Bit of an unusual submission. Transcription and translation by yours truly, original source is this video by Clownswelt [A]
See first comment for further context
I'll skip over unnecessary parts
Yes, my dears, I think, before we delve into the topic of network firefighters, we should let [German Minister of the Economy and also Vice Chancellor, Robert] Habeck himself talk about freedom of speech and autocratic methods to subvert or control it. On the anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, at the Neuhardenberg foundation, he himself talked about a few aspects that, in my opinion, you should be aware of, in order to contrast them with what they want to do now.
Okay, what did he just talk about? Autocrats are allegedly precisely spreading figures of speech domestically to cause instability. Especially, this is how you can understand him, these figures of speech are being amplified, strengthened by the dictators' troll armies - so, probably, tens of thousands of accounts that are centrally commanded to then, with the help of the populists here in the country, continue bringing in their instability agenda, their destabilization into our country. So he is criticizing the targeted use of troll armies to manipulate public discourse according to their whims, as a tool used by the autocrats. Ah, yes.
Yes, exactly, which is why governments have to keep their hands off social media.
Okay, freedom of speech does not mean that AI controls algorithms and manipulates public opinion, but this is why freedom of speech means that the European Union, by means of e.g. the Digital Services Act and its related trusted flaggers who, in the scope of this law, are meant to then regulate this social media discourse.
So then, from an official place, they are intervening in the social media discourse in society. In my opinion, the double standard here is obvious already.
Yes, and it becomes completely clear where the problem is. It's at X, it's at Twitter, the platform which, after Elon Musk's takeover, has become a lot more free-speech than it was before. But that also means that opinions which our woke governing caste doesn't really like are appearing more dominantly and aren't being artificially throttled.
And thus we get to the topic of the Green net firefighters.
They themselves have thought about something to act against such opinions. Especially when it comes to the topic of election campaigns, this whole thing is very important.
A fire department to extinguish the fire, the fire that is happening underneath Green social media posts, that is exactly what it's about, my dear friends. I quote:
Yes, you know them, the magic words, the so-called "hate". If you gave these people a truth serum and asked them what they meant by "hate", they would honestly reply "it's the speech that we hate".
On the other hand, it's about democratic discourse, my dear friends, the discourse that shall please remain left-wing, and the right-wing fringe of the left is the CDU. They continue:
Yes, by "democratic discourse on the net", they apparently mean defending the so-called Green values in social media. Ah yes.
So, by now, the popularity situation of this party is so dire that they have to resort to such means, because apparently the people don't agree with you by themselves - or where exactly is the problem? We'll go a step ahead, because here they are already giving insights into their functions. Quote:
Yes, it is democratic and diverse, but so-called "populist positions" are part of this democratic discourse, no? No, they are not, my friends. I'll continue:
I see. They are already centrally coordinating in order to artificially upvote some posts so that, to outside observers, it looks like these posts are quite a bit more popular than they actually are, because these likes, which are being made by the Green net fire department, are coordinated and thus artificially created. They don't reflect that society in general finds this post so hot. (Habeck clip) "that the opinion of society is being manipulated, that is not what freedom of speech means, and it would be naive to mistake the two." I continue quoting:
Ah, very good. By the way, lies are included in freedom of speech, only slander is criminal. What "hate and incitement" are, well, my dear friends, you feel free to put two and two together yourself.
One thing is clear, if they were able to properly and legitimately use the word "illegal" here, they would have done it. So it is not about something not being legal or so, still they try to, as they write here, "legally prosecute comments and posts where this is possible". (Habeck clip) "So, the regulation of algorithms on X or Tiktok by applying the European legal norms is a central duty."
It's so convenient that we now have the so-called trusted flaggers according to the Digital Service Act, who, with their privileged position as large trustworthy reporters, enjoy the entitlement that social media platforms have to process their reports particularly quickly and effectively. Without bureaucratic hurdles, as they told us back then. Shamed be he who thinks that the Green net fire department, that these people who participate, maybe directly go to these trusted flagger reporting agencies to remove these posts from the net more effectively.
From this example screenshot, you can also see that the Green net fire department apparently seems to be organized in compartments at the state level. Accordingly we see e.g. the Bavarian Green net fire department or the Green net fire department East, which is being advertised at the parliamentary group website of the Greens in Thuringia. Well, you are free to google it for yourself.
I believe that we are genuinely seeing a nationwide, statewide, maybe even below that, municipalitywide organization which is very reminiscent of so-called troll armies. But they're allowed to do it because they're the Good Guys, my dear friends. (Habeck clip) "The troll armies of the dictators and the populists as their useful helpers here at home have gone very far with their instability agenda."
