Hans Georg Maaßen: This is Not a Coincidence, But a Planned Action

The following video features a lengthy interview with Dr. Hans Georg Maaßen by the Austrian journalist Marie Christine Giuliani for FPÖ TV.

Dr. Maaßen is the former head of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution in Germany (see previous posts: #1, #2, #3, #4). He is now a co-founder and president of the Values Union (WerteUnion), a non-profit organization whose motto is “Freiheit statt Sozialismus” (“Freedom instead of Socialism”).

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Time to Take Off the Rose-Colored Glasses

The two videos below discuss the remarks made by a former French intelligence agent, who has sparked a controversy with his statements about the inevitable Islamization of France, and all of Europe.

RAIR Foundation provides this background for the videos:

Former DGSE (General Directorate for External Security) agent Pierre Martinet, who served in a specialized French intelligence agency, delivered a chilling warning about the impending Islamic threat to Europe in an interview on the Les Bâtisseurs podcast.

Martinet, a veteran of the 3rd Marine Infantry Parachute Regiment (3e RPIMa), foresees a terrifying future where Europe faces complete Islamization within the next 50-70 years. The portion of the interview presented below unravels the profound ideological threat posed by Islam, particularly the role of the Muslim Brotherhood, in the unsettling transformation of Europe. Watch the video, which has been translated into English by RAIR Foundation USA, to gain a deep understanding of this alarming prediction and the urgent threat it raises.

Many thanks to HeHa for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling.

The first video shows excerpts from the TV interview Mr. Martinet:

center>

The second video features a panel discussion on the topic from French television:

Video transcript #1:

Continue reading

Islam: Abolition of Civilisation

After an extended sabbatical, our Indian correspondent The Kafir returns with an overview of the civilization-destroying ideology that is Islam.

Islam: Abolition of Civilisation

by The Kafir

“Moreover, whatever may be the respective crimes, virtues and deserts of various races, classes and nations, civilized society requires a certain rule and order to hold back from the edge of anarchic savagery where it is always precariously poised. Human beings must have at least a minimum security in life and property, must be able to move through the streets and between the cities, must accept certain common rules in their mutual inter-course, or civilization does not exist. If this necessary order is subverted, the civilization is destroyed, whether the subversion take place from the best or worst of motives, whether or not it is in some supposedly moral sense justified, whether it is carried out by saints or devils. At some point the guardians of a civilization must be prepared to draw the line.” — James Burnham (Suicide of The West, page 227 [Kindle edition])

Human perception is a very strange thing. Man’s mind may have perceived everything needed to visit the moon. But sometimes it may fail to see the most obvious, glaring thing, not for a few moments or days, but for centuries.

What exactly is Islam? A man born in the Arabian city of Mecca around 1400 years ago claimed that he had been contacted by the God who created this world, had been given a book, and had been commanded to preach that man should worship only that God, in formlessness. So far so good.

Each of us believes so many claims by our fellow men. Men are totally free to believe this man also. They are fully entitled to believe that he was a messenger of God, and should worship God the way he said He should be worshipped. There is no problem so far. The world will go about its business, some nations will have good rulers and hence will be rich, others which have not so good rulers will remain poor. There will be aid for the starving.

But that man said something else also. He said that his fellow men had no choice in the matter. They Must either believe that he was a messenger of God, and worship the way he said, or they ‘will have no security in life and property, will not be able to move safely through the streets and between the cities, and his followers are bound by no rules in their mutual intercourse with non-believers.’ (James Burnham paraphrased) That is, he abolished Civilisation. He abolished the moral laws that make Civilisation possible. (Qur’an 8.39, 9.5, 9.29 and hadith Bukhari 1.2.24).

Kafirs have made mistakes in their response to him from the very first day he proclaimed his mission. They did not figure out his true intentions, and they did not even translate his words properly. For example, jihad.

Jihad is variously translated as Holy War, warfare, or just war. But in a war, an army comes, challenges the army of the target country, the two armies fight, and the victorious army gains possession of the country. People start paying taxes to the new government. This is a war. The only way of war between the civilised countries.

