THE STATE THAT PROSECUTES IRONY AND TOLERATES GENOCIDE IN THE CURRICULUM

I. Two Cases

Case one. Norbert Bolz, media theorist, emeritus professor at TU Berlin. The left-wing daily TAZ runs the headline: "AfD ban and Höcke petition: Deutschland erwacht." Bolz comments on Twitter: "Good translation of 'woke': Deutschland erwache!" — a satirical jab at the TAZ, not at democracy. The prosecution investigates. Four police officers arrive with a search warrant. A house search at the emeritus professor's home. The case is dropped after payment of a fine "in the low four-figure range." Result: no conviction. Cost: lawyers, nerves, reputation. And the certainty that the state will come if you quote the wrong words — regardless of intent.

Case two. Jan Fleischhauer, Focus columnist, podcast "Der schwarze Kanal." He reports on the founding congress of the AfD youth organisation in November 2025, where a certain Alexander Eichwald modelled his speaking style on Adolf Hitler's. Fleischhauer asks ironically: "What is the AfD youth called now? 'Generation Hope' or 'Generation Deutschland erwache'?" — a question that criticises the AfD, not supports it. The Munich prosecution investigates. §86a StGB, use of symbols of unconstitutional organisations. Up to three years in prison. Fleischhauer writes: "I am employed by the Burda publishing house and get lawyers provided. For ordinary people, it can be costly to go the long way through the courts."

And on the platform beyond-decay.org stands an essay titled "Wir werden weiter vererben bis alles in Scherben fällt" ("We will keep inheriting until everything lies in ruins"). The title uses a fragment of an SA song — not to criticise National Socialism, but as literary defamiliarisation: "marching" becomes "inheriting." The SA song is not the subject. It is the device. The parallel reads: then they marched into destruction; now they inherit their way into destruction. Different mechanism, same result.

Two cases, one essay. People who quote National Socialist language — some to criticise Nazism itself; others to use it as a contrasting foil for an entirely different critique. And a state that examines not intent but wording.

II. What the State Prosecutes

§86a StGB prohibits the use of symbols of unconstitutional organisations. The law was created to prevent the glorification of National Socialism. There is an exception for art, scholarship, reporting, and "similar purposes." This exception is called the "social adequacy clause."

In theory, the clause protects irony. In practice, it protects nothing. For the prosecution investigates first and examines the clause afterwards. The process — investigation, summons, lawyers, uncertainty, and in Bolz's case the house search — is the punishment. Even when the case is dropped.

Fleischhauer says it correctly: "Such proceedings have an intimidating effect, even when they end without a conviction." PEN Berlin calls itself appalled. The NZZ writes: "The opinion police in Germany have no sense of humour."

The state prosecutes words. Not intentions. Not effects. Words.

III. What the State Tolerates

Simultaneously, in every school library, in every religious education class, in every church, in every Bible app, in every free church, in every bookshop, there stands a book containing the following:

Numbers 31. God commands genocide against the Midianites. Moses orders the murder of all male children and all non-virgin women. 32,000 virgin girls are distributed as spoils — listed between sheep and donkeys. 32 girls are handed over to God as an offering.

No prosecutor has ever opened a case. No education ministry has removed the text from the curriculum. No bishop has been summoned. No pastor has been searched. No free church preacher has been investigated.

The text has stood there for centuries. In a book regarded as moral authority. In a book on which civil servants swear oaths. In a book from which religious education classes quote — though never from this chapter.

675 sheep for God: no investigation. 32 girls as offering: no investigation. "Deutschland erwache" as irony against the AfD: §86a, up to three years in prison.

IV. The Asymmetry

The asymmetry is so grotesque that it would not work as satire — nobody would believe it.

A journalist quotes a Nazi slogan to criticise the AfD. The state investigates. A professor quotes a TAZ headline ironically. The state searches his home. A pensioner calls the Federal Chancellor "Pinocchio." The state investigates for insulting persons of political life.

Simultaneously: a book that presents genocide as divine command, orders child murder, and lists girls as spoils between donkeys is venerated as holy, subsidised through church tax, used in school instruction, and never questioned by any authority.

The state has resources to transcribe ironic podcasts and scan them for prohibited slogans. It has no resources — or no will — to examine the content of a book that serves as the moral foundation of religious education.

Fleischhauer is right: "One always hears that the judiciary is overburdened. But whoever has time for such nonsense obviously still has too many capacities." The capacities suffice for irony. For genocide in the curriculum, they do not.

V. The Pattern

Behind the asymmetry lies a pattern. And the pattern is not stupidity. It is function.

The state prosecutes what it can prosecute. A journalist, a professor, a pensioner — these are tangible targets. They have addresses. They are identifiable. They have no armies of lawyers (except Fleischhauer, who has the Burda publishing house). A case against them is cheap, fast, and generates file numbers that appear in statistics as "processed cases."

