Posted May 15, 2015
Disney made Anti Nazi Propaganda in Film Shorts with better quality than this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l14WDZCnz-w
Elmofongo
It's 2L84U
Registered: Sep 2011
From Puerto Rico
Disney made Anti Nazi Propaganda in Film Shorts with better quality than this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l14WDZCnz-w
Pantoprazol
Shaggydog
Registered: Aug 2011
From Austria
Posted May 15, 2015
Would you mind writing us what exactly are you studying, which MEP you interned with, what political direction you lean towards and finally, what your position is on TTIP?
Are you kidding?
Don't get me wrong, of course I'm not serious with these questions, although I'll admit that I'm genuinely curious, which is why I asked pretty nicely.
But why mention what de_Monteynard has about having first-hand experience etc. in the first place, if he cannot or won't back it up?
Such as it stands, it seems to me to be some kind of argument from authority (e.g. he saw behind the curtain and the rest of us did not, or similar) and given the fact that he mentioned Malmström and a critical, "left" viewpoint in the same sentence, I take the message with a grain of salt.
Rincewind81
yeah
Registered: Jun 2011
From Germany
Posted May 15, 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l14WDZCnz-w
Elmofongo
It's 2L84U
Registered: Sep 2011
From Puerto Rico
Posted May 15, 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l14WDZCnz-w
But yeah despite its propagandistic origins I found the quality of the animation surprisingly well done. I find myself watching it over and over. They speak in German instead of Accented English.
There is a flaw of course. Little Hans could not possibly have became a soldier because by the time the war is over and the Nazi Party collapse he would have been still 11 years old or even younger judging from the timeline of the Nazi Party.
Mr. D™
steamrefugee
Registered: Mar 2014
From Germany
Posted May 15, 2015
Since I`m not a native english speaker, I refer to this article in the british guardian newspaper.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/14/ttip-deal-british-sovereignty-cameron-ukip-treaty
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/14/ttip-deal-british-sovereignty-cameron-ukip-treaty
de_Monteynard
Technologist
Registered: Jul 2010
From Slovenia
Posted May 15, 2015
I hope you will excuse you if I do not provide your quotes with my direct responses bellow as GOG makes separting posts into smaller quotations a proverbial pain. I will just write my responses in separate paragraphs for easier reading.
First of all concerning Cecilia Malstrom. You are right in saying she is a liberal and that her party is part of ALDE that supports the TTIP. This is why I put left in quotation marks, however, as Scandinavian liberals are to my experience more social than German or continental liberals. The remark about her being critical was meant as an assessment of her character in general. As the Home Affairs commissioner, she held up her own ideas (at least that is the impression I got).
Secondly, about the documents. Yes, a lot of what the public knows comes from leaked documents and I have used them myself in essays and briefings. Nevertheless, the Commission has willingly opened to consultation and has provided official documentation. One of the reason why some of them are still unavailable is simply due to negotiation secrecy. It is the same in the private sector with NDA. Some stuff is just too sensitive and may destroy your negotiating position if it becomes known to the public (although the USA may already have that info due to their snooping operations, but that is for another discussion). Also, some elements of TTIP may relate to Member State secrets, which is why such documents will be kept secret by the Council.
In any case, the actions of the Commission, even if under pressure from the public, civil society and the European ombudsman, show a change in the nature of the beast. Again, never before have trade negotiations been as open. This is a positive thing and I hope that we will see more of this in the course of the TTIP and in future negotiations. The public needs to be reassured that what is done puts their interests first and foremost.
About generating jobs. Uff, that is a difficult one. There have been so many studies and even though I understand the basics of macro-economics, I cannot comment on such studies. The models they use and the data they have differ from research to research. There is also the question of redistribution of any gains among those who may have lost their jobs/living due to increased trade. But that is a national issue, as EU does not have competence in social security.
Concerning the ISDS, please look at my previous post. I presented articles showing exactly the same as you and the Commission's proposal how to change it. Hopefully, we will see something like it in the future.
As for my credentials, I did my undergraduate studies in Slovenia and my obtained my Master of Advanced Studies at the College of Europe in Bruges. Whether or not that makes me the mouthpiece for the propaganda or not is up to you.
I will not mention the MEP, however. She is now retired and out of the public life. Her work on TTIP was no-existent, as even the EPP could not agree if she was to present her views on it or not. Plus, it was at the very end of her mandate. This also means that she was not privy to all the highly classified documentation, or at least, they did not show it to me. I had to use leaked documents myself to bring her up to speed!
Consequently, I apologise if it appeared as if I spoke from a position of authority. I only do so as someone who has knowledge of the EU field and has followed developments. My first forays into the subject was an analysis of the impact of TTIP on the multilateral trade system (very dry reading, I am sad to say). This was around the time it was announced, which means, however, that I have kept an eye over what has been going on since the very start.
As for my personal views, I admit that I am a liberal and supports free trade. That does not mean that I will allow anything to enter my country and I support the Commission's position to maintain our high social, environmental and health standards.
First of all concerning Cecilia Malstrom. You are right in saying she is a liberal and that her party is part of ALDE that supports the TTIP. This is why I put left in quotation marks, however, as Scandinavian liberals are to my experience more social than German or continental liberals. The remark about her being critical was meant as an assessment of her character in general. As the Home Affairs commissioner, she held up her own ideas (at least that is the impression I got).
Secondly, about the documents. Yes, a lot of what the public knows comes from leaked documents and I have used them myself in essays and briefings. Nevertheless, the Commission has willingly opened to consultation and has provided official documentation. One of the reason why some of them are still unavailable is simply due to negotiation secrecy. It is the same in the private sector with NDA. Some stuff is just too sensitive and may destroy your negotiating position if it becomes known to the public (although the USA may already have that info due to their snooping operations, but that is for another discussion). Also, some elements of TTIP may relate to Member State secrets, which is why such documents will be kept secret by the Council.
In any case, the actions of the Commission, even if under pressure from the public, civil society and the European ombudsman, show a change in the nature of the beast. Again, never before have trade negotiations been as open. This is a positive thing and I hope that we will see more of this in the course of the TTIP and in future negotiations. The public needs to be reassured that what is done puts their interests first and foremost.
About generating jobs. Uff, that is a difficult one. There have been so many studies and even though I understand the basics of macro-economics, I cannot comment on such studies. The models they use and the data they have differ from research to research. There is also the question of redistribution of any gains among those who may have lost their jobs/living due to increased trade. But that is a national issue, as EU does not have competence in social security.
Concerning the ISDS, please look at my previous post. I presented articles showing exactly the same as you and the Commission's proposal how to change it. Hopefully, we will see something like it in the future.
As for my credentials, I did my undergraduate studies in Slovenia and my obtained my Master of Advanced Studies at the College of Europe in Bruges. Whether or not that makes me the mouthpiece for the propaganda or not is up to you.
I will not mention the MEP, however. She is now retired and out of the public life. Her work on TTIP was no-existent, as even the EPP could not agree if she was to present her views on it or not. Plus, it was at the very end of her mandate. This also means that she was not privy to all the highly classified documentation, or at least, they did not show it to me. I had to use leaked documents myself to bring her up to speed!
Consequently, I apologise if it appeared as if I spoke from a position of authority. I only do so as someone who has knowledge of the EU field and has followed developments. My first forays into the subject was an analysis of the impact of TTIP on the multilateral trade system (very dry reading, I am sad to say). This was around the time it was announced, which means, however, that I have kept an eye over what has been going on since the very start.
As for my personal views, I admit that I am a liberal and supports free trade. That does not mean that I will allow anything to enter my country and I support the Commission's position to maintain our high social, environmental and health standards.
Post edited May 15, 2015 by de_Monteynard
DracoMagister
GNU/Linux User
Registered: Oct 2014
From Spain
Posted May 15, 2015
This video made by ATTAC explains it better than the one in the OP: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4OQeekSD6s
Post edited May 15, 2015 by DracoMagister
Rincewind81
yeah
Registered: Jun 2011
From Germany
Posted May 15, 2015
1. Bury your weapons and everything with a swastika in the woods.
2. Go home.
They survived - many other kids not. Especially kids believed till the end in an "ultimate victory".
Thanks for the long and informative post!
Post edited May 15, 2015 by Rincewind81
KiNgBrAdLeY7
Слава России! ура́
Registered: Apr 2012
From Other
Posted May 15, 2015
Nah. Won't happen.
As globalization didn't happen.
Thankfully.
They are misunderstanding.
Different people and different cultures, even bound within the same country and growing up the exact same way, will always be different.
Thankfully.
New world order has failed already and they do not even know it.
Somebody wake them up and tell them crawl back in their holes empty-handed.
As globalization didn't happen.
Thankfully.
They are misunderstanding.
Different people and different cultures, even bound within the same country and growing up the exact same way, will always be different.
Thankfully.
New world order has failed already and they do not even know it.
Somebody wake them up and tell them crawl back in their holes empty-handed.
Post edited May 16, 2015 by KiNgBrAdLeY7
de_Monteynard
Technologist
Registered: Jul 2010
From Slovenia
Posted May 15, 2015
Thank you for being an anti-Angst German. I come from a very German part of Slovenia and it is a shame to see what has happened to your nation.
I know that as a German, you are probably aware of this, but for international readers, there is an excellent article from Der Spiegel about Germany's new and growing protest culture.
I know that as a German, you are probably aware of this, but for international readers, there is an excellent article from Der Spiegel about Germany's new and growing protest culture.
Mr. D™
steamrefugee
Registered: Mar 2014
From Germany
Posted May 15, 2015
First of all concerning Cecilia Malstrom. You are right in saying she is a liberal and that her party is part of ALDE that supports the TTIP. This is why I put left in quotation marks, however, as Scandinavian liberals are to my experience more social than German or continental liberals. The remark about her being critical was meant as an assessment of her character in general. As the Home Affairs commissioner, she held up her own ideas (at least that is the impression I got).
Secondly, about the documents. Yes, a lot of what the public knows comes from leaked documents and I have used them myself in essays and briefings. Nevertheless, the fact that the Commission has willingly opened to consultation and has provided official documentation. One of the reason why some of them are still unavailable is simply due to negotiation secrecy. It is the same in the private sector with NDA. Some stuff is just too sensitive and may destroy your negotiating position if it becomes known to the public (although the USA may already have that info due to their snooping operations, but that is for another discussion). Also, some elements of TTIP may relate to Member State secrets, which is why such documents will be kept secret by the Council.
In any case, the actions of the Commission, even if under pressure from the public, civil society and the European ombudsman, show a change in the nature of the beast. Again, never before have trade negotiations been as open. This is a positive thing and I hope that we will see more of this in the course of the TTIP and in future negotiations. The public needs to be reassured that what is done puts their interests first and foremost.
About generating jobs. Uff, that is a difficult one. There have been so many studies and even though I understand the basics of macro-economics, I cannot comment on such studies. The models they use and the data they have differ from research to research. There is also the question of redistribution of any gains among those who may have lost their jobs/living due to increased trade. But that is a national issue, as EU does not have competence in social security.
Concerning the ISDS, please look at my previous post. I presented articles showing exactly the same as you and the Commission's proposal how to change it. Hopefully, we will see something like it in the future.
As for my credentials, I did my undergraduate studies in Slovenia and my obtained my Master of Advanced Studies at the College of Europe in Bruges. Whether or not that makes me the mouthpiece for the propaganda or not is up to you.
I will not mention the MEP, however. She is now retired and out of the public life. Her work on TTIP was no-existent, as even the EPP could not agree if she was to present her views on it or not. Plus, it was at the very end of her mandate. This also means that she was not privy to all the highly classified documentation, or at least, they did not show it to me. I had to use leaked documents myself to bring her up to speed!
Consequently, I apologise if it appeared as if I spoke from a position of authority. I only do so as someone who has knowledge of the EU field and has followed developments. My first forays into the subject was an analysis of the impact of TTIP on the multilateral trade system (very dry reading, I am sad to say). This was around the time it was announced, which means, however, that I have kept an eye over what has been going on since the very start.
As for my personal views, I admit that I am a liberal and supports free trade. That does not mean that I will allow anything to enter my country and I support the Commission's position to maintain our high social, environmental and health standards.
This position paper from the EU commission clearly states that they want to extend the privatization of public wellfare massively in contrast what they mentioned in public media.
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/july/tradoc_151623.pdf
The aim of TTIP is to make privatization permanent
And privatization of public wellfare, like waterservices in Paris for example has always led to lower quality and higher prices. In fact the situation in Paris got so bad, that the city had to buy back the privatized water services. It was a very expensive and horrible experience for Paris. Same story with Berlin and its water services.
With TTIP and its ISDS clause not only countries, but also cities can get sued by companies for "lost expected revenues". Search for Quebec and Fracking. Also the article in Der Spiegel is neoliberal propaganda and not true at all. Der Spiegel used to be a journalistic milestone, but today they are just licking the lobbyists toes :(
Also, I`m not an "angst-german" I am a pissed off european. Pissed off because corporations try to undermine democratic legislation.
Post edited May 15, 2015 by Nr8
OlivawR
New User
Registered: Dec 2013
From Italy
Posted May 15, 2015
I love these informative political topics. Specially those where someone informs us that some politicians are lying because some other politicians said so.
Pantoprazol
Shaggydog
Registered: Aug 2011
From Austria
Posted May 15, 2015
Thanks for the reply and thank you for the clarification about your position in this matter!
While I have the same impression as you on Scandinavian liberals being more social than most of the rest of the EU-liberals, I remain distrustful about Malmström, especially after she became the EU Commissioner for Home Affairs.
I refer to the fact that she started to implement internet censorship (Netzsperren) in the name of fighting against child pornography, which is a weak pretense in this case, given the fact that "Netzsperren" won't do anything albeit concealing the problem of child pornography elsewhere, while being very problematic from a democratic perspective.
Besides, wouldn't you say that trying to enforce internet censorship laws is a very unliberal approach to legislation in general? (Malmström even earned a nickname for this, Censilia...)
About the opening of documents, the fact remains that this happened only after the public put enough pressure on the EU. Without it, everything would remain secret until the end. While I agree to some extent that revealing all of the information could compromise one's own negotiating position, this sounds somewhat evasive in the context of TTIP due to its wide reaching implementations and the harm it could produce. Furthermore, you said it yourself, the NSA probably has most of the information already thanks to their invasive spying programs.
The public cannot be reassured that their interests are put first simply because privatization (especially of essential goods, e.g. water) is pretty much contrary to this statement/goal.
And I ask again, why is there no termination clause for TTIP? As it stands, if TTIP comes into effect, its content is to remain secret until - I'm not sure which year exactly - after 5 years or so after its implementation (why!?) and it is then effective permanently (not really a why, but a WTF!?).
About jobs: I find it interesting to mention, that most of "TTIP will generate jobs"-research is funded one way or another by the EU or parts of the industry, while most independet research suggests that "TTIP will cost jobs".
Can you at least explain this odd discrepancy?
There was also this one EU-Commission funded research saying TTIP wil create jobs, which used economic models and growth calculations of 0,05%/year developed and meant for use in the 1980s and 1990s, which are grossly outdated today. They also just assumed (without any evidence whatsoever) that sectors benefiting from free trade openings will simply compensate for any and all shrinking sectors due to the free trade openings.
Funny conincidence? I find that highly unlikely.
And last but not least, labeling opponents of TTIP as "angst-germans" without refering to their concerns is at best ignorant and at worst disingenuous.
While I have the same impression as you on Scandinavian liberals being more social than most of the rest of the EU-liberals, I remain distrustful about Malmström, especially after she became the EU Commissioner for Home Affairs.
I refer to the fact that she started to implement internet censorship (Netzsperren) in the name of fighting against child pornography, which is a weak pretense in this case, given the fact that "Netzsperren" won't do anything albeit concealing the problem of child pornography elsewhere, while being very problematic from a democratic perspective.
Besides, wouldn't you say that trying to enforce internet censorship laws is a very unliberal approach to legislation in general? (Malmström even earned a nickname for this, Censilia...)
About the opening of documents, the fact remains that this happened only after the public put enough pressure on the EU. Without it, everything would remain secret until the end. While I agree to some extent that revealing all of the information could compromise one's own negotiating position, this sounds somewhat evasive in the context of TTIP due to its wide reaching implementations and the harm it could produce. Furthermore, you said it yourself, the NSA probably has most of the information already thanks to their invasive spying programs.
The public cannot be reassured that their interests are put first simply because privatization (especially of essential goods, e.g. water) is pretty much contrary to this statement/goal.
And I ask again, why is there no termination clause for TTIP? As it stands, if TTIP comes into effect, its content is to remain secret until - I'm not sure which year exactly - after 5 years or so after its implementation (why!?) and it is then effective permanently (not really a why, but a WTF!?).
About jobs: I find it interesting to mention, that most of "TTIP will generate jobs"-research is funded one way or another by the EU or parts of the industry, while most independet research suggests that "TTIP will cost jobs".
Can you at least explain this odd discrepancy?
There was also this one EU-Commission funded research saying TTIP wil create jobs, which used economic models and growth calculations of 0,05%/year developed and meant for use in the 1980s and 1990s, which are grossly outdated today. They also just assumed (without any evidence whatsoever) that sectors benefiting from free trade openings will simply compensate for any and all shrinking sectors due to the free trade openings.
Funny conincidence? I find that highly unlikely.
And last but not least, labeling opponents of TTIP as "angst-germans" without refering to their concerns is at best ignorant and at worst disingenuous.
Post edited May 15, 2015 by Pantoprazol
djranis
Booze
Registered: Sep 2011
From Canada
Pantoprazol
Shaggydog
Registered: Aug 2011
From Austria
