Wartime

2014: Raid on the regional administrations in Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv.
Beginnings of a war of extermination - and of reversing an illegtimate coup d'état, protected and organized by Western countries, as well as fighting for one's right to live not as a 2nd-class-citizen in the place you lived before.

What would somebody say who died 10 years ago about the fuss that takes place today?
In politics as well as society as well as technology - how things in general developed during the last decade?
Would he think "the better that I have died, that's even worse than when I was still alive"?
Or would he say "I should have stayed, just to try to make a change in all these things"?
What about somebody who killed himself?
Would he be happy about his deed?
Would he scream in horror how the world has become, compared to 10 years ago?
What would his words be about Facebook, about streaming, about the current state the world is in - the economical crisis, the West's fight with Russia, the war in Syria, Libya, newly grown information sources that didn't exist back then?
Also, what would he say about culture, about current trends? About the rise of German Schlager, the dropping in the background of Hiphop, the rise of softened Electro House and the current remake mania in Hollywood?
What would he say if he heard that now it's a trend for the lost youth to travel to the Middle East and play "Call Of Duty" for real - voluntarily?

Sometimes it would be better if someone was alive again who didn't follow all these developments, just to give you a more distanced opinion, free from the political correctness of today, free from the frames and shapes which society and public likes to think in during current times.
Having been gone opens a door to potentially give you new ideas. Ideas you wouldn't have if you talked to somebody who's a child of his time and narrow-minded as the current episode is.
Too long ago may become a problem as the changes over 20 and 30 years or more are too huge for someone to comprehend in a small amount of time. There would be the danger of becoming overwhelmed by impressions.
Many things changed in a longer episode of time.

But even during the last 10 years, you have some things which totally took a major development, while you have others where you would say "business as usual". Nothing has changed.
The stupification of mankind hasn't stopped, quite the opposite, it has increased. Through the invention of smartphones and social media shifting from a text-based to a photo- and video-based issue. Bullying and mobbing hasn't vanished from the face of the earth, its results only have become quieter and no-one talks about it anymore loudly. Children themselves don't take a gun into their hands anymore nessecarily to make it known.
Adults don't have more time for their offspring, they even whip themselves some more and force themselves onto their place of work.
Poverty didn't disappear. And the rich have even grown richer than they used to be.
The only thing that maybe has become different, making an interesting change in the pack of cards, that keeping secrets has become more critical for the states. Not only is it more of an importance for them to survive than before, but also the means to do it need to scatter because it is more likely that somebody might get something out and show it to the public. Not all people entrusted with confidential information still agree on or are convinced of keeping their secrets anymore.
Also, there has grown an echo chamber which specialized in picking these things up and spread it as their own propaganda, just like you're used to it from the notorious usual suspects.
This changes the game of what to believe and what not to believe.

Someone who died earlier and was sick of this system might find its joy with the new circumstances...

The American establishment still thinks it can win World War III.

What always recurringly gives you a question about this is: How can journalists, newscaster and so on still join in the propaganda choir, although facts already speak, oozing out of every crack, that it can't be kept up anymore what they're telling? Why do they, even in the dawn of their downfall, still stick to the song they've sung for years, for decades? Because it's their job? Because they have dependants to feed and a flat to pay? Because they truly believe in what they're saying?!
This kind of journalist can only do what they do because they're in a safe place. They think like war's not goint to come to them. And even if it should do so for once, they run like rats leaving the sinking ship. Off to somewhere far, far away where they think nobody can grab them. Where nobody knows who they truly are and what they've done before. Acting the innocent and starting the new life that everyone else liked to have in the ruins they stand in because of the continuous babbling of these people.
You don't need to take out some Nazi propagandists just to find horrible blindness towards real circumstances. Look around and see, in a subtle way narrow-mindeds like these which cause thousands of deaths for nothing exist today, too. And as well as then, they're paid very well for the work they're doing - compared to the people which later must pay for the errors they made.
They can only hope that the friends they allegedly have later also are willing take them out of the shit if things should turn head over heels...

---

In case some want to lay hatespeech or physical threat into my mouth because of that text: Stop being ridiculous with your continuous search for possibilities to seize someone by the collar - and start to fucking read what it says there. Your hysteric associations in your mind are your work, not mine. Blame your fucking self for it, if you find anything offensive. I have an idea what you would like to create out of it and I tell you it's not my intention.

Imagine the situation, if your country, your national enterprises, were to lease licenses for producing most of the technologically advanced devices and the countries to get it from were the stunt to hand it out only for large sums and they even said "first, before all, get a valuable currency - yours is less worth the number that it says on the bill than the material it's made of", think about how much of your daily gadgets you use and your prestige wares that you own to impress someone wouldn't be there because your state and your enterprises couldn't afford it or the prices to sell the wares in your nation were so high that no regular resident could pay so much.
If you can imagine the extent, then you know why the states of the Warsaw Pact and their associates didn't have so many things.

