A new book by Die Zeit's deputy 'politics' desk head shows how low journos™ have fallen, and if his 'arguments™' are any indication, we're still quite far away from the intellectual bottom
I've been mulling over the thought that we're re-doing the 1880-1920 period, but I'm starting to think that was too optimistic. Rather, it seems we're experiencing the pre-Battle of Hastings gradual transition from tribal democracy to feudalism, but in decades rather than centuries.
Details will obviously vary with exactly where one choose to look: Uppsala in 650AD was a much different place than Lutetia, Trento or Miklagård.
I wonder if the cited author can define democracy at all? He reads as a 14-year old "communist" trying to defend DDR as a democracy since they had elections.
Oh, the quality of the writing is piss-poor, no doubt about that--I'm glad you also spotted this 'despite' my translation.
On pp. 15-16, under the header 'What is Democracy?', Mr. Schieritz notes that 'it is not democracy *per se* that's under threat' adding that 'what is at stake here is a specific historic [here the author reveals his dialectic-materialist faith] manifestation: the *liberal democracy* of Western countries as it developed under post-[WW2-]conditions…' (note that there are some emphases that I indicate with asterisks)
Hence, there's no definition to discuss here; what I'd add is that, given the above-detailed ties between Mr. Schieritz' employer, Germany's 'establishment™', and the Transatlantic Empire, it's obvious why the sycophantic, self-identifying-as-VIPs 'journos™' write such BS: they believe these notions akin to articles of faith (which is also why I think your last sentence makes a lot of sense).
This sentiment from the sources you astutely mention and those in the US like Kerry,Hilary,who think there is "too much freedom" -with the first amendment that curtails "consensus"-and economist Paul Klugman, telling US citizens that they are too dumb to think that the economy isn't doing great and their fears of falling through the cracks are unfounded,reminds me of the condescending way the state and some men used to talk about women:not rational,unable to make reasoned and sound decisions ergo not listened to and dismissed.
btw: it's not "Doermer Knaur" (2x) or "Doemer Knaur" (1x) - (but Droemer Knaur), - little flaws in an otherwise masterpiece, thank you for that, another mucking out of the Augean Stables, you've nailed it, thank you I don't have to read the book ( I'd have to puke all the time).
Thank you for reading my piece that attentively--you're correct about these mishaps and I've double-checked all mentions, fixing the typos you noted.
I told a journalist-friend of mine about the posting who replied with a two texts:
First, she linked to a brief comment in the alt-media outlet Kontrafunk (full disclosure: I occasionally appear on that platform) broadcast dated 9 Jan. 2025, specifically to Cora Stephan's consideration of Mark Schieritz' book:
I've been mulling over the thought that we're re-doing the 1880-1920 period, but I'm starting to think that was too optimistic. Rather, it seems we're experiencing the pre-Battle of Hastings gradual transition from tribal democracy to feudalism, but in decades rather than centuries.
Details will obviously vary with exactly where one choose to look: Uppsala in 650AD was a much different place than Lutetia, Trento or Miklagård.
I wonder if the cited author can define democracy at all? He reads as a 14-year old "communist" trying to defend DDR as a democracy since they had elections.
Oh, the quality of the writing is piss-poor, no doubt about that--I'm glad you also spotted this 'despite' my translation.
On pp. 15-16, under the header 'What is Democracy?', Mr. Schieritz notes that 'it is not democracy *per se* that's under threat' adding that 'what is at stake here is a specific historic [here the author reveals his dialectic-materialist faith] manifestation: the *liberal democracy* of Western countries as it developed under post-[WW2-]conditions…' (note that there are some emphases that I indicate with asterisks)
Hence, there's no definition to discuss here; what I'd add is that, given the above-detailed ties between Mr. Schieritz' employer, Germany's 'establishment™', and the Transatlantic Empire, it's obvious why the sycophantic, self-identifying-as-VIPs 'journos™' write such BS: they believe these notions akin to articles of faith (which is also why I think your last sentence makes a lot of sense).
This sentiment from the sources you astutely mention and those in the US like Kerry,Hilary,who think there is "too much freedom" -with the first amendment that curtails "consensus"-and economist Paul Klugman, telling US citizens that they are too dumb to think that the economy isn't doing great and their fears of falling through the cracks are unfounded,reminds me of the condescending way the state and some men used to talk about women:not rational,unable to make reasoned and sound decisions ergo not listened to and dismissed.
I noticed—isn’t it ironic that it is Hillary Clinton who’s cited as ‘evidence’ here?
btw: it's not "Doermer Knaur" (2x) or "Doemer Knaur" (1x) - (but Droemer Knaur), - little flaws in an otherwise masterpiece, thank you for that, another mucking out of the Augean Stables, you've nailed it, thank you I don't have to read the book ( I'd have to puke all the time).
Thank you for reading my piece that attentively--you're correct about these mishaps and I've double-checked all mentions, fixing the typos you noted.
I told a journalist-friend of mine about the posting who replied with a two texts:
First, she linked to a brief comment in the alt-media outlet Kontrafunk (full disclosure: I occasionally appear on that platform) broadcast dated 9 Jan. 2025, specifically to Cora Stephan's consideration of Mark Schieritz' book:
https://kontrafunk.radio/de/sendung-nachhoeren/politik-und-zeitgeschehen/kontrafunk-aktuell/kontrafunk-aktuell-vom-9-januar-2025#id-article (if you understand German, it's the 'Kommentar' at the end of the broadcast)
Second, she told me she's ordered a review copy from the publisher and added a lol emoji.
I had similar feelings when I read his self-promotion in the current ZEIT yesterday.
https://www.file-upload.net/en/download-15448133/Schieritz.jpg.html
Ah, it's already 'there'--what a 'conincidence™', eh?
To be honest as soon as I read this person graduated from the LSE the rest of the article was no surprise.
Exactly my thoughts.
And then there's the entire collusion between the usual suspects--it's amazing how these things are 'hidden in plain sight', isn't it?