October 21, 2024 - 7:30pm
It is by now widely accepted that Covid-19 policies had a devastating effect on the mental health of young people. Those days are over, yet the establishment’s assault on the psyche of young people hasn’t let up. If anything, it’s been ramped up, as we’ve moved from figuratively “waging war on the virus” to the need to prepare for an actual war with Russia.
Indeed, a recent youth study published by the German branch of the oil giant Shell revealed an alarming fact: the greatest fear of young Germans is the outbreak of a full-scale war in Europe. According to the study, 81% of young people share this fear. In 2019, the figure was just 46%.
It would be easy to write this off as a natural consequence of the current geopolitical turbulence in Europe. But the truth is more troubling: even though the study doesn’t go into details, it’s clear that young Germans don’t just fear a Nato-Russia war: they specifically fear a Russian attack on Europe at some point in the near future, as some German commentators have pointed out.
This is the result of a relentless and highly irresponsible political-media campaign waged in Germany against Russia over the past years, aimed at demonising the latter — and specifically at inflating the Russian threat against Europe, and Germany in particular. Take this recent Bild headline: “Russia is ready to attack us in 2030!” The article quotes the head of the BND, Germany’s foreign intelligence service, Bruno Kahl, warning about “a direct military threat from Russia — and very soon”.
“By the end of this decade at the latest, Russian forces will probably be in a position to carry out an attack on Nato,” Kahl said. “The Kremlin sees the Federal Republic of Germany as an enemy,” he added, pointing out that Germany is the second largest supporter of Ukraine. No serious person believes that this is a realistic scenario: Russia has neither the means nor the intention to attack Western Europe. Yet young Germans are now being exposed to this kind of geopolitical fearmongering on a daily basis, so it’s hardly surprising that it is having an adverse effect on their mental state.
This is compounded by repeated appeals by the country’s political leadership about Germany’s need to “prepare for war”, with talk of “building up homeland security” and the “eastern front” — and even of reintroducing conscription and compulsory military service. For example, the leader of the centre-right CDU, Friedrich Merz, recently said that “over 700,000 young people per year” need to be “registered” for military service — including women — though he didn’t specify what this would mean in the event of a war.
Meanwhile, the president of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) warned of increasing Russian activities in Germany. “We are observing aggressive actions by the Russian intelligence services,” he said, noting that Russian espionage and sabotage in Germany in particular are increasing, “both qualitatively and quantitatively”. He failed to provide any evidence, however.
Ultimately, just as during the Covid era, the German political-media establishment has embarked once again on a full-scale propaganda campaign aimed at stoking a climate of fear — based on irrational, unfounded and ultimately logically baseless claims — for the pursuit of political goals, in this case justifying a new military build-up against Russia. And just as during the pandemic, young people are the ones paying the highest price. Having been robbed of their best years during the pandemic, they are now being terrorised by irresponsible — and potentially self-fulfilling — war propaganda.
Thomas Fazi is an UnHerd columnist and translator. His latest book is The Covid Consensus, co-authored with Toby Green.
battleforeurope
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeIt started with climate change, was ubiquitous during Brexit and U.S. presidential elections, and was ramped up to ungodly levels during Covid – using fear to nudge people in the correct political direction. It’s now the go-to political strategy for a political and technocratic elite incapable of winning voters with beneficial policy.
Spot on Jim. My only hope is that these kids eventually cotton on to what has been done to them and turn on those mongrels.
Maybe some of this is the German government trying to justify now increasing their defence spending to the NATO-agreed levels they have been shirking for years.
I do worry about the Germans. They have got no bottle, no mongrel. They are just placid, please everyone, labradors. Who would want to have them as an ally?
They have just lost their major gas pipelines, been subjected to energy rationing in some cases and their industry has taken a massive hit. All a result of the russia ukraine war.
‘German political-media establishment has embarked once again on a full-scale propaganda campaign aimed at stoking a climate of fear — based on irrational, unfounded and ultimately logically baseless claims — for the pursuit of political goals, in this case justifying a new military build-up against Russia’
So it isn’t exactly irrational is it, to pursue a military build up at this point.