On the occasion of another climate summit: If you wanna do nature a real favor, mankind needs to stop living like a lord and draw on unlimited resources - and not just China, India and all those countries which now start to develop to the standard of the so-called "first world countries".
They also need to stop in the West to regard it as a self-evidence to use and throw away, to regard it as a justified measure to invent new things, cut out the old ones and produce the new ones like there is no end only because they can't reach new economic growth with producing the old equipment, and to produce worse things like energy saving lamps instead of regular bulbs made of glass, plate and tungsten only because some lobbyist with no specialized knowledge says they're environmentally more acceptable.
Above all, as radical and evil as it seems, mankind needs to put on serious thought to the fact that their wasteful lifestyle isn't able to be reached by all people in the world if the world contains more than 7 billion people. Either you can continue and have the least percentage of the human world have access to this standard of living, or you need to step down and live very basic from what the industrialized world currently calls its "normality", or there can only be at the most 2 billion people throughout the world which live like that so the resources they consume is enough for this mass taken from one planet. As it neither is healthy for the earth as well as for other planets to exploit their resources of metal ore, nor it is going to cause the world a lot of joy being contamined by radiation that exists throughout space.

People feel it what's coming.
At the moment, they unbelievingly try to resist to face the recognition. As well as the consequences that it would hold.
There's nothing else they could do except repressing it because, not only would it mean a deviation from their daily habits in a perhaps radical manner, but also finding themselves in a world they're absolutely helpless against.
That for human brain rather prefers to live in a lie and pretend to itself it's moving. To avoid the traumatic consequence it would mean when someone is unable to help or move himself.
And, realistically, this impression of helplessness is even correct.
What can they do at all to stop the big boss powers that form their surroundings from making them sick?
Except for violence executed in a mass-manner there's nothing they could do - because in every other manner these people got the greater resources and the greater selection for choice to hide themselves somewhere from the rage of them.
But violence nobody easily likes to take in as a measure.
Also, it would speak against everything socialization taught them.
So the general issue remains unsolved...
...until the very day where it can't be pushed away anymore.

Originally posted by matrixmann at post

Hating to admit it, but maybe that is the key factor in the process of the anti-refugee rallies and why in West Germany they assume that masses of people are xenophobic in the East: The occupation through the Soviet Union carried a different spirit of partiotism into the mentality of that territory.
It's more like the kind of patriotism which people on Russian territory hold up.
People don't necessarily join the demonstrations, which the definitely right sector arranges, because they're against black or different-looking people coming to their country, they're against a state overextending itself and talking it to a bagatelle.
They don't complain about the refugees getting so much help which they actually want in an act of envy - they're against a state mistreating its own people and now inviting masses of foreigners which in the moment of the situation get equipped with better civil rights than them.
A regular person couldn't cross a border without propper documents and then be treated like "okay, we don't lock you in jail for it". A regular person also doesn't get a place in the kindergarten off-hand, they've got to register themselves as soon as they know there's a baby on the way at best to get one promptly when the child reaches the age.
They are against a government not acting in their interests, burning itself out, telling them stories why it can't help them and telling them lies about the prosperity that citizens can't find.
Literally, those people grumbling behind the garden fence, they actually want to save their country.
They expose a vital interest that their surroundings don't go down and they've got to live in total chaos.
They don't care who comes there, it is just that the people which come don't integrate, they cause unrest in the community by the habits and culture they bring with them and the state has nothing else to do than rewarding this by giving them a roof over their heads, supply of food, supply of clothes, giving them a small amount of pocket money, and there's nothing they ever realistically need to present a justification for. If someone attempts to throw them out of the country they disappear and settle somewhere else.
There's no resident citizen which can do so and later is treated like that.
It's rather a "one people, one population - one set of rules for everyone" - and if the state can't enforce it, what kind of state is it?
East Germany already has a kind history behind it to tell their state if they're doing something wrong. And, no matter how bungled by external forces the result was, the spirit of resistance is still alive.
It has become a historical experience that went down into mentality of people on a certain territory - and this is what now claims "we want no refugees, we want a good life ourselves first that you advertise to us day by day".
It is a vital expression of "we care for where we live because we can't run away and we want to protect this area from deteriorating finally completely - and this seems like an issue that is not presented correctly by the media and this is not an issue properly understood by the people living on the former West German territory. Because they never went that far to get a whole government down and to get changes in a system to save their surroundings from sinking into a total mess.
In that aspect it is that the communism of the Soviet Union managed to settle down a kind of patriotism on German territory which doesn't predominantly live on xenophobia, racism and snobbery to be sublime above everyone else.

If there's a question about a right to a better life, it should rather be: Do you want to life in a world with great discrepancies, where some people are as rich that they can live with three computers in a household, using two for toying, and they can buy clothes just for fun, or do you want to live in a world where the rich need to take three steps down from their current niveau and therefore the other poor half can also lead a decent life?