.

In reality, however, carbon dioxide is to be captured and stored in landfills. So it is neither about carbon nor about storage. The wrong terms are being used to pave the way for the fossil fuel industry to continue.

With "CCS", 50 years of misinformation from the fossil fuel industry are entering the next round. As the current legislative planning reveals, it is primarily about CCS for the long-term use of natural gas. The German government is planning for the planned new gas-fired power plants in Germany to be built CCS-ready, i.e. to become the main suppliers for CO2 landfills. The companies that have deliberately led us into the climate catastrophe for 50 years are now to be given a fig leaf for the continuation of their business model and lead the earth further into the abyss of climate catastrophe.

Natural gas consists of methane. Methane is the second most important climate-active gas and is responsible for around a third of man-made global warming. One, if not the main source of methane emitted by humans is the oil and gas industry[1].

Fracked natural gas from the USA, which we are currently importing to Germany in increasing quantities as LNG (liquefied natural gas), is significantly more harmful to the climate than the use of hard coal[2].

CCS plus LNG form a dangerous combination that will further accelerate the climate catastrophe.

CCS is a failed technology that does not deliver what it promises

In 2018, the European Court of Auditors

found that all 12 CCS projects funded by the EU

funded CCS projects did not meet their targets.

3] CCS is also characterized by failed projects worldwide[4] or has been used primarily to extract even more oil and gas[5] and further fuel the climate catastrophe[6].

While CO2 reduction targets have been missed, costs have exploded[7].

The incineration of waste is considered one of the "unavoidable" sources of CO2 that would make CCS absolutely necessary.

But the fact is: the plant with the highest capture rate of a waste waste incineration plant has captured just 11% of the CO2,

89% of the CO2 emitted[8]. composition of waste varies greatly varies greatly, it is hardly possible to optimize CO2 capture is hardly possible.

Precisely where CCS is supposedly is supposedly indispensable, it has technically failed so far.

CO2 landfills are neither safe, nor is CO2 permanently captured

There are probably around 1,800 leaking boreholes[10] and individual blowouts in the fields in the North Sea intended for the construction of CO2 landfills. There is no systematic monitoring, nor are leaking old wells sealed.

There are still no established procedures for sealing leaks from CO2 landfills in the North Sea. An additional 300,000 tons of methane are released every year from the 1990 blowout off Scotland[11], where the serious effects of leaks on the environment and species composition can also be observed.

The injection of millions of tons of CO2 underground year after year could lead to upwelling and

earthquakes, similar to the incident on 22 November 2022 in Alberta, Canada[13]. It has been known since 2015 in the USA that the injection of fluids triggers earthquakes[14]. This endangers CO2 repositories, wind farms, natural gas and oil platforms and the North Sea.

Water problems due to CCS

The amount of water required for the planned scale of CCS could be roughly equivalent to the water consumption stated by the Federal Environment Agency for the entire agricultural sector in Germany.

CO2 pipelines

The CO2 pipelines would pose a permanent danger to people and the environment, as accidents are to be expected. Just this year, for example, there was an accident with a newly built natural gas pipeline in Stade in which 60,000 cubic meters of natural gas leaked or had to be flared off. [19] A comparable accident with a CO2 pipeline in a populated area could lead to thousands of deaths, as CO2 displaces the air and can cause asphyxiation. There is experience of CO2 pipeline accidents, particularly in the USA.[20] The more densely populated the area through which the pipelines run, the more people are harmed by accidents. [21] In Germany, CO2 pipelines are also planned for the most densely populated areas, so it is not a question of whether fatal accidents will occur, but only when, how often and with what consequences. Accidents involving CO2 are also so dangerous because vehicles with internal combustion engines stop suddenly, often preventing emergency vehicles from reaching the scene of the accident in the first place[22].

CCS would permanently increase energy costs

Almost all technologies become cheaper and cheaper as they are used. CCS is an inglorious exception here.

This means that politically induced, permanently high inflation is looming, which will primarily affect the poorest, both in Germany, the EU and the Global South.

Conclusion:

The energy transition can only succeed without CCS. CCS would accelerate the climate catastrophe at the expense of the poorest, minorities and the environment in particular.

Notes on the author:

Dr. Reinhard Knof

Citizens' initiative against CO2 repositories e.V.

https://keinco2endlager.de

Postdemocracy

by Karl-Heinz Goll

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.ossietzky.net/artikel/postdemokratie/.]

George Orwell ("1984") would find himself bitterly vindicated by today's post-democratic conditions. His vision of a totalitarian surveillance state is surpassed by the current situation, which the American political scientist Sheldon Wolin has characterized as "inverted totalitarianism".

In addition to Orwell's screens, which "Big Brother" used to monitor everything, i.e. today's TV screens, in front of which people are sedated on their sofas, smartphones and the internet in every trouser pocket are now being added. There is less need for open surveillance terror; it boils down to an ("inverted") internalized democracy, a recent AI-supported self-alignment through mass manipulation. Opinion polls self-referentially confirm the manipulation as if in a large echo chamber.

The EU and the German federal government are going into overdrive with laws, regulations and codes of conduct against "disinformation", "fake news", "hate crime", etc. Of course, this is all due to the intensive activities of right-wing radicals or other "trolls", including Russian ones, who are active in the infinite spheres of the internet and "social" (?) networks. However, the chronically lagging state or state-sponsored censorship "measures" are double-edged and, above all, one-sided.

What were "thought crimes" according to George Orwell come to light openly and can hardly be contained on the Internet. What is "true" or not is now determined by the superstate and the opinion factories of the TV stations and media corporations, which "join together to form a cartel and turn it into a ministry of truth without having to call on the state" (according to Michael Meyen in the news magazine Hintergrund, 1+2, 2024).

Western private capitalist forms of surveillance states labeled as "democratic" and state capitalist "autocratic" ones (e.g. China) are apparently becoming more and more similar.

Numerous think tanks, foundations and institutes financed by the state, business associations and media groups, such as the "Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik", "Bertelsmann-Stiftung", "Neue soziale Marktwirtschaft", "Zentrum liberale Moderne", "Correktiv" and the "Bildungsstätte Anne Frank", as well as monopoly-like media are spreading the desired narratives.

For example, the pension lies with which, after the failed Riester hype ("personal provision" at the expense of the working population for the profit of companies), the debt-financed "equity pension" is now being propagated, from which only the financial casino profits, while poverty in old age increases and the privileges of the higher earners (e.g. "contribution assessment ceiling") and extra pensioners remain untouched.

Or the war in Ukraine: billions upon billions are being "invested" in an illusory victory for Ukraine. Instead of Russia, Ukraine is ruined in the proxy war instigated by the USA. Germany is to become "ready for war", they want to "take the war to Russia". Escalation to the point of nuclear war is being preached. An example of Orwellian Newspeak ("war is peace") are the "peace rallies" of Ukraine supporters, at which they demonstrate for arms deliveries and a "final victory" in Ukraine and reject compromises - "you can't negotiate with Putin".

Or on the Middle East conflict: any criticism of Israel's right-wing nationalist, racist Zionism, the war of extermination in Gaza and settler terrorism in the West Bank is officially denounced as anti-Semitism, as "Israel-related anti-Semitism". Examples of such disinformation follow at the end of this article.

Who owns "our democracy"? Is it still one at all? It is - as highlighted above - a democracy of capital, of the rich. The mass movement triggered by Correktiv to defend "our democracy" against the AfD can - as harsh as it sounds - be seen as a spectacular example of "reverse (inverted) totalitarianism". It is certainly to be welcomed that hundreds of thousands are demonstrating in many cities against xenophobia and the AfD, for solidarity and cohesion. However, they are demonstrating together with, and for the most part under the initiative and leadership of, the "state-supporting" parties that are responsible for armament mania, war preparations, social cuts and anti-immigrant policies - in other words, for everything that must be understood as "right-wing". There is no need for an AfD when, among other things, Chancellor Scholz calls for "deportations on a grand scale" and Minister Faeser presents a legislative package with a "repatriation offensive", which almost sounds like the un-word "remigration" translated into German.

Migration is an unsolvable problem as long as imperialist wars, devastation and environmental

destruction continue to drive millions of people to flee their homes. It is therefore an ongoing issue that is used by almost all parties for populist politics and propaganda, and the entire spectrum is shifting further to the right.

Examples of disinformation on Israeli policy:

1) From the "Argumentation Guide on Anti-Semitism on the Net" by the "Anne Frank Educational Center", here on the topic of "Israel is an apartheid state": "The founding of the Jewish state is glorified as a racist and colonial endeavor whose goal was the displacement of the Palestinians*. (...) The accusation that Israel is a racist (settler) colonial state (...) is (...) a popular tool of Israel-related anti-Semitism." And then comes the blatant disinformation in response to the question: "What can I say to that? - "Unlike in South Africa under the apartheid regime, all citizens are legally equal in Israel."

From this one can only conclude that Palestinians are not citizens at all, especially not in the West Bank or Gaza. Rather, according to Israeli Defense Minister Gallant, they are "human animals" that must be destroyed.

2) From an interview with the German government's "anti-Semitism commissioner", Felix Klein (Darmstädter Echo, 01.03.24): "The term apartheid (...) is intended to demonize (...) and delegitimize Israel, contrary to the facts. (...) A large part of the Palestinian population lives under self-government. The fact that there are separate roads for Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank, for example, is something Israel has the right to do under international law as an occupying power." And, Klein continues: "As weird as it sounds, anti-Semitism can also be spread by Jews."

Which should make it clear that any criticism of right-wing nationalist Zionism and Israel's current genocidal policy is of course "anti-Semitic".

Tenants of practical reason

by Hans Markus Gehring

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.ossietzky.net/artikel/paechter-praktischer-vernunft/.]

After the end of the Second World War, post-colonial imperialism reorganized the world - with globally valid values and rules. If states fail to comply with these hegemonically defined rules, they are relegated to the status of "failing states". Not only economic ruin, which brings dependencies on the world market to a punishing halt, is in store for them. Military patrols, nofly zones and base facilities suggest that they should not pursue any purposes that are evil for the sake of preserving national sovereignty for the time being. The victory of "freedom and democracy" over unruly obduracy is achieved "hybrid".

The German war mob is participating unreservedly and devotedly in the global undercutting, which unfortunately can only be implemented with the final ruin of the globe. Their willingness

to tackle whatever is necessary does not stem from an elitist and irresponsible oblivion of what the national good actually requires. Rather, the unsurpassable morality of those implementing the necessities of state welfare is expressed in their devotion to one of the highest goods: the responsibility to act "without blinkers" for all those who are required to have the right opinion, without exception and in principle, especially in view of the "highest price" to be paid. Those with the wrong opinion are to be duly treated, because only "angels from hell" can have anything against ammunition and cannon feeding. As the fifth column of enemies who, like the defunct GDR, are (were) different from "us" and therefore "unjust states", they weaken our national good, because constitutional, ability to wage war.

How did this conspicuous expansion of the German nation beyond its borders and the now even more aggressive, pardon: more defensive mindset come about? After the loss of the Second World War, West Germany, which had been repositioned as a bulwark against the Eastern Bloc and democratically reformed, quickly became defensive again. With an increased arsenal, Germany as a whole, which is no longer just economically "gigantic" and for which there is no longer an out of area, is defending itself worldwide in accordance with alliance interests. The aim is to reliably take on new "challenges" in coordination with partners, preferably at the forefront or "leading from behind". Germany - which stands for "I" and "you" - wants to act effectively in accordance with orders from which it expects to gain something (see the war in Ukraine). To put it without political euphemisms: Germany as a military power has the opportunities and, if the need arises - not defined by "me" and "you" - wants to seize them to ruin the basis of rule of enemies by killing their human disposable mass and enforcing a dictatorial peace (what an ugly un-German word).

An "advocatus angeli" may object that others would want and do this - but not Germany! However, good opinion requires a selective perception that does not give much "thought" to something like Germany's role in and after the war in Yugoslavia. Since increased power gives the right to more power, Germany is now naturally entitled to leadership as the moral arbiter of the world and the responsible self-commitment to lend practical weight to the existence of foreign rulers.

Is this representation reasonable? The answer usually depends on what is considered (un)reasonable from the outset. If one is of the circular reasoning opinion that the state is unreasonable if it is not a good shepherd of its flock, one will tend to say yes; with "morally charged" prepotency, it is imposing on itself = the citizens realistically unmanageable things (America, you have it better!). Why this "misbehavior"? Well, because once again and as always, the government gardeners are made up of goats. State action is not scrutinized for its own reasons, ends and means, but ethically branded as a collection of nothing but "loose ends" as a deviation from the preconceived characteristics of ideal statecraft. If, on the other hand, one sees this as a given, if one keeps one's fingers crossed for the state in pursuing the path considered reasonable in principle and claims the subject's right to greater determination in doing so (which the state will not be asked to do for long), then one will reject the previous section as nonsense. In the pros and cons of how much of "practical reason" can be ascertained, facts, objects or events are not being analyzed for a knowledge of their nature from within themselves. Instead, pure (un)reason is supposed to express itself through them apodictically ("isso") according to a moral template or idée fixe that is separate from them. According to this logic, one could also

accuse the coronavirus of irrationality, for example.

It seems to be the same with reason as with intelligence, which is never unfairly distributed; no one thinks they have heard too little about the latter; and no one needs to have their definition of what is reasonable disputed either, as this is merely a matter of opinion, but at least and above all in every case, even one guaranteed by the state. The arbitrariness of opinion intended for inconsequential exchange is often taken as proof of fact: Society can only exist, if at all, as the mere addition of individuals (opinion leaders) whose fate is determined by reason versus unreason. In sum, this results in the well-known task of government to avert harm from this disparate - collective term "people" - and to increase its welfare. This is authoritative reason, endowed with the power to define weal and woe.

