The non-free radical
"You almost had the impression that her speech was prepared" (Björn Höcke in the TV Duel)
By Serdar Somuncu
By Serdar Somuncu
Björn Höcke is an extremist. His whole posture and expression are nothing more than a single spasm. His mischievous smile, his constant smirking and his almost paranoid lamentation, which always seems to be in resistance to an invisible power, are nothing other than the expression of a need for recognition and recognition, which is reflected in an almost manically propagated nationalism.
Höcke is surrounded by a magical aura of untouchability, which sometimes feels like a better arrogance, but often also seems bossy and almost defiant. This enigma is the perfect embodiment of an aspiring tribune of the people who, in his know-it-all role, plays the underdog card, only to then resort to pseudo-revolutionary babble and portray himself as an avenger of the disinherited.
In the most recent TV duel over the election in Thuringia it was also impressively visible how Höcke veers back and forth between uncertainty, lies and stubbornness in order to create nothing other than the impression of a politician loyal to the republic and honest, who ultimately turns out to be a similarly desolate one Stage of inferiority like the abused German people are in. This narrative is unmistakably the DNA of the AfD. But not only those of the party, but also other antipaths, once blameless citizens and stranded people who find the rule of law and democratic structure of our society disgusting, see themselves united in their blunt antagonism against our society, which is supposedly eaten away by immigration and degeneration, and they have conspired in their madness against the infiltrated German innocence.
The target and main motive of their hatred are Islam and the so-called "uncontrolled mass immigration", which Höcke can bring up again and again without being contradicted in order to conceal his fear-obsessed attitude. In this TV duel, Björn Höcke's eternal lament formed the leitmotif of his argument and at the same time revealed the foundation of his often inconsistent but also ideological stance.
Höcke is a dazzler. He claims knowledge of history but is forgetful when it comes to his own quotes. He is defending a nation that does not exist and never has existed. He speaks of an original Germanness, even though Germany has nothing original. This country has always been a composite of different cultures. This is precisely what makes the federalist and republican difference to other nations, which Höcke repeatedly uses in his crude comparisons in order to make himself credible in his nationalist claim to the purity of German culture.
Unfortunately, the understanding of his sympathizers does not go further than heroizing him and seeing his political behavior as something of a resistance that one must offer against the oppression of the alleged establishment. But who is this establishment?
Is there really a caste of rulers in Germany that has set itself the goal of destroying this country? Or rather, do we live in a democracy, something that Björn Höcke constantly doubts, in which majorities determine the direction in which the decisions of those in power should take and even then these should be discussed in compromise and consensus. Just questioning this demonstrates how anti-democratic Höcke's thinking is. For him, the view of things is always authoritarian. Being German is a privilege of origin. Being German is a given catalog of characteristics, language and culture that excludes others. And anyone who doesn't follow the rules doesn't deserve to stay in Germany. In Höcke's limited view, there is no productive mixing of cultures. There is also no fruitful exchange between religions; Islam belongs to the Middle East, just as Goethe and Schiller are quintessentially German. There are no changes, only backwardness. He does not define what it means to be German, but rather he sets up an invisible ideal that is limited to historical achievements and a "positive view" of the German past.
This is not only misrepresentation of history par excellence, but it is also deeply anti-modernist and sometimes anti-Semitic. For Höcke, the Holocaust is a venial sin compared to the "positive sides" of German history. The Holocaust cannot be put into perspective more clearly.
There is a lot about Germany's past - and it actually only begins in 1848 - that should not be viewed positively. The Empire, the Franco-German wars and the fascist-hegemonist ideology of the National Socialists, but also the susceptibility to dictatorships and the collective sadism that was able to unfold in the Holocaust, are facets of the German soul and an inseparable part of the German mentality.
Höcke smugly overlooks all of this, for example: B. describes the Holocaust as a disgrace, but always leaves open the ambivalence that this expression has when it refers to the perception of one's own responsibility for guilt instead of declaring it a flaw that can be thrown off, like unnecessary ballast . It is not for nothing that the term "guilt culture" is part of this agitator's vocabulary.
As outrageous as that sounds, Höcke is very aware that his naive attitude can blind you to any doubt as long as you misunderstand him. So it is also obvious that in the future he will have to answer for his statements in court, because they are deeply anti-democratic, right-wing radical and fascist. Unfortunately, in this gray area it remains difficult for his political opponents to attack and expose him, because Höcke squirms like an eel when he is challenged or pushed into a corner.
Then suddenly the same old platitudes come out about the suppression of freedom of expression and the invisible power of a nomenclature that targets innocent German citizens. But Höcke is neither a tribune nor a rebel. He is touchy, resentful and sniveling, and no one who opposes him can offer an argument that will make him reason or make him think. Because in some way he seems to be hurt in the depths of his soul and is defending himself against an invisible trauma.
If you look at his biography, which he describes in his book of conversations "Never in the same river twice", then you see the psychogram of an offended boy growing up in the Westerwald, between the barriers of his upbringing and the possibilities of his mediocre intelligence. Höcke turned it into something dangerous. Because, similar to other extremists, the basis of their actions is always revenge against their own fate. So it is not surprising that Höcke seems to be driven by the idea of one day taking revenge for the injustice done to him, which is comparable to the mistreatment of a nation by the so-called multiculturally contaminated establishment.
In Höcke's view, the nation is nothing more than a father figure, whose patriarchal authority he himself seems to long for. In his ideology, the state's rigid crackdown on subversive elements is nothing other than an inevitable reaction to the injustice and injury inflicted by the anti-German elements.
So any conversation with him, like this TV duel, remains meaningless and pointless. Because Höcke cannot be reached with arguments. You can neither discuss with him on a rational level nor convince him. Höcke's goal is solely selfish and aimed at alleviating his inner pain for this nation.
But this nation is not sick, nor does it need the help of a seducer. Our society, like our democracy, has long since grown, it is defensive, and it will be able to resist these defeatist influences in the future. She doesn't need a therapist or an educator. Only the experience of peaceful coexistence between different cultures protects us from the delusions of an arrogant demagogue. It is the power of tolerance and respect that withstands any attacks of anachronism and stands in contradiction to the arrogance of the nationalists. Höcke's attempt to divide society is doomed to failure, because the globalized world is further along in its development and more mature than the adaptability of a narrow-minded traditionalist will ever be.
04/12/24
©Serdar Somuncu
Current program "Seelenheil" now downloadable in Shop
*Serdar Somuncu is an actor and director
Höcke is surrounded by a magical aura of untouchability, which sometimes feels like a better arrogance, but often also seems bossy and almost defiant. This enigma is the perfect embodiment of an aspiring tribune of the people who, in his know-it-all role, plays the underdog card, only to then resort to pseudo-revolutionary babble and portray himself as an avenger of the disinherited.
In the most recent TV duel over the election in Thuringia it was also impressively visible how Höcke veers back and forth between uncertainty, lies and stubbornness in order to create nothing other than the impression of a politician loyal to the republic and honest, who ultimately turns out to be a similarly desolate one Stage of inferiority like the abused German people are in. This narrative is unmistakably the DNA of the AfD. But not only those of the party, but also other antipaths, once blameless citizens and stranded people who find the rule of law and democratic structure of our society disgusting, see themselves united in their blunt antagonism against our society, which is supposedly eaten away by immigration and degeneration, and they have conspired in their madness against the infiltrated German innocence.
The target and main motive of their hatred are Islam and the so-called "uncontrolled mass immigration", which Höcke can bring up again and again without being contradicted in order to conceal his fear-obsessed attitude. In this TV duel, Björn Höcke's eternal lament formed the leitmotif of his argument and at the same time revealed the foundation of his often inconsistent but also ideological stance.
Höcke is a dazzler. He claims knowledge of history but is forgetful when it comes to his own quotes. He is defending a nation that does not exist and never has existed. He speaks of an original Germanness, even though Germany has nothing original. This country has always been a composite of different cultures. This is precisely what makes the federalist and republican difference to other nations, which Höcke repeatedly uses in his crude comparisons in order to make himself credible in his nationalist claim to the purity of German culture.
Unfortunately, the understanding of his sympathizers does not go further than heroizing him and seeing his political behavior as something of a resistance that one must offer against the oppression of the alleged establishment. But who is this establishment?
Is there really a caste of rulers in Germany that has set itself the goal of destroying this country? Or rather, do we live in a democracy, something that Björn Höcke constantly doubts, in which majorities determine the direction in which the decisions of those in power should take and even then these should be discussed in compromise and consensus. Just questioning this demonstrates how anti-democratic Höcke's thinking is. For him, the view of things is always authoritarian. Being German is a privilege of origin. Being German is a given catalog of characteristics, language and culture that excludes others. And anyone who doesn't follow the rules doesn't deserve to stay in Germany. In Höcke's limited view, there is no productive mixing of cultures. There is also no fruitful exchange between religions; Islam belongs to the Middle East, just as Goethe and Schiller are quintessentially German. There are no changes, only backwardness. He does not define what it means to be German, but rather he sets up an invisible ideal that is limited to historical achievements and a "positive view" of the German past.
This is not only misrepresentation of history par excellence, but it is also deeply anti-modernist and sometimes anti-Semitic. For Höcke, the Holocaust is a venial sin compared to the "positive sides" of German history. The Holocaust cannot be put into perspective more clearly.
There is a lot about Germany's past - and it actually only begins in 1848 - that should not be viewed positively. The Empire, the Franco-German wars and the fascist-hegemonist ideology of the National Socialists, but also the susceptibility to dictatorships and the collective sadism that was able to unfold in the Holocaust, are facets of the German soul and an inseparable part of the German mentality.
Höcke smugly overlooks all of this, for example: B. describes the Holocaust as a disgrace, but always leaves open the ambivalence that this expression has when it refers to the perception of one's own responsibility for guilt instead of declaring it a flaw that can be thrown off, like unnecessary ballast . It is not for nothing that the term "guilt culture" is part of this agitator's vocabulary.
As outrageous as that sounds, Höcke is very aware that his naive attitude can blind you to any doubt as long as you misunderstand him. So it is also obvious that in the future he will have to answer for his statements in court, because they are deeply anti-democratic, right-wing radical and fascist. Unfortunately, in this gray area it remains difficult for his political opponents to attack and expose him, because Höcke squirms like an eel when he is challenged or pushed into a corner.
Then suddenly the same old platitudes come out about the suppression of freedom of expression and the invisible power of a nomenclature that targets innocent German citizens. But Höcke is neither a tribune nor a rebel. He is touchy, resentful and sniveling, and no one who opposes him can offer an argument that will make him reason or make him think. Because in some way he seems to be hurt in the depths of his soul and is defending himself against an invisible trauma.
If you look at his biography, which he describes in his book of conversations "Never in the same river twice", then you see the psychogram of an offended boy growing up in the Westerwald, between the barriers of his upbringing and the possibilities of his mediocre intelligence. Höcke turned it into something dangerous. Because, similar to other extremists, the basis of their actions is always revenge against their own fate. So it is not surprising that Höcke seems to be driven by the idea of one day taking revenge for the injustice done to him, which is comparable to the mistreatment of a nation by the so-called multiculturally contaminated establishment.
In Höcke's view, the nation is nothing more than a father figure, whose patriarchal authority he himself seems to long for. In his ideology, the state's rigid crackdown on subversive elements is nothing other than an inevitable reaction to the injustice and injury inflicted by the anti-German elements.
So any conversation with him, like this TV duel, remains meaningless and pointless. Because Höcke cannot be reached with arguments. You can neither discuss with him on a rational level nor convince him. Höcke's goal is solely selfish and aimed at alleviating his inner pain for this nation.
But this nation is not sick, nor does it need the help of a seducer. Our society, like our democracy, has long since grown, it is defensive, and it will be able to resist these defeatist influences in the future. She doesn't need a therapist or an educator. Only the experience of peaceful coexistence between different cultures protects us from the delusions of an arrogant demagogue. It is the power of tolerance and respect that withstands any attacks of anachronism and stands in contradiction to the arrogance of the nationalists. Höcke's attempt to divide society is doomed to failure, because the globalized world is further along in its development and more mature than the adaptability of a narrow-minded traditionalist will ever be.
04/12/24
©Serdar Somuncu
Current program "Seelenheil" now downloadable in Shop
*Serdar Somuncu is an actor and director
Write a comment