From a purely logistical point of view – as far as the seating arrangement is concerned:
The larger the group sitting on the right, the easier it is to be deceived: those who previously sat in the centre are now increasingly sitting on the left.
Autore: Peter Herrmann's Blog
Dr. Peter Herrmann is a sociologist of German origin -- well, he was, before moving forward, being now ..., well, some say: social philosopher, permanently crossing borders between arts, economics, jurisprudence, philosophy, political science and .., yes, still sociology ... and having lost many links to the origins as fasr as nationality is concerned, trying to imagine that there is no border ...
Traffic Light Governments and other Populism
From: Sachsenspiegel, ca. 1230
Now let everyone speak, if they are able, more profoundly and better than I have done, if it only benefits humanity. Should he succeed without resistance, then he will achieve what no one has ever achieved before. Because nobody can speak and live to the satisfaction of all people, however much one wants to criticise me for it.
***
Nun rede jeder, wenn er es vermag, tiefgründiger und besser, als ich es getan habe, wenn es nur der Menschheit nützt. Sollte es ihm wohl ohne Widerstand gelingen, so verbringt er, was noch keinem Menschen gelungen ist. Denn keiner kann zur Zufriedenheit aller Leute reden und leben, wie sehr man auch mich dafür schelten will.
Big Data – Big Worries
The current penetration of our society with new media is a profound cultural upheaval.
A statement that can hardly denied. Often experts in some field – as medicine, finance, engineering and of course data processing/information technology – welcome this, making out the great instrumentality, seeing that ‘machines’ are better able to perform some tasks than human beings (even if this is sometimes an illusion: typing a small equation into the calculator may be more tedious than just calculating … – though having only learned to calculate with the calculator may make it impossible to do any calculation that cannot be performed by using the fingers [don’t make divisions, please]). Often the person from the street, ordinary people appreciate it as these ‘cultural tools’ make things possible that had not been even thinkable before – or at least some things are becoming easier. And then there is a third group, also reflected by within the two groups mentioned: sceptics, who, in extreme cases, lament the decline of culture and Western values.
There are surely good arguments in favour of each attitude. However, isn’t there also a good argument for suggesting that we are looking at the wrong question?
The current penetration of our society with new media is a profound cultural upheaval.
This formulation suggests that the new media are the decisive point in question. While looking at the current penetration, it refers to ‘our society’ and this ‘our society’ seems not to be at stake – or to be more precise: our society changes as consequence of (a) the new media and (b) the penetration. Such perspective has major implications for nearly everything: the way we approach democracy, elections, consumption, education, learning, travelling … . – Spoiler: the following does not claim to know the correct answer; and the outline of the present answer is moving on slippery, i.e. contradictory ground.
***
The English businessman Thomas Cook (22 November 1808 – 18 July 1892) is not least known as forerunner of package holidays. However, it had not been until the 1950s that the concept came to a breakthrough: combined flight, transfers, and accommodation, and later the ‘leisure-time activities’ by animateurs characterised new ways of mass tourism. Without doubt a progressive concept, opening explorations to people who could not afford it before.
However, we also see a connotation that is often lost: the amateur had been replaced by the follower of an animateur; the immediate experience of touring by the explorer, entering unknown territories had been replaced by tourism, that offered a framework, an arena, a predefined track for tours. Of course, very few people even in the olden times could afford to travel like Marco Polo (c. 1254 – 8 January 1324), merchant, adventurer and author who travelled years along the Silk Road. One underlying fundamental change is that the multi-skilled, multi-interested and not very rich Marco Polo had been what we may call entrepreneur, undertaker – not in today’s Schumpeterian understanding – who had been replaced by today’s user. There is a paradox implied: whereas for Polo’s generation of undertakers the exchange value emerged from the use value, for today’s user (the entrepreneur as the consumer alike) the use value depends on the exchange value – so far its highest stage and ultimate expression is the financialisation of the economy, techno feudalism (Varoufakis) only being a variation.
Marco Polo, James Cook and the Horizon Holiday Group are only one of many developments that characterise the shallowing and draining of life – the seedbed for
[t]he current penetration of our society with new media
A simple answer can be given by unscrewing the wheel, returning to elitist concepts … – as said: Marco Polo had been one of the few privileged at a time where mass migration existed only as answer on some kind of exodus.
