|
Ab 3:22 min bis 03:57 min spricht der Hauptdarsteller nahezu wörtlich die Rede
von Barbara Lerner Spectre nach, nur eben nicht auf Europa, sondern auf den
Kleinstaat angewandt.
Zur Rede von Frau Barabara Lerner Spectre:
youtube.com/watch?v=MFE0qAiofMQ
dort ab 00:39min. Falls dort nicht mehr vorhanden, man kann den Film auch mit
einem Suchgerät finden. Der Film wird immer wieder neu veröffentlicht.
Im Film bei 05:35 min:
Diversity is good. Diversity is a strength.
Dazu eine Fundstelle aus dem Weltnetz:
"...diversity is good, diversity is a strength, immigration brings
diversity."
Of course ‘diversity’ is a filler goodthink/goodfeel word – effectively
meaningless but thanks to repetition, it is now “good”. The propagandists of
the left are trying to achieve the javalamu effect (
http://www.juvalamu.com/ ). First associate a vague word with almost all
your core principles, then relentlessly redefine it positively.
Eventually you have a meaningless incantation that sounds good and evokes an
appropriate emotion. Simply use you spell word whenever you need to
introduce positivity. As it has no real meaning it cannot be criticised or
deconstructed. It is just a trigger word after all. Javalamu = diversity.
It is a terrible pity that history’s lash cannot inflict any real pain on
the villains of posterity or that contemporary villains cannot be threatened
with future shame. What good is it that people like Hughes will be denounced
as insane fools in 50 years (along with all the other apologists for
fundamentalist intolerance, unrestrained immigration and multiculturalism )?
He will be dead by the time the consequences of his actions have fully
matured. Where are the ghosts of Winterval future when you need them to show
idiots like this the likely consequences of their self-interested idiocy?...
False idealists like Hughes articulate romantic delusions and receive in
return what they hunger for most: acclaim. That it is the acclaim of the
ignorant , the uncomprehending and the collusory does not matter. When the
delusory nature of their hopes is revealed and the deadly consequences of
their idealism expounded – they accuse you of attacking the hopes and
principles themselves.
It is the perennial problem when dealing with idealists (or false idealists)
who are addicted to the mind killing toxic air of their imagined moral high
ground: How can you make them see the link between what appears to be
harmless prating about rights/fellowship/decency etc and the consequences of
actually acting on their proposal? Does one unfurl the long scroll listing
grim unintended consequences and the annihilation of the naive? Does one
ignore and wait for maturity to set in?
These false idealists may or may not misunderstands the constraints on their
(pretend) noble ambitions (and the dangers they create). The dishonest known
the ruinous consequences if their proposals, but speak out anyway to harvest
praise and acclaim. The honest are simply deluded or foolish – believing
their own exhortations and naive pronouncement. Both can be deadly if they
are persuasive. History and the truth are no defence against them: They
appeal to an otherwhere where an ideal set of circumstances makes an ideal
set of men. They sell a dream – knowingly or not the half realisation of
which is ruinous.
An idealist – ignoring all evidence of
man’s self interest – would have you wager the future of an entire culture
or society and 1000 years of moral calculus on an experiment in
mega-immigration and the hoped for beneficence of the ingressing hordes.
I know it sound like insanity. That is because it is.
...
This is just another expression of the battle between naivety and
experience, wisdom and folly, youth and age, reason and madness. It is of
course easy to preach tolerance, brotherhood, fellowship of man, equality,
fairness etc. One is likely to get much approval and ego stroking for
endorsing such goodness. It is an entirely different matter taking
realistic measure to protect yourself from the intolerance, enmity, envy,
violence, inequality and unfairness that is very much the norm in most of
the world. Idealists hope their own fairness will be a talisman to ward off
the brutality of others or perhaps they hope that they will be taken
seriously enough to be universally praised for their goodness, but
sufficiently ignored for their suggested actions never to be carried out.
Quelle:
limbicnutrition.com/blog/on-hearing-simon-hughes-is-calling-for-increased-immigration/
Ab 06:48 min. The Children-of-the-Rainbow-Festival:
Der Hauptdarsteller sitzt auf der Bühne wie ein Liedermacher mit Gitarre
und singt:
"Because I love you... I have given it one more try...
we heal the world... we are the children of the rainbow
we heal the world... we are the children of the dream
Pete Seegers im Jahr 1967:
And because I love you, ... I’ll give it one more try.
Go tell, go tell all----- the little children. ... Tell all their mothers and fathers, too --
Now’s our last chance to learn to share ... What’s been given to me and you.
Im Film spielt der Spruch:
"Kinder des Regenbogens" eine große Rolle.
Es gibt ein Lied von Pete Seeger aus dem Jahr 1967, My Rainbow Race.
Daraus hat Lillebjørn Nilsen ein norwegisches Lied gemacht,
"Barn av Regnbuen" , übersetzt "Kinder des Regenbogens",
rückübersetzt ins Englische "Children of the Rainbow".
lillebjorn.no/barn-av-regnbuen-my-rainbow-race/#regnbuen
dort ist der Text zu beiden Liedern, dem amerikanischen und dem norwegischen.
Meine Anmerkung dazu:
Es gibt ein durchaus vergleichbares Lied: "Imagine" von John Lennon.
"...Das Stück zählt mittlerweile zu den Klassikern der Popmusik.
Es ist eine Vision einer Gesellschaft frei von Religionen, Nationalismus
und Privateigentum.
Zugleich ist der Song ein Aufruf für den Frieden
und gilt als eine Hymne der Friedensbewegung..."
Quelle:
de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imagine_(Lied)
Das ist die schöne Seite des Liedes, und so steht sie auch in der deutschen Wikipedia.
Die englischsprachige Wikipedia ist sehr viel ausführlicher:
...Lennon stated: "'Imagine', which says: 'Imagine that there was no
more religion, no more country, no more politics,'
is virtually the Communist manifesto, even though I'm not particularly a Communist
and I do not belong to any movement." ...
Es ist das Wunschdenken von einer friedlichen gerechten Welt, von einem neuen Menschen,
wobei aber gerade das Kommunistische Manifest
in seiner tatsächlichen Auswirkung auf
die tatsachliche Welt rund 100 Millionen Menschen grausam
zu Tode gebracht hat und
für 1 bis 2 Milliarden Menschen nur ein Leben in Lüge und grauer Armut zugelassen hat.
Bei diesen Liedern stört mich, daß der Widerspruch zwischen vorgezeigtem moralischem
Anspruch und den vom Normalverstand klar vorherzusehenden hundertmillionenmal
tödlichen Folgen so leichtfertig weggewischt wird:
"Aber wir haben doch das Gute gewollt!"
Ich kann mich vor solchen Menschen nur angeekelt abwenden.
In dem Film werden sie durch den Hauptdarsteller, der ihre Lieder singt,
lächerlich gemacht und im weiteren Verlauf des Films
wird die wahre Wirkung ihres Handelns aufgezeigt.
http://www.agriserve.de/Gedenkfeier-Berlin.html
Warum das Lied bei einem staatlichen Anlaß in Berlin verwendet wurde.
agriserve.de/Liedbesprechung-44.pdf
Text und entlarvende Erläuterung.
| |
