Habe gerade den SWR-Beitrag zum Thema Cybermobbing gehört. Ziemlich dumm. Warum? Weil Mobbing - genauer: Beleidigen, Verhöhnen, Nötigen, Angreifen, Kränken und Quälen - nicht neu ist, sondern steinalt.
Jede Generation hatte zu jeder Zeit Alpha- und Omega-Akteure, ganz besonders in den Schulklassen, in denen sich die Persönlichkeiten und Sozialstrukturen erst experimental-spielerisch entwickeln. Die Zahlen im Cybermobbing sind - so schätze ich - nicht größer oder kleiner als vorher im realen Leben auch. Sie sind allerdings erstmalig Institutionalisiert und vor allem erstmalig nahezu Lückenlos und qualitativ hochwertig erfasst.
"Cybermobbing" sollte gerade von Pädagogen nicht als Bedrohung, sondern als Segen erachtet werden. Erst durch die allumfassende Protokollierung wird das Phänomen doch erst erfassbar! Die Frage ist, wollen wir das Leid der Omega-Kinder sehen, wollen wir gegen diese Bully-Alpha-Kinder etwas unternehmen und wollen wir dazu wirklich das Internet als Big Brother nutzen?

Done!

I'm done. And it's too late to tell me otherwise.

In the last week, I did hand in my bachelor thesis, de-register at Uni, dissolve my flat, merge its interior with my old playroom and register at my new Uni for a MA.

While we all wait for my graduation (let's hope I'm not too self-confident), you can already read my BA- thesis online (German), or help translate in English, so the rest of the world can read as well.

Best wishes!

Where have you been that day?

Ten years ago, at 9/11, I was on a class trip to Italy. Yes, you read right, I’ve basically been on holyday!

When a day after the attacks one of my classmates ran around, frantically shouting that the WTC was down, no one took it serious. We probably didn’t listen because the guy was a fool.

My classmates and I just asked: “So what? They’re just buildings – okay damn big skyscrapers – but they’ll be rebuild and people will forget.”

I’ve certainly been too naive back than.

Ex post I recognize that people were afraid be the next target. Being Venice in September however, there was no reason to wonder where all the other tourists have been to. Since no one of us knew Italian, we had no access to radio or TV. No one was up to date informed.

At some point however, we had to wait somewhere: Standing around, doing nothing, is a drag for every pubescent guy. Soon my eye caught a glimpse at a newsstand. Papers from all over the world pictured in bright colors the deaths of 3,000 men and women on front page. It was then, that we realized the scale – and still didn’t care. Newspapers were uncool und and sooo last century.

Just like my classmate – who couldn’t convince us, about the importance of that incident – I think that the importance of the USA for the world has promoted the attack: It was not the message that was important for me back than, it was the messenger.

Have I been the fool back then? Am I a fool now?

I now conclude my study of politics. Not because of 9/11, but because phenomena like it change our perception on the world. Today – exactly ten years later – there is a local election going on. I therefore perform the most sanctuary act of democracy, by joining the poll as a voter. And while I put my cross on the sheet, I think about Norway’s way to handle terror.

Where have you been that day?

“Like” and “Share” prohibited

Last week a nice fellow from Schleswig-Holstein demanded to fine every German company that holds a webpage equipped with a “like” or “share” button. The name of this man is Thilo Weichert and he is the state’s data protection commissioner. The reason for his demand is the dubious doing of Facebook concerning the data of its users. Because he can’t fine Facebook because it claims multinational jurisdiction, it’s far easier to fine those who fall definitely under German law. Good reason and good thought so far!

However, even the federal chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel, most of her cabinet and parliament have accounts at Facebook and Webpages with “like” buttons, as Jeff Jarvis recognizes (G+ 20.08.2011 14:21). Does Weichert really want to sue all of Germany, his own bosses included?

There is another thing: Google and Facebook rearrange the Web. Since the Web is to big to be crawled on your own, these companies provide services to assist your virtual activities. While Google knows best about searching, Facebook provides functions to arrange things that have already been found. I.e. : 20 years ago there was something called billboard charts (since Amazon, it seams hard to remember, right?). Every sold single was counted and used to create a hit list, so everyone could see what’s good to listen to. Published wisely such lists created additional revenue and a common sense of participation and culture. Facebook does the same: People who find something on the web, tend to tell people about it. “like” and “share” buttons are the sophisticated version of hit lists. They not only tell you, what everyone likes, but what you might like individually. That’s what makes the Web 2.0.

