Category: Pick

  • Fascism – Normality, not Exception

    Alberto Toscano: Late Fascism. Race, Capitalism, and the Politics of Crisis, New York (Verso) 2023.

    That Alberto Toscano has struck a nerve with his book, which was recently translated into German, was evident at the end of June at the Volksbühne in Berlin. The book launch, a conversation between Toscano and prominent guests (Bafta Sarbor, Lama el Khatib, and Quinn Slobodian), took place in the large auditorium, which was nearly sold out. Toscano does not offer a diagnosis of the present à la “this is fascism now”, and he strictly rejects any definition of the term based on a checklist of core characteristics. As a reader seeking orientation, this approach can be frustrating. But you are rewarded for reading on: above all with an invitation to think of fascism not as something spectacular, as a state of emergency, as the radical opposite of freedom and democracy, but as a potential and a process that thrives especially within liberal democracies and is experienced very differently by groups with different positionalities—along lines of race, gender, and sexuality.

    The book is divided into seven chapters, which build on and refer to each other, but can also be read individually depending on your interests. All chapters have in common that Toscano gives the authors who inspired him ample voice and often relates them to each other in surprising ways. I would like to briefly introduce two chapters that I consider particularly important: Chapter 2: “Racial Fascism” and Chapter 3: “Fascist Freedom.” In Chapter 2, drawing on anti-colonial thinkers and scholars/activists of the American Black Radical Tradition of the 1970s, Toscano turns the conventional historical classification of fascism on its head. Following Aimé Césaire, W.E.B. DuBois, and others, he argues that already the brutal colonial rule and the exploitation and violence-based as well as violence-generating capitalist divisions of the US Reconstruction period (1861-1877) should be understood as early forms of fascism. These, he argues, paved the way for and helped shape the regimes of the interwar period in Italy, Germany, Croatia, and elsewhere, which are now regarded as “historical fascism.” In a second step, Toscano takes up the insight that fascism did not end with “historical fascism” and its capitulation in the 1940s—at least not for those who were and are subjected to brutal disenfranchisement and violence even in democracies. He quotes, among others, from the prison writings of Angela Davies and George Jackson and states:

    “Jackson and Davis are profoundly aware of the disanalogies between present forms of domination and historical fascism, but they both assert the epistemologically privileged vantage point provided by the view from within a carceral-judicial system that could fairly be described as a racial state of terror. In distinct ways, they can be seen to relay and recode that foundational gesture of anti-racist and Black radical anti-fascism crystallized in Césaire’s Discourse on Colonialism. As the Martinican poet and politician tells it: ‘And then one fine day the bourgeoisie is awakened by a terrific boomerang effect: the Gestapos are busy, the prisons fill up, the torturers standing around the racks invent, refine, discuss.’” (Toscano 2023, 32)

    Fascism and fascist processes are persistent and yet often invisible to those who have the privilege of not being directly exposed to the violence and the terror. In the chapter on “Fascist Freedom,” Toscano seeks to clarify the relationship between fascism and neoliberalism. I find this chapter particularly important because the terms fascism and neoliberalism are frustratingly unclear today, while being at the center of diagnoses of the present that see them as competing rather than consider them together. People ask: is this (still) neoliberalism or (already) fascism? For Toscano, this is the wrong question. He shows that the conventional idea that neoliberalism is fundamentally critical of the state, while fascism abolishes all forms of freedom in favor of state power, is neither theoretically nor historically accurate. He quotes from the writings of Mussolini, Reinhard Höhn, Ludwig von Mises, and others to prove that neoliberalism is indeed pro-state, but pro a very specific type of state, namely one that unleashes market forces and defends private property. Fascism, on the other hand, is indeed pro-freedom, but only for very specific freedoms enjoyed by privileged groups. In the Third Reich, too, the regime’s supporters and executors were granted considerable freedoms. According to Toscano, it is a mistake to overlook and dismiss the “spontaneities and enjoyments that fascism offers to its managers, militants or minions” (Toscano 2023, 61). Those who read on to the end are rewarded with tentative attempts at a definition in the short concluding chapter. Toscano identifies “four interlocking dimensions of the history and experience of fascism” (Toscano 2023, 156) that he wants to make his readers aware of. In a nutshell, these are: 1) that fascism existed before “historical fascism” and that it has survived it, 2) that fascism is by no means experienced in the same way by everyone, 3) that fascism can be understood as a mode of preventive counter-violence in response to epochal panics (such as the panic of the “Great Replacement”), and 4) that fascism not only demands submission from its supporters and perpetrators, but also offers them certain forms of freedom—such as the freedom to exercise violence and enjoy doing so.

