Is Spiegel’s head­line „Does Habeck do Ceaușescu?“ a warning to the Greens?


By JÖRG WOLLSCHLÄGER | In an article [link], Der Spiegel compares the German Minister of Econo­mics, Habeck, with the dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu, who let Roma­nians starve and freeze in a repres­sive slave system [link].


What paral­lels are there between the syste­matic impo­ve­rish­ment and impo­ve­rish­ment policy of the FRG leader­ship and commu­nist Romania? Are poli­ti­cians right to panic?

Bärbock warns of popular uprisings

Citi­zens should prepare them­selves for drastic rest­ric­tions in their quality of life due to the arti­fi­ci­ally created energy crisis, that’s what the news­pa­pers have been saying for weeks. The city of Ludwigs­burg is prepa­ring heat shel­ters for the popu­la­tion, and there is also talk of a nati­on­wide power blackout [link].

It is possible that the poli­tical decision-makers have the feeling that the citi­zens are not ready to adjust to real socia­list condi­tions. In an INSA survey, 53 % of those ques­tioned did not agree to the inter­rup­tion or regu­la­tion of the hot water supply or the heating tempe­ra­ture [link].

In addi­tion, there is the rising cost of living and explo­ding energy prices. 44% of citi­zens are „certain or very likely to take part in demons­tra­tions against the high energy prices“; as a precau­tion, the Minister of the Inte­rior has already declared such protests to be right-wing extre­mist [link]. The party’s own clientele, supporters of the Left Party, are ready to take to the streets toge­ther with AfD and FDP voters, which exposes the politician’s Nazi framing as an absur­dity [link].

The increase in energy prices will be followed by an unpre­ce­dented, deli­bera­tely induced, collapse of the economy with mass unem­ploy­ment and, as a result of infla­tion and increased trans­port costs, an exces­sive increase in food prices. Famine and condi­tions like those after the First and Second World Wars could be the result.

Bärbock even warned in an inter­view of popular upri­sings in connec­tion with the deli­very of the turbine for Nord Stream 2, which is a prere­qui­site for the continued flow of gas supplies:

„The Cana­dians said, ‚we have a lot of ques­tions‘, so we said, ‚we can under­stand that, but if we don’t get the gas turbine, then we won’t get any more gas, and then we won’t be able to provide any support for Ukraine at all, because we’ll be busy with popular uprisings.“

Analena Bärbock, 20 July 2022, link

At the same time, the state’s tax reve­nues are explo­ding, with which new ideo­lo­gical insa­nity can be financed. Compared to the same period of the previous year, the first quarter of 2022 saw a whop­ping 17.6% increase in revenue [link]. A further provo­ca­tion of the people is the announce­ment of emer­gency decrees, which Habeck justi­fies with „we are in the fifth month of war“.

Fore­seeable is an energy shut­down to deal another severe blow to the economy after the Corona chaos. At the same time, citi­zens are to be subjected to even stronger state repres­sion than during the Corona crisis; the police will also invade the private sphere („cold police“) in order to enforce the policy’s measures of restraint [link].

Is the impo­ve­rish­ment and humi­lia­tion just an imple­men­ta­tion error in the nume­rous failed social expe­ri­ments as leftist apolo­gists keep clai­ming? Will it certainly work next time? Or are hard­ship and misery for the people even the actual goal of all socia­list and commu­nist forms of rule?

What is the real goal of communism ?

The aim of commu­nism is the dispos­ses­sion of the people in order to force them into a state of total subju­ga­tion and depen­dence. Marx put it this way:

In this sense, the theory of the commu­nists can be summed up in a single sentence: Aboli­tion of private property.

Karl Marx, The Commu­nist Mani­festo, link

Who are the people to be made depen­dent on? Despite all the class struggle rhetoric, it is only about enab­ling the elite circles of the high and finan­cial aris­to­cracy behind the mask of commu­nism to radi­cally expand their power at the expense of the middle class [link, link]. Clas­si­cally, expro­pria­tion is the commu­nists‘ favou­rite means of giving a handful of ultra-rich people control over the people’s property. In this way they can achieve extre­mely profi­table state mono­po­lies and reap extreme profits through socia­list slave labour. At the same time they cause the most damage and suffe­ring and misery to the „class enemies“. Just coincidence?

