https://youtu.be/HggOu6PqEUA
Hello, friends. In this video, I will talk about current social and political topics. I will evaluate what has happened recently.
In this video, I will focus on interesting topics, for example, the news I learned about the most influential Czech, Ivo Lukačovič . He is a huge media mogul and oligarch who has many times more power than any prime minister – as in general, the media has more power than politicians. So, we will talk a little more about this Czech Goebbels . Indeed, this man is so insidious and evil that he has exactly the same karma as Goebbels, as his newspapers express themselves very chauvinistically towards Slovakia.
I will also talk about Andrej Babiš , the current situation in the Czech Republic, and information that has not been mentioned in the media at all. It is certainly very interesting and enriching when I express my opinion on the topic of politics as a person who sees behind the scenes and knows the most powerful people. And the most powerful are mainly the media, or rather the people behind them. So I will also talk about these media power games .
I will also address several church topics .
Artificial intelligence in speech transcription
As for artificial intelligence , the recording itself is not a work of artificial intelligence, but artificial intelligence is already working when converting speech to text, or rather, it also makes some language corrections. Of course, I have to check everything afterwards. It's quite exhausting because, unfortunately, even artificial intelligence is not that good yet, especially in Slovak.
You still find two to three errors on one A4 page. And it's quite exhausting to reread it and then correct the errors. If you have a two-hour podcast, you immediately have 25 A4 pages, so you can calculate how many errors need to be corrected. That's probably the most exhausting part. I also constantly try to learn and improve how to work with artificial intelligence to make the most of its potential. For example, creating subtitles for a transcribed podcast to make the text clearer.
The situation in Ukraine and the peace treaty
Once again, I would like to briefly comment on the situation in Ukraine . Trump's peace treaty (proposal) was very bizarre because it basically stated something in the context that Ukraine must first hand over a fairly large amount of territory to Russia , and only then can there be any discussion about a ceasefire. So that is completely absurd.
Only then can there be any guarantees, provided that Ukraine must first hand over the territories, and not the other way around – that there are guarantees or a ceasefire first, and only then. Or the so-called demilitarized zone, which is to be created, where officially there should be neither Ukrainian nor Russian soldiers, but there is no longer any guarantee that the demilitarized zone would also be protected. This means that the Russians would be the first to violate the agreement and occupy further territory without a fight. It would be very easy to see how that would turn out.
Sanctions against Russia
Allegedly, it still works in such a way that Ukraine is being pushed to hand over territory; the discussion on the part of Trump and his people has not completely died out.
Furthermore, what I personally perceive as very dangerous is that even if a ceasefire were to occur, the sanctions against Russia would be lifted . Unless the political leadership changes in some way for the better, I do not expect that peace could occur, or that it would even be realistic.
But it would be possible to lift the sanctions, because if the West automatically lifted the sanctions against Russia just because the Russians agreed to a truce, that would be very dangerous. Russia could be economically strengthened again and then they could start the war again in a few years. Personally, I think that as long as Putin is in power and some moderate person does not take over, the sanctions simply have to continue. And it would be very dangerous if they did not continue.
The collapse of the Russian economy
Personally, I think that even if the sanctions were lifted now, Russia would go bankrupt. That if there was a ceasefire and the sanctions were lifted, Russia would not avoid bankruptcy or a serious financial crisis. Maybe not in a year, not in two years, but maybe in about 10 years. Because this war must have consequences for the Russian economy for several decades. So personally, I think that if some other aggravating factors were to combine in connection with the Russian economy, which can happen very easily, then even if the sanctions were lifted and there was a ceasefire, it might not prevent the collapse of the Russian economy. And of course, I'm not saying that it would happen in a year or two, but it could easily be a dragging problem in about 10 years.
Of course, there were also very naive opinions that the Russian economy would completely collapse within six months of the start of the war. For example, Martin Svarovský, a dubious analyst, held such views. I immediately knew that this was a very exaggerated and crazy opinion, that this would not be true. But problems can really arise if Russia continues the war for longer.
Mobilization and Civil Resistance
Russia also has a great advantage in that it does not mobilize soldiers, or mobilizes them by force only to a minimal extent. Ukraine has it quite a bit harder in this matter, as it has to forcibly recruit and mobilize soldiers. So in this respect, Russia has the upper hand.
On the one hand, I think that it is probably not an endless queue of people who are willing to go and die in Ukraine for a lot of money from Russia. In my opinion, this pool and reservoir of people willing to fight voluntarily on the side of Russia will be exhausted and is not endless, and in that case, Russia itself could be in a tight spot. That's my opinion.
In fact, Putin is very afraid of a general mobilization throughout Russia, because in that case, he would be fighting for his bare ass. He too could lose power, because there could really be too much civil resistance, which could realistically mean that Putin could lose power.
The cynical logic of compensation
Putin certainly does not want to lose power voluntarily, so he will avoid general mobilization in Russia until the last moment. Such a phenomenon may also occur. I'm not saying it has to happen, but I personally think that even the reservoir of people from the poor regions of Russia is not unlimited.
It probably works there on some cynical logic – in Russia: yes, I know I'll die in Ukraine, but maybe I'll at least provide for my family. Apparently, there is a lot of compensation for when a soldier falls. The family will get a decent compensation.
On the other hand, it's probably not that simple with the compensation either, because it only occurs if the coffin of the fallen Russian soldier is actually physically brought to Russia. If the soldier gets lost somewhere – and there may be a majority of them – then compensation is not always paid. So, it's not that simple either.
Ivo Lukačovič
Well, I also learned new information about the Czech Goebbels, the neo-Nazi Ivo Lukačovič , a prominent media owner. It is already an enormous extreme to what extent this man spreads hatred towards the Slovak nation, and it is very sad.
This man actually occupies most of the media market in the Czech Republic, which even led to the Office for the Protection of Competition dealing with him because too much power and too much of the media market is concentrated in his media. A really bad, insidious, and immoral person, he has too much influence.
Although this is not current information, I looked up some information about him on YouTube. About a year ago, it was discussed that the Office for Economic Competition (in Slovakia, it's probably called the anti-monopoly office) was also dealing with him. It was also discussed that the entrepreneur Michal Srnad was probably very bothered by the anti-Slovak stance of Lukačovič's hateful, neo-Nazi media.
Michal Srnada met with Ivo Lukačovič, but after that meeting, it may have had the exact opposite effect. Perhaps Ivo Lukačovič became even more embittered, and there was even more hateful content against Slovakia in the media. The meeting probably ended in an argument. Michal Srnada was interested in buying part of his media, but it ultimately didn't happen.
Lukačovič as an autistic and the division of society
I am 100% convinced that Ivo Lukačovič is clearly an autistic person who may not even realize how much damage and evil he causes with his media and how he divides society.
Basically, that person probably adheres to the philosophy that because there is a pro-Russian government in Slovakia, we can dehumanize politicians to an unlimited extent and spread an unlimited amount of disinformation against them.
It is not so clear that the Slovak government is pro-Russian. As far as external communication is concerned, yes, but as far as real actions are concerned, there is no state that would support Ukraine more, especially in terms of weapons and ammunition, than Slovakia. So I think it is quite clear in this area. One thing is what politicians communicate externally before the elections, and another thing is what is actually done.
Not to mention that Slovak-Ukrainian diplomatic relations are much better than Czech-Ukrainian relations. The Slovaks had much more frequent intergovernmental negotiations. I think the Czech Republic and Ukraine had only one intergovernmental negotiation, and the Slovak-Ukrainian Fico government had about four. This also speaks to the diplomatic relations that individual governments have. But the propaganda in the Czech Republic says something else.
Lukačovič's meeting with Fiala
It is also very interesting that Petr Fiala's great supporter, Ivo Lukačovič, met directly with Petr Fiala. Some smaller Czech media drew attention to this and stated that they had clear evidence that Ivo Lukačovič met with Petr Fiala (at the time when Michal Srnada wanted to buy him). It's quite strange.
Just so you know who Michal Srnada is – he is the owner of one of the largest companies in the Czech Republic, which focuses primarily on arms production, mainly in Slovakia, where he owns arms companies. So this man would certainly have enough money to buy Ivo Lukačovič's disinformation portals.
Personally, I think that Ivo Lukačovič is an influential and powerful man, but on the other hand, such people can paradoxically be very lonely . They may not have real friends. That man is a truly lonely autistic person. Maybe there is no one to tell him that he is really overdoing it with that hatred against the Slovak nation.
Then, of course, he only communicates with his hierarchically subordinate people, and they honestly can't say anything to his face. If you express disagreement with your superior, you logically get fired immediately and lose your cushy job. So it's absolutely clear that his direct subordinates will never honestly tell him anything, even if they don't identify with what Ivo Lukačovič wants from them (to spread so much hatred). They probably don't identify with it themselves, but they are simply told from above what to do. If you don't obey, you lose your job. End of discussion.
The effectiveness of media manipulation
Another thing that needs no comment is when the most influential Czech media oligarch, basically the most influential person in a kind of shadow Czech government, who has far more power than politicians, meets with his politician, whom he strongly supports, Petr Fiala. That probably needs no comment.
It is clear that brainwashing and massive media manipulation work very effectively, because despite the fact that Fiala's government was an open mafia (the Dozimeter case, the Bitcoin case – purely mafia cases of the highest caliber), both political parties did not end up so badly in the elections. The manipulation by the media is incredibly effective.
People have no critical thinking at all. They just uncritically consume whatever the media serves them, and no one critically considers whether it is some kind of manipulation. The fact that the Spolu party and the STAN party received as many votes as they did, and that STAN did not end up outside parliament at all, I think is an incredibly effective manipulation by the media, led mainly by Ivo Lukačovič, who covers most, or the largest part, of the Czech media market.
Media manipulation really works very well in the context that, for example, attention was constantly diverted from the Czech Republic to Slovakia. Hugely harsh propaganda against Slovakia, such as: "Vote for Petr Fiala, otherwise you will end up like Slovakia." Meanwhile, Slovakia was reported on in an extremely manipulative and insidious way, as if it were a thousand times worse country than it actually is. Really disgusting disinformation propaganda.
Of course, as I have stated in the past, this could have been Ivo Lukačovič's main motivation to inform about Slovakia in such a hateful way – to divert attention from all the failures of Fiala's government. A philosophy of this type: "Although Fiala's government is not much, if you vote for Babiš, you will end up like Slovakia. So rather vote for the lesser evil, Fiala's government, the political parties that are in his fold."
Problems with forming a government
Of course, the Czech media have done enormous damage, because now Babiš has a very big problem forming a government. He is forced to cooperate with a very unfortunate political party, the SPD party of Okamura , also because Babiš did not get enough votes. If Babiš had received even more votes (if the votes given to the Spolu coalition and the voters of the STAN party had been transferred to the ANO party), the Czech Republic could have had a truly dignified government without the extreme right.
Although the number of votes for the political parties in Fiala's government decreased compared to the elections four years ago, I still thought the drop would be much greater, incomparably greater. After all, it's an unbelievable fact that people are so manipulated that they have no problem going to the ballot box and voting for an open mafia, for those mafia political parties. I don't understand it.
If there really was no other alternative. Babiš is a really decent person who has never had corruption affairs, which is a completely different level. The Stork's Nest case, which I studied, is ordinary media manipulation. It's really nothing.
The blackmail of Andrej Babiš
What is actually happening in the Czech Republic? Petr Pavel blackmailed Andrej Babiš for a very long time in a very insidious way. It wasn't talked about much in the media, but it was very brazen and insidious on Petr Pavel's part.
The Constitution of the Czech Republic states very clearly that the President must appoint a new government. It is certainly not within the President's legal competence to assess whether a politician is in an alleged conflict of interest or not. I can only guess what might have been behind such harsh blackmail.
There may certainly be some media pressure for President Pavel not to be labeled in the media as Babiš's ally, and so he tried to make the appointment of the government as difficult as possible for him. Another thing is that perhaps Petr Pavel surrounded himself with very bad people and lawyers who advised him very badly.
Another thing is a decision by a Czech court that went against Babiš, but in practice, we know that the media has far greater power than the courts. And when the courts acted under immense pressure from the media, which spread a huge amount of hate and animosity against Babiš, it's logical how they actually decided. We also have a huge number of examples in Slovakia, for instance, in connection with the Čurilla case, where it's proven that the media has far greater power than the police and the courts. This is certainly happening in the Czech Republic as well.
When the court receives something politically exposed, it has to whistle according to what the media, which has the greatest power, says. Likewise, as long as President Pavel wants to be on good terms with the media, he cannot easily dismiss Babiš's government.
Interview with Zoroslav Kollár and censorship
Furthermore, I noticed an interesting interview with Zoroslav Kollár on the aktuality.sk portal. What do I think about Zoroslav Kollár? Personally, I don't think that this man did not commit criminal activity, because he was investigated by the Čurilovci, and the Čurilovci are fraudsters. Even Marek Vagovič had to admit, at least in part, that those Čurilovci are simply scoundrels, that they had so-called technical files. When even Marek Vagovič, as the biggest supporter of the Čurilovci, is forced by the facts to admit, at least in part, that not everything was in order there, then I think it is a very serious matter.
Although Zoroslav Kollár has been legally convicted, when you torture someone in custody, I don't know, for a year, that person will basically confess to anything. Similarly, judges from the Judicial Council point out that someone who has been legally convicted is not necessarily actually guilty.
On the other hand, I absolutely despise Zoroslav Kollár. For me, he is a stupid person who is inclined to the extreme right and to conspiracies, and that is very far from me. I also have an extremely bad feeling about his political party. When he hastily gathered dubious people from the street, whom perhaps even he himself does not know, nor can he rely on them in the event that he would actually get political power, I would have quite big concerns. But it's still better than the Republic.
Now, to get back to that interview. The interview was very interesting, even though I don't know Zoroslava Kollára at all and I absolutely despise him. Personally, I am a person who has a sense of objectivity and justice, and the media should really treat every politician, regardless of which political camp they are from, with the same standard. And we did not see that in the case of this interview.
The interview lasted just over an hour, and the journalists only cut out about 17 minutes of it, which suited them. So, this really smacks of censorship . Some media outlets really operate like this, as media outlets commonly did during socialism, when there was official state censorship. This is clearly censorship. You cannot take things out of context, edit videos, and pick out what suits you just to compromise a political opponent in this way. Media outlets must not and cannot operate in this way.
A journalist's confession
I don't know, maybe we'll be surprised and they'll eventually release at least some other part of that interview. We'll see, but so far it hasn't happened. In fact, the journalist confessed at the very end. Zoroslav Kollár published the entire interview on his official YouTube channel, and there it was clear that the journalist himself confessed: " Maybe we'll censor that part of the interview for you. Maybe we won't publish the whole thing." The journalist said this quite frankly. I'm just paraphrasing him. You really need to listen with understanding when you watch it.
He really said it there: " I don't even know what I'll do with the interview yet, because the interview didn't go the way I would have imagined." He said something in that context. It was absolutely clear from that that the interview would certainly not be published in its entirety. I think that in that context, the journalist quite clearly stated that the interview would most likely not be published in its entirety. The journalist said that quite frankly. It was clear from the context of his words. And that is very far from free journalism.
PR agency vs. journalism
There, we can no longer speak of free journalism, but of some PR marketing agency of the Progressive Slovakia party. In fact, I have already published it on Facebook, that editor-in-chief Peter Bárdy no longer even tries to pretend that he is anything other than a PR marketing agency of the Progressive Slovakia party. When he even invites the well-known corrupt person Marta Šimečková to his show, which is a clear support for corruption.
On the one hand, we criticize corruption in one political party (such as the current ruling party), and on the other hand, we support corruption in other political parties. In principle, it is quite clear. If you invite someone to a show and talk to them very friendly, you probably approve, either directly or indirectly, you simply approve of corruption.
When someone from our allied opinion camp steals money, it's okay. On the contrary, if someone from our hostile opinion camp steals, we will immediately criticize them.
Inflating corruption cases
Not to mention that not all corruption scandals uncovered by the (so-called) media were based on truth. Very often it turns out – and as an experienced anti-corruption activist (and not only as an anti-corruption activist, but also as a person who communicated very intensively with journalists) I can distinguish – I know very well on this basis to distinguish whether a corruption scandal is fictitious or based at least partly on the truth.
Or very often it happens that, yes, some minor corruption affair has occurred, but 10% of it is true and 90% is some propaganda, that it is greatly inflated. And on the contrary, with the Progressive Slovakia party – they haven't even come to power, but every second politician from this party is already involved in appalling corruption, and I could talk about it for a very long time.
I really got a bad feeling from it. The journalist at the end actually said that he was not free. He said quite frankly that his role was to compromise Zoroslava Kollára as much as possible. His employer gave him such a task, and it is clearly contrary to publishing any content where the politician defends himself. For example, he also criticized the work of journalists, which journalists clearly did not like. That must be censored.
Progressive Slovakia
Currently, the Progressive Slovakia party has very high preferences, and this causes me great concern. If it came to power, there would be a huge concentration of power in one hand . This mainly concerns media power, which has a huge and far greater influence than political power.
As a result, extremely powerful media would support the Progressive Slovakia party, which is very dangerous. If the media spoils politicians too much, they won't even want to try.
Anticipated media censorship
A far more insidious thing is that I can already see the behind-the-scenes media games. Journalists, especially investigative ones, are already capable and willing to censor. They are currently set up and agreed that if the Progressive Slovakia party came to power and even stole 100 million euros, two hundred million euros, or even half a billion euros, they would simply censor it. They wouldn't write anything about it, even if they knew about this information.
I also have my own experience with the media and what they are capable of. I sent the media information about the biggest embezzlement in the history of Slovakia, which took place at the Ministry of the Environment when Ján Budaj was the minister (one of the biggest embezzlements), and not a peep was published in the media.
Something similar will certainly happen when the Progressive Slovakia party is in power. Media censorship will be enormous.
If the media learns about any corruption, they will remain silent. If something gets into the media through at least somewhat free media, they will still remain silent. If it really breaks out in such a way that it is impossible to remain silent, they will start to cover it up in some way, defend the corruption, diminish the severity of the corruption, or try to relativize it. So it will work on this principle.
Mediocracy instead of democracy
We in Slovakia clearly do not have democracy, because democracy can only work if the voter decides truly freely and based on truthful information. And people do not learn from the media what is happening in politics. One group of politicians is greatly wronged, they want to completely destroy them, and the media is able to support another group of politicians and other political parties even in the biggest dirty tricks.
Another problem in the Progressive Slovakia party, besides corruption, which will be outrageously large: while the media throws dirt at the current government, with 80 percent of things not even based on truth (criticism often stems from very false corruption scandals, which later turn out to be fabricated and not based on truth), on the other hand , they explicitly supported corruption in Progressive Slovakia .
This precedent has certainly been set at least during the case of the dismissal of Michal Šimečka from the post of Deputy Speaker of Parliament. At that time, the media went to the extreme, even making a martyr out of Šimečka, although he was clearly associated with corruption. These were not hoaxes, they were really true information – that Marta Šimečková, Michal Šimečka's mother, was clearly involved in very serious corruption.
For example, the media completely censored an entire press conference of the Minister of Justice. These are very serious things. I don't know how many times they could then criticize the Minister of Justice if he had lied, but the truth was 100 percent. And that's precisely why the media completely censored it. The media cannot function this way – that they will censor what they want.
Extremism in Ecology
Furthermore, there is absolutely insane extremism in the field of ecology . These people want extremist ecology, as do very extremist feminists – that is already a truly huge extreme. All moderate ecologists and moderate feminists have simply been thrown out of the party, and only the hard, radical wing in the field of ecology remained, with which I absolutely cannot agree.
In order to promote the Progressive Slovakia party, the media would not even have a problem defending draconian green taxes. Perhaps propaganda like: "We are going to save the planet" would really be running. People are an endlessly stupid and easily manipulated mass. I can imagine that such absurd propaganda would really work on every other person. That the end of the world is coming, so we have to drastically increase green taxes, we all have to tighten our belts, we have to destroy the entire industry just to save the planet. I can imagine that half of the people would absolutely fall for such propaganda without any problems.
People's critical thinking is zero. As long as the media somehow promotes such a policy of Progressive Slovakia, that party will not dramatically lose preferences if they come to power. I am 100 percent sure of that. It worked similarly in the Czech Republic, where the political parties of Fiala's government did not lose dramatically after the elections, after that cruel government, which was literally a mafia with absolutely huge corruption scandals. Really, Fico's government never had such serious corruption scandals as the Dozimeter case or the Bitcoin case.
The False Ecology of Progressive Slovakia
I also don't like that the Progressive Slovakia party is very strongly against the environment . And it's also very insidious that it presents itself as an ecological political party. But I, as a person who has an extremely strong relationship with nature and am a very strong nature conservationist, don't see it that way.
It is really far-left fake green propaganda in the media that this party is portrayed as green, although in reality it is neither green nor ecological. Eco-terrorism is not ecology . We cannot confuse some eco-terrorism or eco-fascism with real, genuine nature protection and real, genuine ecology.
That is why there are also major conflicts between decent environmentalists and decent nature conservationists (like me) and between those fake nature conservationists who only pretend to be conservationists, but in reality are not. Whether it concerns, for example, corruption in the field of nature conservation, where EU funds are being stolen in an absolutely insane way. We are able to prove that only one percent goes to nature conservation and the rest is stolen and probably goes to some green lobbying, which is very strong, especially in the media.
These are very serious, absolutely insane corruption scandals, which an ordinary person who does not know about direct evidence cannot even imagine that such a thing could be true.
Comparison with Russian propaganda
The Progressive Slovakia party is as concerned about ecology as Russian propaganda is about peace. Russian propaganda is full of the word peace, peace in Ukraine , but what they really imagine by that peace is another matter. It can't even be called peace. Russian propaganda wants a peace that would reward Russia for its military aggression and punish and humiliate Ukraine as much as possible .
Under such circumstances, no peace treaty has ever been signed where the aggressor would be rewarded in an unprecedented way and the victim punished in an unprecedented way. It cannot work that way. They probably want a peace where Ukraine voluntarily surrenders its entire territory to the Russian army without a fight, and that way there will be peace. That's probably naive. And of course, the Russian army could then continue further into Europe, once they have Ukraine subjugated.
We see a lot of contradictions in propaganda. No other propaganda is as full of the word peace as Russian propaganda. Russian propaganda just constantly talks about peace, but it's not sincere. And it's the same with the Progressive Slovakia party, or rather with the entire media machinery behind their false ecology. Even the so-called media ecology is false ecology. This media protection of nature is really false protection of nature.
Media and Corruption in Ecology
Basically, I also came to this conclusion as part of my anti-corruption activities, that the media also receive huge amounts of money, huge bribes , to work in favor of corruption schemes in the field of nature protection. They do not do it completely freely. We have this information based on real communication with real journalists.
We live not in a democracy, but in a mediocracy , where the media dictates who you should vote for based on misleading information, not on truthful information. Under such circumstances, it cannot be called a democracy.
Behind very appealing words about nature conservation, there is often nature damage . If, under the guise of ecology, you say that we will put a national park into a no-intervention regime, it is "sexy", but then this area becomes a dead forest, eaten by bark beetles, because you are very clearly forbidden to take any measures against the spread of bark beetles. You are forbidden to plant trees there. On the one hand, we pretend to be ecologists, we want to plant trees, but on the other hand, in the no-intervention area, you are forbidden to plant trees.
Due to the non-intervention regime, where there are dead trees, soil erosion occurs. The roots that hold the soil together like a net are missing. It has already happened that two female tourists died as a result of a soil avalanche in the Tatras. They died. These are not some theoretical things. Likewise, villages that are near non-intervention dead forests lose their water retention function, so floods are sometimes very strong. These things have already really happened – that people in the villages were flooded. It is precisely this false ecology that the Progressive Slovakia party promotes, with the very strong support of the media machinery.
Lost objective journalism
You will really have to follow the press conferences of opposition political parties, although the media will, of course, boycott the press conferences. You will have to follow the opposition political parties on their official social networks or YouTube channels to find out what is being said there. Otherwise, the media will completely boycott and censor any criticism.
It is also a big problem that in Slovakia, something like objective and independent journalism has basically disappeared. Such a thing does not exist in Slovakia, or if it does, it is only a very small part of the media market. Although all journalists outwardly pretend to be objective, if you were to talk to a journalist in private, they would tell you straight up, "Independent journalism? Are you kidding me? Doing free, objective journalism? That has long ceased to exist in Slovakia, nothing like that exists." The journalist would look at you as if you had fallen from the Moon.
It is really disgusting to get involved in political struggles. We are trying to completely eliminate one political party and we are doing absolutely unethical things for it. And the other political party, which we support, we will absolutely censor all negative information about it and we will lie to readers about what a wonderful alternative it is to the current government, such as the Progressive Slovakia party. What wonderful, perfect people they are. If Chairman Michal Šimečka were to cut up small children live on air, they would be willing to censor it. It is one of the greatest extremes.
Dehumanization and Polarization
The media contributes to the enormous polarization of society . I also disagree with the fact that the current media dehumanizes the current government very strongly. This dehumanization is enormous and very dangerous.
When I communicate with some people who are manipulated by the media, they are not able to discuss at all, they are not able to think critically, they are not able to understand that the media may not always be objective and may even invent some corruption scandals. Although there are very strong facts that a particular corruption scandal was invented only as part of a media battle, that person is really extremely aggressive. They see the government politician as so extremely dehumanized that they will not admit anything, that even the politician could be right about something. That politician will always lie and will never be right about anything. That politician is 100% lying in everything and can never be right.
Even if the politician defends himself by saying that the media fabricated a false corruption affair in some cases (which has sometimes very clearly and demonstrably happened), the person does not accept it. He really sees that politician as absolutely dehumanized.
Also, if I criticized the media somewhere, I was labeled on social media as an automatic flat-earther . Such argumentation causes society to be extremely divided. The same applies to the Czech Republic. Andrej Babiš is also extremely dehumanized in the media, and there may be exactly the same phenomenon as what I am talking about in Slovakia.
The division of society
I am very sorry for this division in society, where we are divided into two extremely quarrelsome opinion camps that absolutely cannot understand each other. Just as an interesting fact: recently, I watched just a few seconds, about 30 seconds, of a completely random video from alternative media, although I don't follow alternative media at all. It was a complete disaster. Mainstream media are still a slightly lesser evil compared to those alternative media.
There, Norbert Lichner was actually very worked up about what a huge outrage it was that the European Union wanted sanctions against Russia, that those European politicians from the European Commission were Nazis because they wanted sanctions against Russia. Such, with all due respect, boorish pub talk is an absolute sewer.
This also needs no comment. So, of course, the mainstream media is a slightly lesser evil, but really only a slightly lesser evil. I think that these mainstream media have also badly divided society, and they sometimes really exaggerate with the dehumanization of government politicians.
Office for the Protection of Whistleblowers
Another thing that is being discussed very heatedly is the amendment to the Act on the Office for the Protection of Whistleblowers . The fact is that the current head of this office is an ordinary activist who approaches the Čurilovci in a very biased way. It is logical that this injustice and unfairness causes some tension.
The crimes of the Čurilovci and injustice
When even the biggest supporter of the Čurilovci, Marek Vagovič , admits that these people have committed very serious crimes for which they face many years in prison, and acknowledges the existence of the so-called technical files they worked with, then there must be some truth to it. The Čurilovci are probably not some holy angels.
In addition, the authenticity of the communication was confirmed, where they literally rejoiced when one of their prisoners committed suicide as a result of literally torturous practices in collusive custody . So they were probably not good guys and we cannot feel sorry for them.
Overall, when we look at the trials with the Čurilovci in the years 2020 to 2023, we see that injustice can never lead to anything good. Robert Fico was not put in jail based on purely political processes. The most it caused was that it radicalized him even more towards the right.
Personally, I am a supporter of equal treatment for everyone . We cannot say that Robert Fico does not deserve a fair trial just because he is Robert Fico. Just because the media hates him, we do not have to dehumanize him completely, and we must not deny him a fair trial. Personally, I disagree with the approach promoted by the opposition or the majority of the media market. I am an objective, impartial, and unbiased person who clearly states that the approach must be equal for everyone.
It is truly absurd that the head of the Whistleblower Protection Office engages in dubious activism, where she clearly defends and supports the Čurilovci, covering up their dirty deeds. I do not consider these people, who literally rejoiced that they had tortured people in custody to the point of suicide, to be good.
Experience with corruption and non-governmental organizations
Not to mention that I had very bad experiences with the Čurilovci. I reported corruption in the field of nature protection at Budaj's ministry, but we have no information that the police have started to act. They did nothing, the Čurilovci covered up all the crime. Really, crime of unprecedented proportions. The corruption cases of Ján Budaj, the former minister, are probably about the same scale as the Gorilla case.
I also have a very bad feeling about Ms. Dlugošová because she worked in the NGO VIA IURIS . I have very bad experiences with NGOs, although not directly with VIA IURIS. Specifically, I have very negative experiences with organizations such as Transparency International and the Stop Corruption Foundation .
After communicating with them, they told me quite clearly and frankly: "You're at the wrong address. Why are you asking us to fight corruption? Our role is only political fights against the Smer party. Go to hell with this talk about corruption of some of Matovič's ministers. We are absolutely not interested in that, that's not our role. Our role is to look for dirt only on the Smer party and nothing else interests us." That's roughly how the communication went.
Of course, I don't have such a negative experience with VIA IURIS, but I personally think that this organization is not very different from other NGOs. That it is just an ordinary PR marketing agency of the Progressive Slovakia party.
Link to politics and disinformation
Dlugošová is the wife of Miroslav Kocúr, who is not a member of parliament, but only an ordinary member of the Progressive Slovakia party. I don't see a problem there. I don't think that the Progressive Slovakia party would somehow arrange through Miroslav Kocúr how Dlugošová should decide. That's a very naive opinion, I really don't think so.
There is really no need to accuse NGOs of any conspiracy theories, that they are paid by the CIA or Soros. These are absolutely easily refutable hoaxes of disinformation alternative media. But as far as my real experience is concerned, it is true information that they are just ordinary PR marketing agencies for the benefit of the Progressive Slovakia party. This is clearly true, verified directly from the first hand.
In reality, it stemmed from communication with these people, who can confirm this communication. On behalf of the Stop Corruption Foundation, it was Ms. Xénia Makarová. I don't remember exactly what the lady from Transparency International was called, but I have it noted down somewhere.
The Stop Corruption Foundation is backed by, for example, a very influential oligarch from ESET, Mr. Miroslav Trnka . He is a very inconspicuous person who has probably only appeared in the media once, but he is de facto the shadow government in Slovakia. He is a person who really pulls the strings. He owns the daily N, so this person is clearly behind all the hatred that the newspaper spreads. And he is also behind the Stop Corruption Foundation, which does not hide the fact that this is publicly known information.
I must also add that the Stop Corruption Foundation is one of the few non-governmental organizations that reveals some financial flows at least somewhat transparently. For example, this foundation pays Aktuality . They cooperate, but this cooperation is not free. They don't say that the foundation pays Aktuality to publish some propaganda for them. Mr. Trnka, this influential oligarch, also pays Aktuality, but we really don't know how much. This is already behind-the-scenes, confidential information.
There is certainly some money there. It's actually just ordinary advertising that they pay for some propaganda. It's good that they at least admit it, even if they conceal the financial flows, that they officially cooperate. That's at least partly transparent.
Moral integrity and impartiality
To get to the point of the whole thing: I really don't have a good feeling that Ms. Dlugošová is clearly a morally very flawed person , because she worked in a non-governmental organization whose basis was to lie and make propaganda against selected political parties and, conversely, propaganda in favor of other political parties.
A person with such weak moral integrity, whose lies are a common part of their work, we cannot naively think that this NGO VIA IURIS is somehow better in terms of ethics than other NGOs, such as Transparency International and the Stop Corruption Foundation. Personally, I am skeptical that this organization would be better than the previous ones.
I think that just because she worked in such a highly politically exposed organization, this person cannot be impartial. She should never have become the head of this office because her regular job was to lie. What will she probably do? Do some propaganda. So we cannot expect her to be impartial, objective, and unbiased. That's why I think it's right that politicians should simply abolish this office and create it again.
Conflicts in the ruling coalition and media hysteria
The Slovak President also behaved in a very strange, surprising, and incomprehensible way. I don't understand his speech, where he criticized the amendment very sharply and harshly. There are probably already some conflicts between Šutaj Eštok and Pellegrini, because Šutaj Eštok himself actually proposed this law, but Pellegrini, in turn, criticized it very sharply. So, probably, at the backstage level, there is a very harsh verbal exchange and conflict between Šutaj Eštok and Pellegrini. I don't quite understand why he went to such lengths to criticize this amendment.
Of course, there is a huge hysteria in the media about these things. The media does nothing but politics. Journalists are more political than politicians, they are involved in power games even more intensely and more than politicians themselves. So, of course, there is now a huge hysteria in the media, a huge outcry about this amendment to the law.
Accelerated legislative procedure
It is also very correct that this was done in an accelerated legislative procedure . Otherwise, the media would have campaigned about it for much longer and divided society even more. If it had gone through a longer legislative process, the opposition would have held longer demonstrations, gained political points from it, and there would have been more bitterness and hatred in society. It is very correct and good that it went through an accelerated legislative procedure so that society would not be unnecessarily divided.
Fraud by the European Commission
In general, there is a significant problem with the independence of NGOs, as they receive subsidies primarily from the European Union . We already have clear and demonstrable evidence from investigative journalists in the Netherlands that the European Union (or the European Commission) also commits fraud, such as officially stating that EU funds are going to a specific cause, but in reality, they are used to support the political propaganda of a political party that promotes the European Commission's Green Deal policy.
Something similar is happening with these purely political NGOs. Once a precedent has been set that the European Commission itself is cheating with EU funds and that they are actually going to something other than what is officially intended, I personally think it is highly probable (although we do not have direct evidence for this) that a similar phenomenon is occurring with these purely political NGOs. They use the fight against corruption as a tool to eliminate political opponents.
The European Commission will say that this political party is more likeable to us than another, and we want to support this political party. Although it will be officially stated that the subsidy will go to independent anti-corruption activities, in reality, it is written in some unofficial annex to the contract that you must support such and such political parties and try to destroy such and such political parties (which may not be so loyal to the European Commission). It is very highly probable that such phenomena actually occur.
Inspection of EC officials
It is an extremely insidious manipulation when the European Commission pretends to be a symbol of the fight against corruption, while it is the biggest corruption in their midst. In the case of the so-called green subsidies, it has been clearly proven and demonstrated that this was the case. However, it is quite possible that such very insidious practices are also widespread, which are perhaps even worse and more dangerous than the practices of bad secret services.
Even the secret service has some control mechanisms to prevent its misuse, but there is no one to control the European Commission , there are no control mechanisms there. A European Commissioner can be replaced, but the official will remain there permanently. And that official can very easily outsmart the European Commissioner. European Commissioners change every five years, but those cunning officials remain there permanently, and it is not a problem to outsmart the European Commissioner.
This may also be one of the reasons why the work of NGOs is very dirty and bad. The duty of every NGO is to have an absolutely impartial and independent approach and to measure every political party by the same standard, not by double standards or double kilometers.
Indeed, I don't have a good feeling about Mrs. Dlugošová. I think her connection to the Progressive Slovakia party is not a problem at all, that's perfectly fine. But a far bigger problem is her former membership in a very dubious non-governmental organization.
Martina Holečková
I will further comment on a very peculiar phenomenon, which is MP Holečková . She is clearly a very insidious, evil and cynical woman.
When Robert Fico's son obtained subsidies for a poor disabled person who had no arms or legs, Holečková called it corruption by Robert Fico's son, who allegedly stole for himself. The fact is that 100% of the subsidies went only to that disabled person so that he could be employed. When someone lies in such a treacherous way, we are already talking about open cynicism and hyenism on the part of this MP.
Prejudice against men and conflict with Taraba
MP Holečková has become famous again. She is very well known for having absolute prejudices against men. This was evident, for example, in a political discussion on TA3, where Minister Taraba was on one side and Holečková on the other. She attacked Minister Taraba terribly.
Although I also don't recognize Taraba in some way and disagree with his views on cultural wars, and it is true that sometimes he did not express himself well about women (for example, the president) when he was still in opposition. When he became a minister, he realized his responsibility and began to communicate much more politely.
She complained that he criticized her (and the entire opposition), although he criticized her factually, constructively, and above all, politely. She actually said: "You are a very bad person, a misogynist , who speaks very badly about me. You always speak badly and ugly about women." Yet, he was absolutely polite in that broadcast. I would rather attribute the impolite communication to MP Holečková. As an impartial and unbiased observer, I unequivocally described Holečková's communication as very bad.
Unacceptable behavior and comparison with Bartek
Holečková is a single mother. She recently got married (I don't know if it was to the father of her child or if she found someone else). It's quite possible that she had a bad experience with men, and that's why she has such prejudices against them. Maybe that man didn't pay child support, maybe he abused her, raped her, or I don't know what. But when she has such huge prejudices against men…
We also saw huge prejudices against men in Bartek's case. I don't want to defend Bartek, he is an uneducated person with boorish communication. But compared to Alojz Hlina, Bartek is an absolutely great guy. Let's be honest, Alojz Hlina's boorish communication is a thousand times worse. I don't even follow Hlina anymore, I'm absolutely not interested. He spreads 90% hoaxes against the government and only 10% of the criticism turns out to be true. Why should I follow a person who lies 90% of the time? He's like some psychopath. Not to mention that his pub-like, aggressive communication needs no comment. So I think Bartek is still a great person compared to Hlina.
Bartek sincerely apologized in parliament. And she called this apology insufficient, and instead of an apology, it was an attack. This, with all due respect, really borders on a psychiatric examination. And not only does it border on it, but a psychiatric examination to see if this person suffers from real schizophrenia already makes sense. These are really symptoms of delusions when someone says something like that. That's absolutely over the line.
Her appearance on TA3 television (I saw it, although I don't watch all political discussions) was absolutely undignified. Taraba criticized her politely and factually, also in the context of criticizing the entire opposition. She immediately understood it as him, as a bad person, not being able to criticize her, because any criticism is essentially hatred towards women . Political discussions cannot proceed in this way when Ms. Holečková is uncriticizable, because even if you criticize her factually and politely, she immediately labels you as a misogynist.
Fortunately, not all female MPs are such psychopaths; there are also more decent women in parliament. But this Holečková is clearly the biggest extreme. I would say she is even more extreme than MP Mesterová , who is also very well known for her aggressive communication and needs no comment. Right after Holečková, the second extreme is MP Mesterová. Just look at the way she communicates for a minute. Every person who has not yet lost the last shred of common sense and reason must openly say that this is a complete disaster. To communicate in a hysterical and aggressive manner – that needs no comment.
Andrej Danko: Similarities with Matovič's politics
The parliament is full of mental wrecks. There are a lot of them there.
Andrej Danko has always distinguished himself from Matovič, saying that if he came to power, he would never be as bad as Matovič. But in reality, we see that Danko's politics are very similar to Matovič's, and we see this on several levels. Whether it was the comedies he made in connection with not becoming the Speaker of Parliament (he threw himself on the ground and sulked).
And so now Danko said that he would not go to coalition councils if Robert Fico had Miroslav Lajčák as an advisor. I see this as a rather bizarre case, which really resembles the politics of Igor Matovič. It is absolutely absurd and outrageous bizarrerie for Andrej Danko to dictate to Fico what advisors he should have. This is exactly the same thing Matovič did.
The Church, Divorce, and Secular Society
Another new development in politics is the amendment to the Civil Code . The liberal wing had comments on this code, for example, they wanted to add registered partnerships or at least strengthen the institute of inheritance and sharing of medical information.
The church itself has an even stronger word to say about this amendment. The code speaks of simplifying divorces. Currently, divorces are done in a rather medieval way, where the legislation tried to make divorces as difficult as possible. Before the court, people have to explain I don't know what reasons why they are divorcing. This is a bit outdated for today. Maybe it would have stood in the 19th century, but not in the 21st century.
However, the Conference of Bishops of Slovakia openly objected to this, saying it bothered them. We will see if they make an exception now. So far, all politicians have obeyed the bishops in everything. We will see if the amendment will contain secular elements, or if it will be just according to the Christian version of Sharia law. It's a bit of a problem. Catholics do nothing different from Sharia law, from Muslims. They really want to impose some of their laws on secular society. If Catholics don't like divorce, then they shouldn't get divorced, but they don't have to force their norms on secular society.
The European Court and the gap between politics and the public
Another thing that certainly added fuel to the fire was the judgment of the European Court of Justice , which speaks of the acceptance of homosexual marriages by local authorities. This, of course, significantly raised the blood pressure of religious extremists and the extreme right, which was basically to be expected. This issue conflicts with the unfortunate amendment to the constitution.
I didn't even know that registered partnerships were allowed in Hungary. Slovakia, along with Poland, are probably the last countries where registered partnerships do not yet exist, which is quite strange and backward.
I would say that the gap between secular society and Slovakia as such and politics is opening up here. Politics is far from representing the majority of society. Politicians do their own thing and the public does its own thing. In this way, the gap between politics and public opinion is widening. These politicians really just do everything to the letter that the church tells them. Whether they are from one political spectrum or another, all politicians obey the church in everything.
On the other hand, I think that even in Slovakia, the general public would have nothing against registered partnerships, except for the hard extreme right and religious fundamentalists.
The influence of religious fundamentalists on legislation
The fact is that from 1989 until today, nothing liberal has been enforced in legislation. However, about 15 different amendments to laws by the extreme right or religious fundamentalists have been enforced. This could be listed in a very long list:
- complicated transitions
- an amendment to the Constitution stating that marriage can only be between a man and a woman (which, fortunately, at least does not exclude registered partnerships)
- the last amendment to the Constitution, in fact, the amendments to the Vatican Treaties, which give the Church enormous power to interfere in education and the school environment. The Catholic bishop dictates who will teach at Christian schools. It is exclusively within the bishop's competence.
- reservation of conscience
- complication of transition (for example).
The moderation of Robert Fico
Another positive thing that has happened recently is that, fortunately, it seems that Robert Fico has calmed down a bit and moderated himself . He had such a bad period (I talked about it in the previous podcast) when he behaved like a complete madman. Fortunately, it now seems that he has returned to some norm. Let's hope it was just a short fluctuation and it won't continue. Robert Fico probably had a bad period, I don't know what was happening to him, but it was very strange. Fortunately, it's a little better now.