At Apollo News we are indeed learning more about the internal workings of this entire thing:
Huh, that kinda sounds like the methods used by the autocrats. (Habeck clip) "among the autocrats' methods is the targeted dissemination of instability." Who, together with their coordinated troll armies, try to influence the open public discourse from outside. (Habeck clip) "The troll armies of the dictators and the populists as their useful helpers here at home". But, nonsense, guys, they're allowed to do it because they're the Good Guys. On this, they continue:
Hm, so they are looking very close at how these algorithms are designed to then steer them to manipulate the public opinion underneath Green posts. (Habeck clip) "It does not mean that an artificial intelligence steers the algorithms in a way that the opinion of society is being manipulated, that is not what freedom of speech means, and it would be naive to mistake the two." So, exactly what Habeck talked about in his speech, just from within his own party?
Well, friends, that can only be alright because they are the Good Guys. So, I would say, let's examine the three screenshots from the internal video presentation for the Green net fire department circles that Apollo News secured for us.
Let's start here, "Handling Hate and Disinformation". They are writing here: "Point out what is problematic in the statements." Below that, in italics, "This is discrimination, misogyny, hate against queers, antisemitism, (anti-Muslim) racism and not a legitimate opinion."
Okay, so, the first tip for handling so-called "hate and disinformation" is just spamming people with some leftist buzzwords. But what if I then inquire "what exactly did I say that is discrimination", do they just use a different buzzword or do they just repeat themselves?
What the Greens are doing here is simply branding an opinion, which is well-reasoned or not, with a buzzword and denying the right to be able to even speak that opinion by saying it's not a legitimate opinion. (Habeck clip) "The troll armies of the dictators and the populists as their useful helpers here at home have gone very far with their instability agenda."
The next item: "Pull instigators back to reality." Yes, here you are supposed to use moral extortion and threaten legal consequences, very nice. A nice intimidation method. (Habeck clip) "among the autocrats' methods is the targeted dissemination of instability."
And you are supposed to "Avoid long discussions", "(risk of ant ladder)".
So, first, an opinion that diverges from the Green opinion is being labeled as a troll. So it can't be someone who sincerely means it, but someone who wants to deceive others. So you cannot legitimately hold an opinion which contradicts theirs. And, on the other hand, they are talking about the ant ladder. This happens when a lot of people comment under a comment and thus, through the algorithm, it is more likely to show up for others. But these algorithms are what the Green net fire department wants to use in their favor. A net fire department, founded by a ruling party, wants to prevent that, through long discussions, controversial comments are shown further on top. (Habeck clip) "It does not mean that an artificial intelligence steers the algorithms in a way that the opinion of society is being manipulated, that is not what freedom of speech means, and it would be naive to mistake the two."
Here we see, for instance, from the video, "Examples of Successful Retorts". So, what we are looking at now are the examples where they internally patted themselves on the back, where they thought "wow, we really burned that hater". Let's look at what they've done here.
Example 1: "Trick: Guardian of freedom of speech". So, by "trick" they mean the way this evil populist comment is to be understood. I quote:
Okay, so that was a successful retort?
I'll assume that the example that is being presented here, probably the post that just has been commented on. They describe the reply as a successful retort, although, as you can see by the likes, it hasn't even gotten half the amount of likes as the initial comment. To me, it looks like the people who are working on this project can't at all reflect on what it looks like from an observer's perspective. That people are to be maligned if they have a different opinion, that this needs to be supported by organizations like the Green net fire department, that this comment here is an example already is the best example that the comment is right.
Let's look at the next example, "Trick: Strawman argument". Quote:
Yes, but a strawman argument is made by Team Franziska Brantner here. He hasn't just called into question that CO2 was a cause of climate change, but he merely said that you want to tax the air.
So who made the strawman here? The reply comment! That these people don't notice that...! And on the other hand, what does this reply comment consist of? And, like I said, these are the examples that the people in the Green net fire department are then to apply themselves in social media.
They call what has been said "baloney", a thought-terminating argument, a dirty argumentation technique that, if you don't elaborate on why it's baloney, is nothing but unfair. Then there is an accusation of resistance to education, so that is a subtle insult. Yes, the one who's contradicting us is uneducated. And then you should go educate yourself by googling it. Okay, Ms. Brantner, then go google "Climate: The Movie". And the AfD is being thrown in because you have to be one of these right-wing extremist populists if you aren't in line with that agenda. So, here, thank you very much, Ms. Brantner or your team, for the AfD commercial.
