People keep appealing to fairness, but theyre appealing to institutions that already see the world through a left-theory frame. Demoralization has changed what those people think fairness even means.
By demoralization here, I mean teaching people a different way to understand their own society. You don’t have to begin with laws. Change how people interpret their history, their institutions, and eventually themselves. Schools, media, universities, churches, HR departments, and professional culture all help teach people what counts as normal, legitimate, fair, or unjust.
So what is the frame being installed?
The critical-left frame Im talking about starts with historical power. The inherited White, Christian, heterosexual Western European order is treated as the dominant order of the modern West and as something that has to be overcome.
This frame sees oppression as structural. Social relations develop over time, harden into institutions and norms, and distribute power unevenly. Some groups inherit advantages while others end up at the margins. In this strand of critical theory, emancipation means finding those structures of domination and changing them.
Reification is the word for what happens, in this frame, when oppressive social arrangements become hard to see as arrangements at all because they take on the appearance of objective reality. Institutions, hierarchies, economic relations, customs, and social norms stop looking like products of a particular history and start looking natural, permanent, simply “how things are.” People live inside them and adapt to them as if they were fixed features of the world rather than things human beings made and can change. Lukács treated this as a central problem: socially created relations take on a thing-like independence and begin to look like a “second nature.”
So the problem, from inside the left frame, is that domination can disguise itself as normality. History hardens into common sense. The inherited order no longer looks historical or political at all. It just looks like reality.
The critic, the person that can really see, tries to break that appearance. Something people experience as normal gets redescribed as historical, contingent, and produced through power. A neutral rule becomes the residue of an older power arrangement. A universal tradition becomes the tradition of a dominant group. A natural hierarchy becomes something history produced and something history can undo.
Thats really where the inversion begins. The existing order is no longer accepted at face value. The critical-left frame teaches people to look beneath what seems normal and find older structures of domination. History has hardened into common sense. If that common sense is itself false or oppressive, dismantling inherited norms can be understood as exposing a false normal rather than destroying something legitimate.
Demoralization takes that frame out into the culture. Activists carry it into the institutions that shape everyone else. They become professors, administrators, journalists, bureaucrats, clergy, managers, and professionals. They teach, hire, write policy, set standards, and decide what counts as legitimate knowledge or conduct.
Once inside those institutions, the frame gets taught back out. Schools pass it to students. Media use it to interpret events. Professional training makes its assumptions routine. Hiring and promotion favor people already comfortable with them. The institutions then produce another generation that sees society through the same categories.
Eventually it doesnt need much pressure from outside. The institution reproduces the frame itself.
The institution doesnt have to disappear either. Keep the name, structure, authority, and prestige, but change what it is for. Thats the part of sublation thats useful here. The university remains a university. The bureaucracy remains a bureaucracy. Their purpose can still change.
A university can keep its faculty, degrees, libraries, and prestige while making criticism of the civilization it once transmitted part of its mission. A bureaucracy organized around equal rules can come to regard equal treatment as inadequate because the groups being treated equally are understood to occupy different historical positions.
Think about diversity, equity, and inclusion.
If one group is understood to have inherited power and another disadvantage, treating them identically can be seen as locking the old imbalance in place. “Equity” can therefore require different treatment to correct different starting positions.
“Inclusion” can work the same way. If an inherited norm is understood as exclusionary or oppressive, removing or excluding that norm can itself be described as inclusion.
From outside the frame, this can sound backwards. Equity can mean unequal treatment. Inclusion can involve exclusion. Within the frame, both follow from the same theory of historical power and correction.
And this gets us back to fairness.
“What if the roles were reversed?” doesnt land because the roles were never equal or interchangeable inside this framework. One group has already been placed in the historical position of dominance and another in the position of disadvantage. Switching the individuals doesn’t switch the historical meaning attached to their groups.
So your appeal to fairness lands on deaf ears. You’re asking for reciprocal treatment from people and institutions that believe they are correcting an inherited imbalance. Inside that frame, reciprocity itself can look like one more way the old order protects itself.
This is Alruna, the daughter of Götz Kubitschek, my publisher. He has 7 children. The whole family is treated like enemies of the state in Germany.
Alruna already has 2 children and finished her studies for a teaching degree and passed the first state exam with the best possible marks (straight A).
She had already been accepted and given an appointment to start the 18-month teacher traineeship in August 2026 at a high school in Dresden in Saxony.
A few weeks before she was to take the position, the Saxon school authority revoked the already granted admission after the secret service ("Verfassungsschutz") got involved. The VS is a repression tool against patriots in Germany.
The Administrative Court and Higher Administrative Court of Saxony upheld the revocation. They timed the ruling so that an urgent appeal was impossible.
Their official reason: doubts about a “minimum of loyalty to the constitution” because she "attended" one event of her father. Kubitschek often has events at his publishing headquarters, where part of the family helps out with organization.
Alruna has been doxxed, her family harassed, her house vandalized. Terrorist Antifas are hunting her down, and now even the courts and state terrorize her.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Everywhere Germans peacefully try to create their own patriotic networks, have children, and raise healthy families and make an income, the system does everything to hunt them down, persecute them, and make it legally and economically impossible.
Everywhere you see a sign of excellence, life, and beauty in Germany, the Antifa-System crushes it and replaces it with woke obedience, ugliness and imported migrants.
Right now elites have turned the state into an instrument that is not protecting or representing, but humiliating, persecuting, and destroying the German people.