Sessanta anni di comunismo hanno insegnato ai magiari l’arte di difendersi dalle dittature. Similmente, mille anni di storia culminata nella rivolta del 1956 hanno insegnato al dna ungherese come la libertà la si conquisti con il sangue, ma con il sangue la si mantenga.
La libertà è un bene prezioso di difficile conquista e facilissima perdita.
Se gli attacchi diretti, armati con armi belliche, sono facilmente individuabili, talora sono meno percepibili gli attacchi portati avanti con mezzi subdoli, di non facile identificazione, e che spesso si ammantano di indebito candore.
Le ngo, ong, di Mr Soros sono state un potente quanto subdolo mezzo teso a deprivare la libertà dei popoli.
Costituite con quattro soldi in uno stato compiacente e con finalità filantropiche, sono subito riconosciute e finanziate dalle strutture politiche locali, così da non pesare ulteriormente sulle tasche del fondatore.
Al riconoscimento consegue il conferir loro il ruolo di consulenza nel settore di interesse, prima, diritto ad esprimere pareri vincolanti, dopo. In breve, anche le istituzioni internazionali a conduzione liberal le osannano, le gratificano e le finanziano con pubblico denaro.
Anche se formate da poche decine di persone, le ong sono coralmente considerate essere voce della ‘società civile’: in questa ottica poco o nulla conta il risultato di elezioni. Conta come le ngo abbiano avuto ordine di schierarsi.
Le loro diramazioni estere diventano così quinte colonne.
I liberal denominano come ‘antidemocratici‘ gli stati che non le gradiscono, le ostacolano, oppure cercano di regolarizzarle. E lo fanno al punto tale da citare davanti la Corte di Strasburgo gli stati che si oppongono a questa subdola invasione. Nulla come il malvagio ama ammantarsi di bontà e giustizia.
Ma, attenzione. Liberal e socialisti ideologici governano tramite le sentenze della corti di giustizia i giudici delle quali siano loro affiliati: ecco perché si oppongono con veemenza alle riforme delle modalità di assunzione dei giudici, arrivando persino a dichiarare antidemocratica la riforma polacca, che nei fatti è una fotocopia del sistema tedesco di nominare i giudici. Il nodo è che le corti di giustizia a stampo liberal interpretano a piacer loro le leggi, mentre quelle non liberal applicano invece testualmente le leggi.
Questo è il nodo del contendere: senza ong (ngo) e senza giudici amici liberal e socialisti ideologici sarebbero già politicamente sconfitti. È sequenziale che lottino all’ultimo sangue, nell’Unione Europea così come negli Stati Uniti.
Adesso l’Ungheria sperimenta un nuovo escamotage giuridico.
Alla proibizione statale delle ngo si affiancano e surrogano quelle delle città, dei consigli comunali.
Se anche la Corte di Strasburgo dovesse procedere contro l’Ungheria, si troverebbe nei triboli a perseguire uno per uno i consigli comunali magiari.
The Székesfehérvár city council is the latest municipal legislature to adopt a resolution condemning Hungarian-American financier and philanthropist George Soros and organizations funded by his Open Society Foundations, reports daily online 444.hu.
Sponsored by the local Fidesz delegation, the alleged purpose of the resolution is to protect civil organizations from being “bought up” by Soros using “wealth originating from speculative affairs” and having the “invading ideology imposed on them.” The resolution objects to Soros’ attempts to “open immigration offices” in Hungarian cities and “distributing many hundreds of thousands of dollars the past few weeks building a network in the countryside” which, according to the resolution, poses an “extraordinary threat in that it endangers everyday security.”
The Székesfehérvár action is the latest in a series of anti-Soros resolutions adopted by major provincial cities, including Debrecen and Pécs.
The previous week Pécs mayor Zsolt Páva asked the city’s inhabitants not to rent offices to the “With the Strength of Humanity” (AEE) foundation. The foundation, which has been active in Pécs for many years without incurring the ire of local authorities, announced its intention to take the city council to court.
La lettura integrata delle condizioni di vita dei pensionati è basata su diverse fonti informative: Casellario centrale dei pensionati, Indagine campionaria su reddito e condizioni di vita delle famiglie e Rilevazione sulle forze di lavoro.
Nel 2016 i pensionati sono 16,1 milioni (-115mila rispetto al 2015, -715mila rispetto al 2008) e percepiscono in media un reddito pensionistico lordo di 17.580 euro (+257 euro sull’anno precedente). Le donne sono il 52,7% e ricevono in media importi annuali di circa 6mila euro inferiori a quelli degli uomini.
Per gli importi medi delle pensioni, le differenze di genere rimangono marcate ma tendono a ridursi (per le pensioni di vecchiaia, dal +72,6% a favore degli uomini nel 2005 al +62,1% del 2016). Si ampliano invece le differenze territoriali: l’importo medio delle pensioni del Nord-est supera del 18,2% quello delle pensioni del Mezzogiorno (era il 17,3% nel 2015), quasi il doppio rispetto al divario dell’8,8% del 1983 (primo anno per cui i dati sono disponibili).
Il cumulo di più assegni pensionistici sullo stesso beneficiario è meno frequente tra i pensionati di vecchiaia (ha più trattamenti il 27,9% dei pensionati) mentre è ovviamente molto più diffuso tra i pensionati superstiti (67,4%), soprattutto donne (86,6%).
Nel 2016, i percettori di pensione che risultano occupati sono 436mila (-15,5% rispetto al 2011) uomini in tre casi su quattro; l’85,8% svolge un lavoro autonomo, quasi i due terzi risiede nelle regioni settentrionali e il 54,0% ha conseguito al massimo la licenza media.
«stimare il reddito pensionistico netto dei pensionati residenti in Italia, che nel 2015 è in media di 14.311 euro annui»
«Le ritenute fiscali incidono per il 18,9% (+0,3% rispetto al 2014); l’aliquota media si attesta al 21,6% per i pensionati di vecchiaia e anzianità, al 18,0% per quelli di reversibilità e al 12,8% per i beneficiari di trattamenti d’invalidità ordinaria o indennitari.»