„We must turn Russia into a desert popu­lated by white Negroes on whom we will impose a tyranny such as the most terrible despots of the East could never have dreamed of. The only diffe­rence is that it will be a left tyranny and not a right tyranny. It will be a red tyranny and not a white one.“

Leon Trotsky in Aron Simanovich’s „Rasputin: The Memoirs of his Secre­tary“, link

Less conspi­cuous are infla­tion (currency deva­lua­tions) or tax increases and impo­si­tions that serve to destroy the exis­tence of small and medium-sized enter­prises and thereby keep compe­ti­tion at bay from the appen­dages of the banks, the corpo­ra­tions. How aloof and unworldly was the commu­nist regime under Ceaușescu? Have the Greens also comple­tely lost their grip on reality with their ban hysteria and unrea­li­stic ideology?

„Son of the sun“ and „our earthly god“.

In typical commu­nist delu­sion, Ceaușescu was worshipped by court poets with titles such as „Titan of Titans“ or „Son of the Sun“; he was also considered „the Chosen One“, „our earthly God“ or „Genius of the Carpa­thians“. His domi­nee­ring wife had herself cele­brated as a „bold scien­tist and explorer, with inter­na­tional reco­gni­tion all over the globe“. Finally, Ceaușescu raised his son Nicu Ceaușescu to the throne, announ­cing the tran­si­tion to a commu­nist monarchy.

Wiki­media: rümä­ni­scher Parla­ments­pa­last 2004

The Stali­nist made his people foot the bill for over­sized pres­tige projects like the luxu­rious Palace of Parlia­ment. The murde­rous state police, the Secu­ri­tate, was parti­cu­larly hated. The children’s gulags were also a nasty chapter: disabled children and those of poor parents were tortured there under inhu­mane condi­tions. Due to the economy of scar­city common under commu­nism, the people starved, also because the „village destruc­tion programme“ to estab­lish agro-indus­trial complexes (coll­ec­tive farms) was a failure. Elec­tri­city cut-offs became common, Spiegel writes in its article that the people had to freeze at 12 C. Does the compa­rison with Ceaușescu hold water? What about commu­nist cadres in the FRG?

Take­over of the Greens by K‑groups

The programme of left-wing poli­tics, regard­less of party colour, is the achie­ve­ment of socia­lism, which is also supposed to be only a stage towards the suppo­sedly para­di­siacal final goal, commu­nism. In addi­tion to the estab­lished left parties, a whole fauna of commu­nist groups exists throug­hout the German-spea­king world. Their para­re­li­gious tendency towards secta­ria­nism and frag­men­ta­tion also contri­butes to this „diver­sity“. Examples are the Marxist-Lenist Party of Germany (MLPD), Red October, Red Flag (MLPÖ) and several others [link]. These parties were never conceived as mass move­ments, but as cadre parties and Maso­nian conspi­ra­to­rial secret socie­ties with Jesui­tical rituals of submis­sion and cadre obedience [link]. The task of the cadres is to infil­trate and ideo­lo­gi­cally assi­mi­late other groups. One of these is the Greens.

„They were citizen children, but not ’shel­tered citizen children‘, but ‚broken citizen children‘. They were seekers. […] Through Marxism and the orga­ni­sa­tions they founded, they could live out fanta­sies of power or violence, compen­sate for their own lack of orien­ta­tion, satisfy their need for reco­gni­tion or for belon­ging to a group,“ Hinck sums up. If Scien­to­logy had been in vogue instead of Marxism, „they might have joined Scien­to­logy en masse or founded similar sects“.

Gunnar Hink, link

Green on the outside, red on the inside: model Trotsky and Khmer Rouge

This approach, also called entrism, is parti­cu­larly prono­unced among the Trots­ky­ists, who are even more radical than the Stali­nists and strive for a perma­nent revo­lu­tion. Who have the left-wing poli­ti­cians taken as their model?