Neither is it irrational for people in Germany to think that a war with Russia is a possibility.
Wars do throw up propaganda, that is not really a breakthrough observation or anything unusual. But to say the fears people have in Germany of the war escalating are irrational and based only on propaganda is really far from the mark. Especially when they have suffered a major pipeline explosion and their energy markets pretty much blew up.
Perhaps the younger generation is so fearful in part because its never had to fight for something or defend something.
Do you mean their country or just anything in general?
Or maybe the Germans actually learned something from WW2
Well, if they didn’t learn “Russia bad” from WW2, they can’t be all that smart.
So you consider that young Germans believe that Russia destroyed its own very profitable gas pipeline? Even despite the fact that Biden said it wouldn’t survive? And the USA is selling Germany very expensive gas? Really?
Good news though! I’m off to Germany because I just happen to have a number of bridges in London I need to sell…looks like there’s one hell of a market there for them…
I believe I made it clear in the past that America was a likely culprit in the gas pipe saga in my opinion.
I can’t remember who are they blaming for it at the moment to be honest. It has changed a few times.
That doesn’t change the fact that it exploded though.
I’m not saying they believe russia blew the pipe up. I feel it’s more likely they are worried about escalation based on the fact people have already started blowing their sh*t up and the war has affected them already. I don’t blame them for being unhappy with America or it’s sanctions and gas arrangements, but it still doesn’t change the fact that a number of western governments are now embroiled in the war anyway, including Germany.
They will have to finish what they have started now, it’s diplomacy or more war at this point, hopefully without escalation, what else are they going to do.
Mearsheimer’s view is that the war will grind on until Russia has what it wants, probably another 20% of Ukraine territory, then there will be a “Korean result ie a frozen conflict with a DMZ and a rump Ukraine which is totally wrecked.
I think he is right. The only escalation would be by the West ie the USA supplying long range missiles to Ukraine…but it doesn’t have enough.
The USA is now engaged on three “fronts”…Europe with Ukraine, the Middle East with Israel and the Pacific against China. The US empire is way overstretched. It will never give up Israel, it cannot afford to “lose” against China…so Ukraine is the one getting dumped. Presumably that’s why NATO allies are being wound up to effectively replace US assistance to Ukraine…but they aren’t rich enough or powerful enough to do it.
The best thing young Germans can do is vote for Wagenknecht…but there’ll be a massive smear campaign against her to scare them off.
It is unlikely much will happen before the American election I think. That is going to make a difference to the outcome I think. But if that is the case, that russia decides to prolong the war, then ukraine may need more help than it is getting at the moment. Really at that point it would surely be worth considering western troops on the ground. I’m not sure about the long range missiles myself, not sure how many they have etc. But pressure is going to be needed if russia decides to grind on.
The us isn’t actually engaged against china yet, it isn’t really that engaged in Israel, I’m aware they sent a small number of troops with additional air defence but it isn’t really rolling heavy over there yet. It isn’t really loosing against China at the moment because they aren’t actively engaged in a war yet, you never know the un might actually do something useful and maybe do diplomatic things instead of America and China fighting.
I’m not sure about your point that Europe isn’t ‘rich and powerful enough to do it’ that seems a very loose analysis. Nato is a very capable fighting force and so are the armies in Europe, you are very defeatist.
Zelenskys victory plan is a good start toward a diplomatic solution too, so how it goes with that is obviously important.
It is a risk the us getting over stretched, it makes more sense to me for them to back off china a bit and help to finish the war they said they would help fight in Ukraine.
Western “boots on the ground” means direct war with Russia. That is an existential matter for Russia and will quickly go nuclear. For Ukraine…thanks but no thanks.
By engaged, I don’t mean actually at war. I mean having the committed resources to do so…which the USA has in all three areas but stretched rather thin…enough for a confrontation but not a full scale war.
Yes well as much as nobody wants wants to go to war, you can thanks but no thanks all you like, it is a still a possibility.
How fast it would ‘go nuclear’ is anyone’s guess.
I hope there isn’t a full scale war, hopefully the us and the west can find and use their words instead of more guns. We’ll see I suppose.
Regrettably the Neocon plan WAS war between Russia and Ukraine. The resultant sanctions were supposed to torpedo the Russian economy and leave Russia prey to Western capital as it was under Yeltsin.
Of course it hasn’t worked like that. The Russian economy is doing well. But who knows what madness the Neocons will try next….
Exactly why America should continue its support.
It isn’t really a question of what madness they will try next, the US/ nato either needs to push back militarily, properly, and not in a half arsed not sure whether to commit or not way, or take Zelenskys victory plan seriously and get diplomatic. There really is only those two options as far as I can see.
You suggested “Western boots on the ground”. No matter which Western state’s boots they are, they will need direct US support and therefore be considered as US boots. That is what “American support” will entail.
The USA cannot be seen to lose in that situation, so escalation is inevitable, and that escalation will be to achieve a defeat of Russia…which Russia will not tolerate. The result will be the use of nuclear weapons. That is an absolute certainty.
The USA will therefore not risk such an outcome for the sake of Ukraine (I hope…) and Ukraine will be told to concede territory. Of course it will be dressed up a lot…but that is the common sense thing to do.
Yes obviously involving western support should include American troops and would be considered a major escalation in the war.
The objective would be to reclaim Ukrainian territory not necessarily to defeat Russia as a state.
I would hope that the us takes its responsibility to not loose seriously. There is nothing to say that sending western support to help Ukraine regain territory would escalate into a nuclear confrontation.
There is always a danger of nuclear confrontation since both sides are armed with them, and the dangers of escalation should be very seriously considered, but shying away from sending further support at this point based solely on a fear of nuclear conflict is flawed in my opinion.
I disagree. There is no “upside” whatever to Western “boots on the ground”. Where is the benefit to the West? There is none.
However a direct conflict between the West and Russia WILL go nuclear. There has never before been such a conflict because both sides know that would be the result. It is not a question of “shying away” but of not risking a certainty for no benefit to the West.
Well America and the UK and Europe should have thought of that before they got involved then shouldn’t they.
The benefit to the west is not effectively loosing all that money in aid and weapons. The benefit to the west and to America especially is showing that when it decides to back what really at this point should be a strategic ally, it will stand by them and not run away from it’s obligations at the first sign of trouble.
America has also benefited from the gas sanctions, their lng industry is doing much better now isn’t it. Their mic isn’t doing too badly either. They need to get that up to scratch too, their weapons are badly overpriced. That is not benefitting anybody but America at the moment.
Nobody can say that the conflict would ‘go nuclear’ for certain. That there has ‘never been such a conflict before’ is not a valid argument. How fast the conflict would/ could escalate would depend on an analysis of the situation as it arises. Ie: what level of nato intervention, what the military objectives would be and what position both sides are in at that point.
‘However a direct conflict between the West and Russia WILL go nuclear. There has never before been such a conflict because both sides know that would be the result. It is not a question of “shying away” but of not risking a certainty for no benefit to the West.’
This doesn’t make sense. If both sides know a nuclear conflict would be the result and that is the reason such a conflict hasn’t arisen, then really you are already negating the possibility of a nuclear conflict. There is no certainty in anything, you haven’t given a good argument to support that certainty either.
The point is that neither side has got involved directly in a conflict in which the other is already involved…never. Both have taken care not to do so. That avoids the nuclear escalation situation. Western troops in Ukraine would cross that line and be foolish in the extreme.
And yes, of course, the USA is currently doing well from the Ukraine war, but that wasn’t the major aim which was to destroy Russia with sanctions. That has failed…but it has impoverished Europe (which may actually also have been an aim) and made it more dependent on the USA.
I understand. My point is that if they (western powers) weren’t prepared to go all the way if necessary in the first place, as in direct nato involvement, they shouldnt have gotten involved. They should be/ have been prepared for the scenario in which Russia made gains and be prepared to deal with it as necessary, even if that means sending troops. The way the situation was at the start, it seems our leadership didn’t think any of this through very well. But it’s no good stepping up to nuclear super power like Russia without being prepared to push back. That pushback should come regardless of the mistakes made at the start and based on the situation is as it is now, not based on the fact that some of the measures taken regarding sanctions etc. were a mistake. It’s not unusual for there to be mistakes in policy/ tactics in a war, you can’t just stop fighting because mistakes were made.
