Gleichschaltung

From Conservapedia
(Redirected from Pro-homosexuality buzzword)
Jump to: navigation, search
Words loosing their values
"Deceit and deception, falsehood and hypocrisy. In the eyes of this world nothing is too mean - if it leads to achieving the objective. Honor, character, principles – they play no role whatsoever. One thing is being said, other is being thought.[note 1] ... One thing is being said, other is being done. The word is losing its value because in the dirty politics, people do not know conscience, honor and morality. Anything goes there - there we are able to make alliance even with the devil, and yet we do it under the guise of and in the name of humanity, peace and justice!"
— Jozef Ondrej Markuš[1]
Living in a state of subjection
«The well-known English author, Somerset Maugham, wrote an important book entitled: Of Human Bondage. How easily men let themselves live in a state of subjection. You older people [in Germany] can remember how you submitted to Hitler. "I believed that two multiplied by two made twenty," many admitted. "I believed it because the Führer had said so!"»
— Wilhelm Busch[2]

Gleichschaltung (meaning "coordination", "making the same", "bringing into line")[3] was the Nazi policy enforcing political conformity in all sectors of society, from the economy and trade associations to the media, culture and education.[4] It is an example from the early days of the Nazi dictatorship of developing its own twisted and distorted language[note 2] used to manipulate and confuse citizens of a totalitarian state so that they no longer can distinguish truth from falsehood. Consequently, they are reduced to such a state of confusion[note 3] and impotence that the dictatorial government can control their hearts and minds. George Orwell’s famous books 1984 and Animal Farm are the classic fictional and symbolic statements addressing this aspect of totalitarianism.[note 4] The Ministry of Propaganda established by Joseph Goebbels, best known for his media and social manipulation in Nazi Germany,[5] is used as model for the Ministry of Truth in the 1984 book.[6] Orwell reasoned that if a government could control all media and interpersonal communication while simultaneously forcing citizens to speak in politically controlled jargon, it could blunt independent thinking.[7] One of the key figures in the process of Gleichschaltung that established the Nazi dictatorship was Hermann Göring, who in 1933 banned all Roman Catholic newspapers in Germany.[8] When gleichschaltung is applied into the realms of science, it transforms science into scientism. The twisted scientific methods and self-serving research are then used to support particular political agenda of the party or pressure group having special interests.

Key figures

Joseph Goebbels, also called the virtuoso of lying propaganda took control of, not only the press, but also radio, film, theatre, music, literature, and publishing, purging Jews and all opposition to Nazism from them. He was also behind The Eternal Jew and Jude Süss, now regarded for being the most notorious anti-Semitic films in history of film industry.[5]

The consequences of applauding falsehood

A high moral standard cannot be reached or maintained unless it is generally accepted and understood by an overwhelming number of people.[9] The nineteenth century French economist, statesman, and author Frédéric Bastiat warned that "When misguided public opinion honors what is despicable and despises what is honorable, punishes virtue and rewards vice, encourages what is harmful and discourages what is useful, applauds falsehood and smothers truth under indifference or insult, a nation turns its back on progress and can be restored only by the terrible lessons of catastrophe."[10]

LGBTI Gleichschaltung

About “new human rights”
[We can observe] the emergence of “new human rights” which, not being generally recognized as such, in fact stand in radical contradiction to “traditional” ethical and cultural values; and, consequently, are also in conflict with the existing domestic legislation and jurisprudence in most countries. They bespeak a “fourth generation” of human rights which, unlike the second and third generations, do not build on the first generation of “civil liberties” and complement them with social and economic entitlements, but are of a truly revolutionary nature: what was once considered a crime is to be transformed into a right, and what was once considered justice, into a human rights violation.[note 5]
—Jakob Cornides[11]

