Roland Dürre
Sunday April 8th, 2018

A (my) Democratic Manifesto.

“New Old Insights“

Here are a few theories that should make you thoughtful. They are the result of discussions I had with people who – among other things – know about data security.

Even in normal life, data security is not possible
(let alone in IT).

Antivirus- and other security software is the “wolf in sheep’s clothing”
(works like snake oil and really opens all the doors).

The business model “angst” is bad for everyone involved
and it dominates the absurdity and ignorance in the
public political and societal discussion
(I wrote all this because I am glad to learn something new each day and because I wish to share what I learned).


  • Huge amounts of courage instead of small minds;
  • Dissidents and deserters, rather than system agents who just follow commands from above;
  • People who live in self-responsibility, instead of expecting commands and just doing what they have been told;
  • Disclosure instead of secrets;
  • No data security persons, but people who reveal secrets 
(we Germans call them “whistle blowers”);
  • No secret service providers, but transparency guarantee providers;
  • No DSGVO, but the obligation to be transparent;
  • No data security officers, but people who lay everything open;
  • The list could be continued.


QUESTION: What proud nation killed most deserters and dissidents? I do not know, but I am sure Germany is among the top.

REMEMBER: Not betrayal is the problem, but keeping secrets is. Because without secrets, there is no betrayal – secrets make it possible.

THINK ABOUT: Those who are prepared to forego basic freedom for a minor temporary degree of safety deserve neither freedom nor safety (and they will lose both).

NOGO: Statements without the readiness to give proof because you need to “protect the sources”. Nothing could be more absurd, because, among other things, it requires a limitless trust advancement that nobody deserves.

DISTRUST: Beware of abbreviations. In Germany, the Nazis were the ones who introduced all the great abbreviations (NSDAP). This alone is a reason against terms such as DSGVO. Because in almost all cases, something pitiful is hidden behind the capital letters.

Why do we accept mediocrity? (Rupert Lay)?

and, above all:

How real is reality? (Watzlawick).

The last sentence is because today so many people believe they own the absolute truth and perhaps that is why they talk in such an irresponsible way.

(Translated by EG)

3 Kommentare zu “A (my) Democratic Manifesto.”

  1. Chris (Sunday April 8th, 2018)

    What’s wrong with Mittelmäßigkeit?
    It goes with democracy.
    Was Lay an elitist?

  2. rd (Monday April 9th, 2018)

    Ich meine, dass Mittelmäßigkeit an sich das “Normale” ist. Ich bin nicht “glücklich”, wenn meine Werte, mein Einsatz und mein Handeln von Mittelmäßigkeit bestimmt ist. Ich möchte nicht, dass mein Wille zu “Erkennen”, “Verstehen” und “Wissen”, also zum dazu Lernen von Mittelmäßigkeit bestimmt wird.
    Ich glaube, dass jeder Mensch, der aus der Mittelmäßigkeit zumindest ein wenig herausragen will, “Elitist” ist – auch wenn er dies gar nicht selber so sieht. Nach dieser – wie ich zu gebe -schwachen (mittelmäßigen) Definition wären Du und ich wie auch Rupert Lay “Elitisten”. Deshalb werde ich weiter darüber nach denken und versuchen, Definition und Verständnis von Elite für mich weiter zu verbessern.
    Jetzt meine ich, dass ein Merkmal der “Elite” ist, dass Sie die Werte durch die Zeit trägt und an der evolutionären Veränderung der Werte mitwirkt.

  3. Detlev Six (Monday April 9th, 2018)

    Chris, dein Kommentar ist ein Kommentar ganz in deinem Sinn: smart.

Kommentar verfassen