#defence of the reich

[deutschland-im-krieg]

Future 206 victory ace and Ritterkreuz mit Eichenlaub und Schwertern (Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves and Swords) holder, Major Hans Philipp. KIA on 8 October 1943 in his Focke-Wulf Fw 190A-5, WNr 530407, during combat with Republic P-47D Thunderbolts and Boeing B-17F Flying Fortresses as Kommandeur of JG 1 'Oesau' near Mūnster, Defence of the Reich. Flew more than 500 combat missions. FIVE HUNDRED. For more, see my Facebook group - Eagles Of The Reich

[clarionglass]

gang,,,,, gang. i am honestly still reeling from The game changer account reblogging the comic,,,, my god. my god.

for newcomers: welcome! thank you for being here!! for those who may have only seen the part of the fic linked to the comic, this is part 6 in the series (because truly i cannot stop myself). all the other parts are linked in the lil game master cinematic universe blurb i've got down the bottom of the post, and the whole thing is now on ao3!

and speaking of my lil blurby thing, if anyone else wants to play around in the game master cinematic universe, tag me so i don't miss it and i'll add whatever you make to the list!! and if you just want to chat about the crossover, hit me up! truly i am so happy to have as many people playing in this sandbox as want to be here :D

but anyway, without further ado:

a selection of correspondence (game master cinematic universe, part 6) | read on ao3

From: Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) To: Group <Dropout cast and crew> Subject: Announcements and info

Hi all,

Just a quick announcement that we have a new member of the team joining us at Dropout! Some of you have met him already, although you may not have realised it—he worked on A Game Most Changed and Escape the Greenroom in season 5, and Bingo, Deja Vu, Beat the Buzzer and Sam Says 4 in season 6, doing some of the hosting in my place.

And before you ask how that can be, this man is my exact doppelganger! He’s a time traveling alien who, for the moment, we are calling Other Sam, because we’ve agreed that the name he’s chosen is not exactly appropriate in a workplace setting. He’s here on a kind of rehabilitation program, as shows like Game Changer provide the sort of enrichment that he needs, without him having to resort to things like planetary conquest and murder. We also have him to thank for our new studio—he has kindly allowed us to use his (currently grounded) spacetime machine to record in, seeing as he did blow up our original studio. On an operational basis, nothing should have changed with the studio, but I do recommend you don’t go poking around in cupboards, just in case.

I promise on everything dear to me that this is not a joke.

I hope you’ll all make Other Sam feel welcome! So there’s minimal confusion between the two of us, he and I will be taking care to differentiate ourselves (he says he will try and look, in his words, “more evil”, although I’ll admit I’m not quite sure how that will work).

Series leads and producers, if you would like to include Other Sam in one of your shows, please let me know. He’s a lot of fun to work with, and he’s promised us his best behaviour, so I can guarantee there will be none of the aforementioned planetary conquest and murder. Of course, the wellbeing of all Dropout cast and crew is my highest priority, so if any of you are not comfortable working with him, please let me know as well, and production and I will ensure you are not cast in the same episodes. In future seasons of Game Changer, we will be sharing the hosting duties, so if you’re on an episode, it’ll be made clear which of us you’ll be working with.

On a related note, you know I hate being the bearer of bad news about mandatory seminars, but there is a training seminar next Monday on psychic defence techniques. This seminar is a requirement if you’re going to be working with him, and even if you’re not planning on that, I’d strongly advise coming along anyway.

As always, if you’ve got any questions, don’t hesitate to get in touch!

Cheers, Sam

---

[Note: many responses with the general sentiment of “what the fuck?!” have not been included in the selection of return correspondence.]

---

From: Brennan Lee Mulligan (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

I need this man in the dome immediately. 

---

From: Siobhan Thompson (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

Hi Sam,

Many thanks for your email, and for letting us know about Other Sam. You don’t need to confirm or deny this, but I’m assuming he did something to us during the Deja Vu recording. I haven’t felt entirely comfortable around you since then, and until now I haven’t been able to find a logical reason why. You mentioned psychic defence techniques in your email, so I take it that there was some kind of mental fuckery involved—perhaps a memory wipe? 

I don’t know what he did, and I’m not sure I want to know, but whatever it is, I don’t think it’s good. I would very much appreciate it if I don’t have to work with him.

Best wishes, Siobhan

---

From: Grant O’Brien (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

Hey Sam,

I’m already digging up info for a Breaking News segment. There’s someone on reddit called scarfytwin who says they might be able to give us some good info, but I might need to sign a few things first? Looks like it’s tangled up in some British government stuff, which is wild. Sounds juicy, whatever it is, and I reckon it would be good payback…

Best, Grant

---

From: Lou Wilson (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

Man, are you telling me that Samuel Dalton was kind of a real fucking thing?? No way. If you let me punch him *hard* one time I’ll go on any show with him.

Cheers, Lou

---

From: Brian David Gilbert (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

Hi Sam,

This explains a lot about the weird feelings I’ve been having since Deja Vu! I know something terrible probably happened during that recording, but I’d love to just sit down with Other Sam and have a chat. Do you recommend we just meet in a professional context, or would that be something you’re able to organize?

Thanks, Brian

---

From: Zac Oyama (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

Cool.

---

From: Ally Beardsley (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

Absolute freak behavior and i love this for you, sign me up for anything!

---

From: Mike Trapp (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

Hi Sam,

Huh, that sure explains some things. This will probably be cool in future, but for right now, I think I need to do a bit of processing. I’ll let you know!

Cheers, Trapp

---

From: Vic Michaelis (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

Hi Sam,

Intriguing! If you think he’d be up for the prosthetics, I’d love to have either of you on Very Important People next season. Both of you together would be even better!

Vic

---

From: Lily Du (@gmail.com) To: Sam Reich (@droput.tv) Subject: Re: Announcements and info

Hey Sam,

I’ve had a chat to Grant, and I would love to put this guy on Dirty Laundry. Grant says he’ll share what he finds out from the reddit person with me, and we might be able to make a good episode happen.

Cheers, Lily

---

From: Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) To: Other Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) Subject: Fwd: Announcements and info

Well, most people seem to have taken it well! Looks like we’ll be having some fun…

---

From: Other Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) To: Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) Subject: Re: Fwd: Announcements and info

“Not exactly appropriate in a workplace setting”?

---

From: Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) To: Other Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) Subject: Re: Re: Fwd: Announcements and info

We discussed this. You agreed.

---

From: Other Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) To: Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) Subject: Re: Re: Re: Fwd: Announcements and info

I most certainly did not. I said “hm”. “Hm” does not count as agreement.

---

From: Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) To: Other Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Fwd: Announcements and info

You do know this is a group of people who I can guarantee, on hearing the word “Master”, would react the exact same way Grant did?

---

From: Other Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) To: Sam Reich (@dropout.tv) Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Fwd: Announcements and info

Fine. “Other Sam” it is.

---

missed an installment of the game master cinematic universe?

original idea by @ace-whovian-neuroscientist: x

art by @northernfireart concept: x scissor sisters sketch: x sam and his doppelganger: x escape the death beam: x

by @bloopdydooooo drawing collection: x

writing by me (!) part one (escape the greenroom): x part two (deja vu): x part three (sam says 4): x part four (you think you know someone): x part five (point and counterpoint): x part six (a selection of correspondence): you are here!

[misfitwashere]

The Muskrat Goes Global

Why is the richest person on earth with the largest political platform in the world and the next U.S. president in his pocket becoming a global neo-fascist? What can be done to constrain him?

ROBERT REICH

JAN 7

Friends,

Elon Musk repeatedly asserts, without evidence, that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer covered up the abuses of young girls by gangs comprised largely of British Pakistani men, in cases that date back to before 2010 when Starmer was head of Britain’s public prosecutions. 

“Starmer was complicit in the RAPE OF BRITAIN when he was head of Crown Prosecution for 6 years,” Musk posted to the top of his account on Friday. “Starmer must go and he must face charges for his complicity in the worst mass crime in the history of Britain.”

In fact, Starmer, who heads the Labour government, did not cover up abuses. Instead, he brought the first case against an Asian grooming gang and drafted new guidelines for how the Crown Prosecution Service should deal with cases of sexual exploitation of children, including the mandatory reporting of child sex offenses. 

Musk also calls Jess Phillips, the Labour government’s under secretary for safeguarding and violence against women and girls, a “rape genocide apologist” because she pushed back on calls for a national inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham, a town near Manchester. 

In fact, Phillips, who has long campaigned for women’s rights, has called for a local investigation by Oldham authorities rather than the central government. Women’s rights supporters say Musk’s labeling Phillips a “rape genocide apologist” is threatening her safety.

Yesterday, Starmer warned publicly that Musk’s baseless accusations “crossed a line,” adding that “once we lose the anchor that truth matters, in the robust debate that we must have, then we are on a very slippery slope.”

Musk’s global reach

Musk’s lies about the left-wing British government and his support for far-right groups are parts of an emerging pattern. Musk is also: 

boosting the far-right party in Germany with neo-Nazi ties, known as Alternative for Germany (AfD), before elections early next month. Musk signaled his support for AfD in mid-December, writing in a post on X that“only the AfD can save Germany.” He also penned an oped in a German newspaper recently, describing the party as the “last spark of hope” for the country. Musk is planning an online “discussion” on X with the AfD’s leader and candidate for chancellor, Alice Weidel, amplifying the party’s neo-Nazi ideology. 

attacking the Italian judiciary for curbing Italian Prime Giorgia Meloni’s hardline anti-asylum immigration policies. Musk has met regularly with Meloni, who has called him a friend, and appeared at a youth event for Meloni’s party. 

urging support for Britain’s far-right MP Nigel Farage’s anti-immigration Reform U.K. Party. Musk says he might donate upward of 100 million pounds ($127 million) to Farage’s group. 

demanding Britain “free Tommy Robinson,” the far-right founder of the English Defence League — an Islamophobic, nationalist group and anti-immigrant agitator whom, Musk charges, is in jail for “telling the truth.” In fact, Robinson is in jail because he was found to have defamed a teenage Syrian refugee and then defied a British court order by repeating the false claims. (Robinson has been previously jailed for assault, mortgage fraud and traveling on a false passport to the United States, where he has sought to establish ties with right-wing groups.) 

allowing on X inflammatory lies of a kind that incited anti-immigrant riots in Britain last July, following the killing of three girls in a mass stabbing in the town of Southport. After Britain arrested more than 30 people, Musk condemned the government for what he called an attack on free speech.

calling Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau an “insufferable tool” over comments Trudeau made in support of Kamala Harris, and predicted he “won’t be in power for much longer.” (Yesterday, Trudeau announced he will resign.)

Where Musk is getting this power

As the richest person in the world, politicians everywhere now recognize his capacity to pour money into their parties and political campaigns, as he did by investing a quarter of a billion dollars to get Trump elected. 

He also owns X, formerly Twitter, which (as of December 2024) has 619 million monthly active users. He has manipulated X’s algorithm to boost his own posts, which now reach 210 million. 

But Musk’s real power these days comes from his proximity to and presumed influence over Donald Trump, soon to be President of the United States. 

Musk has hardly left Trump’s side since the election, meaning that Musks’s opinions (amplified by his social media platform) cannot be ignored by politicians around the world who are trying to decipher Trump’s opinions. 

One prominent member of Germany’s center-left Social Democratic Party is asking that Germany determine “whether [Musk’s] repeated disrespect, defamation and interference in the election campaign were also expressed in the name of the new U.S. government.”

This combination — the richest person in the world, owner and manipulator of the biggest political messaging platform in the world, with direct influence over Trump — puts Musk in the position of being able to move other nations toward the neo-fascist right. 

Why Musk is doing this

Not for money. As it is, he has far more than any human can utilize. 

Partly, it’s ideological. He calls himself a “free speech absolutist,” which puts him at odds with Europe’s and Canada’s aggressive responses to hate speech online. (Britain, Musk says, “is turning into a police state.”)

But the roots of Musk’s neo-fascism probably go deeper. 

I am no psychoanalyst but I imagine that as an immigrant from South Africa, Musk is especially triggered by poor people of color moving into white nations. His father smuggled raw emeralds and had them cut in Johannesburg.

Part of his shift to the radical right also comes from Musk’s transgender child. As Musk told conservative commentator Jordan Peterson, “I lost my son, essentially,” claiming she was “dead, killed by the woke mind virus. I vowed to destroy the woke mind virus after that.” (Musk’s daughter, Vivian Jenna Wilson, now 20, told NBC News that Musk was an absent father who was cruel to her as a child for being queer and feminine.) 

On X, Musk continuously criticizes transgender rights, including medical treatments for trans-identifying minors, and the use of pronouns if they are different from what would be used at birth. He has promoted anti-trans content and called for arresting people who provide trans care to minors. Last July, Musk said he was pulling his businesses out of California to protest a new state law that bars schools from requiring that trans kids be outed to their parents. After Musk bought X, then known as Twitter, in 2022, he rolled back the app’s protections for trans people, including a ban on using birth names (known as “deadnames” for transgender people).

Perhaps the major reason for Musk’s recent effort to push other nations to the neo-fascist right is his newfound thirst for right-wing global politics. After effectively (at least in Musk’s mind) winning the presidency for Trump by spending more than $250 million and unleashing a maelstrom of pro-Trump and anti-Harris lies over X, he now seeks even more of an authoritarian rush. 

