Who are you, the Germans? Ultimately, the central conflict and break lines of these days probably result. Behind the dispute over migration (how much?), Fire walls (what high?), Economic competitiveness (how strong?), Cultural coherence (how foreign?) Or Donald Trump (how brazen?) There is once again the great need of our country to make sure of himself. What is Germany, what should Germany make out – internally and outwards? The saying of Goethe’s “no nation, least of all the German, has not been formed” at the moment. Of course, these questions were and are always present, they are in many small and large decisions of individual, groups and institutions, in personal life plans as well as in party programs. But it’s about more. The economy is in the structure of the structure, the political landscape is fundamentally changing, the technical progress shifts so far existing boundaries of thinking, measurable and predictable. The inflationary use of the word turn is an indication of this. A different expression is more appropriate. The physicist and philosopher Fritjof Capra once called such a phase. The scientific theorist Thomas S. Kuhn would have referred to them as a paradigm shift. It is about more than a single change, more than the invention of the plastic bag, the light bulb, tutoring lessons or the queue, not a single idea, norm or knowledge. There is a broad, many topics of extensive movement, the individual elements of which sometimes do not even notice that they are actually related. There is real rethinking, a different way of taking up the world, reconstructing and interpreting it intellectually. There is a lot to say that we are in such a phase. In itself, this is not bad at first, something like this occurred in history, almost everywhere. Then the Greens and the G20 for example in the 1960s and 1970s came. In many places, people began to question the environment and their protection at the center, whether the common economy remains sustainable, nuclear power is acceptable and growth reaches natural limits. At the same time, women visibly freely freed themselves out of them, prevailed, the insight prevailed that sexuality encompasses more than the marriage between men and women. The reductionist, analyzing, controlling perception was dominated by René Descartes for a long time. In the mechanical physics of Isaac Newton, it continued, which fit perfectly for industrial mass production and the common medicine, which was created for repair – with further achievements for many people. A different perspective now came to your side. One that rather rely on cooperating, integrating, including, because literally is perhaps related to everything. And the aimed at not primarily dividing those involved in conflicts into the winners and losers, but looking for solutions that all better or at least nobody worse. Not only in this country the current overwhelmed the forces established at the time. Here and there, these tried tentative to record the topics. However, they could not prevent the Greens from even forming a significant new party that moved into the parliaments and remained. A party that was and is also not a homogeneous monolithic opinion. And that produced some curious career – Joschka Fischers, as is well known, led from Frankfurt’s street fight over the Hessian Ministry of the Environment to the first Green Vice Chancellery. The world grew together, commercially, cultural, technically and politically. The Internet transported ideas and information everywhere and enabled the exchange with the very distant, gradually even at the level of the individual. In addition to the G7, the G20 joined the G20, China joined the world trade organization – the series of connecting examples could be continued. Discussion is the order of the day – also between the United States and Mexico. Laifwer hangs along the idea practiced in the west since the Enlightenment, to consider development as a rather linear progress agreement is possibly irritated by such dramatic phases of change. Anyone who is based on a Far Eastern philosophy of how it was created in China about two and a half thousand years ago could be less surprised. In the epoch at the time, which went down in history as the “time of the dispute”, warlords fought for dominance in this giant country, borders and rules changed permanently. Thinkers such as Confucius or Laotsse described which attitudes and actions help under such unforeseeable adversity if stability is not certain, but the opposite. From this, the perspective of understanding the political-social progress as a cycle was formed as a sequence of opposite but one-related tendencies (Yin and Yang). Such a cycle often lasts decades or even longer. Philosopher Capra coated this principle to the two contrasts integration and self -assertion. “These two tendencies are opposite and yet complementary. In a healthy system – an individual, a society or an ecosystem – integration and self -assertion are in balance. This balance is not static, but consists of a dynamic interplay (…), which the entire system thinks flexible and open to change. ”As mentioned, we have long since occurred. It is primarily no longer about integration, but about self -assertion – often from fear of being able to assert yourself now or at some point. Much runs in a reflective and contradictory way to the previous phase. Again there is no topic or one group in which this is expressed. It is about the