In the Communist European Union is presently ongoing discussion concerning fresh instruments to combat the right. The European Commission and the safety authorities indicate that "new prevention strategies" must be implemented at this stage. The thought is to extend the definition of extremism to include political views contrary to the dominant, far-left ideological line of Brussels.
The EU wants to recognise the opponents of sex and climateism as terrorists. According to media information, the fresh programme to prevent terrorism and radicalisation is intended to strengthen the ability of EU countries to respond to "changing terrorist threats and violent extremism". The paper points, among another things, to ideological motivations as 1 of the factors that could lead to violence, including aversion to alleged LGBT environments. This leads to a situation where those who object to deviant ideological demands will be seen as a possible origin of terrorism.
The EU institutions have been developing a strategy to prevent radicalisation for years. It includes, among another things, monitoring of content on the Internet, educational activities, de-radicalisation programmes in prisons or cooperation between associate States on the exchange of information on threats. The aim of these initiatives is to reduce recruitment opportunities for terrorist organisations and to prevent political violence.
According to Europol reports, the threat of terrorism in Europe is diverse and covers respective ideological trends. Above all, it is Muslim jihadist terrorism, left-wing terrorism and separatist terrorism. But now, the EU wants to force the right into this framework, too, which does not agree to mass immigration, climate and medical murder, and to extend the privileges of sexual deviants. According to Eurocommunists, specified views are to be the origin of terrorism on an equal footing with jihadists, although there has not yet been a single assassination by, for example, the enemy of the ETS system.
Therefore, the question arises of the boundary between combating radicalisation and protecting average freedom of speech and the right to criticism. The concept of "radicalisation" can be interpreted very widely. If it is defined besides mostly and criticism of genderism and climateism is brought up to terrorism, police action will include those expressing peaceful, legitimate opposition to certain political or planet views. This is simply a panic known from russian times, where government critics were sent to the camps for being “enemies of the people” and only a righteous system.
Unfortunately, the current debate in Brussels forms part of a wider dispute over the direction of safety policy in the EU, where the fight against extremism clearly leads to a simplification in ideological pluralism and freedom of public debate. The eventual goal is to gagged the mouths of critics of the absurd ideology of the far left.
As a result, at the end of this road, terrorists will become members of conservative, white, Catholic families. Demanding normality, the worst of radicals and terrorists will be declared.
We besides recommend: Leader of “Polish Thoughts” defends the commemoration of a judaic communist
