Albrecht Müller
 Albrecht Müller    (journalist) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 | ||||||||||||
| Born | May 16, 1938 Heidelberg | |||||||||||
| Nationality | German | |||||||||||
| Alma mater | University of Mannheim, Free University of Berlin, University of Munich, Nottingham University | |||||||||||
| Founder of | NachDenkSeiten | |||||||||||
| Interests | Willy Brandt | |||||||||||
Former German Social Democrat politician, from 2003 editor of independent media NachDenkseiten
| ||||||||||||
Albrecht Müller is a German economist, publicist and former politician (Social Democrats (SPD)). Müller was head of planning in the Federal Chancellery under Chancellors Willy Brandt and Helmut Schmidt. From 1987 to 1994 he was a member of the German Bundestag for the SPD. In the 2000s he wrote a column for the SPD newspaper “Vorwarts” and has since published several books. He has been the author and publisher of the NachDenkseiten independent media outlet since 2003.
Contents
Manipulation methods
Müller is author of a number of books on political manipulation methods, touching on deep state subjects. In his book Believe little. question everything. Think for yourself (2019) he listed 19 frequently used methods to deceive[1]:
1. Language control
2. Manipulation using constantly used terms laden with specific meanings
3. Telling stories abridged
4. Hide things
5. Repetition – Steady drip wears away the stone
6. Overdoing - A bit is going to stick
7. Send out the same message from different angles
8. Everyone in the group agrees. Then it must be right
9. The seesaw effect
10. Use opinion polls to form opinions
11. Say B and mean A
12. Establishing or using NGOs
13. A hodgepodge of insinuations makes the sum of half-truths into the truth
14. Experts help - to manipulate
15. Linking names and thus judgments of individuals
16. Targeted use of emotions
17. Using and staging conflicts to create mood and opinion
18. The dissemination and use of the basic feeling "We are the good guys"
19. Pars pro toto - a part stands for the whole
We are the Good Guys
The dissemination and use of the basic feeling "We are the good guys"
Spreading the feeling that we are honorable, free, good, democratic and exemplary here in the West is not as easy to understand as a method of manipulation as, for example, the methods of repetition, exaggeration, concealment or telling abridged stories. And yet spreading the basic feeling that we in the West are the good guys can be understood as a method of manipulation. The method is extremely effective and determines a wide area of contemporary political life.
It is a tremendous feat for the West to have established itself as an all-round good world. I should probably say more precisely: created and strengthened the feeling and the impression that we are the good guys here. It is a basic feeling in Western societies and is mostly not questioned by the people living there, but used instead. Being able to use this self-esteem is also nice and helpful. In all situations. Because with this basic feeling one lives quite well. We here in the West are the beneficiaries of this arrangement, without having done much to build up this basic feeling.
This basic feeling can be used without having to be explained and justified, again and again. Any discussion is excluded; that's how the world is divided.[2]
The seesaw effect
The term seesaw effect probably sounds strange. It doesn't appear in the textbooks. However, I could not think of a more appropriate term for the manipulation method that will be outlined here:
US President Donald Trump is a special figure, he uses nasty methods and lashes out with excessive slogans. But in many political intentions and actions, such as the tendency to wage wars, he is no worse than his predecessors Barack Obama and above all than George W. Bush or Bill Clinton and also no worse than his 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton. But thanks to the index finger constantly being raised against the current president, the negative image that already exists is being further aggravated. In return, his predecessors and his competitor appear as wonderfully virtuous figures in the last election campaign. The Democrats around Obama and Clinton seem downright glamorous – the result of the see-saw effect. . Another example: In recent years, the established media and their representatives began to eye the growing media on the Internet critically and even condescendingly. This criticism and the resulting negative labeling also works according to the see-saw principle. The established media appear as the real thing; they appear at the same time more and more as a block. The tabloid Bild-Zeitung on the one hand and, for example, the Süddeutsche Zeitung and Zeit on the other act as a consensual grouping of true media. That's strange, especially when you remember their big differences and mutual criticism in the past.
There has long been a skeptical debate and critical analysis of what is commonly called democracy among critical fellow citizens in the West. Democracy has almost never existed, I once said, thinking of the massive financial support from business for the CDU Chancellor Konrad Adenauer and his successors, above all Helmut Kohl and somewhat quieter Angela Merkel. The conservative parties CDU, CSU and FDP had the support of the rich part of our society. They always had far more resources to fund their election campaigns. Equal competitive conditions and thus truly democratic conditions never existed.
It's no different in other countries, sometimes worse: in the USA, presidential candidates have to raise hundreds of millions of dollars in order to be able to run. This type of candidate selection cannot be called democratic.
In France, a presidential candidate like Emmanuel Macron appears out of nowhere. Apparently selected and controlled.
Big money plays a big role in all such so-called democracies. Actually, one would have to admit that the conditions are not democratic. The see-saw effect helps out of the jam: Compared to the so-called autocrats, compared to Turkish President Erdoğan, for example, the people acting here appear to be democrats and our system appears to be democratic. The seesaw ensures that we are then considered democrats and anyway as the good guys.[3]
Quotes by Albrecht Müller
| Page | Quote | Date |
|---|---|---|
| German Council on Foreign Relations | “DGAP is an insupportable lobbying organization, especially insupportable because we co-finance it as taxpayers. Recently, one of these experts appeared in a television news program again, who are presented in order to (allegedly) disseminate a well-founded opinion. It was about more money for the military, and the quoted expert was Christian Mölling from the German Council on Foreign Relations. This is a lobbying organization that is funded to a considerable extent by us taxpayers and gives the impression that it represents the public interest and thus also the interest of all of us. Mölling is the head of the Center for Security and Defense at the DGAP. Typical for his publications is a DGAP memo with the title: "Defense Budget 2024: The budget is increasing – and not enough yet". The text speaks of a "gaping gap in defense spending". Propaganda for more armaments by publicly paid so-called experts.” | 30 November 2023 |
| Ursula von der Leyen | “As Federal Defense Minister, Von der Leyen behaved as the US President wanted when he called for increase in military spending: higher military budgets, increased armaments instead of disarmament. And although this minister got into trouble because of her high spending on consulting firms and various personnel decisions and was anything but a role model, she became President of the European Commission. That is a key function and it is important for the US.
The decision for von der Leyen happened quietly backstage. No sensible person can explain why she was given this important office. A partial explanation is that she had the support of important countries from Eastern Europe. The United States has a great influence on these states. In the first major critical case, Von der Leyen immediately and unequivocally represented the US position, where she said Iran itself is to be blamed for the confrontation in the Middle East and for the execution of the Iranian general. With her, the United States can probably also stake a claim on other occasions and play a key role in shaping the internal structure of the European Union. Ursula von der Leyen is the perfect example of an "agent of influence".” | 2 January 2021 |