fear of economic relegation and excessive demands, about frustration with missed migration policy or everyday suicide. In the place of superstition, according to which a good solution has to be a complicated (“it is not that simple”), often the longing for simple answers, which of course do not have to be bad, just because they are simply. Because they can’t. Or because you don’t want to. This explains the influx, the new parties or movements that emphasize this time, geographically, mentally, moral. Some care for a rhetoric that is no longer characterized by win-win solutions that do not come to the fore together, but the separation. In which it is weak to show weakness. Many Europeans are particularly shocked by the American president. Because he openly pronounces that Greenland or Gaza Stripes or want to make Canada an American state, demands respect, announces superiority, thinking dissenters, thinks nothing about gender, puts decrees about compromise, loyalty about professionalism, the right of the strength of the right. And not as a dictator, but as a freely chosen head of state of the traditional protective power, which Europe once freed from the Nazis. Trump and his Vice President Vance speak the language of self -assertion, they are happy to hear their voters. And they also accept or even want the “new sheriff in the city” to expand the limits of the office if it has to be. Many who listen to the Atlantic on this side are speechless. You don’t understand. They lack words and perception meters. The Americans have a different worldview than we do, Federal President Steinmeier recently judged at the Munich Security Conference – although that is absolutely wrong: He, Steinmeier, has a different world view than Trump, which is certainly the case. For many Germans and many people in other European countries, however, this apparently no longer applies (more). You are now also in self -assertion mode. And sometimes hope for the AfD, on the FPÖ, on Meloni, Le Pen, Wilders. The American “National Guard” in Texas. Reuterswacher and more speaking than the political left are at least in Germany the classic conservatives that do not remember that these topics do not disappear if they keep it silent. The Union as the last remaining People’s Party, at least during the election campaign, was still very risky with Merz – and no longer with Merkel. In large parts of the country, only the CDU is between the AfD and the State Chancellery. The change is also perceptible in business, where the focus is inevitable at expense and competitors. Productivity (self-assertion) beats CO₂ neutrality or diversity programs (integration), location issues beat by redistribution. And also the technological progress flanked. Artificial intelligence is conceivable to shorten or replace democratic processes algorithmically. It means that machines become more human -like – and, vice versa, that people can be more mechanically thought and thus reduced to mechanical functionality. Technocratic solutions are often often compatible with authoritarians. Artificial intelligence could, too, are a sign, a global scientific community achievement. But it is not. Instead, it is the core of a billion dollar scaffolding that nobody wants to lose because it is clear that this is not just about commercial success, but also about military ones. How bad is that and will it be? Is it all a big correction movement or much more than that? How long does this turning time take? Nobody knows. Is the mood pre -revolutionary? Is now 1913? Or even in 1933? Are we sleepwalkers too? Is nationalism suitable as a reference point at the beginning of the 19th century? Or ancient thinkers such as Plato, Polybios or Thucydides, which considered changing forms of constitutional to the natural gait of things, because in every single the cause of their decline and some major conflict is inevitable? Or the Copernican turn? There is no lack of comparisons of meaningful comparisons that fall back on history. And they all help. Europe was brave enough to get involved with the heliocentric world view. And strong enough to take general human rights seriously as a foundation of values. It is efficient enough to survive during this turning time. Please do not misunderstand: everything is not great in and at Europe – but quite a bit. And after all, history does not just repeat itself one to one anyway. It is also not necessarily thought to the end when she took her worst possible turn – why should that be? The worries that many people in this country are justified and important. But nobody needs to be completely despondent. It still seems quite possible that this country will be a more satisfactory answer to the question in a few years: who are you, the Germans?
// Select the first 5 items from the shuffled array
const selectedItems = shuffledItems.slice(0, 5);
// Loop through the selected items and display them
selectedItems.forEach(post => {
const link = post.querySelector(“link”).textContent;
const description = post.querySelector(“description”).textContent;
// Create a new post element
const postElement = document.createElement(“div”);
postElement.classList.add(“latest-post”);
postElement.innerHTML = `
// Append the new post element to the container
latestPostsContainer.appendChild(postElement);
});
})
.catch(error => console.error(‘Error fetching the latest posts:’, error));
}
// Call the function to fetch and display the latest posts
fetchLatestPosts();
