A Tongue-Lashing for the Gutmenschen

The following video was broadcast by Norddeutscher Rundfunk, the state TV service in northern Germany. I was surprised that they let this benighted WAYCIST voice his views on the air. Maybe they showed the footage as an object lesson to their viewers: “See, this is what an awful, intolerant xenophobe looks like!”

I wonder if airing it had the intended effect…

Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

00:00   Precisely when we are to do an interview with both of them: he — a refugee from Lebanon;
00:05   she is a refugee-helper, this situation develops:
00:10   There are two, one of whom will start college soon, and the other is learning a trade, and
00:15   they are… OK. —And the others go around stabbing people. —I’m sorry?
00:20   And the others go around stabbing people. They are all [college] students; they are all
00:25   studying, very nice. —Both are studying… —Yes, accidentally. Yes, probably the majority there.
00:30   It’s the majority, probably. Probably the supposed majority.
00:35   Yes, I have already lived through a drama in another grocery store. Don’t tell me that
00:40   this time alone it escalated. Don’t tell me that it was the first incident. It’s not. It has only
00:46   escalated. I myself lived through a drama in Räder [store] where the police had to intervene.
00:50   But that’s what the do-gooders don’t hear. That’s the problem.
00:55   …problem… it will… everything… —It will now be a little more difficult
00:58   in Burgwedel for the narcissists to continue
01:01   as conspicuous do-gooders: for themselves or for society. It’ll now be a little more difficult.
01:05   The atmosphere has changed a little already, and will continue changing.
01:10   Are you against accepting refugees? —No, nobody said that. —But that’s how I understand you now.
01:15   No, nobody said that: you’ve interpreted it totally wrong.

12 thoughts on “A Tongue-Lashing for the Gutmenschen

  1. We see here again the stereotypical constellation of aging white woman and much younger African or West Asian male: the pernicious but sad combination of two strong female drives, mothering and sex.

    But maybe the woman in the video is the exception to the rule and is married to a Green Protestant pastor and hence has two strong sons active in virtuously exorcising the Spirit of Germany 1933-45 by bashing and kicking elderly female AfD members in 2018 on their way to a party meeting (irony:off).

    It is concerning and sobering that the German man defensively accepts her hyperbolic use of the word “refugee” (Flüchtling) to describe the hundreds of thousands of country-shopping chancers, adventurers and mere welfare migrants. After all, even senior men in the EU commission, I believe it was Timmermann in 2017, have described 70% of all migrants to EU as welfare migrants.

    Sobering because years of State propaganda have destroyed any awareness on a broad front in Germany of the legal difference between a migrant, legal and illegal and both, and a bona fide refugee.

    Sobering because recently the legal service of Bundestag wrote that Merkel’s action on 4.9.2015 has no basis in law.

    Hence millions of Germans who voted for decades for a party that preached the rule of law/der Rechtsstaat now continue to vote for that same party, CDU, that is utterly outside the law.

    An answer to the woman might instead have been: “Look, a million young men under 35 with no families and many knives are not refugees, they are welfare migrants so quit your lying sanctimonious attack on the safety and happiness of German women and girls especially.”

    • I got the impression the woman was trying to set him up for criminal hate-crime charges, and he was smart enough to avoid the trap. She asked “are you against accepting refugees?” and he said “I never said anything like that.”

      You have to be smart with your words when you live in a totalitarian, thought-controlled police state like Germany. The upside is that with a bit of care, you can get your meaning across and not speak directly of the forbidden topic. I think in Soviet Russia, they called it Aesopian speak, named after Aesop, the teller of morality tales who hid commentary on his society within tales of animals. A Soviet writer would write long tales or commentary on some mythical or past society, and everyone knew what he was really talking about. Actually, you can produce some really good literature in that genre: look at Animal Farm.

      • “The upside is that with a bit of care, you can get your meaning across and not speak directly of the forbidden topic.” Yes! This is a very important point – with a bit of intelligence you can say whatever you want and not be inhibited by the hate-speech legislation.

      • Ronald, thank you for bringing up Aesop Fables. I was just telling one of them to my daughter ( she is 21, but hasn’t heard them all yet) the other day- the one about vanity/flattery : the Fox and the Crow. I was reminding her, that the invaders are not always clearly aggressive and brutal, but that they sometimes use flattery to get what they want; so I told her to beware.

      • @RonaldB: your hyperbole is understandable but unhelpful.

        Germany is not yet totalitarian and thought-controlled if one takes the legal framework as yardstick , else Henryk M Broder, Achse des Guten, PI News, AfD attacks on Merkel in the Bundestag, and street demos would be illegal and punishable and/or blocked as websites, as in e.g. China.

        Second, I may be wrong but looking at the definition of Volkverhetzung/ethnic incitement in the German Criminal Code I do not see grounds for, and cannot recall prosecution for the bald statement of wanting to stop receiving “refugees”. That will be because the element of incitement is lacking.

        However, it is true that in Austria local politician was convicted for referring to a tsunami of Muslims in her election campaign and when she appealed the conviction the higher court expressly noted that the appeal rejection was because of the word tsunami.

        • Let us agree we can have cordial disagreements. I appreciate your calling me out on details, for details matter.

          That said, I did a quick google on German hate speech laws and what I found did not change my opinion much.

          It’s true the Volkverhetzung laws affect social media and don’t seem to impose criminal penalties for individual speech. Of course, this means no one has the ability to present his opinions outside of those literally within speaking range. Also, since the average German citizen is not a lawyer, and sees vicious penalties against social media that carry anything termed “hate speech” (which could include exactly what the gentleman ways saying), it is not a stretch to imagine a citizen being afraid of the police knocking at his door.

          All in all, I see nothing to change my opinion that Germany is becoming a totalitarian state. An opposition party and press is allowed, as long as they are not too specific in their complaints about the issue of the century: immigration. And let’s not forget that any totalitarian state tolerates violent street gangs, like Antifa, that operate outside the law, with the complicity of the government, and give the government deniability on using violence to shut down opposition views.

          But again, do not interpret this as any displeasure with your facts against my argument. If I get Germany wrong, I deserve to be corrected.

  2. “…the legal service of Bundestag wrote that Merkel’s action on 4.9.2015 has no basis in law.

    Hence millions of Germans who voted for decades for a party that preached the rule of law/der Rechtsstaat now continue to vote for that same party, CDU, that is utterly outside the law.”

    How many really do vote for that party? There is a serious disconnect between election results and opinions expressed in polls – one that is difficult to make sense of unless one considers the possibility that elections are fiddled. I mean, the establishment fiddles everything else, why not elections too?

  3. Baron,
    the wording ” state tv service ” might suggest that there is such a thing as state run tv, which is not the case. The nwdr, nowadays wdr an ndr, was founded in 1945 after the model of the BBC , had the finest journalists I remember, and still are democratically controled by a board formed and staffed by public organisms such as ( and here comes the bad news) parties, churches, trade unions, persons from academia and schooling , the standard hothouse of Gutmenschen breed.

  4. “Are you against accepting refugees”? Typical leftist, do-gooder, virtue-signaling, narcissist, sanctimonious, one-upping, supremacist,[all-purpose derogatory redacted for incivility] question.

  5. How could this bubble-brained idiot even ask that question? OF COURSE he’s against taking refugees!! As you should be also!! Because they’re not refugees!! And they’re destroying your country!! Inane! [redacted]! For God’s sake! What’s the point of “doing good” if you destroy your country in the process!!

Comments are closed.