EU MP Christine Anderson mentions “Corruption” and gets censored.

Alright… so it’s rather clear, isn’t it?

“Corrpution” is the forbidden word in the EU Parliament.
If you pronounce it you are being silenced and censored.
Why? And by whom?

Now, of course it’s not nice for anyone to be called “corrupt”. But that doesn’t mean that the use of the word and its meaning should be “taboo” and “banned”, because then there would be no way to even address the issue, as Christine Anderson is trying to do in this video. And that would be desastrous, in fact, it IS desastrous.

Because… in the end, CORRUPTION is actually the greatest global problem, not just in the EU. Maybe even the only problem. It is the underlying filth of all other problems in human society. Only corruption (in fact, lies) leads to or allows for war, major crimes and injustice. Corruption is indeed the greatest disease of humanity. And deep inside we actually all know this. So, in reality, any plausible suspicion should be mentioned with more ease so that it can be drawn to the surface. That is the only way to address and eradicate this authentic profound rot in human society.

And you know what? It’s also not nice to have to call somebody corrupt. It’s not nice at all to suspect that someone or some entity, organization has broken the trust that they have been granted. It’s quite probable that the word corruption often is not pronounced, not only because it’s some kind of taboo but also because one would prefer NOT to believe that his or her trust has been broken. People must be strongly convinced that corruption is really the matter before they reach the point of mentioning it. So some kind of balance exists. For one to dare and want to use the word corruption, quite some plausible suspicion must have accumulated over time. It is this plausible suspicion that then should be put to the test and eventually investigated.

What plausible suspicions may exist?

Maybe this question isn’t that hard to answer. This too, most people sense this deep inside:

  • Secrecy – specially if it concerns public representation or interest
    if they are supposedly working in your representation or interest, why should there be secrets?
  • Censorship – totally silencing dissident voices is often more than just a debate but in fact trying to silence plausible suspicion
  • Incoherence – someone says one thing, but does the other or says another thing later in time.
    Frequently this is excused by “you didn’t understand what I said (back then)”, “I didn’t mean it that way” or the easier and, in fact, frequently heard “I’m not aware of such” or “I don’t (exactly) remember”

 

 

[Total: 0 Average: 0]
13 views