What Do I Do As A Politician When I Have No Facts?

What do I do as a politician when I have no facts?

I am therefore completely free of facts and have neither key figures nor scientific findings based on meaningful data!

I play a bit of a seed game:

You take two states one the fear, two the anxiety and then you wait until the seeds sprout and harvest the yields: the power

Never forget to play off certain layers against each other. Preferably the poor against other poor people. Or those down there against those up there, never forgetting to emphasise that even if you belong to those up there, you are one of those down there.

That always works!

And as written it has to be completely fact-free and therefore a lie, it's not about truth but about polarising.

For and against, even if it's complete rubbish. Only the result counts, you have to throw dirt at the opponent you're trying to damage, the main thing is that something sticks.

A few nice examples that were certainly never demanded, but are sure to divide and polarise - why facts if you just want to get into power? Selecting opponents as targets to cover with propaganda on topics that are actually completely absurd.

The Greens in America want to ban meat completely and increase the price of meat by 1000 per cent by law.

The Democrats want children to be able to determine their own gender from the age of 12, even against parental guardianship.

Migrants from Central America, together with the majority Mexican residents, plan to manipulate the election with the help of the deep state in favour of Biden.

Donald Trump sold really important secret documents about the national distribution to the Russian state for an undisclosed exorbitant amount of money because they blackmailed him. Based on explicit film footage in a Russian luxury hotel room of truly heinous sexual acts involving several people, some of whom were allegedly underage.

You read it and doesn't get round to checking it out, but immediately goes against the excited machine and the invented scandal is in reality.

Welcome to the present day!

Why work together on issues that could be resolved on the basis of competences and compromises if it's all about power?

Education is a means of recognising facts and distinguishing them from non-truth. If there is no evidence and only stories, then it usually just sucks,

Read and compare sources, if there is only one source and only rumours it is usually bullshit!

It's still going down a level and just when you think that's the bottom, you're surprised that it's still unbearable.

Mod

Thoughts on the American debate culture in politics

It's really interesting how this topic has turned into such a scandal. Which is complete bullshit, just to polarise and divide. I was once in a great club in Luxembourg where there were only cubicles with no gender indication, just toilets and someone got upset about going into the same room one after the other to relieve themselves.

In the Roman Empire, everyone sat together in the same room in the loo and without separation by walls, face to face and talked to each other. How it all changes so beautifully culturally until the class struggle over which gender should shit where.

A neutral room labelled toilet or restroom is the most sensible solution to a problem that is not a problem.

mod

Just between us, even the biggest advocate of gender segregation will go to the wrong gender toilet in an absolute emergency unless he/she/it is a real "environmental prick" and shits where it is really inappropriate.

Abuse of power

On a global, social and individual level - and in different contexts in each case - abuse of power refers to behaviour that is based on the illegitimate use of power. The term refers to an accusation that is often used in combination with other terms such as corruption, arbitrariness, greed or thirst for recognition, some of which refer to the possible underlying motives. Various academic disciplines, preferably political and social sciences, but also many others such as economics or sexology, and depending on the context, possibly also criminology or police science, deal with the possibly very different consequences of abuse of power. As a rule, however, there is no definition of the term in either a scientific or other context.

Wikipedia more or less

How this picture came together with the gif can be clearly understood from the previous facts.

mod

We have no intention of influencing or even insulting anyone here.

That has probably already been done by the actual facts of the people involved. They insult human rights and don't even apologise, even though they pretend to believe.

Wow, how lucky we are - we thought nature had nothing left when humanity went down the drain.

Hey little wasch fetish if this isn't the beginning of civilisation.

He/she/it since we don't know that we don't want to commit ourselves, so what we have to say is that he discovered washing before the handgun as a civilisation good, which as we know does not occur with all humans in that order.

Who knows if you have already intellectually overtaken the person filming you, but you don't show it.

As if we're going to fuck this up really hard with humanity and we're going down with our civilisation. It's better to cooperate than to be separatists.

But the way you look, we think you already know that.

Good luck building a new mammalian civilisation smaller.

mod

And please don't start with religion, it only leads to ruin. If it's religion, then embed nature and life as a whole. Quite enough,

It gives a deep insight into the great primal fear of the so-called beast, the fear of the most brutal creature that has ever existed on earth, human beings, of being eaten by a fish threatened with extinction.

mod

I think the outrage would be enormous if there were cut-off arms and feet dangling up there.

I always hope there is no parallel universe in which a cruel species cuts off the arms and legs of a species of humans out of pure indulgence and superstition and then puts them back on the ground to die.

mod

I am in favour of sustainability in fishing - you can only take what can grow back.

If you kill a living creature to distort it, you have a responsibility to ensure that the creature has led a species-appropriate life until its death. And the absolute responsibility that its life is ended with maximum efficiency and with the least possible resources.

At the same time, the living creature must be completely utilised as food only in this way is it sustainable.

I am not against the consumption of meat, but it can be reduced to a minimum.

By buying only high-quality and sustainable meat from your local environment.

By the way, I don't make the completely nonsensical distinction between meat and fish because the meat from fishermen is substantial.

It's just an immoral distinction so that you can say: I don't eat meat! Which is factually wrong and an untruth.

If you really must eat meat do it with great humility and consider the luxury of the gift.

And eating sharks is real rubbish for morons who also eat the rhino horn from the rhino horn because they are addicted to the superstition that it makes them more potent.

Sometimes it's hard to believe how stupid people can be and how unscrupulous others can be to make money out of their stupidity.

mod