It's always someone else who does the propaganda
Psychoanalysis according to Sigmund Freud coined the term "Madonna-Whore Complex", according to which men view women as either holy or degraded. The whore's debasement is linked to sexual desire, while the Madonna, as a person of respect, does not allow any desire. It So there is either the stupid slut who is only there for sex, or the untouchable, almost divine female figure. In its tough either-or, which does not allow for ambivalence or shades of gray and constantly judges, a comparable way of thinking also spreads independently in political discourse from personal attitudes.
By Bent-Erik Scholz
By Bent-Erik Scholz
These are attributions that we know only too well because we are constantly confronted with them: on the one hand there is what is described as "left-green", "mainstream" or "systemling" and on the other neologisms such as "Schwurbler", "lateral thinker" or the good old "Nazi" rule. According to this thinking, various figures that would otherwise have no overlap are thrown into a sack, which is then hit with a rolling pin. It would somehow happen to the right person.
Several factors are characteristic of this form of degradation: Firstly, the classification is carried out with sometimes brutal speed; individual sentences or even sentence modules or general positions are sufficient for this. Secondly, those who are denigrated in this way are often generally denied the ability to form their own opinions and their credibility. This is how it happens that a renowned political scientist like Ulrike Guérot, whose expertise in the field of European politics was considered undisputed for years, suddenly ends up in the same drawer as the ultranational Attila Hildmann, who writes contributions to Jewish politics on Telegram, because of a critical essay on the sense and nonsense of pandemic policy World conspiracy and cast doubt on the validity of the Basic Law.
At the same time, people in the public debate are regularly accused of only representing their position because they have been "bought". When Sahra Wagenknecht made critical comments about arms deliveries to Ukraine, the accusation that Wagenknecht was being paid by the Kremlin was immediately apparent. Those who showed understanding for taking measures in times of pandemic were often confronted with the claim that they were being paid "by the state" for doing so. The whispered ambiguity of these formulations, that "the state" or "the Kremlin" paid someone, says a lot about how serious such conspiratorial allegations are.
In the long run, this thinking leads to a completely distorted worldview characterized by conspiracy theories, in which Heinz-Rudolf Kunze and Alice Weidel are thrown into the same ideological stew because both reject gender, and in which we suspect there are people behind every political statement. Practically since the beginning of the farmers' protests at the beginning of the year, rumors have been heard in the media that the uprising was "infiltrated by the right-wing," while the well-known narrative of Antifa paid by the government was once again emerging in the demonstrations against the right.
The impatience shown when identifying the other person leads to adventurous acts of mental acrobatics. Anyone who even begins to criticize Tucker Carlson's interview with Vladimir Putin is immediately branded as a supporter of the mainstream and a speaking puppet of the government - regardless of what argument underpins the criticism.
The lack of flexibility also results in personal brutality: one wrong sentence and you have already fallen beyond grace. Instead of the debate or the attempt to at least listen to and understand the other person, more and more people are deciding not to tolerate contradiction for a second and to banish it from their own lives as much as possible. The fact that similar reflexes also exist on the left is shown by books such as "A Wrong Word" by René Pfister, which shows a comparable arbitrariness of condemnation in the American university environment.
Analogous to the Madonna-whore complex, here too there are only friend and foe, person of respect or purchased slut - smart and courageous voices that one can only agree with wholeheartedly, or insincere, stupid opposing voices that one does not have to deal with. If you do your own self-confidence a favor by thinking that everyone else is stupid and basically has no idea, you also isolate yourself from reality and start to become mentally rusty.
A few years ago we were talking about a "post-truth time", but today we could establish the concept of "post-argumentative time" in which it is no longer even necessary to convince yourself of the correctness of an assertion, but rather to deal with it peripheral perception is sufficient.
"A celebrity made fun of gender? What a conservative boomer."
"A cabaret artist talked about man-made climate change? Left-green drunken state propagandist."
"A journalist published a text about criminal Muslims in Germany? Nazi."
"So far I've always liked this artist, but now that he's said something about Putin that I don't like, I never want to see anything from him again."
Of course, you can get away with this kind of thinking for a while if you are willing to accept that it will make the world very one-dimensional. However, you will soon realize that in such a superficial view of the world you will quickly become quite lonely. Where there is only black and white, you soon run the risk of succumbing to the false belief that you understand the world. But in the first place, anyone who thinks so is either a charlatan or a simple-minded fool; and secondly, it is also incredibly boring to turn the entire environment through the friend-enemy lack and only concern yourself with the supposed friends. Mental atrophy is inevitable in this way of thinking.
Only those who are curious and who do not shy away from confrontation with the strange or new, but rather seek them out, keep themselves intellectually fit. For whom, according to Freud, neither Madonna nor whore exists, for whom no position is inviolable and every position deserves to at least be heard and explored. Anyone who rejects new impulses across the board and puts their own understanding of the world above everything else gets tangled up in their own prejudices and ends up being stupid.
Clinging to arbitrary and superficial judgments is like fast food for the brain: the first moment of satisfaction may be strong, but it lasts only a short time and only leaves you more immobile and sedate over time. Of course, no one should be allowed to publicly celebrate their own intellectual superiority. Ultimately, however, it is clear: you can masturbate alone at home, we all have to get along in the political public sphere, and because a circle jerk is only partially satisfactory in the long term, a compromise is required.
