Hans Bonfigt
Montag, der 15. Mai 2017

E-Mail 'Kick it Out ...' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'Kick it Out ...' to a friend

* Required Field






Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.



Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.


E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...

2 Kommentare zu “Kick it Out …”

  1. db (Mittwoch, der 17. Mai 2017)

    Was soll ich sagen: sehe ich genauso.

    Es gilt, das herrschende Narrativ und die eigene Deutungshoheit unter allen Umständen zu bewahren, was der herrschenden Klasse immer schwerer gelingt.

    Dazu wird mit Kampfbegriffen gearbeitet, um sich nicht inhaltlich mit politischen Gegnern auseinandersetzen zu müssen, um diese und all ihre Sympathisanten zu stigmatisieren.

    Es geht sogar noch weiter: ihnen wird Anti-Intellektualismus vorgeworfen, es wird suggeriert: jeder, nicht dem herrschenden Narrativ folgt, ist nicht in ausreichendem Maße informiert (und will es auch gar nicht sein) und/oder ist geistig überfordert.

    – Auch WENN es für den Brexit das ein oder andere gute Argument gibt (selbstverständlich auch dagegen),
    – auch WENN die EU mittlerweile zum Laufhaus für Lobbyisten verkommen ist und eine grundlegende Reform längst überfällig wäre,
    – auch WENN es gute ökonomische Gründe GEGEN den Euro in seiner derzeitigen Form gibt,
    – auch WENN gegen Clinton das ein oder andere gesprochen hat (geschätztes Privatvermögen der Clintons lt. Forbes: 220 Mio. USD bei einer Tätigkeit als Staatsdiener – wegen welcher Summe ist Wulff nochmal aus dem Amt geschieden?):

    wer den gegenläufigen Standpunkt – ja noch nicht einmal *vertritt*, inhaltlich Verständnis hierfür zu zeigen genügt –
    1) hat evidentermaßen keine Ahnung
    2) ist bildungsfern
    3) ist xenophob/Rassist/Populist/Sexist/Maskulinist/…
    4) ist leicht manipulierbar/“Rattenfängern“ auf den Leim gegangen
    5) hat keine eigene Meinung

    Ich will nicht behaupten, dass es uninformierte oder dumme Menschen nicht auch gibt – aber quer verteilt über das politische Spektrum: auf einen, der mit seinem Montagabend nichts Besseres als dem Spazierengehen mit gleichgesinnten Glatzen anzufangen weiß und die BRD für eine GmbH hält, kommt einer, der unreflektiert Menschen ohne jede Aussicht auf Asyl mit „Refugees welcome“-Schildern begrüßt.

    (Man denke nur an den peinlichen Auftritt von Claudia Roth im BR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J78MSbnCPqk#t=2m00s).

    Der politische Diskurs – tot. Die Gegner – gebrandmarkt mit Kampfbegriffen. Die Freiheit der Abgeordneten, ohne jeden Fraktionszwang den Worten des Grundgesetzes folgend ihrem Gewissen nach abzustimmen – wo denken Sie hin!

    Was ich mir wünschen würde: gesunde Vorbehalte, Abwägungen, Relativierungen, ein „Ja, aber“ oder „Nein, es sei denn“ statt sinnloser Symbol- und Basta-Politik. Wird aber leider nicht passieren.

  2. Chris Wood (Mittwoch, der 17. Mai 2017)

    Hans, I don’t like this much. It is too polemic for clear speech.
    But firstly, I can agree about the need for clear speech. I would like important politicians to state that the German or European culture requires the truth to be told, and that promises should be kept. This is more important than shaking hands! Why don’t they? Honi soit qui mal y pense. Islam requires “God willing” to be added to a promise, giving a good excuse for not taking it seriously. Christians used to add this too.

    I agree too about cripples. It is sad to mix them with those not right in the head. Perhaps this started with thalidomide/Contergan, when it seemed nasty to confuse these victims with those who had been careless enough to lose a limb or two. (Compare Ernest who lost both parents).

    I agree too about “negro”. This was a useful English word for people who looked like central Africans. In USA, the related word “nigger” was used in connection with slavery, and was extended to cover also people who had mixed African/European ancestry. We should agree, that “Afro-American” is better.
    But the word “black” was often used by themselves. This is awkward in the British Commonwealth, where many Indians are just as black as the Africans. I advise care in this context. In USA and England, a shock insult is sometimes used as an indication of close friendship; but that works badly in Germany. A German satirist on TV said recently that the English choose to be funny, rather than clear. To me, being funny can be the best way to be clear and concise. Few people misunderstand Polt.

    I disagree about racism. We need a word for the common stupid discrimination of people with dark skins, or who otherwise look different. Of course, there are different races of dog. Domesticated dogs constitute a species. Perhaps Germans are less educated than British regarding this distinction. “Species” and “race” can hardly be precisely defined. The distinction concerns the ability to mate. But dogs of widely different size have difficulty mating. Homo Sapiens and Neanderthal could mate, but there may have been problems with Sapiens mother and Neanderthal father. Domestic dogs and wolves may be one species. There Is no clear definition of a race, (except perhaps among animal breeders). But this is true of most words. I do not understand the reference to “Grünen”.

    I too disliked Böhmermann’s “poem”, but it has helped get rid of a silly German law.
    I agree partly about Islam. I read the Koran, and was shocked at the way it repeatedly gloats about unbelievers burning eternally in hell. I have yet to hear a modern Moslem deny that the Koran is the word of God. (A pleasant young Moslem, with whom I did business, a Bayern fan from N. Germany, had little knowledge of it, and was surprised to hear that anybody could be an atheist). But with Turks shopping in PEP, I get the impression that many head-scarved women have their own opinions.

    If Akif Pirincci wants to be understood, he should write and speak more clearly. There are plenty of ways to make people mundtod, (e.g. N. Korea).

    Do you sympathise with Sarazzin? I know him only from TV chat shows, where he avoided answering questions, and fogged the issue.
    You seem to approve of Trump and Brexit, although the voters fell for the lies. In Britain, the newspapers bent over backwards to avoid agreeing with anti-Brexit politicians.

    There was nothing much to be happy about with NRW, unless you are an elitist meritocrat.
    The Greens lost half their votes. I hope it was because they have drifted away from concern for the environment. But I expect it was because few voters now bother about destroying our world.

    The SPD lost even more voters. I hope it was because they are fishing for support everywhere, rather than making clear what they stand for. Yes, they swindle more crudely than the “Christian” Union. But that may be democratically necessary with their part of the electorate. Anyway, we need them, in a globalising world, with widening gaps between rich and poor, with a mad rush to produce all that is needed to make the world uninhabitable. We need them for Christian reasons, (“blessed are the humble”), or at least for self-preservation, against civil violence or even war.

    Yes, I know it was nonsense for Marx to regard the man-hour as having a fixed value across the whole population, but I do not want a desperate minority, or majority.
    I would rather have a muddle, than clearly evil statements. Hitler was clear enough. Have you read his book?

Kommentar verfassen

*