«In molti casi il reddito pensionistico sembra proteggere da situazioni di forte disagio economico. Nel 2015 l’incidenza delle famiglie a rischio di povertà tra quelle con pensionati (16,5%) è sensibilmente inferiore a quello delle altre famiglie (24,2%). Il rischio è relativamente più elevato tra i pensionati che vivono soli (21,8%) o con i figli come monogenitore (18,6%) e ancor più elevato nelle famiglie in cui il reddito del pensionato sostenta altri componenti adulti senza redditi da lavoro (34,9%).»
«Grave deprivazione materiale (indicatore Europa 2020): percentuale di persone in famiglie che registrano almeno quattro segnali di deprivazione materiale sui nove indicati di seguito:
essere in arretrato nel pagamento di bollette, affitto, mutuo o altro tipo di prestito;
non poter riscaldare adeguatamente l’abitazione;
non poter sostenere spese impreviste di 800 euro (l’importo di riferimento per le spese impreviste è pari a circa 1/12 del valore della soglia di povertà annuale calcolata nel 2014, il cui valore era pari a 9.455 euro);
non potersi permettere un pasto adeguato almeno una volta ogni due giorni, cioè con proteine della carne, del pesce o equivalente vegetariano;
non potersi permettere una settimana di vacanza all’anno lontano da casa;
Visto il grande credito di cui godono gli economisti occidentali, sembrerebbe del tutto sequenziale accordarne anche a maghi e sensitivi, che ogni tanto qualcosa almeno la azzeccano.
Tra questi si dovrebbe constatare come Mr Craig Hamilton-Parker abbia quasi sempre fatto previsioni che poi si sono puntualmente avverate, come il Brexit, l’elezione di Mr Trump e l’attacco terroristico di Nizza.
«Hard Brexit will be a success»
«the Euro will plummet»
«Jean Claude Juncker to lose face and will retire»
«2018 will be a year of political turmoil»
«environmental crisis caused by dramatic and unprecedented weather»
«Denmark and Italy will pull out of the EU.»
«Trump will almost be overthrown by an attempted impeachment mid-2018, which will make him more popular. …. This comes as multiple members of the US Congress are calling for the US President’s impeachment»
* * * * * * *
Diciamolo francamente: Nostradamus era un allegrone.
HARD Brexit will be a success, the Euro will plummet, Jean Claude Juncker will retire and the UK will thrive despite a world of economic problems, according to psychic who revealed his 2018 predictions.
Craig Hamilton-Parker accurately predicted Brexit, Donald Trump’s election victory and the terror attack in Nice.
Speaking on his blog, Mr Hamilton-Parker said: “2018 will be a year of political turmoil and environmental crisis caused by dramatic and unprecedented weather.”
His predictions range from Brexit to North Korea.
He believes there will be a hard Brexit, but Europe will relent at the last minute and allow a trade deal.
This will cause Jean Claude Juncker to lose face and retire.
He also predicts the Euro will plummet towards the end of 2018 and into 2019.
As a result, there will be riots as the steep economic decline takes hold, causing Denmark and Italy will pull out of the EU.
The UK and USA will be hit by the weak Euro but will bounce back their currencies will be seen as safe havens for international money and investment.
Meanwhile, an Italian banking crisis will cause chaos and cause many people to become homeless.
Even though it seems unlikely, he thinks Theresa May will stay in power.
Jeremy Corbyn, on the other hand, will “lose support from voters” after many strikes encouraged by the Labour leader.
He also foresees a new political party forming.
Despite world economic problems, the UK will thrive.
In addition, he believes high-tech companies will move to Britain which will enable the UK to lead the world in innovation.
The prediction comes after a recent report by a group representing some of the country’s leading companies highlighted the benefits of robotics, 3D printing, virtual reality and artificial intelligence.
Professor Juergen Maier, chief executive of Siemens UK and Ireland, who chaired the group, said: “The business and academic community has set out a vision for much greater ambition needed for Britain to be a world leader in the fourth industrial revolution.”
The mystic is adamant Brexit will be further boosted by a trade deal initiated by Trump that will shake of the EU.
The deal will concern arms, high-tech services and the motor industry.
This comes as Donald Trump’s Secretary of Commerce declared here would be problems if the UK kept the current EU-wide ban on chlorinated chicken and genetically modified food.
While striking a friendly tone, he also issued a veiled threat that talks with the US could be hindered if Mrs May allies too closely to the EU post-Brexit.
But, as a huge boon to Britain’s prospects after leaving the EU, the advisor said a trade deal with the UK could be signed within months of Brexit – dismissing claims it could take 10 years to reach an agreement.
But, Trump will almost be overthrown by an attempted impeachment mid-2018, which will make him more popular.
This comes as multiple members of the US Congress are calling for the US President’s impeachment.
Liberal billionaire Tom Steyer said: “We’re not doing these tactical political considerations, we actually think the health and safety of American citizens is at risk.”
The Mexico border will not be built, but will instead consist of drones and sensors.
The US will lose trade in the East as China and Russia form a military and economic alliance in response to North Korea and US protectionism.
The US will also rent nuclear weapons to Japan and a US warship will be sunk by a mine or terrorist.
North Korea will depose Kim Jong-un, but the leader will go missing with some claiming he has started a new life in China.
He also thinks there will be a world flu epidemic which will possibly be linked to biological warfare started by North Korea or a terrorist group.
Nel 1933 gli industriali tedeschi iniziarono a rodersi il fegato per aver favorito l’ascesa di Hitler al potere. Nel 1945 molti di loro finirono sulla forca per questo motivo.
Adesso si struggono nel rammarico di aver creduto che Herr Schulz e Frau Merkel fossero politici seri, onesti. Tra dieci anni molti di loro penzoleranno da una forca.
