What Smell Cheerleader Sock

1-2: political conformity

"If elections could change that would be prohibited them" - Bertold Brecht

lies in the word democracy, the hidden assumption that the people of the real sovereign state would be. Today democracy has nothing to really very little with such a democracy and is actually no longer a representation of the people more.
The citizen should choose, but what's available in Germany selectable parties? New parties and parties that do not fit the established parties to be erased from this politically or legally, or controlled by the worm press so made that they have little chance to take the 5% barrier.

looks at European level, from even much worse, as countries such as Italy, Poland and Romania require that once more than 130,000 signatures are collected, so that one party is allowed. Apart from European political parties are banned in all Member States, which predestined the European Parliament in its function to ineffectiveness. [9]

reflects the concept of "consensus society" today's political Happen again and does the complete equalization of all parties with the state authorities, with press and radio and all other relevant groups. Since there is no place for people who want to take their political rights. Said Helmut Kohl said in the fall of 1999 that he was with Franz Josef Strauss and Helmut Schmidt has always agreed that no democratically elected parties could be tolerated in addition to the established ones.

Comparing the electoral programs, we recognize the one hand, similarities between the parties themselves and the other little programs to the things that would keep the people themselves for important issues. Often the most important issues in the parties' agreement deliberately kept out of the election campaign. Moreover, it is questionable whether a program will last longer than until the day after the election, because you can make one party responsible for non-compliance with its promise to sell not so, does not apply to the parties, the law of unfair competition, such as for product advertising. So partial to stand only as a peace party, and later vote for the war.

Before the extreme left and right parties in Germany warned. You would want to abolish the Constitution. They are observed by the intelligence services and some politicians want to ban them. On closer examination, however, noted that it is the ruling parties really that contrary to the constitution act: Finally, the ruling parties have American bombers from their bases in Germany from departing the invasion of Iraq and therefore contrary to the constitution a war of aggression under-supported, the ruling parties have CIA teams with their planes in Germany off and land and and help the U.S. government in the disappearance and torture of people without public trial, they restrict the freedom of the citizens and they want to restrict the right of assembly, they want to use the armed forces in the interior, may shoot down hijacked planes, and abolish the private sphere to monitor every citizen total and listen prophylactically.

And if you look at the candidates in the parties, there are in every party which one would choose under any circumstances, but which will be chosen when a party is his voice. Shall elect the citizens at large often the party he believes to be the lesser evil - if he chooses. The Parties will determine which candidate is on which list position. And if a candidate of a party no longer fits, it is removed from the list, no matter how many votes he got. The party collects the mandate.

Since the citizens elect a party because he does not want the other party, and then both his surprise at the end to form a coalition and make his Desire nothing. Here comes this way, a 5% party to power, and in key policy areas happened so, what does a minority of 5%, and the democratic will of 95% is ignored. The

for example, in Spain used the example of the Iraq war in 2003. Contrary to the will of 91% of the population, the English government donated to the side of President Bush. This also ignored the protests of hundreds of American cities, and held his speeches rather by state-paid soldiers, who cheered on command. Surprisingly, this results in the parliaments often quite different majorities than on the streets. You can see this, then you understand what Rudi Dutschke as leader the student movement in the 60's, said: [10]

"There is in the German Parliament, no, I repeat, no ', represents the interests of the German people!"

A year after Dutschke 1967 these view had expressed publicly on television, was committed in Berlin to assassinate him.

It is typical of today's democracies that completely implausible statistics are expressed, reflected at all in private polls. Appalling and totally unacceptable is when politicians and parliamentarians are also to boast of having squandered a decision as a People's decision would not have materialized. Here, they reveal a governmental understanding of the current policy that the people are stupid and should be guided by a wise government.

The parliamentary procedures not strengthen confidence in democracy. It is said that the deputies were only responsible to their conscience. But just in case is the whip on everything and who does not go along because, after the next election is no longer there. Extortion is therefore a legitimate parliamentary means, and the Basic Law does not count in doubt. The parties share the belief of members, which they obliged by Article 38 of the Basic Law itself are necessary, repealed.

And you do not believe anyone could be as simple deputies in the Bundestag to make a speech. Who can speak on a subject, as decided by the Group.

democracy seems so today only as a method to provide crowd quiet and they fool the significant participation in the political process. And hardly a party in Germany be trusted to change that situation. A party like the CDU, which precludes a member of Parliament as Hohmann creates, not sure. A party like the FDP, which excludes, probably also not a member of Parliament as Möllemann. And a social party like the SPD, the most anti-social reforms in the history the Federal Republic of progress brings surely it is not.

A Look around the world also shows that even the voting process is not always flawless throughout. The slopes and pasting over of election posters, and the disruption and disturbance of other campaign events appear here are only the most primitive maneuvers. In the election in Iraq in 2005, according to the former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi whole truckloads to full ballot boxes have been replaced, [2] and in October 2008 was an employee of the Central Election Commission in Germany announced that here all the sealed ballot boxes-within three minutes could be shared. In Venezuela in 2004 revealed an analysis the elections for a whole range of deception: multiple select, not hand-written signature, missing lists, including of foreigners, minors, deceased, and the signatories are not on the electoral roll, theft of identity. [3] in Mexico resulted in a random judicial review of the 2006 elections, that with almost 6,000 from 8621 examined ballot boxes were anomalies [4] which speaks for wide-scale fraud, and this despite (or because) the U.S. had sent a number of poll workers and election consultant to Mexico. And as it is in the U.S. itself? Clint Curtis, chief programmer of the firm Yang Enterprises Inc (YEI) in Florida, conjured up in December 2004, by affidavit sworn before a U.S. committee, that the U.S. Congress MP and later a member of the Judiciary Committee of the House Tom Feeney of the company YEI for the elections in Florida in 2000 a program for touchscreen voting machines did, which could falsify election results without being detectable later. Technically this is impossible, because the basis of the source code can detect a fraud specialist at all times. Curtis said Feeney about something that is possible only if the uncompilierte source code would remain hidden. [5] And that is also up today in the U.S. voting machines the case: the source code is a secret thing.

in Germany were used in the 2005 Bundestag constituencies in 2200 with over 2 million voters for counting the votes cast, voting machines of the Dutch manufacturer Nedap, but its programs are also subject to confidentiality. [6] early 2008, the Chaos Computer Club Hamburg attention to the simple falsifiability of data with the computer results of elections in Hesse and Lower Saxony, but only acted in a display of slander. And what does it mean when the software is declared a secret thing and the code is not public may be inspected? - This means then that the ruling parties in win future elections are always and no one will notice that actually none of these parties was really elected, and everyone will think wrongly, but the majority was probably stupid enough to do so.

in early elections without a computer is to hear from counting errors, because as said a returning officer, a fax machine would send by itself will always both sides of a paper. In an election in Dachau, near Munich, 3500 ballots disappeared and 404 of them appeared in a paper container at the town's yard again. Elsewhere in Bavaria were "practice papers" letter ballots counted and manipulated by CSU-city councils, to a municipal employee Raided Wahlfälscherin. Neubrandenburg was found with a voter an error of 7,500 votes, and in an election in Hamburg in early 2004, 90% of the posters of the Schill party away from the streets, ballot papers found with already set the cross for the CDU and the total came to 100% votes together. [7] Yes, even in the Federal Parliament adopted it at the polls not accurate when the rough road ahead in the government: In the vote on the tax increase in May 2006, the voice of the Christian Democrat Reinhard Goehner was recorded, although he logged off and had the vote was not there. The voice of the Christian Democrat Jochen-Konrad Fromme, however, was not registered, even though he was there. A repeat of roll-call vote was thought to be unnecessary, however. [8] These two votes may have not really decided the outcome. And as if such interference in elections would only marginal and never the tip of the iceberg, so no systematic information on the extent of election falsification, because the investigations and explanations were never complete. If you do know that is taught in spy schools, how elections best spoofs (see later in text), one should operate at the slightest suspicion of election fraud to clarify the situation with a very different depth and a lot faster elections . Convene

The voter was supposed to self-examine at least able to determine whether his vote is correctly arrived at the right place and whether or not people, streets and whole villages were included, which does not exist. Tamper-proof numbered ballot papers, secure fingerprint systems with liveness detection and verifiable, digital voting systems with open software could play a positive role. It also requires a political landscape in which even small parties a fair chance to grow up without being infiltrated and trimmed. Candidates should not be by the parties "above" but from the proposed constituencies "down". And in the end, a parliamentarian his constituents and his conscience be responsible, instead of having to obey a whip.

[1] http://www.stern.de/politik/deutschland/?id=519510&nv=pr&pr=1 01/28/2004.
[2] Spiegel Online: Ex-Minister Alawi raises serious allegations of fraud, 30.12.2005.
[3] http://www.netzwerk-venezuela.de/firmas/ , 18/04/2004.
[4] Ralf Yield: Signs of election fraud are increasing. Telepolis, 14.08.2006.
[5] Anna Kuehne: U.S. election results 2000 falsified evidence. annakuehne.twoday.net, 02/02/2008.
[6] e-voting, challenging the election because of voting machines, Heise Online, 14.11.2005.
[7] Spiegel Online: calculation errors, embarrassing breakdowns in the Hamburg election, 3.3.2004.
[8] Süddeutsche Zeitung: breakdown in the vote on the tax package, 27/28.5.2006, p. 6.
[9] http://www.newropeans-magazine.org/ , 19.3.2009.
[10] Similarly, he says in the First German Television on 12.03.1967 in the program "to the Protocol" evening program. See YouTube: Dutschke with Gaus, 21/03/2008.