Hermann L. Gremlizas collected writings | EUROtoday

The query of whether or not Hermann L. Gremliza was a communist or not is something however subordinate as a result of the variability is now not too many, however not in Germany, however not anyplace. This already outcomes from its place, which is characterised by isolation and expertise, however definitely doesn’t present how it may be seen in studying the “collected writings”. Their first two volumes are actually out there, a great 5 years after Gremliza’s loss of life.

The one in every of Gremliza’s daughter Friederike and Wolfgang Schneider – one writer of the daddy of the journal for tradition and politics for 45 years, the opposite of his lengthy -time editor – fearful work version gathered all of the clearly identifiable texts, whereby the sympathetic undeniable fact that Gremliza didn’t have an archive formidable has an obstacle. The chronological give up has the benefit that when it comes to content-interpretative objections to place, to categorise it turns into out of date and that one can indulge within the pleasure of the studying.

Gremliza’s stylistic brilliance, his argumentative originality and sharpness, which can’t be denied by anybody, already develop within the first texts that he wrote in 1963/64, in the beginning of twenty, for the Tübingen pupil newspaper “Notes”. Already right here life and work-determining, the entire topic areas to be fitted beneath anti-fascism and anti-capitalism are managed.

It impresses how Gremliza’s conviction reveals itself within the very first textual content: He closes his evaluation of South African arbitrary justice with a name for donations for his or her victims, the linguist Neville Alexander, though he sees little prospects that there’s nonetheless one thing to be modified on the ten -year detention on Robben Island, door with Nelson Mandela. It stirs how easy, merely and truthfully humanitarian considering finds phrases right here: “But releases us from the obligation to testify our solidarity in need of fellow students in need, yes, to show the world that there are students who are willing to act from a spontaneous feeling for moral and good action without first making a statement of success?”

However, idealism was not his trigger. Already within the Tübinger after which in his Berlin pupil season, he calculates with every part that solely smells previously and current in line with NS. In explicit, he has an eye fixed on the workers, which continues to be in workplace and dignity, on this regard. Beyond such outstanding circumstances as Globke and Kiesinger, which Beate Klarsfeld will solely slaps years later, the “notes” and, after transferring to Berlin, the “Fu mirror” are discovered for shameful continuities; Gremliza might virtually be described because the assistant of the Attorney General Fritz Bauer.

The first quantity bundles, masking the years 1963 to 1975- whereas all different three document- the important profession and life stations. Already right here the method, which is skilled at Karl Kraus to follow language as an ideology criticism, involves full bloom. If, in line with Schopenhauer, to whom Gremliza couldn’t ideologically gained, write nicely (virtually), suppose nicely, then you’ve gotten a wonderful instance in Gremliza. He has at all times acknowledged his opponents of their language, which is why he had so many. Style and his criticism he understood as one thing that was a part of historic duty.

He did not keep away from any argument. What Walter Boehlich turned for Suhrkamp in 1968 was Gremliza for the “Spiegel”, to which Rudolf Augstein had introduced him and during which he might most likely have been rather a lot: a load -bearing, however quickly annoying, as a result of it was open to the co -determination and due to this fact needed to be eliminated, which needed to be eliminated because of this or eliminated himself. The worker KG has certainly owes their existence of his Renitenz, who pressured Augstein or gave the intelligent thought of ​​overwriting half of the writer to the staff, however continues to withhold the precise energy.

At Gremliza it didn’t break up, he later advised the “Swabian Tagblatt”: “Augstein said to me the next first head of the department, earn twice, but hold the flap. If he would hardly have thought of him before he left, not documented here; This is how a four -year gap explains until 1972.

Then comes the most important and last stop. The in the mid-1950s, which was founded by the windy hedonist Klaus Rainer Röhl in the mid-1950s and renamed in 1957, at the best of time on a circulation of more than 175,000, but then soon downgraded APO central organ-Gremliza spoke of “ranging”-offered him a suitable platform that he was responsible for publishing solely and editorial Since then the issue of September 26, 1974, which was published every month and until his death in December 2019, remained to expand and consolidate that his name and that of the magazine soon came to cover. He admitted openly that with the founding of the publisher was “needed to pay a whole lot of tuition”.

It is understood that journalists like to write down about different journalists. Gremliza did that too. But his media present “Express”, which soon became the trademark of the booklet and for some to read it, was not an organ of self -referentiality or gossip, but an expression of its attitude. Although the man who was scary at a young age had a solid worldview, his personnel and theme policy was liberal in an unorthodox sense. He had confessions within his own sheet carried as well as those with other leaves and their authors.

