Is the obsession with titles endemic in the CDU?
It became apparent with Merkel:
Her defense minister, Baron zu Guttenberg, was not content with his aristocratic background and also wanted to adorn himself with academic honors. When the fraud was discovered, he defended himself by claiming he had been working so hard that he hadn't had time for a proper doctoral dissertation. The Chancellor considered him a pillar of her power and therefore didn't want to dismiss him. Only when he abandoned the narrative that the Bundeswehr would be building wells and opening girls' schools in Afghanistan, but instead would be waging war, did she have to let him go.
A confidante, who had fraudulently obtained her doctorate, appointed her ambassador to the Vatican. Perhaps there's a special understanding for sinners there? At least Pope Francis wanted to adapt to the spirit of the times and rambled on about an "inclusive capitalism." However, he didn't deny reality and described NATO's war of aggression in Ukraine as barking at Russia's doorstep.
Things aren't much different in the SPD: Scharping had himself waited on hand and foot by a men's outfitter, and Pistorius is worried about his party colleagues. Names and sums of money only come to light if Pistorius deviates from his position that Russia is an enemy state. He has already been inconsistent on several occasions, so he's on the hit list of some mainstream media outlets.
Normally, in a state governed by the rule of law, public prosecutors would be required to investigate politicians for fraud; however, in Germany, they are bound by political directives due to a Nazi-era law, so every prosecutor is wary of indicting a minister or even a state premier. The situation in Thuringia is not an isolated case.
And when one thinks of the SPD health minister and the man with the water damage who received millions from the government for his loyal service, can one conclude from these circumstances that lying and cheating are part of the political process?
"After months of deliberation and nail-biting, those in charge have apparently realized they have no choice: if they want to be taken seriously as a scientific institution, they must strip Mario Voigt of his title, revoke the fraudulently obtained one. And they have now apparently informed the former Doctor of Political Science of this."
As one would expect from a political figure of Mario Voigt's caliber, Voigt reacted with attacks and incomprehension. He claimed that the decision of the Chemnitz University of Technology was incomprehensible to him, adding that the scientific core of his work was unaffected by the plagiarism, that an "independent expert" had determined that his dissertation met "scientific requirements" (a feat, considering he plagiarized from people who had already demonstrated their scientific competence), and furthermore, that the whole thing was unfair because the Chemnitz University of Technology had changed its evaluation criteria during the ongoing proceedings against him.
"You can't really spread more outrageousness and nonsense than that."
https://sciencefiles.org/2026/01/28/entdoktert-mario-voigt-soll-endlich-sein-titel-aberkannt-werden/
Milena Preradovic 01.02.26:
"Anyone who compares today's Germany with that of just 15 years ago will not recognize the country."
An example of political ethics. When it came to light that Defense Minister zu Guttenberg's doctoral dissertation was riddled with plagiarism, public and media outrage drove him to resign in 2011. Today, the situation is quite different: Thuringia's Minister-President, Mario Voigt, is exposed, his university revokes his doctorate, and... the 20 p.m. news simply ignores it. The Süddeutsche Zeitung's narrative: Voigt is fighting the revocation of his doctorate. N-TV and Der Spiegel follow the same pattern.
Take energy, for example. While Germany once increased its prosperity with cheap gas, we now, at the end of January, are looking at a gas storage level of just 35 percent. The exorbitant energy costs are crippling industry and small and medium-sized businesses, and politicians applaud when previously smoothly functioning nuclear power plants are demolished.
And take freedom of speech as an example: From the 1960s to the 2010s, more than two-thirds of Germans regularly believed they could freely express their opinions. Now, only 46 percent believe in freedom of speech in the "best Germany of all time." The police raids at dawn on innocent citizens demonstrate the good instincts of most people.
And cabaret artist Monika Gruber is also worried and expects little good this year in light of new censorship laws and the appeal by leading politicians to restrict independent media. "The new fascists are disguising themselves as anti-fascists," says Gruber, who will be rocking the stage again in 2026 after a one-year break. The conversation also covers the Berlin power attack scandal, the gloomy mood of compliant Germans, war zones instead of Christmas, and the emigration thoughts of someone who is actually attached to her homeland.
Yes, not only individual opinions, but also independent, free media are under enormous political pressure. And they reap the anger and contempt of the political class. Wonderfully evident at the federal press conference.
According to Henderson, someone who uses the term "cis-heteronormativity" doesn't really want to discuss the reality of gender roles, but rather to say: I belong to the elite. I have time to concern myself with thoughts that have no connection whatsoever to my daily problems. I can pronounce difficult words fluently. I am kind and inclusive. I am much better than you.
And why is this idea so interesting? Status is gained by appearing socially acceptable. Up until now, expressing beliefs about luxury has been seen as friendly. Therefore, these beliefs are widely espoused. Woke people view proponents of "trans-inclusion" as good and socially just individuals. The opposing side believes their good intentions but considers them foolish for not fully grasping the implications of unleashing men on women, deindustrializing Germany, abolishing family values, or opening the borders.
Good and groundbreaking, or well-intentioned but somewhat dim-witted—these are the prevailing opinions. So far, people believe the moralizing of these proponents. However, should the view prevail that someone is simply trying to climb the social ladder and to hell with those at the bottom, then these ostentatious views are likely to quickly lose popularity. Who would seriously advocate trans ideology if it weren't fashionable anymore? Or mass immigration? Quite seriously, even in the face of social opposition?
https://tkp.at/2026/02/04/ist-transideologie-ein-statussymbol/