Thesis 78: Those who plan a state of emergency do not want freedom.

This post is also available in: Deutsch (German) Français (French) Italiano (Italian) Español (Spanish)

Explanation and justification

States of emergency are supposed to be exceptions – unpredictable, limited, retraceable.
But when a state begins to plan, institutionalize and automate them,
the state of emergency is no longer an instrument of reaction – but a tool of domination.

What state of emergency planning means

  • Pandemic plans that specify measures – independent of Parliament
  • Scenarios in which fundamental rights are restricted as a precautionary measure
  • Emergency regulations in stock
  • international treaties that undermine national sovereignty
  • Algorithmic early warning systems with a duty to act

This is how the state of emergency is becoming the new form of government.

Why this is not harmless

  • Because every future crisis serves to legitimize a prefabricated apparatus of exception
  • Because control is then not democratically legitimized, but systemically activated
  • Because citizens become accustomed to being unfree at intervals – depending on the authorities’ assessment of the situation

Our position

We2030 says:
Freedom must not be undermined by precautionary structures.
A democracy that plans a state of emergency says goodbye to the idea that the people are sovereign.

Anyone who plans a state of emergency does not want freedom.
Because anyone who puts freedom on demand has already abolished it.


Discover more from Wir2030

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Wir2030

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Discover more from Wir2030

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading