On November, 8th, Sina Trinkwalder wrote on Facebook.
You simply have to sit down and realize; what currently happens in Germany is not “like 1933”.
In those days, the people followed a rat-catcher, because there was mass unemployment. They went onto the streets hoping for a better life.
Today, the people follow a rat-catcher, regardless of the fact that, officially, with 2.6 million unemployed, we have full employment. They populate the streets because they fear they might have to share even a slight morsel of their unjustified wealth.
That is the difference. Both are comprehensible. Both are condemnable. And the social community must oppose both
I found it impossible to resist, so I commented:
I rather like the term “unjustified wealth”. And I would find it a good idea for us to, at long last, step by step reduce our “reserves in wealth”. Incidentally, I find going places by car a good metaphor for unjustified affluent behaviour.
Wouldn’t that be a good place to start renouncement? – See also #aktmobcmp.org
The reply was:
Do I understand correctly: if you work in car production, that makes you an “unjustified affluence profiteer”?
Again, I could not resist and replied somewhat polemically:
Well, naturally the conclusion “if you work in car production” is wrong in many logical/dialectical ways. For me, everyone who takes more from the world than his due is an “unjustified affluence profiteer”. And I am afraid we all who write so wisely belong in that category. As to cars: I actually do believe that it is possible today to use your competence, creativity and intelligence for more important things than for building cars. After all, cars kill more than 1.3 million persons world-wide and, for example in Bavaria, the motorised individual traffic (cars) generates more carbon dioxide per capita than would be allowed even if you even wanted to preserve the current situation.
But I truly believe that the term “unjustified wealth“ as entered into the discussion by Sina is a very central term. So far, I never used it. It gave me pause.
I believe you should extend it to read “unjustified collective wealth”. And we should never forget that, basically, whatever we do is oriented towards the goals of “protecting our acquired possession” and “preserving habits that are often nonsense (and sometimes even detrimental)”.
If, however, we continue as before, a world that was once worth living in for me will probably be lost very few generations from now. And that is not an attractive idea in my book, because in some way or other, I see myself as part of an entity – and that also includes the dimension of time. Maybe we already lost our nice world …
(Translated by EG)