[Rationalism and mystification. On the formal pathetic of being against].

Abstract

The article presents the results of the interpretation of qualitative interviews with coronavirus critics. It focuses on the forms of social criticism manifested in the interviews. The analysis (1) shows that the critique is based on a rationalistic ideal of crisis resolution. The fact that the coronavirus crisis, from this point of view, is not dealt with rationally is seen as an indication that there is something fundamentally wrong with it. It is this problem that the conspirituality of the critics reacts to: a combination of conspiracy theory and esoteric ideas whose unity is based on the interest in the mysterious. The analysis (2) allows to determine the specific style of the critique of counter-measures as formal pathetics: Substantially, it remains relatively empty, while rhetorically it is emphasized all the more emphatically. The rhetorical means are the most drastic comparisons possible, the romanticism of the heroic resistance and the claim to be committed to the well-being of children. Finally, (3) we put forward a socio-theoretical embedding of the critique of counter-measures, which assumes with Eisenstadt that modern society is characterized by an erosion of the foundations of all certainty. This leads to a fundamental credibility problem, manifesting itself in the loss of confidence in central social institutions (politics, science, medicine, media). The criticism of counter-measures expresses that in an ideal-typical way.