'Educate Children For War'

And just like that, a German historian--of all people--is calling for the re-institution of paramilitary training in the country's high schools

We’ll interrupt the Covid reporting for a moment here as I feel the need to share this piece of legacy media reporting™ with you. Truth be told, it’s such a stupid piece that serves but one purpose—as a call to enquire whether you hate legacy media enough or not (yet).

Translation, emphases, and [snark] mine.

Also, do remember, if Vladimir Putin does the same, it’s of course shameful, a disgrace, and must be subject to your two minutes of hate (see the bottom lines about this).

What a f******* shit-show.

---

Physical Education for Emergencies: Educating Children for Far

Historian Michael Krüger [faculty profile at the U Münster] calls for a different understanding of physical education. Students should be made fit for defence [sic].

By Johannes Kopp, Tagesanzeiger, 24 Jan. 2025 [source; archived]

Michael Krüger assures us that he was shocked at first when Defence Minister Boris Pistorius spoke the following sentence into the camera at the end of October 2023:

We must become fit for war—we must be able to defend ourselves and prepare the Bundeswehr and society for this [of course, the main question here is: what did the gov’t and the military do in the past couple of decades? Needless to say, this is the question that is avoided by both the ‘expert™ du jour’ and the ‘journo™’, akin to the devil’s reaction to holy water…]

However, it didn’t take long for the sports scientist [sic] and historian to feel called upon to take this statement further. Before he fully retired, he wrote a final and remarkable commentary in the official organ of the German Sports Teachers’ Association (DSLV) called sportunterricht.

The professor emeritus from Münster explained that the defence of a free society here is not just about military equipment. It needs citizens who are capable of doing so [this kinda reminds me of what I wrote in yesterday’s posting about the utter uselessness of what passes for ‘public health™’: we’re the most lethargic, drugged, and unfit society ever, which is, strangely enough, correlated with the domination of the public health-big pharma cabal today]. Physical education is ‘in this sense also part of the education for “war fitness” [orig. Kriegstüchtigkeit] in a free society’.

It cannot be said that this specific escalation of Pistorius’ words would have caused horror. Krüger’s commentary was published in the monthly specialist magazine last August. Editorial director and Leipzig professor Thomas Wendeborn says that there was no reaction. The whole thing had rather remained under the radar. After all, the print run of the journal is 2,500 copies per issue. There are also digital subscriptions. In some federal states, all members of the sports teachers' associations receive the magazine automatically.

Internally, Wendeborn reports that the contribution to the ‘Brennpunkt’ [current issues] section did not lead to any debates either. Every member of the editorial team is free, there is no editorial censorship. Wendeborn himself speaks of a polarising commentary [I’ve read this segment a few times as it is incoherent, logically speaking, but this is an accurate translation]. He would agree in part with Krüger’s position.

His concerns? Physical education, which is already expected to do a lot anyway, could be overloaded with social expectations. However, he reports that the editorial team has already received one or two letters from teachers asking whether hand grenade throwing should be reintroduced. In the GDR, ninth-graders practised this as part of compulsory military science [ah, but that’s not the best Germany of all times].

On the other hand, Martina Schmerr, a consultant in the schools division of the German Teachers’ Union [orig. Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft, or GEW], is ‘concerned’ about Michael Krüger's comment. She says that although links between military issues and education has increased in society and politics, she has not yet come across anyone who has formulated such a position. She first learnt about Krüger’s article from the taz newspaper [here, the teachers’ union rep is telling everybody that she doesn’t read the trade publication: why isn’t that a kind of indictment of union policy, by the way?].

‘Schools,’ she says, ’must not allow themselves to be used for security policy purposes. Rather, schools are the nucleus for the development of peace-loving societies.’ [apparently, knowledge of—the Prussian/German, of all places—school system is obviously also not required if you’re a consultant of the teachers’ union]. It is about educating people to love peace and non-violent conflict resolution, as is also stated in the school laws. ‘I find the idea that schools are also there to produce as many fit bodies as possible for the case of defence downright disturbing.’ [I’m kinda agreeing and disagreeing at the same time…] In recent years, the GEW has repeatedly taken a stand against the increasing influence of the Bundeswehr on schools [well, perhaps the teachers’ union wishes to weigh in on the cheap graphic novel agit-prop sent to high school graduates, then?]

