Understand, seniors, you also have to contribute to the weapons. Professor Keller and Government Nonsense

Pension reform of the current government. How does it affect you?

In the case of the government’s reform efforts, this is a typical case of a repeated joke that ceases to be a joke. At the moment, ANO politicians are arguing with the politicians of the government coalition about the correct wording of the minutes from the castle meeting on the pension reform. The minutes were taken by the president’s economic advisor Vladimír Bezděk.

Witnesses will surely remember that in 2005 and then in 2010, two so-called Bezděk Commissions for the preparation of the pension reform functioned. These commissions proposed, among other things, to reduce the social insurance premiums transferred to the state coffers, to lower the ceiling for the premium levy and thereby favor those who earn the most, to transfer three percent of the premium payments from the pay-as-you-go system to private funds.

The loss of tens of billions in the ongoing system was to be compensated by an increase in VAT. There were also suggestions that people under the age of forty should send money to private funds completely compulsorily, and that mandatory pension savings would fall to a private fund after the applicant’s death. We were then bombarded with calls to start handing over our money to private pension funds as soon as possible. The more serious ones offered an appreciation of our savings for old age somewhere between one and two percent.

None of these proposals were implemented, the private pension pillar collapsed. Only Vladimír Bezděk remained from the whole parade as the recorder of the negotiations on the next pension reform. I am not at all surprised that he has the full confidence of Mr. President.

According to Jana Maláčová from Socdem, nothing will be saved. Do you agree?

This is not about saving anything. The point is to change the pension system so that seniors finally understand that their age does not release them from the obligation to contribute to the purchase of the most expensive military equipment, to the expansion of the army and to the overall militarization of our country. The fact that they can no longer be conscripted will be sweetened by the fact that they will work until an ever later age, so that they will then be entitled to low-valued pensions for an ever shorter period of time.

After all, everyone has to be somehow involved in the peace efforts of our government. The pension reform of this government is not supposed to improve the situation of the elderly. A rolling pension system is unsustainable when people are afraid to have children because of the high cost, housing crisis and poor prospects. And private pension funds only serve to launder money in times of high inflation.

Jiřina Šiklová and I once agreed that as leftists we have no one to vote for. How are you doing?

It’s about which body they are elected to. The European Parliament elections are not about left and right, but about maintaining the last vestiges of national sovereignty. Therefore, each of the candidates should clearly state whether they are in favor of abolishing the right of veto, whether they are in favor of the introduction of the euro and whether they agree to the introduction of mandatory quotas for accepting migrants with the possibility of paying a penalty in case of unwillingness to accept them. Nothing else may interest us in the case of candidates for the European Parliament.

Even in next year’s parliamentary elections, we do not need to examine election programs in any particular detail. The profile of individual parties and movements is clearly determined by whether they somehow got involved with the government of Petr Fiala and Vít Rakušan or whether they would join a coalition with one of the parties of these two gentlemen. You don’t really need to study electoral programs. What good would it do you today if you knew Fialo’s pre-election promises even by heart? It would only lead to feelings of nausea.

After all, why do Czech voters no longer miss the traditional left?

Czech voters don’t just miss the left, they obviously don’t miss the right either. A right-wing voter must look at Fial’s ODS or Pekar’s TOP 09 just as much as a left-wing voter at Šmard’s Socdem. If we have become an ordinary colony economically and a striving vassal politically and militarily, then arguing about who is the most left-wing or right-wing in the entire Czech basin is about as meaningful as saving for old age in a time of skyrocketing prices. However, it is far from our only problem, the crisis of the right and the left is universal.

I will put it very simply. The traditional slogan of the right is a free market and a minimum of state intervention in the economy. However, it has come to the point that corporate giants use state power and merge with it to dictate entire societies. Politicians regularly move between top state positions and management positions in large companies. The economy has not become independent from politics, the two are increasingly merging. Small entrepreneurs who are unlucky enough to function as subcontractors of the powerful, zigzag between regulations and provisions that suit only the financially strongest.

The left is similarly miserable. Its traditional motto is solidarity. Today, solidarity has become mandatory, i.e. something supremely hypocritical, semantically meaningless and politically unbelievably brazen. Whoever found the recipe for a return to the true right and left would deserve a Nobel Prize for saving democracy.

How did you take the adoption of the so-called migration pact?

I consider the migration pact to be a fraud without a veil. Those who reluctantly accepted it defend themselves by saying that it does not contain mandatory quotas and that there are exceptions to it. In this case, the quota is the number of migrants that the country must accept in one year. If this quantity were not determined, it would not be possible to calculate the amount of money which country has to pay for refusing to accept the specified number of migrants in the given year. It’s so simple that, with the exception of the highest civil servants who supposedly defend Czech interests, everyone understands it.

It is similar with the exceptions to the migration pact. If an exception were to be granted because of the high number of migrants on the territory of a certain country, then those states that enforce the migration pact precisely because they have too many migrants would have to apply for the exception. I will list at least some of them in alphabetical order: Belgium, Italy, France, Germany, Netherlands, Austria, Greece, Spain, Sweden. If they were granted an exception, because they have been living in this situation for a long time, the case of the Czech Republic would be assessed. If all the mentioned countries were to receive an exception, the migration pact would seem like something normal again only to the highest state officials, whom I already mentioned.

And one last thing. Little is said about the most important thing – by adopting the migration pact, our country loses the right to decide for itself how many foreigners will move to us. This right passes from the Czech government to the Brussels Commission. In the best case, anonymous officials will decide about us, in the worst case, people like Danuš Nerudová.

Among other things, you write about him in your comment What is today’s propaganda striving for. You come to the conclusion that her goal is to make everyone think that common sense is useless and that trying to make sense of things is a completely useless act. How good is this tactic?

Yes. I argue that the purpose of propaganda is not to dictate what people should think. Her goal is to make people believe that it doesn’t matter what anyone thinks. That is why it is okay for the Prime Minister to first proclaim that the European Union is completely impossible, and then to act as its most obedient messenger. That is why it does not matter when the Minister of the Interior claims that the migration pact is good news, and at the same time comforts people that we will have an exception to it.

That’s why it’s normal to go into debt to buy assault weapons while at the same time claiming that pensioners would eat away at our future. It’s very simple. Common sense has become not only useless in politics, but also highly suspect. An attempt at a logical argument becomes an indication to the relevant authorities that you may be working for ulterior interests. But for those wrong foreign interests. In contrast to the right foreign interests, for which the relevant authorities may be working.

According to the Czech mainstream, the best tactic is to stick with the USA. How do you perceive it?

This is undoubtedly the best tactic for the Czech mainstream. How else would they stay in the Czech mainstream?

Add PL to your favorite feeds on Google News. Thank you