Whoever speaks of the “mobility turnaround” can only mean turning away from individual mobility. A “turn” signals nothing other than a radical U-turn, a reversal in the opposite direction. In plain language: away from automotive mobility, back into the sluggish world of immobility.
Wende can be heard all the time in Germany. It all started with the turning point in 1989, when the "GDR" moved from socialism in the opposite direction to capitalism. In this respect, the term “turnaround” was entirely appropriate. If there is constant talk of a turnaround in the current political arena, then nowadays mistrust is absolutely appropriate. Because turning around means turning around. Not correction, as today's reversible necks want us to believe.
“Wende” is mostly perceived as a turning towards good
Be it the energy turnaround, the traffic turnaround, the mobility turnaround: all of these empty phrases obscure the ideological background and the intention behind it. What can a change in mobility mean but a 180-degree change of direction? The “Wende” protagonists know only too well that this cannot be implemented. But in order to push politics in this direction, people pretend that a “turnaround” should always be understood as a move towards the good. “Wende” has a fundamentally positive connotation in broad circles of the media and the population.
Angela Merkel's sentence of wanting to "tighten the reins" shows how treacherous formulations can be. In doing so, it makes it clear that it has so far led the citizens of this country, the sovereign, by the (loose) reins. What a revealing, what a discriminatory language is that! That is the language you would expect from dictators, but not from a head of government in a democracy. To express that one leads the citizens by the reins is an outrageous presumption.
Green verbal politics in the slipstream of Corona
And when a prime minister fables about the start of the economy and ignores the fact that a go-around maneuver actually has to save a failed approach. Not only politicians often get tangled up in linguistic images that completely ignore their actual purpose, but make the truth behind them visible. They do not notice that they are exposing themselves. Like Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière at the time, who refused to answer a journalist's question on the grounds that this could only unsettle the population. It is actually outrageous in a communicatively transparent democracy. Had Putin or Trump said this, media hell would have fallen on both of them.
The fact that green politics also wants to push through completely different intentions in the slipstream of the corona measures is also evident from a subordinate clause of Baden-Württemberg's Minister of Social Affairs, Manfred Lucha (Greens): It is known that hotels are not hotspots when infected. The aim of the ban on accommodation is to reduce the incentive to be mobile. Well, yes, in the meantime the ban on accommodation has been overturned by the state's administrative court. Of course, Lucha's party sticks to its intention to restrict mobility.