The question of where social "planing" with its inevitable "chips" comes from seems as foolish as the question of whether gravity has to exist here. The battle of all against all cannot take place without collateral damage, which is why it falls to the state tamer to keep the antagonisms in check; this by means of control by the best = the sensible, who qua function (could or should) know what is beneficial or least painful.

The state not only helps in the search for the sensible; it also understands the concerns of constructively critical citizens. Their overarching theme is above all the anxious question: Are we being led correctly? More precisely: Are we being led as we deserve? And are we worthy of such leadership? Well, perhaps we will have to work on ourselves a little bit; praise be to those who work hard ...

The state does not essentially need the ongoing unification of public opinion to prepare for and wage war. On the one hand, it finances and undertakes what is necessary in terms of weaponry and deployment, including the consideration of reviving the "citizen in uniform". He does this out of his own authority, which he then uses to deploy to war. On the other hand, this does not mean that he leaves out what he does not absolutely need; why should he limit himself in shaping his purposes? Precisely because its grip on the members of the nation is absolute and fundamental, it takes care of unpopular opinions and activists in terms of definition, law and also in practice, including endangerers and invasive foreigners, establishes memorial days and ceremonies for those who have already died with honor and "brings back to the center of society" respect for those who are yet to become such. The state offers interested citizens opportunities to act sensibly in their own way.

This is why the official fate-makers make the attractive offer from bus stop billboards: "Learn leadership skills!" A fine thing. The School of the Nation (in the spirit of Kurt Georg Kiesinger) makes it possible, with deadly certainty for everyone.

Ten lies of western politics

by Wolfgang Herzberg

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.ossietzky.net/artikel/zehn-luegen-westlicher-politik/.]

We are currently dealing with an unprecedented self-deception and self-deception of Western politics, which is dragging us further and further into a foreign and domestic political abyss that threatens to lead to a third world war. Self-awareness can be the first path to improvement. For this to happen, however, the West's wrong-headed ideology must be placed on the feet of historical truths, which should be included in the slogans of an international peace movement.

The lie

The eastward expansion of NATO, planned since 1990, which represented a breach of the "TwoPlus-Four Treaty" negotiated with Gorbachev, and finally the contractual rejection of Ukraine's accession to NATO in 2022, comprises the period of the actual "turning point" that led to the war in Ukraine. This was a turnaround from the hard-won policy of détente, which contributed to 1989, to a return to the policy of the "Cold War" and the US-led West's claim to world domination, to enforce its capitalist, supposedly "rules-based order", contrary to the spirit and letter of the UN Charter, wherever possible throughout the world, be it with economic sanctions or, if necessary, by military means.

Lie

SPD Chancellor Scholz, who swore when he took office that he would "avert harm" from the German people and respect the Basic Law, has, for the most part, helped to steer the traffic light government deeper and deeper into unconstitutional NATO war involvement in the Ukraine conflict. How can such a war policy be justified at all, given Germany's disastrous history in the 20th century with over 70 million deaths? Participation in the war that does not contribute to a ceasefire or a political peace solution is denied, even though this war would otherwise never have started and would have ended long ago. The consequences of this include : the billions in taxpayer funding of arms deliveries to the international conflict zone of this war; the escalating, self-inflicted national debt due to the unprecedented armament of the German army; the costly admission of millions of Ukrainian refugees into Germany's social systems and into the federal states and municipalities, which are completely overwhelmed by this and at the same time drive voters to the radical right-wing AfD; the capping of inexpensive oil and gas contracts with Russia, as well as the allegedly unexplained blowing up of pipelines through the Baltic Sea jointly financed by Russia and Germany; the purchase of expensive fossil fuel imports from Arab oil states that violate human rights; the associated escalating inflation and rising cost of living for the population; finally, Germany's economic stagnation, partly as a result of economic sanctions. economic sanctions against Russia and the loss of investment power due to the weakening caused by the high national debt.

Lie

There is supposedly a majority of the population that agrees with NATO's war policy and its consequences. This has never really been substantiated by serious surveys, which would also have to reveal the way in which the questions were asked! Has it ever been asked whether a majority of the population approves of the socio-ecological consequences of the war in Ukraine with German participation? Has it been asked whether the ongoing financial injections and arms

deliveries to the Ukrainian rulers are bringing them and us closer to a peace solution with Russia? Has it been asked whether the political system in Ukraine, which is receiving extensive support, can really be regarded as democratic or whether it also represents authoritarian oligarchic rule? Has it been asked whether the peace precepts of the UN Charter are being heeded in Ukraine? Has it been asked whether the membership of Ukraine, which is at war, would be a gain for a majority of the population in the EU?

Lie

Russia's victory would endanger Western Europe, indeed the entire Western alliance of states. Isn't it rather the case that the collapse and disintegration of the Soviet Union has weakened Russia economically, militarily and in world politics as never before since the end of the Second World War? Is it not the case that 32 NATO states with far superior military technology and annual armaments budgets of over a trillion dollars (!) now face a militarily much weaker Russia, which has not even invested around 100 billion dollars a year, i.e. less than 10 percent of the West's armaments expenditure, in its armaments? Is it not the case that this war would have long since been decided in Russia's favor if Russia were really as strong as Western politicians and the media would have us believe? Is it not the case that the West's arms lobby is interested in an unprecedented spiral of armaments because their shareholders are making exorbitant profits from taxpayers' money?

Lie

The enforcement of a "rule-based value system" in the sense of the "Western values" is based on the international law of the UN Charter. Isn't it rather the case that the peace policy core of the UN Charter, which led to the consensual founding of the United Nations, is intended to exclude any country or group of states striving for supremacy in order to enforce the legal and social concepts it has defined through economic and military force? Has this not been diametrically opposed to the central precept of peace and the main purpose of the UN Charter since 1948, which assumes a multipolar world so that the disasters of the First and Second World Wars are not repeated?

Lie

The USA is the most important democratic protective power in Europe and the world. Have the global policies of previous US governments and their involvement in the wars in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Israel, for example, as well as the eastward expansion of NATO, actually made Europe and Germany safer or much more prone to war? Are the deeply divided domestic political conditions in the USA conducive to overcoming world peace and ecological crises or rather extremely threatening?

Lie

Is Olaf Scholz's proclamation true: "We leave no one alone!" in these times of crisis? Hasn't the involvement in the war caused more social and mental insecurity and political division in all classes and strata of the German population than at any time since reunification?

Lie

The debt brake must be adhered to. Or is it rather compliance with the debt brake and the refusal to raise taxes on the extremely wealthy that is blocking the urgently needed ecological transformation and the corresponding growth of the economy? Under constitutional law, doesn't the socially responsible management of the ecological crisis alone justify relaxing the debt brake and solidarity-based tax increases for higher earners in order to expand the welfare state for the socially disadvantaged and counteract the increasing social divide?

Lies

The leading media are independent. Doesn't the downright inflammatory support in the public and private media prove that the interpretative sovereignty of government-conformist statements and commentaries dominates here? While critical, reflective, warning voices from peace, environmental and social movements are only given marginal or rather derogatory coverage and images, even though they represent at least half of the population, if not the majority, as the fall of the traffic light parties in voter surveys proves.

Lie

The traffic light party, the CDU/CSU and the leading media all agree that the AfD poses a major threat to democracy in Germany. Isn't it rather the case that the main causes of the rise of the radical right-wing nationalists are primarily based on an aggressive foreign policy and a domestic policy that endangers social cohesion? Is this wrong policy not deeply anti-democratic because it makes the arms profiteers richer and richer, but deeply contradicts the vital interests of the majority of the population and thus continuously fuels fascist tendencies?

Recently published by Wolfgang Herzberg: Jewish & Left. Memories 1921-2021. On the cultural heritage of the GDR, Berlin 2022, 500 p., 25 €.

Democracy Dreams

by Dilan Canbaz

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.ossietzky.net/artikel/demokratie-traeume/.]

As a boy, I dreamed of her day and night. I desperately saw the only hope in it, and immediately fell in love with it, with "democracy", with its pure theory. Her honesty, justice and unambiguousness seemed to me to be extremely sacred in my thoughts. So I became addicted to her, internalized everything, especially her basic values. It was simply beautiful with her, the theoretical form of her politics, which went hand in hand with freedom and equality for all, had a calming effect on me. Each time I promised myself that I would strive for her all my life, swear eternal loyalty and love to her and one day exist only for her. Every night before going to bed, I

said to myself: "I will soon grow up and finally grasp her in all her reality."

When I met Democracy for the first time many years later, all my dreams were fulfilled. Crazy about her, everything seemed like my first dream of her. I loved her for years to come and never said "no" to her. I found this strange, but in this intoxication everything about her felt fine and wonderful, as did everything that reached my ears in her name. Perhaps I was blind, still too blind from my first love for her?

As I grew older, my mind matured, the principles of democracy proved to be non-transparent, the politics in her name proved to be manipulative, as I gradually realized this, I now looked at her with different eyes. Her sincerity suddenly seemed to me to be exclusively in words, her fine image so beautiful and real only in my head, in my dream. That made me skeptical. My life was gradually being weighed down every day, weighed down with all kinds of questions. I stopped dreaming, not about her, because my questions no longer found answers in utopia. This maturity affected everything, including my blind faith in the democratic system. I was frustrated, I wanted to be a boy again, not so politically experienced, but without that faith in democracy. However, the closer and more open I became, the more her initial model disappeared from my mind. I still longed for their real ideal. I was looking for it, the democracy that actually fought all exclusion, promoted social justice and equality of people at all levels of society, that held up the environment as its motto. That was perhaps too reckless of me.

I took to the streets first. Many said good-naturedly, but also firmly: "You will grow old in your search, this eternal waiting for your democracy will eventually destroy you. For better or worse, everything has its origins in our self-confident science and culture. We are ultimately obedient, but only a part of this moral power. We are without influence, we have long had nothing against the capitalist social order, all the authorities of a democracy in our hands." I came back without democracy and without a solution.

I went to the educational institutions, to the intellectuals, in good faith. They were self-confident, they had something to criticize about everything, but they never doubted themselves and therefore never doubted their democracy. Unfortunately, I also came back from them without them.

I went to the politicians. But they didn't want any criticism and ignored everything I said. They spoke to me like saints: "Just believe in us, you'll get everything from us." They called it all progress, including their own inviolability.

I was also with the believers and spent depressed days and nights in the forest. When I went into myself without any prospects, I still came back to her without my first love in the distance.

Everywhere I went I was told: "Fuck your democracy. We are the real components of democracy, we only know it, what do you want with your dismissive attitude here?"

"I just want a people-friendly system that is not just based on economics, reason and morality, harmonious cooperation that promotes joint action instead of competition."

Everyone laughed at me. They thought their hypocrisy was the best invention in the world. After all, it's all very well for these people if they really want a misguided form of politics. I didn't like "this new inhumane democracy" with its dull face, its dependence on many powers from above.

When I found myself in a democracy under duress, I immediately remembered the dictator of my childhood. When I got a bit loud about it, I was immediately recognized as lacking solidarity. When I spoke out in disgust during the crisis against its callous form, I was actually called "a criminal".

Nevertheless, I said "No without coercion" to her: "Democracy knows no coercion, no big lies, no exaggerated power, so much money for the pockets of the few. Holding together unconditionally doesn't always have to mean something good, something solidary. For me, that is callous, not democracy, perhaps just the little half-brother of dictatorship. The difference between the two was unfortunately not too great in my emergency situation, it was most likely in the definition and not in the reality of both. In a sham democracy you are offended step by step, only diplomatically eliminated, in a dictatorship you are eliminated on the spot." I really don't know which is better or worse for me at the moment.

No, people are not criminals because they think democratically and want to uphold the principles of democracy.

Nevertheless, despite my critical remarks about this hypocrisy, I am glad that I am far away from any dictator. There is no dictatorship here, just chaotic politics that wants to function regardless. For me, this conservative strategy is far removed from any humanity, without transparency, seriousness - also far removed from the truth of any democracy.

Perhaps it still exists somewhere in its entirety, without the hands of these profiteers of any political-moral system, who want to become rich, famous, beautiful, fine, untouchable and powerful at all costs, while other souls perish for their comforts worldwide and in their democracy.

Is this really the meaning of our existence? Can democracy be saved when money rules the world and constantly undermines democratic principles like a dictator?

I hope that something new will nevertheless emerge, a completely new policy that is tolerant, family-friendly, not too serious, that believes in true education and healthy upbringing, that does not put fear into our children, shows them compassion and love and how to really live and still laugh every day.

Dilan Canbaz was born in 1973 in Sulaymaniyya in Iraqi Kurdistan, came to Graz at the age of 22, has been writing and publishing since 2018. In addition to his writing, he works in the social sector with children and young people.

Dialogue about sense and nonsense

by Gerd Bedszent

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.ossietzky.net/artikel/dialog-ueber-sinn-und-unsinn/.]

Can the insanity of capitalist economics in our present day be explained - or not? Serious debates between theorists of the Marxist-oriented left have become rather rare. Nevertheless, a book was recently published that dealt with precisely this topic, among others. In fact, it is a multi-part debate on the sense or nonsense of political economy as a whole - an interesting book, especially as the authors have very different biographies.

Klaus Müller (*1944) completed his doctorate in the GDR, held a professorship in economics at the Technical University of Karl-Marx-Stadt until 1991 and subsequently published several books on Marxist economics. His opponent Knut Hüller (*1953), on the other hand, has a decidedly western-left socialization: schooling at the same time as the rise and fall of the 1968 movement, studies in physics, scientific work in a chemistry institute, involvement in the valuecritical movement resulting from negative experiences with West German commercial enterprises. Hüller is the author of several theoretical articles that have appeared in various journals in recent years.

The debate between the two authors began with a review: in 2019, Müller published a book with the title "Auf Abwegen. Von der Kunst der Ökonomen sich selbst zu täuschen" published by PapyRossa Verlag. Hüller wrote a highly critical review of the book for the magazine Exit! Müller contradicted this criticism and Hüller contradicted the contradiction. The result was a lengthy dispute, which has now been documented in book form. For the sake of fairness, it should be noted at this point that although the author of these lines was also socialized in East Germany and studied economics, among other things, my view differs greatly from that of Klaus Müller. So what is the disagreement between the two authors? They are obviously largely in agreement about the current decline of classical bourgeois economics.

