In the 21st century, many people are no longer directly affected by the daily struggle for survival. In this class, life is organized according to artificially created social rules that have grown regionally over thousands of years.

These rules are not questioned and are lived intuitively to a greater or lesser extent by each individual. They indirectly ensure that survival is secured. Money, relationships, power, to mention just the core elements. Of course, these rules are more multi-layered, more complex, more opaque.

Nevertheless, these rules can be recognized and questioned. From everyone. However, since these rules directly affect the quality and indirectly the duration of survival, they are part of the humanitarian problem: life and survival are almost never questioned. Even death is ignored for as long as possible.

On the one hand, this behavior is understandable, as it is deeply ingrained in humans as a survival instinct. On the other hand, the degrees of freedom of the mind make it possible to reflect on one’s own construction and to question one’s own behavior.

Of course, it is much easier to accept the status quo and ignore the potential of hidden opportunities, which is why very few people see the status quo as a problem. The status quo of someone trapped in an artificial social construct and the corset of basic instincts imposed by nature, who wanders aimlessly and without a plan in a world that despises and destroys humanity and only the fewest benefit from this man-made construct.

It takes a good deal of self-deception not to rebel against this perfidious system of rules and not to try to create a new one in which all people can live self-determined, fair and peaceful lives in harmony with nature and in perfect symbiosis with the rest of life.

Journalists attach great importance to freedom of the press and anonymization of their sources. What you unfortunately do not value is quality journalism, balanced reporting and critical illumination of important factual issues.

This is reflected in the work you deliver every day. Deplorable and pathetic, the poor workmanship is driving away more and more readers and subscribers. And rightly so.

But where does the discrepancy between self-perception and actual journalistic work come from? Why is there no look at other countries where quality journalism is still possible in marginalized areas and which could serve as a positive example?

Why is the level of your own standards so low that most published texts can only be subsumed under scribbling? Where is the professional pride and the ethos of the past to be enlightening and informative and to limit oneself to the important and essential?

The majority of content is cross-published, bought in or, it seems, agreed with competitors. Interchangeable and arbitrary content, interchangeable and arbitrary publishers, interchangeable and arbitrary authors.

Why are highlights of journalistic work so rare and the vast majority of publications completely irrelevant?

Journalists struggle with various adversities:

• Your own hubris
• The own inability
• The own phlegm
• The minimum value standards of one’s own work
• The learned scissors in the head
• The prevailing cost pressure
• Indirect pressure from politicians and publishers

As a result, mediocrity is still a euphemism to describe journalism published in Germany in the 21st century.

See also: Mainstream, Krüger Uwe

In the late 20th and early 21st century, one approach to conflict resolution was and is discourse withthe parties involved.

However, discourse is only possible or meaningful if the following points can be assumed by all parties involved:

• Openness
• Empathy
• Tolerance

These abilities are often attributed to themselves without actually being present. Without the triad of these basic skills, a discourse quickly degenerates into an exchange of entrenched world views with no chance of resolving the underlying conflict.

Unfortunately, very few people involved in a conflict have just one of the three skills, which is why many of the publicly displayed discourses, known as talk shows, are unparalleled in their ridiculousness and predictability.

Conflicts can only be resolved if all parties involved have the ability and willingness to find and accept a solution.