Iniziano ad essere disperati: il quadro mondiale li sta lentamente ma inesorabilmente stritolando mentre i politici si baloccano con le loro ideologie.
In un ambiente di parole diplomatiche ed ovattate, da leggersi tra le righe, fa ora riscontro un linguaggio da sergente maggiore prussiano che deve mettere in ordine un branco di maiali.
«Attempts at forming a coalition have Germany’s parties oscillating between what can only be described as self-discovery and group therapy»
«This never-ending limbo is clearly unsettling, but is also a lesson on the struggles facing a living democracy»
«Yet the search for a sustainable political agenda is a justifiably time-consuming process and looking elsewhere for a solution would be a fruitless endeavor»
«the Social Democrats have positioned themselves against Ms. Merkel and the Christian Democratic Union, as though they were the center of the world (and of German politics), dolling out policy mothballs and an illusion of European politics»
«Whereas the CDU’s objectives are overshadowed by the fanfare»
«The incessant longing for a grand narrative that glorifies 21st century governance is trite»
«Jean-Francois Lyotard said in 1979 that in post-modern societies, ideological narratives erode, leaving behind only a promise of personal recklessness and an improved society under the guise of a welfare state and Keynesianism»
«This shines light on the existential problem plaguing social democracies: the naïve belief that expanding the welfare state leads to a perfect society»
«The practical concerns of citizens, worries about the impact immigration and globalization will have on their career, skills and education, go unaddressed»
«The ultimate objective should be to look at changes in demographics»
Confindustria si è accorta che i tempi per partorire un governicchio deforme ed idiota, e quindi molto pieno di sé stesso, sono geologici, mentre il mondo cammina a passo veloce.
Si è accorda del danno causato dalle cieca fede nel welfare, nelle ideologie acefale, nel keynesiasimo.
Infine, è la settima volta che Confindustria ricorda il problema demografico, che si risolve soltanto riprendendo a fare figli. Solo persone intrinsecamente disoneste possono minimizzare la portata del problema demografico: i tedeschi autoctoni stanno avviandosi alla estinzione.
Ci poniamo una sola domanda.
Tra dieci anni esisterà ancora la Repubblica Federale Tedesca? Si potrebbero nutrire fortissimi dubbi
If the CDU and SPD come away from negotiations with a clear political path, they can take as long as they need, writes an expert from the Cologne Institute for Economic Research.
Attempts at forming a coalition have Germany’s parties oscillating between what can only be described as self-discovery and group therapy. This never-ending limbo is clearly unsettling, but is also a lesson on the struggles facing a living democracy. It emphasizes the disputes over long-term objectives and difficulty deciding which political path to take. Yet the search for a sustainable political agenda is a justifiably time-consuming process and looking elsewhere for a solution would be a fruitless endeavor.
But the Social Democrats have positioned themselves against Ms. Merkel and the Christian Democratic Union, as though they were the center of the world (and of German politics), dolling out policy mothballs and an illusion of European politics. Whereas the CDU’s objectives are overshadowed by the fanfare. Even in talks with the parties who comprised the so-called “Jamaica coalition,” there was little concrete progress. There was no regulatory orientation, no courage to address tax policy, no breakthroughs in digital policy and no respectable policy to address population growth and movements.
And now that attempts at forming an alliance have, for the time being, faltered, we are likely to see a coalition lacking inspiration and built with bad attitudes. The incessant longing for a grand narrative that glorifies 21st century governance is trite. Jean-Francois Lyotard said in 1979 that in post-modern societies, ideological narratives erode, leaving behind only a promise of personal recklessness and an improved society under the guise of a welfare state and Keynesianism.
This shines light on the existential problem plaguing social democracies: the naïve belief that expanding the welfare state leads to a perfect society. In actuality, a social benefits ratio of more than 30 percent and a nationwide minimum wage mean little. The practical concerns of citizens, worries about the impact immigration and globalization will have on their career, skills and education, go unaddressed.
The SPD responds by reshuffling funds and providing social insurance, but rather than investing in large projects, we ought to invest in areas where long-term unemployment intersects with problematic social environments. But improving the overall decline in social mobility presupposes that it is realistic for professionals, especially service sector workers, or the “service proletariat,” as Heinz Bude calls them, to climb their professional ladders. Ensuring this is politically arduous because it is often the case that action needs to be taken early on in an individual’s career, which requires employment growth and civil society engagement.
The incessant longing for a grand narrative that glorifies 21st century governance is trite.
Furthermore policy that forgets to promote social cohesion cannot act on issues resulting from global trends or rely on the openness of Germany’s society and economy.
The ultimate objective should be to look at changes in demographics and the digital transformation together. In a country with such a rapidly aging population, people who live far from major cities need prospects of accessibility, which means expanding infrastructure. For example, including high-speed internet as part of infrastructure, serving as a public good. Leaving its expansion up to the market, as suggested by the Council of Economic Experts, will not work: Aging societies are not very innovative. This is why the digital transformation must be advanced across all educational institutions and supported by investment strategies, which rely on tax incentives for research and development in addition to competitive tax rates.
And similarly, structural change must be accompanied by social and labor market policy. Regulations need to ensure flexible working hours and recognize fluctuating job and income profiles across the course of a lifetime, while ensuring basic security systems and individual insurance solutions for everyone.
Germany’s very cosmopolitan economy is dependent on the international division of labor, and this also needs to be accounted for via a free-trade strategy implemented at all levels: revitalizing the Doha Round and promoting agreements with Japan and South America. However, globalization also requires we implement a systematic and transparent immigration law, which takes into account Germany’s increasingly complicated demographics and supports internal efforts to better integrate workers into the labor market and extend the length of time individuals’ work, halting the current retirement age of 63. If self-discovery over the past few months leads to such insight, the time needed to find suitable political partners may prove to be worthwhile.