Libidinis causa

In the course of few decades the radical homosexual activists have managed to adopt the terminology of human rights[12] in order to make the way for their particular interests hence depriving the human rights of their true content.[13] LGBTI campaigners have been using the language of rights[14] in an attempt to add moral force to what are nothing more than personal desires. In many cases they have bypassed the democratic process and succeeded in imposing their views on the rest of the population by force of law given not by parliaments but created from judicial bench by means of judicial activism.[15] In Roman law this type of judicial activity made for the purpose of fullfiling the sensual lust and sexual bodily urges was titled Libidinis causa. The legal causes outwardly pretending the just cause but in fact hiding the real intentions and will of their originators were termed in Latin as Dissimulatio and Servius (Ulp. D.4,3,1,2) labeled them as deception (dolorum malum).[16] Francis Bacon regarded as negative phenomenon the dissimulation when a man lets fall signs and arguments, that he is not, that he is; and called as simulation the situation when a man industriously and expressly feigns and pretends to be, that he is not.[17]

In his short satiric video sketch titled Modern Educayshun, Neel Kolhatkar shows how policies of LGBTI Gleichschltung disguised under the label of Gender equality delve into the potential dangers of modern increasingly reactionary culture bred by social media and political correctness.[18]

The most frequent terms in LGBTI gleichschaltung

"Gay rights"

LGBTI lobbyists make efforts to equate sodomy, a pattern of perverse behavior between people of same sex involving anal or oral sex, with a civil right.[19][20][21] In Bowers v. Hardwick, the US Supreme Court ruled, that claiming, as LGBTI advocates do,[22] a right to engage in sodomitical conduct and argue that it is "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition" or "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty", is, at best, facetious. The U.S. Constitution does not confer a fundamental right upon homosexuals to engage in sodomy.

Sexual orientation

The term Sexual orientation is used by “gay” activists to deceive both policy makers and the public about the nature of homosexuality, which should be more accurately termed a sexual disorientation.[note 6] The LGBTI, or gender nonsensical theory about sexuality was invented by “gay” political strategists to serve their own selfish interests at the expense of the welfare of society as a whole. It helps to frame the debate about homosexuality in such a way that the average person is tricked into accepting “gay” presuppositions without challenge and even those people who continue to oppose the homosexuals’ political goals start using their twisted language. Once the presuppositions have been accepted, especially when they become “law” in so called "anti-discrimination" policies, resistance to rest of the “gay” agenda becomes much more difficult. The only effective counter-strategy is to reject and refute the false assumptions of sexual orientation and re-frame the issues on a truthful foundation.[29]

Homophobia

Homophobia is an obscure psychiatric term originally coined to define “a person’s fear of his or her own same-sex attraction.” It has been redefined and misused by the political strategists of the “gay” movement such as George Weinberg in order to ostracize all disapproval of homosexuality as a form of hatred and fear akin to mental illness (a phobia is an anxiety disorder). The word “homophobia” is today not a scientific term, but a propaganda tool for psychological manipulation. As a rhetorical weapon, it serves:

  • first to define anyone who opposes the legitimization of homosexuality alias sodomy as a hate-filled bigot
  • the term can be used as the semantic equivalent of “racist,” helping the “gay” movement further indoctrinate the public with the notion that opposition to homosexuality is equivalent to prejudice against racial minorities
  • collectively, the word “homophobia” serves pro-“gay” advocates to intimidate opponents into silence.
  • Smith maintains that it can be regarded as a form of defence mechanism, a sort of guilt-shifting trickery which is adopted immediately when initiator of this label comes short of arguments thus tries to sabotage any rational discourse[30]

When any expression of opposition to homosexuality alias sodomy draws the accusation that one is a mentally-ill bigot equivalent to a racist, few people will venture to express their opposition to sodomical lifestyle publicly. Those who still will do, will also tend to be defensive, offering the disclaimer that they are not hateful, thus unintentionally but implicitly validating the lie that hatefulness and not valid objections is the general rule. The solution countering this LGBTI gleichschaltung is to reject the term “homophobia” itself as harmful and illegitimate. Its illegitimacy can be exposed by making the "gay" sophists define the term with emphasis on the distinction between "homophobia" and non-homophobic opposition to sodomical lifestyle based on presenting valid arguments, such as, for example, scientific thought experiments. They will reveal that they accept no opposition to their agenda as legitimate.[note 7]