Does this happen in jihad? No. From the very first “battle” the Muslims fought, jihad means something else entirely. In jihad, you can attack trade caravans, you can kill non-combatants, you can simply attack a home/village, kill all the men, rape women and sex-enslave them, and enslave children and trade them around like goods; and loot the goods of household. This is sanctioned in the Qur’an, this is sanctioned by the examples of early Muslims, this is sanctioned in hundreds of hadith, and there are whole chapters of sharia manuals devoted to detailing this. The only condition is that you have to share 20% of the looted women, children and goods with the leader of the moment, the Imam/Caliph/Amir.

Does it all sound like a war? This is actually dacoity.

Merriam Webster defines dacoity as “robbery by dacoits — now used in the Indian penal code of robbery by an armed gang of not less than five men” Dacoity is word taken into English from India. The synonym is robbery/loot. The same dictionary defines robbery as “larceny from the person or presence of another by violence or threat.” So the correct translation of jihad is dacoity/robbery. The man made dacoity/robbery lawful against those who did not believe him. He made dacoity/robbery a religious duty.*

And civilisations died. Wherever his followers went, the places they seized, civilisations died. Baghdad or Cordoba are paraded around as examples of Islamic civilisation. That is, Islam is claimed to have established civilisation of its own kind after it has conquered a non-Islamic civilisation. But what are the creations of Baghdad or Cordoba except some translations of Indian/Persian/ Greek texts? Any literature, science, architecture, paintings, roads, canals, dance forms, music, universities? Anything that we take as achievements of a civilisation? In reality, every Muslim kingdom meant only one thing: regular raids on the kafir villages and cities, the killing of men, the looting of women, children and household goods. That is, dacoity.

Continue reading

Creeping Sharia in the Schools of North Rhine-Westphalia

Many thanks to Gary Fouse for translating this article from the public broadcaster Westdeutscher Rundfunk:

NRW [North Rhine-Westphalia] school committee debates sharia incident at Neuss school

January 17, 2024

The sharia incident in Neuss landed the school committee in the state parliament today. Pupils in one school reportedly have demanded strict Islamic rules.

by Benjamin Sartory

“Radicalism and extremism have no place in our school,” said NRW School Minister Dorothee Feller (CDU) at the start of the school committee session. The AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany) had requested a current update on the incidents in a Neuss school. Several pupils reportedly demanded strict Islamic rules there, including segregation of genders in class.

Pupils in Neuss wanted gender segregation

Reporting for the state government was the school crisis official within the School Ministry, Martin Oppermann. Accordingly, three of the four high school students contacted teachers last spring and showed “interest in a stricter interpretation of Islam”. In the school’s view, “statements critical of the state” were made, so they called in the police.

In a “creeping process”, the pupils then somehow tried to influence other pupils in their religious practice and create gender segregation. The school then took measures within the school, including, for example, providing information and the strengthening of students and teachers. In addition, the Ministry authorities were informed.

However, from the point of view of the Neuss school, associating the behavior of the pupils with the term, “sharia police” in no way affects the facts. Basically, the school feels it has been falsely presented publicly and they actually believe they are a functioning community.

State Security called in due to sharia pupils

Christian Blex (AfD) found the statements insufficient. He would have liked to know more about what exactly happened in the school, and also asked questions about the consequences for the pupils. “Was there at least a written reprimand?” Oppermann answered that one of the pupils was suspended from classes for one week.

“Every extremist is garbage,” said Franziska Mueller-Rech (FDP). However, she warned against exaggerating the incident. She doesn’t recognize a nationwide danger to the schools.

Dilek Engin (SPD) demanded that the school ministry cooperate more closely with the extremist prevention program “Guidepost”. The Neuss school finally addressed this. This program, incidentally, has had more to do lately, the state interior ministry said today.

Continue reading

Those High-Maintenance Migrants

It’s widely accepted that “migrants” are a net financial drain on any Western nation that decides to import them en masse. The following article reports on the research conducted by a German economist in an effort to quantify the amount of money lost due to all the cultural enrichment.

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from Junge Freiheit. The translator’s comments are in square brackets.

