At the moment, a man is making headlines who seems to be causing a great deal of friction among politically interested citizens and people who live from politics. Those who would describe themselves as "left-wing" even in the conservative political camp and the professional outrage-mongers who learned to drive on the left in political driving school. Personally, these templates for describing political positioning seem outdated to me. But we don't have any better terms yet.
Or stop! Perhaps it's time to use seafaring terminology. They are still unused and, after all, we are all on board a badly battered and rust-ridden luxury liner. The "Deutschland". Quite a few passengers have already strapped on lifebelts, others are already looking longingly at the lifeboats. Some desperate people have made the "Küblböck".
So it's possible that a political cadet will come on board in September who has what it takes to clear the ship, at least on the starboard side.
At least that's the view of those who first took him from the "Thüringen", the pilot ship, to the rope ladder.
Only time will tell whether he makes it to the officers' mess.
In any case, it is astonishing how this man polarizes. How the crew on the port side, where verdigris and rust-red are attacking the boat, are sounding the tally-ho on this man. He is also a thorn in the political starboard corners.
I was already interested in the man in October 2020. How can you get so worked up about him? What moves this man? What does he think about our country and its parliamentarians?
What drives him? What would he change?
With an open mind, I went in search of answers with producer Rainer Spix. Where, surprisingly, many journalist colleagues don't even dare to think.
Close to Hans-Georg Maaßen.
A rocky road in terms of production.
Producer Rainer Spix had some freelance cameramen and sound engineers cancel when they found out who we would dare to interview. What's going on in this country?
This reaction has almost got us "hooked" on the other political spectrum, on the port side, to see who offers friction there. But that will take some time with the output.
Today, due to the current situation, I would like to recommend you to watch the movie "Der Stachel" again. It is completely free of advertising here at clubderklarenworte.de behind a paywall.
Why a payment barrier? Read more here.
Come and have a glass of wine this weekend and form your own opinion of this personnel.
I promise you a gain in knowledge about a man whom I have experienced as a conservative free spirit. But of course you don't have to share this assessment.
I'm curious to see what you think. Perhaps you would like to use the comments function to give your assessment.
Click on the yellow "buy now" button. Then enter your payment method (credit card or PayPal) and your e-mail address. You will immediately receive the access code to your e-mail address, with which you can watch the movie immediately. On any device. In full screen mode. You can also show the signal on AppleTV, for example. You can pause the movie at any time and then resume watching with your personal code. We have chosen an independent technical service provider in Germany; Munich. It fulfills the high ISO/IEC 27001 standards. We are thus supporting a technology company in Germany and are free from Global player censorship.
English 
German 
Spanish
24 Responses
The more I follow the correspondence on this and many other platforms, the more I think that "the German" needs to stop thinking in pigeonholes. "Right", "left" or in the middle? But am I allowed to be in the middle, to advocate equal treatment for all people, a possible "wealth tax" and solidarity with the supposed "underclass", but at the same time express a critical opinion on a large proportion of those arriving in the so-called "refugee crisis" in 2015, have an absolute aversion to the GEZ and also take a critical view of the church in this country? Am I then still allowed to speak out against what I consider to be unconstitutional measures by the German government, but also have an interest in preserving our planet and recycling all kinds of materials? Or will I be criticized for saying something - admittedly incorrectly - against the refugee crisis? "The good German" is neat. And to find something again quickly, it is advisable to decide on a drawer immediately. "Communis fortis", as if it were a politically left-green fascism. The more opinion falls in one direction, the more likely it is that the differentiated view that strives for compromise is an extreme of the other, "wrong" side. We must stop prioritizing the consumption of mass media in our conditioned lives and strive to develop a backbone that no longer resembles that of a gummy bear. You may have a differentiated view of Mr. Maassen's statements, but as a rational person you have to admit one thing: This man has backbone and can justify his point of view. And he is often available for a discussion and has the arguments to back up his stance on various issues. It simply does not do him justice to place him in the "right-wing corner" and not to engage with his views, which are largely based on knowledge and experience. In my opinion, the man deserves to be dealt with on the basis of his previous achievements and his serious demeanor alone. But I assume that between the next veggie smoothie order so that you can post a photo of your trendy meal on Instagram and the human dumbing-down machine on the 20:15 program, where people with an IQ that is afraid of heights in the basement represent the supposed German center so that the consumer feels more entitled, you don't have enough time to meet the intellectual requirements of a Hans-Georg Maaßen. This country is finished! Corona is not the pathogen. Corona is just the symptom of an education policy that has been neglected for far too long and which - together with the accelerator of globalization and the (let's call it the "social") market economy - is showing the ugly face of multimorbid democracy. Good evening.
I'm a little confused. Are you actually promoting Maaßen here? Your words aren't so clear after all - well, they're clear, but they're colored "clear" and unfortunately not independent.
Hello Arnold, thank you for being here. Allow me to ask you a few questions and ask you to answer them.
Have you seen the interview?
What do you mean by "words are not clear" and "not independent"? Please specify this.
Basically, interviews are not advertising. Unless they run on HSE24 or are conducted in an undistanced manner, as is often the case with public broadcasters.
With best regards M.L.
Arnold, weren't you still called Daniel last week?
You know, Mr. Birk,
I was a passionate leftist for over 45 years, "leftists" like you drove me away.
That's a good thing, because today I am exposed to substantiated, sensible and fruitful
open to arguments from any party and consider moralizing pointless because it is exhausting
and destructive.
With a greeting from
HV
Hello,
I don't believe you.
Best regards,
VB.
Hello Mr. Birk,
Thank you for your reply.
It is your right not to believe me, but it is irrelevant to me.
I was pleased with your simple comment for two reasons.
You don't deny being "left-wing", I was right about that
and I see myself in my decision to move away from the "left".
of people to distance themselves from your opinion.
Please don't get me wrong, I respect the honest left.
Well, an essence of Marx, Engels, Kant and a little Hegel. That certainly seems
now a bit weird, but as I already emphasized, a fruitful thought pleases
me, no matter which brain it came from.
By the way, my mother is still honestly left-wing, she brought me up that way too.
The fact that I have changed my political views merely enlivens our discussions.
Greetings VH
Thank you, Mr. Langemann! That was a very interesting and multifaceted interview. Strong, authentic and above all very human. I wish there were more people like Mr. Maaßen in German politics!
Dear Mr. Langemann,
exactly: "What's going on in this country?"
Thank you very much for this great filmed interview (black and white - brilliant). You have kept your promise of gaining knowledge.
I had to take breaks in between, the density of questions and answers is overwhelming. Answers that have substance, not just hot or blue air.
It has never been clearer (to me) that people like Maaßen, for example, are "unacceptable" in public. I have long wondered why there are no inspiring minds in politics. Why are critical statements followed by an apology and why do we now have to distance ourselves from anyone for anything? And my only answer is: go with the flow or go under. Actually, I thought this way would have gone under in 1989. I am glad that you are not doing this.
For me, the movie answered unasked questions, questions that were buzzing in the background. Questions about Antifa (who or what they are), questions about Mr. Maaßen that came up with the text. I no longer remembered the background and connections.
After your film, it is as clear as day to me why they obviously want to prevent Mr. Maaßen from coming back. Who wants a "sting" in their ranks, close to them?
I'll treat myself to a glass of wine the second time I watch it 🙂 I look forward to continuing the conversation.
Yes, Mr. Maaßen is one of the few remaining politicians with stature. But unfortunately, at this stage of the political landscape, it no longer does him or us much good.
I like Hans-Georg over the Ma(a)ßen. Because I'm a conservative CDU voter, belong to the "Values Union", agree with him on everything? No, not at all. Then why?
Because Maaßen has values and aligns his political actions accordingly. He is predictable, reliable and has a backbone. That should be a matter of course, but is now a rare exception. Today, poll ratings are more important than values. The only thing that seems to matter is what is "in". Hurray climate protection, hurray gender madness. On the surface, we are colorful and tolerant. But anyone who disagrees gets a black-and-white, intolerant "slap on the wrist".
A Laschet as a counter-example. He said something very right over a year ago, which positively surprised me. Whether out of conviction, out of calculation or by mistake remains to be seen. Laschet said at the time that we shouldn't just listen to virologists, and not just to one, but also to sociologists, economists and psychologists. At the same time, Söder positioned himself as a lockdown hardliner. Söder was then celebrated in the media as a doer, while Laschet was tarred and feathered in the media as a belittler and procrastinator. When Söder's poll ratings shot up and Laschet's plummeted, Laschet did a 180-degree turnaround. That wouldn't have happened to Maassen. He is stable in his opinions and has an attitude. I reject journalists with an attitude, but I appreciate politicians with an attitude.
When Maassen answers questions, I notice the following: He lets the question sink in, lets it go through his head. The answers are complex because the questions are often complex. He doesn't evade, doesn't answer with slogans and speech bubbles, but with clear language. Always very matter-of-fact, never "emotionally outraged".
So Maaßen is the opposite of a radical. What does that say about the gasping masses who call him a radical? "We don't see things as they are, but as we ourselves are."
Thank you for your accurate words. You speak from my heart!
Yes, Mr. Löcke,
You also speak from my soul.
The modern, permissive defamation without the ability to take the actual perspective of the other even for a moment is a defensive reaction of the defamer to his own conflict of goals...which one? Why are other points of view no longer tolerated and the corridor of what one is still allowed to say ever narrower? I consider myself differentiated enough to be able to distance myself from right-wing extremist ideologies - and to do so. However, I don't agree with the assessment that the nomination of Mr. Maaßen does not sufficiently distance me from the right. Justified by what? By the fact that he openly identifies a problem with "Antifa"?
Well, Verena. "Justified by what"? That's exactly what I ask myself.
It can't be Maassen's problem with the Antifa, because I read CDU statements today that demanded that we must distance ourselves from both the far left/antifa and the far right. The AfD and a Maaßen CDU were then defined as far right. Which of Maaßen's attitudes are supposed to be "suspicious", which specific statements/demands are supposed to be questionable? As always, it remains vague and unspecific. Perhaps the answer lies in the title and Mr. Langemann's description. Maaßen is a free spirit and a thorn, and therefore uncomfortable, even within the party. They need to be weeded out and the best way to do that is to label them "right-wing".
"Why are other points of view no longer tolerated and the corridor of what can still be said ever narrower?"
This brings to mind my favorite quote from Noam Chomsky (who is considered a leftist): "The smartest way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of accepted opinions, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum."
The problem with Antifa is that there are still enough stupid people who believe that Antifa is an acronym for people who are against fascism (greetings to Saskia Esken). Then I would be Antifa too. Only - I once "tried" to talk to some Antifa demonstrators. I asked them whether they weren't on the wrong side, because enabling laws had just been passed, like the last time in 1933. Apart from insults, I was hoping for at least a few counter-arguments. But these "anti-fascists" didn't even know the key dates of the Second World War, let alone the Enabling Acts. But Nazis like me had to be put in camps and forcibly vaccinated. It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.
Let's hope for better times, Verena.
Hello Mr. Löcke,
...I share your observation and the self-proclaimed "anti-fascists" are themselves resorting to the very means they actually want to fight.
But my question is rather: what is the motivation behind the pejorative labeling of all sorts of things in society and the glossing over of nuances? This is a defensive reaction to a conflict of one's own - usually not primarily the problem of the labeled person, but of the person who is doing the labeling. What makes "them" feel so offended that their glasses slip? What is the underlying attitude? Only if you understand and address this can you perhaps find a level of reasonable dialog again...
Greetings, V.
My (kitchen psychology;-) view of things is that many, many people have allowed themselves to become very unsettled in recent years or even decades. The media are constantly suggesting that everything is so much more complex and complicated and that we should leave the (social, political, societal, etc.) classification to the "experts". All in the spirit of "follow the science". The result is people who have given up thinking for themselves. Subconsciously, however, they somehow know that they have not worked out their own position/opinion on a matter themselves and that it is therefore based on uncertain ground. In my opinion, the vehemence with which such people defend their position serves less to convince or rather overwhelm the other person than to reassure themselves and lull them into a sense of security that they are on the "right" side.
Especially as an incredible number of people are triggered in these exceptional times and (transgenerational) traumas and false beliefs are likely to come to the surface, causing inner perception (feelings, emotions), inner attitude (values, beliefs) and outer perception to collide and trigger cognitive dissonance.
But this is all my own personal assessment. It doesn't have to be universally true. It just makes sense to me.
Hein Blöd apparently leads a double life: I've never met an intelligent antifant. The public prosecutor brushes off Saskia Esken's Covidiot derailment due to a lack of initial suspicion of insult. The reasoning is adventurous and proves that the judiciary has fallen victim to the zeitgeist. Incidentally, "You can't argue with stupid people. They drag you down to their level and beat you there with their experience. (Mark Twain)" People often make the mistake of inferring intellect or intelligence or aptitude/ability based on academic titles or simply hierarchy. Competence is no longer a criterion. Tragic poster child: Greta Thunberg.
My suspicion is: Antifa, QAnon, Black Lives Matter, etc., and possibly also parts of the lateral thinkers, were organized by the totalitarian globalists to polarize, to destabilize, and to take the wind out of the sails of real resistance and counter-movements, and to be able to direct and control them.