Heterosexism

Heterosexism is another artificial word invetned by LGBTI political startegists and sex reformers. It has been designed to derogate the scientific conclusion that natural family framed in traditional marriage of one man and one woman should be accepted as the best norm for society in order to ensure its integrity, and that this norm should be upheld and valued in social institutions, including public schools. Totalitarian supporters of gender ideology striving in their activism for acceptance of deviant sexual behaviours insist that words such as "wife," "husband," "father" and "mother" used in association with family life are "discriminatory" and should not be taught to children.[29] They are trying to enforce into schools their politically correct educational programs, such as one called “Proud Schools” in Australia, thus advancing their political agenda under the fig leaf of promoting tolerance and an anti-bullying message.[31]

Notes

  1. cf. Machiavellianism
  2. cf. "Together with new methods and a new morality they have introduced also a new vocabulary into Europe." Duff Cooper, House of Commons, October 3, 1938 (After Munich Agreement); See Also Examples: Politics: Peace for our time vs. The first foretaste of a bitter cup
  3. cf. "The well-known English author, Somerset Maugham, wrote an important book entitled: Of Human Bondage. How easily men let themselves live in a state of subjection. You older people can remember how you submitted to Hitler. 'I believed that two multiplied by two made twenty,' many have since admitted. 'I believed it because the Führer had said so!'"[2]
  4. cf. Newspeak
  5. cf. "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter." Isaiah 5:20 Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.®
  6. Disorientation is the opposite of orientation. In more general sense, it is a cognitive disability in which the senses of time, direction, and recognition of items (things), people and places become difficult to distinguish/identify[23] and can be due to various conditions, e.g. from delirium[24] to intoxication. Typically, disorientation is first in time, then in place and finally in person.[25] Mental disorientation is closely related, and often intermixed with trauma shock, including physical shock. In case of sexual disorientation, the cognitive disability pertains to recognition of own sexual identity, it can also be fueled by delirium[26] and intoxication,[27] and finally ends up in difficulties to properly distinguish/identify a person normal to mate with (i.e. focusing on individual(s) or object(s) other than person of the opposite sex of legal age instead, See Also: Paraphilia). With respect to sexual disorientation, the trauma shock often comes from child molestation or sexual abuse,[28] respectively. Sexual disorientation can be the aim of pressure groups spreadding the homosexual agenda, in order to deliberately augment the misinterpretation of same-sex attractions among children and young people by misusing the ideomotor effect.
  7. The “gays” outrageous mistreatment of Miss California 2009, Carrie Prejean, for simply giving her opinion that marriage should be between a man and a woman is illustrative of this fact.

