Corona, the perfect pretext and precursor to partially self-inflicted slavery.

Today it is exactly 19 months ago that this whole madness started. Since February 11th, 2020 the citizens of this world were made global slaves of the CAF, the Corona Army Faction! Also here in Germany under the pretext of the fight against a fictional and medially hyped up pandemic humans became hostages of a policy, which is built on sand. Now, from a socio-philosophical point of view, with David Hume the question is to be asked whether this can be at all.

How is it at all possible that the few rule over the many with such ease?
How is it possible for a few to take so many people hostage and to seduce them with the promise of "more freedoms", e.g. to have vaccines with a simple emergency approval tried out on them, which they would only very rarely take for purely health or even altruistic reasons, but solely out of the perfectly understandable desire to be free again?

The assumption is obvious that this is by no means a unilateral overpowering by more powerful people. It seems much more to be a fatal collaboration. We have not only watched our deprivation of liberty, but we have at least implicitly consented to it! We have gone on the way into a "Voluntary Servitude" due to a tacit agreement, which has proved to be comfortable for many people, who find it too exhausting "to think for themselves" and enjoy instead to let their new masters think for them, to let them make decisions vicariously, to take their orders etc., instead of acting independently and in the sense of true freedom also to take the responsibility for their actions!

The voluntary servitude into which we have placed ourselves is paradoxically characterized by many freedoms. But according to the words of Friedrich August von Hayek, a society of many small freedoms is not a society of freedom! Such a system characterizes much more a society, in which individual privileges are lent and the people acquire individual liberties in exchange for offers, which they cannot reject.

What we experience is a creeping solidifying development in the small, which makes the whole thing particularly dangerous! Already Alexis de Tocqueville warned against it that one forgets that it is straight and above all dangerous to enslave the people in the small. For the voluntariness and the recklessness with which we have given away our freedom there is a reason! They were prepared by a swiftly launched propaganda campaign that made us forget the values of an open society within a few months and then simply swept aside former self-evident facts.

This propaganda campaign is accompanied by an "administration of fear", of which Paul Virilio already spoke years ago. This fear, which has existed in our societies not only since this fictitious pandemic, but which has dominated us since then in a conspicuous dimension, is the breeding ground for a development on the political, medial, social and psychosocial level, which has led to a totalitarian system that will outlast the Coronafake for a long time to come.

Above all, this fear is maintained by a conglomerate of interests and disinterests. On the one hand we see the striving for power, the lobbyism and the corruptibility of politics, the profit interests of the economy, especially of the BIGtec and the pharmaceutical companies and the planned economy games of the utopians, while on the other hand we see the ignorance and naivety of the population, accompanied by a general fear of freedom and a meaningless hypermoralistic rhetoric of solidarity and the intellectual cowardice and impotence of formerly renowned philosophers publicists writers and scientists.

Speaking of scientists, the rhetoric of "Follow the Science" or "Trust Science" seems particularly perfidious, both genuinely anti-scientific slogans used by influencers and paid journalists to portray legitimate doubts about political pronouncements as "science denial." Hannah Arendt, Karl Raimund Popper, Helmut Schelsky, and most recently the Lausanne philosopher of science Michael Essfeld have already drawn attention to the fact that "science" does not provide eternally secure knowledge, nor is its unity (if it exists at all) a sufficient indication of certainty, and that it can establish descriptive but not normative propositions, and certainly not political commandments or prohibitions according to which a democratically constituted community should act.

If we want to be an open society with pluralistic fundamental values, we should not make the mistake of replacing one authority, be it the people, the leader or "The Party," with another authority and exchange our hard-won exit from our own immaturity for a new bondage. Otherwise, our hostage-taking, into which we have so carelessly maneuvered ourselves, will not end.