"Who knows what would have become of me, if my parents had not had their influence on me"
About this Quote
There’s a sly humility in Otto Schily’s line, the kind that sounds modest while quietly staking a claim. “Who knows what would have become of me” performs uncertainty, but it’s a controlled uncertainty: the sentence frames his life as a near-miss with chaos, redeemed by parental “influence.” For a public servant, that matters. It signals that character isn’t just personal grit; it’s social formation, a transferable lesson that politely flatters the stabilizing institutions behind him: family, discipline, bourgeois normalcy.
The subtext is also a subtle preemptive defense. Schily’s biography carries political voltage: a lawyer with roots in the 1960s left-liberal milieu who later became Germany’s hard-nosed interior minister, synonymous with security policy and state authority. In that light, “parents” works as origin story and alibi at once. It suggests continuity where observers might see ideological pivoting: whatever shifts happened, the moral ballast was always there. He isn’t confessing dependence so much as narrating legitimacy.
The line also smuggles in a conservative theory of causality without preaching it. Influence is not coercion; it’s guidance. He avoids crediting party, ideology, or mentors in public life, which would invite partisan reading. Parents are politically neutral, emotionally resonant, and culturally unassailable. That’s why it lands: it’s biography as soft power, turning a personal anecdote into an argument for stability, inheritance, and the quiet forces that make a state function.
The subtext is also a subtle preemptive defense. Schily’s biography carries political voltage: a lawyer with roots in the 1960s left-liberal milieu who later became Germany’s hard-nosed interior minister, synonymous with security policy and state authority. In that light, “parents” works as origin story and alibi at once. It suggests continuity where observers might see ideological pivoting: whatever shifts happened, the moral ballast was always there. He isn’t confessing dependence so much as narrating legitimacy.
The line also smuggles in a conservative theory of causality without preaching it. Influence is not coercion; it’s guidance. He avoids crediting party, ideology, or mentors in public life, which would invite partisan reading. Parents are politically neutral, emotionally resonant, and culturally unassailable. That’s why it lands: it’s biography as soft power, turning a personal anecdote into an argument for stability, inheritance, and the quiet forces that make a state function.
Quote Details
| Topic | Family |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Otto
Add to List