References

  1. Jozef Ondrej Markuš (2001). Prorok Daniel (in Slovak). Matica slovenská, 164–165. ISBN 80-7090-600-6. “Klam a zvod, faloš a pretvárka. V očiach tohto sveta nie je nič príliš podlé - ak to vedie k dosiahnutiu cieľa. Česť, character, zásady nehrajú nijakú rolu. … Iné sa hovorí a iné sa myslí. Iné sa hovorí a iné sa robí. Slovo stráca hodnotu, lebo v špinavej politike nepoznajú svedomie, česť a mravnosť. Tam je všetko na niečo dobré, tam sa spájame aj s diablom a ešte to robíme pod pláštikom a v mene humanity, mieru a spravodlivosti!” 
  2. 2.0 2.1 Wilhelm Busch (2001). Jesus our destiny. Brunen Publishing. ISBN 0-86347-024-6. 
  3. www.princeton.edu. https://www.princeton.edu.+Retrieved on December 6, 2014.
  4. Christoph Strupp. 'Only a Phase': How Diplomats Misjudged Hitler's Rise. Spiegel Online International. Retrieved on December 6, 2014.
  5. 5.0 5.1 Jerry Bergman (2012). Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview: How the Nazi Eugenic Crusade for a Superior Race Caused the Greatest Holocaust in World History. Joshua Press, 194–5. ISBN 978-1-894400-49-7. “Goebbels...His chief propaganda theory was "the Big Lie": if something is repeated often enough, people will believe it no matter how false. This technique worked very well in disenfranchising Jews.” 
  6. Edgar Feuchtwanger. Nazi Gleichschaltung. The new perspective journal. Retrieved on December 6, 2014.
  7. Stella Morabito (24 June 2014). How The Trans-Agenda Seeks To Redefine Everyone. Retrieved on 16 April 2016.
  8. Hermann Göring, "The Iron Knight". www.HolocaustResearchProject.org. Retrieved on 5 June 2015. “Georing had joined the Reichstag in 1928, and subsequently became the parliament's president from 1932 to 1933, he was one of the key figures in the process of Gleichschaltung that established the Nazi dictatorship. For example, in 1933 he banned all Roman Catholic newspapers in Germany, despite the support the Centre Party had given to Hitler's chancellorship.”
  9. Peter Hitchens (2010). "6. Homo sovieticus", The Rage Against God. www.continuumbooks.com. ISBN 978-1441-10572-1. 
  10. Bastiat, Frédéric. 21 Economic Harmonies 21.35. Liberty Fund, Inc.; Econlib. Retrieved on May 17, 2015.
  11. Jakob Cornides (2009). Natural and Un-Natural Law. International Law Group Organizations. Retrieved on 3 September 2015.
  12. Bob Marshall. Sodomy is not a civil right. CNN. Retrieved on 20 Feb 2016. ““Sodomy is not a civil right. It’s not the same as a civil rights movement, … sodomy is not a civil right, and there’s an effort by homosexual lobbyists to equate the two. That’s wrong. It’s a pattern of behavior.””
  13. Gabriele Kuby. "VIII. Politické znásilnenie jazyka (Political rape of the language)", Globálna Sexuálna Revolúcia. Strata Slobody v mene Slobody. (Global Sexual Revolution. The loss of Freedom in the name of Freedom.) (in Slovak). Bratislava, Slovakia: Lúč, 219. ISBN 978-80-7114-922-4. “The title in German original is “Die Globale sexualle Revolution.”” 
  14. Peter Sprigg (2007). Homosexuality Is Not a Civil Right. Family Research Council. Retrieved on 18 Nov 2014. “The stories of Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. have become an inspiring part of American history. It’s not surprising that homosexual activists have tried to hitch their caboose to the “civil rights” train. They do this in the context of efforts to change the definition of marriage in order to allow same-sex “marriages” (by comparing same-sex “marriage” to interracial marriage) and efforts to pass “hate crime” laws (which stigmatize opposition to homosexual behavior as a form of “hate” comparable to racism). The”
  15. Steve Doughty (20 March 2012). Gay marriage is not a 'human right': European ruling torpedoes Coalition stance. Associated Newspapers Ltd; Part of the Daily Mail. Retrieved on 11 October 2015. “Norman Wells, of the Family Education Trust, said: ‘For too long campaigners have been using the language of rights in an attempt to add moral force to what are nothing more than personal desires. ‘In many cases they have bypassed the democratic process and succeeded in imposing their views on the rest of the population by force of law. ‘We are seeing the same principle at work in the Government’s sham of a consultation on same-sex marriage.’ He added: ‘The ruling from the ECHR will embolden those whose concerns about same-sex marriage and adoption are not inspired by personal hatred and animosity, but by a genuine concern for the well-being of children and the welfare of society. ‘Instead of rushing to legislate without seriously considering the views of the electorate, the Government should be encouraging a measured public debate on the nature and meaning of marriage.’”
  16. Karol Rebro (1995). Latinské právnicke výrazy a výroky (in Slovak). Iura edition, 100–1, 173. ISBN 80-88715-20-2. “za účelom žiadostivosti, zmyselnosti” 