Let's go to the final example. "Trick: Silent majority". Quote:
Yes, in the moment where he illegally crosses the border, he has committed a crime and is thus an illegal in the country. That is a fact, and this opinion [the one presented in the retort] can only be held by someone who wants to abolish national sovereignty and borders as such. Thus, this opinion itself is absolutely crazy.
And we can see that this retort is so successful that this reply comment, which was highlighted as a positive example, received one like and the comment above has received 65.
My friends, these are their best examples of successful retorts. Just write some baloney underneath it. Why is it baloney? Because the comment above is right. I'll just simply quote Statista, "What, in your opinion, is the most important political problem in Germany which needs to be solved urgently? And which is the second-most important?"
On first place, with a big margin, with 48%, immigration and refugees. Right after, by the way, with 20%, the economy. Both are problem areas that are directly linked to the Greens.
But, my dear friends, they are allowed to lie in their replies. Because they're the Good Guys.
And that was it, the Green net fire department, organized at the national level and coordinated at the regional level. So now, are Green troll armies to win back the majority opinion underneath Green posts? Especially now in the coming election campaign season they want to artificially pretend as if random citizens, very coincidental encounters [translator's note: he's referencing how many Green and SPD politicians get interviewed and presented as "random passerby" on television, the number of these "coincidences" is truly shocking], in the comments find what the Greens want really great.
And in the context of the existence of this project, every positive comment, every glorifying comment underneath a Green post is immediately suspicious. Because how are they then supposed to prove that the exaggerated songs of praise that you're going to see underneath Habeck's next Twitter video haven't been created by the Green net fire department and haven't been artificially liked by the members of the Green fire department? So they are using the methods that Habeck criticized before. They want to manipulate public discourse artificially, astroturfed, are openly advertising it, and makes it very unambiguously clear to us:
See first comment for further context
I'll skip over unnecessary parts
Green troll armies
Hello, friends, and a warm welcome to Clownie's They're-Allowed-To-Do-It-Because-They're-The-Good-Guys World.Yes, my dears, I think, before we delve into the topic of network firefighters, we should let [German Minister of the Economy and also Vice Chancellor, Robert] Habeck himself talk about freedom of speech and autocratic methods to subvert or control it. On the anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, at the Neuhardenberg foundation, he himself talked about a few aspects that, in my opinion, you should be aware of, in order to contrast them with what they want to do now.
Okay, what did he just talk about? Autocrats are allegedly precisely spreading figures of speech domestically to cause instability. Especially, this is how you can understand him, these figures of speech are being amplified, strengthened by the dictators' troll armies - so, probably, tens of thousands of accounts that are centrally commanded to then, with the help of the populists here in the country, continue bringing in their instability agenda, their destabilization into our country. So he is criticizing the targeted use of troll armies to manipulate public discourse according to their whims, as a tool used by the autocrats. Ah, yes.
Yes, exactly, which is why governments have to keep their hands off social media.
Okay, freedom of speech does not mean that AI controls algorithms and manipulates public opinion, but this is why freedom of speech means that the European Union, by means of e.g. the Digital Services Act and its related trusted flaggers who, in the scope of this law, are meant to then regulate this social media discourse.
[excerpt from EU Digital Services Act, emphasis added by Clownie]
So then, from an official place, they are intervening in the social media discourse in society. In my opinion, the double standard here is obvious already.
Yes, and it becomes completely clear where the problem is. It's at X, it's at Twitter, the platform which, after Elon Musk's takeover, has become a lot more free-speech than it was before. But that also means that opinions which our woke governing caste doesn't really like are appearing more dominantly and aren't being artificially throttled.
And thus we get to the topic of the Green net firefighters.
They themselves have thought about something to act against such opinions. Especially when it comes to the topic of election campaigns, this whole thing is very important.
A fire department to extinguish the fire, the fire that is happening underneath Green social media posts, that is exactly what it's about, my dear friends. I quote:
Yes, you know them, the magic words, the so-called "hate". If you gave these people a truth serum and asked them what they meant by "hate", they would honestly reply "it's the speech that we hate".
On the other hand, it's about democratic discourse, my dear friends, the discourse that shall please remain left-wing, and the right-wing fringe of the left is the CDU. They continue:
Yes, by "democratic discourse on the net", they apparently mean defending the so-called Green values in social media. Ah yes.
So, by now, the popularity situation of this party is so dire that they have to resort to such means, because apparently the people don't agree with you by themselves - or where exactly is the problem? We'll go a step ahead, because here they are already giving insights into their functions. Quote:
Yes, it is democratic and diverse, but so-called "populist positions" are part of this democratic discourse, no? No, they are not, my friends. I'll continue:
I see. They are already centrally coordinating in order to artificially upvote some posts so that, to outside observers, it looks like these posts are quite a bit more popular than they actually are, because these likes, which are being made by the Green net fire department, are coordinated and thus artificially created. They don't reflect that society in general finds this post so hot. (Habeck clip) "that the opinion of society is being manipulated, that is not what freedom of speech means, and it would be naive to mistake the two." I continue quoting:
Ah, very good. By the way, lies are included in freedom of speech, only slander is criminal. What "hate and incitement" are, well, my dear friends, you feel free to put two and two together yourself.
One thing is clear, if they were able to properly and legitimately use the word "illegal" here, they would have done it. So it is not about something not being legal or so, still they try to, as they write here, "legally prosecute comments and posts where this is possible". (Habeck clip) "So, the regulation of algorithms on X or Tiktok by applying the European legal norms is a central duty."
It's so convenient that we now have the so-called trusted flaggers according to the Digital Service Act, who, with their privileged position as large trustworthy reporters, enjoy the entitlement that social media platforms have to process their reports particularly quickly and effectively. Without bureaucratic hurdles, as they told us back then. Shamed be he who thinks that the Green net fire department, that these people who participate, maybe directly go to these trusted flagger reporting agencies to remove these posts from the net more effectively.
From this example screenshot, you can also see that the Green net fire department apparently seems to be organized in compartments at the state level. Accordingly we see e.g. the Bavarian Green net fire department or the Green net fire department East, which is being advertised at the parliamentary group website of the Greens in Thuringia. Well, you are free to google it for yourself.
I believe that we are genuinely seeing a nationwide, statewide, maybe even below that, municipalitywide organization which is very reminiscent of so-called troll armies. But they're allowed to do it because they're the Good Guys, my dear friends. (Habeck clip) "The troll armies of the dictators and the populists as their useful helpers here at home have gone very far with their instability agenda."
At Apollo News we are indeed learning more about the internal workings of this entire thing:
Huh, that kinda sounds like the methods used by the autocrats. (Habeck clip) "among the autocrats' methods is the targeted dissemination of instability." Who, together with their coordinated troll armies, try to influence the open public discourse from outside. (Habeck clip) "The troll armies of the dictators and the populists as their useful helpers here at home". But, nonsense, guys, they're allowed to do it because they're the Good Guys. On this, they continue:
Hm, so they are looking very close at how these algorithms are designed to then steer them to manipulate the public opinion underneath Green posts. (Habeck clip) "It does not mean that an artificial intelligence steers the algorithms in a way that the opinion of society is being manipulated, that is not what freedom of speech means, and it would be naive to mistake the two." So, exactly what Habeck talked about in his speech, just from within his own party?
Well, friends, that can only be alright because they are the Good Guys. So, I would say, let's examine the three screenshots from the internal video presentation for the Green net fire department circles that Apollo News secured for us.
Let's start here, "Handling Hate and Disinformation". They are writing here: "Point out what is problematic in the statements." Below that, in italics, "This is discrimination, misogyny, hate against queers, antisemitism, (anti-Muslim) racism and not a legitimate opinion."
Okay, so, the first tip for handling so-called "hate and disinformation" is just spamming people with some leftist buzzwords. But what if I then inquire "what exactly did I say that is discrimination", do they just use a different buzzword or do they just repeat themselves?
What the Greens are doing here is simply branding an opinion, which is well-reasoned or not, with a buzzword and denying the right to be able to even speak that opinion by saying it's not a legitimate opinion. (Habeck clip) "The troll armies of the dictators and the populists as their useful helpers here at home have gone very far with their instability agenda."
The next item: "Pull instigators back to reality." Yes, here you are supposed to use moral extortion and threaten legal consequences, very nice. A nice intimidation method. (Habeck clip) "among the autocrats' methods is the targeted dissemination of instability."
And you are supposed to "Avoid long discussions", "(risk of ant ladder)".
So, first, an opinion that diverges from the Green opinion is being labeled as a troll. So it can't be someone who sincerely means it, but someone who wants to deceive others. So you cannot legitimately hold an opinion which contradicts theirs. And, on the other hand, they are talking about the ant ladder. This happens when a lot of people comment under a comment and thus, through the algorithm, it is more likely to show up for others. But these algorithms are what the Green net fire department wants to use in their favor. A net fire department, founded by a ruling party, wants to prevent that, through long discussions, controversial comments are shown further on top. (Habeck clip) "It does not mean that an artificial intelligence steers the algorithms in a way that the opinion of society is being manipulated, that is not what freedom of speech means, and it would be naive to mistake the two."