    ↗ www.versobooks.com/products/2627-late-fascism

  • The Serbian government’s revenge on students and professors

    Adriana Zaharijević und Jana Krstić: How Did a Fight Against Corruption Become a Struggle Over Education? — Chronology of Pressure, Balkan Talks, 23. Mai 2025, https://balkantalks.org/chronicle-of-serbias-student-and-academic-uprising-2024-2025/

    Largely unnoticed in Western Europe, the conflict between the government and universities, students, and professors in Serbia continues to escalate. Since the end of last year, civil society in Serbia has been staging mass protests, mainly against widespread corruption and the collapse of constitutional institutions. (Snežana Stanković, here at Debatte, already outlined how the EU is involved in these events with its “lithium pact” and arms trade, in her pick on February 3.) The protests are mainly led by students. In December 2024, almost all public faculties in the country backed the students’ demands, fearing that the very existence of science and the education system itself was at stake. Teachers have organized and networked nationwide.

    Since March, the government has been cracking down relentlessly: the Ministry of Education, dubbed the “Ministry of Revenge,” is simply refusing to pay teachers and university professors most of their salaries. Peaceful protests are being hijacked by agents provocateurs to damage the reputation of the demonstrators, and the government is stirring up fears of violent clashes. University professors are now required to teach 35 hours per week, which makes research almost impossible. They often no longer know how they will make a living. Many are facing dismissal, and the accreditation system is in danger of collapsing. Since May 8, the government has been planning a new law on higher education that is expected to drastically restrict freedom of research and teaching.

    Our Serbian colleagues appeal to the international community not to ignore the repressive measures in Serbia, but to stand in solidarity with the students and professors and their demands for transparency, accountability, and academic independence.

    https://balkantalks.org/chronicle-of-serbias-student-and-academic-uprising-2024-2025/

  • From bystander to accomplice

    Sarah Schulman: The Fantasy and Necessity of Solidarity, New York (Penguin Random House) 2025, 320 pp.

    The Fantasy and Necessity of Solidarity is the latest book by Sarah Schulman, a US writer, educator, and activist, perhaps best known to the wider public for her monumental oral history of ACT UP, the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power. Part political memoir, part manual, the book offers nuanced reflections on the practice of solidarity and features some highly quotable definitions such as: “Solidarity is the essential human process of recognizing that other people are real and their experiences matter,” and “Solidarity is the action behind the revelation that each of us, individually, are not the only people with dreams.” 

    While the book’s focus is on solidarity Palestine (a cause Schulman has been involved in since 2009), the author also draws on her broader activist, artistic, and teaching work, offering examples of solidarity in action, from clandestine reproductive rights activism to informal support groups formed within the exclusionary spaces of New York’s theater scene. Beyond her own experiences, Schulman finds valuable lessons in the work of Vivian Gornick, Wilmette Brown, and Jean Genet, among others.

    Embracing its inherent messiness, Schulman convincingly argues that ”solidarity is possible without ideological purity, without 100 percent didacticism of motive, and yet despite contradictions, it can still be important, evolve, and have an impact.” But perhaps the most important wisdom Schulman offers — rooted in decades of organizing and heartbreak — is her honest and lucid acknowledgment of the difficulty and necessity of coalition politics in solidarity work: “There is an unease in coalition because we sacrifice the very specific personal politics that none of us can achieve alone, for a more compromised collective. But without that flexibility, no movement building would be able to take place. It is the change, the peace, and the justice we seek that are more important than being right in our living rooms.” 

    https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/771411/the-fantasy-and-necessity-of-solidarity-by-sarah-schulman/

  • Moral failure – Gaza, knowledge, and responsibility

    Didier Fassin: Une étrange défaite. Sur le consentement à l’écrasement de Gaza, Paris (Editions La Découverte) 2024, 198 pp. Englische Übersetzung: Moral Abdication. How the World Failed to Stop the Destruction of Gaza, translated by Gregory Elliott, London/New York (Verso Books) 2025, 128 pp.

    Didier Fassin says it all. In eight chapters, he talks about the destruction in Gaza, about the approval of it, and about how talking about it is made impossible and words are given new meanings: “Language is damaged when demands to stop killing civilians are ‚antisemitic‘, when an army that dehumanizes its enemies is ‚moral‘, when an enterprise of obliteration is a ‚riposte‘, when a military operation openly conducted against civilians is the ‚Israel-Hamas war‘. Thinking is suffocated when debates are prevented, lectures banned and exhibitions cancelled, when police enter institutions of higher education and prosecutors are imposed to ensure orthodoxy.” (p. 87)

    Precisely because Didier Fassin says everything that everyone can know, everything that is accessible everywhere in the media: about the dead, the hunger, the bombs, the destruction, the blockade, the arms deliveries, the history of violence—the immediate violence of the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, and the violent long history leading up to it, back to the Balfour Declaration of 1917— the justifications, the declarations of intent… he leaves us with a deep sense of the futility of all words. We know what he is reporting here. And it changes nothing.

    In fact, there is a lot of talk, and almost always deliberately avoiding what is happening in Gaza, so that the talk erects a kind of sound barrier between Gaza and our knowledge. “The language to describe it seemed somehow dead. Or rather, an attempt was underway to induce its death by imposing a vocabulary and grammar of facts, by prescribing what must be said and condemning what must not be said (…).” (p. 5/6) And yet the reality is obvious, and everyone knows: whether you call it genocide or not, tens of thousands of people have been deliberately killed in Gaza, hundreds of thousands have been displaced and displaced again, and the survivors have suffered severe physical and psychological damage and had their livelihoods destroyed in the long term.

    What does this insignificance of knowledge about what is happening before our eyes mean? We are witnesses without testifying. Didier Fassin regards the moral failure of the West, its “consent” to destruction, which lies both in allowing it to happen and in actively supporting it, as a profound historical turning point. And indeed, with the knowing silence about the destruction of Gaza, a point of no return seems to have been reached. Even if the normative order that at least claimed to value every human life has always been hypocritical, the open rejection of its values and principles opens up an even deeper moral abyss. The inequality of the value of human life is not only accepted and no longer metaphysically confined, but has become the new principle of a completely lawless world. But Fassin believes that one day history will be told differently: “A voice will be restored to the Palestinians and with it a language will be reborn. Words will find their true meaning again. (…) People will no longer dare to claim that some people’s lives are worth less than others’, and that the death of the former is not as grievable as that of the latter. It will be understood that the dehumanization of the enemy entails the loss of humanity of those who articulate it.” (p. 92).

    https://www.editionsladecouverte.fr/une_etrange_defaite-9782348085369

    https://www.versobooks.com/products/3370-moral-abdication

  • Does the fixation on the term “genocide” desensitize us to new genocides?

    A. Dirk Moses: Nach dem Genozid. Grundlage für eine neue Erinnerungskultur [“After genocide. foundations for a new culture of memory], Berlin (Matthes & Seitz) 2023, 160 S.

    “After Genocide” – it is difficult these days not to relate the title of the heavily abridged German version of Dirk Moses’ groundbreaking 600-page work ‘Problems of Genocide,’ to Gaza, where Palestinian life is likely to soon cease to exist. But it is precisely in relation to Gaza that the other, actual meaning of the title makes sense: that the accusation of genocide itself is not sufficient to prevent these crimes and that it obscures rather than clarifies them. While the realization is beginning to sink in that Israel’s actions in Gaza are indeed genocide, it is already too late for tens of thousands of people who have been killed, and one senses that the fixation on the genocide paradigm itself may have contributed to this. The institutions of international law are collapsing, and in the moment of their decline, their birth defects are becoming visible.

