Human rights interventionism of the green camouflages as a fight for the good, but mainly serves to preserve Western supremacy
Parallel to the congress of bundnis 90 / the green has from 11. to 13. June also the G7 summit in English Carbis Bay and little later the NATO summit in Brussel took place. Both in Carbis Bay and in Brussels, the participants agreed on an aggressive course against Russia and China. The NATO hour, as US Prasident Joe Biden formulated in dealing with these two countries "New challenges", Both, "Not as we hoped for" act.
After eliminating the irritations leased by his transaction, one wants to reinstate the force to defend the western supremacy in the world by all means. "We are in a competition for victory in the 21. century", so biders on the G7 meeting, "And the starting signal has fallen."
Grununen made it clear on their party congress that they support such a course unrestricted and as a ruling party a reliable partner of both FURS Transatlantisch oriented German capital as well as the USA.
Your guest speakers, ex-Siemens boss Joe Kaeser and the early US Aufem Minister Madeleine Albright, underlined this impressive. The title of your election program for the coming general election "Germany. Everything is in it." Sounds more threatening in this context.
The greats are masters of the double standard
According to the Zeitgeist, which the grunes like no other German party serve, the tones in the election program are moderate. Central for the non-sub-policy should take precedence "Human rights" be and the "Starting multilateral cooperation", Especially with the USA.
Her "Aufen- and security policy" goals "on preventing conflicts" and therefore set up "Perspective" and "Sustainable development". From "Civil Crisis Pravention", "Conflict resolution" and "Peace consolidation" is the speech.
Great animals generally present themselves as the party who has written the use of freedom, democracy and human rights to their flags, and develop an almost missionary zeal. It is progressive, however, that your approach is very selective. First and foremost only landers in their focus, which do not pay to the circle of the federal partner.
A typical example were the very different reactions for the approach of Chinese safety force against the Krawalle in Hong Kong 2019 and its French counterpart against simultaneous demonstrations of "Yellow-west".
Although the protests in Hong Kong, where u.a. Had been put on fire, unevenly violent goods than in France, the Chinese police force to Parliament and sanction demands against China, while a criticism of the hardly less violent police violence in France is awarded.1
The speech is only of burial rights. As a mab of development of a country alone, the liberal, market economy, bourgeo-parliamentary social order established in the west serves solely, which in dealing with other social approaches "Western value system" will increase.
In which MAB goes to social human rights in the singing countries, no role plays. What does it mean that China has exempted 800 million people from extreme poverty in recent decades, Syria until 2011 was a developed country in which a variety of volks and religions survived relatively peacefully, or the Libyans: inside under Gaddafi the highest standard of living within Gaddafi All of Africa enjoyed.
All this does not pay if you do not want to subordinate the practices, standards and interests given by the West.
"Fuhrerschaft of the US and Europe"
The Grunen, which are stalked by explanatory mabs, which are fixed on the side of the US, the human rights rhetoric ultimately serves economic and geostrategic interests. Madeleine Albright made unmistly clear as a guest speaker, what is the ruling transatlantic circles.
First, the Fuhrerschaft of the US and Europe had to be recovered inelectively Germany.2 "No other group of nations" have "Both the historical identification with freedom as well as the geographical reach to inspire and strong democratic institutions in each region and strong."
This played the "Grande lady" US AUBEPOLICY obviously on the possibilities of the US and the EU states to build directly or indirectly via government-related NGOs, bonded Kaftte in opposing countries and to put with them unpleasant governments under prere or even through "Colorful revolutions" sturge.
The restoring hegemony is, of course, all countries who do not want to submit to the vehicle, directly in the way and must be treated as an opponent, the most potentist stdden fried, Russia and China.