Note: the translator has also appended some interesting and useful material at the end of this translation:

Raffelhüschen: Immigration costs €5.8 trillion

The pension and social expert Raffelhüschen calculates the overall economic price of immigration. He dispels a myth, and describes migration policy as “dumb as straw”.

Berlin

The economist Bernd Raffelhüschen has presented a calculation of how expensive immigration is for the German population. Accordingly, mass migration creates an overall economic hole of €5,800,000,000,000 — in short, €5.8 trillion. [I’d love to know how much of that money has ended — and is still ending up — in the offshore accounts of the political “migration” mafia?]

The Freiburg professor dispelled the myth, promoted by all established parties, that immigration saves pension and social security funds. According to Raffelhüschen, there is already a large gap in the aging German society between what employers and employees pay in taxes, nursing care, pension and health insurance contributions and what they will be paid out in the future, says Raffelhüschen.

According to the expert, this “sustainability gap” will grow to €19.2 trillion if Germany continues to accept 300,000 foreigners annually. On the other hand, if we no longer allowed migrants into the country, the number would only be €13.4 trillion. Immigration increases the hole by €5.8 trillion. Raffelhüschen: “That is the price of immigration in our current system.”

Raffelhüschen: Foreigners pay little

On average, migrants would need six years to integrate into the German labor market. During this time they have scarcely paid anything into the social system. But even after that, according to his study, which he prepared for the Market Economy Foundation, things will hardly get any better. Because they earned significantly less than their German colleagues due to a lack of qualifications. As a result, they also paid fewer taxes and duties. However, they received the same sickness, nursing and pension benefits.

Raffelhüschen explained: “Although the age structure of migrants potentially has a demographic rejuvenation dividend, this does not lead to a positive fiscal balance of migration in any of the scenarios considered.”

To illustrate his results, Raffelhüschen chose an example: “An asylum seeker comes to Germany at the age of 26, is rejected after two to three years, but remains here with tolerance. Then he gradually begins his first jobs, gets qualified and, at the age of 35, begins a career as a tax and contribution payer. Because his pension entitlement is low, he receives basic security as a pensioner — for which his contributions would never have been enough.”

Even skilled immigration brings a loss

The 66-year-old scientist, who once advised the federal government in the so-called “Rürup Commission,” said: “It doesn’t pay off. This is all far too expensive.” This year alone, the federal government is making almost €50 billion available in its budget for migration — not including the costs to the social system.

Raffelhüschen has calculated that even with an additional immigration of 100,000 trained skilled workers per year, Germany would still show a loss. The “sustainability gap” would then still be €14.2 trillion — and therefore €800 billion above the financing burden without any immigration.

Raffelhüschen found clear words for the migration policy pursued so far by both the Merkel and now Scholz governments: “If we carry on as before, we are dumb as straw!”

Afterword from the translator:

Continue reading

Deviant Opinions About Sexual Deviants Are Forbidden

If you’re in Germany and hold unapproved opinions about deviants and perverts, you’d best keep them to yourself.

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from Apollo News:

“Incitement to hatred”: Trans-critical blogger targeted by police

The blogger Rona Duwe was summoned for identification and must face an investigation for “sedition” — all because the 53-year-old made critical comments about the transgender hype and the Self-Determination Act. Duwe is certain: she is to be “silenced”.

“Incitement to hatred” — Because of this accusation, the Dortmund police are conducting an investigation against the blogger Rona Duwe. And that was probably only because the 53-year-old had made critical comments about the transgender hype and the planned self-determination law on platforms such as X (formerly Twitter). For Duwe, this is an obvious “attempt to intimidate”.

On November 5, 2023, the mother of two and graphic designer received a letter from the police summoning her for an “identification procedure for preventive law-enforcement reasons”. She is accused of equating “transitioning people” and people with pedophilic tendencies and spreading negative comments about an association for trans and intersexual people.

Her lawyer, Roman Lammers, emphasizes that there is no legal basis for the summons because Duwe operates under her real name on the Internet and expresses her opinion openly. Duwe sees herself as the target of a political campaign to silence her. She argues that the identification subpoena is an attempt to intimidate. “I’m to be silenced because some people don’t like my opinion,” the blogger told Die Welt.