As Hüller writes at the very beginning of the volume, his opponent strives to replace the political economy of the capitalist system, which he quite rightly criticizes, with a "better economy" - by incorporating Karl Marx as a critic of this very political economy into it. The result of such an integration would, however, reduce the general critique of the "positive-scientifically incomprehensible madness" of political economy to one of many "alternative positive models". And the search for a functioning model would then completely lose sight of "how the original to be described is already groaning and moaning". Such a "flattened critique of capitalism" must also lead "sooner or later back to bourgeois consciousness".

Müller obviously felt offended and personally attacked and wrote in his reply that he was concerned with how "the complex whole could be (better) grasped". This would include "the necessary criticism of capitalism". Of course, reality is so complex that "you can't grasp it in one fell swoop".

As can be seen from the opponents' further statements, Müller still essentially defines the system

of capitalism as an exploitative relationship that deprives the majority of the population of their share of the profits generated. For Hüller, on the other hand, capitalism, which is based on the "basic principle of growth", is primarily a repressive system that compulsively produces distribution struggles resulting from this growth. And a delusional system cannot be modeled rationally. As he writes elsewhere, early advanced civilizations - which were certainly not an egalitarian idyll - were largely unfamiliar with the "modern accounting of everything and everyone in taking and giving (...)". It was therefore logical to get rid of the nonsensical social model known as political economy for good.

Müller then accused his opponent of "narrow-minded physical thinking", called him an "economic autodidact" and said that the critique of value wanted to "abolish value" because it did not understand "its content, its function in capitalism". However, the word "abolish" is unlikely to be found in any of the writings of the first critics of value. Müller's argumentation involuntarily testifies to the fact that he is obviously unable to think beyond the categories of capitalist economic activity.

As a result of the increasing ideological decline of the left, criticism of capitalism is currently mainly coming from the right. However, a fundamental critique of the political economy of capitalism is completely alien to the political right - their wishful thinking is rather a return to the phase of repressive, barbaric early capitalism, in which the world was supposedly "still in order". The fact that social developments cannot simply be turned back like this is beyond their imagination.

The following question now arises: Is the necessary consequence of the imminent collapse of a capitalist-dominated economy a continuous descent into hunger and barbarism? The answer is: not necessarily. Many inventions and civilizational achievements in the history of mankindsuch as agriculture, animal husbandry, metallurgy, painting, music, poetry and writing - date back to times long before early capitalism. And early capitalism, which emerged around the 16th/17th century, did not bring about prosperity and culture across the board, but initially a wave of gruesome impoverishment for the majority of the European population. The philosopher Robert Kurz (1942-2012) summed this up as follows in his "Black Book of Capitalism", published in 1999: "In the early modern era before industrialization, the whole of Europe had turned into a Dantean hell of impoverishment."

And the later "achievements" of developed capitalism included deliberately created famines, years of trench warfare under a hail of bombs and shells, mass murders of the defenseless using poison gas and the development and dropping of atomic bombs. There are obviously very bad times ahead of us.

Klaus Müller/Knut Hüller: The dialog. A conversation about the sense and nonsense of political economy, Mangroven Verlag, Kassel 2023, 154 p., 18 €.

Taurus threatens us too!

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet,

https://www.ossietzky.net/artikel/taurus-bedroht-auch-uns/.]

With French President Macron's announcement that he will not rule out the deployment of NATO troops and the plans of some hardliners to deploy Taurus cruise missiles against Russia, the war in Donbass threatens to spread to Europe. Whatever one's position on this war, the facts are the same for both supporters and opponents of the Taurus delivery:

1. unlike all weapons delivered to Ukraine so far, the device can reach Moscow. This is the main difference to the British-French cruise missiles. This is also the difference to the Leopard and other Western weapons systems that have been delivered so far. They pose no direct threat to the Russian heartland. This fact is withheld from the citizens by the supporters. The Taurus poses a greater threat to Russia's statehood than anything else to date - and therefore also to ourselves

2. Russia has red lines. It has clearly indicated these. The country will cross these lines if other states use nuclear weapons in a first strike or if Russia's existence is threatened by a conventional war. When this is the case is not decided by the German Bundestag, NATO headquarters or Washington. Moscow alone decides according to its own criteria. No matter how many German politicians and experts claim to know that no red lines will be crossed with the Taurus, the decision will be made elsewhere

3. its range makes the Taurus an incalculable risk, regardless of whether it is used by German experts in Ukraine or independently by the Ukrainians. It is not for nothing that no NATO state, not even the USA, has supplied weapons that can reach the Russian heartland. Because they are all aware of the danger of a counter-attack. All those who demand the delivery of the Taurus in their anti-Russian frenzy should be aware of this. If Russia strikes back, it will also hit those who demanded and supported the delivery and use of the weapon. It will affect them, their children and their grandchildren. Weapons of mass destruction make no distinction between supporters and opponents, between good and bad, between right and left. Weapons of mass destruction kill everyone without exception.

And since we are all under threat, we should all consider what is more important to us in the fight against these weapons. Is it more important for us to get through this crisis alive together, despite our differing views on other issues? Or do we prefer to be united in death because we did not want to fight with each other in life? We should choose life with all its adversities.

We, the Craftsmen for Peace, call on you all to protest against the delivery and deployment of the Taurus. Let us place this year's Easter marches under the demand:

No delivery of Taurus, no further escalation of the war!

This is an appeal by the "Craftsmen for Peace" - an initiative of the Anhalt Dessau-Roßlau District Craftsmen's Association, Königendorfer Straße 80, 06847 Dessau-Roßlau, e-mail: aufruf-handwerker@web.de.

Community - as a trap?

by Wolfgang Teune

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.ossietzky.net/artikel/gemeinschaft-als-falle/.]

CDU representatives and other conservative circles are once again discussing compulsory service for all in order to avoid the word conscription and at the same time include women. It should be pointed out that such compulsory service is a form of forced labor. It may well be that some people find experiences in it that can give them a sense of fulfillment, but this does little to change the fundamental character of the compulsion.

The idea of community is highly charged in this Germany. If conflicts are to be glossed over and attitudes of refusal are viewed negatively, the community card is often played in the political game in order to smooth over perceived or suspected resistance. Anyone who does not speak out in favor of the community and the associated political demands then runs the risk of being singled out.

After the tiresome radical decrees against left-wing thinking and left-wing organizations by the venerable SPD 50 years ago, it is difficult to believe in a revitalization of such measures. Back then, words or word choices in the form of sentences were enough to set the force of the exclusionary practices in motion. Today, when right-wing circles in the CDU and other parties believe they have to incorporate this procedure in a fight against the right, it cannot be ruled out that competitors for sinecures are being excluded. Perhaps some politicians do not realize how they are being instrumentalized. Incidentally, it can be said for the distant past that a high percentage of closed pre-fascist attitudes were also present before 1970.

Anyone who appeals to a community in this environment and in our culture should look for good examples of successful or successful communities. The old cooperative system thrived on these ideas, whether in agricultural cooperatives or in cooperative banking. I would like to remind you of the consumer cooperatives, in which, unfortunately, the control mechanisms were poorly developed and thus opened the door to lonely and economically damaging decisions. Neue Heimat was run into the wall decades ago, even though it could play an outstanding role in the housing market today.

Association life in Germany is so intact that there almost seem to be more associations than members. They bring together communities that want to fulfill a limited purpose, which, however, now and then turns into a regulatory frenzy, if you take the regulations for allotment garden associations as an example. In addition to the voluntary communities, there are now a myriad of compulsory communities, for example of apartment owners. In them, a playground for all kinds of aggressive forms of interaction can be observed.

Left-wing parties were also not a haven for friendly interaction, for example when a prominent believer in a group wanted to set the tone in order to bring the less faithful or those who still had doubts onto the right track. In the past, the divisive fungus quickly took root in them, so that eventually there were a lot of K-groups. To attribute this solely to the situation at the time would

be all too cheap. If you only use Marx as a quarry for formulas, there are almost no limits to the divisions. These few sentences should at least contribute to skepticism, because those who do not remember will always have to deal with the same mistakes.

Skepticism should contribute to more distance here and help to promote dialectical thinking again, which can oppose the simple either/or. In the old texts of Marxist philosophy, intensive reference was made to the dialectic between the individual and the community, because even in a thoroughly planned production system, the innovator movement is needed to assert itself against overly insistent forces. But enough of the left's navel-gazing. The proposal to invoke the UN Charter for a collection of left-wing forces is sympathetic, but not viable. The highest values, even in the form of highly respected legal principles, force the dispute because, as in any court case, situations and contexts must first be interpreted in order to be able to relate them to the legal principles. Law is only effective as a guide in the sequence of judicial decisions in which individual cases are judged. Legal principles in their most general form say nothing about how decisions are to be made in individual cases. As can be seen in the Federal Republic of Germany, laws, insofar as they are comprehensible to the political community, are often concretized by the Constitutional Court. But that is only the first stage. The wrangling over the correct interpretation then moves on to further stages. Here, legal principles share the fate of high values that say nothing about concrete decisions in conflict situations and leave it up to rhetorical and political skill to fill them with content. We are currently experiencing once again how sentences and onesided descriptions, assumptions and lies are used to make decisions of the greatest significance.

In times of war, when an entire society, including the healthcare system, is to be trimmed to be fit for war, when an operational plan for Germany is being drawn up and lists for disagreeable citizens are possibly being written, as preventive detention is already a possibility, at least in Bavaria, an appeal to the community should only be taken with a pinch of salt. Because those in power have more battalions on their side and can rely on the media's power of definition, so that they can even put the Pope in a propaganda corner. The Pope is no longer able to get the community of believers behind him. Politicians with a religious background such as Friedrich Merz or Ms. Strack-Zimmermann, as devout Catholics, distance themselves from the Pope's appeal, who does not share their view of the situation and says so publicly. A religious community in which the idea of community is a high value is currently in the process of disintegrating. Our democratic parties are on the way to making the war independent, reversing the situation, increasing the cost of armaments and, in order for this to bear fruit, installing compulsory service, building bunkers and patrolling a homeland security force. No hope for peace arises from a bunker mentality, from petrified autistic thinking (Senghaas).

The left must therefore organize itself and relearn how to put a political situation into its own words and not get stuck in the narcissism of the smallest difference.

Energy transition? - Yes, but not like this!

by Heinz- J. Bontrup

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.ossietzky.net/artikel/energiewende-ja-aber-nicht-so/.]

Seven professors from the Westphalian Energy Institute at the Westphalian University of Applied Sciences have written an updated and expanded position paper entitled "Energy and climate transition between aspiration, wishful thinking and reality - implementation paths". The authors, five engineers and scientists and two economists (one of whom is the author of the article), take a critical look at energy policy from a technical, economic and social perspective. The researchers do not give a positive assessment of the German government's current energy transition course to solve the upcoming energy policy challenges. In 2022, the professors had already outlined the challenges and potential solutions in an initial statement on the current development of the worsening global climate crisis. "The key points presented two years ago are still relevant," explain the authors in the revised study. "However, due to changes in the framework conditions, such as the Federal Constitutional Court ruling on the debt brake, there was a need for updating in various places. We have also incorporated new technical findings and looked at the effects of the legal framework conditions that have changed in the meantime."

The authors made the first study available to Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and Climate Action Robert Habeck (Bündnis90/Die Grünen) with an accompanying letter in May 2022. However, in his arrogance of power, he did not consider it necessary to respond. The new and revised study has also been sent to him. In their work, the researching professors focused on the following findings, among others, in the second edition of their position paper:

Firstly, in order to meet Germany's climate targets while ensuring security of supply, more than 100 terawatt hours (TWh) of hydrogen storage, more than 700 TWh of green hydrogen imports and at least 100 gigawatts (GW) of backup power plants must be realized by 2045. This exceeds the German government's technical targets many times over. By 2030 at the latest, there will be a significant electricity shortfall that will lead to serious power outages and thus call into question the urgent need for unrestricted security of supply. The head of Westenergie, Katherina Reiche, comes to a similar conclusion ("Westenergie boss fears 'electricity gap'" WAZ of March 13, 2024). Westenergie is the subsidiary in the Eon Group that has over 180,000 kilometers of power lines and around 24,000 kilometers of gas pipelines in North Rhine-Westphalia, RhinelandPalatinate and Lower Saxony and is also involved in many municipal utilities with their distribution networks. The Federal Court of Auditors has also sharply criticized the federal government. The government is currently missing its self-imposed targets in all respects: "Secure supply is at risk, electricity is expensive, while the federal government is unable to comprehensively assess the impact of the energy transition on the landscape, nature and the environment," said Court of Auditors President Kay Scheller. Habeck commented: "I have taken note of the Federal Audit Office's report, but nothing more." He could not understand the criticism. The generation prices for electricity are at pre-war levels and the expansion of renewables is picking up speed. "I'm not saying we're through. But to say that the federal government is not doing enough (...) is an astonishing perception that has nothing to do with reality." Habeck later emphasized once again that the coalition of traffic lights had inherited the problems from previous governments. Grid expansion was important in order to reduce electricity prices. But it is now costing money. "I didn't need the report by the Federal Audit Office for that. Anyone who can think can see that this is a problem." The Court of Auditors had "a point", said Habeck - and followed it up with a "Thank you very much for that".

It is telling how Habeck reacted to the criticism from the Federal Audit Office. Like someone who has lost track of his actions and the associated consequences. Habeck, like many others, is concerned solely with the ideological implementation of the energy transition, without any technical expertise. You could also say that they don't know what they are doing or what damage they are causing to society. Despite all the insight into the need to fight against every tenth of a degree more of global warming, rationality must not fall by the wayside when it comes to reducing CO2 emissions. Germany has a great responsibility here, but Germany alone will not be able to save the world's climate.

Secondly, the Westphalian Energy Institute notes that the German government's energy policy is also proving to be too short-sighted from an economic perspective. The hope that the markets alone, in conjunction with CO2 pricing, would lead to an efficient organization of the energy transition is naive. A solution inherent to the market economy does not work. It only leads to suboptimal results. State intervention is urgently needed here. This needs to be supplemented by industrial electricity prices, contracts for difference and green lead markets - albeit in a very restrictive manner in order to rule out asymmetric advantage-taking. At the same time, the Energy Efficiency Act should actually focus on increasing energy efficiency and not on reducing energy consumption independently of the climate neutrality of energy. This does not work in practice.

Thirdly, the professors state that the energy transition requires immense private and state investment (approx. €90 billion p.a.), which in itself is certainly manageable. However, this competes with many under-invested areas such as public infrastructure, housing construction, education, healthcare and digitalization (at least an additional €250 billion p.a.). The hope of financing this through "green" economic growth is pure wishful thinking. Overall, against the backdrop of an ageing population, persistently high unemployment and a poverty rate of almost 17%, Germany is reaching the limits of what is feasible - despite high overall economic savings of around €300 to 350 billion per year. However, around 200 to 250 billion of this is needed to finance the foreign trade surpluses, which are not being questioned by the ruling neoliberal politicians and their claqueurs. This means that financing prioritizations are unavoidable. However, politicians are not offering any holistic solutions.

Fourthly, even if the financing were feasible from a macroeconomic perspective, which it is not, social peace is highly endangered if we continue with the energy transition. This already has political implications and effects that threaten democracy. In order to prevent the energy transition from overburdening the lower income groups, there is an urgent need for a drastic redistribution of income and wealth as well as the assumption of state debt, either by creating a special fund or by abolishing the current debt brake. The energy transition will not work without a redistribution of income and wealth. The current government is completely ignoring this. It is high time that realism and honesty were given greater consideration in the energy transition, despite all the political wishful thinking. However, there is currently no sign of an urgently needed master plan from the federal government. As a result, we are lurching towards an energy transition that is and will remain socially and economically piecemeal.

The summary and the long version of the study can be found on the website of the Westfälisches

"War is mass murder by order"

Speech by Bernd Drücke, delivered on December 4, 2023 at the rally "Protection and asylum for conscientious objectors and deserters from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine" by Bernd Druecke

[This article posted on 12/23/2023 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.linksnet.de/artikel/48731.]

To call for an end to the persecution of conscientious objectors and deserters in their countries of origin and to increase pressure on the German government and the EU to take in military conscripts who have fled, over 40 peace groups from all over Europe held antimilitarist rallies and actions from December 4 to "International Human Rights Day" on December 10, 2023. They demanded reception and protection for all those fleeing the war in Ukraine.

The #ObjectWarCampaign (1) action tour began on December 4 with an antimilitarist rally in front of the Westphalian Peace Town Hall in Münster. It was organized by the German Peace Society - United Opponents of Military Service (DFG-VK), Connection e.V. and the editorial team of Graswurzelrevolution, among others. We document the message read out there by the pacifist Yurii Sheliazhenko, who is under house arrest in Kiev (see page 16), and the speech (2) by the GWR editor, which has been edited and supplemented for the GWR. (GWR ed.)

The #ObjectWarCampaign is an international campaign for deserters and conscientious objectors. People from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are particularly affected by militarization. Since the beginning of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine on February 14, 2022, more than 250,000 conscripts have left Russia - they do not want to take part in the massacre in Ukraine.

Over 300,000 conscripts have fled Ukraine since the start of the war - some of them to Germany. They are currently only granted protection until March 2025.

There are also thousands of conscripts in Belarus. The death penalty for deserters has now been introduced there. It looks like the Lukashenko dictatorship there is preparing to take part directly in the war in Ukraine. The criminal Belarusian regime is on the side of the Russian war criminal Putin.

Under Putin, Russia has been transformed from an autocracy into a dictatorship. The imperialist regime has now announced that it will increase the number of Russian soldiers by 15 percent to 1.3 million. A further 170,000 men from the Russian Federation are to be forced into military service.

Ukraine has suspended the right to conscientious objection in 2022 and, according to its own figures, now has 800,000 men under arms. Men between the ages of 18 and 60 cannot legally leave Ukraine and are being forced into military service.

Energieinstitut

The people of Ukraine are experiencing a bloody war with hundreds of thousands of deaths on both sides. What do we see of it here? Very little, actually. We are experiencing the German defence minister's propaganda to make society "fit for war", a remilitarization and war propaganda on all channels. War propagandists, weapons lobbyists and generals sit on the country's talk shows, but no anti-militarists or people from the peace movement have their say. Even anti-war activists, pacifists and deserters from Ukraine, Belarus and Russia are hardly heard in the German mass media.

That is a scandal. We want the states to be deprived of the means and the "human material" for the war. Of the more than 250,000 people who have fled Russia since the beginning of the war to escape mass murder on command, only a few have been able to flee to the European Union. The EU usually does not even allow deserters and refuseniks to cross the border. Georgia alone has taken in more Russian conscientious objectors than the entire EU.

The German state has so far only granted asylum to a fraction of Russian deserters and conscientious objectors. From the beginning of the Russian war of aggression until September 2023, only 90 Russian deserters and conscientious objectors were granted asylum. That is only 2.6 percent of the more than 3,500 asylum applications received from Russians liable for military service. That is shameful.

As a rule, deserters are not granted asylum in the EU. This is a political scandal against which we are demonstrating here today.

The human right to conscientious objection is still not enforced. Even during a war of aggression, when people flee to avoid taking part in a massacre, they are not granted asylum in this country. We have to change that. We want people from Ukraine, Belarus and Russia to be able to refuse military service and leave their country. We want to grant them protection here.

How will this war end?

The war in Ukraine has been a trench war for many months. Sometimes the Russian army advances a few hundred meters, and then the Ukrainian army advances a few hundred meters again. It's a situation like we know it from the First World War, a war of position, like the one suffered by millions on the Western Front, with countless casualties on both sides.

Today there is a "war of attrition" on the "eastern front", in the middle of Ukraine. There are two highly armed armies, both of which use weapons that violate international law without any scruples. Even cluster bombs are being used. These are incredibly cruel weapons that have been outlawed by 110 countries due to their devastating effects, which often last for decades. Nevertheless, both warring parties use these weapons. Not only the aggressor Russia. This means that entire areas are littered with mines and contaminated, perhaps making them barely habitable for decades. Cluster munitions are particularly terrible. But the other weapons are also deadly.

It is a human right and should be a matter of course that all people who want to escape war are granted solidarity and shelter, that they are supported. If the armies run out of soldiers, then they

can no longer fight wars. The First World War also showed that. So the war-weariness lamented by War Minister Boris Pistorius is something we must strive for. We should ensure that warweariness develops on all sides of the war, that it develops in the same way that, for example, contributed to the US army ending the Vietnam War and withdrawing from Vietnam. The Vietnam War was also ended fifty years ago because an anti-war mood arose in Western countries, especially in the hegemonic power USA, because more and more people realized that war is mass murder.

Every war, including the war in Ukraine, is a crime against humanity.

Hundreds of people have been killed in Ukraine every day for almost two years.

It is not only the aggressor Russia that is committing war crimes, but also the Ukrainian army. The devastation is happening on both sides and is traumatizing countless children and adults. How will the war in Ukraine end?

It is likely that it will "end" in a similar way to the Korean War. The Korean War was a war from 1950 to 1953 involving the USA on one side and China and the Soviet Union on the other. This war claimed almost four million lives. It was never officially ended. There has been a ceasefire since 1953. There is a demarcation line between North and South Korea, with heavily armed armies on both sides. There is no peace treaty, the people of North and South Korea cannot come together.

The national borders are a problem. People who have lived together for decades can no longer visit each other because they suddenly find themselves on the other side of the Iron Curtain as a result of forced border movements.

The people in Ukraine are experiencing something similar. The imperialist war started by Putin is also leading to families being torn apart, people who have lived together, who have been friends for decades, are now being ordered to shoot at each other, to kill people on command. Because nothing else is war. It is mass murder by order. And we should refuse to obey this order. That is why it is our duty to support all conscientious objectors, all deserters, regardless of which party is at war. That is why we are standing here today and demonstrating for: Never again war! Never again fascism! Asylum for deserters and conscientious objectors!

"We don't have to be enemies"

Speech by Svetlana Novoshenova (Palestinians and Jews for Peace), held at the "Arsch Huh" demo in Cologne

by Svetlana Novoshenova

[This speech posted on 1/5/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.linksnet.de/artikel/48739.]

Under the title "'Give Peace a Chance' - Humanity and Peace instead of Terror and War", a rally

of the anti-fascist initiative "Arsch huh, Zäng ussenander" took place in Cologne on December 3, 2023. We document the speech given there by Svetlana Novoshenova as well as excerpts from a speech she gave on November 19 at the first demonstration of the group Palestinians and Jews for Peace (1), which had been founded in Cologne shortly before. (GWR-Red.)

Before I begin my speech: I am a German Jew and I distance myself from Benjamin Netanyahu and Olaf Scholz.

I am Svetlana and I am a co-founder of Palestinians and Jews for Peace. We are a group of young people with Jewish, Palestinian, Israeli and other roots. In just five weeks, we have organized two peace demonstrations, made friends and built a community of solidarity. We came together because we want to show the world that we don't have to be enemies. We were able to give ourselves and the people around us a sign of hope that peace is possible. We have shown that the things that unite us are stronger than the things that divide us. It turned out that we are united by much more than our love for falafel. But what sounds so natural and hopeful that it could almost be kitsch, makes us the target of an incredible amount of hatred.

Solidarity between Jews and Palestinians is portrayed as impossible, radical, even dangerous. The list of insults we have to listen to could be funny if the situation wasn't so sad. Sometimes we are anti-Semitic Hamas sympathizers, sometimes an identitarian cross-front, sometimes a pseudo-Jewish campaign, sometimes we ignore the suffering in Gaza. The accusations could not be more contradictory, but they are united in their judgment: we are always traitors. Because we are in solidarity with those who should be our enemies.

Being a Jewish woman in the public eye today, being politically active, feels more dangerous than ever before in my life. My ancestors survived countless pogroms, attacks and the Shoah so that I can stand here today. Sometimes very narrowly. I owe this not only to the incredible resilience of my ancestors, but also to the people who protected Jews. Those who stood up to anti-Semitism in their society and sometimes risked their own lives to do so. These people have inspired me and I have always hoped to be as brave as them one day.

For this reason, I cannot remain silent when my Jewish identity, our collective trauma and our justified fear of anti-Semitism are exploited for right-wing agitation and war propaganda.

The German-Israeli Society, the Alliance against Anti-Semitism Cologne and the Central Council of Jews are calling for unrestricted solidarity with the Israeli government and the IDF. In their press release, they claim that murderers are hiding behind the call for peace. They describe Israeli warfare as "prudent, proportionate, just and, above all, justified". The oh-so-moral IDF (2) bombs schools, refugee homes and hospitals.

Israeli politicians call Palestinians animals and announce that Gaza will be razed to the ground. The Israeli government calls it self-defense that 15,000 Palestinians in Gaza are dead, the majority of them women and children. Half of all homes in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed, and 1.5 million people are homeless as a result of the Israeli military's attacks.

Anyone who dares to criticize this brutal action is accused of sympathizing with Hamas and

being anti-Semitic. Anti-Semitism is a real problem that threatens Jews - not an accusation that can be thrown around inflationarily and indiscriminately to justify Israeli war crimes and silence critics.

For months, thousands of Israelis have been protesting against the most far-right government their country has ever had. A government that is well on its way to abolishing its status as the "only democracy in the Middle East" through totalitarian judicial reforms. A government that has long been a thorn in the side of human rights organizations and is threatening to deport Israeli peace activists and protesters to Gaza by bus. A government that is now also trying to put an end to freedom of the press and criminalize newspapers that are critical of the government.

On October 7, the Israeli government and the IDF failed to protect Jews from terror and violence. An article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz criticizes the fact that Israeli female soldiers had been warning their superiors about the planned Hamas attack for months - but their superiors did not take the young women's warnings seriously. This arrogant chauvinism is unfortunately not an isolated case in the IDF and has contributed to the deaths of over 1,200 people; countless Israeli women have been victims of the most brutal sexual violence at the hands of Hamas.

Jewish women:Jews no longer feel safe in Germany either. Most of us came here as quota refugees from the countries of the former Soviet Union, just like my family. We came to Germany because we were promised protection from anti-Semitism. But instead of really doing something against anti-Semitism, for example investigating right-wing violence, uncovering right-wing networks in the police and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution or investing money in political education, German politicians prefer to point the finger at others. The "bad foreigners", "the Muslims", the "aggro-Arabs". Fighting anti-Semitism with racism and deportations, what an original idea.

Anti-Semitism and racism are life-threatening, whether in Germany, in Gaza, in Israel or worldwide. We should stop looking for evil only in others and instead engage in a critical conversation with ourselves. If we learn to listen, then we take steps towards dialog, towards peace.

Our call for a ceasefire is neither naive nor radical, but pragmatic. It is the only way to ensure peace, security and justice in the long term. We are not alone in this demand. Every day we receive messages of gratitude and solidarity with us and our message. People who finally feel heard and seen, including many Jewish, Israeli and Palestinian voices. These voices ensure that we do not give up hope and believe in a peaceful future after the war.

Dunja Hayali recently posted on Instagram: "In a war in which people die, there are no two sides. There are only people who die, and every death is one too many."

I can only agree with that.

The lives of Palestinian civilians are worth just as much as the lives of Israeli civilians. Human rights are so called because they apply to ALL people. The freedom and security of Israel and Palestine are not conflicting interests, they are inextricably intertwined. Peace only works

together and not against each other. In Israel, in Palestine, in Germany and all over the world.

