[Skybird]

The Greens have a run, sewem to be successful. But hiddne behidn their advertsing figures Habeck and Baerbock they still are the same Germany-hating destruction brigade that wants to erode Germany from within. That are StaSi destabilizing methods in action, and they indeed stem from the Cold War and the East's attempt to infiltrate West-Germany and destabilise its social integrity from within.
The Neue Zürcher Zeitung writes:



Robert Habeck and Annalena Baerbock are right to be applauded for their stance on the war in Ukraine. Their policy is consistent because it leaves no doubt about who is the perpetrator and who is the victim. At the same time, she is pragmatic because dogmas no longer apply to the question of energy supply. What a pleasant contrast to the errant duo of Scholz and Lambrecht.

What is a success in foreign policy terms is becoming a risk in domestic policy terms. While all eyes are on Ukraine, the Greens are pushing ahead with social restructuring. Whether gender issues or migration - the former environmental party is focusing all the more on identity politics, as wartime has demanded many compromises from it. For example, it is courageously replacing the lack of Russian gas supplies with coal and gas from the Gulf - in other words, it is pursuing sober realpolitik. On identity issues, however, the party polarizes and promotes extremes. The Green Party's control center for its reeducation program is the Ministry of Wokeness, formerly known as the Ministry of Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth.

The party's approach is illustrated by the personnel of Ferda Ataman, the designated anti-discrimination commissioner. Family Minister Lisa Paus proposes a candidate to the Bundestag for election who denigrates Germans as "potatoes."

Discrimination is fine as long as it is directed against the majority society, but satisfies left-wing foreigner politicians and activists. These believe that white Germans are generally privileged - whether they are welfare recipients or multimillionaires. Discrimination against Germans is consequently not discrimination, but only the accelerated creation of equal living conditions.

It is not about dialogue and balance, but about confrontation and window-dressing. The journalist Ataman belongs to an association that pilloried other journalists for using the allegedly xenophobic term clan crime.

In Germany, Ataman and her like-minded friends do not want it reported that Arab clans are among the dominant forces in the underworld in Berlin and other cities. What must not be, cannot be. Ideology and approval in a red-green justemilieu are more important than facts.

If the goal were to find solutions instead of left-wing populist management of an issue, the phenomenon of clan crime would lend itself to a differentiated examination. For here we can see how a short-sighted policy toward foreigners can create serious social problems.

In the 1980s, Turkish and Lebanese extended families used the GDR as a gateway to the West. The Stasi state let them in, provided they moved on immediately to the West. West Berlin could not deport the migrants, but would have liked to get rid of them. So the families received a toleration, which forbade them to work or even to go to school, and thus literally forced them into illegality. Although they were only temporarily tolerated, they never left Germany again.

This migration story would be an ideal example to explain why the traffic light coalition is reforming the law on foreigners. Tolerated persons are to be granted permanent status after five years, provided they are well integrated. This is sensible because it avoids unnecessary suffering. The state must take action against illegal migration, but four years and 364 days is time enough to expel a person from the country.

But the prospective anti-discrimination commissioner is obviously not interested in explaining and appealing for understanding. She would rather scandalize and indoctrinate. Anyone who reports on migrant crime, which has long been ignored, is to be muzzled.

When I was still researching the topic as a correspondent 15 years ago, a criminal counselor at Berlin police headquarters told me that it would not be appreciated if she provided information on the subject. That would contradict the image of multicultural Berlin.

Multiculturalism no longer exists; today it is called diversity. Seen with common sense, this means nothing other than recognizing social diversity and living it as a matter of course. This is not enough for red-green identity politicians. They claim that true diversity and democracy will only be achieved when all people, largely independent of origin and length of residence, can have a say.

This idea represents the distorted image of a democracy that mutates into a participatory club for everyone who just feels like participating. The state would be nothing more than a random assembly, with no binding force and no duties. The individual only has rights and claims against the state for "inclusion" and "participation".

The social contract is no longer a mutual contract, but a unilateral agreement in which the individual formulates his or her wishes. Democracy is shrinking into a service agency for all those minorities who articulate their demands most loudly.
Medical risks must be discussed - even if this contradicts gender ideology.

Limitless individualization is the program of the Greens and, with some exceptions, also of the FDP. This is reflected in the coalition agreement. It promises individuals total power of disposal over their bodies, regardless of social conventions, legal or medical objections. For example, anyone over the age of 14 is to be able to change their gender by a simple declaration of intent, including chemical and surgical treatment.

Anyone who speaks out against this, for example citing the developmental psychology of teenagers, is berated in the same savage manner that degrades Germans to potatoes. The Family Ministry, the agitation center of the otherwise urbane party leaders Habeck and Baerbock, always leads the campaigns.

The state secretary in the ministry, Sven Lehmann, railed against "homophobia and transphobia" and "fake news" just because several authors had pointed out in a guest article for the "Welt" that sex reassignment surgery for pubescents can affect their health. They also warned against media coverage that downplayed the risks.

With any other treatment, it is the doctor's legal as well as ethical duty to provide information about possible side effects. Only in the case of gender reassignment do green identity ideologues turn Hippocratic truthfulness into "group-related misanthropy." No television advertisement for harmless vein ointment can do without the slogan: "Ask your doctor or pharmacist about risks and side effects. Only in the case of irreversible surgery is this not supposed to apply.

Yet a completely different kind of misanthropy is conceivable: Activists immunize a treatment method against any criticism. Media amplify the marginal phenomenon to a social trend, and unquestioning physicians do not let themselves be told twice to reach for the scalpel. Such an operation is certainly lucrative, and it would not be the first time that unscrupulous doctors put themselves at the service of a misguided zeitgeist.

When medical practitioners and scientists question the equally beneficial and sometimes terrifying miracle world of modern medicine, this deserves respect. This should be true even if one does not share their arguments. Science is based on speech and counter-speech and the willingness to falsify every hypothesis.

During the pandemic, however, "science" mutated into a creed that could be used to exclude dissenters. The Corona experience shows that verbal disarmament promotes social cohesion. Unfortunately, this realization bounces off the armor of ignorance worn by all enthusiastic right-wingers - whether on the left or the right.

The green battle brigade does not notice the paradox of its actions. It demands tolerance and equal rights for minorities, but meets all objections with intolerance. Anyone who dares to contradict Lehmann or Ataman is a potato or a misanthrope. This is the language of cultural revolutionaries, not politicians who want to take a society on the long road to change.

One thing is certain. When the Ministry of Wokeness has realized its program, the Republic will be unrecognizable in some places.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)