Comment from Markus Langemann
The digitalization of our society, reflected in our daily activities, has progressed mightily in recent years. Online shopping in global megastores or just digital kiosks, scanning QR codes on every picket fence, paying by smartphone or the transformation from car mechanic to mechatronics technician. The long list of digital change would easily circle the equator in the sunshine.
In the frenzy of enthusiasm over the dissolution of our trade and change into columns of ones and zeros, the cheerleaders of digitalization in the start-ups between Palo Alto and Alt-Potsdam overlook the total deformation of our previous existence that it has triggered.
The dark power of digitalization is only illuminated with candles. Or not at all. And yet it is a great dark fair of jugglers with the power of lack of freedom and control. This global fair of digitalization will bring us shackles that look like cool Fitbit bracelets. If we continue to be seduced by "eye candy" and also allow semantic reinterpretations of "lateral thinking", for example, the Mephistophelean will prevail at warp speed in this decade.
In this article find out more about the dark side of digitalization. Michael Westphal is my interview partner and a seasoned media entrepreneur with profound experience in the digital business world and knowledge of upcoming developments. We have known each other for decades. Here at the Club of Clear Words, for example, we entrust the complex technology of our media library to one of his companies. - The man knows what he is talking about, you should definitely listen to him.
The digitalization of almost all areas of life is a consequence of the constant urge for growth, that is certainly beyond question. The political philosopher Dr. Katja Gentinetta writes in an essay, this here as a pamphlet published with economist Prof. Niko Paech, about growth:
"So if you not only want to save nature, but also enable more people to live a better life, you have to focus on growth: growth that is committed to ecological, social and economic sustainability."
That doesn't just sound like a provocation to my ears.
Niko Paech formulates his position in writing as follows:
"If, firstly, the planet is physically limited, secondly, industrial prosperity cannot be decoupled from ecological damage, thirdly, the earthly foundations of life are to be permanently preserved and, fourthly, global justice is sought, there must be an upper limit to the material prosperity claimed by a single individual."
You, dear reader, can see the excesses that constant growth is driving simply by looking at the development of the commercialization of the healthcare system.
I recommend the conversation that publisher Markus J. Karsten recently had with surgeon Bernd Hontschik in public in Frankfurt. You can here in the media library see. It almost seems to be a rebuttal to philosopher Gentinetta's thesis.
English 
German 
Spanish
15 Responses
Digitalization is like a splitting axe; I can use it to make firewood, but of course I can also use it to injure someone or worse. We will not stop digitalization, but if we want to stop the misuse of new technologies, we have to take political action and "dare more democracy". This is the only way to combine digitalization and action in the spirit of the "Declaration of Human and Civil Rights" of 1789. The principles expressed there were the basis for the constitution of the first thirteen states of the USA in 1787, which is still in force almost unchanged, and for all subsequent democratic movements - including our current one. It should therefore be quite clear that our non-violent democracy movement should be able to expect support from constitution-protecting organizations. For me, the positions of Gentinetta and Paech have good approaches. If G. meant qualitative rather than quantitative growth, which would not necessarily mean greater consumption of resources, I would be able to agree with her. P.'s well-known approach of maintaining moderation and, in case of doubt, valuing sustainability more highly than mere consumption is absolutely right. Nevertheless, in a democracy you have to convince people and not simply govern through (Angela Merkel before her first term in office). As we all know, fear campaigns are running in a continuous loop on this topic instead of engaging citizens with comprehensible, fact-based policies. Just as in times of war and dangerous epidemics, this has a certain charm for governments because it makes it possible to push through things that would not even be conceivable for the majority under normal circumstances (Robert F. Kennedy, nephew of J.F.K., in Berlin at the end of August 2022). Reading the above-mentioned Declaration of Human and Civil Rights in the original made me realize the political situation we are currently in as people and citizens of this state. Highly recommended.
Your opening sentence hits the nail on the head: everything digital is actually a tool! I also think the comparison with an axe instead of a paintbrush is fine. And by recalling Willy Brandt's slogan "dare more democracy", you speak to me from the depths of my soul. However, the slogan of "qualitative growth" is a pleasing chimera that cannot solve the problem of "quantitative" growth, as you call it, which is necessary for the continued existence of our economic system, but rather conceals it and thus exacerbates it. The unanswered crucial question to which our Western world will have to find an answer in the future is therefore: can the transformation of the economy be reconciled with the preservation of democracy at all, and if so, how?
All the things that are associated with the term "digitalization" ... whoops, you're back to the criticism of growth, against material prosperity, etc. Poor, own nothing, shut up but be happy, as recommended to the plebs by the Davos billionaires.