"It has never felt so scary for me to be Jewish"

Excerpts from a speech by Svetlana Novoshenova, held on 19.11.2023 at the "Sharing Sorrow. Bringing Hope - Sharing Sorrow. Bringing Hope" demo organized by Palestinians and Jews for Peace in Cologne.

(...) I was seven years old when my grandmother pulled me aside and warned me in a low voice not to tell strangers that I always went to ballet class at the synagogue on Wednesdays. At the time, I didn't understand why she told me to hide this part of my life and not the fact that I always have recorder lessons on Mondays.

Today, 25 years later, I know. It has never felt so scary for me to be Jewish. It has never felt so scary to be Jewish in public. But silence is no longer an option.

Because our justified fear is being instrumentalized to promote right-wing agitation and war propaganda. Concern for our safety as Jews is being used to label people as terrorists, Hamas supporters, radical Islamists, barbaric "aggro-Arabs" and to demand their deportation. Calls for freedom for the Palestinian people are being branded as anti-Semitic incitement and criminalized. Under the pretext of "security concerns" and "special responsibility towards Jews", basic democratic rights such as freedom of expression and freedom of assembly are being trampled underfoot while Nazis continue to chill in the Bundestag.

In Israel, right-wing extremist armed mobs shout "Death to the Arabs", settlers throw Molotov cocktails at the homes of their Palestinian neighbors. Israeli politicians deny the Palestinian people their right to exist and the IDF invokes "Israel's right to self-defense" to commit war crimes against innocent civilians in Gaza. Israeli and Palestinian peace activists are insulted, threatened and criminalized as traitors.

In Germany, Jews no longer dare to enter synagogues and Stars of David are sprayed on Jewish people's houses. Tough Nazis, right-wing conspirators and Islamists are using the opportunity to radicalize people and spread their hate ideologies. In Russia, Jews are being hunted down by an anti-Semitic mob at an airport. I could cry because I have the feeling that people have learned nothing from history.

As always, the German government's response is the same. Clean a few stumbling blocks, make pompous speeches about dead Jews, recite "Never again" like a prayer wheel, lay down a wreath of flowers - and don't forget the most important thing: express unconditional solidarity with the Israeli government. After all, Germany has a special historical responsibility towards the Jewish people.

But what is the German government supporting in the name of solidarity with Jews?

In response to the terrorist attack by Hamas on October 7, the Israeli government is causing a military escalation of appalling proportions, which is responsible for over 11,000 civilian

casualties in Gaza, more than 60% of them women and children. Half of all homes in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed and hundreds of thousands of people have been left homeless by Israeli military attacks. The IDF continues to bomb refugee homes and hospitals.

For months, thousands of Israelis have been protesting against (...) a government that has long made no secret of the fact that it does not regard Palestinians as human beings. (...) The German government continues to stand unwaveringly by the side of the Israeli government. In doing so, it is not only putting the lives of millions of Palestinians at risk, but also those of the Israeli hostages who are still being held captive by Hamas. Our calls for a ceasefire and the release of the hostages are growing louder and more desperate. German politicians and the media keep repeating that only Hamas would benefit from a ceasefire. Honestly, are you still in your right mind? So I'm not at all surprised when some swindlers claim again that the Jews control the media and the German government. But instead of really doing something to combat antiSemitism, for example investing in political education, the German government is cutting funding for this of all things. I don't feel protected by this, but simply fooled. Unconditional solidarity with the far-right Israeli government and the IDF does not protect Jews in Israel, Germany or anywhere else in the world.

We call on our government to stand in solidarity with ALL victims of this war. A human life is of equal value, whether in Tel Aviv, in Ramallah, in Haifa, in Jerusalem or in Gaza. Palestinians in Gaza and around the world are not responsible for the crimes of Hamas. Jews are not responsible for the war crimes of the Israeli army. Human rights are called human rights because they apply to ALL people.

We demand a ceasefire. The release of the hostages. An end to the military occupation of Palestine. We stand side by side with our Palestinian friends.

There is no alternative to peace in Israel and Palestine. Not for Jews, not for Palestinians and not for the other people who live there. This is not naïve, but realistic and pragmatic. It is not radical, but the only option to end the suffering of innocent people. (...)

The elixir of life

In many ways, water reacts like a living being that has energy and even a memory. As such, we are all indebted to it.

Water is a phenomenon. Countless spontaneous associations come to mind. Water is omnipresent in our existence. It seems to teach us something, just as it provides for us. It seems to learn and remember. Water is an artist in dialog with all things and beings, reflecting, sustaining and codeveloping manifested life. The author has often photographed water, magically attracted by its vitality and richness of form in the aggregates. Here he shows some samples and comments on them. A text for the #water special.

by Uli Fischer

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.manova.news/artikel/das-lebenselixier-2.]

Everyone has a special relationship with certain bodies of water, forms a bond, loves their river, lake, sea, nearby stream or hamlet. When I lived in the Inn Valley near Rosenheim for a while, I naturally developed a connection to the Inn. I "visited" "it" regularly and tried to get in touch with its essence. In the photo, the Inn lies mirror-smooth like a lake at your feet, it can foam like a small sea when the famous Inntal wind blows.

Bathers in Lake Thumsee are usually impressed by the cleanliness and vitalizing power of the mountain lake water - and its "tappish" coldness even in midsummer. The locals love their lake.

But let us now enter into a stream of water associations:

Water is constantly present to us in two of its aggregate states: in humidity and in body fluids or cell water.

The anomaly of water, the increasing volume when the aggregate changes from water to ice, is remarkable and also puzzling. For practical reasons, we prefer to take it into account at freezing temperatures.

The so-called "memory of water", its ability to react to thoughts, emotions and sonic influences in its fine structure, raises questions about the quality of consciousness of water. What is it all about? Who is remembering here? In what way is this possible?

The self-purifying power of many non-stagnant bodies of water is astonishing. It is hardly conceivable that a metaphysical function and ability does not emerge here, into visibility. What is happening there? What forces are at work? And how do they know that action is necessary?

The healing power of water, both that of natural, geomantically particularly excellent waters and springs and the cultivated, traditional form of baths and water treatments, can in principle always be used beyond all the blessings of the health systems. The public bath, the sea vacation, the Kneipp cure, the meditative view of waters in motion or at rest.

Sacred springs, water places with a high intensity of vitality, are present as places of spiritual power and radiance for many peoples, although there have been many attempts to "seal" such places with buildings, i.e. to disturb them and eliminate them as influential factors and places of pilgrimage for nature-loving spirituality in order to establish "religious authority".

The contrast between extremely arid regions and the abundance of water on earth is peculiar. The unequal distribution of land and water masses may in principle favor this. Nevertheless, the idea arises that the internal relationship between humans and landscape and water must play a role beyond large-scale ecological interventions. Is a collective, possibly induced and then exploited awareness of scarcity the real reason for the drying up of springs and revitalizing waters in certain landscapes?

Some water researchers speak of gigantic water reservoirs in the earth's interior deep below the groundwater resources. If this is true, it would be a further indication of the need for a

comprehensive correction of our ideas about the geological structure of the earth. The question of the organic function of water for the earth as a whole should perhaps be posed in a similar way to that of petroleum and natural gases, in a comprehensive spiritual and mental context. Is water a transition zone from the mineral to the plant level of consciousness of the soul?

In many places today, natural cloud formation is no longer the "normal case" that nature needs to maintain the water cycle and climate stability. We have had to get used to the streaky formations in the sky, the "contrails" that float down on us. Geo- and weather-engineering, as it has been practiced for several decades now, mostly unnoticed by many, should come to an end as soon as possible, because we may also be hindering processes in the area of metempsychosis (transmigration of the natural kingdoms), which is probably indispensable for us humans as a backstop.

Religiously motivated baptisms or the secular, so-called equatorial baptisms remind us that water has always been understood as the water of life, as a medium of initiation into the deeper laws of life, as a mediator of initiation into phases of life.

Why is this so? What correspondence does water have in the hidden structure of the deep experience of the self?

Water sounds, it speaks many languages in dialog with the materials surrounding it: the murmuring stream, the roaring sea, the foaming spray, the still water, the rain pattering on the roof. Water is primal music.

The more subtle qualities of water are almost impossible to fathom: Soft water, hard water in terms of the dissolved minerals it carries are just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. In general, the ability to dissolve and absorb substances. Water can do magic. Even in homeopathy, which is so unjustly fought against and vilified.

Water has different time scales and follows its own logic: "Soft water breaks the stone." It hollows it out, drop by drop, with patience and gentle power. Although its elemental force also manifests itself quite differently in storms on the high seas. The areas along the Rhine and Elbe, the Danube and the Inn, which are used to flooding, tell the story of the river without a natural pulsation chamber year after year, because we Europeans are only gradually regaining an understanding of the interplay between landscape rhythms and cultural embedding. If at all.

At least there have been some intelligent renaturalizations of rivers, streams and coal mines in recent years. The fact that cities have often been built on river bends is probably due to the experience that these areas "collect" and "provide" vital energy - apart from the advantages for navigation in such situations and natural protection. The Ahr valley inhabitants had to learn the hard way that proximity to the river also entails risks; however, the exact circumstances of the incident are shrouded in the darkness of contradictory information. It could well be that, in addition to the possible dysfunctionality of the early warning system, deliberately induced extreme weather conditions also played a role.

Water always gets into the flow, into the "flowing" ... : It naturally follows the gradient of the

landscape and thus makes the permanent interplay of gravity and matter clear in a moving way. All water features are based on this. Pools and flowing steps, waterfalls and fountains vary the one "earth-musical" theme: the force of attraction towards the center of the earth, which nothing and no one can avoid or escape and which nevertheless allows, demands and seeks to play with it.

The art of water - once admired in the surface tension of the water droplets hanging from branches, which capture the world as a whole, reflecting it in reverse. But also in the refraction of light, in the infinitely varied water wave patterns on water surfaces swept by winds. Water art in the magnificent expanding and overlapping circles created by raindrops in the puddles. The many "painter's corners" on bodies of water or near lakes are certainly no coincidence. Water inspires, stimulates, enlivens the consciousness when it itself, the water, the consciousness, still weaves its life as naturally and unspent as possible. It facilitates the flow of inspiration for the artist and every thinker.

"Water inspirations" can also happen in the shower: External and internal cleansing correlate with receptivity to creative impulses and to the spontaneous realization of joie de vivre. The famous song from the bathroom. -

Water refreshes - how does it do this? Certainly not only because people like to drink it cool, but also because it carries subtle, invisible life energy that "recharges" the person's vital body.

Probably also via resonances of the material structures, the water clusters in their diversity. We learned it from water, as the German folk song goes. Have we? And what? Or are we still learning? Learning never stops, just as the river flows and flows.

Studies on the quality of drinking water always make us sit up and take notice: How many additives seem necessary or are "prescribed" is barely comprehensible. Water treatment thus appears to be water preparation according to the doctrines of scientific ideas and the interests of the chemical treatment industry. The many different water purification systems for home use speak volumes: the "water quality" organized by society as a whole has gotten out of hand in many respects. Perhaps precisely because it is "organized" by "society as a whole" - and is no longer maintained with regional water rites of thanksgiving under local responsibility. Centralistically imposed regulations are always a gateway for financially motivated manipulators and their conveniently communicated ideologies.

Photography seemingly counteracts the flow of life, captures the moment, however long it may last, determined by the exposure time, and then unites in the picture to form the moment. Instead, it gives us a different view of the inner artistry of water. Water is an artist of form and transformation. It masters the most distinctive and lively formal language of all substances. It is impossible to talk about water exhaustively. It is just as inexhaustible as the divine source of life.

The events at the Tesla plant in Grünheide near Berlin in 2023/2024 speak for themselves: what is happening there is not in the interests of the water (groundwater lowering), the landscape and the people living there. Large-scale industrialism in general is a first-class enemy of water. That is well known. A comprehensive transformation task awaits us here, which can only be solved by

overcoming the crisis of world consciousness and a cosmology that is hostile to life. Both factors will entail a complete restructuring of our technicistically deformed economic and social life.

I have recently been impressed time and again by the practical examples of holistic water management work by Sepp Holzer and his team. The reports by Elisa Gratias on the water initiatives in Slovakia (1) and India (2) are encouraging examples of the beginning of a new water culture that is effective in the landscape and a deepened water awareness.

Do we allow water to speak and look directly and speak for itself often enough in everyday life? It has so much to tell us that can and wants to be seen, heard and experienced.

Water, you faithful companion of life on earth, we thank you. You always remind us of the primordial vitality of the spiritual-cosmic and manifest being, its eternal change, its abysses and shallows and unlimited creative power. You show us the beauty and meaning of the living form, which inspires us to self-knowledge and meaningful, creative action.

March 22 is World Water Day. It is important that the media do not simply react to the latest madness in the world, but take action themselves. That is why we, together with a number of other media portals, are putting a topic on the agenda ourselves. The participating media partners, where you will find articles as part of the #Wasserspezial in the week from March 18 to 24, are currently:

Entertaining massacres

By being presented on social media, armed violence becomes a spectacle.

No acts of violence have ever been as well and comprehensively documented as the West's war against Russia in Ukraine and the genocide in the Gaza Strip. Ministries of defense, soldiers and mercenaries film their missions and attacks and upload the video material to the Internet. Some mercenaries even boast about their deployment in this way. But this medialization of violence dehumanizes the victims and encourages war and destruction.

by Felix Feistel

[This article posted on 4/6/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.manova.news/artikel/unterhaltsame-massaker.]

"The revolution will not be televised" is a song by Gil Scott Heron. The revolution, it says, will not be televised. With a view to the prominent conflicts in the world today, one could add: war, however, is. Whether it's the West's war against Russia in Ukraine or Israel's massacre in Gaza and the West Bank - whenever they want, anyone can go directly into the war from their computer and see what's happening on the ground. This is because Ukrainian and Israeli, and to a lesser extent Russian and Palestinian, fighters not only film their operations, but also post their videos online on a large scale.