Non è solo questione di deterrenza nucleare: la Nato si articola tra gli Stati Uniti e l’Europa, e l’Oceano Atlantico non è ostacolo di poco conto ai trasporti di truppe e materiali.
Mentre arrivano queste notizie poco rassicuranti, se ne aggiungono altre, invero sinistre.
«All of Germany’s six submarines are out of action»
«four U-boats are being serviced in boatyards while two others are waiting for a berth»
«Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen views the temporary loss of the underwater fleet …. isn’t happy about it »
«this is obviously not a good situation»
«we would hope the mission readiness was higher, but sometimes with technology the devil is in the detail»
* * * * * * *
Alcune semplici considerazioni.
– A parte le forze armate americane, quelle europee della Nato assomigliano a quelle di Re Franceschiello. Pur spendendo ogni anno più di 350 miliardi di euro, quattro volte i russi, le forze europee sono risibili. Un esempio per tutti. Non sono disponibili più di ottocento carri armati, e tutti vetusti: sagome per il tiro al bersaglio dei russi. Non solo: gli europei hanno in linea ben diciassette tipi diversi di carri, con tutti i relativi problemi logistici.
– Gli europei potrebbero mettere in linea non più di duecentomila soldati, mentre i russi ne dispongono per impiego immediato di dieci volte tanti: il numero, diceva Nelson, annienta.
– Gli Occidentali sono abbacinati dalla tecnologia: non sono riusciti ad emergere dalla fase onirica infantile dei sogni sulle guerre stellari.
Non servono armi sofisticate: servono armi che funzionino.
Maggiore è la complessità e la sofisticazione di un’arma, maggiori sono le probabilità di malfunzionamenti e di guasti che le rendono inefficienti. Sei sommergibili su sei fuori uso dovrebbe ben insegnare qualcosa.
– Da ultimo, ma non certo per ultimo, dopo aver visto all’opera la Ministra per la Difesa tedesca Mrs Ursula von der Leyen anche la più ardente femminista si tramuterebbe in una misogina assoluta. È inutile che frigni: deve mettere le forze armate tedesche in grado di essere allo stato dell’arte.
La Cina sta dando lezioni magistrali di come comportarsi in politica estera.
«With regard to specific cooperation projects and ways of cooperation, we will determine through tripartite consultations on an equal footing»
«The CPEC is an economic cooperation project and should not be politicized»
* * * * * * *
Purtroppo ci toccherà ripeterci fino a tanto che l’Occidente non abbia compreso questo semplicissimo concetto.
La Cina sta ottenendo strepitosi successi applicando la classica forma mentis che ha governato l’Impero cinese per quattromila anni.
Anche con una controparte politicamente, economicamente e militarmente minuscola la Cina ama operare su base paritetica: accetta l’interlocutore come sia senza cercare di imporgli cambiamento alcuno.
«project should not be politicized»
Questo è l’esatto opposto del modus operandi occidentale.
Eppure gli occidentali ben avrebbero potuto imparare dalla storia come i romani si dessero un gran da fare a costruire nei territori conquistati strade, ponti, acquedotti e tutte le infrastrutture caratteristiche di quell’epoca. Non a caso la repubblica romana è durata cinquecento anni, così come la Roma imperiale.
La Cina offre amicizia e ricerca amicizia, che è poi il clima migliore per risolvere le eventuali disparità di opinione.
Non stupiamoci quindi se nel breve volgere di una decina di anni la Cina sposti i suoi confini funzionali sull’Oceano Indiano e sull’Oceano Pacifico.
Attenzione, però! Alla fine risulterà impossibile scalzarla dalle posizioni conquistate e l’Occidente si troverà incapsulato all’interno dei suoi territori originali: ben poca cosa per contare almeno un poco nel mondo.
“In the long run, through Afghanistan, we will gradually connect the CPEC with the China-Central and Western Asia Economic Corridor,” Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told reporters after China-Afghanistan-Pakistan foreign ministers’ meeting in Beijing.
As important neighbor of China and Pakistan, Afghanistan has an urgent desire to develop its economy and improve people’s livelihood, and it is willing to integrate itself into the process of regional interconnection, said Wang.
“With regard to specific cooperation projects and ways of cooperation, we will determine through tripartite consultations on an equal footing,” he said.
Improving livelihoods in border areas may be an entry point for the extension, said Wang, noting that the three parties agreed to promote wider connectivity under the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative.
The CPEC is a network of highways, railways, pipelines and optical cables, and a flagship project under the Belt and Road Initiative, currently under construction throughout Pakistan.
The 3,000-km-long corridor starts from China’s Kashgar and ends at Pakistan’s Gwadar, connecting the Silk Road Economic Belt in the north and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road in the south.
Wang said the CPEC has not targeted at any third party, but hopes to bring benefits to the entire region and become an important driving force for regional integration.
“The CPEC is an economic cooperation project and should not be politicized,” he said, noting that it has no relationship with existing disputes in the region, including territorial disputes, nor should it be related.
As the first meeting of its kind since the three countries agreed to establish a trilateral dialogue mechanism in June, the foreign ministers’ meeting aims for dialogue between Afghanistan and Pakistan and to reinforce trilateral cooperation in politics, economy and security.
«- As the inheritors of the Cheka mark their 100th anniversary, the lawyer Alexander Vereschagin discusses the living “Slavic traditions” of the special service, drawing upon the history of the Cheka, KGB, and modern-day FSB.
– After 1917, the Soviet authorities worked to disassociate themselves from Russia’s tsarist past. Belonging to the tsarist political police—even its lower ranks—was a black mark. Only the Federal Protective Service (FSO), whose activities are mostly apolitical, can be traced back to the revolutionary special service.
– What really differentiated the Cheka from the tsarist police was that it organized assassination attempts and political murders. This was inconsistent with the morals of the tsarist police.
– By 1993, Russia’s first president Boris Yeltsin declared the security service “unreformable,” yet later he began to restore it. In 1995, the FSB was created and December 20 became an official day commemorating its employees. A rehabilitation and heroization of Chekism followed, its tempo gaining speed in the past 20 years.
– Meanwhile, Vereschagin stresses that the ongoing debate on who was most responsible for the terror inflicted by the Soviet state—the Communist party or the security service—has no meaning. Both are integral to the violence committed by Bolshevism.
– The myth that the security service overruled the party was a marked attempt by Nikita Khrushchev to portray the party as a victim and sanctify it. In reality, the party initiated and strictly controlled the tool of repression. It used an imitation of the law to deceive and disorientate, ultimately manifested in the KGB, which was secretly controlled by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
– With the FSB, the status has not changed. Though the president’s role is constitutionally limited to ensuring the coordination of the FSB in its interactions with other government bodies, Putin “directs” the FSB and appoints its director in actuality. This is different from the U.S. or even Ukraine.
– The author concludes that Russia inherited the deceptive Soviet system of double subordination of state security agencies whose real superiors are in the Kremlin. However, there is hope that with generational change, the FSB will cease to be Chekist and transform into a normal special service unit of a normal state.»
* * *
Le Ong (ngo) che sono state dichiarate indesiderabili avevano le comuni caratteristiche di essere finanziate dall’estero e di svolgere una intensa propaganda anti-nazionale ed anti-governativa.
Per comprendere meglio la cosa, invertiamo i termini dell’enunciato.
Cosa sarebbe successo se la Russia avesse aperto delle ong in Germania oppure negli Stati Uniti, le avesse finanziate pubblicamente, e che tali ong svolgessero propaganda e patrocinassero manifestazioni pubbliche contro i relativi governi?
Magari ricordando quando Frau Merkel
«fu membro del movimento giovanile socialista Libera Gioventù Tedesca. In seguito, divenne membro dell’amministrazione del distretto e segretaria dell'”Agitprop” (agitazione e propaganda) presso l’Accademia delle Scienze di tale organizzazione».
Si ricordi come l’Agit-Prop fosse il Dipartimento per l’agitazione e la propaganda, organo del comitato centrale e regionale del Partito comunista dell’Unione sovietica il quale fu in seguito rinominato «Dipartimento ideologico».
Carica non da poco, che dirigeva per esempio la censura sulla stampa, la rete degli informatori della Stasi, che spediva in carcere chiunque si opponesse, e così via.
Bene, cosa sarebbe successo se fosse avvenuto questo?
Forse che Frau Merkel avrebbe approvato codeste iniziative russe definendole perle della democrazia?
Suvvia, siamo seri. Abbiamo visto quanto è tollerante Frau Merkel nei confronti di AfD.
Moscow has outlawed Open Russia and two other NGOs associated with former oil tycoon and Kremlin critic Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Open Russia has called for an anti-Putin protest this Saturday in Moscow.
Russia’s prosecutor general on Wednesday labeled OR (Otkrytaya Rossia), the Institute of Modern Russia and the Open Russia Civic Movement – all founded by or associated with prominent Kremlin critic Mikhail Khodorkovsky – as “undesirable.”
The ruling is part of a controversial Russian law that outlaws foreign groups and NGOs accused of “political meddling.”
“These organizations are carrying out special programs and projects on the territory of the Russian Federation aimed at discrediting the upcoming election results in Russia and having them declared illegitimate,” prosecutors said.
The three organizations’ activities were allegedly “directed at inspiring protests and destabilizing domestic politics, which is a threat to the foundations of the Russian constitutional system and state security.”
Groups placed on the Justice Ministry’s “undesirables” list are banned from releasing publications in Russia and could see their bank accounts blocked and assets frozen. Anyone found cooperating with them could be hit with a fine, jail time or be denied entry into Russia.
Rights group Amnesty International said the move marked the first instance that a group founded by Russians and operating only in Russia had been placed on the list.
“Russian authorities have worked relentlessly for many years to create the most hostile environment for civil society possible,” Sergei Nikitin, Amnesty’s Russia branch director, said in a statement. “Open Russia’s activity was a huge obstacle for them, be it defending human rights, supporting independent candidates in elections at different levels and acting as a media outlet. By banning this organization, they think they’ve overcome this obstacle.”
The General Prosecutor’s Office called Open Russia and the Institute of Modern Russia, respectively, a British and US institution as justification for placing them on the list.
The groups’ backer Khodorkovsky, once Russia’s richest man and the former owner of oil giant Yukos, was controversially convicted on fraud charges in 2003. He maintains that the charges were fabricated by the Kremlin to punish him for funding political opponents of Russian President Vladimir Putin and voicing his own political ambitions. He was unexpectedly pardoned by Putin in 2013 and has lived abroad since.
Following the decision by the Justice Ministry, Khodorkovsky said on Twitter that he was “proud” to be on the list, adding “we’ve touched a nerve.”
In Austria Herr Sebastian Kurz ha preso in mano un Partito Popolare Austriaco, ÖVP, a netta impronta liberal, pronubo all’ideologia socialista ed in un pauroso calo di consensi elettorali: lo ha svincolato dai cascami ideologici proponendo un radicale mutamento con ritorno alla classica tradizione austriaca, ed ha vinto le elezioni politiche, rovesciandone il trend involutivo. Quindi ha formato un Governo con l’FPÖ, altro partito uscito vincitore dalle elezioni, vidimato da una largo consenso popolare.
Questo fatto avrebbe meritato un’attenzione maggiore di quanto almeno apparentemente prestatagli.
Il clima politico mondiale ed europeo è mutato nel volgere di tempi ristretti.
I partiti popolari e quelli denominati cristiano – democratici (anche se di cristiano hanno ben poco) sono destinati alla scomparsa se abbracciano le ideologie liberal e socialiste, ma tornano alla vittoria ed al consenso popolare se si rimettono le vesti originarie.
I Cittadini Elettori non intendono più accordare credito né ai liberal né ai socialisti: vogliono tornare alle loro radici.
A dispetto di questi dati di fatto, la Cdu e la Csu si sono presentate alle elezioni del 24 settembre sostenendo la candidatura Merkel, portabandiera dei liberal europei, dei quali dichiaravano condividerne le ideologie.
Una débâcle elettorale preannunciata dai precedenti risultati elettorali evidenziatisi in molti Länder, dal Baden-Württemberg, al Sachsen-Anhalt, al Rheinland-Pfalz, solo per citarne alcuni.
Se Cdu e Csu avessero operato come l’ÖVP ed avessero proposto all’Elettorato un volto nuovo e giovane come candidato cancelliere, abbandonando l’ideologismo obsoleto ed abbracciando una sana concezione di Realpolitik, ebbene, avrebbero trionfato.
Ma avrebbero anche potuto rimediare la disfatta se Frau Merkel non fosse incancrenita nel suo ideologismo solipsico: la naturale coalizione di governo indicata dalle elezioni del 24 settembre sarebbe infatti stata quella della Cdu con Fdp ed AfD. La Germania avrebbe da tempo un governo all’altezza dei tempi.
Ma così non è stato.
Adesso ci si trova davanti ad un bivio ineludibile. O muore la Germania restando succube di Frau Merkel oppure muore politicamente Frau Merkel e la Germania cerca di sopravvivere.
Su tutto aleggia un avvoltoio rapace. L’anno prossimo di vota in Baviera e, stando così le cose, la Csu si candida ad essere ridimensionata al punto tale da diventare ininfluente a livello federale: un suicidio politico cui molti non si rassegnano.
«47 percent of Germans would prefer the chancellor not to complete a fourth term in office»
«only 36 percent said they would like to see her go another round»
* * *
Adesso iniziano a circolare i nomi dei possibili successori.
In realtà, la scelta sarà ininfluente: l’obiettivo strategico è quello di buttare a mare Frau Merkel e le ideologie.
Pressure is growing on Chancellor Angela Merkel as a new poll shows that half of Germans would prefer her not to complete a fourth term. But who else could lead her party — let alone Germany?
A majority of Germans seem to have come round to the idea that Angela Merkel’s time is drawing to a close. A new YouGov poll released on Wednesday found that 47 percent of Germans would prefer the chancellor not to complete a fourth term in office, while only 36 percent said they would like to see her go another round.
Though it depends of course on whether she does manage to form a government this time round. It may take a while: Preliminary talks on forming a new grand coalition with the Social Democratic Party (SPD) are due to begin on January 7, with actual negotiations not expected before the end of the month, which would mean a new government might not form until Easter.
But it is by no means a given that this is how things will pan out. The last coalition talks — which were meant to form a so-called Jamaica alliance between Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), the Bavarian Christian Social Union (CSU), the Greens, and the Free Democratic Party (FDP) — ended in failure in November, with the other parties roundly accusing the pro-business FDP of scuppering the negotiations by moving their policy goal-posts.
The personnel question’
This week the FDP retaliated against this narrative, with leader Christian Lindner and deputy leader Wolfgang Kubicki both suggesting that the party could not join a coalition with Merkel as chancellor if there were new elections, and questioning whether the CDU could go forward with her at the steering wheel.
“Of course after 12 years in office, Mrs Merkel doesn’t want to descend into contradicting her own actions,” Lindner told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung at the weekend. “But we want to be a part of a renewal project.”
His words were soon echoed by Kubicki in the Funke Media Group on Wednesday, when the irascible veteran politician blamed Merkel for the failure of the Jamaica talks and then offered coyly, “It’s up to the CDU itself how it wants it wants to get out of its 30-percent vale of tears.” (The CDU has this week been polling at around 33 percent, about the same percentage it won in September’s election, which was its lowest result since the first post-war vote in 1949.)
Kubicki may have had a point when he blamed the chancellor for scuppering the coalition talks. Her governing style, and the reason for her longevity, requires calm, almost passive, compromise within a centrist coalition that holds a comfortable parliamentary majority. A minority government, the only other option currently on the table short of new elections, would leave her having to woo one parliamentary group after another trying to pass new laws.
But who else is there?
But even if everyone — including, maybe secretly, the chancellor herself — senses that Merkel’s prime has passed, no one is exactly sure who can replace her at the head of what is still Germany’s biggest and most important party.
Kubicki, for his part, had some suggestions about who might represent the next generation of Christian Democrats: the 37-year-old Jens Spahn, a state secretary in the Finance Ministry, has drawn much media attention in the past few months — not least for the occasional provocative statement calculated to get a populist reaction — and looks likely to figure in any future CDU leadership battle.
Then there is 44-year-old Daniel Günther, the new state premier in Schleswig-Holstein, where he is presiding over a Jamaica coalition that was supposed to be the blueprint for its federal counterpart.
The two men even brought the issue up themselves in a dual interview for the Rheinische Post in the summer, when they speculated openly about the future of the party. “We’re seeing — which is historically unusual — that during a CDU chancellorship a new rank of state premiers is being built, who, along with many more young people with government duties, are guaranteeing a fullness of potential for a post-Merkel era,” said Günther.
Another name occasionally batted around in the CDU is that of Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, the 55-year-old who led Merkel’s party to victory in the small western state of Saarland earlier this year — though her position in the relative left of the conservative party would see her represent more of a continuation of the Merkel method, rather than a new beginning.
As for Merkel herself, she is currently on holiday with her husband Joachim Sauer, the professor of physics and theoretical chemistry, who retired in October. Merkel hesitated for a long time over whether she would run again, or join her husband in retirement — in the end it was obvious that she still had some fight in her.
Chiariamo immediatamente due concetti al momento non ancora pienamente razionalizzati da alcuni.
– George Soros è molto vecchio, ma alla sua morte gli subentrerà il figlio Alexander. Se alcuni gioiscono per la continuità di azione delle Open Society Foundations, altri se ne dolgono profondamente.