Weichert’s attempt maybe saves the day, but also sends us back to static webpages of Web. And where does it end? Laws are meant to be universal: If you do it once, you better do it for all. That would mean ban all recommendation buttons as well. Platforms like digg, G+, reddit, etc. would be erased. In the end someone might have the idea to prohibit the address bar because you could write of the web address and recommend it manually! Usually I’m with the data protection commissioners, but that’s just bullshit once again. I guess Weichert is just aiming for attention, to be granted the chair of Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information of Germany, which has to be reassigned in about two years.

Offener Brief an den Partei-Bundesvorsitzenden der F.D.P.

Sehr geehrter Herr Rösler,

warum haben Sie nicht endlich offen ausgesprochen, was bereits in ihrem Parteinamen verankert ist? Warum sagen Sie nicht offen und ehrlich “was Sache” ist?

Im ARD-Sommerinterview (in Bericht aus Berlin) fragte Sie der Reporter Herr Reinald Becker:

“… Herr Rösler, die Frage an den FDP Parteivorsitzenden muss doch in dem Zusammenhang lauten: Warum wendet sich Ihre Partei immer so vehement gegen schärfere Kontrollen im Internet? Da kommunizieren diese Gewalttäter. Müssten Sie sich nicht vor dem Hintergrund dieser Geschehnisse in Norwegen gerade jetzt bewegen?”

Ich hätte erwartet, dass Sie zu ihrer Partei stehen und vehement opponieren. Es hätte auf Risiken aufmerksam aufmerksam gemacht werden können und an Chancen appelliert werden müssen. Sie hätten darauf hinweisen müssen, dass Regulierungen meist mehr Nach- als Vorteile haben.

Sie hätten argumentieren können, dass das Internet eine Plattform zur freien Kommunikation und Informationsverbreitung ist. Bereits jetzt gibt es Gruppen, die dies mit hohen informationstechnischen Kenntnissen und politischen Interesse einfordern (z.B. Anonymous, LulzSec, Chaos Computer Club). Jede Restriktion der Freiheiten im Netz fördert doch die Gefahr, dass Deutschland sich diese Gruppen zum Feind macht; dass sich radikale Zellen bilden und dann echter Cyberterrorismus mit deutschen Know-How entsteht!

Sie hätten herausheben müssen, dass Extremisten und Terroristen nicht mit Waffengewalt, Richtsprüchen oder Gesetzen aus unserer Gesellschaft entfernt werden können. Es wird immer Menschen geben, die aus religiösen, extrem linken oder rechten politischen Motiven, aus Gründen des Umweltschutzes, persönlicher Erfahrung, geistiger Instabilität etc. eine Spur von Tod und Zerstörung hinterlassen. Diese Menschen müssen aber nicht entfernt werden! Sie müssen bekehrt werden. Wir müssen ein offenes Ohr und ein offenes Herz für diese verwirrten Seelen haben, um sie auf “unsere” Seite ziehen zu können. Das gilt für das persönliche Gespräch, die Medien und auch das Internet.

Sie wiesen statt dessen auf die Balance zwischen Sicherheit und Freiheit hin: 

“Aber eines zeigen die Ereignisse deutlich: Eine freie Gesellschaft kann nur dann frei bleiben, wenn man weiß, dass man seine Freiheitsrechte nicht über Bord werfen darf, wenn man sich schützen will. Und genau das tun wir. Wir versuchen immer wieder die richtige Balance zu finden, zwischen Freiheit in der Gesellschaft auf der einen Seite und notwendige Sicherheit auch auf der anderen Seite. …”

Das ist nobel, verschenkt jedoch die Gelegenheit sich zu profilieren und endlich ein Zeichen in der Netzpolitik zu setzen. Sie hätten darauf bestehen müssen, das Internet nicht zu regulieren, und die Menschen animieren müssen sich in offenen Diskussionen zu engagieren. Das Internet ist ein Musterbeispiel für den liberalen Austausch und Demokratie. Die Beschneidung dieser Institution wäre ein Angriff auf die freiheitlichen-demokratischen Grundwerte Deutschlands und sind mit den Werten Ihrer Freiheitlich-Demokratischen Partei nicht zu vereinen.

Das hätten Sie in die Kameras und in die Gesichter der Deutschen sagen müssen. Gekommen ist jedoch nur heiße Luft und kalter Kaffe. Das war zu wenig, Herr Rösler.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
--
ein besorgter Bürger

Bank-rupt-cy

Germany is the biggest economy and therefore the biggest spender for bankrupt EU member states. Just to get things clear:

1. Nations are for providing a framework for their people to live in free.
2. Therefore nations take money from their people to spend it for them.
3. Therefore countries can’t go bankrupt (AAA+) !