Michael Krüger himself does not want to be put in the militaristic corner in an interview with the taz. He is the last person who wants to see Prussian drill in PE lessons, he explains.

Hand grenade throwing should not be reintroduced. School sport remains a civilian matter, despite its warlike nature.

In his commentary, he also refers to the merits of Carlo Schmid, a social democrat and one of the ‘fathers of the Basic Law’ of the Federal Republic of Germany, who, together with others in West Germany, gave physical education a new ethical legitimacy and turned his back on the unfortunate tradition of viewing physical education as preparatory training for military fitness.

Lack of Debate

Krüger makes it clear that he does not want to give any prescriptions for a different organisation of PE lessons:

I want to clarify the self-image of the subject. School sport is subject to a state educational mandate. In a liberal and democratic constitutional state, this also includes the defence of these democratic and liberal values and principles. In addition to education for democracy, this also includes the physical training of pupils.

This dimension of physical education has been lost sight of in West Germany in particular.

Perhaps Michael Krüger’s musings should also be seen in the context of the recent debate on how performance-orientated physical education should still be [can’t have that debate in a woke-fied, equity-thumping society where everyone gets a medal for showing up]. Whether the measurement and assessment in national youth games does not contribute to discrimination against bodies that do not conform to the norm [see what I mean? The taz immediately introduces this nonsense, and they subvert any kind of debate]. Whether sports lessons should not become even more playful. Pistorius’ talk of suitability for war could provide a welcome direction and also offers a favourable opportunity to attribute increased importance to one’s own subject.

Martina Schmerr finds the lack of debate both among the magazine’s readers and within the sports teachers' organisation irritating. ‘I would like to see a professional and controversial debate on this topic.’ [that is, on changing the way PE is taught, not the merits of having more paramilitary content, because that’s the prerogative of the state].

---

Rules for Thee, But not for Me

In lieu of the conventional bottom lines, I shall briefly contrast the above-related notions with what German legacy media has written about the same topic—in Russia.

First up, state broadcaster MDR introduced a piece (published 30 Sept. 2024) about this kind of subject in Russian schools as follows:

Combat drones, machine guns, love of country. Starting this school year, military training is returning to Russian schools with a new subject. Soldiers who have returned from the war against Ukraine will be among those teaching the subject. Where indoctrination and denunciation become part of everyday life, parents and teachers are also looking for ways to escape.

Three weeks earlier (5 Sept. 2024), Deutschlandfunk published an op-ed about the same topic and opened in the following way:

Education for Patriotism and Dependency [orig. Unmündigkeit]

Starting this new school year, patriotic education will be part of the curriculum in Russia. Author Alexander Estis, who grew up in Russia, fears that this will fuel anti-Western resentment: more aggressive than during the Cold War.

And, finally, the Bundeszentrale für Politische Bildung, Germany’s official textbook/info provider for all that’s fit to be taught and printed, wrote this piece and published it on 22 Jan. 2024:

Analysis: How ‘good Russian patriots’ are moulded: Education, indoctrination and the youth in Russia

In order to secure the support of young Russians for the war, the Kremlin relies on militarised youth organisations such as the ‘Yunarmiya’.

I’ll spare us all the rest of this.

You see, it’s bad™ if ze Rooskies do this, but it’s required, if not necessary, to do the same thing to ‘defence our values and principles’.

Sure, epimetheus, this is a clear case of whataboutism and double-standards, one might argue. I agree—the hypocrisy is mind-bending, and I doubt that those who write such pieces are clear-eyed enough to understand that they’ve been had.

I suppose we may now talk about specks and beams once more.

What a shit-show.