Nazi war c r i m i n a l Hermann Göring's universal strategy to manipulate the people

Source:
https://rumble.com/v3a0btt-nazi-war-criminal-hermann-grings-universal-strategy-to-manipulate-the-peopl.html#comment-275105064

“Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ... The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.” ― Hermann Göring
https://factcheck.afp.com/quote-fear-misattributed-hermann-goering

EXAMPLES OF THE SAME RECIPE APPLIED TO OTHER CONTEXTS

- ‘ATTACK’: (Human-induced catastrophic) Climate change

Anybody who claims that...

* the climate has always changed, so the mere fact that it is changing is no reason for concern
* the climate is not (significantly) impacted by humans
* climate change is unlikely to be catastrophic (e.g. because increased CO2-levels will induce more plant growth, which will in turn stabilize CO2-levels)
* there is no adequate scientific proof that climate change is caused by CO2
* climate predictions are only based on models, which are notoriously unreliable and biased
* previous doom scenarios on climate change have always been completely off the mark

... is labeled a ‘climate denier’ and a threat to the planet and consequently, civilization.

- ‘ATTACK’: Not just Ukraine, but the whole world is threatened by Russian aggression

Anybody who takes a wider view, for example:

* The United States was on the verge of wiping Cuba off the face of the earth during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. The U.S. legitimizes its own preemptive attacks when it feels threatened, but if the Russia does the same, it's a huge crime.
* The United States invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. legitimizes invading sovereign countries (and bombing other countries, e.g. Syria, Libya), but if Russia does the same, it's a huge crime.
* U.S.-led violent coup d'état in Ukraine in 2014 and subsequent military build-up in order to provoke Russian intervention/‘aggression’
* When the Allies attacked the Nazi's to save the Jews, it was good. When the Russians invade Ukraine to save the people in the Donbas region from being attacked by their own government, it's bad.
* The west claims to defend civil liberties in Ukraine, yet Ukraine has banned political parties and suspended the election. Ukraine has also banned all critical media and admitted to murdering journalists, so there's clearly no freedom of the press. The west claims to stand for gay rights, yet Ukraine suppresses LGBTQ people. The west claims to defend democracy, yet Ukraine is enormously corrupt.
* The NATO has expanded significantly towards the east, in spite of agreements after the second world war. In the meantime, Russia has not expanded its territory at all. So which party is expansionist? Isn't the pot calling the kettle black?
* A peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia was reached very shortly after the war started, but the U.S. sent Boris Johnson to block the agreement.

... is called a Putin-lover and threat to democracy.

REFERENCES

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Gilbert
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_G%C3%B6ring
https://www.perseusbooks.com/titles/g-m-gilbert/nuremberg-diary/9780306806612/