Günther Groissböck on Corona: "I'm afraid of actionism"

He sees it differently than many. And he does not say a word: Opera singer Günther Groissböck comments on the corona crisis

Actually, he should have sung the Wotan in Wagner's “Ring” for the first time this summer. But the Bayreuth Festival was canceled, the mammoth project will now be launched in 2022. Günther Groissböck is also involved in other things - in his opinion, these are excessive measures in the corona pandemic. The 43-year-old also fears that fundamental rights will be undermined.

What are you most afraid of at the moment?

Groissböck: Before actionism and political overreactions. Measures that do more harm than save us from something. The disease itself or an infection personally don't scare me at all. I still find a kind of shock rigidity in many people. And there is a big confusion of numbers.

You don't trust the official numbers?

Groissböck: Yes, it does . For me, the number of deaths, also in comparison to the same period last year, and the number of intensive care patients are decisive. I am less interested in infection numbers because they depend on the frequency of tests in the individual countries and are therefore not suitable for comparison. This is always explicitly referred to by critical experts, if they are allowed to have a say, and one should always take this into account. We are still afraid that the health system may collapse. Now, however, we already have the third week with extreme measures such as exit restrictions, and in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, emergencies in this form have not even occurred. So how long should and can we maintain a state in which fundamental rights are so vehemently interfered with? In the end, this collateral damage may be more significant than the health damage.

There is currently some kind of resistance because there is increasing talk about returning to normal. The "mirror" wrote of a possible "revolution of the middle class". How will this continue in the next few days?

Groissböck: The social question could of course soon become a problem. Most people who work in the free economy are naturally much more skeptical of restrictions than officials, for example. You feel a certain rumbling and questioning, precisely because you suspect that the economic system will be badly damaged. But what should not be forgotten beyond that: It is also and especially about the restriction of liberties, as we have never known since the Second World War. Is this even in relation to the actual dangers? Corridors of opinion and the suppression of criticism of government measures, ranging from social media to content deletions, could also contribute to a new kind of revolt. No matter how the individual opinion turns out - the free word must still be allowed. I know some people who were actually behind the restrictions but are now slowly paying attention for these reasons.

What alternatives do you suggest for the measures imposed?

Groissböck: I would have let everything go as far as possible. The risk groups could have been warned urgently and with massive arguments - and given every conceivable help. It is just an appeal for personal responsibility. For professionals in such a group, one could have set up an extra fund so that they would not fall through the net. The vast majority of those infected really have virtually no problems with Corona. Of course, it's also about the psychosocial: people are totally insecure. On the one hand, until recently it was always a matter of controlled infection in the non-risk group in order to achieve herd immunity as quickly as possible, and on the other hand, fueled by the media, an insane panic of infection is spreading. I find that somehow schizophrenic. And we have now learned that some people can no longer stand the situation.

You are assuming a basic talent for reason. And if you look at the crowds on the Isar and in the cafés two weeks ago ...

Groissböck: Talent is the prerequisite for any free, democratic society. Road traffic, for example, only works like this: We assume that the other person knows the rules and will not drive into my car at the next intersection. So if I belong to a risk group, then it must be clear to me or made clear that this is probably not a good idea with the Isar in this specific case. However, older and vulnerable people in particular often see things much more relaxed because at the end of their lives they simply seek to be close to their loved ones. Even if they expose themselves to an increased risk, the hug of a real, close person is much more important for many than the sterile, risk-free treatment by nursing staff in plastic overalls. We have such a sad case in our family, where someone could soon die in loneliness and under such circumstances.

There is a lot of discussion: What are we taking with us from the corona crisis? Solidarity, re-thinking about living together ... What is left of the negative?

Groissböck: I see these positive aspects as well. In this quiet time, we can now think again about what life is all about - that it also means uncertainty and that not everything can be calculated. This is not so easy for our fully comprehensive society, which tries to hide these facts in its total, unfortunately now totalitarian materialism. The most negative thing for me is that within a very short time a kind of moralizing block warden culture has developed again. But what is much more crucial is: what remains of the restrictions on our rights, of measures that almost invaded us overnight? When, for example, “temporary border controls” were introduced between Austria and Germany in 2015, it was said that this was limited to three months due to the refugee crisis. Everyone understood it, despite Schengen. After almost five years, this nonsense still exists. There can be no question of proportionality here either. Peu à peu, basic rights are undermined and many things are simply accepted. Just think of the currently discussed surveillance via mobile phone. We don't want that, do we?

Is that the time of the strong men behind whom everyone is gathering - whether behind Markus Söder, Sebastian Kurz or Christian Drosten?

Groissböck: I think and hope that this is only a short-term phenomenon. Profiling hardliners have to be careful because the mood can quickly change with such drastic measures. Unsettled, frightened people often long reflexively for a strong hand in such crisis situations. For example, I am very curious to see how long you can keep people in their homes in a country like France, where - see yellow vests - there is a high social explosive potential. It will be exciting in the next two weeks.

How are you actually in the situation now?

Groissböck: I was completely down last week. You have a calendar that is so crazy because you can hunt from one highlight to the next - and suddenly you are slowed down from 200 to zero, so to speak. Above all, singing is much more than a job for me. Almost something vital for survival. Of course, this also hits you hard economically. And as a freelance artist, you may not imagine what it is like when everything lasts until autumn.

When Jürgen Klopp was asked about Corona, he furiously ironed the questioner down: as a trainer, he was not an expert. And when people say: What does Günther Groissböck want anyway, should he rather sing?

Groissböck: I would like that! I hardly talk about the illness or the virus itself. I am only concerned with hard facts such as deaths and intensive care patients, which should then justify such extreme measures. My father was a doctor, my sister is a doctor and my brother-in-law is also a doctor, so there is a certain family, medical environment. But I'm clearly not an expert, even if I'm always skeptical about this word and I immediately ask myself: Where does the expert come from? Who pays it? To whom is it his duty? All of this must always be questioned, whether in culture, politics, journalism or even in science. Jürgen Klopp was also asked at a relatively early stage of the crisis. I would have reacted that way at the time. But now, in this delicate situation, no one is allowed to give up an opinion. Because the argument "We couldn't have known" does not apply this time! And that brings us back to democracy, maturity and personal responsibility.