And
In the 2nd century AD, around the same time in the Western world that the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius was recording his philosophical thoughts on papyrus scrolls and relying on scribes to reproduce them, the main works of classical Chinese literature were cut into stone slabs in China over a period of eight years from the year 175 AD. Thousands of copies were made in the form of copies: Moistened paper was pressed onto the inscription stones in such a way that when the paper was brushed with ink, the incised characters stood out white against the otherwise blackened paper. (Team “Mainz. Gutenberg 2000: Vor Gutenberg; https://www.gutenberg.de/erfindung/vor_gutenberg.php; 17/11/2024; own translation)
The various steps of massification from earlier developments until today seem to be inextricably linked to a flattening.
But, so far, the simple answer ignores one aspect: what appears to be massification, had been dominated by the idea of rationalisation and making control more effective – that the ability to read could also be used to read other info that those supported by the modern entrepreneurs had to be accepted as unintended side-effect. The liberating effects, however, had not been transposed into the real liberation of the user, or even more: the transformation of the user into the role of the owner. Instead, it had been the orientation on gain as sole guideline also for social processes (see Polanyi) – the alternative is becoming clear in the following lines, taken from the first volume of Willi Bredel’s Ein neues Kapital – A New Chapter: (Berlin: Aufbau, 1974: 412)
| ….Deshalb wollen wir lernen, fleißig lernen, nicht um klüger zu werden als andere und daraus Vorteile zu gewinnen, sondern um die noch nicht Kluggewordenen klug zu machen. Deshalb wollen wir schaffen, rastlos schaffen, nicht um reicher zu werden als andere und daraus Macht zu gewinnen, sondern um das Leben aller reich zu machen. | ….Therefore we want to learn, to study hard, not to become wiser than others and to gain advantages from it, but to make those who are not yet wise wise. Therefore we want to create, to work tirelessly, not to become richer than others and to gain power from it, but to make life rich for everyone. |
A simple example: The daughters of a famer had been ‘travelling the world’, the father ‘travels with them’, using the internet, National Geographic etc. and of course digital means of communication even if he rarely moved physically to the next lager city. Both could afford it, not least because they had been ‘time-rich’.
Keynes, writing in 1930 about the Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren, suggested
Three-hour shifts or a fifteen-hour week may put off the problem for a great while. For three hours a day is quite enough to satisfy the old Adam in most of us! (https://www.aspeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/files/content/upload/Intro_and_Section_I.pdf; 17/11/2024)
Wouldn’t that allow all of us to travel more substantial than instagramable, to exchange honestly instead of sending only short messages and sending pictures, to study deeply rather to depend on ‘deep AI’ .
And not least, would that not also open a door to informed political decisions, ‘deep democracy’, going beyond elections – in the US for instance, the campaign of the recent elections had been the most expensive ever (see e.g. https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2024/10/total-2024-election-spending-projected-to-exceed-previous-record/; https://www.zeit.de/politik/2024-11/usa-wahlkampf-teuerster-donald-trump-kamala-harris; 17/11/2024), resulting in a criminal being president (see e.g. https://www.lto.de/recht/hintergruende/h/usa-donald-trump-us-stormy-daniels-manhattan-new-york?utm_source=Eloqua&utm_content=WKDE_LEG_NSL_LTO_Daily_EM&utm_campaign=wkde_leg_mp_lto_daily_ab13.05.2019&utm_econtactid=CWOLT000034312644&utm_medium=email_newsletter&utm_crmid=).Interestingly enough, taking from an entry on the US elections on Robert’s blog, we learn:
The biggest caveat to Trump’s voting victory is that contrary to the usual hype of a ‘massive voter turnout’, fewer Americans eligible to vote bothered to do so compared to 2020. Then over 158m voted, this time the vote was down to 143m. The voter turnout of those eligible fell to 58.2% from the high of 65.9% in 2020.
Around 40% of Americans registered to vote did not do so. And the number of Americans who failed to register rose to 19m from 12m in 2020. So, although Trump got 51% of those who voted, he actually got only 28% support of Americans of voting age.