From November 2021 to May 2023, several investigations are said to have been conducted against Duwe — without the blogger, who has been “controversial” for years because of her critical views, knowing about it. Although she was informed about various complaints from trans activists, she was not informed of any investigations.

Duwe’s lawyer therefore contacted the police to clarify the matter, but according to Die Welt, he has not yet been able to access the files. Duwe’s only option now is to file a lawsuit against the identification process before the Gelsenkirchen Administrative Court.

Afterword from the translator:

Continue reading

AfD Supporters Must Be Silenced

As the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany) grows more and more popular, the German political establishment is becoming increasingly alarmed, in much the same way that the Deep State in the USA views the popularity of Donald Trump with growing dismay.

The solution, of course, is to crack down on AfD supporters who voice their opinions on social media.

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from Apollo News. The translator’s comments are in square brackets:

Kretschmer calls for restrictions on “new media” due to high AfD polls

Current surveys show the AfD in Saxony with 37%, ahead of the Union [CDU (national) + CSU (Bavarian)]. The incumbent CDU Minister-President Michael Kretschmer sees social media as a reason for this and is therefore calling for strict regulation of the “new media”.

The latest survey results from Saxony have caused a stir in the political landscape in Germany. With 37%, the AfD would currently be the strongest force there — even ahead of the CDU. A great danger for the incumbent Minister-President Michael Kretschmer. At a New Year’s reception on Friday, the CDU politician blamed social media, among other things, for the Alternative for Germany’s current rise. [And I’m pretty sure that he would’ve blamed the Printing Press 500+ years ago, since it’s never their own fault that people turn away from them and their LIES.]

“We do not yet have an enlightened approach to these new media,” explained Kretschmer in a speech to the Saxony Industry Club. Kretschmer sees an explanation for this in the fact that many people in Saxony no longer regularly read daily newspapers, but rather get their information via social media. He calls for stronger regulation of the “new media”. [That’s funny, the propagators of darkness calling for enlightenment. I guess that’s going to be by striking a “lucifer” and lighting the faggots for an Auto da Fe with freedom at the stake.]

CDU is preparing for state elections

The AfD’s current poll numbers should be taken “seriously,” but the situation could still be changed, explained Kretschmer. Elections will take place in Saxony in September. The tone of all parties is becoming more tense. On Friday evening, during a closed meeting in Bad Schandau, the CDU state executive committee agreed on a proposal for the state list for the state elections on September 1st. Accordingly, Minister-President and party leader Michael Kretschmer will run as the top candidate in first place on the list.

The other places planned are Culture and Tourism Minister Barbara Klepsch, Secretary General Alexander Dierks, state parliament member Susan Leithoff, parliamentary group leader Christian Hartmann, as well as state parliament members Ines Saborowski, Georg-Ludwig von Breitenbuch and Sandra Gockel. Also on the list is Minister of Education Christian Piwarz. Oliver Schenk, head of the State Chancellery, was nominated as the Saxon CDU’s top candidate for the EU elections.

The final confirmation of the CDU lists for the state elections and the European elections is to take place at a representative meeting on January 20th in Dresden. There is a possibility that there will be opposing candidacies for some places on the list.

Afterword from the translator:

Continue reading

“Democracy Completely Contradicts Islam”

In the following video, an estimable “Frenchman” of the Islamic persuasion discusses the incompatibility of Islam with secular institutions, especially the institution of democratic governance.

Many thanks to HeHa for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Don’t Call Them Parasites, or You’ll Do Time

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from Apollo News:

Refugees called “parasites” — Twitter user sentenced to three months in prison

Because refugees are “more likely to be parasites,” a man in Baden-Württemberg was given a suspended sentence for incitement to hatred. The process seems dubious.

A 50-year-old man from Heinstetten in Baden-Württemberg wrote on Twitter (now X) on November 15, 2022: “Refugees and displaced people are probably more like parasites.” The public prosecutor’s office then began investigations into sedition. In doing so, the accused is said to have disturbed the public peace, violated people’s human dignity and made them contemptuous.

