The Party is Always Right

The DDR, more commonly known as East Germany, did not die in the fall of 1989. The Communist nomenklatura were simply absorbed into the political ecology of the German Federal Republic, and their ideological heritage eventually became dominant throughout Germany.

At least that’s the way it seems. The following video is emblematic of the DDR-ization of a country that was once considered a beacon of freedom in Central Europe.

Translated from the notes accompanying the video:

Migration-critical interview triggers meltdown at MDR [Central German Broadcasting]
Moderator Katrin Huß Tells About Her Experience With Censorship

Katrin Huß, who has been a moderator at WDR [West German Broadcasting] since 1995, conducted an interview in January 2016 with the psychoanalyst Hans-Joachim Maaz, who critically commented on the uncontrolled influx of “refugees”. The video above contains a brief excerpt from the interview, and then Katrin Huss telling what was going on behind the scenes at the MDR. During an interview at NouViso Talk she described how she felt as if she had return to the DDR and the lyrics of “The Party Song” came to her mind.

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

For your further delectation, the following video has “The Party Song” with subtitles in German and English:

MissPiggy elaborates:

The “Song of the Party” (German: Das Lied der Partei), also known as “Die Partei hat immer recht” (English: “The Party is always right”) was the party song of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany, the ruling party of East Germany. It was written by the composer Louis Fürnberg. It is best known by the first line of its chorus: Die Partei, die Partei, die hat immer recht (English: The Party, the Party, is always right).

Video transcript:

00:01   The crucial difference is allowing unlimited migration, which I don’t think is good,
00:07   in which an unlimited number of refugees come who destabilise the entire system.
00:14   This would destroy social cohesion and social relations.
00:22   A social system like ours cannot function with open borders, because everyone will want
00:28   to come here to get something. Which makes sense, but it won’t work.
00:33   We are creating conflicts through this kind of policy. Our exceptional conditions will become
00:40   such a burden that it will break and won’t function any longer. All the energy used during this
00:48   “welcoming culture” and all the billion of Euros that are needed could have been used to create
00:56   economic fairness in this world which would naturally sustained these people far better in their
01:01   own countries and be used to reduce poverty. That would be the necessary changes as far as
01:06   I am concerned. Unfortunately, I’m afraid that’s not going happen.
01:12   Normally during an interview I usually contribute by sharing my own opinion,
01:15   but this time I purposefully didn’t do so. I just let him speak. Following the show, the telephones
01:22   must have been ringing off the hook. Facebook was full of comments like,
01:25   “Wow, great! What’s going on at MDR? Finally someone is allowed to speak the truth!”
01:29   and “Maybe you’re not the lying press. Great!”. Then I thought to myself,
01:32   “Well, I did let him speak his mind. Who knows what’s going to happen now?” After that I went to
01:38   the newsroom and the managing editor was just hanging up the phone with a totally red face.
01:42   So I said, “What did you think of the interview?” He screamed, “Leave me alone;
01:46   I’ve got to go home!” I thought to myself, “Oh my gosh, what happened?” So the next day,
01:51   there was a meeting. I came thinking that I would get a serious reprimand. There were
01:57   around 40 people sitting around in the editor’s conference room. 35 of them were looking down
02:03   and the rest were looking at me. I knew there were on my side, but they didn’t say a word.
02:08   So about five people just started to rant at me. “How could you do such a thing? How could you just
02:13   let him speak so long?! You are supposed to interrupt with the MDR agenda!”
02:17   I just thought to myself: What do they expect? I was just doing an interview. We were getting
02:23   such a positive viewer response. So the ranting just continued for twenty minutes, and then
02:28   I finally said what I wanted to say. I was able to endure quite a bit, but at some point
02:32   I also become loud. I said to them, “Listen up, I am a journalist and not an opinion-maker.
02:36   If you wanted to have a debate, then we should have invited someone with a contrary opinion.
02:42   I need to remain neutral. It was you who invited him, and you knew who he is.”
02:47   The ranting continued, but at some point it had to end because I needed to do the next show
02:52   that day. I moderated the show until the end of the week. Then on Friday, after my shift,
02:59   I was escorted by the secretary of the director to his office. We also had a discussion.
03:06   He said to me, “So, Katrin, Dr. Maaz is over 70 years-old. You know, he’s a bit off and
03:14   we can’t really take anything he says seriously anymore.” I though to myself: Has he gone nuts?
03:20   We shouldn’t talk about our guest this way. So I responded to him like a little girl, saying,
03:24   “Well, we had great ratings and a huge viewer response saying the show was good.”
03:29   Then he says, “We got negative ones as well!” So I asked to read the other emails
03:34   from those viewers and he refused saying, “I don’t have to show you anything!” I said OK,
03:39   but continued to resist until my boss said, “You are responsible for what guests say on your show
03:51   and must intervene politically in the interest of the MDR.” So then I stood up and told him
03:58   I would get the written concept for the show. In the hallway on the way to the elevator the lyrics
04:02   from the Party Song came to mind: “The Party, The Party, it is always right!”
04:06   Somehow the entire situation reminded me of the time in the DDR. After getting my interview
04:11   concept I presented it to him. I showed him the questions that were approved by the
04:16   editorial department and used during the show. No one suggested to more scrutiny or
04:20   anything else. The conversation seemed to never end, but then I was told to come back in
04:28   Three weeks. At that time, there would be a meeting with the editorial department as well to discuss
04:35   their role in all of this. So I left and was shaking. It still makes me upset and very emotional.
04:45   At that moment, I completely lost faith in my profession. It made no sense. I did a good
04:49   interview. The viewers accepted it. Then my editorial department puts me in the crosshairs.
04:55   What is going on? Someone higher up was knocking heads together, which led to their
04:59   passing it on to me. They needed to find a guilty party for the lousy interview that I conducted.

20 thoughts on “The Party is Always Right

    • At first, I thought that it was a parody, then I realized that… it’s real!
      The Party Song is real. Ouch.

      Now, if someone can please tell me, the Justin Trudeau calendars (printed in China!), are they meant as a joke, or are they meant for fans? I’ve never been able to figure that one out, either.

  1. What is it with a certain percentage of Germans that they believe in totalitarian governments?

  2. The song’s tune is a bit catchy, I think. I wish I could roll my ‘r’s like that. I’ve only ever achieved it once in my life and that was entirely by accident.

    I thought a couple of the scenes in the clip looked like they were from downtown Leipzig.

  3. Twice in the last century Germany, acting from the right, brought Europe to the brink of destruction. Now, early in this century, Germany, acting from the left, is bringing Europe to the brink of destruction again, but this time there will likely be no saving it.

    • I’m not trying to be overly picky here, but too many people still seem to labor under the impression that Hitler and the Nazis were right wing, politically: they were not. Nazi meant “National socialists”; though he hated Stalin and eventually went to war with the USSR his political views were actually rather close to those of Stalin: for instance, he believed in the power of the State (as a good Leftist is wont to do) and that consequently, the individual was essentially valueless.

    • From the right?

      His party was the National Socialist German’s Worker Party. Take out the word German and Obama or Clinton would have joined in 5 seconds. Bill and Barry Sotero would have joined after their respective heads of household.

  4. Your introductory remarks were spot on, Baron. The Communists didn’t disappear, or retire gracefully to the sidelines. They just stopped calling themselves Communists.

    I’ve been convinced for a long, long time that the glasnost and perestroika nonsense were simply the latest ploy in the biggest disinformation campaign of all time.

    • A ploy? May very well have been so – but somehow went out of control I think.

      Why I see it this way? – countries of the former Eastern and Central Europe, for decades vassals of the Soviet Empire, ascended to full democracies and as of now are actually bastions of the Western values – values that are disappearing in the Western Europe by the month.

      But you brought up an interesting point regardless … I never thought about it from such a “conspiracy” viewpoint.

      • But is it ‘out of control’ ?

        There is SO much that could be written on that … but space here does not permit.

        I am a great admirer of the ‘vassal states’ you refer to, and suggest that it is precisely because they had first hand experience of living under the jackboot that they ‘know the enemy,’ and are now the most courageous opponents, and the least likely to be duped : they’re not falling for the propaganda – they’ve heard it all before.

        They are also the nations on the periphery of Europe, the Schengen border countries, and still have in their national historical memories the experience of being on the frontlines against Islamic invasions. So no sympathy for the globalist’s baloney there, either.

        But these countries are not the nerve centers. Moscow, Brussels, London and New York (and perhaps Beijing, and Riyadh) are where the action is. The EU and the UN. The WTO, IMF, etc.

        Virtually every time the Soviet Union got into disastrous economic straits, from 1917 onwards, it pretended to ‘reform,’ and ‘moderate,’ … and was bailed out, by the West. With the ‘collapse’ of thirty years ago Western capital, and ‘capitalism’ came flooding in. All the Western useful idiots at lower levels migrated seamlessly and effortlessy into the ‘Green’ movement. (See esp. Prof. Antony Sutton’s “National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union,” a 1-volume summary of his massive 3-volume, 1500 page “Western Aid and Soviet Technological Development.” Also Prof. Carrol Quigley’s “Tragedy and Hope.” And of course Diana West’s more recent book, “American Betrayal.”)