If it is said that
how we learn, work, discuss, position ourselves socially and politically and make decisions – all of this is changing so quickly that we can hardly keep up
we should go a step further, asking for what we are leaning, discussing and position ourselves, what kind of decisions are we making. If the polity changes along the line of gaining and maintaining power – individually and/or in the sense of MAGA (or any other country). If political decisions are replaced by financial investments and juridification ala “seek(.)[ing] jail and public office ban (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/14/marine-le-pen-embezzlement-trial-national-rally-prosecutor-ban?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other; 17/11/2024) for disagreeable politicians we are confronted with the problem of depleting public spaces, leaving it to individuals to decide ‘what is right and what is wrong’. Such ban directed against Le Pen may be in the short run to be welcomed as it may be welcomed to ban a right-wing populist party like the German AFD. At the end, however such depletion of public spaces is a kind of re-feudalisation, reestablishing the absolute ruler. Of course it is a paradox: in the extreme case, and only then, the absolute ruler may be necessary to avoid the absolute dictator.
Indeed, it is interesting that
[t]he German legal system does not provide any legal protection against disinformation and fake news beyond defamation offences. In order to activate the protective effects of the law, a personal reference is always needed first. In the broad area of assertions without personal reference, in particular the right-wing camp has adopted the peculiar narrative that Google, X and Bytedance (the company behind TikTok) should decide on lies and truth rather than the state. (Chan-jo Jun, Flint, Jessica, 2024: Warum nicht Tiktok und Co über Demokratie entscheiden sollten. Regulierung nach dem DSA; in: Legal Tribune Online, 30.05.2024 , https://www.lto.de/persistent/a_id/54659; abgerufen am: 16.11.2024)
This fundamental problem must be highlighted: the trinity of privatisation, individualisation and the dismissal of the state from responsibility. The aforementioned juridification only appears as contradiction, insofar law is fundamentally concerned with rights of individuals. This basically opens the door to digitisation, and what’s more, digitisation becomes a logical consequence if not necessity as both are based on the principle of binarity.
With all of this, contexts are systematically destroyed – TV programmes, that people are talking about are victim of TV media libraries, commercial channels that offer whatever we like at whichever time we want [and of course, they tell us as well what we want] …. The “Monday morning question at work”: Did you watch …? The subsequent discussion cannot really happen anymore, is at least not encouraged; the debate of the latest news is difficult as the news are sooner old than they can be digested – and in addition they drown in ‘multimedia-news shows’: presenting a central message, accompanied by the stock exchange info on the bottom, the weather forecast on the right and/or some sport info on the left and not least the very latest news in a short superimposition … and of course, somewhere the next film is announced — already now available in the TV library, even if only broadcasted the next day … . This can be continued without end, applied for different areas – and perhaps the only exception is sports: bringing people together and although they get lost in the crowd, everyone feels an important part of it – not digitally, but in analogue. – And yes, sometimes the smell of horses on the field or in the arena of a circus is much better, a counterweight against Pokémon.
And it is in this sense always necessary to discuss the meaning of rights, not leaving justice as in the hands of algorithm-driven machines.
not this way – changing transport
OPEN = PUBLIC STATEMENT (letter to the German Railway – Deutsche Bahn – maschine translation)
Hello, I am not contacting you on my behalf, but in the interest of a friend who visited me.
1) She received an offer of a BahnCard at a special price – this was probably chosen by lot. So far, so good. However, something went wrong with the booking – the code entered had expired; the REQUEST for a new code to be sent was rejected in a way that was friendly but showed that the customer was not aware of the email. It is forgivable that the railway booking system fails, but it is not forgivable that the employees fail and do not take note of texts. Or is it because the workers are underpaid and the CEOs are overpaid?
2) On the return journey, the regional train was late, so the connection could not be made. – The seat ticket in the quiet compartment expired, instead the journey from Hamburg to Berlin had to be spent in a noisy neighbourhood, the customer’s willingness/interest to engage in a closer relationship with DB for the future suffered greatly (to say the least). My willingness to retain the BC 50_1 on a large scale is also not strengthened. And I am not just expressing the unease of two people.