The state does not prosecute what it does not want to prosecute. The churches, the Bible, religious education — these are institutions. They have lobbyists, tax revenues, constitutional status. Article 7(3) of the Basic Law guarantees religious education as a regular school subject. Whoever touches the Bible touches the church. Whoever touches the church touches a power older than the state.

So one prosecutes the journalist and leaves the Bible in peace. One searches the professor's home and leaves Numbers 31 in the curriculum. One investigates the essayist and ignores the 32 girls.

That is not justice. It is risk management.

VI. The Irony the State Does Not Understand

There is a deeper irony that escapes the state. And it concerns the technique of critical appropriation in all its forms.

When a journalist quotes a Nazi slogan to show that the AfD youth behave like Nazis — he is fighting National Socialism. He makes it visible. He warns.

When an essayist uses a fragment of an NS song as a device to criticise the inheritance republic — he is using the language of the past to illuminate the present. His subject is not National Socialism. His subject is decline. The NS quotation is a contrasting foil, not the object.

In both cases: if the state prosecutes the usage, it does not punish National Socialism. It punishes the critical engagement with language. It says: you may not use these words, no matter what for and no matter against whom. The word is prohibited, regardless of intent.

That is like punishing the fire alarm for shouting "fire."

And while the fire alarm stands in court, the building burns. Alexander Eichwald delivers his Hitler speeches at AfD congresses. The AfD may install its first state premier in Saxony-Anhalt. The language Fleischhauer warned about is not spoken in podcasts — it is spoken at party conventions. And there, nobody investigates.

VII. The Essay Not Yet Prosecuted

"Wir werden weiter vererben bis alles in Scherben fällt." So runs an essay on beyond-decay.org. It analyses the German inheritance republic — the €113 billion in annual inheritance volume, the 45 major heirs with a 1.5 per cent tax rate, the 231,000 companies without successors, the Buddenbrooks syndrome of a society that inherits more than it builds.

The title paraphrases the SA song "Wir werden weiter marschieren, bis alles in Scherben fällt." It replaces "marching" with "inheriting." The SA song is not the essay's subject — it is a contrasting foil. Then they marched consciously into destruction. Today they inherit their way unconsciously into destruction. The essay is about the inheritance republic, not about National Socialism. The fragment of an NS song serves as a rhetorical tool — as literary defamiliarisation, as Brecht or Tucholsky practised it: one takes the language of power and turns it until it shows the truth.

Is this §86a? The echo of the SA song is recognisable and deliberate. But the intent is not glorification, not even criticism of National Socialism — it is literary defamiliarisation for an entirely different critique. Every reader understands that it concerns inheritance policy, not National Socialism. The NS quotation is device, not message.

By the logic with which Fleischhauer and Bolz are being prosecuted, the title is a risk. By the logic of common sense, it is literature. The problem is that the Munich prosecution apparently operates not with common sense but with text-recognition software.

VIII. What a State Should Do

A state that wishes to protect its citizens from National Socialism should do three things:

First: examine intent, not wording. A journalist who quotes "Deutschland erwache" to criticise the AfD is an ally of democracy, not its enemy. Prosecuting him is not merely unjust — it is counterproductive. It intimidates precisely those who name and fight National Socialism.

Second: recognise its own inconsistency. A state that prosecutes irony and tolerates genocide in the curriculum has a credibility problem. Either one takes the protection against inhumane content seriously — in which case one must also address Numbers 31. Or one accepts that texts must be read in context — in which case one must leave Fleischhauer alone.

Third: deploy resources where the danger lies. The danger is not a Focus columnist mocking the AfD youth. The danger is the AfD youth. The danger is not an essayist using an SA song as a contrasting foil to criticise the inheritance republic. The danger is the inheritance republic.

IX. The Exhaustion

Germany is exhausted. Its judiciary is exhausted. Its police are exhausted. Its schools are exhausted. Its religious education has been repeating the same sermons for a hundred years, as the young woman at the ICF observed.

And in this exhaustion, the obvious happens: one prosecutes what is easy. Transcribing a podcast, flagging a word, opening a file number — that is easy. Addressing Numbers 31 in the curriculum — that is hard. Fighting the AfD where it is actually dangerous — that is hard. Reforming the inheritance republic — that is hard.

So one does what is easy. And what is easy is: giving Fleischhauer a file number. Searching Bolz's home. Investigating the pensioner for "Pinocchio." And leaving Numbers 31 where it stands — in every Bible, in every school, in every church, in every app. Untouched. For three thousand years.

A state that prosecutes irony and tolerates genocide in the curriculum does not protect democracy. It protects itself — from the effort of asking the real questions. The real question is not whether a journalist may say "Deutschland erwache." The real question is why 32 virgin girls as an offering to God stand in a book that the state recognises as teaching material. And why nobody asks this question.