"It's all the media's fault" - Interview

Covid. The war in Ukraine. Israel, Hamas and the Gaza Strip. Three events that could not and cannot be discussed in public with any deviation from the only accepted opinion, without the bearer of a different view of the matter being ostracized from decent society. Before, I don't think such ferocity and hate-mongering were so noticeable. How do you see it?

I think that in this new conflict, even more than in the conflict in Ukraine, the old saying that every war suits only politicians, their powerful interests and other people who fit very well in the shop is true. The rich get richer and only ordinary people and civilians die needlessly. Eight of the ten largest arms companies are in the USA and the American economy is in desperate need of an injection, what are we talking about…
It is a delusion and a media hoax that I refuse to follow in any way - a foul game that I refuse to be drawn into in any way.
It is not (and never really was) about the "good" and "bad" side - but only about the interests that the mainstream fully and intentionally supports.
Unfortunately, people jump on those manipulations - for example, out of hysterical fear for their own lives - and then hate anyone the media labels as a potential threat to their narrative.

Recently, at the Senate Conference on the Family, I heard stories of young parents not "loaning" their children to grandparents because they have different political views. Can the mentioned events and possible others mean the permanent separation of families and the liquidation of ties between people who were good friends until then? What can this weakening of togetherness bring?

It's just another variation of the media game I talked about in the previous question. Unfortunately, this game has always been there. I remember the 1990s when Klaus and Zeman were implacably pitted against each other in the media - but it was all just a comedy for the media. While their admirers hated each other to death, they themselves were (and still are) great friends, teasing each other and going out for a beer together.
And the same thing is happening now - only thanks to accelerated time and social media - much more acutely.
There is no doubt that all this is mainly caused by the media - it's just a matter of whether they do it "just" purely for the sake of readership and thus for profit, or is there a hidden interest of those who own them...

It seems to me that people trust the media more than ever, but each only their own (their own), so a significant part of the population has opinions copied from the broadcasts of Czech Television, which is not characterized by much effort to offer viewers a range of different perspectives. What role does the seventh power play in informing the public?

I recently had a meeting in Sokolov, where a whole class of young high school students came - which is very unusual. I was a little worried about it, but they were absolutely flawless, they followed everything I told them with open mouths and even wrote me on social media afterwards and thanked me.
They are smart, they want to think for themselves, but unfortunately they only have one-sided information. They are already heavily indoctrinated from schools, or from internet influencers who basically follow the same line as the mainstream media.
The worst thing is that young people think they are doing good, but out of ignorance they commit far more evil than if, paradoxically, they did not get involved blindly.
But I don't understand the older generation, who knew the lies with which the television of the time and, for example, the Red Right flooded the media space daily, and yet today they completely believe the same lies - only colored blue - without a trace.

Czech television once enjoyed showing its viewers footage of President Václav Klaus taking the protocol pen during his visit to Chile. Last month, the wife of the Czech president, Eva Pavlová, visited Kyiv on the occasion of the First Ladies' Summit. On it, she was unable to answer the question for tens of seconds, she awkwardly flipped through the papers with the documents and then blurted out one sentence completely off topic. From ČT, we will learn how the Czech first lady got on and how active she is, but her abilities, like those of her husband, will remain hidden from us through the public media. Why probably?

You're right - the media lie is so pervasive and actually so ridiculous that you can approach the mainstream media by turning any news you read on its head to get the truth.
Indeed, it is as if some kind of strange self-censorship and misguided purple rhetoric has sunk under people's skin, that we are at war and whoever criticizes the government in this "difficult" time is a desolate one who is undermining his country. And so the media remain tactfully silent and look the other way.

How to explain that the majority of Czechs are afraid to openly express their opinions and feel that censorship is returning to our lives, as he showed SANEP agency survey for the Society for the Defense of Freedom of Speech, when we have not lived in totalitarianism for almost 34 years?

