politics is a linguistic minefield. Therefore, it seems somewhat strange that, of all things, Robert Habeck published a mindfulness book about political language. Here, a wants to defuse the mine field of political communication, which has started a few days ago, even a Mine. Habeck had said in a Video before the Bayern-choice, that with the end of the CSU-alone government return to democracy after the Bayern back – as if the previous absolute majority would have been undemocratic. It rained criticism. Habeck responded, apologized: “I formulated lashing.”
Perhaps, it is already a progress, if a politician interprets your own statements as an active failure. Common in the phrase to have expressed in an ambiguous fashion or, worse, simply misunderstood.
No question, Habeck language can be, he has his SPD-colleague Andrea-“Starting tomorrow, you’ll get in the face”-Nahles, German language and literature studies, he is a PhD, and Yes, he writes. Children’s Books, Fathers Books, Africa, Novels, Plays. Perhaps it all not necessarily for the history of literature, but language instinct, Habeck has definitely. Also, the “formerly known as outside Minister” on his Twitter Account is evidence of this.
“Who could we be” (Kiepenheuer & Witsch) Habeck of more political “sensitivity for what it can do language”. It is true that the national populist has produced tables discourse in the last years an unprecedented verbal muck, with the Green as a “climate Nazis”, Angela Merkel’s chancellorship as the “darkest Chapter of German history” and Germany as the “spirit of dictatorship” have been defamed. Certain AfD-politician, Habeck, “to use terms with which Nazism has been described for the democratic present”. This is a “revaluation of all values” à la Nietzsche.
Habeck takes on its hundreds of pages with mindfulness but it is not only the right but also the left edge of the policy language to the visor. “Language is home. In a very basic sense. Only when I understand the language around me, I can find myself in the world, to feel at home.“ If not, Habeck cinema advice, not to be lonely, like Bill Murray in the Tokyo of the Film “Lost in Translation”.
Green are not understood
the following is a very telling scene about the “lost” in their own country: “We, the greens, use in official texts, such as, of course, the Gender-Star, to make visible, that all the people in the language have their place – but in East Germany the people look at one blankly when one speaks of workers, though it’s been there for decades, of course, is that women, much more self-evident, as it was a long time in the West.”
analysis aptly. And what follows? Every politician should ask themselves: “What are the terms I, and what is the use?” Habeck know that political language has to make a identity offers. And yet he wants to lead this discourse rather in the subjunctive, “open”, “vulnerable” and “vulnerable” instead of “cynical”, “populist” and “bitter” such as the AfD. Carefully, we should talk, verbal Softies we want to be.
Sometimes Habeck Tacheles must talk
this begins with The title in the subjunctive: “Who we could be” and not “Who we are” as the eponymous book on the identity of the East German of Wolfgang Engler, and Jana Hensel. Habeck would like to bring more Musil’s sense of Possibility in the policy language, he touches on Hölderlin, Novalis, and Paul Celan, and knows that he needs to talk to a country farmers Tacheles, and not just in quotation marks can speak. Whether “the language of democratic dispute,” which calls for Habeck, quiet, smart, and successful at the same time, it will show in the election results.