The immune system of democracy is attacked and weakened
Was it just two years ago that the Basic Law passed in 1949 was solemnly celebrated? In these two years it was honed - and with it the highly praised "civil society". Today the citizen is at the mercy of another state.
How much Germany has changed in the past few months can be seen from a look at the way we dealt with AIDS. Let us remember - AIDS was initially regarded as a "gay epidemic", and not a few regarded it as a punishment from God that was both maliciously and secretly acclaimed. But it quickly became clear that it was serious business.
Lack of raw materials for industry was feared because it was particularly raging among the miners in southern Africa; some saw Africa inevitably doomed to extinction because of the promiscuous sexual practices that prevailed there. Globalization seemed to be coming to an end after a particularly sexually permissive and geographically agile airline steward had spread the virus worldwide. Today a Chinese cave bat is blamed for this. But otherwise everything identical?
Camp for the infected?
Leading politicians called for the establishment of camps for those infected. Then, as now, in Australia they already exist. It turned out differently back then. It is also thanks to the then Minister of Health Rita Süßmuth that a different path was chosen.
“We fight the disease, not the infected,” was the initially controversial guideline of her policy. Sussmuth will later describe how she came under pressure for this in the Kohl cabinet at the time. Nevertheless: As Minister for Women, Family and Health, she turned “on the subject of AIDS against all attempts at exclusion and against the risk of hysteria” and “against inhuman exclusion”, recalls Süssmuth.
You don't hear that anymore today. Neither do the following sentences:
“ Always remember to take citizens with you, to expect and trust them to have skills and commitment. Does not stir up fear of the dangerous, but strengthen individual self-confidence and personal responsibility. Activate it, keep explaining the medically complicated, remains understandable!"
You have to quote these sentences in order to be able to classify the Saarland Prime Minister Tobias Hans (CDU), who sends unvaccinated a clear message: "You are now out of social life".
Tobias Hans is not the only politician who thinks that way. Vaccinated Chancellor Olaf Scholz wants to “no longer accept red lines” for his government , ie to cross any constitutional and legal limits in the fight against non-vaccinated persons.
And here the historical analogy ends, if it gets crooked, as with all lessons from history:
At the time, Sussmuth wanted to fight the disease, not the infected. Today, he fights healthy people and excludes them simply because they don't have a vaccination pass. A passport or a colored ribbon becomes a privilege; Whoever does not have it can be blocked and taken out. They receive Christmas gifts online only. A biological trait, such as vaccination, replaces traits previously derived from ancestry; where hereditary traits were immutable, after all, vaccination, on the other hand, is a process that one can undergo, and one that soon has to be repeated over and over again if one still wants to be socially accepted.
Leading politicians called for the establishment of camps for those infected. Then, as now, in Australia they already exist. It turned out differently back then. It is also thanks to the then Minister of Health Rita Süßmuth that a different path was chosen.
“We fight the disease, not the infected,” was the initially controversial guideline of her policy. Sussmuth will later describe how she came under pressure for this in the Kohl cabinet at the time. Nevertheless: As Minister for Women, Family and Health, she turned “on the subject of AIDS against all attempts at exclusion and against the risk of hysteria” and “against inhuman exclusion”, recalls Süssmuth.
You don't hear that anymore today. Neither do the following sentences:
“ Always remember to take citizens with you, to expect and trust them to have skills and commitment. Does not stir up fear of the dangerous, but strengthen individual self-confidence and personal responsibility. Activate it, keep explaining the medically complicated, remains understandable!"
You have to quote these sentences in order to be able to classify the Saarland Prime Minister Tobias Hans (CDU), who sends unvaccinated a clear message: "You are now out of social life".
Tobias Hans is not the only politician who thinks that way. Vaccinated Chancellor Olaf Scholz wants to “no longer accept red lines” for his government , ie to cross any constitutional and legal limits in the fight against non-vaccinated persons.
And here the historical analogy ends, if it gets crooked, as with all lessons from history:
At the time, Sussmuth wanted to fight the disease, not the infected. Today, he fights healthy people and excludes them simply because they don't have a vaccination pass. A passport or a colored ribbon becomes a privilege; Whoever does not have it can be blocked and taken out. They receive Christmas gifts online only. A biological trait, such as vaccination, replaces traits previously derived from ancestry; where hereditary traits were immutable, after all, vaccination, on the other hand, is a process that one can undergo, and one that soon has to be repeated over and over again if one still wants to be socially accepted.
How do you beat a virus?
