[Skybird]

I'm getting more and more scared and anxious in this country. Brutal ice-cold ideologues and self-lobotomized lunatics elevate state-defined collectivism to the reason of state - even in infancy. And for years now it has been getting worse and worse. Where do we differ from authoritarian regimes such as Russia or China, which also maltreat the very young to ensure that they become the trained conformists, ideologically trimmed state drones that the control-addicted state leadership demands them to be? The NZZ writes:

The German "traffic light" (coalition) has entered its sixth month. In mid-December of last year, Chancellor Olaf Scholz issued his first government declaration. Since then, the accusation that the three-party coalition has been running its mouth too full has persisted. Digitalization is not making any progress, economic development is stalling, the healthcare system is limping along, and the "share pension" is a long time coming. It's all a lot of bickering, hesitation and dithering.

The SPD, Greens and FDP can point to the Ukraine war and its consequences as mitigating factors. And they can look with pride at those areas in which they are actually delivering. The social transformation that Olaf Scholz promised is progressing. Society is well on its way to becoming a community of the committed. But is this really progress?

Every plan carries the seeds of failure, and not all laws change reality. But no one can deny the will of the three governing parties to fundamentally transform society. Federal Minister of the Interior Nancy Faeser of the SPD, for example, calls for and promotes "democracy education.

In this way, she gives the Germans an alarming report card. Clearly, almost 80 years after the end of the war and 33 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, her compatriots are still not (or no longer) proper democrats. If that were really the case, all of Europe and half the world would be worried. But it is possible that Faeser's diagnosis is a rhetorical ploy to make it easier for her pet project, the "Democracy Promotion Act," to clear the hurdles of necessity.

By the end of the year, a draft law prepared jointly with the Ministry of Family Affairs should be available. Initiatives and associations that previously relied on short-term project funding can then look forward to regular payments from the state budget.

According to the two ministries' discussion paper, Germany needs "democratic commitment and convinced democrats. For this reason, "projects in the area of promoting democracy, shaping diversity and preventing extremism are to receive reliable support." Family Minister Lisa Paus of the Green Party specifies: The "committed civil society" deserves every state support.

If civil society is already a strange conceptual bastard of state and society, which should be in fruitful tension with each other, "engaged civil society" is completely wooden. What is meant here are social actors who act in the interests of the parties currently in power and are subsidized by the state to do so. The state wants to shape a society in its own image. Ultimately, the citizen is placed under reservation.

Those players in identity politics who offer courses and seminars on the "fight against the right," against climate change, for integration and for "diversity" are primarily worthy of permanent funding. Paus and Faeser expressly reject an extremism formula with which the initiatives would have to renounce any extremist temptation.

The "committed civil society" is supposed to oppose racists and extremists of all stripes, although their extreme right-wing form is mentioned very often and the Islamist form almost never. It is also disconcerting that Faeser mentions "anti-Semites and anti-feminists" in the same breath. Apparently, the SPD politician considers hatred of Jews and rejection of feminism among "convinced democrats" to be equally abhorrent.

To prevent both from arising in the first place, Faeser advocates early childhood democracy education. Kindergartens should become a political space in which the youngest children can playfully learn about the "fight against right-wing extremism. If one takes other statements by Faeser, who is also the Minister of Home Affairs, at face value, the battle against the traditional concept of home must also be fought in the kindergarten.

Home, says the minister, "is all people, no matter where they come from." That's why "we have to reinterpret the concept of home in a positive way and define it in such a way that it is open and diverse. And that it expresses that people can decide for themselves how they want to live, believe and love." We learn: the Secretary of Homeland considers homeland a negative term that must be reinterpreted by the state. She demands that the collective work on the concept in order to then generously assign individuality.
The social restructuring of the "traffic light" has two goals: First, life is to break down into a sequence of correct decisions, from kindergarten to the deathbed; this creates a long flow of confessions and thus of ideological norm control.

Secondly, it is no longer being that determines consciousness, but doing that determines existence. Those who do not permanently participate and pull along have no part in the community of the committed. "Our cohesion" (Paus) does not apply to the apolitical, or even to those who already consider home a positive concept.

Even four-year-olds should learn to distinguish the right from the wrong attitudes in kindergarten. To this end, the "rainbow portal" operated by the Ministry of Family Affairs recommends a reading book with the story of a male mermaid. "Individuality, diversity and variety" are to be taught to the little ones in this way. Childhood must no longer be an island of purposelessness and thus not a childhood in the previous sense. Politics overarches every stage of life.

At the age of 14, still a minor, every young person is to be allowed to decide freely at the registry office which sex he or she has. This is what it says in two draft laws by the Greens and the FDP that failed in the summer of 2020, and which are now being incorporated into the "self-determination law" sought by the "traffic light" majority before the parliamentary summer break.

Once again, the will to arbitrariness is celebrating triumphs, even at the cost of turning absurd. These merits were earned by the federal government's queer commissioner, the Green politician Sven Lehmann, when he recently claimed that gender identity could not in principle be examined from the outside, not even by doctors.

At the physical borders of the country, however, the same fluid principle should apply as at those of the body: the assertion defines being. Those who do not identify themselves when applying for asylum are allowed to establish their nationality by means of an affidavit. According to Interior Minister Faeser, this possibility should only be an exception in cases of emergency - but how can one prevent the exception from becoming the rule? Once again, identity politics turns identity into a chimera.

The new spirit has also already taken hold of German jurisprudence. In April, the administrative court in Mainz ruled against the city of Worms, which did not want to naturalize a Somali because he could not produce official identification documents. Witness statements from the family, the judges said, would have to suffice in emergency situations. Will such "communities of responsibility" be formed in the future on such a basis, as the FDP is pushing in family law? "Two or more persons of full age" are soon to be allowed to enter into such a relationship, provided they are not related.

In a speech at the end of April, the foreign minister clarified the epochal change that the "traffic light" wants to set in motion. "Identity in the 21st century," Annalena Baerbock explained, means "above all, civic engagement, being integrated into society." Such a definition breaks with anthropological certainties and is hardly compatible with the conditions of a liberal constitutional state.

According to this definition, identity is not shaped by the ego but by the collective, and the individual must be committed in order to attain it. Only the politically desired commitment makes a person. Only society provides individuality. Why an FDP that sees itself as a liberal party tolerates these statist maneuvers in part and welcomes them in part will have to be explained to its core constituency. It is also difficult to understand the deafening silence of the CDU and CSU, which have so far done nothing to counter the expulsion of the bourgeoisie.

So the conclusion is: The "traffic light" that wants to create a fear-free, diverse, free society is afraid of diversity and freedom.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)