However, since #3 seams not to be right anymore we have to ask “why?”. The answer is simple: globalized economies. Even though, sceptics want to turn back time on this phenomena it exists as long as humans trade. All countries around the world trade with each other with their taxpayers money. If they are lucky there is a jackpot to be won. However, it is also the reason why letting down Greece, Spain, Italy, Iceland or any other isn’t such a good idea.

Remember what happened after Lehman went down? It could get far worse if any of the western countries should fail. So what should be done instead? We should re-evaluate the list from above in reversed order:

1. Pay your debts!
   • If necessary lend yourself money, to pay the debts by other debts, but keep an eye upon the interests
   • You’ll need all support you can get!
2. If you can’t, try to lower your debts:
   • If banks can’t spare some percentages, they’ll lose it all
3. If it doesn’t work, you’ll still have to ensure the framework doesn’t collapse:
   • Ensure jobs
   • Provide at least basic services
   • Keep social security running
   • Make your people confident in the future!
4. If you fail the above civil war wont be stoppable!

Now talking about Greece, we’re already up to number 2. The EU has lend money and gives out guarantees. However, the new CCC-rated nations of the western world are so deeply indebted that giving money can’t fix the situation anymore. Therefore it could be argued it’ll be wise to make banks waive some of their claims. However, that would be a sign of weakness and things could turn out more messy then they already are – say the rating agencies and stock market analysts.

I was pleasantly surprised when I heard German job agencies where advertising in nations with too many skilled personal in the sectors of German employment gaps, to help each other economies. Even though this is just dislocating the problems instead of solving them, it buys valuable time if done properly. More important then throwing tax payers’ money out the window and lowering the debts is keeping Greece together. The demonstrations have already turned violent. What would happen if Greece would get bankrupt? There would be a civil war caused by a spreading disease in the middle of Europe!

Thesis. Bachelor. A.

What do I do with my spare time? I write. Something like this.

I write essays, notes, posts, lists, code and … my thesis. However, it takes some time to get the material. So you either need a very colourful – nude – life or you have to keep yourself updated to mash some stuff up.

My tutor says, I have to make notes. Everything that sticks to the eye, lights up the mind or is of the slightest interest, has to be written down before it’s forgotten.

For my bachelor thesis I took it literally. Writing it all in LaTeX, I first realized bibliographic entries, abstracts and quotes for every article, book or webpage findable. At least till the point I recognised the effort and decided to plot down links instead of full bibliographic information whenever possible. Now there are more then 100 pages of data and still researching to be done. For my thesis I still can’t cover all necessary fields with high quality material.

You might think: Is this guy mad?! Hundred pages of material is enough for three thesis! Get done with it already!

Actually I would have done it anyway. The choice for the subject Safety and Security in the Information Age wasn’t just for my addiction for proper puzzles. For me this is fun! It is a subject rarely anyone has written anything scientifically relevant about it. To find and connect sources of the analogue and digital ages gives me a certain kind of pleasure. It literally brought me from a state I wrote more than I read, to a productive academic workflow.

So, what do I do with my study time? I read. Something like this.

Year of democracy?

2001: Two airplanes crash and kill 3000 people. The aftermath of this tragedy was more than just cleaning up und burring the dead. It was a turning point in democracy. It triggered measures to ensure security by limiting liberties. The "war on terror" was a war on democracy. It hindered peace in the world and recreated the state prior to the fall of the iron certain. But instead of West and East, it was a crusade against Islamic. The credo US President G.W. Bush declared was clear: "With or against us".

Within weeks, the year 2011, became another turning point for democracy. Instead of a cowboy madman a black youngster rests in the White House. He became a symbol for a new hope and is just the tip of the iceberg. Tunisia, Egypt and Libya showed the world how potent people can get, if they are willing for real changes. And yesterday the man who gave the reason for the democratic downturn died: Osama bin Laden.

However, we shouldn’t judge the situation too fast. The wars in the middle east aren’t over yet. The devastation is going to need aid for decades, while the soldiers meant to peace the region only evoke more insecurity with their presence. The terror organizations won’t die out, just because one man is down and the democratization of the revolting countries isn’t yet done. To conclude, we have potentially reached the tipping point. We can still fall back in medieval circumstances. However, if this works out well, this year will be written in very big letters in the history books.

The deadly stalemate in Libya

I just saw the news. On Easter the pope spoke about Libya and a day later bombs fell close to the man everyone seems to love-hate.
Of course, what happens there is war and no war is "nice". But is it just? Is there a good reason to fight or get involved in fighting? Peace protesters around the world say no. Human Rights groups say we had to protect the weak, innocent and endangered. Some add: by force, if necessary.
Let me put it another way: You know I’m German. It is a duty to me, to keep the lecture of my countries bitter past alive. It's not because of me, but because of the victims it took. However, about a month ago Germany didn’t take part in the election about the Libyan question. The press was enraged Germany had indirectly violated humanity once again, but they didn't analyse the alternatives. Saying yes meant to send in troops - which is since WW2 no option for Germany - to liberate the Libyan people from its "mad" leader, while saying no meant to stand idly by and watch them die. But why do neither?

Conflict statistics say every war endures longer and draws more blood from the involved the more foreign help is involved. In other words: It doesn’t matter if you aid the Libyan rebels with money, food, weapons or whatever, in the end the war will become more painful. The alternative would be not to helping, which is equivalent to let the rebels die. Still, this unnecessary bloodshed and violation of human rights would have stopped afterwards within a week without any further incident. Of course this outcome is of no one’s favour, since social networks and well networked human rights organisations would publicise the murder immediately worldwide like it’s been done several times already. Not helping would therefore mean to be identified as a supporter of the Libyan dictatorship, which is unacceptable after the incidents in Tunisia and Egypt.

So now the NATO is supporting the rebels by putting bombs on military aims and having an eye on the Libyan air force, weaponry and logistics. Is it much? Yes and no, because on one hand the equipment used therefore is some of the most expensive toys militaries can play with while on the other hand not a single soldier is sent to set a food on Libyan territory (yet), which would be the magical threshold to actual name it a war against Libya. And while the NATO goes on bombing journalists say, the rebels’ only chance to make any move is more help from the allied forces. That means if we go on like this there will be stalemate that will last until a (un)lucky incident decides the conflict or it’ll last forever.
An invasion – and "going in" means nothing else – means to be absorbed in violence and if you can win you have to rebuild the nation you just destroyed. As we can see in the Middle East, even though the US Army could take over within a minimum of time, conflicts and rebuilding might take decades to be ended.
So if can neither going in, out or going on are right decisions, what can be done? The last card to play – or the first and longest to be played – is diplomacy. War IS ALWAYS the last resort. Diplomacy however is a modern, logic and – most importantly – the least bloody way to settle conflicts. Being democratically raised in the western world, I don’t see any alternative to it. Still, diplomacy is the art of words and they haven’t achieved anything yet. There are offers discussed in the news, so that the uniformed camper can retire in peace and without going to court, but the fights go on. Am I the only one recognizing that this is going nowhere peaceful as long as Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi isn’t "retired"?

No I'm not. Everyone with half his brain active knows the cause and who's the most responsible. However, this man isn't a puppeteer holding all the strings. Just some of the most important and someone will take over if he falls. So things are far more complicated than a couple of lines in a Blog can show, but that doesn't change anything about the most important question:
What would you do?

Ginger's no girl for me

Just yesterday a young woman comes my way, asking me if I’d been interested in taking part of a student’s survey. I know the game. Did it myself: wrote a concept, made a questionnaire, ran around bothering strangers and put a report together. Now what was this about?

"What kind of girlfriend are you looking for?" Ginger's first question was about. I confess, I'm neither the perfect gentleman nor a good house husband. Couch, TV and my PC take the best of me, even though I'm trying really hard. However, the question pointed in the direction of fortune polls you find in women's magazines. You know the kind of "What kind of person are you and where will you find the perfect man?!"
None the less, I had to give an answer. What does she want to hear? What did she think when she designed the questionnaire?
"She should be self-determined."
Of course, Ginger wasn't satisfied. I figure, she wanted to hear something like "blond, big breasts, thin, nude and willing", but I'm not that bad. She enquired what I meant, hoping to get some more results. As a happy single and someone who's actually more interested in finding than searching, the only answer I could give her was, that I couldn't do with someone who doesn't have a mind of his her own.

However, in reality it's like this: When I was at college, there were classes just for teachers, nurses and hairdressers that were usually just enrolled to by women. Each year more than fifty students enrolled just for one course, of which 95% been female, between sixteen to twenty years old and not very bright (if they were, they wouldn't have been there). After two years only fifteen of the fifty made it to last test. Most of the rest dropped out, at least half of them because of pregnancy. Of course that's their thing to found a family and give new live, but typically those mothers are faster at the end of the road than any other group. Most of them never go to school again, will never have a qualification and will only work in awkward jobs, if they'll work at all. Without work, they are not able to pay into the pension font. Without that, they will have a minimal pension and bad insurance. Only chance out is – and hasn't changed in Germany for decades - the formally acknowledged husband. Since marriage gets out of fashion these days and every third couple splits up, I wonder how these women will live when they've reached a certain age, when they are completely dependent on their role as wife and mother.
While the husbands earn money by traveling, meeting people and doing all sorts of things they are later able to relate to, women tend to throw their world traveling dreams over board. The only people they meet regularly then are family members, the parents of their kids’ friends and the hosts of the afternoon talk shows. Basically it's a self-inflicted social exile and it's not only done by the stupid, it's also done by the well educated. They achieve the best grades (better then men), have ambitious aims and then – when they are finally at a position to leave an impression - withdraw to family. *sigh*
Best thing: When it comes to splitting up such women rise to their best by developing a high capacity for the legal system. Particularly in laws governing divorce, alimony and child care they become experts and fight like lions. It's hard not to sympathize when family is everything for them. *more sighing*

Okay, shame on me! As a man I'm of the obnoxious half of the human species. I'm obviously neither able to empathize nor do I have an idea about the double burden of motherhood and career. But it worked with my upbringing and Mom's from – you know – the last millennium. It sickens me, to have to play to the standards of families' bread-earner role model while it's the hundredths International Women's Day. I have no reason to look for an attractive young woman, who would willingly degenerate her self-esteem and visions, by throwing away her career to care for children and household. That sort of female devotion is men-kind's oldest version of slavery. Thanks, but no thanks.

No idea what's going to happen in the next decade or so, but I want a woman who lives self-reliant and I don't like the idea of keeping a human pet. Instead I register one Barbie doll after another and become frustrated when I encounter surveys like Ginger's. Of course I didn’t tell her all this in detail, but if you like to know more about how society creates self destroying females, you may watch "Killing Us Softly 4" by Jean Kilbourne I embedded below.

Women and Advertising from Hienz on Vimeo.

Islam, der deutsche Garten und Kochrezepte

Ich habe grade wiedermal eine Zusammenfassung des letzten Jahres an mir vorüberziehen lassen – bei so viel Flaute in der Flimmerkiste kann man nicht von „ansehen“ sprechen – und da kam ganz selbstverständlich das Zitat des Bundespräsidenten Wulf über die Zugehörigkeit des Islams zu Deutschland drin vor. Ich hatte das erste meiner beiden Ohren noch nicht ganz offen, da musste ich als Kommentar von einem glücklichen Protestanten hören, dass der Islam aufgrund seiner zahlreichen Vertreter zwar einen reellen Stellenwert in Deutschland habe, ja doch aber keinesfalls dazu gehöre!

Das klang wie bei einem schlechten Kochrezept und jagte mir einen Schauer über den Rücken: Hatte diese Person tatsächlich von „dazugehören“ gesprochen? Vielleicht hatte ich mich ja verhört, aber so viel Naivität im Fernsehen wundert mich schon lange nicht mehr. Nur ums klarzustellen: Die Gestaltung dieses Landes will ich weder Gärtnern noch von Köchen überlassen!

Es gibt beim Thema „dazugehören“ vielleicht zwei wichtige Ansätze, die man kennen und unterscheiden können sollte. Beide zielen auf das mehr oder minder aktive Gestalten des Staates ab und halte ich für sehr gefährlich. Den Ansatz mit dem Gärtnern hat Deutschland einst mit sehr großem Elan und überragenden Erfolg betrieben. Es geht dabei darum, dass der Staat sich einem Gärtner gleich aussucht welches Kraut; welche Blume, Büsche, Bäume und Tiere, in seinem Garten aufhalten dürfen und welche nicht. Ganz Herr der Lage, kultiviert er das eine und rottet das andere aus. Das Problem ist nur, dass der Deutsche Garten vor ca. 70 Jahren nicht jedermanns Geschmack war, vor allem nicht jener die dem „Unkraut-Ex“ zum Opfer fielen bzw. deren Angehörigen. Dies führte seinerzeit zu Verhandlungen über die gestalterischen Freiheiten von Staatsgärtnern, welche aufgrund ihrer großen Beliebtheit bis heute in unvernünftiger Regelmäßigkeit ein ums andere Mal neu Inszeniert werden. Und auch wenn’s zynisch ist, so bleibt doch der Schluss, dass der Holocaust ein „Running Gag“ der Geschichte ist, den wir einer gewissen Unbelehrbarkeit der Menschen verdanken – man kann sich ja nicht immer für alles interessieren.

Der zweite Ansatz – der des Kochs – ist ein ähnlicher. Es ist genau dieser Ansatz dessen dieser theologisch aufgeklärte Protestant sich zwischen den Zeilen bediente: In eine bestimmte Speise gehören einfach bestimmte Sachen rein und andere eben nicht. Eine Schwarzwälder Kirschtorte besteht aus Sahne, Kirschen, Kirschwasser und mehrere Schokoladenbiskuitböden. Man kann das Mischungsverhältnis leicht ändern oder was ergänzen, aber weglassen oder völlig umzugestalten ist tabu! Was wäre beispielsweise eine Torte mit mehr Kirschen als Biskuit? Allenfalls ein Fruchtdessert mit Schoko und Sahne, aber keine Torte! Rezepte sind was das angeht wie Eisenstangen: Man kann sie biegen, um daraus was Schönes zu fertigen, aber man muss gewaltig aufpassen, dass man sie nicht zerbricht.

Was passiert nun also mit dem Rezept, wenn man es ändern muss? – Wenn man also gezwungen wird, die Stange soweit zu verbiegen, dass sie bersten muss?? Was passiert wenn im Zeitalter dynamisch globalisierter Businessmen und -Women die kleinen Sünden aus der Mode geraten? Wenn süße Schokolade, fettige Sahne und der Geist aus der Flasche dem Zeitgeist weichen müssen? Dann kann man entweder sein Rezept anpassen oder – weil Diätschokolade und fettreduzierte Sahne auch mit Alkohol keinen Geschmack mehr entwickeln – das Projekt in die Vergessenheit entlassen. Bye-bye Schwarzwälder Kirschtorte, war lecker mit dir.

Sehen Sie lieber Leser, der Grund warum mich diese Debatte so frustriert, ist, dass die Personen, die sie führen, scheinbar vergessen haben, warum Köche und Gärtner dieses Land und sein Leute bereits einmal in den Abgrund reisen konnten. Es hat lange gedauert, bis Deutschland sich wieder nach oben ziehen konnte, und jetzt, wo es wieder über den Klippenrand schielen kann, stehen ihm diese Scharlatane auf den Fingern und fragen: „Kann ich helfen? – Hunger? – Willst’e Blume kaufe‘?“

Aber warum mache ich mir die Mühe, das alles über den Umweg mit dem Gärtner zu beschreiben? Weil man einen Garten – genauso wie ein Kochrezept – auch nach Vorschrift gestalten kann. Hätte das dritte Reich länger als eine Generation überlebt, dann hätten die Leute angefangen den Garten-Deutschland nach jenem zeitgenössischem Kochbuch zu bestellen, das ihnen ihr Führer hinterlassen hatte. Denn jedes Rezept ist eine Doktrin: Es definiert was ist, was soll und was nicht. Es sortiert die guten von den schlechten Früchten und sagt welche wohin gehören. Kochrezepte sind die Übersteigerung des Holocaust auf eine der trivialsten Kleinigkeit unseres täglichen Lebens: Essen.

Die Wahrheit ist, dass Deutschland keine Torte ist: Man backt dieses Land nicht aus Christen und einer Prise Juden; dem Mittelstand und einer Handvoll gut ausgebildeter Akademiker. Wer das behauptet oder auch nur andeutet, der bereitet jenen den Weg, die das Unkraut-Ex wieder an Menschen statt an Pflanzen anwenden wollen. Deutschland ist auch kein Garten, zumindest keiner der einen Gärtner brauchen sollte. Wenn sich hier Muslime ansiedeln wollen, dann sollen sie das dürfen! Sie sollen sich beteiligen, einbringen und äußern können. Und ich ermuntere jeden den ich treffe, das auch zu tun – auch unbequem wenn’s sein muss. Denn nur wenn wir kommunizieren – uns miteinander austauschen – und als Resultat daraus zwangsläufig in Konflikte geraten aber ebenso zwangsläufig aufeinander abfärben; nur dann können wir eine Gesellschaft bilden.

Denn Kochrezepte sind nicht nur wie Eisenstangen oder der Holocaust, sondern auch wie Monokulturen: Sie sind anfällig für Veränderungen und geraten dann schnell aus der Mode.