WIE SÖDER. NUR ÖDER.

WIE SÖDER. NUR ÖDER.

Will man dem oft postulierten Niedergang der alten bundesrepublikanischen Werte nachschnuppern, kommt man an der Bayernkapitale München nicht vorbei.
Alles, was hier heute Bedeutung hat, hatte es so auch schon vor vielen Dekaden. Das Problem: es kommt nichts Neues dazu.

Eine Polemik von Kai Blasberg
WIE SÖDER. NUR ÖDER.

Im Sommer 1986 war ich bei der Bundeswehr.
Es war der Sommer nach Tschernobyl.
Meine Schwester lebte damals in Schwabing, dem schönen, alten Schwabing am Elisabethmarkt. Streng genommen sogar Maxvorstadt. Aber das wissen nur Eingeborene.

Damals war es die Zeit der gläsernen Radiostudios, hier in der Nordendstraße war es wohl Radio Gong.
Thomas Gottschalk und Günther Jauch waren die Stars beim BR, auch im Radio. Prägten über ihren Stil eine neue Epoche der Gelöstheit.

Patrick Süßkind las man, das Parfum, das ich übrigens damals unfassbar langweilig fand.
Alle wollten sein Buch verfilmen, obwohl es als nicht verfilmbar galt. Der Autor zierte sich.
Später wurde sogar ein Film gedreht, der davon handelte, dass einer sich ziert und ein anderer es will. Ich war 21.
Helmut Dietl, der, der wollte, drehte aber erstmal Kir Royal, die Vorlage dazu war Michael Graeters Leben bei der AZ, später bei Bild, noch später bei Bunte; auch so was typisch Münchnerisches.
Der Klatschreporter wurde von beiden erfunden und bekam in Baby Schimmerlos sein Denkmal.

Essen tat man, war man wer, bei Käfer, essen kaufte man ebenda und bei Dallmayr.
Zu trinken gab's beim Karl, der sich schon Charles nennen ließ, in der Maximilianstrasse, von wo man dann zu Fuß zum Feiern ins P 1 schritt oder torkelte. Vergessen sind Kays Bistro und das Roy.
Der FC Bayern entsandte damals seine Kicker ebenso in diese Destinationen, wie es heute noch geschieht. Lothar Matthäus war dabei, und ist es auch bis heute. Der Brehme Andi ist sogar schon verblichen in diesen Tagen. Aber auch der lebte bis zuletzt hier.
Regiert wurde von Franz Joseph Strauß, der immer so tat, als sei er größer als Alle, um es endlich nie zu sein.
Es war ja auch schön in München. Und riesig, strahlend in seiner Enge. Damals war München mein Ziel. Wer es hierhin schafft, der hat es geschafft. Das war das Lebensgefühl der Musikstadt der Siebziger. Giorgio Moroder und Harold Faltermeyer, der Queen-Sänger Freddie Mercury liebte Barbara Valentin. In München.

In den Achtzigern war München die Filmstadt.
Der Eichinger-Bernd. Aber auch Klaus Lemke.
Die vielen Originale wie die Wepper-Brüder, der Monaco-Franze, der Dietl eh, der Sedlmeier, der Mooshammer. Und sogar die Uschi Glas. Die als einzige derer noch lebt.

München schwang sich auf zur großen Medienmetropole, die Privatsender entstanden, nicht nur im Radio. Die Papiermedien AZ, TZ, SZ standen in voller Blüte. Ich habe es dann später geschafft und kam dazu. Und blieb fast 30 Jahre.
Und blieb fast 30 Jahre Gast in diesem Ort.
Denn München lädt nur den, der so ist wie alle Anderen. Der alt geworden ist und wohlhabend.
Früher hießen sie Adabeis und Wanna-be's.
Jene, die die Staffage gaben und nicht wirklich wichtig waren, gleichsam einer Füllmasse Mensch.
Heute scheint München nur noch aus dieser Füllmasse zu bestehen. Die Orte sind dieselben.
Entseelt, behäbig, unfähig der Reform, zurückschauend und den alten Glanz beschwörend. Verstopft von Touristen und den ewigen Baustellen derer, die erst den Bürger durch Verkehrsstenose terrorisieren, um dann abzukassieren: Die renovierten Wohnstätten in der Stadt sind nur noch von Geldsäcken zu finanzieren.
Hier wie da: Erben. Der Strauß heißt jetzt Söder.
In all den Jahren blieb der einen einzigen verwendbaren Gedanken schuldig. Der Hoeneß heißt immer noch so und sieht das Rezept Hoeneß als einzig anwendbares.

