The email below was sent out by an Austrian academic in response to the controversy over the recent Swiss referendum on immigration from the EU. A copy was forwarded to Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, and has been kindly translated by JLH.
ESW includes this note:
Prompted by the Swiss referendum a few weeks ago and an interview conducted with the candidates for the European Parliament elections, Christian Zeitz, a member of the Wiener Akademikerbund, felt the need to vent his feelings.
The translated email (which is really two emails — an introduction from Christian Zeitz, followed by an enclosed email from Herbert Vytiska).
On February 16, 2014, Christian Zeitz wrote:
We owe Herbert Vytiska profound thanks for the care taken in the conducting of the interview and the notable and enlightening synopsis of the mode of thinking of the system’s force-fed, synchronized puppets on the subject of the “Swiss Plebiscite on the Immigration Question.” This presentation of political opinion is a teachable moment on the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the ruling class, whose members no longer have even the suggestion of a feeling for the problems and concerns of the people they pretend to represent.
The statements of Blümel, Leichtfried and Mlinar demonstrate the following indisputably:
|1.||The statements of those concerned are completely and randomly interchangeable. Not one of these functionaries is able to express an independent or original thought. Instead, they offer nothing more than (slightly) diverse variations of a unified EU superstate ideology, for which they act as ventriloquist’s dummies, incapable of reflection or criticism. Circumstance dictates that members of SPÖVP [combination of the acronyms for the Social Democratic Party of Austria and the Austrian People’s Party], the Greens and the Pinks [the Neos — “party of the young,” pink is their color] are all a part of the same nomenklatura network whose only concern is maintaining the domination of the political caste.|
|2.||The almost cabaret-like surrender to the regulation and control of language leaves out none of the 24-hour mantras of EU propagandists and multiculti ideologues. The SVP (Swiss People’s Party) is “populist” and has succeeded in “causing diffuse fears in the populace” (Leichtfried). This was a “populist agitation by the right wing” (Mlinar). “Fearmongering and populism” (Blümel). “Seclusion and xenophobia” (Leichtfried).|
|3.||The customary, unquestioning, mystified talking points in service of the rudderless EU project being unavoidable and without alternative are zealously applied. “It is not possible to cherry-pick…” (Blümel) Why not? Precisely that should be the task of a pro-active foreign policy. The Americans express it that something is for or against “the interests of the USA.” “It is well-known that we need incoming foreigners to counteract a lack of personnel in different branches.” (Leichtfried) Who has ever supported this claim with anything except the constant demands of industry for cheaper labor than is available here and now? And why is this myth — preserved over the years — not met with the contempt of the educational policy wonks who have provided this “lack” for such a long time? “Without free movement of people, there is no freedom of capital and goods trade.” (Lunkcek) In what primer of national economics or social science is this enlightened legal insight? At any rate, numerous states and/or economies have maintained foreign trade relations for centuries without also exchanging or exporting their populations.|
|4.||Without being even slightly versed in economics, intellectually lightweight apparatchiks presume to make incontrovertible claims about fundamental economic causal relationships. “Certainly since EU membership 14,000 new jobs have been created and an additional annual growth stimulus of .6% in the GDP generated.” (Leichtfried) Offering an absolute number for workplace openings while simultaneously ignoring the far greater growth of the population (ultimately determined by immigration, not fewer than 40,000/year in the same time span) which certainly led to the highest unemployment rates since WWII, is no more than cheap propaganda. And the claim of an EU-induced economic growth of a certain magnitude lacks any scientific basis. No serious study on the basis of recognized economic theorems, utilizing valid data and in the context of verifiable model calculations would envision such relationships. The most important decision-makers in Europe — finance ministers, federal reserve chiefs, and commission members — have been weighing us down for many months with information and prognoses (whose half-life rarely exceeds fourteen days) on the preparation of aid packages for ailing EU states and banks as well as the implementation of the “EU bailout funds.” They have either been lying to us or have no clue. How can it be that we have allowed ourselves to be beaten over the head in the face of claims by these economic illiterates that they are knowledgeable in the most complicated transmission mechanisms?|
|5.||And nowhere among all the propagandistic sayings, gobbledygook and drop-dead statements is a single clause or phrase to indicate that the representatives of the system presented here have an inkling of understanding for the criticism and rejection of a regime of immigration that at last count was bringing as many as 80,000 per year into the country. This immigration regime does not merely evoke “diffuse fears,” but has a number of serious and specific consequences. The direction and dimension of these consequences have not been the subject of political discussion, let alone a democratic decision process in one single European country. The incompatibility of Islam with our extant culture, the step-by-step decline of our cultural capital and educational standards, the rising crime rate, increase of spiritual and psychic illnesses, the overloading of social systems and the spread of poverty are real and thoroughly documented facts. Where in all this is a single word of regret or concern? Instead, we get the totalitarian attitude, the concept of mass immigration and all the means and the intent to push through the related model of the multicultural society. Ominously, the decision of an absolute majority of the Swiss — perceived as the product of a confederacy of good hearts and dull populism — has come to pass against the wishes of the entire establishment of the (media-facilitated) consciousness-raising industry, which has nimbly thrown a net of disinformation over the populace. This is an expression of a shocking narrow-mindedness and aloofness in the nomenklatura functionaries who have over time lost all contact with reality and the needs of human beings. The system they support has long since lost any claim to legitimacy.|
|6.||The recitations of the apparatchiks quoted here are representative of the morbid condition of partisan democracy, overgrown by the continental transformations wrought by the EU superstate. This system is characterized by the utter avoidance of discourse, by the imposition of speech bans and regulations and thought controls and by the enforcement of large, societal projects against the definitive wishes of the majority population (de-Christianization; multiculturalization, genderization and homosexualization of society; establishment of trans-continental mechanisms for redistribution; decoupling of capital value and asset value by means of a failed European monetary regime; territorial expansion and competence-optional deepening of “European integration”). So what justifies our calling this system democracy or a nation of laws?
If the evidence noted is not in error, our national-political direction is toward a very dangerous situation. When the extensively eroded legitimacy of the community combines with the aggressive results of economic decline one or the other truly threatening scenario can be realized. Are we ready for that?
On February 14, 2014, Herbert Vytiska wrote: