1. The Need of New Approaches - Kritische Stimmen zur ...

2012
Chapter 9: The Thought Experiment
Evading the Trap of Book Publication
The obvious option of self-financing a first book publication by one of the relevant publishers was discussed,
but was rejected for several reasons.
First of all, it was essential that the anonymity of the research project would not be endangered. And without a
certain easing of this anonymity, it seemed unlikely that a publisher would risk the apparent uncertainty of such a
legal situation. No publisher, however, can really guarantee its author complete discretion. With the outstanding
proof of its criminal energy over the past 80 years, the so-called “academic science” would be quick to spy out any
publisher chosen.
Moreover, the fate of the two best critical publications in the German language - Theimer 1977 and Galeczki/
Marquardt 1997 - although in book form and freely available as a publisher’s edition in the bookshops, did not
appear to us to be very enticing. Although purchased by several libraries and private customers, no mention
whatsoever was made of them in the conformed press and they were excluded from scientific discourse by the socalled
“physical science”, as is all other criticism.
In a certain sense, both books can therefore be said to have been published subject to the exclusion of the public
- so far, at any rate.
A third point was that, in the event of a book publication, simultaneous distribution in the Internet is not
normally possible. So far no model for parallel distribution via different distributors (in print via the publisher, and
online via the author) has been developed, except perhaps for works of reference.
Publication by a publishing house to the exclusion of the public and subject to waiving of Internet distribution;
such a dead end is not exactly something on which the project needed to invest either money or effort. Nevertheless,
to leave no approach unused and to exclude no one from our thought experiment we sent the first text version of the
documentation to approx. 30 publishing companies. In future, therefore, no one from the publishing companies
either can creep into the mouse holes of unawareness.
The Catastrophe of Educational Incompetence
When masterly books such as those by Theimer in 1977 (which was miraculously republished in 2005) and by
Galeczki and Marquardt in 1997 (unfortunately still out of print and so far not reprinted) can be excluded from
public attention, this is a sure indication that our society is seriously ill.
This is a very objective diagnosis. Our society is either blind or deaf or both, or drug-addicted or otherwise
mentally or emotionally disturbed, or perhaps simply feeble-minded; the term feeble-minded applying to all
appearances of debility up to idiocy, recognizable - according to the dictionary - by the symptom of educational
incompetence.
When this is suffered by an individual, one speaks of an inevitable, twist of fate. When it is suffered by a whole
society, then it has been deliberately organized and there are those responsible for it, who have pulled on the right
strings of power. Since the affliction has been artificially induced, however, it can also be overcome.
The circle of those responsible can only be vaguely demarcated, but it does exist. One only has to listen to these
people when they praise each other: exceptionally intelligent, always profound, incredibly well-educated, ethically
outstanding, bearers of heavy responsibility both day and night, important for their earnings or for their office or
their influence up to a fourth „force” of their own within the nation, and then supposedly even actively investigative
and always with the welfare of the public in mind.
All in all, therefore, it has to do with the great thinkers, geniuses, luminaries and pillars of our society, its crème
and elite. The best amongst us. Some of them even write poems to the natural sciences. In terms of their own selfassessment,
the offices they hold, their functions and their influence, these people are responsible for informing
and for not informing the public and consequently also for the suppression of criticism and for the censorship in the
media and in all powerhouses of our educational system, practically throughout the whole federal German society.
So these people, the best amongst us, are responsible or co-responsible for a cultural catastrophe the extent of
which is as yet unknown, the catastrophe of relativity, which is why it is important to test their responsibility and to
record the results.
3
G. O. Mueller: STR