Filme werden gedreht. Von Bernds Firma.
Der längst Vergangene aber würde sich nicht gnädig zeigen ob der Ergebnisse. Die Privatmedienszene kümmert vor sich hin und hat außer Siechtum wenig vorzuweisen. Und die Füllmasse: Rechtsanwälte und Wirtschaftsprüfer, Ärzte und deren Häuser, die von Ölscheichs leben. Und Angestellte. Wohlbestallt und zukunftslos.
Beim Charles gehen die ein und aus, die es immer taten, nun aber nicht mehr so saufen können, wie sie es taten, weil sie es nicht überleben würden.
Wie soll das nur weitergehen, fragen sich Viele im Stillen. Laut ist hier keiner. Außer der Stadt. Die dröhnt unerträglich im permanenten Überforderungsmodus.
München war Elite.
Elite ist nicht Portemonnaie. Elite ist Visionen und Idee, Träume, Wünsche. Und Tun.
München tut nichts. Steht still.
Schon allein geographisch vor den Bergen wie in einer Sackgasse. Und die Straße zum Tegernsee ist samstags voll und verstopft, weil sie dieselbe ist wie in den 50ern. Und dann kommt Österreich.
Natürlich höre ich jetzt die vielen Freunde, die dageblieben sind.
Keiner will zugeben, in einer Sackgasse zu leben.
Und natürlich höre ich Laptop und Lederhose.
Jetzt auch 30 Jahre alt. Der Mann hieß Stoiber.
Weltraum wird geschwafelt, KI dazu. Und denken Sie an den Englischen Garten. Und das Skifahren im Winter. Es schneit halt kaum noch. Aber schee war's.
Zünden tut das alles nicht.
Weil die vollen Taschen zu füllen keinen Reiz aussendet. Thomas Gottschalk und Günther Jauch, längst im Rentenalter, machen jetzt Kindersendungen. In Köln. Max Eberl ist da.
Er hat schon als Kind in Bayern-Bettwäsche geschlafen. Das reicht hier unten.

29.02.24
*Kai Blasberg war 40 Jahre in den privaten Medien in Deutschland beschäftigt
Schreibe einen Kommentar
Datenschutzhinweis
The same faces always follow me on the streets of Berlin: Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann in the Christian Lindner memorial black and white; Sahra Wagenknecht, who has only mastered a single facial expression in photos for fifteen years and is not running at all in the European elections; or Katharina Barley, who is apparently so unknown as the top candidate for the European elections that Olaf Scholz is standing by her side on the posters, so that the passing mob at least develops a rough idea of what this mysterious Ms. Barley is all about.

However, it's also exciting who doesn't advertise with the faces of their candidates: the CDU knows full well that it can't win much ground with the likeness of Ursula von der Leyen. The Christian Democrats are focusing on their core competence: airy casings that somehow sound delicious, the potato soup among the slogans, consisting of empty carbohydrates and still warm. "For a Germany in which we live well and happily" was the motto of the 2017 federal election. Today: "For a Europe that protects and benefits." Sexy.

First and foremost, we are dealing with great theater. The Germany in which we live so well and happily believes that its population has very little influence over their own interests. We are free to change staff every four years, although the overall shifts are rather manageable in most cases due to the five percent hurdle - much more than that is up for debate. Once they have made themselves comfortable in their seats, the politicians primarily do what they want. If they do nonsense, you have to wait until the next election to be able to sanction them for it. The population is only allowed to participate in the debate on Twitter or TikTok.

There are no means of driving out a politician who throws his principles and election promises overboard in a very short space of time - otherwise the Green faction in the Bundestag would be significantly smaller today. In addition, there is the planned electoral law reform to reduce the size of the Bundestag, which, however, primarily targets direct mandates from smaller parties. Here alone one could speak of a gross break with the will of the voters, after all, the common voter is not just there to shift percentages, but to make his or her voice heard.

The structures at the European level in particular are almost absurdly opaque. At five-year intervals, citizens are counted to cast a vote primarily in favor of leaving them alone for the next five years. There is a good tradition of deporting failed or simply annoying former federal politicians to Brussels in order to keep them busy there with twice the workload of meeting weeks and thus practically silence the local discourse. Meanwhile, the future of all of us is being decided in Europe - and we know next to nothing about it! Via text message, Ursula von der Leyen is costing taxpaying EU citizens billions and billions of euros for a vaccine that over time turned out to be significantly less effective than was initially assumed. A single company benefited greatly from the biggest crisis since the Second World War.

One hears again and again that the legislative periods, especially at the federal level, are too short to actually change anything. We should only elect the German Bundestag every five or even six years to give the poor politicians the time to implement their plans in peace. The logical error here is obvious: governments are completely free at any time to make future-oriented decisions, the benefits of which will only become apparent long after the current legislative period - but they consciously decide against it in order to promote populist fast food based on surveys. to pursue politics that are intended to maintain one's own power.

It is better to push the unpleasant things into the next legislature. After all, you want to decorate yourself with immediate, small successes. However, why this should be a problem for voters is completely unclear. Shouldn't we expect more from our elected representatives to get off their high horse and commit themselves to the German people instead of just keeping their own chair warm? Is it the voter's fault if Lauterbach pulls off a patchwork bureaucratic monster of cannabis legalization in order to be celebrated as a pioneer?