In his first years, Gremliza was dealing with the staff of the social -liberal era, which he did not affect doctrinary, but in the awareness that this was less evil compared to a conservative government. How difficult it had and would always have a left -wing majority in Germany at the time, he also recognized the decisive difference to the Union camp, which was already a power machine at the time.

In any case, astonishing how durable his inventory is. You don’t have to talk something like topicality, but some things could be directly from today, where you are spending a few thoughts about the formation of a left -wing camp, such as this from May 1972: “In addition, alliance questions are existence questions of left -wing politics. Anyone who has labored for ten years to arrange the SPD for a grand coalition needed to know that brief -term alliances with the correct to lower the idea of a left -wing get together. , “Mobilize ‘,” mobilize corporations’ after which the good commonality – this may take a celebration whose aim is upkeep and acquisition of energy, however not a celebration that promotes modifications and whose advantages should signify credibly. ” A moment of real political reason is still suitable for its sharpest attacks. Gremliza was in the SPD until the faction had risen to sing the national anthem on the occasion of the fall of the Berlin Wall – he left out.

Thanks to Gremliza’s information, you get a pretty precise picture of a political public, of which one really takes on today that the parties differed even more in it, in which, however, also working with the toughest bandages, often or simply gently argued. In any case, the social liberal years were not particularly civilian. Gremliza stated his daily policy considerations in the annoyance of the eternal fragmentation of the left, although it is noticeable that his thoughts were already explicitly circling a “democratic socialism” from which the SED, the “concrete” under Röhl, but no longer co -financed under him, later formed its new name. Some of the problems he did as a purely academic one, whose solution would not help anyone rightly: “But is it actually so necessary in a rustic just like the Federal Republic, whether or not Marx or Lenin or Lenin or Rosa Luxembourg or Mao or two or three of them are proper. Is it actually necessary at a time when socialism is way away and at the least additional away than a right-hand coup?” So clarified, principally the not but thirty -three 12 months outdated in October 1973.

From right here it’s now not thus far to the infamous “concrete congress” from June 1993 in Hamburg, which was under the impression of murders of migrants and the resulting asylum law enforcement, but also showed less dispute, but a dispute. Ulf Poschardt, who has long since no longer suspected sympathy for any communist, recognized a problem that has not become less since then: “With this congress, the triumphal march of angle over the information, morality concerning the argument, the gesture concerning the substance.”

Special occurrences or subjects that Gremliza’s focus was on the time, along with the “capitalism criticism” that has always been consequently, in our days, and the so-called “skilled ban”, which has become consequently without consequences and the exposure, and often enough, the radical decrease, the allende crash in Chile and, the activities of the CIA and, Continuous, what was going on in Bonn.

His omissions are interspersed or enriched with the most exquisite polemic that could in principle hit everyone, not only the Union Personal (Norbert Blüm expressly excluded). The fact that he joined the Armen Theo Sommer (“Die Zeit”) was less due to disagreements, rather because of his editorial habit. He actually only let the comrades satisfied: Herbert Wehner. Surprising are the sharp but civilized skirmishes with Rudi Dutschke and with Günter Wallraff, whose ghostwriter was Gremliza for the “Bild” newspaper report “The Aufmacher”. His relationship with the RAF, which is more distant than the priori ideological similarities, suggested, which is more distant.

With the question of what Gremliza has achieved with all of this, you do not need to wait until the eighteenth and last volume of this work edition, for which you can only wish the editors the best. With his pointed-enthusiastic joke, with which he also made it to an unmatched master of the names of the name, with his bat-fine linguistic organ, he stood today, where the journalism has become less confrontative, often harmless on the one hand, but also in its alarmism, but also fully as the solitaire that he was from the start. He couldn’t do anything about the fact that he and his magazine, not only because of an inevitable loss of circulation, over time. It was serious that it was serious to him with the left thing that could only have been effective in unity; He just didn’t find the right one or enough heard. The “solely left -wing public journal in Germany”, according to his own claim, became an objection to it in 1989/90, which was a cut that was hardly too overestimated for him and his milieu.

Hermann L. Gremliza sensed as soon as someone left the educational citizen out. However, he did what was his office according to Horaz: he used and also enjoyed a lot of pleasure. That should be enough.

Hermann L. Gremliza: “Collected writings in 18 volumes”. Specifically, Hamburg 2025. Vol. 1: 1963–1975, 545 p. Vol. 2: 1975–1978, 485 pages born, € 30.