Without competition and growth, we (= humanity) will neither improve the situation of the poor nor solve the ecological problems. As leftists like to forget, the environment and nature in the so-called socialist countries were in a wretched state, energy consumption was high because there was a lack of insulation and heating controls, windows had to be cracked open because too much heat was coming through the pipes from the lignite-fired power station. In the affluent countries, they began to tighten emission limits, exhaust filters, rivers became clean, etc. This began in the USA, Japan and the USA. This began in the USA, in Japan, then in Central and Northern Europe. Not in the poor countries, not in the USSR, not in the GDR.
To reduce CO2 emissions, we need more and better scientists and engineers, not more economists, political scientists and genderists. If I, as an engineer, were to build bridges according to the changing opinions of economists, I would go to prison.
Since you rail so much against economists and apparently consider engineers like yourself to be smarter, as an economist I will allow myself a few questions: Do you know approximately how high the CO2 emissions per capita were in the FRG compared to those of the GDR? And secondly, have the CO2 emissions per capita in countries with "continuously tightened emission limits, exhaust filters (...) etc. (...) in the USA, Japan, then in Central and Northern Europe" risen or fallen in the course of achieving their prosperity? And finally, thirdly, do you believe that CO2 emissions per capita will rise or fall in future as a result of the development of the "situation of the poor", i.e. "in the poor countries", towards greater material prosperity there?
You might think that digitalization is massively damaging people's cognitive abilities. Otherwise, such excesses of collective stupidity are hard to imagine:
s. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/parteien-erfurt-kuehnert-warnt-cdu-vor-zusammenarbeit-mit-afd-in-thueringen-dpa.urn-newsml-dpa-com-20090101-220604-99-546052
and:
Parties - Erfurt - FDP Secretary General: CDU proposal on wind turbines "provoked" - Politics - SZ.de (sueddeutsche.de)
The simple idea that they are the ones who are wrong and ruthlessly disregard the residents affected does not even occur to these arrogant, snotty types of the internet age. If the SPD, the Left and the Greens also voted for common sense, the AfD's votes would become meaningless. The CDU proposal of a minimum distance of 1000 m from a residential area and that with wind turbines up to 250 m high is just a bad joke anyway. Anyone who thinks even that is too much should have their mental state examined.
However, you only have to look at the history books to save digitalization. Every age has had phases in which stupidly ruthless powerful people were in charge. Our age is no exception. The problem seems to me to be that the possibilities for surveillance and manipulation have already reached, and will reach, a global scale that makes any rebellion futile or pointless. The coronavirus crisis was probably just the beginning. Phases of paternalism and ruthlessness could result in permanent paternalism and permanent ruthlessness or inhumanity. The first signs in this direction are unmistakable in this new millennium.
Dr. Aßmann -
Yes, their goal is a world population that can be fully controlled and managed at all times and reduced to a tolerable level.
They are on this trip, in this frenzy, and above all the *Greens* are driving it forward, they are virtually the spearhead of this madness, this intention to artificially replace EVERYTHING, including homo bisherikus.
And we are already in the middle of this no longer utopian dystopia, it is the infernal blow against naturalness in every respect, which will be irreversible, even freedom will not be retrievable.
Quo vadis - stupid man ? He destroys by finding what he is looking for, his spirit of research is this Pandora's box that he opened thousands of years ago, and he didn't grow a warm coat so that he was forced to burn up the planet... ( grin ).
Sorry, something went wrong with the second link. So here is a second attempt:
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/parteien-erfurt-angekuendigte-afd-zustimmung-zu-cdu-antrag-erhitzt-gemueter-dpa.urn-newsml-dpa-com-20090101-220604-99-547389
P.S.: But this may also be due to the fact that the SZ has apparently changed the title and content of the online report. After all, when it comes to promoting green ideologies at the expense of the people concerned, this newspaper is not at a loss for words. Together with other press products and the ÖRR as well as the Greens, SPD, Linke and, unfortunately, to a large extent now also the CDU/CSU and FDP, an increasingly self-contained block of opinion is forming that is incapable of discussion on some topics and is increasingly clearly opposed only by the increasingly right-wing nationalist AfD, which is therefore unelectable for any clear-thinking person with only a slight awareness of history. Democracy cannot function like this in the long term. What emerges on the subject of climate protection and wind energy is the maximum possible nonsense. Not even the fact that global warming in Germany and Europe has significantly decoupled from global warming since the first wind farm was opened on August 24, 1987 at Kaiser-Wilhelm-Koog makes these people think: Dumbness in the guise of politicians, journalists, managers and scientists!
(see DWD diagram in the following WELT report: https://www.welt.de/wissenschaft/article158110222/Wetter-aendert-sich-in-Deutschland-besonders-krass.html or explained in detail in the current publication "Generationenprojekt Energiewende: Elektroenergiepolitik im Spannungsfeld zwischen Vision und Mission" by Herbert Niederhausen, 05/2022, ISBN-13: 9783755774389, p. 152)
More than 30 years ago, when I was looking into how humans and AI could work together in a meaningful way, I realized that outsourcing too many cognitive activities to an AI (at that time it was still called an expert system - XPS) can lead to a rapid decline in human cognitive performance once a certain level of AI support is reached. It is a law of nature that everything that is not retrieved by our body is mercilessly degraded (muscles as well as mental abilities). If certain mental / cognitive skills are not developed at all as a result of too much AI / digitalization in childhood, then it is very difficult to acquire them in adulthood. The consequences, for example in the case of independent (not cell phone-guided) and critical thinking, are something we are currently feeling very clearly.
Another example of this development can be seen more and more frequently in professional life - people are now increasingly solving problems with and because of computers that they would not have without them. This is confirmed to me by many professional colleagues, as the computer is supposed to be an aid for us in automation and measurement technology. Computer scientists often see this differently, as for many of them computing technology is the end of all means.
At some point between 2005 and 2012, we passed the optimum and now computing technology is no longer a tool that increases efficiency and frees up valuable resources that can be used for new tasks, but instead ties up or wastes more and more resources (working time, energy and materials). Younger people often find this difficult to comprehend as they lack the ability to compare and, due to an often blind trust in the promises of IT and tech companies, also lack the cognitive skills to make a differentiated assessment.
Like you, I just want to scream. "Unfortunately" I'm only 56 and have three children. They have the same view of things, although not quite as pessimistic as me. Our plans for the future are no longer working out and we are doing things that would never have occurred to me and my husband a good two years ago. The course of rapidly changing things is probably unstoppable.
In the meantime, I no longer see any chance of turning the current development into a positive one. There will be a deep valley of tears.
Hadmut Danisch has given a good summary of this.
To be found under:
https://www.danisch.de/blog/2022/05/31/ich-ein-pessimist/
I look at the homo smartphonicus partly with horror and partly with amusement - never had such a thing - since this nonsense began and then increasingly shaking my head until the current terrible outgrowth of this slavery .
* If you really want to be free, you need one of these things... * was suggested in the advertising at the time, I was the only person in the world who recognized this trap immediately, which is how it seems to me now.
Places to meet, to talk to each other... to get to know each other, to exchange ideas with eye and facial contact, to read the face of a counterpart at eye level...
That's how it used to be, that's how it was normal, that's how people used to be.
I've long been the only one in training and fitness without it (to give you a terrible example), it's always to hand, no matter what device I'm using, after the set in the relaxation break it's back in my hand, plug in my ear, wired, I've never given up the need to talk, but when I speak I disturb them, they have to pull a plug out of their ear and raise their lowered heads...
I, the last analog human being, it seems to me - am now the outcast, the marginalized, because I am still normal.
They have stored their lives in this constraint, the real analog runs alongside like a shadow, it's all spooky.
I think it's already too late, this nonsense can no longer be reversed, they are already remote-controlled by radiation, now, G6 is already approaching.
All of this is already AI, is already transhuman.
And oh yes - the latest hyper-modern generation of training equipment has a screen and keyboard, no joke, you sit in it like a comfortable TV chair and type in the desired resistance, additionally wired, of course.... digital they are fit.
You won't believe it, but there is someone else who sees it exactly the same way.
The advantage of this is that life is much quieter and easier on the nerves.
I think there are a few more, but they don't stand out so much because of the mass.
I, too, when they started doing away with the good old telephone booth, was very
recognized early on where all this was leading.
It will pass. For some, withdrawal could be quite a painful experience,
but the human species only learns when it really hurts.
The architects of digitalization break the world down into a binary grid that has essentially shaped their thinking. They do not understand that this world consists almost exclusively of the spectrum of nuances and that the decisions that people make every day in order to cope with life are balancing considerations.
Above all, these are decisions that are based on the reality of life and have nothing to do with the bipolar multiple-choice requirements of the consumer universe. Life is too complex, its demands and pleasures too diverse, to be able to be digitally rasterized in a useful way. Life needs space in which it can develop, try out and establish itself in an uncontrolled way if it meets the requirements. All these things are alien to the technocrats who feel called upon to forcibly shape a future that no longer has anything in common with a meaningful life.
You only have to look into the empty (deflated) eyes of Gates, Musk and these other guys. These guys are imposing their simplistic view of the world and of people who don't think and act so simply. The house of cards of Musk, Gates and their co-makers will collapse, just as the WEF with Schwab will one day vanish into thin air.
I think we're in the dumps, I'm still running around outside but now without hope. Thank God I'm already 60 years old and have no children