Internet-Statement 2011-20 "Yes, We Can" Reloaded? Maria
Weiß may
25, 2011 The principle of presumption of innocence
which allegedly is not existing in the American juridical system, at least not in
the same form as
in Europe and other
countries around the world, for instance is precisely
intending to prevent, inter alia,
politically motivated acts of revenge. The fact that, in this
case, a man
only on suspicion is treated
in fact like a dangerous criminal,
and thus in advance
is already being sentenced,
with all the consequences - this has really
a very special taste. Now it became known that the respective person is in the hands of a private
security service in an
unknown location - these security services
are not required to
tell where it is - , not far from
Ground Zero, as
it was said. In any case, the main
responsible persons certainly will know the place. But
everyone knows what private security services can do, for example just think of the Iraq war, what kind of crimes
they are able to commit. One can
not help thinking, in this
case, in the view
of this whole procedure,
that it actually means not only a
kind of punitive action
in advance against
this respective person, but
also a kind of punishment
of European countries
and also of some
of their efforts to come free from tutelage. Can the principle
of "suspicion is sufficient" be accepted? At times of the
so-called reunification of Germany
in the early 1990's, our organisation has
been dealt with this problem. For example,
at that time there
was a meeting of
the then so-called
Independent Trade Unionists, which came mainly from
the former GDR, a
fierce debate about the
question of whether, for
example, the allegation
of sexual harassment by
a woman solely is sufficient
for a conviction of the
affected man. Some people
there said that due
to the weaker position
of women "suspicion is sufficient ", what was decisively denied by
us. It's not about
denying, from the start, the
possibility of such action on the part of the involved male, that would be nonsense.
It's all about that before
a conviction or even
just a quasi
conviction through a similar
public action the respective facts must be enlightened. Equal rights
for everyone are regardless of
gender. One cannot apply double standards here, neither as a
means of compensation for
in fact existing inequalities. What to complain
about a certain kind of action such as in China in relation to the so-called dissidents? In
principle, the distinction
is little or none, what
throws a light on
the state of mind of the so-called critics
of the Chinese
revisionists, of the present Chinese government, on the part of the U.S.
imperialists and other
imperialists and reactionaries. The society, also the global society, as a matter of fact is divided into
classes, or let us call it
interest groups or interest communities,
and these are not
exactly identical. They
are partly in a very sharp and even to some
extent in an irreconcilable contradiction
to each other, and that
affects the whole society.
It should now be obvious
that the exploitation
has spread to the
whole world -
"globalisation"- and
this fact has
just to do with very
different approaches to property and the use
of it, to appropriate the
labour of others in order to multiply property, generally speaking. Marx
has delivered a
much more accurate and
detailed analysis 150
years before, and this has not been
refuted yet, in
no way as a whole.
There are objectively
irreconcilable interests in society,
and they just play a role in social events and
also in the approach,
whether by individuals,
whether by governments, institutions, interest groups or anyone else. And
these objective things
very well are
in relation with each other and
also with others. We must defend this materialistic
method, otherwise you can
not see things
properly. There are always
opportunists and others
who are opposing that and try to lump it together with so-called conspiracy theories. In the present
case, it catches the eye
that at first a
completely outstanding action
is present here, the international
exposing of a top international representative of the international
financial bourgeoisie
allegedly unmasked as a criminal, what (still)
is not the
case. The question
suggests itself, why it
is done in this way. And a number of answers are possible. The first thing
to say is that
the U.S. juridical system is different from the
European one, namely the fact that the principle of presumption of innocence is handled less stringent than in
Europe. But that is not the reason for
such an approach as
in this case because, if you compare
it for example with other
cases, there was not a similar action in these cases, not even
close to that, so indeed you have to ask yourself what the aim is and
which reasons they have to pursue this aim.
And a number of outstanding circumstances are catching the eye. For example, the
economic crisis in the
U.S. (and not only
theirs) is aggravating increasingly.
They do not know how they
will ever pay their
debts, remaining the leading economic power
in the world what
is something that
absolutely does not fit together, at least not
in permanence, surely it cannot but end
for them in a similar
disaster. Next it is a
fact that the present management
of the IMF in a certain sense has favoured the
European position - and thus a competitor – as well as
it has signalled a certain willingness to recognise the
emerging demands of
new international forces
such as China and other so-called
emerging powers on
other continents, though of course in the
whole history there have been
close connections to the U.S. Of course, in the
eyes of an economic power that
strives to preserve domination and
hegemony, increasingly outdated,
this is not just
what they wish
for themselves and a
clash is inevitable
in some way.
So it is not an outrageous consumption that anyone here has played
with the idea to bring about a change,
"unscheduled" and quite suddenly. It's not a coincidence
that now for example also
a Turkish representative
is under discussion as a successor
to the IMF top
job. It is likely
that this would still
fit best into the concept of
the U.S., since Turkey plays an important
role in the preservation of their influence
on European countries
and the EU as a whole and more recently on the development
in the Middle East. One should not
underestimate: the U.S.
government still has considerable difficulties
to keep under control the situation
in the Middle East.
The contradictions with regard to Israel are
not to be overlooked,
at least on the conceptual level, and they are increasing. And as for the mass
movements in these countries, everything else is in sight, but that they
will readily prevail there.
In any case they need a
"stabilising force"
trying to represent its interests in regard
to certain other so-called
emerging powers, "Bridge Powers" of Europe to Asia
and Africa. And there
Turkey seems to propose itself. Let's see what will come out. Of course, such a
lack of self control or
a possible act of violence would not be all right,
if it had occurred. Of course
it could not be tolerated. But what is being
practised here is outstanding, this international exposing and incitement,
almost reminiscent of pogroms. That can
not be tolerated in any way. Anne Will talk round of may 22 on the
given theme It’s extreme, these people who simply
refuse to think politically. It may be true that this class or, if you
like, caste or whatever you want to call it has the peculiarity (also)
in France to be snobbish and
vain. But the crucial question that still arises is, what happened in fact? And that must be answered. Only for comparison:
Who represents for
here the hundreds of thousands
of young women from
Eastern Europe or countries
of the Third World, which are deported to here and
forced into prostitution, by
force, by the
respective traffickers and mobsters,
etc.? Who speaks for them with such vehemence as it
is done in this single case which not even is enlightened? I
still have not heard
that even one of these criminal pigs
that operate in human trafficking, was similarly put to pillory
in public. So much for "Double
Standards Reloaded".
In this respect the supposed champion
of women's emancipation, Alice Schwarzer, said succinctly: "Prostitution
is not prohibited"!
Nobody can hardly express his own perversion
more clearly , and also the
dirty sweatshop mentality
that comes to light
in it. You really do not have to wonder how
this woman stoops to be a reporter for the "Bild-Zeitung" in the Kachelmann trial. On the subject
of rape Homosexuality is abuse
of human nature, nature
in general. This will not be attacked by these forces.
On the contrary, it is
touted as supposed emancipation.
A forced sexual act is a
rape of woman that
can not be accepted, of course. Homosexuality,
however, is violation of human
nature, and that
is worse, even
if it takes place
"by mutual consent,
" it is abuse of nature,
which would inevitably
lead to its
demise, if it should
prevail in general, because
any reproduction of
nature - at least in all higher forms -
needs sexual polarity.
Only very few
and poorly developed creatures
go through this process unisexual, but “within same sex" it
does not happen at all.
You can measure
the essential contents of the propaganda
(especially by the
ruling caste) for
so-called "homosexual
lifestyle". Who is "detached" from what in this respect? The really important thing about this whole matter is
that action must be taken against this type
of methodology. The
only principal conclusion to
be drawn from this whole
affair and from this whole
situation, from the whole
crisis, which worsens
further and further, is that
the overthrow of the
imperialist-capitalist
system (including its
revisionist re-editions)
is on the agenda all over the
world. And those
peoples that have risen
and all those who will rise up in future
will do well
to recognise this
and to accept democracy
in its literal sense, hold their own against all imperialist manoeuvres and
resist all attempts of manipulation.
(Translation of the German original) www.neue-einheit.com www.neue-einheit.de |