This song, 'Happiness at the Trade Fair', sings the praises of the Düsseldorf Conference Center. The reference is to a meeting in Hall B3 in which Herr Sakamoto whips out his 'finest software', if you know what I mean.
A brief slice of an educational English-learning TV show from the former East Germany. Unfortunately, it cuts off just before the good part, in which Muttonchop drops some Sweet Slabs of Socialist Science™ on the English reporter:
A quick note to Germans: Stop calling every policy you disagree with a 'human-rights violation'. There's a solid consensus on what human rights are. They only cover the big things, not every aspect of government policy.
The requirement to send your children to school (g), to pick one of 10,567 examples, is not a human-rights violation. In fact, it's precisely the opposite. Nor is deporting illegal immigrants.
When you claim some government action is a human-rights violation, you're wrong 90% of the time. I can and will prove it.
Stop chuntering about human rights this, human rights that. If you disagree with a policy, just tell us why.
I hope this has been helpful!
"All people of broad, strong sense have an instinctive repugnance to the men of maxims; because such people early discern that the mysterious complexity of our life is not be embraced by maxims, and that to lace ourselves up in formulas of that sort is to repress all the divine promptings and inspirations that spring from growing insight and sympathy. And the the man of maxims is the popular representative of the minds that are guided in their moral judgement solely by general rules, thinking that these will lead them to justice by a ready-made patent method, without the trouble of exerting patience, discrimination, impartiality, without any care to assure themselves whether they have the insight that comes from a hardly-earned estimate of temptation, or from a life vivid and intense enough to have created a wide fellow-feeling with all that is human."
George Eliot, The Mill on the Floss (source)
There's only one way in which I care about the Erdogan thingy — as a pretty interesting legal puzzle. As for all the self-righteous German bloviation about Freedom of Speech, The Whims of a Despot, etc. — that's all a bunch of hooey nobody except a tiny journalistic elite cares about.
From a purely legal perspective, there's a good case Böhmi should be found guilty and fined. Just so nobody don't get the wrong idea, let me explain that I find the 'insulting foreign leaders' law silly, and believe Germany should have got rid of it a long time ago. I also have doubts about whether a modern legal order needs the category of 'abusive criticism' (Schmähkritik). I am talking here descriptively about German law as it is, not as I might wish it to be.
And under these laws, Böhmi's guilty. The 'insulting foreign leaders' law will obviously be interpreted in light of artistic and political freedom guaranteed by the German Basic Law. But here's the thing: artistic freedom, satire, etc. have limits. German magazines can be and have been punished for satire that 'goes too far' (I'm lookin' at you with admiration, Titanic). The key distinction is whether there is a 'Sachbezug' — roughly, some relationship to a recognized political or social issue. It's a weighing test: the severity of the insults against the strength of the relationship to a legitimate subject of debate.
Böhmi's 'poem' fails. It wasn't a puppet-show, or a song, or a sketch, or even a straightforward political commentary. It is nothing more than a collection of racist insults that go far beyond what German law permits in any case. Goat-fucker, kiddie-porn devotee, carrier of gang-bang related sexual diseases, etc. All of these insults are illegal in Germany, even when used sarcastically and even when nobody could be expected to believe there was truth in them. That's how German law works. If Böhmi had said these things about a private persons on national television, it is 100% absolutely ironclad certain he would be convicted. There are literally hundreds of cases on exactly this subject. There was only a brief mention of political issues in the 'poem'. Böhmermann himself, as he read the poem, said that it was illegal. He even entitled it 'Schmähkritik' (abusive criticism). Böhmi consciously, knowingly, by his own admission engaged in conduct that is against the law in Germany.
And if this argument doesn't convince you, let's do a Gedankenexperiment: Böhmi reads a poem about the Israeli President Reuven Rivlin calling him a 'dirty Jew', 'child-murderer', a 'racist warmonger', and a 'fat, malodorous pig'. That is the level of rhetoric directed at Erdogan. Would German politicos and journos be whining about freedom of expression and kowtowing to foreigners? Of course not. Any judge worth his salt, however, will see that these two cases must be treated equally, if the idea of a principle-driven legal system is to have any meaning at all. The issue isn't which foreign leader was targeted, it's what was said.
So he should be found guilty, and I think he will. This is not a case about freedom of expression. This is a case about whether a person who publicly announces he is going to break the law and then does so should be punished. The answer is, and should be 'yes'. The best analogy here is to Joseph Gibbons:
Artist and former MIT professor Joseph Gibbons learned this week that robbing banks, even in the name of art, will still land you in jail. He pleaded guilty to burglary in the third degree this week in a Manhattan court.
Gibbons was arrested in January for a heist staged on December 31 at a Capital One bank in New York's Chinatown. According to court documents, he made his demands for cash in the form of a polite note asking the teller for a donation for his church, and then took $1,000 (see Artist and Former MIT Professor Robs Banks Claiming It's His Art).In November, Gibbons held up a bank in Rhode Island using the same method, and made off with $3,000.
Both times, Gibbons videotaped the theft. “He was doing research for a film," his cell-mate, Kaylan Sherrard, told the New York Post. “It's not a crime; it's artwork…He's an intellectual."
Gibbons went to jail because freedom of expression does not cover illegal activity. That's just as true in Germany as it is in the U.S. Whether you agree with Germany's restrictive freedom-of-expression laws or not, Böhmi broke them.
Here's the problem:
1. Anyone who's paying attention can see that 95% of the migrants who came to Germany in 2015 are going to integrate into the German social welfare system, and probably 50% will never leave it.
2. This is going to piss off working- and lower-middle class Germans, who will still have to work 40 hours a week to make a wage only 20% higher than welfare. Uwe says: 'Why do I have to I bust my ass working in some shitty supermarket for an asshole boss while Firduz hangs out on the street corner getting free money from the government for doing nothing?'
The answer: Universal Basic Income. Abolish Germany's ludicrously complex welfare system, and just give everyone, say, € 900 per month. Enough to subsist on, but not much more.
This plan will have some side-effects, of course, but it won't be such a huge change, since everyone in Germany is already entitled to a basic income — they just have to prove they're unemployed and have no more assets. Under the new plan, everyone gets it. 95% of the useless welfare bureaucracy will vanish, providing huge savings to the German state.
Most importantly, UBI will remove, or at least greatly reduce the envy factor. Uwe will probably continue to work, since the UBI won't pay enough for any luxuries, such as a private washing machine, cars, or vacations. But since he is also getting what Firduz is getting, he will feel much less resentment.
If the SPD had any sense at all, it would stop futzing around with idiotic nanny-state schemes nobody cares about (sexist advertising) and come out loud and defiant in favor of UBI.
A Syrian refugee in Bingen, Germany set fire to the migrant shelter where he lived, and spray-painted a few swastikas to mislead the police:
You call that a swastika? Pathetic.
Take it from me: The secret to spray-painting swastikas is to spray the central cross first. If you're aiming for authenticity, tilt it 45 degrees to make an 'X' — that's now the Nazis did it. Then you simply add some hooks at 90-degree angles. Bingo! It's not called a 'hook-cross' (Hakenkreuz) in German for nothing.
I'll be expecting much better work from now on, Kameraden.
German words for parts of the body are much more colorful and descriptive than their prettified Latin counterparts in English. Fuck nostril, German gives you 'nose-hole' (Nasenloch). Suck it, placenta, in German you're 'mother-cake' (Mutterkuchen). Don't think about that last one too long.
And now for the synovial bursa. WTF is the synovial bursa? This:
A bursa (plural bursae or bursas) is a small fluid-filled sac lined by synovial membrane with an inner capillary layer of viscous fluid (similar in consistency to that of a raw egg white). It provides a cushion between bones and tendons and/or muscles around a joint.
It comes from the Latin bursa, or purse. This is why people in English get bursitis.
Ooh la-de-da, bur-si-tis!
German, the Moe Szyslak of languages, doesn't bully its speakers with this hifalutin' Latinizing.
What is the 'synovial bursa'? It's a bag.
What's it filled with? Slime.
So the German word is Schleimbeutel — literally, 'slime-bag'. Now, you could also perhaps call it 'mucus-bag', since the German word for mucus is also 'slime'. (Hence the German word for the unpronounceable train-wreck of Latinate fuckwittery we English-speakers have to call mucous membrane is Schleimhaut — 'slime-skin').
But the synovial bursa isn't filled with mucus, is it now? No, it's filled with a 'lawyer of viscous fluid' — er, layer of viscous fluid — similar to an egg white.
In other words, slime. And if your slime-bag gets infected, you have a Schleimbeutelentzündung — slime-bag inflammation.
Now you know that in Germany, there are dozens of slimebags inside your body. In addition to the ones in high office (ba-da-BOOM!)