People have gotten too used to their comfort, shiny lifestyle and are afraid that they might lose it - the system "bought" them with tinsel and the fear of defaulting on mortgages.
People are scared and it's not a crime (yet), but of course that's just the next step.
I can see the gradual transformation on social networks - at first they were afraid to comment on anything, then to like and now maybe even follow.
Most people are afraid of conflicts, they want to live in peace, and they are often so confused that they don't even know what is "right" today, so they prefer to stay silent.
It really reminds me of the time before the revolution, when people met a dissident on the street, so they preferred to cross to the other side of the road, so they wouldn't have to greet him and get into any trouble...

Openly expressing opinions different from the official ones is not very common nowadays. And if people complain about something they don't like, then "they" are to blame. But who are those "they" who link us and often make our lives miserable?

Those "they" today are actually anyone who dares to criticize what is the mainstream "truth" - just so that the blame does not fall on the government. It was here under the communists and it works perfectly even today, but in the opposite guard.
After all, we know this from the 1950s in America, where there were committees for "Un-American Activities", thousands of people from the culture were blacklisted, who were falsely accused of supporting communism - exactly the same thing that happened in our country, but here, on the contrary, it was closed behind support of "American imperialists".
It seems to me that we are returning to a strange cold war, where it is already blurred who is at war with whom and every day everything is reversed and the past is erased. It's really complete Orwell - when Oceania is alternately at war with the countries of Eurasia and Eastasia.

When a disparate group of five parties came to power thanks to more than a million lost votes in the election, their voters reveled in what a bright future lay ahead. In what ways did the government led by Petr Fiala benefit the country during the first half of its mandate, what steps should be appreciated and in what ways is it doing significantly better than the previous Babiš government?

What can I say so that this answer is not completely empty…
I would unequivocally describe Violet's government as the worst thing that happened to us after the revolution and a real threat to the future and sovereignty of this country - and I write this as a great opponent of Andrej Babiše, against whom I always tried to speak out. Unfortunately, a lot of people who end up looking at the Fiala will just go back to the Babiše choice...

A lot of what we talked about appears in your book A Guide down the Rabbit hole, which is currently being released. In the annotation for it, I learned that it is like the biblical apple of knowledge - then the world, the news, the individual "personalities" and events you read about, you will never see the same again, and you will find that what you believed to be a safe haven - especially the whole 20th century - is one big lie. Can you reveal one that you write about?

It is not so much about individual lies, but about connections. Each chapter that deals with a topic is troubling on its own, but all together act as a strong warning. I have not found any similar book that would comprehensively and simply bring such connections, and with a little exaggeration one could say that is why I also wrote it.
The book consists of thirty-three simple and easy-to-understand chapters - such as: Education and the Next Generation, The American Dream and the Marshall Plan, Doctors and Healthcare, Banks and Fake Magic Papers, Media "Truth", The Covid Scam, The Green Deal Scam, Mass Hypnosis and programming the masses, Fools and minions, Evil in the guise of good, Great Reset, Overpopulation and depopulation, God, souls and evil and more.
I didn't want to write a scientific work with hundreds of references - each topic would also be published in a separate book, but then no one would be able to absorb them in such a comprehensive way.

I was interested in the chapter "Evil under the mask of good". Where is it most commonly found?

The chapter begins:
"The old fascism or Nazism was militant, conquering and aggressive - basically trying to wipe out a part of the population and expand into a huge empire. But the totality that is approaching today is far more stealthy, more subtle, and what is worst – it hides behind virtue, truth and love.”
These are all kinds of non-profits, greendeal agendas, the "best" solution to covid, altruistic billionaires - there are hundreds of examples - everything is hidden behind an apparent good and people listen to it. Unfortunately, people want to live in their false golden cage and not ask what lies behind it…

The final chapters with the titles "Loss of the meaning of life" and "Collapse of the system and civilization" seem quite depressing. Is it the author's intention to leave the reader with dark thoughts?

Two-thirds of the book is mainly factual information and often unknown and surprising connections to people, the second part I would say is more reflections and more spiritual and philosophical overlaps, and the last chapters are, as you write, a little dark and light warning.
But everything leads to the last chapter, which is called Hope, and in which I focus on what, despite the dark and seemingly hopeless, I see the positive and hope for our future.

(Questions by Jíří Hroník for the Parliament Papers)