        Virtually everything the much-maligned anti-Communists of the 1950s and 60s had warned of was vindicated when much of the Soviet archives became accessible. The globalists very briefly acknowledged that, but carried on as before. Only a tactical tweak or two needed. No need to change the Grand Strategy.

        • Thank you.

          “(See esp. Prof. Antony Sutton’s “National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union,” a 1-volume summary of his massive 3-volume, 1500 page “Western Aid and Soviet Technological Development.”)

          The one volume summary is available as a free PDF download.

  5. I’ve talked to a number of retired counter intelligence types of my acquaintance over the last few years about Merkel.

    From what they’ve been able to get as far as information goes, Merkel’s movement patterns before the Berlin Wall came down were those of an agent runner, and not a Stasi internal security agent runner, but of spies in Western Europe.

    And funnily enough, it was the records of those parts of the Stasi that were concerned with their external operations that weren’t recovered after the Wall went down.

    They got most of the records on the internal operations and low level Stasi types in East Germany, but very, very little on the high level external operatives and nothing on their active agents.

    So Germany have themselves a former Stasi agent runner as Chancellor. Way to go.

    • I appreciate your sharing this information with us.

      My impression is that the actual provinces of the former East Germany are the most resistant to Merkel’s invasion strategy. It was far more difficult to survive in East Germany than West Germany, so the East Germans, although under the totalitarian boot, were actually less inclined to be agreeable.

      This brings up the question to me of whether Merkel is an actual acting agent of someone, or if she simply is employing the tactics of the espionage master to eliminate her opponents and bend the situation to her will. Certainly, the most undisputed generalization about Merkel is, her power does not derive from her brilliant eloquence.

      A bit OT, Hillary expressed admiration for Merkel as a role model, which seems about right. Hillary’s power is derived from her proximity to a real President, while Merkel scratched and kicked to power on her own. Merkel can really eliminate opponents, or even friends who are merely in her way. Hillary is relegated to screaming fits and making life miserable for the military men and security agents unlucky enough to be assigned to her.

      Perhaps Hillary’s real claim to fame is the total destruction of Libya and the rise of ISIS in Syria.

  6. I’ll make the leap and infer that the MDR is a state-supported, state run news operation.

    That makes the bureaucrats totally beholden to politicians and other bureaucrats. The common feature of bureaucrats is, they don’t want a problem as they pursue their tenure on the road to a rich retirement. The communications bureaucracies are funded through tax dollars, given involuntarily, so the actual consumers of their products are irrelevant unless they make enough of a noise that it threatens their position.

    So, it makes perfect sense that the negative emails are more important to the director than all the positive emails. They represent potential trouble.

    It seems to me the executives of the huge mega-broadcasting companies, and the huge technology companies, act more like government bureaucrats than like entrepreneurs. The revenues of Amazon, Google, Twitter, etc are not really going to be affected all that much by unhappy consumers who, nevertheless, flock to “free” services. But, the real negative impacts come from the governments of even third-rate mudholes like Pakistan or the unhappy dictators of China.

    Anyway, the psychoanalyst himself didn’t have a whole lot to say that was original. Psychoanalysts, on the whole, are vastly overpaid and overrated. Milton Friedman probably 70 years ago observed that you can have a welfare state or an open immigration state, but not both.

    Plus, Maaz had the brilliant idea of taking billions of Euros from Germans and shoveling it into third world countries to create prosperity. I suppose it never occurred to him to leave it with the people who earned it and if they choose to send it to sub-Saharan countries, well and good.

    We are creating conflicts through this kind of policy. Our exceptional conditions will become such a burden that it will break and won’t function any longer. All the energy used during this “welcoming culture” and all the billion of Euros that are needed could have been used to create economic fairness in this world which would naturally sustained these people far better in their own countries and be used to reduce poverty . That would be the necessary changes as far as I am concerned. 

    Again, if a psychoanalyst ever bothered to research any ideas outside his own field, he would see that actual economists studying the third world know that foreign aid devastates the local economy by undercutting the local farmers, craftsmen, and businessmen.

    • In your opening assessment of the MDR I caught myself thinking : “Wait a minute, is RonaldB describing the German MDR, or Canada’s CBC … ?”

      • Both.

        I was just guessing, but MDR is part of the public broadcasting network, financed by mandatory license fees collected from each household (taxes in other words). You can’t get much more state-supported, state run, than that.

        I would be surprised if a government run by a (former?) Stasi intelligence agent (spy) would tolerate much of an independent voice in German communication media.

Comments are closed.