Even with all due respect for the efforts to make the railway more attractive, the old sentence from Goethe’s pen also applies here:
“Enough words have been exchanged, let me finally see action!”
Unsatisfied greetings from Peter Herrmann
so nicht – die Verkehrswende
OFFENE = OEFFENTLICHE STELLUNGNAHME
Hallo, ich melde mich nicht im Auftrag, aber im Interesse einer Freundin, die mich besucht hat.
1) Sie erhielt ein Angebot einer BahnCard zu einem Sonderpreis – dies wurde wohl per Los ausgewaehlt. Soweit, so gut. Allerdings schlug bei der Buchung etwas fehl – der eingegebene Code war damit verfallen; die BITTE um Zusendung eines neuen Codes wurde in einer Weise abgewiesen, die freundlich war, aber von Nicht-Kenntnisnahme des mails der Kundin zeugte. Dass das Buchungssystem der Bahn versagt, ist verzeihbar, dass die MitarbeiterInnen aber versagen und Texte nicht zur Kenntnis nehmen, ist nicht verzeihbar. Oder liegt es an der Unterbezahlung derjenigen, die arbeiten und der Ueberbezahlung der CEOs?
2) Auf der Rueckfahrt hatte der Regionalzug Verspätung, damit konnte der Anschluss nicht erreicht werden. – Die Platzkarte im Ruheabteil ist verfallen, stattdessen musste die Strecke von Hamburg nach Berlin in lärmender Nachbarschaft verbracht werden. Die Bereitschaft/das Interesse der Kundin, sich auf eine engere Bindung zur DB fuer die Zukunft einzulassen, hat darunter zumindest stark gelitten (um das Mindeste zu sagen). Meine Bereitschaft zu einer großzügen Beibehaltung der BC 50_1 wird ebenfalls nicht gestärkt. Und damit spreche ich nicht nur das Unbehagen zweier Personen aus.
Auch bei allem Respekt fuer die Bemuehungen, die Bahn attraktiver zu machen, gilt doch auch hier der alten Satz aus Goethe’s Feder:
„Der Worte sind genug gewechselt, lasst mich auch endlich Taten sehn!“
Unzufrieden gruesst Peter Herrmann
democratic miracle
The German Die Zeit suggested that the mass demonstrations the recent days must be seen as democratic miracle. Sure, it had been in some ways encouraging to see people demonstrating. Though a little drop of bitterness is going hand in hand with it:
• The protest had been in some way diffuse, directed against the AFD, often with reference to a meeting between AFD members, in which CDU members were also involved, as a point of reference and as …, well, equally diffuse request to the government, to the prime minister and to “the people” to counteract the further drift to the right;
• While these demonstrations are looked at as democratic miracle, two major movements are not mentioned in this context: the strike of railway workers and the protest of (not only) the farmers – doesn’t this suggest that these are not part of the democratic movement?
• And then a rather fundamental issue: The Aerzteblatt published already in 2019 a short side note (https://www.aerzteblatt.de/archiv/209491/Randnotiz-Frage-nach-der-Nuetzlichkeit): it concerns a parliamentary question. In short:
die AfD will wissen, welche „volkswirtschaftlichen Verluste durch die nicht genutzten Erwerbspotenziale“ von Menschen mit psychischen Erkrankungen und Beziehern von Erwerbsminderungsrenten bestehen.
The AfD wants to know what “economic losses exist due to the unutilised employment potential” of people with mental illnesses and recipients of reduced earning capacity pensions.
And the Diaconia warns that people should never be assessed on grounds of utility considerations
- Hinter der Frage darf die Vorstellung vermutet werden, dass psychisch Kranke die Volkswirtschaft und die Sozialsysteme belasten. Die Nazis propagierten ihre Vernichtungsaktionen mit Plakaten von „unnützen Essern“, die nicht in den „gesunden Volkskörper“ passten. Kein Mensch darf Nützlichkeitserwägungen unterworfen werden – niemals mehr.
- The idea that mentally ill people are a burden on the national economy and social systems may be assumed to be behind the question. The Nazis propagated their extermination campaigns with posters of “useless eaters” who did not fit into the “healthy national body”. No human being should be subjected to considerations of usefulness – ever again.