You don't have to descend into the murky darknet to see them; all you need to do is look on X or YouTube. Here you can see patrols in combat vehicles, exchanges of fire with the other side, drone strikes on tanks or soldiers in trenches. Even Western mercenaries proudly display their

missions in Ukraine. This means that even those who are completely uninvolved can immerse themselves in the events of the war and watch live as soldiers storm enemy positions, advance and shift the front line in this way.

Even every civilian today has a smartphone and can film missile strikes and explosions in their home town. This is how the latest events find their way into the wide world of the internet in sound and vision. In contrast to earlier wars, this enables a completely different kind of participation in the world's conflicts.

Who remembers the blurry night shots of the US bombing of Baghdad? A few bright flickers in the night sky, missile strikes and explosions and, in front of them, an insecure reporter giving his extremely limited view of things. This is how the reporting on the USA's war of aggression against Iraq, in violation of international law, began. An overhead view from the outside, from the sidelines so to speak. Today, however, viewers can be right in the middle of the action.

On the one hand, this enables a good analysis of the events. And so there are some YouTube channels that make use of the footage to show how the military situation is developing in Ukraine, for example. They show where the Ukrainians have to retreat, where the Russians are advancing, which side has suffered losses and to what extent. In this way, it is possible to get a reasonably realistic picture of the situation on the ground, even from a distance, and it is possible to undermine the propaganda of all sides. On the other hand, it can also mean that the war, the deaths and suffering of soldiers and civilians degenerate into pure entertainment.

Many people are already used to watching gunfire and explosions, violence and destruction in films. Younger generations even take part in such massacres and battles themselves in the form of video games.

We all know that the violence experienced there is not real. But the drone and video footage from Ukraine or the Gaza Strip is. And yet it seems like the logical continuation of the hypermediatization of the world. War, death and violence become a multimedia event that loses its horror in this way.

As a viewer, you quickly find yourself in the position of cheering on the successes of the favored side, like cheering on the goals of your "own" team in soccer. In this way, war becomes a sporting event in which you can take sides, cheer and cheer when your "own" side blows up enemy positions, kills soldiers or destroys tanks. But the fact that there are real people on the other side, in the trenches and tanks, losing their lives or being seriously wounded, is then forgotten. In this way, people are dehumanized into mere pixels whose destruction is almost longed for. The human being becomes a mere "enemy", an obstacle that must be overcome if the "own team" wants to achieve success and make progress.

Even the death of one's "own" people is less of a concern because, unlike in soccer, soldiers are not even associated with a name, let alone a face or a personality. The soldier becomes an anonymous tool of the spectators' enthusiasm, not to mention the anonymous tool of the rulers, who enforce their power interests on the backs of ordinary people. Through the medialization of events, dying loses its tangibility and becomes intangible. Since the video footage only shows us

strangers, their deaths do not affect us any more than the mass deaths in the films we are used to seeing. The events on the battlefields are thus strangely decoupled from the very real death, they lose their horror.

In this way, war seems like an adventure. Running, jumping, shooting, ducking into trenches or crawling across the ground to approach enemy positions, the battlefield as a playground whose painful and painful side is withheld from the viewer. This also happens because the shots are often interrupted at the point where the drone hits the tank or the shells hit the enemy. The situation is somewhat different in Gaza, however, where Israeli soldiers proudly display the mistreatment of captured Palestinians.

Movies and video games have long made us accustomed to seeing people die. It's just that these people weren't real until now, or the deaths were faked. In the society of spectacle in which we live and which Guy Debord described in his work of the same name, it is only the next logical step to replace the staged battles and virtual fights with real ones.

The destructive mega-machine, which also gave rise to the sprawling entertainment apparatus, is constantly striving for new content, for new forms of representation, and the audience is striving for the same. But as a result, we are slowly becoming accustomed to the sight of gruesome deaths, to the murder that states unleash when they vie for supremacy.

Now, it is true that one of the great problems of our society today is that we try to suppress death with all our might. This was particularly evident during the pandemic, when life was to be 'protected' by all means and large sections of the population were afraid for their own lives and those of their fellow human beings. Death has been so far removed from our society that the idea of it leads to terrible fears, even panic, and it is no longer seen as a natural part of life, which it actually is.

So it is not the habituation to the fact of mortality that is problematic here, but the way in which this death occurs. By becoming accustomed to war and violence, people become accustomed to the idea that a state can decide over people's lives and willingly sacrifice them if it serves its own interests. What's more, these sacrifices take place in cruel, destructive ways, in which bodies are perforated, torn apart, burned or corroded and suffocated with chemical warfare agents. Natural death can occur peacefully and cheerfully - death in war is a cruel, barbaric act in which humans seize power over other humans and use it to physically annihilate them. In war, man is dehumanized, turned into an instrument, a tool. As a result, life itself is devalued and cruel death at the behest of one's own or another state is transfigured into normality, to which people become accustomed until any other idea is forgotten.

It is therefore important not to get used to this depiction of war. It encourages our own victimization, our own dehumanization by the state or by fellow human beings. Because what can happen to soldiers in Ukraine or Russia, Israel or Palestine can happen to anyone else in the world at any time. The violence of war and war itself are thus made palatable to people, brought closer to them, and this ultimately increases their willingness to go to war themselves, a war that has long been planned by the ruling powers to fill their coffers and expand their sphere of power.

It is perfectly legitimate to want to know what is happening in the war zones. Anyone who wants to find out what is happening on the ground can hardly avoid watching the video footage, and it provides good evidence of the war crimes that are taking place. No genocide has ever been as well documented and filmed as that in Gaza, and the footage is evidence for any subsequent court proceedings, which can make it easier to prosecute the crimes.

But one should always remember that this footage shows real people and real violence. These are real people who are dying or have died somewhere in the world, suffering from serious injuries.

These are sons and fathers, daughters and mothers, brothers and sisters who give their lives here for the machinations of criminal war chests. These are represented in governments and corporations, hedge funds, banks and capital accumulation centers; they willingly sacrifice other people for their own profit, the expansion of their own power base and reshape the world according to their own interests through this war.

Felix Feistel, born in 1992, studied law with a focus on international and European law. He already worked as a journalist during his studies; since his state examination he has been working full-time as a freelance journalist and author. He writes for manova.news, apolut.net, multipolar-magazin.de and on his own Telegram channel. His training as a trauma therapist according to Identity-Oriented Psychotrauma Theory and Therapy (IoPT), which he also works as, has broadened his understanding of the background to what is happening in the world.

Financial institutions are increasingly taking targeted action against critical media and thus participating in the dismantling of democracy by the political establishment. 04.04.2024 by Felix

Feistel

Not a safe bank

Financial institutions are increasingly taking targeted action against critical media and thus participating in the political establishment's dismantling of democracy.

"Everyone has the right to freedom of expression as long as they do not expect to have a bank account without interference. The freedom of the media and its plurality shall be respected within the limits of thought set by the government." Is this what Article 11 of our Basic Law looks like? Hardly. But it would have to read like this if it corresponded to the reality of a ninenormal Germany. More and more media that see themselves as critical of the government and the system are being harassed by their banks and chased out of the courtyard like uninvited visitors. And this is completely irrespective of the fact that the press organs in question are acting within the law. In this way, the bankers are allowing themselves to be instrumentalized for the project being promoted by Nancy Faeser and her cohorts to narrow the spectrum of opinion. Anyone who attracts unpleasant attention - such as the "Democratic Resistance", "apolut" or even "Manova" - is canceled. In such cases, the cohesion of all those who are still interested in independent reporting is required.

by Felix Feistel

[This article posted on 4/4/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet,

https://www.manova.news/artikel/keine-sichere-bank.]

In February of this year, Interior Minister Nancy Faser presented a new package to combat "right-wing extremism". 13 measures are to be used to combat right-wing extremism, including the "uncovering of financial sources". The Office for the Protection of the Constitution is to be given the authority to uncover such financial sources and even close accounts. A change in the law means that in future, a so-called "potential threat" will suffice.

However, this is a very vague term that has no clear definition behind it. In cases of doubt, the Ministry of the Interior decides what is a "potential threat" and what is not. The same applies to the term "right-wing extremism": In times when anyone who voices criticism of a state thataccording to Economics Minister Robert Habeck - "makes no mistakes" is already classified as right-wing, the "fight against right-wing extremism" can be extended as far as you like and waged against any form of opposition, even if it has nothing at all to do with classic right-wing extremism.

The fact that the opposition's sources of funding are being dried up is nothing new and was already being practiced before Faeser's Democracy Promotion Act. Critical media outlets in particular have repeatedly been given notice of termination by the bank, usually without giving reasons. This was also the case for Manova magazine at the beginning of March 2024, when the cooperative GLS Bank terminated the account without giving reasons. This gave Manova's sponsoring company two months to set up a new account and transfer the funds to it. Fortunately, such an account was found fairly quickly.

However, such a step is always associated with massive financial losses, as all the standing orders that previously ensured the funding and thus the continuous work have to be set up again.

Manova is not the first medium to have its account terminated by the bank. apolut's account had already been terminated - also by GLS - even though Ken Jebsen had previously advertised this bank as a cooperative alternative to the big banks for years. At the end of March, the portal experienced another account termination. The magazine Compact also recently took legal action against an account termination - albeit unsuccessfully. The judges followed the defendant bank's argument that such a customer would jeopardize the bank's reputation.

However, the weekly newspaper Demokratischer Widerstand probably has the most experience with such attacks. The former sponsoring association has been active since March 2020, even before the weekly newspaper was published. At that time, donations were still being collected in a private account at Berliner Sparkasse, which was then used to support the democracy movement. Within a month of the start of the demonstrations against the coronavirus policy, this account was closed.

The pretext was the accusation by the public prosecutor's office that the private individual was using the account to fraudulently obtain benefits, as she had applied for corona aid during this time. However, the communication between the Berliner Sparkasse and the public prosecutor's office available to Democratic Resistance proves that the reason for the termination was in fact the demonstrations, which - according to the assessment - were financed from this account.

The co-editor of Demokratischer Widerstand, Hendrik Sodenkamp, rejects this, however. Demonstrations, he explained, did not need much funding. Instead, the money went towards setting up the weekly newspaper.

After the founding of the sponsoring association, the account changed several times. As there are not many banks in Germany that handle association accounts, and some of these banks refused to cooperate from the outset, all banks were soon exhausted. The association switched to several online banks, such as Revolut or N24, one after the other, always with the same end result: termination after a short time without giving reasons. Finally, the sponsoring association had to be abandoned in favor of a limited liability company in order to be able to set up an account again. The GmbH is now with its 13th bank in four years.

Every change of account is associated with extreme financial losses. The standing orders have to be changed and some of them are lost accordingly. In addition, in several cases the money has to be reclaimed - a lengthy, cost-intensive process. The example of democratic resistance shows that account terminations are used specifically to weaken the opposition. The aim is to dry them up financially and destroy them in this way.

It is difficult to tell whether the banks are taking this step on their own initiative, as a sign of political opportunism, or whether instructions are being given in the background and such steps are being organized.

But the fact that it only affects opposition media is evidence of a targeted campaign against those forces that stand up for diversity of opinion and democracy as well as peace and diplomacy.

Additional information from the Manova editorial team:

Difficulties such as those currently facing our magazine are not insurmountable. If Manova's community of activists, readers and supporters pull together now, the bank's move against press freedom will come to nothing.

This is where you come in, dear donors and readers:

White guilt

In his book about a slave revolt in Guyana, author Thomas Harding presents interesting historical facts, but fails because of his own political correctness.

26.03.2024

by Felix Feistel Out of the moral prison!

The intimidation strategy

Banks are terminating the accounts of government critics in droves in order to exert pressure on freedom of expression even "below the threshold of criminal liability". Manova has now also been hit.

We are familiar with these procedures from the coronavirus era: What used to be a matter of course and the right of every citizen is being reinterpreted as a grace that can be withdrawn at any time. Dependencies have been created that can be used against political opponents in the event of conflict. Banks are legally entitled to terminate a customer's account without giving reasons. And they have made ample use of this in recent years. We are unable to identify with certainty the motives of the banks, most of which are maintaining an elegant silence. However, there is one suspicion: by creating unnecessary stress, financial losses and a vague feeling of being "undesirable", people in Germany who are capable of criticism could be brought into line. Harassment of members of the opposition also helps those in power to continue with destructive policies that they are neither able nor willing to change. If an unbearable spirit of confinement, intimidation and conformism has now developed in Germany, it is partly thanks to banks like these. Manova has a proposal to counter this renewed attack on freedom of expression. If as many readers as possible switch their standing orders to our new bank or become donors for the first time, the slap in the face of the free press will become a slap in the face.

by Elisa Gratias,

Madita Hampe, Jana Pfligersdorffer, Nicolas Riedl, Roland Rottenfußer [This article posted on 3/30/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.manova.news/artikel/die-einschuchterungsstrategie.]

All the corona measures were necessary and appropriate because they allowed me to protect myself and others. I am passionately in favor of rearmament because Germany must defend itself against an imminent attack by the aggressor Vladimir Putin. I am in favor of heat pumps and against the right. I happily welcome the bombing of the Gaza Strip, which has now claimed over 30,000 lives, because our solidarity must be unconditionally with Israel these days. I consider Nancy Faeser and Lisa Paus to be extremely capable female politicians who see their most important task as protecting our democracy. Men can be women and women can be men, peace is only possible after a war has been won, and the state makes no mistakes.

Was that right, Mr. Teacher? Am I being good? Will we get our bank account back now? We don't know what ultimately went through the minds of those who terminated the account of our initiative for the democratization of opinion-forming a few weeks ago after years of trouble-free partnership - even back in the Rubicon days.

