The nasty tricks of the anti-democrats!


How do you recognize hypocritical anti-democrats? Answer: By their true attitude. They hypocritically present themselves as supporters of democracy, but do everything they can to stigmatize their political opponents.


Anti-democrats do not accept other opinions!
They are so sure of themselves that they don't accept other opinions. They think they have the sole sovereignty of interpretation. Anyone who dares to contradict them is either stupid, lives in a bubble, is obstinate, or whatever. For them there is only one truth.
The established parties, the mainstream media, celebrities and the corporate lobby are largely in agreement on the crucial points. For example, they support the euro, rave about the European Union, celebrate the abolition of internal European national borders as a great achievement, see the salvation of mankind in a misunderstood liberalism (global wage and tax dumping through tariff cuts), dutifully believe in the
skills shortage and the need for high levels of immigration, support the European freedom of establishment, the ultra-relaxed asylum policy, etc.


Democracy thrives on counter-speech!
But the self-confident anti-democrats (who see themselves as protectors of democracy) probably never internalized that. They shower hate and malice on all those who do not submit to the media-generated mainstream and form a kind of bloc party system. They even commit character assassination by insulting their feared opponents as fascists, right-wing or left-wing radicals, anti-Semites or racists. They are not aware of any guilt, because they count themselves among the chosen ones who have the perspective, know the truth, see through the complex political context, and can distinguish good from evil.


The media can steer a democracy in any direction desired by the establishment, almost turning it into a moderate dictatorship. Even abstruse ideologies find social acceptance (even the euro and the zero interest rate policy) through the selection and penetrance of opinion-forming reporting.


How democratic is it to exclude political opponents and to exclude any cooperation with them even before an election?
Our protection of the constitution ensures that our basic law is strictly observed by all politicians in the Bundestag and in the state parliaments. So nobody need fear the existence of radical or even anti-democratic fiends in the ranks of our parliaments. In this respect, it gives a deep insight when in a democracy an entire Bundestag party is marginalized and permanently portrayed as unelectable.


The state television largely determines the formation of opinion!
What's democratic about that? What political influence does it have, for example, when the NSU murders are repeatedly served up as No. 1 news in the news, even after more than ten years, as are anti-Semitic outrages? Do you want to wear the population down, give them a guilty conscience, market the insane acts of some lunatics as a basic social problem and as a constantly lurking danger from the right? Why do the hundreds of "honor killings" of Germans, the terrorist attacks by foreign fanatics and the anti-state parallel universe of powerful clans receive far less attention? Why are there no organized commemoration rituals that are repeated year after year?
It is clear how the very one-sided representation of the culture of remembrance alone (also with regard to the World War and the Holocaust) has the effect of brainwashing and forces the bio-German population to be humble, stigmatizes them - and thus exerts a considerable influence on politics. Densely populated Germany as an "immigration country", the euro, the EU - would all of this have been possible without the media preparatory work (re-education) of state television?


In modern democracy, it is no longer about the well-being of the people, but about their appropriation and re-education. But probably not even the politicians are aware of this. Most of the time, they don't even realize how much they are being instrumentalized by the lobby network of establishment or capital.


Crucial re-education wherever you look …
Is it surprising when highly paid ECB officials consistently downplay and justify the strange practices of their perpetuum mobile money machine? Almost everything can be glossed over and justified by the selection of the commentators on the state television, which is subject to charges. All you have to do is pushy and persistently build up euro lobbyists as the only authoritative experts and let them have their say. This re-education not only affects the euro, it applies to almost all systemically relevant areas! The mainstream can be directed very precisely via state television, and the absurd and impossible can ultimately be implemented politically.
So if 90% of the main media (television and print media) praise the EU and the euro as unalterable and conducive to prosperity, similar approval ratings will be achieved in elections and polls. Because man was educated by the authorities to trust the statements of high-ranking experts. And because the world has become inscrutable not only for the layman due to the (often unnecessary) global interdependencies and umpteen thousand changes in the law.


Even the choice of words has the effect of gentle permanent brainwashing …
To name just one example: the rescue of hundreds of boat people is cheered on almost every day on television news. The very word "rescue" is a completely inappropriate glorification. After all, these "people saved from drowning" are refugees who intentionally got into the unseaworthy boats (even paid a lot of money for it). The supposed rescue operations are clearly aid to escape, smuggling services. Because the "refugees" definitely don't want to go back to Africa, they want to blackmail access to rich Europe/Germany.
A neutral observer would report on the television news that "today the Seawatch once again shipped 200, 400 or 800 Africans to Europe". But neutrality is undesirable, after all one wants to stoke emotions, pretend a rescue, even if it is illegal blackmail or being taken by surprise.
I don't even think like-minded journalists want to consciously deceive or manipulate their viewers. They've just gotten so caught up in their ideology that they don't even realize how partisan they are.


Do anti-democrats use state television to achieve their own goals and for re-education? Is mainstream education designed in this way democratically legitimate?


How does our pseudo-democracy work?

1. Public disputes are only about trivial matters and consequences …
Examples: minimum wage increases, redistribution, climate change, etc.
These artificially inflated key issues are mostly just the consequences of a failed policy. Even experts can hardly assess the effects of the demands made in this regard. They're a shot in the dark because, after all, they're just treating the symptoms and ignoring the true sources of disease (because disclosing them would be highly embarrassing and embarrassing for the establishment).