It’s no good maintaining a fighting force like nato, to then say that you can’t use it for precisely the reason it was invented in the first place, at a time when arguably it is needed most. The Ukrainians are loosing ground at the moment, it’s not good enough to say that sending troops in the situation as it is would be ‘foolish in the extreme’. Especially based solely on a fear of nuclear confrontation, you still haven’t really provided a valid argument to support your point that the war could then ‘go nuclear’ at any moment. I think there is a fair argument to be made that not sending troops at this point would be foolish in the extreme.
.’ That has failed…but it has impoverished Europe (which may actually also have been an aim) and made it more dependent on the USA.’
If that is the case, remember it is ukraine that wanted to join the EU, and therefore that is very unhelpful of the US. Even better reason to make sure they take the not loosing part seriously.
Even if that is true (and I don’t think that it is), surely the West can’t pass up the opportunity to give Ukraine lots more weapons which enable it to kill many more Russians? A scenario where the flower of Russian manhood is “pushing up the daisies” (as we say in Anglo countries) is a desirable outcome for pretty much everybody (apart from the Russians, of course).
Yeah, I wonder how that “pipeline” thing happened.
I do not wonder about it too much.
Europe and America need to get their arses in gear and their issues worked out and pull together regardless, in my opinion, so they can finish the war on terms ukraine is happy with.
If you really do wonder, it was covered rather well, by various outlets at the time. I suggest using Google.
I’ve seen any number of suggestions put forward. I have a vested interest, because I am on record as saying that I will buy beer for whoever did it.
In that case, I would laugh if it was actually russia.
No problems. I’ll send them a couple of cases of Corona (world’s worst beer).
Let me understand this – Putin intends to wait until he’s 78 years old to take over the world.
Bad guys just do bad guy stuff, irrespective of their age.
Same age as Trump, bad omen indeed. Nothing more dangerous than old men going wild with nothing left to lose.
Silly and unserious comment. Give me the list of 75 year olds who became dictators.
And the head of MI5 just warned about Russia causing mayhem in the UK…
It seems they didn’t read the bit where they were told not to be too obviously co-ordinated in stating these “facts”…
Really do have to respect the Russians though…they couldn’t kill two people with deadly novichok (of which they apparently had enough to kill thousands…) but they can cause chaos in the UK and Germany (but not take and hold all of Ukraine..)…yeh right!
It really is so ridiculous as to be laughable…almost.
It’s not too hard to understand. Russia is entirely malevolent, but laughably incompetent.
No need to worry then…
Not just at the moment (assuming you’re not Ukrainian).
This sentence is haunting:
“Having been robbed of their best years during the pandemic, they are now being terrorised by irresponsible — and potentially self-fulfilling — war propaganda.”
Maybe covid had a purpose beyond and bigger than –cannot name these events anymore?
The political ‘media’ establishment? Who voted for anyone in ‘media’?
Name names? Who wants young Germans and Russians to die in the unelected ‘media establishment’?
Two of Fazi’s references are to a German website called “NachDenkSeiten,” and both pages rave about the government/media conspiracy.
Who’s going to fight for Vaterland? Turks and Somalis? Good luck
I think a more relevant and interesting question is why 46% of German young people stated their number one fear was the outbreak of a European war in 2019, three years before Putin invaded Ukraine.
Because Putin was already dictator of Russia in 2019.
While I agree with the sentiments in this story, four of the references are in German, which is of no help to me whatsoever,
The reference to the Shell study is kosher.
The reference for the claim that some commentators have said young Germans specifically fear war with Russia is rubbish: the page linked to doesn’t say that.
The reference to “Bild” is kosher. It’s not clear to me why Fazi thinks he’s better informed about Russia’s military status and intentions than the head of the BND is.
The reference to Friedrich Merz is (to be polite) an over-simplification. He referred to registering all young people for military or civil service. In the context of the question asked in the relevant interview, it couldn’t start until Merz won a federal election in 2025, and he said that the process would take 5-10 years to complete. He didn’t mention war in Europe, or a Russian war against Germany, or indeed any war of any kind anywhere, at all.
So 1. young Germans are more worried about war in Europe than they were five years ago, which is a natural and obvious consequence of the Russia-Ukraine war which began two-and-a-half years ago, 2. a Western security chief is worried about Russia, as Western security chiefs often are, and 3. a conservative politician thinks that it would be a good idea for young people to do military or civil service, which is what conservative politicians often think; I vaguely remember some British outfit called “The Conservatives” suggesting something of the kind a while back.
I suspect your three points could probably be applied to any western country today. Thanks for the clarification.
Point 3 might not apply to the USA.
Even though it’s spoken of often by many governments I can’t imagine them having much success these days,
No evidence of espionage or sabotage? Maybe Thomas thinks that drinking a cup of tea laced with polonium is just one of these things. Or that munitions factories just set fire to themselves. Or that power lines just spontaneously combust. Or that gremlins just find their own way into computer networks.
But there: there’s none so blind as those who will not see. I expect they’re the same people who think the Hamas massacre in Israel last year was a gigantic hoax.
These young Germans would be praised by their long-dead great grandfathers. They are inheritors of the German attitude to Russia that predated 1914. At least the Federal Republic of Germany isn’t in a position to engineer a war as at that time a century ago.
Have the geniuses in Germany thought that a large increase in military preparations might increase the paranoia in the Kremlin? The Russians might fear a repeat of 1941, however irrational.
In any case, the martial age of Germany, like the Blitz spirit in Britain, however impressive culturally, has long since passed with those generations who lived in the nation state, not a community of communities, and who were not taught to hate themselves for the slavery of the ancestors.
Who knows how much courage was burnt out of the German DNA by the catastrophic manpower losses in WW2. Whatever you say about the Krauts, they were magnificent fighters. Both Churchill and Washington, D.C., worried about how readily the British Tommies surrendered to them. If the Germans are timid and fearful, maybe they have reason to be.
Who knows? Germany could lose a war, have its industries re- built, and be given a cavernous financial advantage over its victors.. as in 1945?!
Yeah, I can see Russia doing all that.
I am of course speculating, but my speculations have often proven right in the past:
Globalist elites have all the power in Europe and the USA. They firmly believe in the necessity for coordinated global action against climate change and of course they believe that they are the ones who should coordinate it.
They also have come to understand that what they deem necessary to ‘combat’ climate change is not feasible in a democratic system, and as a consequence, they actively implement the following plans:
Dumb down the population by ideologizing the public discourse with gender and racism nonsense. A population under such a strict thought regime is much less likely to oppose strict measures for climate change.Covid was the dry run for climate change action. It was used to test societal control mechanisms and also to identify groups that would pose a threat to the elites’ plans.Implement strict thought regimes in favorable companies first to let them spread into society. I work in the aerospace industry and they have already begun to ask all employees to identify misbehaviour by their coworkers and to establish denunciation processes. Seriously.The war against Russia is really a war against all countries that are likely to not follow the globalists’ agenda. In their logic, they do not have an alternative to winning this conflict and that is why they are so far detached from reality.The war in the middle east is the same, it is a war of domination by the globalists against forces who don’t bend the knee for the globalists.The best proof for all this is the fact that countries outside or at the fringes of the globalists’ sphere of influence are forming alliances at a hugely accelerated pace. If you look at what is happening at Kasan right now, look at the smiling faces of the various attending leaders. Those are not the faces of people who are intimidated, but the faces of people who look like a huge weight has been lifted from their souls.
It becomes increasingly clear that neither the war against Russia, nor the war against Iran will end well for the globalists, and simultanously, it becomes increasingly clear that the globalists are not willing to back down.
That is where the US elections come into play: Trump is the anti-globalist. If he gets elected, the globalists have lost.
That is what Elon Musk means when he says that if Trump loses, it might be the end of democracy.
Congratulations! You are a Finalist in the Conspiracy Theorist of the Year 2024 Award!
At least I don’t pretend to spread anything else but theories . And since every truth known to man has been a mere theory at some point, that’s just fine 🙂