The case has now been heard at the Albstadt district court. The court found the man guilty of sedition and, at the request of the public prosecutor, imposed a three-month prison sentence, which was then suspended. In addition, the man, who says he is currently unemployed, has to donate €1,500 to a charitable organization.

The man pleaded innocent in court. “I’m innocent,” he said, as the Südwest Presse reported, “you post a lot, right?” He wasn’t aware that anyone could see this post. And: “That was satire. For me, that’s freedom of expression.”

The public prosecutor reportedly replied: “So you thought that was OK? This won’t do you any good.” The punishment would only increase, as three months in prison would be the minimum sentence for sedition. The defendant then said: “Then I withdraw the objection.”

This seems very dubious: such a minimum sentence only refers to a part of the sedition paragraph, which is about “disturbing public peace.” Other forms of sedition can also be punished with fines. To what extent a tweet by a non-prominent person against “parasites” is supposed to endanger public peace is a mystery. But the defendant withdrew his objection because of this statement, apparently out of fear of receiving an even more severe sentence. However, this concern seems completely misplaced.

Afterword from the translator:

Continue reading

A Green Holodomor for Germany?

The “climate crisis” provides a useful pretext for the oligarchs that rule over us, justifying interference with our daily lives down to the finest details — what we eat, what we wear, what we drive, where we live, and, most importantly, how much of each of these things we do. Saving the planet requires sacrifices on our part, and we are assured that will be brought to heel in service of this noble purpose.

The Green party in Germany is in the vanguard of the Western push to impoverish ordinary people in order to accomplish environmental goals. And, since the Greens are part of the current governing coalition, they are now in a position to impose their will on German citizens.

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from the online news portal Nius:

Is the next bureaucracy monster coming? Greens demand “Resource Protection Act”

The Greens believe that Germany consumes too many raw materials. And that’s why they’re calling for a “resource protection law”. Is the next bureaucratic monster already lurking here?

The environmental policy spokesman for the Green parliamentary group, Jan-Niclas Gesenhues, called for a “resource protection law” on Thursday. The reason for this: Germans live well above their “ecological standards”.

“We need a resource protection law at the federal level in order to legally limit and reduce resource consumption in Germany,” said the member of the Bundestag in an interview with the editorial network Germany. “We live massively beyond our ecological circumstances.”

An environmental levy per ton of material is to be introduced

Germany consumes 16 tons of raw materials per capita every year. Germans would use 340 kg of packaging waste per capita. This would put Germany in second place in Europe. “We have to correct this in order to protect the environment and not burden future generations.” The Green politician called this government intervention a “market economy instrument”.

That is why there should now be binding reduction targets for materials such as gravel or sand by 2030. In addition, there should be an environmental tax per ton of material. Green lobby groups such as BUND have been calling for such a law for years. So far they have not been able to get their demands accepted.

Afterword from the translator:

Continue reading

The Reticence of Adeel Mangi

The following report was posted earlier this month by Sharia TipSheet.

Muslim Judicial Nominee Won’t Answer Questions About Sharia Supremacy and Jihad

The Sharia TipSheet sent questions about sharia supremacy and jihad to Adeel Mangi, the first Muslim to be nominated for a seat on the federal appellate bench. The questions asked about the nominee’s personal beliefs on these matters and other incompatibilities between the U.S. Constitution and sharia law.

The questions were made more urgent by recent revelations the nominee sits on the board of the Alliance of Families for Justice, a left-wing group founded by a domestic terrorist which has campaigned for the release from prison of a half-dozen black nationalists convicted of killing police officers. The nominee has thus given the appearance by virtue of his board membership of condoning violence, which begs the question: Does he also condone jihad violence as a means of achieving Muslim world domination?

The questions were sent in early December to Mangi’s workplace, but there was no response. The TipSheet raised similar issues with regard to the three previous Muslim federal judicial nominees, but no public official — Democrat or Republican — has had the courage to put such questions to the nominees at their confirmation hearings or in questions for the record. Moreover, Mangi was not asked these questions at his confirmation hearing earlier this month, making him possibly the fourth Muslim to skate to the federal bench without the American public knowing whether he personally believes sharia law or the U.S. Constitution is the law of the land.

The TipSheet’s query letter and question set follow:

Questions for Judicial Nominee

To: Adeel Mangi

I publish the Sharia TipSheet at Liberato.US.

You are the fourth Muslim nominated for a federal judgeship.

The American people are entitled to know whether your personal beliefs would prevent you from honoring the oath of office which requires federal judges to perform all duties incumbent upon them under the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

Please answer the questions below. Your responses will be published verbatim in the Sharia TipSheet.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Questions for the Nominee

Given the numerous ways Islamic doctrine conflicts with the U.S. Constitution, the nominee should be asked the following questions:

It has been reported you are a Muslim. While there is no religious test for federal office, the Senate and the American people are entitled to know whether your personal beliefs are compatible or incompatible with U.S. law — law which, if you are confirmed, you will be asked to swear to uphold. As a preliminary question, do you as a Muslim affirm and adhere to Islamic doctrine from the Quran, hadith, and other authoritative Islamic sources?

Islamic doctrine holds that sharia law should be the supreme law of the land throughout the entire world. It further holds that sharia law is divine in origin and thus superior to any human-made law, including the U.S. Constitution. If confirmed, you will be asked to swear an oath you will uphold the U.S. Constitution, which by virtue of its Article VI, is the supreme law of the land. Do you renounce the portions of Islamic doctrine calling for the supremacy of sharia law and the subjugation of all human-made law to sharia law?

Continue reading

The Muslim Brotherhood in Sweden, Part 16

Many thanks to Gary Fouse for translating this article from Fria Tider:

Charges filed against thesis that Sweden is infiltrated by Muslims

December 20, 2023

The thesis “Global political Islam? Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Federation in Sweden” at Lund University is the subject of charges by the controversial Ethics Review Appeals Board (Önep).

In the thesis, which was approved earlier this year by Lund University, Sameh Egyptson writes about the way Islamists tied to the Muslim Brotherhood are infiltrating Swedish society.

He himself describes the 744-page-long study as the result of twenty years of work.

The Ethics Review Appeals Board (Önep), a controversial state board of leftwing activists, has now filed charges against the study. According to Önep, the thesis handles sensitive personal information connected with political and religious beliefs, as well as information concerning criminal court judgments without the necessary ethics review permission.

“I have not used a single interview or secret document; everything comes from open sources,” says Sameh Egyptson himself to Sydsvenskan.

Önep’s attempt to stop politically incorrect studies has drawn attention recently. Earlier this year, over 2,000 researchers signed an open letter to members of Parliament that demanded a change to the Swedish system of so-called ethics review.

Fria Tider has previously written about the way left-wing activists in Önep attempted to have Professor Kristina Sundquist of Lund University convicted of a crime because she researched immigrant rapes. The case ended with the prosecutor dropping the preliminary investigation this past summer.

Prior to this, Önep was reported to JO [Parliamentary Ombudsman] by Academic Rights Watch, which explained the members’ leftwing activist commitment and comical fight against “racism”.

Chairperson Ann-Christine Lindeblad herself, as a member of the judiciary, among other things, handed down a controversial decision in 2019 that made it significantly more difficult to deport convicted immigrant rapists. In the meantime, the 69-year-old was forced out of her position after she was caught shoplifting.

[Fria Tider on X]

2,000 researchers in revolt against politically correct ethics review.
Described as “acute threat” against Swedish science.
Professor threatened with prison after researching immigrant rapes.
May 11, 2023

We Have Ways of Making You Give Up Your Christmas Goodies!

Here’s another example of “Bah Humbug” in Germany, but this time it’s not because of political correctness or Islam. It’s simple bureaucratic overreach by state agencies on behalf of entities that profit from the copyright on a Christmas musical ditty.