    Unlike the full English version, Moses’ German book makes almost no mention of Palestine. The contemporary case studies are primarily Russia’s actions in Ukraine, but also Sudan, Syria, Myanmar, and China. It was completed before October 7 and probably also takes German sensitivities into account. However, even without explicit reference to Palestine, its main thesis is incompatible with Germany’s state-driven culture of remembrance. In a nutshell: The 1948 Genocide Convention claimed that crimes such as the Holocaust were to be prevented in the future. However, its surgical distinction between military and genocidal intentions (the former aimed at defeat, the latter at destruction) allowed genocidal warfare to escape the narrow definition of the Genocide Convention. Moses says that genocidal and other forms of mass violence against civilians are driven by a pseudo-rationality, namely the pursuit of “permanent security” by preventing anticipated attacks. This is expressed in the unbounded use of terms like “security,” “prevention,” “final solution,” etc. The pseudo-rationality of permanent security normalises genocides but also justifies mass killings and sieges of civilians in non-genocidal or not yet genocidal wars which react to resistance as well as anticipate future threats: with carpet bombing and drone strikes, with the use of nuclear weapons, with starvation and slow death, with colonial crimes of all kinds. In practice, military and genocidal logic and intentions very often go together and are intertwined.

    The fact that every child can become a terrorist and every innocent person a “human shield”, in conflicts where the ultimate goal is to combat resistance, makes horrific crimes possible. These then become, almost imperceptibly to the viewer, ethnically and racially charged and escalate into genocide. The targeted populations know from the outset, of course, what criminal dynamics they are exposed to. But the perpetrators, the bystanders, the accomplices can rationalize the crimes by referring to defense and permanent security. Thus “Never again Hamas” inevitably results in the destruction of Gaza, the mass killing of Palestinian civilians, and ethnic cleansing, under the ‘humanitarian’ pretext that this is also done in the interest of the victim population.

    The German majority society—in the media, politics, and in academia—has still not forgiven Dirk Moses for exposing the “catechism” of their state-sanctioned memory culture by simply describing its components. With his intervention, Moses had merely suggested getting rid of the ethnic assumptions of the German memory culture and developing it further so that it becomes inclusive of victim memories that are obscured by the singularity thesis with its fixation on ideology.

    The German “Historians’ Dispute 2.0,” or whatever one wants to call it, is now unfortunately tainted by, among other things, the fact that Dirk Moses continues to be regularly defamed and associated with Holocaust deniers and relativizers. A discourse analysis of the self-contradictions and empirical falsehoods with which his reputation has been destroyed in the German media is still pending. The May issue of Sehepunkte [points of views], a widely read review journal for historical sciences, recently again alleged in passing that “Moses and others refuse to recognize any special qualities in the Shoah or in Nazi anti-Semitism that fundamentally distinguish the National Socialist mass murder of Jews from colonial genocides,” —and no German colleagues are coming to Moses’ defense. It should go without saying that Moses is aware of the “special qualities” of the Holocaust and the differences between it and colonial genocides. But he analyzes them in their historical context, with the particular temporality that the Holocaust had:

    “They planned the elimination of enemy groups in advance. Unlike ‘classical’ imperial violence, much of their violence was deliberately planned. They tried to set the course of history. Seen in this light, the Nazi Reich and its notorious extermination policy mark the culmination of centuries of empire building and the destruction of enemies, both domestic and foreign, whether real or imagined. This imperial project was characterized by a ‘redemptive imperialism’ [Erlösungsimperialismus] because, as Hitler said, it would lead to the historical ‘solution of the German question,’ for which ‘there can only be one path: violence.’ The ‘redemptive anti-Semitism’ [Erlösungsantisemitismus] of the National Socialists was an integral part of this project; after all, the extermination of ‘the Jews’ also represented a fundamental answer to ‘the German question’ for them.” (pp. 104-105)

    The contradictory, spiteful, and uncomprehending insinuations that have been leveled against him in Germany were refuted in part elsewhere, but this work might be futile. German memory culture must first free itself from nationalistic misinterpretations of the “lessons of the Holocaust.” A new mass murder of Jews, such as that which took place on October 7, 2023, will not be prevented with the German “Staatsräson” [reason of the state] and its illusions of permanent security. Instead, Germany will become increasingly entangled in war crimes and ongoing genocides. As is now the case in Gaza. That is what Dirk Moses is concerned about.

    https://www.matthes-seitz-berlin.de/buch/nach-dem-genozid.html

  • The controversy surrounding the memorial to the Sinti and Roma of Europe murdered under National Socialism

    Alexandra Senfft: Ignorierte Opfer. Sinti und Roma kämpfen weiter um die Erinnerung an den NS-Völkermord [Victims ignored. Sinti and Roma continue to fight for remembrance of the Nazi genocide], Forum Wissenschaft (2025) 1, 29-32.

    Germany’s commitment to remembering the Holocaust and its historical obligations to the Jews has become a largely ritualized part of its political discourse. However, these German commitments apply far less to the other group of victims whom the Nazis sought to exterminate completely, the Sinti and Roma, even though they were disenfranchised and murdered with the same brutal systematicity as the Jews. After the war, there was a long delay in recognizing the genocide against the Porajmos. To this day, they experience racism, exclusion and discrimination, and are usually marginalized in collective commemorations – if they appear at all.

    Alexandra Senfft describes the controversy surrounding the memorial in Berlin’s Tiergarten, which commemorates the Sinti and Roma murdered by the Nazi regime, as a particularly revealing case. It was only in 2012 that it was finally inaugurated, after long institutional resistance and tenaciously stalled on the part of politicians. It was designed by the Israeli artist Dani Karavan (1930-2021), who created an architectural structure composed of sound, sculpture and nature, surrounded by trees. Since 2020, however, the Senate and Deutsche Bahn have been planning a new S-Bahn line, “S21,” whose second phase of construction will tunnel under the memorial. Originally, the memorial was to be completely demolished and then temporarily removed. In the end, a solution was found that will leave the architecture itself somewhat intact, but it is expected that the surrounding trees, which are an integral part of the concept, will be cut down. For many Sinti and Roma, this is a desecration of the site.

    Dani Karavan, who died in 2021, supported the Sinti and Roma protest in 2020, deploring that “the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe (opened in 2005) would never have been treated in this way”. Senfft describes how Karavan had already noticed while working on the memorial “that Romani-speaking people were considered second-class victims: ‘As a Jew, I can say that. Nobody is interested in the Sinti and Roma.’” In July 2024, Karavan’s family co-initiated a letter of protest against the S-Bahn line, which was signed by numerous artists and cultural figures. So far, however, it seems that the risks of damage to the memorial are not being taken seriously – although we should probably be glad that things have not turned out even worse.

    I find this case particularly interesting for two reasons that are not reflected in the article: First, the Karavan family’s involvement demonstrates a solidarity across victim groups that can be observed in many other contexts. Relatives of Holocaust victims use their positionality to help relatives of Porajmos victims. Even today, Jews and Jewish Israelis stand up for Palestinians; Ukrainians show solidarity with Palestinians, as do Roma; Palestinians show solidarity with Sudanese, and so on. The shared experience of marginalization, disenfranchisement, and threatened or actual genocide gives rise to resistance to attempts by the majority society to pit victim groups against each other and to privilege some over others.

    On the other hand, the case also points beyond this. The fact that Dani Karavan was Jewish certainly helped to establish and maintain the memorial for the murdered Sinti and Roma in the German culture of remembrance, and may even have been decisive. But this use of Jewish-Israeli positionality in German remembrance culture is full of ambivalence. Karavan’s first major piece of memorial architecture was a monument to the Palmach Brigade in the Negev Desert near Beersheba, built between 1963 and 1968 – an ensemble of concrete, desert acacia trees, water, and wind chimes. The Palmach was a moderate Zionist paramilitary force that collaborated with the British before the creation of Israel, establishing and defending settlements on the one hand, and fighting the extremist Zionist terrorist organizations of the Irgun on the other. Had the Battle of El Alamein been won and Nazi Germany invaded Palestine, the Palmach would have defended the Jews living there from certain death in the Holocaust. Instead, they fought in the War of Independence against the Arab states and played a key role in the Nakba. In the Negev, where Karavan’s memorial to the Palmach is located, they carried out the ethnic expulsion of the Palestinian Bedouin from their villages; they were given 48 hours to move to Gaza. When Karavan began work on the memorial in 1963, it had been only 15 years since the entire Arab population of Beersheba had been expelled or killed in massacres.

    From a narrow anti-Zionist perspective, Karavan’s position and his acceptance of state commissions such as the Palmach memorial might disqualify him from creating a memorial to the murdered Sinti and Roma. But I see it differently: I would like to see a holistic examination of these issues of memory politics and memory culture. The memorial in Tiergarten is important to the Roma and Sinti community and is accepted by the victims’ relatives as a place of remembrance – whereas the “Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe”, in the words of Paul Spiegel, was always intended to be only “the official memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany” and not a “memorial to the Jews in Germany”. The Roma wish for a respectful, i.e. non-ritualized, non-bureaucratized and non-politicized approach to the memorial must be respected. At the same time, we should reflect on the price that must always be paid for the state’s recognition of the victim’s status in the official culture of remembrance, which in this case is once again being paid by the Palestinians. This is the only way to prevent solidarity between victim groups from becoming exclusive and, in turn, marginalizing others.

    https://www.bdwi.de/show/11261854.html

  • Peter Beinhart in conversation with Karen Attiah about being Jewish

    Peter Beinart: Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning, Gespräch mit Karen Attiah, Bookstore Politics and Prose, Washington DC, February 25, 2025.

    Here I am picking an interview with Beinhart, conducted with Karen Attiah, on February 25, 2025 in a crowded bookstore in Washington DC, which I find particularly moving. Beinhart struggles for concrete answers to concrete ethical questions in the face of the destruction of Gaza and the ongoing genocide in Palestine – based on his Jewish faith and his understanding of Jewish tradition. He sees the self-definition of so many Jewish communities in terms of Zionism and the state of Israel and the legitimation of apartheid and genocide as necessary to protect Judaism as an expression of spiritual poverty and the trivialization of Jewish tradition. Almost always, he says, the history of the Jewish people is told only as a story of victims and self-assertion: the Jewish people in a struggle for survival with absolute evil, with “Amalek.” This ignores the fact that in the biblical stories, Jews are also perpetrators and capable of committing mass crimes – like any people. Awareness of the possibility of being a perpetrator is important for spiritual practice and ethical-religious education. He calls for a Judaism in which Jews need and claim equal rights wherever they live, and not the supremacy of a state that denies self-determination and human rights to the members of another people.

    Beinhart talks about Jewish friends and relatives, “loved ones”, who have broken ties with him because of his clear stance on genocide. They are silent or turn away from him because they cannot face sincere discussions and do not want to listen. It is impressive that, despite his passionate claims, Beinhart never becomes morally overbearing or hardened. He rejects instrumentalization of the hostages and avoids professions of “empathy”. The empathy he shows to the hostages is all the more credible, including a deep sense of a shared belonging to the Jewish people. 

    In a longer passage in the conversation he talks about his experiences in South Africa, where a supremacist elite, fearing the violent resistance and revenge of the ANC, also could not imagine the abolition of apartheid. The histories of South Africa and also Irelands teach us that security increases when  repressive regimes come to an end, because then terrorist resistance becomes superfluous. Beinhart wants to apply this lesson to Israel/Palestine. Yet, it’s best if you listen for yourself:

    ↗ https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=yBwLLJM1EGw

  • The rise and continuity of the anti-migrant left

    Vinit Ravishankar: The Rise and Rise of the Anti-Migrant Left: Reject Parochialism, Embrace Migration, The Left Berlin, January 13, 2025.

