The presumption and sanction: A look at the Guttenberg affair

In the world of politics and public opinion, the fascination for the rise and fall of celebrities remains unbroken. The story of Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, whose political career ended abruptly due to a plagiarism scandal, is an example of how presumptuousness and sanctioning by the public and institutions play a central role. this articleIlluminates the background, dynamics and ethical implications of this affair.

The rise and expectations

Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg’s rise within the CSU and his later appointment to various government offices created a milieu basis that made his takeover of power appear as a logical consequence of courageous decisions. His image as a modern conservative, coupled with the support of the media, fueled expectations of a new era in German politics.The public perception was characterized by the idea that Guttenberg not only possessed the skills but also the ethical integrity to take on a leading role. The media landscape played a crucial role. Influential newspapers that acted with similar objectives seemed ready to rise as a political crowning glory of Guttenberg’s rise toto announce consistent conservatism. The rhetorical veiling through the ethics of honor and the portrayal of Guttenberg as an adoptive son of Merkel reinforced this impression. The actors and the public in the hectic opinion-forming forums could hardly escape the attraction of this adventurous logic of surpassing.

The presumptuousness and the bourgeois order

But before the myth of “iron” chancellorship and ethical inflexibility could determine action, the bourgeois order stood in the way. Students’ sneakers, the outcry of the scientific organizations, critical journalism and the parliamentary debate at the people’s sovereign place, indicated that the elementary human figure of presumption was notwould be sanctioned without consequences. The misjudgment of this fact culminated in the public accusation of fraud and led to a dismantling of the claimed credibility. The associations with ancient tragedy do not seem exaggerated in this context. It was not the strategic deception or Machiavellian calculation, but the deception about oneself, thehad to be sanctioned. In ancient times, this was the thing of the gods who performed draconian rituals of punishment. The bourgeois order, for which the separation of office and person is a great achievement, keeps other ways open. The resignation and at the same time the protection of the person are fundamental elements that reflect the dignity of dignity for the experience of presumption, error andpride.

The motivation of the programmed failure

The question of the motivation of the programmed failure of the intent remains unanswered. In the succession of the logic of surpassing, which large parts of the nation were willing to follow in sporting enthusiasm, how can the reading of unrecognized risk and the obvious hazard, which is at the very beginning, be interpreted? The close neighborhood of daring and embarrassment inGuttenberg’s dramaturgical exposé is subject to the reading of the opposite, a caesura, a pause. It is not to be denied that the publicly celebrated grandiosity, including its presumptuous ride in the direction of the chancellorship, was accompanied by the longing to be relieved of the self-commitment. As if Kairos, Guttenberg’s constant companion, in theDisguise of what has historically been uniquely waiting for the biographical moment to finally be able to shed the disguise, to leave the masquerade of excessiveness behind and to find recognition in a bourgeois understanding – i.e. in a dignity without preconditions.

The role of shame and the possibility of self-reflection

Every year, the German Society cultivates the carnival, a public thematization of deviance and masking, a later descendant of the tragedy. A rogue who came up with the bourgeois order purgatorium, after a sharp parliamentary debate on politics and pride, after the resignation of all political offices, may be thePrerequisites have entered into Aachen and receive the order against animal seriousness. No longer in the plagiarism, in the mask of brother Philipp, but in the authentic figure of an insightful member of society. That wouldn’t be coket with irony, not pathetically declared humility, but insight and self-irony – a narrative,A rewriting in the spirit of Richard Rorty, which only provides bourgeois society. However, this presupposes to overcome the greatest obstacle of human insight, which shame. Once again, shame proves to be the great regent behind the theater that lies behind us. She is more confused with self-assertion than with reflection. Rather, she insistsThe game with the mask, to make it visible to the farewell to hallucinated greatness as an achievement, as agreement and recognition of personal weakness. The appearance of fate is limited in modernity after the gods have disappeared to no more than a hint – not punishment, but an offer, a tender doubt about “always:” and about “hardly anyforeseeable”. Incidentally, taking up the effort of self-reflection could keep the promise, with the remaining recognition of the milieu specialty, in respect of the achievements of the family tradition, to enter a field of activity in the complex requirements and competence structure of the bourgeois world, neither animal seriously nor permanently bold, but just as not shameful.