  17. Francis Bacon. Essays of Francis Bacon:Of Simulation and Dissimulation. Retrieved on 9 Jul 2016. “There be three degrees of this hiding and veiling of a man’s self. The first, closeness, reservation, and secrecy; when a man leaveth himself without observation, or without hold to be taken, what he is. The second, dissimulation, in the negative; when a man lets fall signs and arguments, that he is not, that he is. And the third, simulation, in the affirmative; when a man industriously and expressly feigns and pretends to be, that he is not.”
  18. Neel Kolhatkar. Modern Educayshun. Retrieved on 6 December 2015.
  19. Sodomy is not a civil right. Retrieved on 2 june 2016. ““Sodomy is not a civil rights movement...Sodomy is not a civil right, and there’s an effort by homosexual lobbyists to equate the two. That’s wrong. It is a pattern of behavior.””
  20. Peter Sprigg (2007). Homosexuality Is Not a Civil Right. Family Research Council. Retrieved on 18 Nov 2014. “The stories of Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. have become an inspiring part of American history. It’s not surprising that homosexual activists have tried to hitch their caboose to the “civil rights” train. They do this in the context of efforts to change the definition of marriage in order to allow same-sex “marriages” (by comparing same-sex “marriage” to interracial marriage) and efforts to pass “hate crime” laws (which stigmatize opposition to homosexual behavior as a form of “hate” comparable to racism).”
  21. Peter Sprigg (2004). Outrage: How Gay Activists and Liberal Judges are Trashing Democracy to Redefine Marriage. Regnery. ISBN 978-08952-60215. “…the Supreme Court has never declared sexual orientation to be a protected class under civil rights laws…” 
  22. Wtvrerikaneddenien (18 May 2012). Marshall: ‘Sodomy is not a civil right’. WTVR. Retrieved on 2 June 2016. “William Eskridge, a Yale Law School professor, has spoken out against Marshall's statement, saying sodomy is, in a practical sense, a civil right--according to the Supreme Court...“The Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence that anal or oral sex, commonly known as sodomy, when performed in private by consenting adults, is constitutionally protected -- which makes it a civil right,” Eskridge told MSNBC.”
  23. Isaac M., Janca A., Sartious N. (1994). ICD-10 Symptom Glossery For Mental Disorders, 10, WHO. 
  24. Delirium. Patient, the independent health platform. Retrieved on 14 Feb 2016.
  25. Berrios G. E. (1982). Disorientation States in Psychiatry., 479–491. 
  26. Drunk Danes - Gay parade (18+; Parental Supervision is Advised) (7 Jan 2008). Retrieved on 14 Feb 2016.
  27. (2011) christopheryuan. WaterBrook Press, 82. ISBN 978-0-307-72935-4. “I felt like we had become one - our souls enmeshed. But in reality, much of the passion between us was fueled by Ecstasy - thus our relationship was fierce and intense, both good and bad.” 
  28. Lenderking WR et al. (12 Apr 1997). "Childhood sexual abuse among homosexual men. Prevalence and association with unsafe sex.". J Gen Intern Med. (4): 250–3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9127231. Retrieved 14 Feb 2016. "Of 327 homosexual and bisexual men participating in an ongoing cohort study pertaining to risk factors for HIV infection who completed a survey regarding history of sexual abuse, 116 (35.5%) reported being sexually abused as children. Those abused were more likely to have more lifetime male partners, to report more childhood stress, to have lied in the past in order to have sex, and to have had unprotected receptive anal intercourse in the past 6 months (odds ratio 2.13; 95% confidence interval 1.15-3.95). Sexual abuse remained a significant predictor of unprotected receptive anal intercourse in a logistic model adjusting for potential confounding variables.". 
  29. 29.0 29.1 Scott Lively (2009). Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda, 1 (Version 1.1), Veritas Aeterna Press, 6, 104.  See Scott Lively.
  30. Frank LaGard Smith (1993). Sodom's second coming. Harvest House Publishers, 29. ISBN 978-15650-71544. “the page number is from 2004 Czech translation” 
  31. Hilary White (18 October 2012). Children to be taught 'heterosexuality not the norm' in Australian schools project. LifeSiteNews.com. Retrieved on 11 October 2015. “In an editorial, the [Sydney] Telegraph said that it “goes without saying that any measures to stop bullying or abuse in our schools are desirable and welcome,” but the newspaper questioned whether the Proud Schools program “is so ridiculously proscriptive and politically correct it might have the opposite effect.” “Indeed, it appears that far from merely promoting tolerance, the program seeks to advance a political agenda. Teaching high school students that gender and sexuality are ‘fluid’ concepts and that ‘binary’ notions such as gay and straight are ‘heterosexist’ is not an anti-bullying message. It is presenting a particular view - and doing so as though it is scientific fact.””

See also