Back then, in the age of AIDS, it quickly became apparent that the virus could not be defeated and that, therefore, within a few years drugs were developed which soon enabled those with the disease to lead a largely normal life.
Today the virus is being fought, one should be vaccinated, the ZeroCovid [online hashtag] has long since become the guideline of politics, although it is clear that this will not be possible because it mutates again and again or can jump from animals to humans. Incidentally, the plague has not been eradicated either - "the plague is treatable today and has lost its horror", summarizes Hendrik Streeck, for example, who in his latest book strings together those horrors such as Ebola, plague, tuberculosis and polio: horrors that have not disappeared, but could be curbed by medical research and robbed of much of their horror.
But why are people declared enemies, why are camps required - this time for healthy people who have only one flaw: they are not vaccinated? Where does the preference and privilege come from for vaccinated people who continue to be contagious and can infect others - and the exclusion of non-vaccinated people, who are even forbidden to prove their health by means of a current test? The fight against the sick became the fight against the healthy, who supposedly pass the virus on anyway. More nonsense is difficult or impossible to understand, and yet this nonsense is eagerly spread by the current health minister and his government colleagues. Vaccinated people are also spread like infected people. That is already clear to everyone involved. Then why is it going on like this as if this fact simply doesn't exist? If they are required to test - is the same thing treated unequally by the state? But that doesn't matter in the blind zeal of “war” against an invisible enemy.
Back then, in the age of AIDS, it quickly became apparent that the virus could not be defeated and that, therefore, within a few years drugs were developed which soon enabled those with the disease to lead a largely normal life.
Today the virus is being fought, one should be vaccinated, the ZeroCovid [online hashtag] has long since become the guideline of politics, although it is clear that this will not be possible because it mutates again and again or can jump from animals to humans. Incidentally, the plague has not been eradicated either - "the plague is treatable today and has lost its horror", summarizes Hendrik Streeck, for example, who in his latest book strings together those horrors such as Ebola, plague, tuberculosis and polio: horrors that have not disappeared, but could be curbed by medical research and robbed of much of their horror.
But why are people declared enemies, why are camps required - this time for healthy people who have only one flaw: they are not vaccinated? Where does the preference and privilege come from for vaccinated people who continue to be contagious and can infect others - and the exclusion of non-vaccinated people, who are even forbidden to prove their health by means of a current test? The fight against the sick became the fight against the healthy, who supposedly pass the virus on anyway. More nonsense is difficult or impossible to understand, and yet this nonsense is eagerly spread by the current health minister and his government colleagues. Vaccinated people are also spread like infected people. That is already clear to everyone involved. Then why is it going on like this as if this fact simply doesn't exist? If they are required to test - is the same thing treated unequally by the state? But that doesn't matter in the blind zeal of “war” against an invisible enemy.
The freedom of decision - but only for a time
Nobody should be prevented here from getting vaccinated as often as they want. This decision is a very personal one; it is the ultimate freedom to be able to decide whether and what kind of treatment to undergo. “My stomach belongs to me”, the women's movement's claim to power no longer applies - the upper arm and everything that is attached to it belong to the state from now on. But health is not guaranteed with it. Only a milder course of the disease is currently being promised. And every vaccinated person must know that the day of exclusion is approaching relentlessly when the legislature, for which there are no more red lines, just keeps shortening the expiry date from the current 12 months, elegantly this should be done electronically, at the push of a button you will cast out from one group to the group of the wicked.Germany becomes a vaccination republic. This is an exciting logistics venture for a country that can no longer build a reasonable airport and whose central traffic structures are closed one after another due to the threat of collapse.
If, in future, one has to be “boosted” every three months, that means 320 million vaccinations per year for around 80 million people. Is that really what we want, this general-led, repetitive mass vaccination? By veterinarians, dentists and pharmacists, and because it is still not enough, soon also by laypeople after they have completed a short course? Which is why the very earthly and possibly soon subterranean process from the Evangelical Church of Kurhessen-Waldeck was elevated to the religious level with the sentence: "Vaccinate your neighbor like yourself". Will we all soon pick up the needle, anytime, anywhere? Is it really a good recipe when the FDP recommends "concerns later"? So do not consider a process that is so unprecedented in this breadth, so senseless as it is unheard of.
Back then, in the age of AIDS, it was possible to organize broad social solidarity with galas and donations and red ribbons that signaled community instead of exclusion. Today, ribbons are supposed to serve for the faster exclusion of the non-vaccinated, non-boosted and healthy, while possibly sick vaccinated people are allowed to pass the virus on in an uncontrolled manner. The fight against AIDS was glorified when “civil society” was born, and it perished in the fight against the unvaccinated.