Only those who understand what the other person's interests are can make compromises. And not by assuming them, but by understanding them before declaring the other's needs a restricted zone and making contact impossible in a "don't play with the dirty kids" manner.
02/16/24
*Bent-Erik Scholz works as a freelancer for RBB
Several factors are characteristic of this form of degradation: Firstly, the classification is carried out with sometimes brutal speed; individual sentences or even sentence modules or general positions are sufficient for this. Secondly, those who are denigrated in this way are often generally denied the ability to form their own opinions and their credibility. This is how it happens that a renowned political scientist like Ulrike Guérot, whose expertise in the field of European politics was considered undisputed for years, suddenly ends up in the same drawer as the ultranational Attila Hildmann, who writes contributions to Jewish politics on Telegram, because of a critical essay on the sense and nonsense of pandemic policy World conspiracy and cast doubt on the validity of the Basic Law.
At the same time, people in the public debate are regularly accused of only representing their position because they have been "bought". When Sahra Wagenknecht made critical comments about arms deliveries to Ukraine, the accusation that Wagenknecht was being paid by the Kremlin was immediately apparent. Those who showed understanding for taking measures in times of pandemic were often confronted with the claim that they were being paid "by the state" for doing so. The whispered ambiguity of these formulations, that "the state" or "the Kremlin" paid someone, says a lot about how serious such conspiratorial allegations are.
In the long run, this thinking leads to a completely distorted worldview characterized by conspiracy theories, in which Heinz-Rudolf Kunze and Alice Weidel are thrown into the same ideological stew because both reject gender, and in which we suspect there are people behind every political statement. Practically since the beginning of the farmers' protests at the beginning of the year, rumors have been heard in the media that the uprising was "infiltrated by the right-wing," while the well-known narrative of Antifa paid by the government was once again emerging in the demonstrations against the right.
The impatience shown when identifying the other person leads to adventurous acts of mental acrobatics. Anyone who even begins to criticize Tucker Carlson's interview with Vladimir Putin is immediately branded as a supporter of the mainstream and a speaking puppet of the government - regardless of what argument underpins the criticism.
The lack of flexibility also results in personal brutality: one wrong sentence and you have already fallen beyond grace. Instead of the debate or the attempt to at least listen to and understand the other person, more and more people are deciding not to tolerate contradiction for a second and to banish it from their own lives as much as possible. The fact that similar reflexes also exist on the left is shown by books such as "A Wrong Word" by René Pfister, which shows a comparable arbitrariness of condemnation in the American university environment.
Analogous to the Madonna-whore complex, here too there are only friend and foe, person of respect or purchased slut - smart and courageous voices that one can only agree with wholeheartedly, or insincere, stupid opposing voices that one does not have to deal with. If you do your own self-confidence a favor by thinking that everyone else is stupid and basically has no idea, you also isolate yourself from reality and start to become mentally rusty.
A few years ago we were talking about a "post-truth time", but today we could establish the concept of "post-argumentative time" in which it is no longer even necessary to convince yourself of the correctness of an assertion, but rather to deal with it peripheral perception is sufficient.
"A celebrity made fun of gender? What a conservative boomer."
"A cabaret artist talked about man-made climate change? Left-green drunken state propagandist."
"A journalist published a text about criminal Muslims in Germany? Nazi."
"So far I've always liked this artist, but now that he's said something about Putin that I don't like, I never want to see anything from him again."
Of course, you can get away with this kind of thinking for a while if you are willing to accept that it will make the world very one-dimensional. However, you will soon realize that in such a superficial view of the world you will quickly become quite lonely. Where there is only black and white, you soon run the risk of succumbing to the false belief that you understand the world. But in the first place, anyone who thinks so is either a charlatan or a simple-minded fool; and secondly, it is also incredibly boring to turn the entire environment through the friend-enemy lack and only concern yourself with the supposed friends. Mental atrophy is inevitable in this way of thinking.
Only those who are curious and who do not shy away from confrontation with the strange or new, but rather seek them out, keep themselves intellectually fit. For whom, according to Freud, neither Madonna nor whore exists, for whom no position is inviolable and every position deserves to at least be heard and explored. Anyone who rejects new impulses across the board and puts their own understanding of the world above everything else gets tangled up in their own prejudices and ends up being stupid.
Clinging to arbitrary and superficial judgments is like fast food for the brain: the first moment of satisfaction may be strong, but it lasts only a short time and only leaves you more immobile and sedate over time. Of course, no one should be allowed to publicly celebrate their own intellectual superiority. Ultimately, however, it is clear: you can masturbate alone at home, we all have to get along in the political public sphere, and because a circle jerk is only partially satisfactory in the long term, a compromise is required.
Only those who understand what the other person's interests are can make compromises. And not by assuming them, but by understanding them before declaring the other's needs a restricted zone and making contact impossible in a "don't play with the dirty kids" manner.
02/16/24
*Bent-Erik Scholz works as a freelancer for RBB
Write a comment