„We mean the word ‚red‘ lite­rally, for we shall shed such floods of blood that all the human losses suffered in the capi­ta­list wars will tremble and pale in compa­rison. The grea­test bankers across the ocean will work in closest contact with us. If we win the revo­lu­tion, we will build power […] on the ruins of the burial of the revo­lu­tion, and we will become a power before which the whole world will kneel. We will show what true power is. By terror and blood­baths we shall reduce the Russian intel­li­gentsia to a state of utter stupi­dity and idiocy and to an animal exis­tence… At present our young men in their leather jackets, the sons of watch­ma­kers from Odessa, Orsha, Gomel and Vinnitsa, know how to hate ever­y­thing Russian! What a plea­sure it is for them to physi­cally destroy the Russian intel­li­gentsia – offi­cers, acade­mics and writers!…“

Leon Trotsky in Aron Simanovich’s „Rasputin: The Memoirs of his Secre­tary“, link

For some, even Trots­kyism was (or is) not progres­sive enough. They take their cue from the Khmer Rouge, a bestial gang of murde­rers who took the lives of 1.7 million people. Moreover, accor­ding to the neo-Malthu­sian guide­lines of the Committee of 300, the Cambo­dian people should be allowed only the most primi­tive living condi­tions by these Stone Age commu­nists [link].

Wiki­media: Phnom_Penh_Killing_Field_Skull

Such K and Sponti groups infil­trated the newly founded Greens and the trade unions and edito­rial offices belon­ging to the parties. Conser­va­tive ecolo­gists around Herbert Gruhl were margi­na­lised early on and split off. Promi­nent German examples of entrists are Winfried Kret­sch­mann, the current prime minister of Baden-Würt­tem­berg, Krista Sager, the former party leader Jürgen Trittin, the tempo­rary vice-presi­dent of the German Bundestag Antje Vollmer, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, ex-Green leader Joschka Fischer, EU parlia­men­ta­rian Rein­hard Büti­kofer and Kerstin Müller [link, link].

So there are paral­lels, at least in terms of ideo­lo­gical orien­ta­tion, between the commu­nist regime in Romania under Ceaușescu and the leader­ship of the Greens. Have the Greens, espe­ci­ally Econo­mics Minister Habeck, gone too far, just like Ceaușescu?

Ceaușescu’s end: warning to Habeck?

Finally, the tormented people had had enough and turned against their oppressor, at least that is the offi­cial version. In fact, the over­throw came from parts of the secu­rity appa­ratus [link], as he refused to resign and initiate „pere­stroika“ during a visit to Moscow in November 1989. The Queen stripped him of the knight­hood he had been awarded in 1978 [link]. Clearly he had gone over the top with his refusal to resign to his comman­ders. Ceaușescu was sentenced on 25 December 1989 after a short „trial“ that lasted exactly 1 minute and 44 seconds and was imme­dia­tely put up against the wall toge­ther with his wife.

Then the Ceau­sescus appeared. „They whim­pered like children,“ Cirlan recalls. “ ‚We can’t be killed like dogs!‘ he shouted, looking at us. ‚We will be killed like dogs!‘ That was a hard moment for all of us. Then she said, ‚If you are going to kill us, don’t kill him out of respect for our love for each other and let me watch. At least let me die toge­ther with my husband.‘ And the general ordered, ‚Take her to the wall with him.‘ “

At one point Cirlan said, „It was so hard to look at them that we turned away. They were put against the wall. We knew who they were, but I suddenly saw this human face – he looked so confused. Then he looked me straight in the eye and shouted: „Long live the Socia­list Repu­blic of Romania! History will avenge me!‘ And he started singing a frag­ment of the ‚Inter­na­tio­nale‘. At that moment the order came and all three of us shot from the hip. We shot at him while he was singing. We shot from a distance of one metre, maybe even 50 cm. We had only emptied half the maga­zines before they were pressed dead against the wall. The impact of the bullets into her was so strong that she moved like this…“ and Cirlan, who had been sitting until now, stands up to demons­trate how Elena Ceau­sescu was slammed against the wall at an angle and upwards. Then he sits back down on the black faux-leather sofa.

Ed Vulliamy, Guar­dian article of 19 July 2009 [link].

Can the head­line in Der Spiegel be inter­preted as a warning to Habeck from the back­ground powers? Is he being dropped as a scape­goat or even staging a popular upri­sing like in Romania if the Great Reset plans fail? Is there dissent at a higher level?

Kommentieren Sie den Artikel

Bitte geben Sie Ihren Kommentar ein!
Bitte geben Sie hier Ihren Namen ein