Nobody should be prevented here from getting vaccinated as often as they want. This decision is a very personal one; it is the ultimate freedom to be able to decide whether and what kind of treatment to undergo. “My stomach belongs to me”, the women's movement's claim to power no longer applies - the upper arm and everything that is attached to it belong to the state from now on. But health is not guaranteed with it. Only a milder course of the disease is currently being promised. And every vaccinated person must know that the day of exclusion is approaching relentlessly when the legislature, for which there are no more red lines, just keeps shortening the expiry date from the current 12 months, elegantly this should be done electronically, at the push of a button you will cast out from one group to the group of the wicked.Germany becomes a vaccination republic. This is an exciting logistics venture for a country that can no longer build a reasonable airport and whose central traffic structures are closed one after another due to the threat of collapse.
If, in future, one has to be “boosted” every three months, that means 320 million vaccinations per year for around 80 million people. Is that really what we want, this general-led, repetitive mass vaccination? By veterinarians, dentists and pharmacists, and because it is still not enough, soon also by laypeople after they have completed a short course? Which is why the very earthly and possibly soon subterranean process from the Evangelical Church of Kurhessen-Waldeck was elevated to the religious level with the sentence: "Vaccinate your neighbor like yourself". Will we all soon pick up the needle, anytime, anywhere? Is it really a good recipe when the FDP recommends "concerns later"? So do not consider a process that is so unprecedented in this breadth, so senseless as it is unheard of.
Back then, in the age of AIDS, it was possible to organize broad social solidarity with galas and donations and red ribbons that signaled community instead of exclusion. Today, ribbons are supposed to serve for the faster exclusion of the non-vaccinated, non-boosted and healthy, while possibly sick vaccinated people are allowed to pass the virus on in an uncontrolled manner. The fight against AIDS was glorified when “civil society” was born, and it perished in the fight against the unvaccinated.
A devastating storm sweeps across the country
Like a tremendous storm, basic social institutions have been destroyed in recent months: the Federal Constitutional Court has been submitted to the federal government, since the last three unanimous and scandalous rulings on the forced financing of public broadcasting by parliaments, on The protection of the climate were practically justified by eliminating the Basic Law through the measures against the Coronavirus. The citizen became defenseless, and the vaccinated also enjoy their limited freedoms until the next inevitably close appointment.
The Basic Law - Freedom on time and on demand? For those who deviate, the new Justice Minister Marco Buschmann has the rod ready: “Our constitutional state must take decisive action against hate crimes.” He expressly praises the Network Enforcement Act, which the FDP wanted to fight before the election. Hate is a mostly negative emotion, a feeling - but not an act and above all: not a legal category. The fact that the new Justice Minister wants to blur this distinction shows that the resolved contradictions, perhaps expressed emotionally, will soon be punished and prosecuted as an alleged "hatred" of the government, which is not critical in its wisdom. If a Minister of Justice expresses himself that way, it is not only a bad choice, but a danger to the rule of law and democracy. But these are just "red lines" that Olaf Scholz wants to cross, amid general cheers. Corona is a political plague. The disease affects people and the government's Corona policy has also seriously weakened and damaged the immune system of our democracy.
Like a tremendous storm, basic social institutions have been destroyed in recent months: the Federal Constitutional Court has been submitted to the federal government, since the last three unanimous and scandalous rulings on the forced financing of public broadcasting by parliaments, on The protection of the climate were practically justified by eliminating the Basic Law through the measures against the Coronavirus. The citizen became defenseless, and the vaccinated also enjoy their limited freedoms until the next inevitably close appointment.
The Basic Law - Freedom on time and on demand? For those who deviate, the new Justice Minister Marco Buschmann has the rod ready: “Our constitutional state must take decisive action against hate crimes.” He expressly praises the Network Enforcement Act, which the FDP wanted to fight before the election. Hate is a mostly negative emotion, a feeling - but not an act and above all: not a legal category. The fact that the new Justice Minister wants to blur this distinction shows that the resolved contradictions, perhaps expressed emotionally, will soon be punished and prosecuted as an alleged "hatred" of the government, which is not critical in its wisdom. If a Minister of Justice expresses himself that way, it is not only a bad choice, but a danger to the rule of law and democracy. But these are just "red lines" that Olaf Scholz wants to cross, amid general cheers. Corona is a political plague. The disease affects people and the government's Corona policy has also seriously weakened and damaged the immune system of our democracy.
Source: Tichys Einblick
Posts