And why is this mentioned in the context of the mass demonstrations against the right, as drop of bitterness of the democratic miracle? Exactly this utilitarian thinking had been accepted for years: migrants being classified as those who are welcomed as adding to the national workforce and those who are seen as burden of the social security systems; the deserving and the non-deserving poor; the good, well integrated workers and those who are victims of mobbing and discrimination, notwithstanding the laws that are forbidding such maltreatment …
Sure, the recent developments broke the camel’s back; but wasn’t it a serious neglect not to talk about the fact that the problem begins with camels being used as working animals?
The president and prime minister and other state reps celebrated the democratic miracle. A mystery seems to be, then, that they represent a state that app 44 % of the AFD’s budgets comes from the state.
GTPT
Outright wrong !?
Tiny differences matter – you want to look at Chat GPT and a typo brings you to chat about GTP, of course no problem as you know everything about Guanosine-5′-triphosphate (GTP), this tiny building block which plays an important role in transcribing the synthesis of RNA.
Well, and this is the problem, where we should not really worry primarily about Chat GPT (or google’s bard or …) which may get things reasonably correct as long as we (a) apply the correct spelling, (b) do not expect really clear replies and are happy with answers that are as concise as the horoscope or the statements of any other oracle and (c) come up with simple issues . It is so advanced now that occasionally you may end up with an honest answer:
Sorry, I cannot answer this question. I am an AI-tool.
Yes, there are things where HI, i.e. human intelligence is needed: contradictory, emphatic, combative …
More worrying is the AI-imposed formulation of questions. Embedded in our word processor, or available as AI-writing support like Outright, QuillBot, Grammarly …
Such applications may be helpful at times …, and at first glance. But then the tiny differences may make a big difference:
This is really only the first draft of the initial script and we appreciate very much feedback by the readers.
This is
reallyonly the first draft of the initial script and we appreciateverymuch feedback by the readers.This is really
onlythe first draft of theinitialscript and we appreciate very much feedback by the readers.
Or in Italian
Sono
Io sono
Sono anch’io
Io sono anche
AI comes up and autocorrects a sentence in different ways, sometimes possibly more elegant, and possibly “correcting” something that is actually wrong … because it is new: a new term, concept, … a searching for an “unknown unknown” — yes, borrowing from a militarist like Rumsfeld (MI?) may occasionally be more intelligent than relying on AI.
Intelligent or not … enjoy Christmas … or look forward to Spring Festival while others are celebrating …
Finality
As more as we go into detail with scientific investigations we are running towards a point of statis, transcending reality to the extent to which we are missing out the actual relationships that are characterising “being”. These are disregarded in much of the actual work.
It is interesting to look at the work and conversation of and between Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and Alexander von Humboldt. Although we usually do not consider this as question of methodology, it is highly relevant that both emphasise the importance of movement, as matter of liberatiing thinking and ideas on the one hand, furthermore the emphasis by Alexander von Humboldt that traveling in actual effect allows to be immediately confronted not only with distance but at the same time with the connections between the different things.
Also Alexander von Humboldt states ‘If one travels through 100 miles of earth in a few weeks, the law becomes clear’.
However, this may open road to a paradox: Goethe, somewhere in the west-eastern divan, emphasisis that the ‘experience’ of 3,000 years is necessary to actually understand the world.