It seems to be the case with the lateral thinker demos that at some point, paid violent "activists" suddenly appear or are smuggled in where and when the cameras of the mass media can document the events. The same trick seems to be used in the USA for anti-corona demonstrations.
What's more, people seem to me to be on the wrong track with all this party and right-to-left thinking.
So I think there are areas, e.g. systemically relevant ones such as banking and finance, health and social services, the media, the food and water supply sector, where priority must be given not to the profit maximization principle of capitalism, but to the common good, and which should actually be managed exclusively as public property (or "in public hands") - what then has causally and inevitably led to this mega-crisis?
On the other hand, capitalism has functioned in a very positive and healthy way in many other areas.
Incidentally, I also think that globalism is ultimately the only functioning form of worldwide administration - but not in the totalitarian, centralized form, but globally networked, decentralized, regional, democratic-meritocratic.
Mr. Maaßen would be a suitable Federal Chancellor: objective, realistic, well-educated, knowledgeable, well-connected and, above all, with backbone.
What Merkel has destroyed within the CDU and CSU in 15 years, Mr. Maaßen will not be able to make up for in the foreseeable future, or even bring this left-green CDU onto a conservative course. His goals may be good and correct, but they are also somewhat naive. Even if he is still reluctant today, he will not be able to get past the only uncompromising, value-conservative AfD in Germany's political spectrum in the long term. It would therefore be more far-sighted of him not to join the chorus of left-green ideological dictators and lash out at the AfD.
The radical neo-liberal market ideology, which the Chancellor represents like no other, is an extreme right-wing ideology. To describe Merkel as "left-wing" is wrong. In political theory, ideologies that uphold egalité are left-wing. There has probably never been a chancellor before her who has done more damage to the equality of all people in Germany than the chancellor; not even Gerhard Schröder has managed that, and he really did enough damage with Agenda 2010.
The misconception that progressive ideas are "left-wing" is also used in the USA to cloak hard-core neoliberal ideologues in a social mantle, after all, they are doing something for "diversity". This ignores the fact that the fascist movement in Italy and National Socialism in Germany were also progressive movements. It was the diehards after the Second World War who refused to recognize Hitler's betrayal and therefore gave the impression that this was something conservative.
The so-called "AfD" is also not value-conservative. Instead, it has two wings: the radical market neoliberals from the Friedrich A. von Hayek Society, which is named after the founder of the radical market movement. These include Alice Weidel and Beatrix von Storch, for example. (Christian Lindner left this society at the time in protest at the founding of the competition). The other wing is still there, even though it has been officially disbanded: these are the National Socialists, such as Bernd Höcke. This brown wing also includes the ex-head of the secret service with his astonishingly scandalous career, which the media, who have turned him into a hate figure, are interestingly happy to ignore. When the media report a lot, whether good or bad, it's advertising. So the man is being built up for the election.
There seems to be a secret knowledge about the AFD ("market radical" ) or now also Hans Georg Maaßen ( "scandalous career" ) that only a few have access to. It is a pity that even after reading these fantasies I am not one of the insiders. Although, unfortunately, I did read to the end!
In general, now is the time to ask whether the topos "left" stands for socially responsible politics at all - and not rather for a permanent promise of the same.
Let's look at the facts: after (in the 1970s) the working population tended to reject "liberation" by the left, the left simply changed the increasingly marginalized target group to be liberated. Today it is LGBTxxx. Tomorrow: who knows? Maybe the suppressed artificial intelligence in the drinks machine?
What the "left" is playing is the game of the donkey and the carrot.
Dear Mr. Birk,
I think you're getting things mixed up. There were three major ideologies in the 20th century: socialism/communism (left), liberalism (middle class/center) and conservatism (right). A "radical market/neoliberal ideology" is an offshoot of liberalism and therefore has nothing to do with right-wing extremism. "Progressive" simply means further development/change. This means that left-wing movements, which want to change the status quo, are also progressive. The only non-progressive ideology is conservatism. The really devastating component of National Socialism was social Darwinism, based on the "scientific" views of the time, and only to the extent that it was about superiority and inferiority, i.e. hierarchies in their most extreme form. Nowadays, if a person advocates social-national positions, he can only be legitimately labeled a Nazi if he shows a derogatory attitude towards certain groups of people. It is not clear to me how Mr. Maassen is supposed to represent national socialist positions. Incidentally, I am not trying to defend anyone here, I am simply concerned with the correct use of terminology.