It will not be the first time in history that someone is seduced by the thrill of unconstrained power, although it may be the first time that so much of it is concentrated in one unelected megalomaniac. 

What should be done about Musk?

For the time being, particularly under Trump, there is little that we in America can do to constrain Musk except by boycotting Tesla and X. 

Canada and Britain and other European nations, meanwhile, should, at the very least:

enact laws and regulations to prohibit non-citizens (like Musk) from financing activities that could affect their elections.

maintain, if not strengthen, laws and rules against hate speech, and ensure that they are applied to social media companies, such as Musk’s X. 

refuse to contract with Musk’s Space X and its Starlink satellite division, or with Musk’s other corporations (Tesla and the Boring Company).

disengage from any joint ventures or technology transfers involving Musk, including xAI, his artificial intelligence company. 

(If you’ve got other ideas, please include in the comments.)

[enemymine2000]

People are like: It's only 4 years, we will get through it. And by everything that might be out there and is holy, I hope you are right. But fascism came to power in Germany in 1933 legally, by being elected. Two days later the parliament was dissolved and due process abolished. That's why our current German constitution entails special provisions for that to never happen again - even our government now having imploded doesn't change the fact that we still have one, and will continue to have the very same one until the next election. It is written into our constitution that we have to be a constitutional democracy and that is the one Article that can never be changed. Is it absolutely failsafe? No. But it is something our grandparents (or great-grandparents depending on generation) did not have.

So, I hope you will get the chance to fair and free elections in 4 years. But if you don't you will need to have put in as many democrats as possible everywhere. Because those will be your line of defence in the cities, the town, the villages. Those will lessen the blows that will come from above. My hometown for example had the same fascist people on top as every other during the Third Reich. But below the basis was socialist. Things can not be sugarcoated, it was bad. But the minute the fascist regime was beaten, they were there to take back the reigns. To rebuild. And ever since that day my hometown has been leftist - German leftist, not US American leftist, so socialist. This is the first time since then we don't have a socialist, but a green mayor.

Again, that doesn't mean to sugarcoat anything. But to show you, why it matters that you still express your rights as long as you can. Your voting rights are a voting privilege. Use it!

[dailyanarchistposts]

J.5 What alternative social organisations do anarchists create?

Anarchism is all about “do it yourself”: people helping each other out in order to secure a good society to live within and to protect, extend and enrich their personal freedom. As such anarchists are keenly aware of the importance of building alternatives to both capitalism and the state in the here and now. Only by creating practical alternatives can we show that anarchism is a viable possibility and train ourselves in the techniques and responsibilities of freedom:

“If we put into practice the principles of libertarian communism within our organisations, the more advanced and prepared we will be on that day when we come to adopt it completely.” [C.N.T. member, quoted by Graham Kelsey, Anarchosyndicalism, Libertarian Communism and the State,p. 79]

This idea (to quote the IWW) of “building a new world in the shell of the old” is a long standing one in anarchism. Proudhon during the 1848 revolution “propose[d] that a provisional committee be set up” in Paris and “liaise with similar committees” elsewhere in France. This would be “a body representative of the proletariat …, a state within the state, in opposition to the bourgeois representatives.” He proclaimed to working class people that “a new society be founded in the heart of the old society” for “the government can do nothing for you. But you can do everything for yourselves.” [“Aux Pariotes”, La Représantant du Peuple, No. 33] This was echoed by Bakunin (see section H.2.8) while for revolutionary syndicalists the aim was “to constitute within the bourgeois State a veritable socialist (economic and anarchic) State.” [Fernand Pelloutier, quoted by Jeremy Jennings, Syndicalism in France, p. 22] By so doing we help create the environment within which individuals can manage their own affairs and develop their abilities to do so. In other words, we create “schools of anarchism” which lay the foundations for a better society as well as promoting and supporting social struggle against the current system. Make no mistake, the alternatives we discuss in this section are not an alternative to direct action and the need for social struggle — they are an expression of social struggle and a form of direct action. They are the framework by which social struggle can build and strengthen the anarchist tendencies within capitalist society which will ultimately replace it.

Therefore it is wrong to think that libertarians are indifferent to making life more bearable, even more enjoyable, under capitalism. A free society will not just appear from nowhere, it will be created be individuals and communities with a long history of social struggle and organisation. For as Wilheim Reich so correctly pointed out:

“Quite obviously, a society that is to consist of ‘free individuals,’ to constitute a ‘free community’ and to administer itself, i.e. to ‘govern itself,’ cannot be suddenly created by decrees. It has to evolve organically.” [The Mass Psychology of Fascism, p. 241]

It is this organic evolution that anarchists promote when they create libertarian alternatives within capitalist society. These alternatives (be they workplace or community unions, co-operatives, mutual banks, and so on) are marked by certain common features such as being self-managed, being based upon equality, decentralised and working with other groups and associations within a confederal network based upon mutual aid and solidarity. In other words, they are anarchist in both spirit and structure and so create a practical bridge between now and the future free society.

Anarchists consider the building of alternatives as a key aspect of their activity under capitalism. This is because they, like all forms of direct action, are “schools of anarchy” and also because they make the transition to a free society easier. “Through the organisations set up for the defence of their interests,” in Malatesta’s words, “the workers develop an awareness of the oppression they suffer and the antagonism that divides them from the bosses and as a result begin to aspire to a better life, become accustomed to collective struggle and solidarity and win those improvements that are possible within the capitalist and state regime.” [The Anarchist Revolution, p. 95] By creating viable examples of

“anarchy in action” we can show that our ideas are practical and convince people that they are not utopian. Therefore this section of the FAQ will indicate the alternatives anarchists support and why we support them.

The approach anarchists take to this activity could be termed “social unionism” — the collective action of groups to change certain aspects (and, ultimately, all aspects) of their lives. This takes many different forms in many different areas (some of which, not all, are discussed here) — but they share the same basic aspects of collective direct action, self-organisation, self-management, solidarity and mutual aid. These are a means “of raising the morale of the workers, accustom them to free initiative and solidarity in a struggle for the good of everyone and render them capable of imagining, desiring and putting into practice an anarchist life.” [Malatesta, Op. Cit., p. 28] Kropotkin summed up the anarchist perspective well when he argued that working class people had “to form their own organisations for a direct struggle against capitalism” and to “take possession of the necessaries for production, and to control production.” [Memiors of a Revolutionist, p. 359] As historian J. Romero Maura correctly summarised, the “anarchist revolution, when it came, would be essentially brought about by the working class. Revolutionaries needed to gather great strength and must beware of underestimating the strength of reaction” and so anarchists “logically decided that revolutionaries had better organise along the lines of labour organisations.” [“The Spanish case”, pp. 60–83, Anarchism Today, D. Apter and J. Joll (eds.), p. 66]

As will quickly become obvious in this discussion (as if it had not been so before!) anarchists are firm supporters of “self-help,” an expression that has been sadly corrupted (like freedom) by the right in recent times. Like freedom, self-help should be saved from the clutches of the right who have no real claim to that expression. Indeed, anarchism was created from and based itself upon working class self-help — for what other interpretation can be gathered from Proudhon’s 1848 statement that “the proletariat must emancipate itself”? [quoted by George Woodcock, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, p. 125] So Anarchists have great faith in the abilities of working class people to work out for themselves what their problems are and act to solve them.