Three thousand years, a personal visit in Rome where I had been speaking on a conference on the diversity of modernisation, i had been confronted with being in the situation of actually living through even more than 3000 years: ancient history and even the ‘prehistoric times’ but as well the more recent histories – manifestations as the Forum Romanum, the villa of Mussolini, street names reminding of popes, politicians relevant during my own lifetime … and the personal history: having lived and worked there for some time, my modest domicile in the via della Musa, just around the corner of the villa of ‘il duce’, the office nearby, the “foundation library””” at EURISPES – there, though more hidden than really public -; occasionally the smell from a pasticeria, the cafè et cornetto, and the many reminders of personal life somewhere: the Korean signs, reminding me of the Melancholic Chanson I once received, handwritten with love;
the gelateria next to the Piazza Vittorio Emanuele II, where Chen and Lv enjoyed ice cream, the Basilica Papale di Santa Maria Maggiore, where the friendship to Simona commenced; the now “empty” junction in front of the main station: the two old ladies, sleeping rough and … well, call it messed around, commented by my then landlady by the question: why do you always see the nasty things …. yes, all this is in some way making history: living, learning, loving, loosing …
A few days, from ancient times to personal presence …. it seems that the concentration and condensation of history actually makes it fading away, becoming meaningless. Moreover, it is not just history as we commonly understand it, but it is time in general and even in its own way reality becoming meaningless. Who would not be reminded of or even feel like Raymond Fosca, whom we know from Simone de Beauvoir’s outstanding work Tous les hommes sont mortels …. and for the one who is not, the loss of time results in the loss of relevance of life.
Et puis vous m’avez ouvert les yeux. Elle cacha son visage dans ses mains. Un brin d’herbe, rien qu’un brin d’herbe. Chacun se voyait différent des autres; chacun se préférait; et tous se trompaient; elle s’était trompée comme les autres.
Reality becomes somewhat arbitrary, random, autopoitically self-controlled – history can sold – in tourist shops, often by Asians who left there own history behind – in some respect it reminds me of having talked to Wendy from Australia many years ago: she envied me as European, with the wealth of a cultural heritage. I could only answer: The Australians killed their history, genociding the aborigines – and the Australians who acted murderous had been in fact Europeans …
Selling history, killing history … and forgetting to make history as it is easier to send links instead ot talking … history from the self-service shop with the finished products …
Standing on the shoulder of giants? Or allowing them to cover us with dust?
*******
In the documentary An der Unstrut we hear a shepherd saying:
“Indifference bothers me, unpunctuality bothers me. And it bothers me when people always believe that everything has to be like that and don’t even think that something has to be done for it in daily life. That bothers me. And going through life so lala, so unstable…I don’t like that. I have to know that when I finish work at night, I have to be sure that the day has brought something. Living like this… living like this annoys me. When people think that everything that happens here today is so self-evident. That bothers me. When I think back… Everything used to be difficult until then. Many have forgotten that. That upsets me.”
Political Economy, Macroeconomics and Political System
Recently sent to the publisher, waiting for proof prints now – it will be published in the series
Human Rights – Looking towards the Future – NOVA Science
Setting the Scene
The first part of this book is based on various seminars during summer schools, in particular those organised by the network attac – the idea behind those seminars and now the reason for the publication of the short compilation is given by the fact that questions of political economy and economics are frequently raised and (political-)economic reasoning is put forward in many debates that are centrally concerned with other topics, these may be matters of current economic and labour market development or we may see political economic arguments being brought up in debates on human behaviour or societal development. Furthermore, economic topics and issues are again and again popping up in daily conversations on all levels. However, references made are too often limited, referring to some catch-words, referring to single sentences or ideas while overlooking that political economy as well as economics cannot be understood or applied by decontextualization individual statements and arbitrary use in general debates.
It is important to consider the selective nature and the highly condensed presentation of the following – only slow reading, detailed follow-up studies and ideally ventilation of the topics in group discussions make it possible to arrive at a thorough understanding. Three essential general points must be emphasised right at the beginning:
- The approaches presented and also their critique can only be understood in the respective historical context. Even if, and precisely because, science is biased, it must recognise that ‘progressiveness’ cannot be understood without placing issues in their respective framework – the individualisation of road transport was at the time, from a technical and technological point of view as well as from an economic and social point of view, by and large an undisputed advance – it remains to be discussed whether it was also undisputed at the time as there had been critique from what we may call by and large ‘conservative positions’, sticking to the traditional means, accepting the limited speed and also social inequality as well as limited supply with goods. In any case, today things look quite different: There are more advanced possibilities of transportation, which should not only be seen in the light of increased ecological sensitivities.
