|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact | ||
|
Fantastic: Even your freedom restrictions are already definedIsn't it wonderful how carefully and foresightedly our judiciary defined your freedom restrictions years ago? 
It doesn't take much – any justification will do to suddenly shrink your freedom of movement. Not because you did something, but because it’s said to be necessary. For the greater good. For the common welfare. For your own good, of course. This refers to the article “The state gives you the finger – You only have a right to basic needs – Which (which politician) will be in solidarity?” One of the usual narrow-minded thinkers asked something along the lines of: Why don’t you just buy a used car? And why should politicians, who are being criticized here, even donate money? Well – the former was already explained in the article. The latter is a pious wish anyway. Because that would mean a politician would have to overcome their own ego – and that’s about as likely as a stone face starting to dance. The reduction of your freedomsWhat these narrow-minded thinkers didn’t understand: The core of the article isn’t about cars or disability-accessible renovations. It’s about the reduction of freedoms to what is legally waved through as “basic needs” – and not exclusively for people with disabilities, but silently used as a standard for everyone whenever the state demands it. And yes – that’s where Article 3 of the Basic Law comes into play: “No one may be disadvantaged because of their disability.” Equal treatment, in other words. But not upwards – downwards.The basic needsBluntly put: a roof over your head, washing, eating, pooping, watching TV, making phone calls, shopping at discount stores, and walks around your home. Everything else? Luxury. Driving? Not a basic need, says the judiciary. Visiting friends, culture, leisure, broader movement – sorry, you’ll manage somehow.Because people with disabilities must not be disadvantaged, their basic needs become your benchmark. Meaning: if things get tough, you're allowed just as little. Unless you have to work – because someone has to generate the taxes that will fund the next round of restrictions. That’s how it works. Politics is intrusivePolitics – the state – has shown itself in recent years to be very intrusive, very restrictive of basic rights. And of course: they can and will do it again at any time. All it takes is a little panic, a bit of constant media bombardment, a touch of “there is no alternative.” And then you’ll be told again why you’re now unfortunately reduced to your basic needs.Curfews! Movement zones!Let’s remember those wonderful plandemic years: Curfews. Movement radii. County borders you weren’t allowed to cross. Dog owners were allowed out, people weren’t. Yes, during that time, dogs actually had more rights than humans.Also remember the two motorcyclists from Leipzig who were stopped at Lake Mondsee near Hohenmölsen by the public order office – beautiful weather, no one in sight, no one to infect, no one in danger. But the state, the public order office isn’t impressed by logic. Rules are rules. Therefore: fine! What justification comes next?So the question remains: What justification will politics pull out of the hat next time? A new pandemic? Maybe. The climate? Tricky – especially during this hellish summer. But maybe next year, when it gets warm for five days again. Then you won’t be allowed outside – to protect the world’s climate. Or a harsh winter: no sun, no wind, gas and oil scarce, electricity rationed. Then it’s: stay home and don’t travel – for supply security!Or how about a new foreign policy crisis? The rearmament is underway, the rhetoric too. All that’s missing is the “occasion,” the justification (the reason is not the justification). And when that comes, you too will once again be reduced to the legally defined minimum. To the minimum of what you need to survive – not to live as a free human being. The legal ration of existenceBecause you, citizen, sovereign, alleged bearer of all state power – you’ll be downgraded again. To the basic needs, to the legal ration of existence. You’re not allowed more. You’re not entitled to more.And if you then think: “No! My basic needs are far more extensive!”, then throughout the entire hierarchy – from federal politics down to the local order office – everyone will snap to attention, click their heels, shout “Yes, sir!” and slap you with a hefty fine. Because you, the alleged sovereign, don’t get to decide what your basic needs are. Your basic needs were defined by those who were more or less elected to represent you and your interests. Well, and if they say you don’t need more, then … um … that’s just how it is, right? Then it’s in your best interest not to be allowed more. Great, isn’t it? As Nena said in July 2021: “The question is not what we’re allowed to do. The question is what we let them do to us.” What do you let them do to you? The narrow-minded thinkers probably won’t get that either. Author: AI-Translation - Американский искусственный интеллект | |
|
| Other articles: |
 | 1140 Likes, Countless Horn Honks, Nearly 16,000 ViewsThe little deer were protesting over the highway again.... zum Artikel |
 | The Majority Wants No More of the Same – AfD Soon 50% and More?The election results in Burgenland – Saalekreis speak a clear language.... zum Artikel |
 | Career Counseling – What on Earth Will Become of the Child?The school year recently started in Saxony-Anhalt as well. For numerous students, this will be their last year, as they will either complete the 10th grade or take their Abitur exa... zum Artikel |
|
Support the operation of this website with voluntary contributions: via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/evovi/12 or via bank transfer IBAN: IE55SUMU99036510275719 BIC: SUMUIE22XXX Account holder: Michael Thurm Shorts / Reels / Kurz-Clips Imprint / Disclaimer |