Germar Rudolf, Resistance Is Obligatory (2012; PDF-Datei

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
Germany in the process of the increasingly fanatic enforcement of “political
correctness”:
“He who nowadays expresses a really controversial position will
instantly hear a clamor of outrage or will even be suspected of having
breached a taboo in a dangerous way. The liberal public tends
to no longer allow any other than the liberal opinion [or what it considers
to be liberal, GR]. A list of thoughts could be drawn up, the
expression of which is almost prohibited. [Only almost? GR …] Liberalism
has prevailed, but this victory consists in having lost its tolerance.
A persecuting liberalism has evolved that puts all contemplation
under the suspicion of radicalism which is searching for alternatives
to the persisting conditions. […] Victorious liberalism has
assumed the mentality of a State Protection Force which sees enemies
of the constitution everywhere. […] Nowadays one is faster
classified as a fascist than one can blink with an eye.”
Mathias Kepplinger, who has thoroughly investigated the media’s
methods to ostracize dissidents, wrote in a study with the title The Art of
Scandalization and the Illusion of Truth: 198
“What are the reasons for the intolerant reactions of these people
who consider themselves to be tolerant? One reason is the firm conviction
that dissidents not only have the wrong opinion, but that they
reject reality, which itself is a result of the successful establishing of
a generally binding point of view. […] The claim of validity is documented
in an exemplary way by scandalizing persons and organizations
violating the norms. The aim of the scandalization is public
condemnation. […] Hence nonconformists have to be eliminated.
[…]
The condemnation of nonconformists caters to the majority’s
feeling of superiority, and it serves to subjugate those who have been
scandalized. […] In this sense all scandals have totalitarian traits:
They aim at enforcing conformity by all, because public deviation of
a few would challenge the claim to power of the scandalizers and
their adherents. The big scandals can therefore also be viewed as
democratic versions of show trials.”
And if public scandalization is not enough to suppress dissent, then
the State resorts to trials, as can be seen in my case.
198 Die Kunst der Skandalierung und die Illusion der Wahrheit, Olzog, Munich 2001, pp. 84f., 88f.
178