They contradict each other very often. It is an interesting sociological and psychological phenomenon that would be worth more scientific research. Unfortunately, it is an example of the fact that the critical thinking of the whole society is a big problem.
Examples of contradictions of toxic political ideologues:
- Perhaps the most extreme example of contradiction is the pro-Russian propagandist Eduard Chmelár and his ilk. Fascist Chmelár actively defends Russian aggression on the one hand, and on the other hand, he is the person who speaks most loudly in Slovakia about how much he cares about peace. It is a strange phenomenon from the perspective of social psychology that so many people fall for his propaganda despite the total contradiction. In Slovakia, the biggest warmongers, such as Chmelár, portray themselves as false peacemakers and pacifists. I analyze this contradiction in much more detail in a separate article .
- On the one hand, ecological left-wing extremists in Slovakia say that they are concerned with the protection of nature, and on the other hand, they say that devastated, dead forests caused by bark beetles are desirable for nature. Our moderate ecological community tells these extremists that they are destroyers of nature.
- In Germany, left-wing environmental extremists claim to be in favor of reducing CO2, but on the other hand, they have managed to shut down nuclear power plants, which have zero CO2 production. Due to the shutdown of nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants have to run at 110 percent capacity, which is in complete contradiction to ecology.
When confused eco-terrorists contradict themselves and cannot distinguish ecology from environmental damage
What is ecoterrorism?
It is very important to define this term so that we know what we are talking about.
Eco-terrorism is an ideology that, under the guise of a false ecological ideology, will do more harm than good. Eco-terrorism is a confused, contradictory ideology that often fails to distinguish between environmental damage and ecology, damage to nature and nature conservation, and ecology and anti-ecology. In Germany, eco-terrorists shut down nuclear power plants, while coal-fired power plants are running at 200% because they have to replace them. In Slovakia, this is going to even more serious and radical extremes, where eco-terrorists consider the devastation of national parks by an overpopulation of bark beetles to be the only correct form of nature conservation. I consider it very dangerous that this extremist ideology has enormous support in the media, based on the dissemination of the most insane hoaxes by eco-terrorists. It has come to such an extreme that we have more beautiful nature in commercial forests than in national parks.
As a person who has a strong positive relationship with nature and is a true conservationist, it keeps me awake at night, and my heart breaks with sorrow when journalists give space to extremists and promote hoaxes about harming nature as nature conservation.
A lie repeated a hundred times becomes the truth. People will believe even the most absurd hoaxes if the media repeats them often enough and for long enough.
Eco-terrorists also scare people with climate change and hyperbolize this problem. They express themselves in a context as if the end of the world was to happen tomorrow due to climate change. They preach the ideology of destroying the economy in favor of fighting climate change. Some journalists and some politicians from the PS party strongly adhere to this psychopathic ideology.
My opinion is that no green deals will save our planet, they will not help the planet at all and will only destroy agriculture and the economy. The only thing that will save our planet is if Europe starts distributing condoms and contraception in developing countries.
When the "chtimirs" get confused , they contradict themselves and cannot distinguish peace from warmongering.
We live in a very strange time full of propaganda. Putin's biggest admirers are the loudest in calling for peace. Being pro-Russian and calling for peace is a contradiction in terms. Cheering for the aggressor and at the same time loudly shouting the word "peace" is a prime example of contradiction. People who cheer for Russian fascism pretend that they do not see any contradiction in it. They are either manipulated or they sincerely cheer for the killing of Ukrainians and Russian war crimes.Although they aggressively call for "peace", it is a strange "peace" that is as advantageous as possible for Russia and a "peace" that humiliates and degrades Ukraine as much as possible.
It is something similar to how, during World War II, fanatical Nazi followers of Adolf Hitler would most loudly call for peace, but for a peace that is as advantageous as possible for Hitler and that humiliates and degrades the occupied countries as much as possible.
Just as the word peace gets on my nerves, so do the words "ecology" or "nature conservation". Not that I'm against ecology or nature conservation. On the contrary, I'm very strongly in favor. The problem is that these concepts have been profaned. The Greens in Germany, under the guise of ecology, destroyed the environment by shutting down climate-neutral nuclear power plants, which produce zero carbon dioxide, while coal-fired power plants in Germany are running at 200%. Modern ecologists are misguided people who cannot distinguish between the concepts of ecology and environmental destruction. Similarly, the topic of "nature conservation" is an extremely profaned topic in Slovakia, where the media gives space exclusively to a minority of activists who call the destruction of nature, the liquidation and devastation of forest ecosystems by overpopulated bark beetles with incalculable consequences, "nature conservation".
In conclusion: Just as the "Chthimiri" cannot distinguish the word "peace" from "war-mongering", modern "ecologists" cannot distinguish "ecology" from "anti-ecology".
Today's era is peculiar. The more pro-Russian a person is, the greater the defender and admirer of Putin, the louder they call for peace. A thoroughly profaned peace. Except that by peace they mean that only the West and Ukraine should make compromises, but never the Russian aggressor.
It is as absurd as if during the Second World War, the more of a Nazi, the more of a follower of Hitler, the more they would call for peace with Hitler. However, these people would never condemn Hitler's military aggression or demand compromises from Hitler, but would only demand humiliating compromises from the countries attacked by Nazi aggression. Calling for such a false peace is nothing more than legitimizing military aggression and indirectly defending it.
It's sad that many disoriented people have fallen for Russian propaganda, which is contradictory and cannot distinguish military aggression from peace.
Propagandist Chmelár or pro-Russian Fico never called on Putin to:
- ended the war, withdrew the army from Ukraine
- suspended fire,
- They did not accept weapons, ammunition, drones, soldiers from North Korea and Iran.
- Similarly, Chmelár and Fico never called for peace negotiations in which Putin would have to make some compromise, in which Russia would have to give up at least part of the occupied territories.