- Much has far more fundamental significance than is apparent at first glance. This is meaningful, for example, in connection with individualism, because it is not just the emphasis on the individual and the note on personality – this was ultimately only true for a limited elite; much more significant is the other and for the overall structure more meaningful aspect: individualism as a general ‘guiding principle’, which has nothing to do with personalities and their recognition, but with the cutting-off of individuals and their modes of action from the respective social contexts. It also means that one must be careful, avoiding a shortened presentation of the criticised paradigms – for example, the view of the often-mentioned invisible hand in liberalism. Also, there – and even among the neo-liberals – the state is seen as active and constitutive factor, shaping economy and society, and it is important to look closely at the mode of intervention, instead of claiming that it is simply a matter of ‘deregulation’, in which there is no role for the state. – One may well say: it is in fact much worse … .
- Even more significant is the fact that initial topics, such as individualisation and transport, must be understood in a broader context, which then, however, at first glance, appears to be an independent topic: thus, non-transportation as part of a fundamental change in the way of economy and life can certainly be an answer to the problems discussed with regard to individual transport and the problems of individualism. In the scientific and political discussion, however, local and regional economies can certainly be addressed as well without referring to individual transport and hyper-individualism.
*****
The present compilation can in no way claim to be exhaustive, to provide a general overview of political economy and economics. To some extent, it provides not more than a general framework and some core quotes and with this hopefully a stimulus to further studies; at the same time, however, it is a handout that serves as background for other topics, for example, ecological-economic activity, precariousness and precarisation, or also working conditions and resulting burdens for individuals, their social environment and society in large, including considerations of legal systems and justice. Again, the historical character must be considered: Reception and critique of individual approaches are not necessarily absolute, they also result from the historical constellations, existing as background for the reappraisal of theoretical approaches of the past.
Pandemics … a publication and the afterthought …
Just signed a contract, a book titled
Pandemics as a Matter of a System Crisis – Precarity of Society
Springer Nature is the publisher, Prekarisierung und sociale Entkopplung the title of the series, edited by Rolf Hepp and others.
The following are some thoughts, arguing that the topic is still relevant, whatever the next news concerning the virus will be:
Afterthought
While finalising the script, already answering some questions after having submitted a first version, and thus with some time having passed since first taking up the work, it becomes clear to me that than pandemics helped to highlight part of the polity-virus but even without such an extreme and extremely manifest threat the Precarity of Society as System Crisis is sadly obvious.
Sure, Corona is still occasionally issued as threat, new variants striking – but by and large the pandemics are not a topic on the political agenda anymore. This does not mean that the socio-economic consequences are solved. Going together with other major economic crises and hazards small shops are under severe pressure; social provisions and services – be it health care, child care, education and also the capacities of municipal administrations – are overburdened and even standard obligatory acts are hugely delayed, offices closed for the public, allowing staff to catch up with the growing piles of files; the housing situation a matter of serious concern – and the government trying to cushion the problems by occasional grants to relieve the burden on certain groups.
The hopes for a fundamental change, however, burst like soap bubbles: While climate activists are blocking roads and motor highways, highlighting the dangers of global warming, asking for roundtables and negotiations, they are in many cases criminalised and/or met by aggressive measures. At the same time, private transport is fostered, now focusing on electromobility while negotiating the reform of public transport and the relevant pricing systems are suffering from the same weakness as they had been shown above in relation to Covid 19. In Berlin, after a successful referendum I support of the socialisation of the property of large housing corporations according article 15 Basic Law, there are again and again new hurdles erected: socialisation cannot become real, if it goes beyond ruinous payment of selective relief funds …
The emperor’s new dress showing that the ruler is still trapped in the structures of the small princedoms. He only reacts with fear, but without strategy, to the fact that the people have turned their backs on him. In the ‘positive’ case, it is addicted to individualism and withdraws more or less depressively into itself or the family as own little princedom; in the negative case, it follows the populist pied pipers (although such an allusion to the fairy tale of the Pied Piper of Hamlinneeds some qualification). – Still, a certain loyalty to the system is, of course, still maintained by the fact that the powers – be it in business, government and the mass media – still succeed in building up an external enemy. If, though, today’s challenges are global, not knowing any borders, it would be wiser to focus on real cooperation.
COMMEDIA DELLA VITA OR PÁNTA RÊI'S FIRM GROUND 