However, as the GLS Bank has remained silent and no other reasons for the termination are apparent, we can only speculate. If we had used this or similar narratives in our magazine, would anyone have even thought of canceling our account? You don't fall out of favor when you call for nuclear weapons for Germany that threaten millions of people with death. You fall out of

favor when you stand up for peace and for civil rights enshrined in the Basic Law to continue to apply indefinitely after 2020.

The bank account as a reward for good behavior

Such practices are de facto the introduction of a social credit system based on the Chinese model. Access to social participation and to benefits that are sometimes crucial to people's livelihoods will no longer be a matter of course; they will be transformed into a bonus for good behavior. The criteria for this are determined by the group that sets the tone in society, led by the state.

If you think this trend through to the end, it could mean for political journalism: The state itself sets the rules for whether, how and with what severity it may be criticized, as Nancy Faeser has already expressed in her latest initiative. Where it is not legally entitled to punish because there is no criminal offense, it allows punishment. By willing enforcers from "civil society" who are eager to serve the most powerful authority or who may even have been put under pressure by it.

Those who have not been brought down by the politically misguided will be brought down by the cowards. We would be moving towards a society in which published opinions mysteriously never deviate very far from the government's view.

In practical terms, account cancellations for media with a large number of business contacts, readers and donors involve considerable organizational effort and are an acute threat to their existence. This applies in particular to standing transfer orders from supporters, which will come to nothing if they are not all switched to the new account in April.

Manova has no significant reserves and needs all the donations it receives to cover the running costs that are essential for the continued operation of the magazine. The income must therefore not be reduced - so please note our important information at the end of the article.

Evil below the threshold of criminal liability

We are currently witnessing a rapid restructuring of the community through the sanctioning of alleged misconduct "below the threshold of criminal liability". (Lisa Paus) As Michel Foucault clairvoyantly foresaw in his classic non-fiction book "Surveillance and Punishment", the citizen is becoming "at home in a universe of punishability and means of punishment".

The list of occasions for punishment is constantly growing, as is the repertoire of possible punishments, "until everything can be used to punish everything". Not being vaccinated, i.e. having the same physical status as before 2020, can be punished by being denied entry to a restaurant; having published a critical, actually rather funny video by making a "dangerous speech" and publicly exposing the "wrong thing" can be punished by the termination of a bank account. In this way, any person or institution can become the executive organ of a "strong state" that is basically just too mentally weak to deal with criticism.

The stories of other independent, critical journalists indicate that I am right to assume that the bank accounts of "members of the opposition" were closed for political reasons. They show that

these are not isolated cases, but a campaign, a principle of political action on the part of those in power. Journalist Boris Reitschuster, who gained some popularity during the corona years, had his private account terminated after 20 years of business relations. At the same time, the bank also terminated the savings account of his then seven-year-old daughter. When Reitschuster asked the bank why, the bank stonewalled:

"Dear Mr. Reitschuster, unfortunately we cannot comment on specific reasons. Private banks have freedom of contract. (...) In principle, we cannot go into the background or individual circumstances of such a decision. However, we can assure you that an account termination is never unfounded or frivolous, but is based on internal and/or legal regulations."

A second bank, where Reitschuster soon opened an account, also terminated his account. "Data protection regulations" were cited as the reason for this. In the end, four banks terminated the journalist, who had also attracted attention due to his critical appearances at federal press conferences, within just one year.

"Voluntary submission to the zeitgeist"

Reitschuster is convinced:

"The decision is solely political. The bank was either put under pressure or it acted in anticipatory obedience and/or voluntary submission to the zeitgeist. For fear of suffering 'reputational damage' because they are dealing with someone like me."

He sees his personal case as a symptom of a general phenomenon:

"In rows, critical journalists, but also ordinary citizens who are politically active and criticize our government, are having their bank accounts terminated. Just like that. Because they are politically out of line."

And he also has a suspicion as to why such cases are rarely made public:

"Most people don't dare to make it public. So as not to look like a victim. Or for fear of not getting an account at all."

But that's not all: a crowdfunding platform also gave Reitschuster notice. According to Reitschuster, the platform told him that it was "in favor of freedom of opinion. But only for the right opinion". The platform argued that there were "limits that we now see as having been exceeded". An international online payment service also took action against the journalist with considerable harassment.

After these two funding channels broke off, Boris Reitschuster temporarily had great difficulty earning money with his work. These events remind him of Franz Kafka's novel "The Trial". "I don't even find out what I'm accused of. And the verdict is passed without even hearing me out first." The former Russia correspondent also sees methods at work "that I know from Moscowand that seem to come from the KGB and Stasi handbook".

Terminations are "organizational hell"

The consequences for those affected are massive on several levels. Boris Reitschuster complains above all about the workload that arises as a result of harassment in connection with the payment transactions that are essential to his profession. "Instead of working and writing, I once again have to see how my work and my site are progressing and how I can secure the existence of my site." Quitting is "organizational hell". He even admits: "My first reaction was to chuck it all in."

In the "ideal case" - from the perspective of the opponents of free media - critical journalists would be kept so busy by trouble shooting that they have no time or energy left to criticize.

Journalists, on the other hand, who see their job more as being government heralds and claqueurs, would have peace of mind and always enough time, as they can always be sure of the goodwill of their bank.

Incidentally, the immediate reason for terminating an account with a critical media company could be denunciation. As a rule, this cannot be proven in individual cases. However, it seems unlikely that bank employees would spy on their customers - there are thousands of them - across the board in order to catch a potential "corona denier". According to Reitschuster, there are people "who have really specialized in denunciation. They write to banks, for example, even putting them under fire in order to blacken critical minds there".

"Also socially responsible for corona denial"

An article in the taz newspaper in September 2020 showed what this can look like and the mentality you have to expect from opponents of freedom of expression. The article was entitled

"Social to corona deniers too. GLS Bank advertises itself as particularly ethical, but offers conspiracy ideologue Ken Jebsen an account - and doesn't answer any questions."

The article first tries to grab the bank by its honor and maliciously points out its social and ecological orientation. This, it goes on to argue, is proven to be pure hypocrisy by the fact that the GLS Bank has granted Ken Jebsen - the critical journalist now known as Kayvan SoufiSiavash - an account.

"In contrast, the bank shows little attitude towards one of its best-known customers: GLS offers a business relationship to conspiracy theorist and corona denier Ken Jebsen, of all people."

Apart from the fact that this characterization of Jebsen indicates that the author must have been put through various brainwashing systems and has also adapted his language to common defamation clichés, one thing is striking:

The article portrays the "granting" of an account as an exceptional privilege that should not be granted to just anyone. This "overlooks" the fact that everyone in the modern world needs an account - not because of personal preference, but because of factual external constraints.

This was not always the case. Until 1957, it was common practice to hand employees their pay packet every month or even every week. Workers took their cash out of it, spent it as they pleased and only took the portion they didn't need immediately to the bank - in other words, to "save" it.

Today, banks are indispensable - especially for decentralized companies such as Manova, which is sometimes used as a means of power. Individual banks are merely tools of the great transformation. Banks that do not participate in the politically induced "culling" of their customers deserve appropriate respect.

Forced bank hopping

In the future, citizens who don't parry may no longer be able to get cell phone contracts, but without a smartphone they will hardly be able to participate in public life. For those who think such a scenario is unlikely, consider this: as recently as 2020, it would probably not have been considered possible that access to a restaurant or cinema could one day be made dependent on proof of a certain "vaccination". And what if a water supplier invokes its "freedom of contract" and only supplies drinking water to supporters of the traffic light parties?

Ken Jebsen no longer has an account with the GLS Bank and has had to struggle with a number of difficulties. Like Reitschuster, he was forced to "bank hop". Whether the taz article in question contributed to this remains unclear. What is certain, however, is that the newspaper had the undisguised intention of exerting pressure on the bank. The message was:

"If you as a bank do not want to ruin your good reputation, I advise you to purge your customer base of people that we - i.e. the embedded media - consider problematic. If you remain stubborn, it will be uncomfortable for you."

The taz author proudly reported that he had sent GLS Bank a "ten-point list of questions". This had remained "unanswered despite repeated requests".

"It therefore remains unclear whether the GLS management around board spokesman Thomas Jorberg believes that Jebsen could stylize himself as a victim and martyr if he terminates his account - or secretly fears that quite a few customers and sympathizers could be Jebsen's."

It is clear to see how persistently the journalists/denunciators proceeded. In the end, the bank's fear of losing various supporters of Jebsen was not as great as the fear of damage to its image caused by a shitstorm from the monopolists of quality from taz & Co.

The "private autonomy of banks" a sacred cow

Such "cases" are rarely heard in public. Mostly when the dismissed person is a quasi-recognized ogre and one can therefore expect broad sympathy for the dismissal process. This is what happened in the case of AfD chairman Tino Chrupalla.

Die Welt, which reported on the case, refers to a "ruling by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) a good ten years ago". In this ruling, it "declared a ban on terminating a current account without objective justification to be an 'inadmissible interference in the private autonomy' of banks". In contrast, the Federal Court of Justice ruled in 2003 that the Leipziger Sparkasse was not allowed to terminate the NPD's account. Deutsche Bank suffered a similar fate in 2019 when it tried to kick out the Marxist Leninist Party of Germany.

Whatever you think of the ideologies of those mentioned here, the trend is moving in a direction that makes it more difficult for customers who have been labeled as "enemies". Legislators and the courts are increasingly giving banks a free hand when it comes to arbitrary terminations, which are being pronounced as measures to enforce correctness.

Once again, it is the taz that ideologically underpins the politically motivated exclusion of individuals and groups:

"In the labor market and in private mass transactions (such as in the supermarket or at a housing association), no one may be excluded simply because they are dark-skinned, female or homosexual. However, this new ban on discrimination does not apply to political views. No innkeeper has to rent out the back room to Nazis for events, and that's the right thing to do."

What is said here about "Nazis" certainly also applies to critics of the corona measures, pacifists and other "enemies of democracy". However, the "granting" of a bank account is a routine that is practiced on a massive scale and cannot be equated with the bank's commitment to the customer's world view. Account management in the background, which is mostly automated nowadays anyway - for example for a person with a "right-wing" ideology - does not bother anyone who does not want to be bothered by it. A roaring choir of drunken "Nazis" in the back room of a bank, on the other hand, would be truly unacceptable.

De-banking as a global phenomenon

The phenomenon of "de-banking" is in any case an international one. The case of British politician and Brexit supporter Nigel Farrage, whose bank NetWest even had to withdraw the termination of his account due to protests from several political camps, became known. Again, it was the taz that wrote - in this case critically for once:

"Politically exposed persons (PEPs) are increasingly seen as a liability by banks. The Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle said that he constantly had problems with banks because of his political views."

It is important to note here that no one is safe from bank harassment just because they are not, or do not consider themselves to be, a 'right-winger'. Even "left-wing extremists" and other people with different beliefs could end up on the index, especially in times of a looming campaign against the threat of "left-wing terrorism".

The phenomenon threatens the diversity of opinion as a whole and on an international level. The founder of Querdenken, Michael Ballweg, had to struggle massively with this and tried in vain

18 times to find a bank. The print newspaper Demokratischer Widerstand also came under massive pressure. Alexei Navalny was affected, as was Julian Assange. Of course, these cases are somewhat different from those of Manova and other alternative media. Alexei Navalny's accounts were blocked as part of criminal proceedings, while Julian Assange's account was officially terminated because he is not Swiss. Nevertheless, the impression is that an international, cross-camp and cross-ideological repression based on banking is at work.

As long as there are no legal regulations to protect consumers, freedom of speech and freedom of the press, free thought is subject to the arbitrariness of any bank manager who feels like the king of Lummerland. Likewise, political campaigns such as Nancy Faeser's can trigger an irresistible impulse to join in among contemporaries in need of adaptation: "I'm also involved in the fight against lateral thinkers - like every decent person these days."

A "strong state", as Faeser has defined it, exerts an irresistible attraction on weak characters.

"So does the local park bank now decide what its customers can or cannot say?" scoffed AchGut magazine. "Do I have to submit this article to some branch manager for approval before my editor-in-chief does? Or will some offshoot of the countless 'anti-hate' foundations already do this for me without my knowledge?"

It becomes even more dangerous when the bank accounts of unpopular people are simply "frozen" and their owners, who have left their money to the banks in good faith, are thus plunged into existentially threatening hardship. The trucker protest in Canada was effectively stopped by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau using such methods.

Trudeau also deliberately refrained from using the military against insurgents. Who needs beating soldiers and police when you have bankers who are eager to serve and can knock out government opponents with a few clicks in their banking software? Stick together now so that banks don't decide what is published

Fortunately, difficulties such as those currently faced by our magazine are not insurmountable. If the community of activists, readers and supporters of Manova pull together now, the bank's push against press freedom will come to nothing. From our point of view, the first step has already been taken.

We were able to open an account with a new partner bank relatively quickly. However, this does not eliminate all the difficulties. First of all, converting current direct debits and notifying countless business partners of the new account details is a huge amount of work, which Jana Pfligersdorffer in particular had to deal with.

Elisa Gratias, born in 1983, studied translation and journalism. She emigrated to France in 2005. She moved to Mallorca in 2014 and has been working there as a freelance author, translator and artist ever since. From 2018 to 2023, she managed the Rubikon-Mutmach editorial team as a freelancer. She writes about happiness, fulfillment and society on her blog flohbair.com. She shows her art at elisagratias.com.

Madita Hampe, born in 2002, lives in Leipzig and considers herself a self-taught artist. She expresses her political and philosophical interests primarily through journalism, as this is almost the only socio-political field in which analysis and activism can meet and cooperate on an equal footing. Her aim is to channel her energy, strength and creativity into a more peaceful, just and democratic world without domination. She is a member of the Manova youth editorial team and writes for the "Young Feathers" column.