In his well-read pamphlet "Screw Selflove, Give Me Class War," the author Jean-Philippe Kindler describes our democracy as "capitalism with elections." So while the personnel changes, politicians, as soon as they get into positions of power, despite all the loud promises of unshakable ideals, end up serving the corporations. This is rarely as obvious as when the FDP leads the finance ministry. The AfD, which sells itself as social, also repeatedly talks about not wanting to tax wealthy people or companies more heavily under any circumstances. Commitment to the needs of the much-discussed (and rarely actually addressed) "little man" on the ass. In view of the draft law on the Promotion of Democracy Act, which, depending on its interpretation, can also be misused to stifle criticism of the government by citing a threat to the state. Imagine if such a law were in force under an AfD-led government.

Anyone who walks through the streets in Berlin is stared at by posters with slogans such as "Give Prosperity a Voice" (CDU), "Against Hatred and Incitement" or "For Moderation, Center and Peace" (both SPD) - absolutely meaningless turnip stew formulations - or: "Education: first line of defense of democracy." Of course a poster from the FDP, whose top candidate Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann cannot deviate from the war rhetoric even when it comes to educating people to become politically informed, responsible citizens . But it is of course welcome that the FDP wants to work for better education, because things are extremely bad in Germany. There are even said to be well-known female politicians in government parties whose reading skills are apparently so limited that they consider Mother Courage to be a positive identification figure.

As I said, it is true that most governments achieve little that will change the world in the four years they are given. However, that doesn't mean you shouldn't try. Unfortunately, we are observing a completely discouraged government that is not providing any answers to pressing questions about the future. In a rule by the people, we would actually be counted on to assert our civic duty beyond the ballot box to vote on individuals. We have the instrument of the referendum for this purpose. But anyone who walks across the streets in Berlin and observes election posters cannot help but remember the last referendums here in this city:

On May 25, 2014, a referendum was held on the development of Tempelhofer Feld. The development of the popular park planned by the Senate should be prevented by the plebiscite. A majority voted for the referendum and thus for the preservation of Tempelhofer Feld as a local recreation area and historical site. There were last headlines about the planned development of Tempelhofer Feld in autumn 2023, so the referendum is up for discussion.

The referendum on the expropriation of the real estate group Deutsche Wohnen took place during the 2021 federal election. The aim was to break the dominance of corporations like Deutsche Wohnen in order to prevent rents from skyrocketing and to maintain Berlin as a reasonably affordable place to live. As a basic service, apartments should be rented out by the city at controlled prices so that there is no Darwinian struggle for the scarce living space. The referendum received widespread support from the electorate. It has not yet been implemented and is no longer even discussed.

The last Berlin plebiscite was "Berlin 2030 climate neutral". The aim was to formulate a law that would oblige Berlin to comply with certain emission saving measures. The initiators must also have been very aware that the feasibility was only moderately good; the idea was certainly not least to be able to hold the city accountable for past failures. But none of that matters, because the referendum was actively sabotaged by the city of Berlin by not holding it parallel to the repeat election in February 2023, but more than a month later, even though it would have been possible to hold it in February.

The reason that referendums are often combined with elections is that they can increase participation. The only time the German Michel tends not to go to his polling station is for a referendum. If the plebiscite is added when an election is coming up anyway, it will have a huge impact on the number of participants. Scheduling the referendum on the climate law for Berlin on a separate date inevitably meant that the necessary quota was not reached. Here the population was partially denied the opportunity to make their own voice audible in a simple and low-threshold manner.

When Hubert Aiwanger said that the people should "take back democracy," it was treated like a despicable threatening gesture given his unjustifiable missteps in his previous life. But we need to think seriously about the state of a democracy in which we give power to people who can then act with impunity against the will of the voters and even ignore it when it is officially stated. The idea of representative democracy is noble and shows a belief in the good in people, but does not take into account the corruptibility of politicians, which always has to be taken into account in capitalism. When Julia Klöckner, then Minister of Food, praises Nestlé, it should be clear to every responsible citizen that something is wrong here. Whose interests should be represented here?

It is only worth arguing about longer terms of office if at the same time it enables greater participation of the population in other democratic processes. Imagine if we were now tied to the traffic lights for a total of six years instead of four and were practically at its mercy for the entire period when it comes to potentially existential debates such as arms deliveries or military conscription. Stability in a democracy can only exist if the population actually trusts the government and can intervene when that trust wanes. When politicians no longer just use easily digestible phrases and populist theses for election campaign purposes, only to be unable to be warned to comply once they are elected. When corporations, lobby associations and shady interest groups are disempowered. If this succeeds, a government no longer has to be so afraid of the Internet that it would need a law to promote democracy.

05/06/24
*Bent-Erik Scholz works as a freelancer for RBB