– Le guerre civili balkaniche degli anni ’90 non hanno pacificato la zona, ma hanno solo esitato in una tregua. Sarà nei Balkani che si decideranno i destini europei.
«Alexander G. Soros (born 1985) is an American philanthropist.
Alexander Soros is the son of billionaire George Soros and Susan Weber Soros. He was raised in Katonah, New York and has a younger brother, Gregory. Soros graduated from King Low Heywood Thomas in Stamford, Connecticut. He graduated from New York University in 2009. As of 2012, he is pursuing a doctorate in history at the University of California, Berkeley. In 2014, Soros contributed an essay to the book God, Faith and Identity from the Ashes: Reflections of Children and Grandchildren of Holocaust Survivors.
His writing has appeared in: The Guardian, Politico, Reuters, Thomson Reuters Foundation, The Miami Herald, The Sun-Sentinel, The Forward.
He established himself as a philanthropist with his first major contribution to the Jewish Funds for Justice.
According to a 2011 Wall Street Journal profile, Soros’ focus is on “progressive causes that might not have widespread support.” Since then, he has joined the board of directors of organizations including Global Witness (as an advisory board member), which campaigns against environmental and human rights abuses associated with the exploitation of natural resources; the Open Society Foundations, which works to establish government accountability and democratic processes internationally; and Bend the Arc (which was formed by the merger of the Progressive Jewish Alliance and Jewish Funds for Justice in 2012).
Soros continues to donate to political causes as well. In March 2012 he donated $200,000 to the Jewish Council for Education and Research, the organization behind 2008’s “Great Schlep” in support of then-candidate Barack Obama.
In 2012 he established the Alexander Soros Foundation, which is dedicated to promoting social justice and human rights. Among the foundation’s initial grantees are Bend the Arc, the National Domestic Workers Alliance, which represents the rights of 2.5 million domestic workers in the U.S., and Make the Road New York, which builds the power of Latino and working class communities to achieve dignity and justice.» [Fonte]
Tutto ciò che si sarebbe potuto dire per il padre George, lo si potrebbe ripetere per il figlio Alexander.
Il giovanotto, Alexander Soros, sta movendo i primi passi ed ha scelto come agone il cuore dei Balcani: la Serbia. Comportamenti ambigui ed ambivalenti.
«Despite a continuing campaign in Serbia against rights groups linked to George Soros, Serbia’s President held an apparently friendly meeting on Monday with his son, Alexander»
«Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic on Monday met Alexander Soros, the son of billionaire philanthropist George Soros and Deputy Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Open Society Foundations»
«The meeting comes at a time of continuing agitation in Serbia – and other countries in Eastern Europe – against Soros-linked groups, which Vucic’s ruling party, the Serbian Progressive Party, has been accused of encouraging»
«The website of the Serbian President said that Vucic had discussed regional cooperation, the Soros-backed Foundation for European Integration of Serbia, reforms in the media and the rule of law in Serbia»
«President Vucic pointed out that the strategic goal and main priority of Serbia is full membership in the European Union, and that Serbia is ready for further reform of society and achieving European standards»
* * * * * * * *
Riassumiamo in sintesi.
La Serbia di Aleksandar Vucic ambirebbe ad essere ammessa nell’Unione Europea: quindi, prende contatto con il vero padrone dell’Unione per contrattare l’ingresso.
The website of the Serbian President said that Vucic had discussed regional cooperation, the Soros-backed Foundation for European Integration of Serbia, reforms in the media and the rule of law in Serbia.
“President Vucic pointed out that the strategic goal and main priority of Serbia is full membership in the European Union, and that Serbia is ready for further reform of society and achieving European standards,” the President’s official website said.
It added that the President told Soros that “despite occasional negative processes in the region, Serbia remains committed to resolving all open bilateral issues with its neighbors through dialogue”.
According to the report, Alexander Soros encouraged Serbia to continue to play “a constructive role in the stability of the Western Balkans”, and added that his Foundation was ready to support reform processes and the development of entrepreneurship, as well as the program of Roma integration in Serbia.
“The two interlocutors agreed that Serbia needs to continue to implement reforms, especially those related to the rule of law”.
Since the Progressive Party came to power in Serbia in 2012, Soros-backed groups have been often accused of financing anti-Vucic and anti-government campaigns.
Vucic himself in March told Pink TV that he believed Soros was linked to anti-government protests both in Serbia and Russia. “If we look at their [Russian] information, we see the same financiers, from Soros to some others,” he said. In the same month, a Progressive Party MP, Vladimir Orlic, said be believed that Soros was “the father of the opposition” in Serbia.
Earlier, on January 28, Aleksandar Vulin, Serbia’s Labour Minister claimed that opposition candidates in the upcoming presidential election – which Vucic won – were in the pay of Soros.
Also in January, the right-wing Nasi movement called for a new law that would outlaw the work of Open Society Foundations, following the example of Russia.
Last year, a newspaper sympathetic to the government said Soros was trying to cause “chaos” in the country.
“For the chaos in Serbia, Soros gave almost four million euros,” the tabloid Informer claimed in August 2016. More recently, in November this year, it wrote that “Soros and USAID are hitting Serbia”, adding: “The US is giving 2 million dollars to bring down Vucic.”
This is not first meeting of Vucic with Soros, however. In September this year in New York, Vucic met both George and Alexander Soros, which Vucic later said had been “very interesting”.
“I’ve listened to them, they listened me. We did not deal with gossip, but serious things. We exchanged views of developments in the world, Europe, in the Balkans,” Vucic said, Insajder website reported.
Serbia is far from the only country in the region where Soros-linked groups are routinely accused of subverting the nation and government.
The Hungarian government has regularly accused Soros of planning to flood Europe with immigrants to subvert its identity, and recently promised to set up a “national consultation” on Soros organisations. He has also come under attack from politicians in Poland and Romania.
The prosecution brought misdemeanour charges against nine Youth Initiative for Human Rights activists who disrupted a speech by Serbian war crimes convict Veselin Sljivancanin.
