Author: Redaktion

  • A smokescreen for an authoritarian turn?

    Marion Detjen: „Diese Resolution zerstört den freien Diskursraum an Unis“ [“This resolution destroys free discourse at universities.”], Neues Deutschland, January 30, 2025.

    The resolution is self-contradictory, above all because it makes scientific excellence the sole criterion for determining whether research projects are worthy of funding, while at the same time seeking to prescribe a single definition of anti-Semitism for science: the IHRA definition, which, because of its vagueness, allows for an arbitrary interpretation of so-called Israel-related anti-Semitism. Politically prescribed definitions are an absurdity in science. But the resolution does not bode well in other respects either: it wants “reporting offices” that are supposed to cooperate with the security authorities; teachers are to be indoctrinated in special seminars and themselves forced to indoctrinate; knowledge of the complex circumstances in the Middle East will therefore not increase, but decrease. The promise given in the title of the resolution, “to ensure freedom of discourse,” is being turned into its opposite.

    https://www.nd-aktuell.de/artikel/1188670.gastkommentar-diese-resolution-zerstoert-den-freien-diskursraum-an-unis.html

  • Universities are not “hotbeds” of antisemitism

    Ilyas Saliba: Das Ende der Wissenschaftsfreiheit [The end of academic freedom], Spiegel, January 29, 2025.

    The fact that the Bundestag even considers it necessary to pass a resolution specifically on anti-Semitism at universities and in education suggests that universities are a central breeding ground for antisemitism in Germany. However, the study conducted at the University of Konstanz on behalf of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research on antisemitism at universities shows exactly the opposite. Anti-Semitism is less prevalent at universities and among students than in society as a whole. The study, and with it the article, recommends a differentiated view, because even positions among students in support of Palestine are “hardly or only to a small extent” connected to antisemitism. This important finding is suppressed in the resolution. It obviously does not fit into the problematic image that the Bundestag has formed of the universities in a generalizing way.

    https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/antisemitismus-an-hochschulen-bundestagsresolution-schraenkt-die-wissenschaftsfreiheit-ein-a-75e8afc5-9481-4fd5-b02f-217a621daa9e

  • Palestine protests at universities: the police is not needed!

    Ilyas Saliba/Ralf Michaels: Protest an der Alice-Salomon-Hochschule: Es geht auch friedlich [Protest at Alice Salomon University: Peaceful demonstrations are possible, too], taz, January 23, 2025.

    Because the president of the Alice Salomon University of Applied Sciences, Bettina Völter, negotiated with the protesting students and thus avoided a police operation, she came under fire from critics. However, her example should be followed, because her prudent handling of the protests shows that it is possible to avoid police intervention. This does not suit those who think that more repression and state control at universities are necessary.

    https://taz.de/Protest-an-der-Alice-Salomon-Hochschule/!6060185/

  • Antisemitism resolutions lead to the erosion of constitutional standards

    Florian Meinel: Die Idee der Staatsräson im neuesten deutschen Recht [The concept of raison d’état in the most recent German legislation], Verfassungsblog, January 2, 2025.

    The legal form of the resolution deliberately avoids legal liability and thus creates a new legal effect in a diffuse way: through the erosion of constitutional standards and through vague group-related declarations of enmity. This article analyzes the tangible impact of this in administrative practice in individual cases, based on a ruling by the Regensburg Administrative Court on the new naturalization law.

    https://verfassungsblog.de/die-idee-der-staatsrason-im-neuesten-deutschen-recht/

  • The antisemitism resolutions identify Jews with Israel and are therefore antisemitic themselves

    Samantha Carmel: Die falschen Lehren aus dem Holocaust: Deutschland stiehlt mir meine jüdische Identität [The wrong lessons from the Holocaust: Germany is stealing my Jewish identity], der Freitag, December 5, 2024.

    This thought-provoking article by Jewish-American intellectual historian Samantha Carmel is hidden behind a paywall. It explains with painful consistency what the anti-Semitism resolution passed by the Bundestag on November 7, 2024, and the German “Never again is now!” mean for left-wing Jews who refuse to identify with the State of Israel:


    “The core aim of the resolution is not to protect jews, but rather to silence criticism of the Israeli government’s war on the Palestinian people and to shift the blame for increasing anti-Semitism in Germany onto refugees, migrants, and marginalized groups. To this end, it uses the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, whose original authors say is not suitable for legal and political use.


    By censoring everyone’s right to criticize Israel and the actions of the far-right Netanyahu administration, the German government also censors the rights of Jews to do so … By implication, Germany is censoring me in my efforts to protest a government that supposedly represents me as a Jew … The resolution thus not only narrows Israel down to the Israeli government, but also attacks legitimate expressions of Jewish identity and presumes to decide who should be recognized and heard as a Jew: ultimately, only those who are represented by the Central Council of Jews in Germany. For me and other Jews who are not allowed to speak, this attempt to hierarchize and control the Jewish population is nothing other than anti-Semitism. (…)


    The resolution invokes the protection of Jewish life to enable a complete reversal of victim and perpetrator by creating two new social categories. With the concept of the “left-wing anti-imperialist antisemite,” it provides a rhetorical framework in which I am effectively stripped of my Jewishness. At the same time, with the concept of “Israel-solidarity thinking,” it allows non-Jewish Germans to effectively become Jews. Their freedom of expression, the resolution states, must be protected against antisemitism just as much as that of people “with Jewish roots and of Israeli origin.


    In this way, the descendants of the Nazis write me out of their definition of Jewishness. They classify me as an anti-Semite because I don’t belong to the  category of Jew that’s politically useful to them. They combine this denial of my identity with their own self-proclamation as potential victims of—anti-Semitism! … And all this as a political maneuver  to circumvent recognition of the genocide in Gaza and to legitimize a racist, anti-immigration turn in Germany? My head spins, my heart breaks.”

    https://www.freitag.de/autoren/der-freitag/nie-wieder-bedeutet-nichts