Anarchist support and promotion of alternatives is a key aspect of this process of self-liberation, and so a key aspect of anarchism. While strikes, boycotts, and other forms of high profile direct action may be more “sexy” than the long and hard task of creating and building social alternatives, these are the nuts and bolts of creating a new world as well as the infrastructure which supports the other activities. These alternatives involve both combative organisations (such as community and workplace unions) as well as more defensive and supportive ones (such as co-operatives and mutual banks). Both have their part to play in the class struggle, although the combative ones are the most important in creating the spirit of revolt and the possibility of creating an anarchist society.

We must also stress that anarchists look to organic tendencies within social struggle as the basis of any alternatives we try to create. As Kropotkin put it, anarchism is based “on an analysis of tendencies of an evolution that is already going on in society, and on induction therefrom as to the future.” It is “representative … of the creative, instructive power of the people themselves who aimed at developing institutions of common law in order to protect them from the power-seeking minority.” Anarchism bases itself on those tendencies that are created by the self-activity of working class people and while developing within capitalism are in opposition to it — such tendencies are expressed in organisational form as unions and other forms of workplace struggle, co-operatives (both productive and credit), libertarian schools, and so on. For anarchism was “born among the people — in the struggles of real life and not in the philosopher’s studio” and owes its “origin to the constructive, creative activity of the people … and to a protest — a revolt against the external force which had thrust itself upon” social institutions. [Anarchism, p. 158, p. 147, p. 150 and p. 149] This “creative activity” is expressed in the organisations created in the class struggle by working people, some of which we discuss in this section of the FAQ. Therefore, the alternatives anarchists support should not be viewed in isolation of social struggle and working class resistance to hierarchy — the reverse in fact, as these alternatives are almost always expressions of that struggle.

Lastly, we should note we do not list all the forms of organisation anarchists create. For example, we have ignored solidarity groups (for workers on strike or in defence of struggles in other countries) and organisations which are created to campaign against or for certain issues or reforms. Anarchists are in favour of such organisations and work within them to spread anarchist ideas, tactics and organisational forms. However, these interest groups (while very useful) do not provide a framework for lasting change as do the ones we highlight below (see section J.1.4 for more details on anarchist opinions on such “single issue” campaigns). We have also ignored what have been called “intentional communities.” This is when a group of individuals squat or buy land and other resources within capitalism and create their own anarchist commune in it. Most anarchists reject this idea as capitalism and the state must be fought, not ignored. In addition, due to their small size, they are rarely viable experiments in communal living and nearly always fail after a short time (for a good summary of Kropotkin’s attitude to such communities, which can be taken as typical, see Graham Purchase’s Evolution & Revolution [pp. 122–125]). Dropping out will not stop capitalism and the state and while such communities may try to ignore the system, they will find that the system will not ignore them — they will come under competitive and ecological pressures from capitalism whether they like it or not assuming they avoid direct political interference.

So the alternatives we discuss here are attempts to create anarchist alternatives within capitalism and which aim to change it (either by revolutionary or evolutionary means). They are based upon challenging capitalism and the state, not ignoring them by dropping out. Only by a process of direct action and building alternatives which are relevant to our daily lives can we revolutionise and change both ourselves and society.

[admiralnelsoniii]

Adolf Galland was a German fighter ace general of Fighter Command in France. He flew 705 combat missions, and fought on the Western Front and in the Defence of the Reich. On four occasions, he survived being shot down, and he was credited with 104 aerial victories, all of them against the Western Allies.

I personally feel Galland is truly the top ace of the war for two reasons. First, although his score wasn't as high as the others, he earned every kill against the Western Allies. They were considerably better pilots with much better aircraft. And the second reason is from getting an idea of what sort of man he is from the interviews done on him after the war. Not to mention he was planning, organizing, and then leading those combat missions. He took the best care he could of his men, and fought tooth and nail (within reason considering) to get his squadron the best equipment, aircraft, and supplies possible.

I thought it interesting when he discussed the issue with the Me 262. He argued heavy for making it a dedicated Interceptor instead of the foolish ideas Hitler insisted upon it being a bomber. Because that makes sense, right? You definitely take your highest performance and most heavily armed plane and make it a bomber. Yeah! Idiot 😓. But in the end Hitler gave him like 20 or 30 for the Interceptor role. So, he said, he would have maybe ten operational at any given time to fight. But he was saying that if it he would have given him all the 262s being produced, he could have had up to three hundred one a given day! 300 Me 262s to attack USAAF in day and RAF Bomber Command at night. Now, even he said, that wouldn't have changed the outcome. But it would have been a much tougher fight. And, who knows, could have seen 262s go head to head with Gloster Meteor! That would have been interesting!

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Titania McGrath

Published: June 2023

Many people describe me as an extremist. And yet all I have ever yearned for is social justice and world peace. I am the very definition of a moderate. This is why I believe that anyone who disagrees with me ought to be publicly executed. 

Allow me to explain my reasoning. I have seen some abhorrent violence in my years of campaigning. Only last week, my friend Charlotte was deliberately misgendered. I believe the exact phrase was: “Sir, would you mind putting your testicles away?” Believe me, we are never going to that garden centre again. 

And yesterday I heard a “commentator” on the radio claiming that not all white people are privileged. Such violent rhetoric recalls the darkest days of the Third Reich. Why should a white man be given a platform to spread such vile racism? (I assume he was white anyway; he sounded quite articulate.) 

I have been heartened to see trans rights activists at various protests across the globe punching people in the name of tolerance. Given that “science” and “biological facts” are dog-whistles deployed by terrorists, beating up bigots who claim that there are two sexes is an act of self-defence against their harmful words. 

I have taken on board the many arguments against state censorship, and I do appreciate that unlimited power for one individual is not necessarily a good thing. For every benevolent and wise leader like Joseph Stalin, there’s an evil tyrant like Rishi Sunak. 

And so rather than widespread censorship, it would be safer if the government simply exterminates anyone with the wrong opinions. This system is far less likely to be exploited and, for those of us who live in London, it would also mean that there would be no further need for the congestion charge.

“What about human rights?”, I hear you cry. But when people hold such evil views and are completely lacking in compassion, they can barely be said to be human beings at all. As such, we are perfectly entitled to have them ritualistically diced into small cubes and fed to pigs.

[thefathersbride]

Spell your url ✧˖°.

Spell out your URL using song titles that can describe your muse/OC, then tag as many people as there are letters in your URL!

@cove-holdens tagged me for this game, thank you! This was really hard, I cannot remember with how many songs I was like "this is perfect for X or ship Y" - only to realize that they did not have the right starting letter :( But, here we are, I managed! :) I am tagging, without any obligations as always, @glowwormsmith @jacobseed @starsandskies @illithiad @alyssalenko @theviridianbunny @baldurians @fenharel @ginadotjpg @honeypunks and... YOU YOU YOU YOU and YOU!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

T - THE GOOD LIFE by THREE DAYS GRACE. "the good life is what I need, too many people stepping over me. the only thing that's been on my mind, is the one thing i need before i die" for Daphne Bosworth

H - HAD ENOUGH by BREAKING BENJAMIN. "when all is said and done, i will be the one, to leave you in your misery, and hate what you've become" for Eleanor Strand and Joseph Seed

E - EVIL by HOLLYWOOD UNDEAD. "evil, am i evil, through the empty eyes of you people? evil, i am evil, or are your eyes deceitful?" for Daphne

F - FIREDANCER by POETS OF THE FALL. "But fire doesn’t dance to their dictates. and now you’re dancing with the greats, let the fools have their fates, for time it never waits" for Iris Hawke

A - APOSTLE by DARKHAUS. "you gave words that were true, and you have made my life brand new. i was lonely and you were the only thing keeping me in line" for Eleanor and Joseph

T - TYRANT by DISTURBED. "but the love turned to hate we kept pushing away, and the words that came out turned it into a mess, and it's like pulling teeth 'cause you'll never confess." for Eleanor and Joseph

H - HAMMER OF DAWN by HAMMERFALL. "i can't pretend, never let it go, 'cause everything comes with a price. what you have done, what you put me through, the devils incarnate is coming for you" for Jayna Cousland

E - EMPIRES by RUELLE. "empires rise, empires fall. we live or die to take the throne. empires rise, empires fall. we live or die to take the throne. only one will stand at the end of it all" for Daphne

R - RISING SON by STURM UND DRANG. "can't you see me coming, coming for you baby? coming there to take you from the light. can't you hear me calling, calling for you baby? so you better take on to the night, i'm the rising son" for Jayna

S - SURVIVOR by 2WEI & EDDA HAYES. "i'm the survivor, i'm gonna make it, i will survive, keep on survivin'" for Caivyre

B - BEYOND THE HORIZON by POETS OF THE FALL. "beyond the horizon, i’ll follow where love has gone. twilight finds me here alone. beyond the horizon, i see your love shining, oh. my ghostlight, my afterglow" for Iris and Anders

R - RAISE YOUR GLASS by PINK. "so raise your glass if you are wrong in all the right ways, all my underdogs. we will never be, never be anything but loud and nitty-gritty, dirty, little freaks" for Caivyre

I - INTO THE HEART OF DANGER by BATTLE BEAST. "walk into the heart of danger, and don't let the darkness enchain you. walk into the heart of danger, face your fear" for Iris

D - DEFENCE OF MOSCOW by SABATON. "they don’t belong, we stand our ground, a million strong. we are ready for their strike, face the army of the reich. a million strong, this is our land, they don’t belong." for Dagmar Trevelyan

E - EVERYTIME WE TOUCH by CASCADA. "your arms are my castle, your heart is my sky, they wipe away tears that I cry (that i cry). the good and the bad times, we've been through them all, you make me rise when i fall" for Dagmar and Cullen Rutherford

[pinturas-sgm-aviacion]

1944 07 Messerschmitt Bf109G-14-AS JG 27 Reich Defence - Carlos Alonso

[mariacallous]

Not to diminish the capacity of the British for public disorder, but there is something darkly comic about watching, split-screen style, the contrast between the UK and US in the run-up to their general elections. While in the US, the former president and frontrunner becomes a convicted felon who shares videos referring to the possibility of establishing a “unified reich”, the UK’s prime minister enjoys a drink in a cafe by the river as a boatload of Lib Dems, holding placards and waving vaguely sardonically, gently bobs down the river behind him.

In the US, the threat of political violence becomes ever more present, with a movie imagining civil war in the republic topping the box office and Trump facing further charges of election interference. In Britain, a news alert at the top of the week announces: “Drink thrown at Nigel Farage during campaign visit to Clacton.” (It was a banana milkshake, and of course it was Clacton. Where else could it have been?) Britain has experienced sustained political violence more recently than the US, as British people love to point out to Irish Americans fondly valorising ye olde IRA. But held up against what’s happening in in the US, and for all the Tory party’s awfulness of the past 14 years, Rishi Sunak’s appeal to the British electorate on Tuesday night made him look about as threatening as a Beatrix Potter villain.

This is not how things are in the US, where a week on from Trump’s historic felony conviction, the fallout couldn’t be worse. Any sense of triumph experienced last week at the reading out of 34 guilty counts against Trump was curtailed, instantly and viscerally, by the verdict’s implications. This was not the same moment of giddy jubilance as when Trump was found liable for sexually assaulting and defaming E Jean Carroll (twice) and ordered to pay her $83.3m.

But that was the civil courts. In Judge Merchan’s court last Thursday, Trump became a convicted felon – a turn of events that, no matter how keenly we might have sought and anticipated it, seemed at the moment of reckoning to be a truly shocking and frightening development. We talk about Trump as a figure who, over the past eight years, has expanded the Overton window to a degree no one imagined possible. Last week, it stretched to accommodate the prospect of a man found guilty of a hush-money plot to influence a previous election possibly winning the next one.

And accommodate is the word. For anyone clinging to the delusion that a criminal conviction would, finally, trigger a grain of conscience in Republican high command, the disappointment was swift and unsettling. For a moment, oddly, only Trump himself seemed deflated. Whether as a result of age (he turns 78 next week), his recent weight loss or the stress finally catching up with him, after the verdict he looked hollow-faced, like an empty espadrille peeping out from a fringe of rush matting. It hardly mattered. If Trump was quiet, his proxies in the form of Mitch McConnell, Susan Collins and a slew of other Republican leaders leapt, shamefully, to his defence.

Susan B Glasser in the New Yorker handily collated the worst of these, from a tweet by Nick Ayers, the former Trump White House staffer, who wrote “Kangaroo court. Banana republic”, to the Republican senator for Kansas, Roger Marshall, calling the verdict “the most egregious miscarriage of justice in our nation’s history”. Marco Rubio, making up in hyperbole for what he lacks, as Trump himself has pointed out, in stature, claimed that “the public spectacle of political show trials has come to America”. And there it was: criminality sanctioned and embraced at the highest levels of government, with the implicit invitation to act accordingly to all who follow him.

And let’s not forget Nikki Haley. When she was running against Trump during the primaries, Haley threw some of the toughest criticism of any Republican his way. Well, that was then. The day after Trump’s defence team rested their case, up popped the former governor of South Carolina to confirm that, come November, she would be voting for a man she once called “diminished” and “unhinged”. In response to which, I find myself regressing to childishness. How could you?! Are you out of your mind? When all of this ends in Trump seizing an illegal third term and passing legislation to enable the deployment of US troops on domestic soil, what will you put in your press release? Or, at that point, will you be too busy angling for secretary of defense?

We know where undermining public faith in a country’s justice system can lead. And we know that Trump will do anything to secure his own victory. Now we know something else, too. When the guilty verdict rang out 34 times last week, my heart sank and an odd thought – in keeping with all the other absurdities thrown up by Trump – came to mind. Better that he had been found not guilty than convicted and the quiet part said out loud: that there is no line. That no one on his own side will do anything to stop him.

[deutschland-im-krieg]

Blohm & Voss BV 138MS (Minensuch/mine clearing) being lowered into, or hoisted out of the water, location and date unknown. A few BV 138C-1 Seedrache (Sea Dragon) were converted to minesweepers in 1942/43, the self defence armament was removed and a degaussing device, a hoop with the same diameter as the length of the fuselage and magnetic field-generating equipment, was fitted. These were used to sweep for mines and detonate them. For more, see my Facebook group - Eagles Of The Reich

[firewalkzwit]

runt // jonathan crane x reader. (13)

Chapter 13

cross-posted on AO3

masterlist

To Crane and many others, sex and violence had always been directly correlated. Violence manifests itself in sexual desires, and the lack of sex also often proves itself to be channelled through violence. Similar to when captive chimpanzees are celibate for too long, and they begin to become destructive and aggressive. People also manifest their unresolved emotional conflicts and defence mechanisms they develop from their childhoods in the shape of violent sexuality. The desire to be choked, spanked, beat up, or being the aggressor and finding sexual arousal in it fascinated Crane, as much as he didn't pay studies of sexuality half the time he did to fear, he was immensely passionate on most fields within psychology likewise.

However, it was not until recently that his long forgotten student years, where he first read Freud and Wilhelm Reich, and particularly the latter and his correlation to sexuality and violence, had struck his memory. Him and Freud's apprentice shared a fair amount of discrepancies, yet this didn't mean that when he had his second wet dream with Y/N, the men's names assaulted his mind. Waking up hard again, and with the latent scent of the coffee lingering from his dream, Crane almost felt like his own mind was playing sick games with him. He felt immensely conflicted. He knew even though they were just dreams, the repetition of the same scenery, only this time more vivid and violent, and the remaining sensation that he could hear her being significantly more lucid, had an underlying meaning he tried to refrain from investigating.

What he hated the most, was that trying to avoid the analysis of his dream only continued to prove that his dreams were what hid in the darkest corners of his subconscious desires. The desire to fuck, destroy and contaminate her female purity. The Y/N in his dreams held a knife, and would ask him to get naked, holding the weapon threateningly. He'd see himself in third person, as he usually dreamed in such state. The blurry vision reminded Crane that although he always dreamt in colour, as soon as he woke up he couldn't name any one of them. Once completely naked, she'd eye him down in an expression indiscernible, yet he could perceive her desire to subvert him. Soon, the scenery would switch and the memory of when or how completely disappeared as soon as he woke up -they were in a bed, room being dimly lit, and she was under him playfully resisting as he held her wrists. He could vividly recall the vision of her breasts under his chest, and how the tender meat would quiver along with the rest of her body as she moved.

"Hit me." She'd ask, to which he would initially resist, his visions seemingly panning shots of flames consuming a candle like a film. "Hit me.” she'd whisper.

"No."

"Hit me, hit me!" And finally, he'd comply, slapping as her head darted the opposite direction, finally snapping him awake.

He never got to see her face in the dreams, but he knew it was her. Something about sensory perception in dreams often gets lost in translation, but one can vividly remember paradoxical invisible sights or inaudible sounds one perceives. Dreams fascinated Crane, he often journaled about them as soon as he'd woken up. But those two particular dreams he had with Y/N he refrained from writing them down, something in their sinful nature being scolded and repressed by his conscious self. He sometimes hated to watch himself subject his own psyche to follow the most recurrent, basic archetypes in psychoanalysis. Then again, he was only human, as much as he wished sometimes he could exempt himself from tendencies that seemed so primal. Psychoanalysis breaks down human behaviours and reduces what most presume to be civilised creatures into simple animals, chained to their tendencies and desires. He found solace in the thought that the humanity we live in is only a piece of a process in the evolution of our species, but it ached him to know he couldn't form part of the future generations and their developments.

Her naked body was covered by a silk white dress, and she'd gracefully move in a circle of illumination drawn by the spotlight over her head. Her limbs were lightweight, and she moved with such flexibility that her body often seemed to lose its consistency and shudder like liquid. He was watching from afar, she couldn't see him, smell him or hear him, she just knew. As she danced, she could feel the dress beginning to melt off, becoming milk and dripping down on the floor, exposing her naked body to who, in the dream, seemed to be her captor. As she stood immobile and impotent, unable to help her exposed body or exit the spotlight, his approach rapidly culminated in his lewd touch. All over her body, she'd feel his touch infect the purity of the white milk that had traced down her body. He'd slide his hands up her legs and suck his fingers, drinking off of her and taking the only thing she possessed in that world; her milk.

Unusual dreams were often accompanied by sexual undertones, never arousing her, but always violating her, and the implications of purity in the embodiment of herself in dreams. It particularly caught her attention that this time, Crane was the protagonist of her dream. She recalled in her sleep feeling a sort of hesitant desire, her dream self being prude and even puritanical, yet an underlying desire causing her to reject his touch yet not want him to stop. Until then, the thought of having sex with Crane had been either downright terrifying or nonexistent at all, yet it wasn't until that particular dream that she begun to think of having sex with Crane on a more objective standpoint. Now that they were supposedly going to work together, would he ever want to have sex with her? He never even insinuated it, not even physically coercing the formality between them by touching her in a way suggestive enough to trigger her, in fact he hardly ever touched her at all. She wrote down her dream, and pondered on the potential interpretations to her recurrent dreams on scenes that depicted her desiring her purity to be corrupted in an overly sexual manner. As she reached the end of her memories, she figured she'd ask Dr. Crane about dreams as soon as she saw him.

[ciswomenofficial]

Serious work to improve the rights of queer and trans people grows out of the barrel of a gun. Maybe a literal gun, maybe a riot, or maybe the gun of a bourgeoisie police officer in the case of liberal reform, but it’s all possible because of guns. Our society would collapse if there were no violence in it. All societies existing in present conditions do so because of violence.