Jana Pfligersdorffer, born in 1979, took her first steps into the media landscape at a major daily newspaper and, after completing her training, switched first to print and media production and then to tourism marketing. She lacked leisure time and hobbies for years due to a part-time degree course before her own offspring took over this role. From 2017 to 2023, she worked for Rubikon, first as a volunteer editor, then as editorial director and managing director.

Nicolas Riedl, born in Munich in 1993, studied media, theater and political science in Erlangen. He documents and analyzes the increasingly abstruse zeitgeist of Western culture in critical texts. He is also a book lover, a strict cash payer and an unusual digitalization grouch for his generation. Accordingly, you won't find him on any social media platform. From 2017 to 2023, he worked for the Rubikon youth editorial and video editorial team.

Roland Rottenfußer, born in 1963, worked as a book editor and journalist for various publishers after studying German language and literature. From 2001 to 2005, he was an editor for the spiritual magazine connection, later for Zeitpunkt. He worked as an editor, book copywriter and author scout for Goldmann Verlag. He has been editor-in-chief of Hinter den Schlagzeilen since 2006. From 2020 to 2023 he was editor-in-chief of Rubikon, and since April 2022 he has been co-publisher and editor-in-chief of Manova.

The holistic well poisoning

In an interview, water expert Yannick Mehren explains why the desolate quality of drinking water symbolizes sick people in a sick society.

Every day, millions of people unsuspectingly turn on their taps. According to surveys, most people in Germany do not see any danger in drinking water. After all, its quality is within the legal limits. Very few people are aware that these have been raised over the years and decades. In addition, the same applies to drinking water testing as to any other type of test: what is not looked for cannot be found. In fact, drinking water is only tested for a few dozen pollutants, while at the same time thousands and thousands of chemicals and pharmaceutical residues are released into wastewater and groundwater in alarming quantities. Even the most modern wastewater treatment plants are not able to filter out all of these substances. Those who are aware of the danger posed by drinking water are turning to alternatives, most of which are very expensive. In an interview with Manova, the water expert and co-founder of the drinking water filter manufacturer "UrQuelle®" explains the actual state of drinking water quality, the factors that pollute tap water, what alternatives are available and what the disregard and disrespect for water in politics, the media and culture says about our society. A text for the #WaterSpecial.

by Nicolas Riedl

[This interview posted on 4/2/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet,

https://www.manova.news/artikel/die-ganzheitliche-brunnenvergiftung.]

Nicolas Riedl: In our latitudes, water is not perceived as a scarce commodity, but as something that is available in abundance and comes out of the tap as a matter of course at all times. What prompted you to focus on this element and even co-found a company in the field of water filtration?

Yannick Mehren: It started about 10 years ago. I had problems drinking tap water. This gave me the idea of drinking water of spring water quality. Even back then, I heard a lot of positive things about it. I first started buying spring water from the health food store. It tasted much better. I could feel the difference straight away. From then on, the journey began. I was determined to do something good for myself and my body. After all, we humans are made up of 70 to 80 percent water. Accordingly, we should also consume good water.

According to a survey conducted in 2017, more than half of people in Germany regularly drink tap water, another survey conducted in 2020 found that less than ten percent see drinking water quality as a major problem and concern about drinking water contamination is not even listed separately in the ranking of Germans' greatest fears. Why do you see tap water as a greater danger than most of your fellow citizens?

There are two levels that make tap water very problematic. These are the material and the energy level. On a material level, tap water can be heavily contaminated nowadays. Although it is repeatedly claimed in this country that tap water is the best controlled foodstuff - and compared to other countries our water is significantly better - this does not mean that the water meets the quality criteria that it should.

Tap water is only tested for 32 pollutants, for which there are also limit values. However, 40,000 industrial chemicals are used today. Accordingly, there is a wide range of substances for which the water is not tested at all and for which there are no limit values.

These substances include microplastics, nanoplastics, hormones, fabric softeners and so on. All of this ends up in the groundwater. Sewage treatment plants can no longer filter it all. And if the water is not tested for these levels, it is of course very easy to give the green light.

Near Mönchengladbach, where I come from, we sent our tap water to the laboratory because we wanted to know what substances it contained. It did indeed contain a highly toxic herbicide. Two metabolites of the substance chloridazon. The limit value of the herbicide was exceeded elevenfold.

So much for the substance. Then there is the energetic level. Water itself is a carrier of consciousness, information and frequencies. Dr. Masaru Emoto has done a lot of research into this and discovered that high-quality water always forms crystalline, beautiful structures, whereas contaminated water forms inharmonious, desolate structures. Nowadays, this can also be visualized with crystal photography.

In the case of tap water, we have to imagine it as follows: This water flows through dark, long

pipes, through the sewer system and through sewage treatment plants. It comes into contact with faeces, hormones and chemical impurities. And this information spectrum is stored in the water, more precisely in the cluster structure of the water.

It is important to know that water always forms cluster structures. Spring water has very small clusters, whereas tap water has very large ones. And we also consume this information spectrum when we drink the water. If you measure the bioresonance field, you will find that spring water has a stable resonance field, whereas tap water has a completely destroyed one.

Has the quality of drinking water in Germany ever been better and, if so, what do you think are the reasons for the deterioration?

Drinking water quality used to be much better. There was also a legal guideline value, for example the microsiemens (µS). There are TDS devices that can be used to determine the electrical conductivity of water. The higher the value, the more saturated and impure the water is. In the 1950s and 60s, there were also limit values of up to 130 µS; the value was not allowed to be higher. Over the course of time, however, the limit values were continually increased. In the 1990s, it was already at 1,000 µS. In the 2000s it was already 2000 µS. We are now at 2,790 µS. For comparison: in Canada, water with a value of 1,500 µS is already referred to as industrial wastewater.

In addition to the industrial chemicals just mentioned, pharmaceuticals are also a factor that should not be underestimated when it comes to drinking water quality. Keyword birth control pills. Millions of these substances flow into wastewater via urine. These and other factors have led to the limit values being raised further and further so that it can be said that the water quality is still within an acceptable range. The limit value for nitrate, for example, is 50 milligrams. But you certainly wouldn't want to drink even one milligram! Nitrate is converted to nitrite in the body, where it triggers a range of major problems.

And then there is the ever-increasing environmental pollution. Around a hundred years ago, people didn't have to worry about these problems. The springs, lakes and rivers were completely unpolluted.

So far, we have not seen people in this country being admitted to hospital in droves due to drinking water poisoning. How and with what illnesses does the harmfulness of drinking water affect people in the short or long term?

The pollution of drinking water and the harmful additives in food lead to a permanent poisoning of the environment and our own biochemistry, which in the long term leads to a wide variety of diseases and an acceleration of the ageing process.

You can imagine the latter as follows:

If you harvest a plant and lay it down, you can observe how it shrivels up over a period of hours because the life of the plant escapes along with the cell water. And this is exactly what happens to people. Research has shown that people become dehydrated even though they drink

enough.

This is because contaminated water is very difficult to "pass through cells" compared to crystalline water. And this in turn leads to an acceleration of the ageing process, because the cells have to expend so much energy on the cleansing process. You can observe this in yourself. If you drink tap water, you can tire quickly. Spring water, on the other hand, refreshes and invigorates body and mind. The decrease or increase in energy can even be measured in the organs.

In addition to poor drinking water quality, there are other factors such as contaminated food and electrosmog. The combination of all these factors then manifests itself differently from person to person. Some become depressed, others develop thyroid problems, others cancer and so on.

Reports of drinking water contamination have been increasing for almost ten years, although they are always described as temporary and localized. Have the media just found a new topic to get excited about in order to increase circulation, or do you think it's the other way around: is the media covering up the real extent of the contamination with a "limited hangout" by only reporting on specific points instead of showing the overall picture?

I clearly see a cover-up here! The problem can no longer be hushed up. Especially as countless studies now bear witness to the state of drinking water quality.

In my perception, the issue is not wanted. I don't want people to see how badly contaminated the water has become. There are abysses opening up.

If we look at today's industrial landscape, especially the many pharmaceutical companies, we simply have to realize that we are talking about very high turnover. If people were perfectly healthy, these companies would be obsolete and bankrupt. The whole range of medicines I mentioned earlier would no longer be needed. Against this background, I can imagine that a certain basic health burden on the population is even intentional. In this context, this quote from Eugen Roth often comes to mind:

"What deprives the doctor of his bread?

a) health b) death/ Therefore the doctor stops, that he may live / us in limbo between the two."

In my opinion, this quote sums it up very well.

And to come back to the media coverage. I notice an enormous inconsistency here. On the one hand, it is repeatedly emphasized how healthy drinking water is, while at the same time reports about drinking water contamination and general drinking water pollution keep appearing.

Google trends show that interest in the keywords "Abkochgebot" and "Trinkwasserfilter" has been rising continuously since 2015. In the digital dictionary of the German language (DWDS),

there has been a steep increase in the frequency of these keywords since 2022, whereas previously the frequency was close to zero. Do you see a growing interest and awareness in the population for the topic of drinking water quality?

Absolutely! When I started working on the subject in 2014/15, it was a completely niche topic. Sometimes it was even ridiculed. That has changed a lot since then. As I work with water filters myself, I can see that interest and demand for alternatives to contaminated drinking water is increasing. A rethink is increasingly taking place, especially since 2020.

These water filters, which your company also manufactures and sells, are said to turn tap water into spring water. How exactly does this technology work and why has it only recently become available?

There are various water filtration techniques, such as distillation, activated carbon or reverse osmosis. We have specialized in reverse osmosis with our company. This technique does not ensure that you get water like water from the mountains, but the water is very pure.

The technology behind it is as follows: Inside the system is a mebrane, which is a very fine layer with very fine molecular pores. Water is pressed through these pores. Only the pure H2O gets through and the pollutants such as microplastics, medicines, nitrates and plasticizers stick to the membrane and are filtered out. This is what distillation does and then you have completely pure water.

However, it is important to note that such pure water does not occur in nature. Water from nature always has a certain sediment of minerals. Osmosis water has the disadvantage that its pH value is very acidic. It is empty water and this has many disadvantages. It spoils quickly when exposed to sunlight because it no longer has any natural protection. Osmosis water must therefore always be treated, i.e. renatured. For example, using volcanic rocks or sea corals. These provide the necessary sediment of minerals, which brings the pH value back into the neutral range and thus restores the naturalness of the spring water.

In order to produce water that resembles spring water, it is important to restore the natural order and this is achieved through revitalization.

To do this, the water must come into contact with various quartz crystals. In addition, the water is swirled - just as it occurs in nature. We also use a force field technology based on fine gold in our filters. This technology exerts a stable field on the water, bringing the bioresonance field into a healthy state.

Of course, when I list it like this, it sounds a bit abstract at first. We have therefore had laboratory results prepared to prove the effectiveness of this filtration.

We have already touched on the role of the media in this topic. Parallel to the reporting on drinking water contamination, warnings about drinking water filters are also becoming more frequent in the leading media. Do you have an explanation for this? Do drinking water filters or water distillers - due to incorrect handling, for example - pose a danger that even exceeds that of

tap water?

The risks are actually very low. But of course there are. For example, mold growth. For example, there are so-called top filters, where water is poured on top and then the water runs through several layers. These filters tend to germinate really quickly. You really should be careful and not use these filters for months on end.

The other danger is what I mentioned earlier: drinking osmosis water. As I said, this should definitely be treated. With distilled water, there is also the fact that it has a particularly strong dissolving power due to its purity. As it is empty, it is very absorbent for toxins. However, this also applies to the toxins in the distillers, especially in low-quality models with plastics inside.

Apart from this, the dangers of water filters are very low. If you pay attention to the dangers mentioned, not much can actually happen.

With regard to recipients of social benefits, precarious workers and destitute students, it should be noted that not everyone can afford a water filter system. Are there also inexpensive ways of avoiding tap water contamination?

There are certainly options. Organic food stores, for example, sell very good spring water. Of course, this also has its price. You can also look for water sources in your own area. However, it is important to send samples from these sources to a laboratory. Otherwise it is uncertain whether chemicals are present.

It is also possible to buy four to five liter containers and put several gemstones in them. These are some of the most effective stones for treating water. Precious shungite has been proven to neutralize a large proportion of pollutants and partially restore the natural order structure. Simply put it in and let it steep overnight, then you can drink it.

Many people who don't have the financial means to afford expensive alternatives to tap water often switch to bottled drinking water from plastic bottles. In your opinion, is this less dangerous than tap water?

I would classify both as very dangerous. If you buy water from plastic bottles, you inevitably drink the microplastics and nanoplastics that leach out of the bottles. What's more, water in plastic bottles is checked for even fewer harmful substances than tap water. In addition, this water is often enriched with minerals, which massively increases saturation. So I would completely advise against drinking water in plastic bottles.

In your opinion, what political importance should be attached to water supply and what does it say about a society that does not attach great importance to water in general?

It says a lot about the spiritual orientation of today's world.

Water should be treated in the most noble and respectful way. It is the most important substance next to the air we breathe. It keeps us alive.

Politically and socially, we are currently treading on very thin ice. All natural structures and principles are being completely disregarded and ignored. We see this in so many areas. The water is symbolic of all the misconduct.

One last question: we currently have over 40 million households in Germany: do you think you will live to see everyone in this country have access to pure spring water?

That's the paradox. Somewhere inside me, I am very optimistic, because I am deeply convinced that major changes will happen in the world, that at some point a critical point will be reached at which humanity will rethink. Even now, more and more people are feeling the pull towards an original, natural and healthy lifestyle.

And so I also think with regard to water that the damage done can be reversed. And if a revolutionary rethink takes place in this area, among others, then not even every household would need a water filter, because then the need for filtration might even be eliminated.

Thank you very much for the interview!

March 22 is World Water Day. It's important that the media don't just stop at reacting to the latest madness in the world, but take action themselves. That is why we, together with a number of other media portals, are putting a topic on the agenda ourselves. The participating media partners, where you will find articles as part of the #Wasserspezial in the week from March 18 to 24, are currently: