Suchergebnisse

Der gegenwärtige Ausnahmezustand der Corona-Pandemie verstärkt eine Umdeutung des Liberalismus - nach Mill die Lehre von der Freiheit um ihrer selbst willen - zu einer zweckdienlichen Methode der gesellschaftlichen Konfliktbewältigung. Nirgendwo wird dies so deutlich wie in den Arbeiten des derzeit hoch geschätzten Frankfurter Soziologen Andreas Reckwitz, der sich kürzlich in einem Aufsatz mit der "Krise des Liberalismus" befasst hat. Doch die gesellschaftlichen Problemfelder, die Reckwitz untersucht - Meritokratismus, Infrastruktur und Reziprozität - zeigen, dass das Paradigma des "einbettenden Liberalismus" kaum zum politischen Leitbild der nahen Zukunft werden dürfte. Ein unentschiedener, hybrider Liberalismus, der mit sachten Maßnahmen und Anreizen kaum Veränderungsprozesse anstossen wird, dürfte von einem interventionistischen Post-Krisenstaat hinweggefegt werden.

Abstract
In uncertain geopolitical times, demand is high for political concepts to grasp the unfolding change and give direction. To Europeans and Germans, the presidency of Donald Trump, the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine have all demonstrated how dependent they are from other states and regions in the world. This is particularly true for technology in sectors such as health, energy, defense and digital. In order to reduce these dependencies,"technological sovereignty" has become a key concept - some say a buzz word - in the political debate in Europe. In this article, we analyse prominent views of technological sovereignty particularly in Germany, and suggest a definition and three-pronged analysis framework to understand the key political challenges in implementing the concept. In today's highly connected world order, there is no sovereignty without a measure of interdependence. For Germany and Europe, this translates into a "transatlantic sovereignty" in close alignment with the USA as a principal partner.

This text focuses on transcripts of meetings Bayernwacht-Führer Hans Ritter von Lex held with Hitler in March 1933 which were among church records found in the headquarters of the SD. At the end of the war, these records were confiscated by the Red Army, taken to Moscow and later transferred to the GDR where they remained locked up in the NS archives until the GDR's collapse. Today this archival material is stored in the Bundesarchiv's interim archives Dahlwitz Hoppegarten. The transcripts, which have been edited here, document discussions between Hitler and Ritter von Lex immediately after the NS takeover in Bavaria. In these meetings the possibility of a coalition government between the NSDAP and the BVP were discussed. Although the meetings were known to historians, the content and outcome of the discussions remained obscure. The transcripts reveal how Hitler, during the escalating situation of March 1933, kept several options open and made political decisions spontaneously which followed logically from the course of events. The young party leaders close to Fritz Schäffer and Ritter von Lex began a frenzied search for some middle ground between direct confrontation with the NSDAP or complete assimilation of their party convinced that maintaining political autonomy was the way. (Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte / FUB)