If you want gay liberation, women’s liberation, or trans liberation, than you will have to do the kind of reforming of the economy that is not possible under the gun of the bourgeoisie police officer. The most you can achieve without restructuring the economy into a socialist economy and cultural revolution is the liberation of the gay settler or the gay middle class. If we want a total emancipation of the whole gay people, we need to navigate it though the primary contradiction: ultimately class, but in a colonial context racialized class.

And the anti-capitalist and anti-colonial struggle in America has always at its best been armed and militant. Even Martin Luther Kings famous non-violent direct actions were attended by individuals wielding shotguns for self defence, to say nothing of the SNCC members who kept guns around their homes, the panthers, Malcom X, the American Indian Movement and many others among the chief forces and most politically advanced members of the colonized masses in that era. the anti- colonial struggle globally has also been armed and militant at its best; they fought a bloody war in Algeria, Nelson Mandela did bombings in South Africa, China valiantly fought off the Japanese invaders and the comparators who profited from American and European business interests. Even the first anti-colonial war of the modern era in Haiti was fought violently. Every slave revolt was fought through violence. Back in America some of those slave revolts (the ones happening domestically) and the fight fought by John Brown (supported by black anti-slavery activists such as Harriet Tubman) both drove the nation forward to the violent civil war that abolished slavery. The history of opposition to colonialism is bloody, and so it must be.

The idea that we must not give them resistance, the idea that resistance is what they want and makes us look bad is an ahistorical idea. No amount of hand-holding, or satire has ever defeated oppressors. Do you think there was no satire against the nazis? People didn’t take the nazis seriously enough because they were hypocritical and held probably false views. That did not stop them from taking over the Weimar government and declaring themselves the new German reich. No, the nazis were stopped by war. Civil war, international war, that is the most reliable way of stopping one’s enemies. Can we vote against the problem? Well, male Gen zers are—in general—turning to the right wing, and Trump is becoming more and more appealing to a lot of people while the democrats are losing ground by their own incompetence. Voting will not win is the issue any time soon—just as attempts at voting did not matter in the Weimar Republic and did not stop the nazis.

The force of fascism in society is not driven by poll numbers. Nor have other developments: Keynesian policies are popular in America, FDR is upheld as one of the greatest presidents, and yet his popular Keynesian reforms been being dismantled by neoliberal reforms since the Carter administration. No Democratic Party led government has reversed this purposed “Reganomics” as some erroneously call it. That is because these policies are driven by the historical changes in economic realities driven by the contradictions in capitalist economics. So is rising fascism. Rosa Luxembourg once said that either socialism will triumph or barbarism shall. The people of Germany chose nazi barbarism in the decades after that. We have two choices in the present: continue with capitalism and colonialism and fall into our own period of barbarism, or fight against them and prevent and defeat barbarism. Perhaps it will be a Keynesian barbarism and will not be barbaric to you personally. That does not seem as likely at the moment, when Bernie sanders campaign has failed so spectacularly, driven in part by Democratic Party scheming towards its emerging left wing. What is more likely is that we will be the subject of fascist barbarism.

[onetwofeb]

On Kantian ethics, Hegel argued, the moral agent is reduced to an isolated being, imagined apart from all particular attachments and expected to deliberate on the precise formulation of his moral duties in a non-social void, his only aids being reason and the purity of his own intentions. As a result, any attempt to sustain a community of moral creatures, held together by the kind of collective sentiment which supplies the basis for action as well as a shared rational capacity to collaborate socially in distinguishing right from wrong, becomes exceedingly difficult. The pursuit of goodness cannot begin from nowhere. Nor does it start from no-when. It is both socially and historically grounded. Summarising Hegel’s problem with Kant’s belief in formulaic injunctions, Bourke writes: “a viable faith had to be a people’s or a ‘folk’ (Volk) religion: it must engage existing human affections.” Moral duties, then, can only receive a concrete content and win our allegiance in a socio-historical setting, for this—not Kant’s imagined “Kingdom of Ends” (Reich der Zwecke)—is where we in fact find ourselves. Hegel’s infamous line about the identity of rationality and actuality was far from a surrender to Prussian power; it stemmed from a genuine conviction that, since reality is both conceptual and dynamic, we should trust in the moving potential of Geist to redeem us at a social level, rather than despise this world out of love for our own mind-forged blueprints for a better one.[...]

[dailyanarchistposts]

J.6.1 What are the main obstacles to raising free children?

The biggest obstacle is the training and character of most parents, physicians, and educators. Individuals within a hierarchical society create psychological walls/defences around themselves and these will obviously have an effect both on the mental and physical state of the individual and so their capacity for living a free life and experiencing pleasure. Such parents then try (often unconsciously) to stifle the life-energy in children. There are, for example, the child’s natural vocal expressions (shouting, screaming, bellowing, crying, etc.) and natural body motility. As Reich noted:

“Small children go through a phase of development characterised by vigorous activity of the voice musculature. The joy the infant derives from loud noises (crying, shrieking, and forming a variety of sounds) is regarded by many parents as pathological aggressiveness. The children are accordingly admonished not to scream, to be ‘still,’ etc. The impulses of the voice apparatus are inhibited, its musculature becomes chronically contracted, and the child becomes quiet, ‘well-brought-up,’ and withdrawn. The effect of such mistreatment is soon manifested in eating disturbances, general apathy, pallor of the face, etc. Speech disturbances and retardation of speech development are presumably caused in this manner. In the adult we see the effects of such mistreatment in the form of spasms of the throat. The automatic constrictions of the glottis and the deep throat musculature, with subsequent inhibition of the aggressive impulses of the head and neck, seems to be particularly characteristic.” [Children of the Future, p. 128]

“Clinical experience has taught us,” Reich concluded, “that small children must be allowed to ‘shout themselves out’ when the shouting is inspired by pleasure. This might be disagreeable to some parents, but questions of education must be decided exclusively in the interests of the child, not in those of the adults.” [Op. Cit., p. 128]

Besides deadening life energy in the body, such stifling also inhibits the anxiety generated by the presence of anti-social, cruel, and perverse impulses within the psyche — for example, destructiveness, sadism, greed, power hunger, brutality, etc. (impulses referred to by Reich as “secondary” drives). In other words, this reduces our ability to empathise with others and so the internal ethical guidelines we all develop are blunted, making us more likely tp express such secondary, anti-social, drives. So, ironically, these secondary drives result from the suppression of the primary drives and the sensations of pleasure associated with them. These secondary drives develop because the only emotional expressions that can get through a person’s defences are distorted, harsh, and/or mechanical. In other words, compulsive morality (i.e. acting according to externally imposed rules) becomes necessary to control the secondary drives which compulsion itself creates. By such processes, authoritarian child-rearing becomes self-justifying:

“Psychoanalysts have failed to distinguish between primary natural and secondary perverse, cruel drives, and they are continuously killing nature in the new-born while they try to extinguish the ‘brutish little animal.’ They are completely ignorant of the fact that it is exactly this killing of the natural principle which creates the secondary perverse and cruel nature, human nature so called, and that these artificial cultural creations in turn make compulsive moralism and brutal laws necessary.” [Reich, Op. Cit., p. 17–18]

Moralism, however, can never get at the root of the problem of secondary drives, but in fact only increases the pressure of crime and guilt. The real solution is to let children develop what Reich calls natural self-regulation. This can be done only by not subjecting them to punishment, coercion, threats, moralistic lectures and admonitions, withdrawal of love, etc. in an attempt to inhibit their spontaneous expression of natural life-impulses. The systematic development of the emphatic tendencies of the young infant is the best way to “socialise” and restrict activities that are harmful to the others. As A.S. Neill pointed out “self-regulation implies a belief in the goodness of human nature; a belief that there is not, and never was, original sin.” [Summerhill, p. 103]

According to Neill, children who are given freedom from birth and not forced to conform to parental expectations spontaneously learn how to keep themselves clean and develop social qualities like courtesy, common sense, an interest in learning, respect for the rights of others, and so forth. However, once the child has been armoured through authoritarian methods intended to force it to develop such qualities, it becomes out of touch with its living core and therefore no longer able to develop self-regulation. In this stage it becomes harder and harder for the pro-social emotions to shape the developing mode of life of the new member of society. At that point, when the secondary drives develop, parental authoritarianism becomes a necessity.

This oppression produces an inability to tolerate freedom. The vast majority of people develop this automatically from the way they are raised and is what makes the whole subject of bringing up children of crucial importance to anarchists. Reich concluded that if parents do not suppress nature in the first place, then no anti-social drives will be created and no authoritarianism will be required to suppress them: ”What you so desperately and vainly try to achieve by way of compulsion and admonition is there in the new-born infant ready to live and function. Let it grow as nature requires, and change our institutions accordingly.” [Op. Cit., p. 47] So in order to raise psychologically healthy children, parents need to acquire self-knowledge, particularly of how internal conflicts develop in family relationships, and to free themselves as much as possible from neurotic forms of behaviour. The difficulty of parents acquiring such self-knowledge and sufficiently de-conditioning themselves is obviously another obstacle to raising self-regulated children.

However, the greatest obstacle is the fact that twisting mechanisms set in so very early in life, i.e. soon after birth. Hence it is important for parents to obtain a thorough knowledge of what rigid suppressions are and how they function, so that from the beginning they can prevent (or at least decrease) them from forming in their children. Finally, Reich cautioned that it is crucial to avoid any mixing of concepts: “One cannot mix a bit of self-regulation with a bit of moral demand. Either we trust nature as basically decent and self-regulatory or we do not, and then there is only one way, that of training by compulsion. It is essential to grasp the fact that the two ways of upbringing do not go together.” [Op. Cit., p. 46]

[beardedmrbean]

A jail term for a far-left extremist who took part in violent attacks on neo-Nazis has caused uproar on both the left and right of German politics.

Lina E was given a sentence of five years and three months - but was also told she is now free pending an appeal, having been in custody since 2020.

Three men convicted with her were also given jail sentences on Wednesday.

Left-wing protesters demonstrated in several cities against the verdicts. A big rally has been banned in Leipzig.

Other Germans were angered by the decision to release Lina E - criminal defendants' second names are not made public - after two and a half years in custody - believing this sends a signal to the left that violence against the extreme right is acceptable.

The judge, Hans Schlüter-Staats, said Lina E would be allowed out pending the result of her appeal. She is said to be unwell and has had to hand in her identity card and passport.

Delivering his verdict, the judge said that "opposing right-wing extremists is a respectable motive", but use of force was only for the state and her actions were still "serious criminal acts". He criticised her defence lawyers' argument that the case was politically motivated.

Lina E was seen as the ringleader of her far-left group which waged a brutal campaign of violence against the extreme right for several years - using hammers, iron bars and baseball bats.

In one attack in 2019, the gang attacked a well-known neo-Nazi pub called the Bull's Eye in the town of Eisenach, beating its owner Leon R. They attacked him again weeks later. Leon R was later arrested in a police operation targeting neo-Nazis across Germany.

The far-left militant group gained notoriety for its violence, attracting the name "hammer gang". Lina E's partner Johann G is also suspected of attacks and has since gone to ground.

In another incident in 2020 involving at least 15 people, a group were beaten up as they returned from a ceremony marking the firebombing of Dresden during World War Two. Several victims suffered serious injuries.

Lina E was detained in November 2020. Her surname has not been made public. Three men who joined her gang were given sentences of 27 to 39 months in jail.

Sabine Volk, a researcher on the far right from the University of Passau, said that the crimes committed by the gang were horrible but that there appeared to be a "power imbalance" in eastern Germany against the far left.

"In radical left circles there's this perception and narrative that the state isn't doing anything against the neo-Nazi scene and that's why they have to take over their duties," she told the BBC. "It's not entirely true but it's not far-fetched either."

Last December, after years of being dismissed as harmless cranks, 25 people were arrested on suspicion of plotting to overthrow the German government on behalf of the far-right Reichsbürger (Citizens of the Reich) movement.

German 'crackpot' movement turns radical and dangerous

Germany, where car is king but protesters won’t let you drive

After Lina E was found guilty, there were far-left protests in several cities and police were targeted with bottles and fireworks.

Meanwhile, the head of the police union, Jochen Kopelke, said officers were shaking their heads that she had been released: "It was clear to us as officers that we would also be the focus of extremists."

Interior Minister Nancy Faeser has warned of an increasing willingness among the far left to resort to violence. However, she said last week that right-wing extremism remained the biggest radical threat to German democracy and that attacks last year rose by 12%.

An anti-fascist "Day X" march planned for Saturday has been banned in Leipzig, where Lina E was a student, because police are concerned it could descend into violence. But a major police operation is planned anyway, as several major events are due to take place in the city.

The far-right AfD party condemned the decision to release Lina E as "soft" and complained there had been a failure of the rule of law.

The AfD has risen in German opinion polls in recent months as dissatisfaction grows with the coalition government. The latest poll puts them neck and neck with Chancellor Olaf Scholz's centre-left SPD on 18%.

The AfD has also benefited from a backlash among German voters from climate activist protests that have blockaded streets in key cities.

Hans-Georg Maassen, a former German spy chief who is seen as a right-wing conservative, ridiculed Lina E's sentence as giving free rein to far-left activists to stage further violent attacks.