2. In matters of systemic relevance, the tactic of being taken by surprise is all too readily used …
Examples: introduction of the euro, zero interest rate policy, freedom of establishment, abolition of intra-European borders, etc.
Via the state media (television, radio, Internet, schools, universities), thedesired radical changes are generally praised as indispensable and as promoting prosperity. If, despite massive state propaganda, the population does not give their consent in advance, the projects will still be carried out (e.g. euro). Despite the gradual economic decline, the ongoing state propaganda prevents an uprising against the coercive measures that have been pushed through. Because the established parties are once again all in agreement on these fateful questions and the population is misled by downplaying statistics and nasty accounting tricks.

3. System changes through creeping re-education …
The usual approach. Examples: Germany's transformation into a country of immigration and a multi-ethnic state, establishment of wage, tax and interest dumping through tariff reduction, etc.
In accordance with the new ideologies disseminated via the state media, the population is attuned to the desired paradigm shift. The transformation process takes place slowly, so that the population hardly notices the change and ultimately sees it as a matter of course. One invokes the zeitgeist and scourges the "diehards" and the "unteachable". But no one explains why, despite all the progress since 1980, real incomes and pensions in Germany have fallen and unemployment has multiplied.


The lobbyists call the shots …
Politics seems to be firmly in the hands of the lobbyists, the NGOs and big business. Ultimately, these stakeholders determine the political direction, explain what is going on in a way that is effective for the media. They change society with their concerns and shape the new morality. They are largely uncontrollable because they often operate from the background and their proximity to politicians and parties remains hidden.


How free are our "representatives" really?
Contrary to the Basic Law, our deputies are not really free in their decisions: They are usually prisoners of party discipline. Of course, this could be changed - by secret votes in the parliaments, with a few exceptions. But you don't want that at all. One (or the establishment) wants to retain control over the deputies and put any dissenters in their place.
The second problem: Members of parliament are usually one-sidedly influenced by their environment and their CV. As left-wing politicians, for example, they welcome or almost blindly tolerate everything that corresponds to their do-gooder ideology. For example, the admission of refugees, the abuse of asylum laws, higher Hartz IV rates, commuter allowances, etc. As if there were unlimited money or money simply had to be there. They give little thought to the long-term consequences of naive good-naturedness.
When Hartz IV families end up doing better financially than average earners and work is often no longer worthwhile (which is often the case), the collapse of the welfare state is inevitable. And when a state has to finance itself through a self-inflicted glut of cheap money, that's more than an indictment of our democracy - it's the beginning of the end.



A heartfelt request: If you liked this article ( please recommend it to others. Because only the general education of the population paves the way for necessary changes. Thank you Manfred J. Müller


Excuse me!
There is no equality of opportunity - even when it comes to forming opinions. While the capital (corporations, speculators, lobbyists, media, governments) can afford the best translators, I have to settle for a simple language program for financial reasons. I hope, however, that the text is nevertheless reasonably understandable and that no major mistakes have occurred. Thank you for your understanding.
Manfred Julius Müller, 24939 Flensburg (Flensburg has approx. 90,000 inhabitants and lies on the German-Danish border)


My websites are absolutely non-partisan and independent!
They are not sponsored by state institutions, global players, corporations, associations, parties, unions, aid organizations, NGOs, the EU or capital lobby, hyped by google or influenced by the cancel culture movement! They are also free of advertising and fees.

Background and analysis:
German Political Encyclopedia: independent & non-partisan
Do doctored statistics and state propaganda form the basis of our democracy?
Poverty research: Which countries with high birth rates are really doing well?
The infiltration of democracy by the Cancel Culture movement …
The nasty tricks of the anti-democrats!
In Germany wages have been falling since 1980. Why?
Causes and consequences of global economic crisis
Germany: The brazen proclamation of skills shortage!
Globalization: the ignorance of the facts
"We have to explain Europe better!"
When will the Dexit? (the withdrawal of Germany from the EU)
The rule of law becomes a laughing stock




© The above text is the summary of a study by the independent, non-partisan economic analyst and futurologist Manfred Julius Müller from Flensburg (Germany).

Manfred J. Müller has been analyzing global economic processes for 40 years. He is considered a pioneering thinker. For example, 20 years ago he called for a kind of supply chain law that obliges manufacturers and dealers to only import fairly remunerated and produced goods to Germany (finally became law in May 2021). He has also long recommended a minimum profits tax for large companies on domestic sales (Joe Biden's proposal for a global minimum profits tax in spring 2021 is finally moving in the same direction, but is far too lame and will hardly be implemented internationally). Manfred J. Müller has also been fighting for his idea of wage cost reform for three decades (gradual reduction of social security contributions with counter-financing through value added tax and customs duties).


Through decades of brainwashing, the corporate lobby has succeeded in making radical ideologies a matter of course!
Through an army of loyal politicians and sympathetic journalists and the superiority of their opinion factories, system-owned economic institutes producing desired statistics, etc., they have brought about social changes and laws that only serve their special interests. This can be seen, for example, in the development of earned income (real net wages and pensions have been falling in Germany since 1980) on the one hand and the gigantic jumps in profits on the other (such as with shares and dividends). Should it always go on like this?

A critical look behind the scenes of political machinations:
The dreaded books by Manfred Julius Müller...