Volume 5, 2021/7, May 24, 28 pages ♦ pdf format
Sabine Riedel
“Conspiracy Theories”, Maoism, Structural Analysis, Modern Money Theory, Bio-Power and (Trans-)Humanism
CONTENT:
The 28 pages include:
Analysis, summary, 14 figures and excerpts, 199 references (linked).
In the Corona crisis, the voices of experts in social or political science are hardly heard. Many are concerned with the deficits and conflicts of other countries, but there seems to be little interest in the preservation of our own democratic culture. However, it needs to be explained why fundamental rights have to be restricted in order to manage the dangers of a pandemic. Why is Europe going the Chinese way with lockdowns and de facto forced vaccinations instead of trusting the expertise, crea-tivity and self-regulation of open societies? This article shows why this can only lead to a dead end, in mass surveillance and drug dependency that reduces people to the intellectual level of machines.
This study is intended as a plea for a revival of humanistic values and is based on a meta-theoretical analysis of Corona politics with five approaches. First, the catchword conspiracy theory is taken up, which does not exist in any research discipline, but serves to control public discourses. This can be used to denounce any political scientist who studies open and hidden stakeholder interests. In free societies, such defamations contradict the press code; in authoritarian regimes like China, they are a tool for ostracising government critics. Beijing’s current Corona policy is not only rooted in Maoism, it also rhetorically harks back to the Cultural Revolution that victimised millions.
Currently, Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is on everyone’s lips because it gives politicians the green light to print money in the Corona crisis. In combination with structural analysis, the risks be-come visible: A second “level of instrumental measures” has been established in the European Union (EU), which controls finances outside the EU treaties and national law. This loss of control also af-fects health policy. The approach of bio-power shows that its dissolution leads to a “seizure of power over the humans as living beings”. Transhumanism glosses this over with the promise of an evolu-tionary leap forward. Humanists, on the other hand, rely on a future in which people can preserve and develop their self-determined, creative nature.
“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, […], The General Assembly, Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights […].“
If humans differ from machines in their ability to think multidimensionally, then analyses of the human sciences should always take a multidimensional perspective. So far, this has rarely been the case. The struggle for the role of the “dominant doctrine”, which is accepted, applied and taught by a majority of the respective discipline, still dominates (juwiss.de, 17.10.2013). In contrast, the present article shows how fruitful a change of perspective can be in terms of broadening knowledge, especially when it transcends narrowly defined disciplinary boundaries.
In the present case, a meta-theoretical approach was taken to the analysis of the Corona policy and its measures. Different criteria speak for the theories in question, such as the topicality and relevance of an approach (e.g. MMT and transhumanism), the revival and transfer of an older theory to current developments (e.g. structural analysis of the Nazi regime and bio-power) as well as terms and theories that simulate a scientific nature and serve manipulation (e.g. ‘conspiracy theory’ and Maoism or its cultural revolution).
Of course, far more approaches could be considered. But this should be left to other researchers. This contribution is intended as a first impulse for social scientists to overcome their speechlessness in the current Corona crisis. After one year, it is time to start scientific discourse on how democratic societies can regain their lost humanistic values. In this sense, the following summarising theses have been deliberately sharpened in order to provoke contradiction and awareness. [S. 22]