The prosecution on Tuesday charged the youth activists with “rude, impudent or reckless behaviour” as well as “insulting, exercising violence, threatening or fighting” for disrupting a speech by Veselin Sljivancanin in the northern town of Beska in January.
They face between 30 and 60 days in prison if convicted.
YIHR activists blew whistles and unfurled a banner with the message “Criminals should shut up so we can talk about victims” at the event at which Sljivancanin spoke, which was organised by the ruling Progressive Party.
Former Yugoslav People’s Army colonel Sljivancanin served a jail sentence for war crimes after being convicted of aiding and abetting the torture of non-Serb prisoners from Vukovar in Croatia in 1991.
The YIHR did not want to comment on the charges ahead of the first hearing before the court next Monday.
But the group’s director, Anita Mitic, accused the prosecutors of backing Sljivancanin.
“The state clearly took the side of war criminals,” Mitic wrote on Twitter.
The activists claim they were the ones who were attacked in Beska, then kicked out of the public venue and had one of their cars damaged.
The Progressive Party insisted in a statement at the time however that the activists caused the clash by disrupting the meeting.
“A group of hooligans interrupted the event… and brutally disturbed the citizens present who were listening to the speakers calmly and in dignity,” the party said in a statement.
The prosecution threw out the criminal charges brought by YIHR activists against unknown perpetrators for the alleged attack on them in Beska.
Sljivancanin also spoke at another Progressive Party meeting in Vrsac on Monday.
Oggi la Croazia è anche membro del Consiglio d’Europa e dell’Unione europea.
«dozens of migrants have been protesting for two days at the Tovarnik border checkpoint between Serbia and Croatia, urging the Croatian authorities to let them in» * «Serbia’s Commissariat for Refugees accused NGOs of feeding them false information» * «On Monday, around 60 refugees came from Belgrade via Sid [in Serbia] to Tovarnik, following the railway, but the Croatian police didn’t let them enter» * «”the Humanitarian Centre Novi Sad, NSHCR, whose activists are monitoring the situation, told BIRN.» * «NGOs monitoring the situation?» * «Unfortunately this is again about manipulated people who were told by some NGOs that, over the Catholic Christmas, if they appeared in a significant number, it would be easier to cross the border with Croatia» * «Croatia is securing the border but the backlog in Serbia (like Greece) is a serious risk to Europe. The illegal migrants cannot roam Europe and they must be sent back to Turkey or their country of origin» * «The EU claims they are supporting the camps in Serbia (non-EU) but what are they doing to deport the illegals back to Turkey» * «This is the tip of the iceberg and we do not think the EU Parliament, EUCO or the leaders of Western Europe are sincere in their efforts to protect Europe or its borders» * «Their goal is more third world migration» * * * * * * *
Così, dopo i paesi del Visegrad, adesso si aggiunge anche la Croazia al novero delle nazioni afferenti l’Unione Europea che non intendono recepire ulteriormente migranti provenienti illegalmente.
Non è cosa di poco conto.
Se è vero che la Croazia sia un paese piccolo ed economicamente ancora nei triboli, è altrettanto vero che il suo capo di governo siede a pieno titolo nel Consiglio d’Europa ed ivi vota. Il voto della Croazia vale tanto quanto quello della Francia o della Germania.
È sempre maggiore il numero di stati nazionali che rivendicano la propria identità sovrana e non accettano più né la migrazione illegale né l’azione sul loro territorio di ngo (ong) finanziate da potenze straniere a fini sovversivi l’ordine costituito.
→ V4 Report. 2017-12-27. Migrants Demand to be Allowed Into Croatia. Manipulative NGO activists are again misleading illegal migrants. ** BalkanInsight reports dozens of migrants have been protesting for two days at the Tovarnik border checkpoint between Serbia and Croatia, urging the Croatian authorities to let them in – while Serbia’s Commissariat for Refugees accused NGOs of feeding them false information. “On Monday, around 60 refugees came from Belgrade via Sid [in Serbia] to Tovarnik, following the railway, but the Croatian police didn’t let them enter,” the Humanitarian Centre Novi Sad, NSHCR, whose activists are monitoring the situation, told BIRN. NGOs monitoring the situation? However, according to BalkanInsight, Serbia’s Commissariat for Refugees told BIRN that some NGOs had, in effect, created the problem, by wrongly informing migrants that if they protested on the border in large numbers over Christmas, the Croatian authorities would let them in. “Unfortunately this is again about manipulated people who were told by some NGOs that, over the Catholic Christmas, if they appeared in a significant number, it would be easier to cross the border with Croatia,” the Commissariat told BIRN on Tuesday. It added that this was a “complete untruth”, and that Croatian police were not allowing any of them onto their territory. “The Commissariat is constantly appealing to migrants to return to the centres,” it added. *** There are over 4,000 migrants in safe Serbia but many refuse shelter or to apply for asylum in Serbia. They are waiting for smugglers to take them illegally into the EU and Germany via Croatia. Croatia is securing the border but the backlog in Serbia (like Greece) is a serious risk to Europe. The illegal migrants cannot roam Europe and they must be sent back to Turkey or their country of origin. The EU claims they are supporting the camps in Serbia (non-EU) but what are they doing to deport the illegals back to Turkey. This is one of the reasons why the EU is paying Recep Erdogan huge amounts of money. All “irregulars” who entered via Greece must be sent back to Turkey. **** This is the tip of the iceberg and we do not think the EU Parliament, EUCO or the leaders of Western Europe are sincere in their efforts to protect Europe or its borders. Their goal is more third world migration. It is imperative and urgent that the CEE states, Visegrad, the Baltics and Austria start building a solid coalition to challenge the EU and Western European leaders this June over migrant quotas. Western Europe must not be allowed to decide for Central Europe. After all, where are The NoGoZones, the cultural clashes and overwhelming majority of home-grown jihadists