What is a healing scab made of?

For God's sake?

This “14-minute trailer of an allegedly two-hour anti-Mohammed film”, which has been clicked a million times: http: //www.theeuropean.de/martin-eiermann/5197-berichticherung-uber-mohammed-video-auf-youtube, which to bloody riots and murders in liberated Benghazi and other parts of the Arab world, the viewer switches off after a few minutes. Not even out of a gag reflex like Hillary Clinton, who also presumably never saw the entire film, but at least thinks the trailer “hideous or reprehensible” ”: http: //www.youtube.com/watch? V = p-wePTyzGEM . Or like “Guido Westerwelle”: http: //www.tagesthemen.de/multimedia/politikimradio/audio94936.html, who also presumably never saw the film and, following a crude understanding of diplomacy, calls out to the Arab world: “I appeal especially on today's Friday, on the day of the Friday prayers, to the fact that the opinion is expressed with determination against this video, because that is a despicable video. "

As bad as late afternoon series on commercial television

No, this film excerpt is so inexpressible because it is so badly made. As bad as those late afternoon series on private television that you turn off when you accidentally go there. The trailer for this piece of work (I did see it to the end) points to a film that cannot nearly have the cinematic quality of Mel Gibson's film "The Passion of the Christ". Gibson's film also triggered an outrage - albeit bloodless - which resulted in a joint declaration by the Central Council of Jews, the DBK and the EKD in Germany, for example: “The way the film is portrayed carries the risk of reviving anti-Semitic prejudices. This is particularly explosive in view of a situation in Europe in which an increase in anti-Semitic tendencies can be seen. ”So now people were dying because of a completely insignificant and, moreover, terribly badly made film preview. And the violent demonstrations in Islamic countries continue. The US is even sending prophylactic warships to protect American citizens from the angry mob and is currently withdrawing some of its ambassadors.

One could despair over all this madness

Is it high time to verbally crack down on this actually existing form of Islam? Of course, and rightly so. But aren't we arguing with the water pistol for religious peace? What is going on in the 21st century with these unspeakable monotheistic world religions? What is going on in the leaders, followers, and followers of these religions? What motivates “religious” people on both sides to rage and kill for their religious beliefs over the centuries? One could actually despair over all this madness, this hatred and this brutality in the name of Jesus or Mohammed. Hillary Clinton again on the murders in Benghazi: "An attack that should horrify people of all faiths in the world: We pray for those (...) we have lost." No, Madam Secretary of State, these acts also horrify that silent majority who do not belong to any faith at all or who do not practice any more. People who do not pray, but who can still feel compassion and sadness in the most original way. Yes, there it is again, that leaden aftertaste that can be tasted so clearly in our own ranks at least since W. Bush's religiously argued God-wants-it! Campaigns. The war of civilizations prophesied for the beginning of the 21st century did not materialize. Because culture doesn't have any of that. What remains are the old, blood-soiled battles in the name of one of the two religions, in the name of a great global unculture. This could lead to the sad assumption that humans are actually bad by nature. Yes, the Christian religions state this explicitly, but leave the promising loophole belief: Those who only believe strongly can overcome evil. Who would like to delve deeper into all this sleight of hand-insanity? What an eternally damned struggle for plausibility in the irrational: In our hemisphere of faith from Augustine to Luther to the German Pope, who claimed in a nebulous modern way: “Nobody has the opportunity to start at a perfect 'point zero' and do their good in complete freedom to develop. ”But yes, Christianity currently seems domesticated on the whole. And the tamed domesticate their children themselves. But out of necessity! Because they are under permanent secular fire. In their own country. Islam does not stand under this introspection. You look at the madness from the outside.

The typical reflexes take effect

The Middle East-Palestine conflict is a good example of the wickedness of religions. This incurably bloody wound between Christianity / Judaism and Islam. And how thin the healing scab is on this nasty wound is proven again by the reactions to this unspeakably dreary 14-minute film. Because of course, the ominous makers of the film, now probably forcibly outed as somehow Christian hate nerds in Coptic-Egyptian, should initially be Jews. Sure: Hollywood, film, Jews - this is how the hollow chain of credibility clues should work. Who could refute the assertion here that the good will, the will to do good, is lip service on both sides of these religions. It almost seems that Islam and Christianity define themselves most effectively through the violence of the other side. And yet, as a non-monotheistic European, one cannot avoid falling ill with Stockholm Syndrome in view of the excesses of violence that this video triggered. Yes, yes, one is practically compelled to show solidarity with the Christian who has been calmed down in the centuries of struggle for the Enlightenment. Do you think we need our Christians as brave soldiers at the front against radical Islamism? But what do we do afterwards with the Christians who have become radicalized again in this way, whom we should then have allowed to run wild? No, the gloomy calculation would not work out. Because the elementary interest in making the front exists on both sides of the monotheistic religions. The great Wolfgang Brosche - who will hopefully get a bigger platform in the future than only in the comment function on The European - puts it aptly: “What the Catholic morality (Protestant morality is only an offshoot of it) can actually be found over two millennia not just in Deschner's exuberant collection of facts. ”Of course, the same applies to Islam, only that you have 700 years less on the bill, or you could trample on the backs of people who wanted only one thing all over the world; be left in peace and enable their children to live a peaceful and contented life.

An insulting machine that does not want to be demolished

This video is an example of a machine of insult that does not want to be demolished, which - who can assume otherwise? - Must be inherent in monotheistic religions. Villains define their promise of salvation by increasing the malevolence of their counterpart. A contest of evil? Perhaps actually, if one can still think in the religious categories of good and bad at all. So there is also a kinship. Identity of essence. Wolfgang Brosche continues: "Religions (...) always fight to the blood for the correctness and truth of their God." And Brosche on the Stockholm Syndrome: "Even if a large part of the population is supposedly religiously indifferent, I fear that in insecure Times of the run in the pews starts again. Out of fear of the future and fear of one's own responsibility (...). Regardless of which religion it is - they are still poisoning our lives in the 21st century. ”Back to the beginning: The German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, who is sinful because of his homosexuality in both religions, calls for (peaceful) religious demonstrations! What an act of complete self-denial! Because in at least seven Islamic countries, in Iran, Nigeria (northern parts of the country), Mauritania, Sudan (northern parts of the country), Yemen, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, Westerwelle is even threatened with the death penalty (“Source Wikipedia”: http: // de .wikipedia.org / w / index.php? title = File: World_homosexuality_laws.svg & filetimestamp = 20120815123138).

The monotheistic religions are being exploited

And then you ask yourself what someone like the “model Catholic Martin Mosebach”: http://www.theeuropean.de/alexander-wallasch/11479-martin-mosebachs-vom-wert-des-verbietens feels these days. Let's hope he's domesticated and horrified by the escalation like all of us. But how great must this secret wildness be to see his latest demand supposedly confirmed, which says: that it “serves art and the social climate when blasphemy is punishable again”. And of course this film is exactly that: a blasphemy in the guise of art, however unartistic it may be. Yes, the hatred and violence in the Islamic countries on the occasion of this video actually use both monotheistic religions in a perfidious way. Or as Martin Mosebach seems to be hoping for in his essay “The Value of Prohibition”: “But even for a state that is strictly neutral in terms of ideology, the need to combat blasphemy could arise if it jeopardizes the state's order. This can happen when a large group of believers feels so violated in their religious beliefs by blasphemy that their outrage becomes a public problem. "

To think that now is gloomy. Maybe too dark

And now to finish with a U-turn, as for example Dr. Bernhard von Guretzky thinks ahead: “What if the escalation around this 'video' was all just a game, like it was back then with the Mohammed caricatures? And just no - at least currently justified - reason to rail against the monotheistic religions? Then one would have to ask the question, however, how it can be that a society can be so incited. And what kind of strange society is the West that it thinks it has to sink into the ground because of this concoction? “Yes, could speak for what Benjamin Netanyahu just told NBC: Iran is“ ruled by a leadership with an incredible fanaticism ” : http://www.tt.com/Nachrichten/5421693-2/netanyahu-wirft-iran-unlaublichen-fanatismus-vor.csp. It is about "the same fanaticism" that has been the basis of the violence against numerous Western embassies in the Muslim world in recent days. To think this further is gloomy. Maybe too gloomy.