A summer of panic

It is warned again. This time it is the delta variant of the corona virus that the professionally admonishing voices warn about, and Delta-Plus was mentioned in the news today as a precaution. We are warned of the fourth wave, which could reach us in just a few months. It is also warned that all, without exception, those who do not get vaccinated will sooner or later become infected with the Delta version, or perhaps even with Delta-Plus. And so that no one takes this possibility lightly, it is also immediately warned that such an infection can be very dangerous, much more unpleasant than the vaccination reaction, which can indeed be very unpleasant, if one can believe one’s own experiences and the information from the small talk topic number 1. But infection, experts warn, can be much worse, even for children, so it is rumored.

Of course, there will be more waves of infection, it will be the delta version of the Corona virus, or maybe the theta version. Perhaps in the next few years we will memorize the whole Greek alphabet, and as a donkey bridge we will use the seasons and months in which the particular variant first appeared. You will write poems with funny rhymes, because “Beta” rhymes with “Later” and only " Psi “rhymes with"Never”.

The students can then memorize the poems again in the next lockdown or the actors, who will not play on theater stages again, can declaim them on YouTube.

Because it is warned, but nothing is done to prevent the next lockdown. No schools will be equipped with ventilation systems. No old people’s homes will be rebuilt, so that visits and community are safely possible even in a pandemic. And there is far too little talk about what measures really make sense to limit a contagion risk.

Nor is there any discussion of what we want to learn from the past months in order to arrive more quickly at the most comprehensive possible assessment of the situation and at the most balanced possible measures with a sense of proportion in the event of future pandemics. How should the coordination between virologists, epidemiologists, sociologists, educational scientists, economists and researchers from other disciplines take place so that all relevant aspects of the crisis can be understood and taken into account right from the start? How can the discussion about different views within a discipline be moderated, so that politicians at the same time gain an understanding of options for action and of the difficulties of assessment? In addition to scientific expertise, how can the interests of the different population groups be taken into account so that there are no further and deeper divisions in society? This must now be discussed politically, and proposals must be put on the table. How can reasonable measures against a pandemic be determined without ignoring the Basic law and fundamental rights with the self-evident arrogance of power?

But the political class has no interest in this, neither the heads of government at federal and state level, nor the members of parliaments, nor the judges who are supposed to control their actions, nor the political consultants from science, who were heard in the last crisis and were given prizes every month and who can be sure that they will again be at the top of the list of influential experts in the next crisis.

You have to see it clearly: it never governs itself as easily as in a crisis for which you are not prepared. The last year and a half has shown that people are, for the most part, willing to go along with and accept everything they are expected to do under the pretext of no alternative. They are craving regulations for which the word ‘measure’ is actually a euphemism, because measures would have to be mentioned if the right steps were taken now to make regulations unnecessary in the future. They cling to the lips of experts and prefer to believe those who demand the toughest regulations. Moreover, as the last few months have shown, the majority of people seem to think that all those who have doubts about the need for draconian health protection measures, and who still express them publicly, must be pushed to the margins of society as troublemakers.

This is a mood in which it is easy to govern, especially since regulations on health protection can also be used to curtail the possibilities of publicly demonstrating visible opposition. When was the last rally in Germany possible, where tens of thousands of people crowded together and loudly expressed their unwillingness to the current policy?

Thus, as things stand, politicians, their established advisers and the recognized experts in the media have the least to fear from a fourth wave and from further pandemics. The warnings they proclaim are not directed at themselves, but at the people to behave in a disciplined manner, because otherwise it is their own fault if the next lockdown is soon necessary. Unless the students and parents, the musicians and artists, the restaurateurs and, above all, those who want to make their political opinion visible on streets and squares and make it known together when necessary, use the summer to make it clear to politics that they will not accept another lockdown.