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from the online news portal Nius:

Cookie trouble in North Rhine-Westphalia: Kindergartens are no longer allowed to sing “In the Christmas Bakery”

“There are lots of goodies in the Christmas bakery…” These are the words that begin the popular song by Rolf Zuckowski from 1987, which many people probably remember from their own childhood. Otto Waalkes sang it, and many others, too. To this day it is a hit in many kindergartens at Christmas time.

The popular Christmas song is now flying off the song list in two North Rhine-Westphalian daycare centers. But not because it’s suddenly too Christian. The bureaucracy is to blame, or rather — GEMA.

GEMA stands for “Society for Musical Performance and Mechanical Reproduction Rights”. And this GEMA puts a stop to the daycare hit: If the song is rehearsed and sung in front of the parents, this is considered a public performance and the kindergarten has to pay fees. This is what RTL reports. GEMA charges €150 for a public performance. That’s why a daycare center in Münsterland and one in Recke, near the Lower Saxony border, have decided to no longer perform songs that are subject to GEMA.

The CEO of one of the affected daycare centers, Björn Schmitz, explained in an interview with RTL: “It’s not about the amount of the fee, but rather the bureaucratic effort behind it.”

“I would have to pre-register every song we sing”

A piece only becomes officially license-free 70 years after the composer’s death; before that, public performance of the song incurs license fees, which GEMA collects on behalf of the rights-holders. To register via the GEMA online portal, you must specify exactly how long the celebration lasts, how large the area or room is in which the celebration takes place and how many minutes of it will be without music. “I would have to register every song we sing in advance,” explains daycare director Mechthild Ahrens in an interview with RTL. It is not possible to spontaneously start or play a song.

NRW does not have a framework agreement with GEMA

The problem with daycare centers in North Rhine-Westphalia is that this federal state, unlike others, does not have its own framework agreement with GEMA. That’s why every daycare center has to sign a contract itself and pay the fees — or simply forego certain songs. Each song must be registered individually; spontaneous singing performances are not possible. There is also another bureaucratic burden: the facilities have to specify how long the celebration lasts, how large the rooms are and how long music will be played.

Afterword from the translator:

Continue reading

Silenced in Germany

Saying what you think in Modern Multicultural Germany is no longer advisable. At least that’s what ordinary Germans seem to think nowadays, according to a recent survey.

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from the online news portal Nius. The translator’s comments are in square brackets:

Worst level in 70 years: The majority of Germans do not dare to express their political opinions freely

Since 1953, the Allensbach Institute has been asking Germans how free they feel to express their opinions. The results of the latest survey are alarming: never before has the population been so afraid of speaking freely. Only the supporters of a certain party see it completely differently…

Under the traffic light government, fewer and fewer people dare to speak freely. This emerges from the latest “Freedom Index” from the Allensbach Institute for Demoscopy (Public Opinion Research). Every year Allensbach asks: “Do you have the feeling that you can express your political opinion freely in Germany today, or is it better to be cautious?” The two possible answers are: “You can express your opinion freely” or “It is better to be careful.”

The wind has changed

Since 1953, the majority of Germans have said they can express themselves freely. The survey reached its peak in 1971, when 83% of the population said they felt free to express their opinions. But the wind has long since changed. [I’m not surprised by that specific date, since that’s just before those ‘68ers started to infiltrate every aspect of industry, academia and public life.]

This year, 44% say it’s better to be cautious. Only 40% believe they can speak freely — the lowest figure since the survey began in 1953.

[graph]

“Since the fall of the Wall, when 78% of Germans answered this question extremely confidently in 1990, the values have fallen steadily, first with the Schröder government, then under Merkel, only to register their historic low point at the halfway point of the traffic-light government,” the authors of the study write.

Only one party has a majority belief in freedom of expression

The difference between the supporters of different parties is striking. In November of 2023, 62% of AfD supporters were of the opinion that they could no longer speak freely. But the majority of supporters of the FDP (57%), SPD (46%), Left Party (45%) and CDU/CSU (43%) also see it this way.

Only Green Party voters firmly believe that there is unrestricted freedom of expression in Germany. 75% of them say they can speak freely. Only 19% of them think that one cannot freely express one’s political opinion. That is less than half as often as supporters of all other parties.

Continue reading