IIs German actually the only language that chooses annual non-words every year? Is it because of compound words that German has produced a series of appalling structures such as “anchor center”, “corona dictatorship”, and “social tourism”, or is it the reactionary specter that plagues the language?
I want to add a simple one to the unspeakable monster: learn. Learning has become a buzzword. Today, people should learn something from everything, about their privileges, failed marriages and natural disasters. If you understand learning as making up for shortcomings, then learning is not a bad thing in the first place. For example, democratic systems are not perfect systems; they must continue to evolve to keep up with the pace of social change, while also protecting themselves from threats. However, learning must not be reduced to clichés, transferring social and political issues of racism, misogyny or anti-Semitism to the personal level. Cosmetics are not enough, and specific steps are needed.
It’s not impossible to stop them
Similar depoliticization also occurs when talking about terrorist attacks. Over time, we have increasingly dealt with individual perpetrators. The term “lone traveler” is not wrong in the beginning: a lone traveler is someone who plans and executes an attack alone. The Nazis called it “resistance without a leader.” Islamists relied on this strategy, and terrorist organizations such as IS called for attacks with knives or trucks. This is also related to the security policy precautions of the past few years that have made it more difficult to carry out large-scale attacks with many insiders. The lesson after 9/11 was only at the airport, during the long security check, we noticed it. But it is not impossible to stop individual perpetrators. According to terrorism expert Peter Neumann, it is estimated that 50% to 80% of people communicate their intentions in advance. The Breitscheidplatz Assassin in 2016 is known to the authorities, as is the Dresden Assassin in 2020. The individual perpetrators may belong to a terrorist organization, or they may be inspired or ideologicalized by a terrorist organization. If you look closely, most of the perpetrators are not alone.
However, it is a bad term to use “individual perpetrators” in the sense of “individual cases” because it is completely wrong. It is related to “mental illness” and is misleading. “Mental illness” does not mean “guilty”. “Mentally ill” does not mean “potential terrorists.” Therefore, if we only talk about “lone travelers” and “psychiatric patients,” it is despising and suppressing the political core of the behavior.
The perpetrators in Würzburg chanted “Allahu akbar”. During the interrogation, he talked about his contribution to the jihad. Allegedly, Islamic propaganda materials were found in his residence. All of this illustrates the attacks of Islamism. However, the investigation has not yet ended, and the culpability has not been finally verified. Like the previous terrorist attacks, now yelling on the Internet again-everyone was deported because of “knife immigration” (another bad word), Merkel was the culprit-and some leftists even avoided Consider Islamism. Instead, they prefer to talk about the toxic masculinity of the perpetrator, which probably worked. You are right to warn against crimes through encroachment on power, but you work very hard to relativize the Islamic motives for crimes. There was an awkward silence at the scene, as if this attack was just a freak of nature, and the victim was just collateral damage.
The boundaries are not between identity or culture, between whites and non-whites, between Muslims and non-Muslims, between refugees and Germans. It lies between an ideology that hates humans and the values of freedom and democracy. The latter was rejected by the right and Islamists. When we talk about Würzburg, we also have to talk about people who oppose the perpetrators (many of whom have a history of immigration). For example, Chia Rabiei, a Kurd from Iran, spent 17 months in Germany and controlled the perpetrators with a backpack. As a means of combating terrorism, civil society opposes Islamism. On the other hand, rights have no remedy for Islamism, even though most politics use it. They culturalized and racialized it, and misunderstood what it is: an anti-modern, global aversion to human ideology.
Islamism adapts to the environment. Corona has also been incorporated into ideology. The international community is now fighting the pandemic, and the fight against terrorism has retreated behind the scenes, and the Islamic State has proposed a strike. IS has lost its territory, but it operates like a franchise company: anyone can form an I-AG, and IS provides ideology, strategy and logo. Deportation will not do anything, and of course it will not look the opposite.