Here we see, for instance, from the video, "Examples of Successful Retorts". So, what we are looking at now are the examples where they internally patted themselves on the back, where they thought "wow, we really burned that hater". Let's look at what they've done here.
Example 1: "Trick: Guardian of freedom of speech". So, by "trick" they mean the way this evil populist comment is to be understood. I quote:
The reply by BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN:
Okay, so that was a successful retort?
I'll assume that the example that is being presented here, probably the post that just has been commented on. They describe the reply as a successful retort, although, as you can see by the likes, it hasn't even gotten half the amount of likes as the initial comment. To me, it looks like the people who are working on this project can't at all reflect on what it looks like from an observer's perspective. That people are to be maligned if they have a different opinion, that this needs to be supported by organizations like the Green net fire department, that this comment here is an example already is the best example that the comment is right.
Let's look at the next example, "Trick: Strawman argument". Quote:
Which, by the way, is a completely correct statement. CO2 is part of our atmosphere that we breathe in and CO2 taxes are thus a tax on a part of our atmosphere, thus the taxation of a part of our air. So there is nothing wrong about this comment. But Franziska Brantner replies and this here is the successful retort:Carbon [CO2] tax, you're taxing the airshame on you.
Yes, but a strawman argument is made by Team Franziska Brantner here. He hasn't just called into question that CO2 was a cause of climate change, but he merely said that you want to tax the air.
So who made the strawman here? The reply comment! That these people don't notice that...! And on the other hand, what does this reply comment consist of? And, like I said, these are the examples that the people in the Green net fire department are then to apply themselves in social media.
They call what has been said "baloney", a thought-terminating argument, a dirty argumentation technique that, if you don't elaborate on why it's baloney, is nothing but unfair. Then there is an accusation of resistance to education, so that is a subtle insult. Yes, the one who's contradicting us is uneducated. And then you should go educate yourself by googling it. Okay, Ms. Brantner, then go google "Climate: The Movie". And the AfD is being thrown in because you have to be one of these right-wing extremist populists if you aren't in line with that agenda. So, here, thank you very much, Ms. Brantner or your team, for the AfD commercial.
Let's go to the final example. "Trick: Silent majority". Quote:
Retort comment:
Yes, in the moment where he illegally crosses the border, he has committed a crime and is thus an illegal in the country. That is a fact, and this opinion [the one presented in the retort] can only be held by someone who wants to abolish national sovereignty and borders as such. Thus, this opinion itself is absolutely crazy.
And we can see that this retort is so successful that this reply comment, which was highlighted as a positive example, received one like and the comment above has received 65.
My friends, these are their best examples of successful retorts. Just write some baloney underneath it. Why is it baloney? Because the comment above is right. I'll just simply quote Statista, "What, in your opinion, is the most important political problem in Germany which needs to be solved urgently? And which is the second-most important?"
On first place, with a big margin, with 48%, immigration and refugees. Right after, by the way, with 20%, the economy. Both are problem areas that are directly linked to the Greens.
But, my dear friends, they are allowed to lie in their replies. Because they're the Good Guys.
And that was it, the Green net fire department, organized at the national level and coordinated at the regional level. So now, are Green troll armies to win back the majority opinion underneath Green posts? Especially now in the coming election campaign season they want to artificially pretend as if random citizens, very coincidental encounters [translator's note: he's referencing how many Green and SPD politicians get interviewed and presented as "random passerby" on television, the number of these "coincidences" is truly shocking], in the comments find what the Greens want really great.
And in the context of the existence of this project, every positive comment, every glorifying comment underneath a Green post is immediately suspicious. Because how are they then supposed to prove that the exaggerated songs of praise that you're going to see underneath Habeck's next Twitter video haven't been created by the Green net fire department and haven't been artificially liked by the members of the Green fire department? So they are using the methods that Habeck criticized before. They want to manipulate public discourse artificially, astroturfed, are openly advertising it, and makes it very unambiguously clear to us:
- They're allowed to do it because they're the Good Guys.
- They are so Good that they don't even notice, or at least pretend not to notice, that they are using the same methods the autocrats use.
- They are communicating another fact: The Greens are apparently scared shitless, they see themselves forced to use such methods to ensure that they don't get too much hate in the comments. So they are completely aware that they have a public image problem, that they have a popularity problem, and we have to interpret it as a gift that they are openly communicating that they want to solve this popularity problem by means of a coordinated Green troll army, which just makes the issue worse.
Last edited:
