HAMBURG – A German professor with the name Norbert Frei (“Free”) just gave the interview of his life in the German Times (DIE ZEIT); or rather he was benignly abused. That’s because the journalist and interviewer was no other than Matthias Naß (“Wet”), a well-known manipulator and propagandists.
The background to the story is easily explained. For decades in Germany the corrupt media could write whatever they wanted us, the public, to believe; and there was absolutely no outlay or platform to reproach them, to expose their lies, or to debunk their fabrications. In short, what the media said could not be questioned. But now of course the public turns en mass to the alternative media and the social media –the latter are largely US-owned companies dressed as public services, e. g. Facebook, Youtube, Wikipedia, Twitter, Tumblr, Blogger, and so on- for airing their dissent.
The German public calls the corrupt media unanimously “die Lügenpresse” –the Lying Press. The media’s brutal response to this is to render all those critics as unemployed losers, conspiracy theorists, or new national socialists –Nazis. This of course only reinforces the contempt for the media tyrants who now demand the German government (in the name of the unelected media) to punish the dissidents harshly. They cannot shut down the social media completely, because those media are American (in the US ‘freedom of expression’ is sacred). So, experiencing loss of control and loss of respect, powerful German journalists like Mr. Naß peel off their skin to demand severe censorship, banning, and a country-wide crackdown on civil disobedience.
“Despite the fact that the laws of physics dictate that the past cannot return, Mr. Naß and Prof. Frei say it could and would if we didn’t censor and prosecute the disobedient and dangerous masses.”
Matthias Naß, unelected and full of himself (as arrogant as journalists come), is under heavy attack from “the people.” They exposed him as “militarist” and “warmonger.” He calls for censorship of his critics! They call his breed “the Lying Press.” He demands the prosecution of his enemies. For Mr. Naß, all his critics must be Nazis. So, he decided to call a certain Nazi-expert and holocaust professor who he knew would say certain things about certain people: Professor Frei. An interview ensued of the ugliest agenda-driven journalism and agitprop thinkable, with Mr. Naß going home with the professor on everything he wanted to bullhorn: censorship, prosecution, and the Nazis.
Mr. Naß and Prof. Frei (“Wet” and “Free”) want to construe the case that people who call the media “liars” are losers, right-wing, racist and extremists that ought to be censored (of course!), but also punished by the law! For that to happen, since Germany values “freedom of expression” in its Grundgesetz, they have to criminalize them as Nazis. To avoid the term “Nazi” themselves, Mr. Naß compares the besieged German press to the ‘Weimarer Republik’ -which was overthrown by the National Sozialists –the Nazis. So the game is on:
Despite the fact that the laws of physics dictate that the past cannot return, Mr. Naß and Prof. Frei say it could and would if we didn’t censor and prosecute the disobedient and dangerous masses. So, when Mr. Naß compares the media critics in said way with the National Socialist movement prior to Weimar, the professor praises the insightful journalists: yes, yes, “they do that on purpose, in full awareness to the NS-movement.”
So, now our two expert idiots have established that if THEY (our enemies) “talk on purpose in full awareness of the NS-movement,” that’s despicable. But if WE (Naß and Frei) are doing it in the media of matter –that’s just plain journalism. Let us be very clear about one thing: If there is an ultra-right front in this country, it is negligibly small –and it is THE MEDIA that is blowing them out of rational proportion, shaming them for having made the media doing it, and call for eradicating the vermin. It is typical Hegelian dialectic: create a problem, deliver the reaction, and offer the solution.
“Worried that ‘the people’ are wandering off to alternative media, Prof. Frei continuous to say that all is disastrous since without the propaganda of the mass media citizens would turn into beasts immediately…”
The two moralists talk about necessary censorship of the masses. Let me repeat this: A media representative and a representative of scholarship propose censorship! That gives us an idea where they are coming from and how they made their careers. DIE ZEIT, a self-declared defender of “press freedom” and “freedom of expression” when it comes to censorship in China, Russia, or anywhere really, is censoring as if there was no tomorrow –for example in its very comment sections beneath each and every article. This double standard, hypocrisy, and total lack of respect for the freedom of expression of others, let alone for critical voices, is the most cynical and violent form of suppression in any democracy: THIS IS AN ECHO CHAMBER FOR OUR PROPAGANDA. Your criticism will be deleted, your comments removed, and your account banned! Of course, the corrupt journalists are furious if anybody calls them the corrupt press.
Prof. Frei explains why those little people (the people who never make it into DIE ZEIT) who are infantilized, patronized, and if they dare to say anything back, are brutally censored, are turning to [free!] social media, which cannot be censored so easily by DIE ZEIT, so must be prosecuted: “the hatred articulates easily. Smartphones, Youtube, and Facebook do not replace the corner pub, but they radicalize [speech].” Worried that ‘the people’ are wandering off to alternative media, Prof. Frei continuous to say that all is disastrous since without the propaganda of the mass media citizens would turn into beasts immediately: “decoupled from the reputable media, they slander with malicious pleasure. And some go further: from verbal aggression to symbolic violence, then the violence against property and eventually to humans.”
Yes, Professor Frei has just established the scientific, causal link between freedom of speech and violence against property and humans. Congratulations. Oh sure as hell do we have to curb that freedom of speech, Professor Free -or else we will go back to the Third Reich or Orwell’s 1984! What a charlatan! It makes your author think how easy that professor’s career must have been if all the way when he simply could accuse his critics of being Nazis and right-wingers, and had them quickly removed. You can present fraud scholarship till the end of times if all your critics are banned from the public discourse.
There are quacks like Professor Frei in every discipline. People who claim that computer games cause violence; that movies cause violence; that art cause violence. What an idiot! That makes the media causing violence, too. And reading War and Peace. And reading The Bible. But, hey, we have to destroy our critics, so anything we can throw at them goes. So, the speech of our enemies causes violence, so let us take freedom of speech away from them! And despite the fact that across the spectrum all those ‘pseudo-scientists’ who tried to establish links between free speech and violence have been exposed; except of course for people like Professor ‘Freedom’ here, who claims that unbelievers of his thesis must be Nazis and therefore compromised.
But wait, it gets better. Not only does Prof. Frei advocate censorship and suppression of freedom of speech, but he also calls for penal punishment. He is of course referring to what basically enabled his entire career: morally prosecuting the critics for hate speech, slander, treason… you name it. No, but that’s not all, and not enough: The professor especially wants those critics with social status (opinion makers) to be blackmailed and coerced! (“Think what will happen to your life and your family if we report you as Nazi.”) His ideas (probably time-proven and practices during his academic career) are plain and simple: Punish a few prominent opposition leaders, and the pack will disperse.
If this reminds us of Chinese or Russian authoritarian practice, that’s because it is authoritarian practice. Professor Frei has no business in the infringement of the freedom of speech of others, if he is to keep his freedom of speech. It’s that simple. But of course Mr. Naß has the lowest opinion of the little men in the street. He asked theatrically: “How should the State and Justice react to the agitators?” To which Prof. Frei responds generously: “By applying the laws consistently.” Isn’t that interesting? This dumbing-down. This infantilizing of the readership. In fact, all dictators and tyrants in world history have asserted that the people will be punished according to the laws. The hinge of course is that the laws do not apply to the dictators and tyrants themselves. The journalist Mr. Naß will always claim freedom of the press, while the academic Prof. Free will always claim the right to freedom of research. It’s the criminalized little people who are completely fair game to our moral prosecutors and at the mercy of the tyrannical media regime.
The ‘enemies are everywhere’. This seems to be the mantra of fear among senior journalists in this Republic. And therefore, the journalist needs the professor to say this: “The enemies of foreigners are the enemies of this society.” The ‘enemies of foreigners’ are the Germans – Professor Free’s fellowmen – who show hostility toward foreigners. That’s interesting. Because the West bombs its enemies all over the Middle East. So, clearly, those policymakers and soldiers must be the enemies of “this society” too. Washington talks frequently about “its enemies” –the enemies of the United States of America. Why should a German who wants to protect “this Republic” not have enemies? DIE ZEIT has probably millions of enemies (home and abroad) –probably billions if we consider how narrow-minded and inbred white Western journalism has become. The paper would never give a foreigner a platform to expose the crimes of German press soldiers or the German regime. Are the DIE ZEIT journalists therefore the enemies of “this society” too? Theoretically, yes. In practice, no, because Professor Frei wants to criminalize only a selection of society: those people he doesn’t like and who could be a threat to his monopoly on opinion.
“The publication serves only itself, its journalists, its editors, its investors, its advertisers. Its own ideology and political agenda has top priority.”
He explains his terror: those people are “the enemies of democracy” [because they express their views!!!] and therefore our “open society” (he and Mr. Wet) must collaborate and confront them. We don’t “ban” them at first, the academicians explains, but we “enlighten” them. If they still don’t comply, THEN we prosecute. “We must hold up our Grundgesetz,“ he says. Which grants freedom of expression in theory; but forget that because that freedom can be taken away or re-interpreted anytime if our elites feel threatened by it.
DIE ZEIT as a media of matters is supposed to protect the public from the corrupt and powerful elites, but who protects the public from the powerful media –nobody! The media are granted total immunity (press freedom). But look what they’ve made of it. DIE ZEIT is perfectly self-aware of its privileges and abuses them for its own goals. The publication serves only itself, its journalists, its editors, its investors, its advertisers. Its own ideology and political agenda has top priority. Forget about the allegory about the media being the ‘Fourth Pillar’ of society and “speaking up to power.” The media is all-too-powerful, and nobody protects us from them. They obviously have no incentive to report their own corruption.
If Mr. Naß and Prof. Frei belittle the public and brush their tens of thousands critics as right-wing and extremist, that’s bad enough. But it is within their right. But if the people return the favor and express anger and contempt for this kind of journalism, THEN our “elites” cry for censorship or even punishment, which isn’t just insincere and dishonest, it’s plain stupid!
Professor Freedom has studied Nazism all his life, and sees Nazism everywhere. Mr. Naß needed this perfect strawman for DIE ZEIT leftist propaganda. We are going to witness many more shoehorning and showpiece interviews about how to crack down on dissension.
Here’s the part where Prof. Frei sees “freedom of speech” absolutely leading to dictatorship by the people: “Racism, inhumanity, lack of empathy, nationalism,” he says, transforms angsty citizens into “mindless followers of right-wing leaders.”
And this against the noble spirit of the left-wing leader DIE ZEIT who absolutely does not stir hatred [the word ‘Hass’ (hatred) is exchanged 9 times (!) in their short interview], aims for censorship, recommends thought police, and propose court sentences for critics. And who could possibly disagree with the German Times’s prerogative if “being a Nazi” is offered as the only alternative to being a radical-leftist quack with a victim complex.
“We must do everything to prevent a new progrom,” Professor Free promulgates. You’ve heard him. You are not only a bona-fide national socialists and radical rightist for disagreeing with his bullshit and pseudo-science and call for censorship, you are also an anti-Semitist.
Which, of course, expose the entire ‘Naß and Frei’ vehicle as agenda-driven journalism and cheap, cheaper, cheapest leftist agitprop. This, Ladies and Gentlemen, is what DIE ZEIT has become: a privileged journalist Matthias Naß, and a snobbish scholar Norbert Frei both calling for censorship and punishment of disagreeable citizens. And would the last dissenter being silenced please turn off the lights…
Thor Tukoll is a pen name of Thorsten J. Pattberg, a German writer and cultural critic. He is the author of The East-West Dichotomy, Shengren, and Inside Peking University.
2015 (c) Thor Tukoll