    Amid all the protests against Friedrich Merz and his CDU tearing down the firewall to the AfD in the course of the joint vote for the five-point plan to tighten migration policy, the fact that the Sarah Wagenknecht Alliance was also involved has been somewhat overlooked. The party was first founded in September 2023, splitting off from the The Left in order to offer voters what was then described as a socially left-wing and culturally conservative platform. Just over a year later, the alliance has moved so far to the right on migration issues that even a joint policy with the AfD no longer seems to deter anyone there. In The Left Berlin, Vinit Ravishankar places these and similar developments in Europe and the US in a broader historical context: from the “jingo-socialism” of the US labor movement in the early 20th century to the exclusion of so-called “guest workers” from trade unions and works councils in postwar Germany. Even if, as Ravishankar argues, globalized labor migration is certainly in line with neoliberal policies, this should not mean that the left should turn against the exploited migrants according to the logic of nation-state isolation; rather, the goal should be to support them in their local emancipation in the spirit of international solidarity.

    https://www.theleftberlin.com/the-rise-and-rise-of-the-anti-migrant-left/

  • Neo-liberal release of fascism?

    Zeynep Gambetti: Exploratory Notes on the Origins of New Fascisms, Critical Times (2020) 3 (1), 1–32.

    To what extent do the concept and theories of fascism help us to understand today’s fascist phenomena? I find Gambetti’s text very clever. She takes up Hannah Arendt’s reflections on fascist power and totalitarianism and discusses how they can be transferred from the then “imperialism-fascism-totalitarianism nexus” to today’s “biopolitics-security-neoliberalism nexus”. For Gambetti, what is essential is the reproduction of the devaluation of the “weak” and the “useless,” ultimately born of fear, a fear that turns against them and dehumanizes them as a threat. In this, totalitarianism and fascism “seize” the individual “from within” – also today.

    However, I also struggle with the text. I find Gambetti’s transference of fear in totalitarianism to fear in neoliberalism too imprecise. I don’t think Arendt would have gone along with that – even if she assumed the possibility of personal responsibility in every situation. But above all, fear doesn’t really explain to me what I observe as fascist tendencies in Brandenburg or in Bombay and Delhi. This focus on the production of insecurity and fear in neoliberalism obscures what is all too apparent in ethnographic observation: the joy and sense of empowerment felt by those who are convinced by fascist ideas. Now, of course, one could say that you have to feel powerless to experience joy in a self-empowerment. But is that it? Is the experience of powerlessness enough to explain the joy of power? Such “deficit” analyses of the possibility of fascistization processes may overlook essential moments. And that, in turn, diminishes the strategies of resistance.

    https://read.dukeupress.edu/critical-times/article/3/1/1/165497/Exploratory-Notes-on-the-Origins-of-New-Fascisms

  • The German silence about the protests in Serbia

    Julian Borger: “We’ve Proved that Change is Possible” – but Serbia Protesters Unsure of Next Move, The Guardian, February 3, 2025.

    It was the last working day of the week, November 1, 2024. The train station in Novi Sad, a vibrant, multicultural city, was busier than usual. At 11:52 a.m., the station’s canopy collapsed, killing 15 people. Shock, grief, and anger spread throughout the country. A protest movement developed from vigils and traffic blockades, led by students, who have since demanded accountability, transparency and responsibility from the government. The tragedy in Novi Sad happened against a backdrop of long-standing systemic corruption, increasing poverty and widespread human rights violations. At the same time, Serbia has become an attractive country for foreign investors in recent years and has moved closer to the West in a somewhat contradictory way. Belgrade has supplied ammunition to Ukraine for $800 million without joining the sanctions against Russia. There is a lively arms trade between Serbia and Israel (here,here and here). Last summer, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz was present when the EU forged a “lithium pact” despite civil protests in Serbia and despite resistance from environmental activists: a framework agreement on lithium mining for the production of electric vehicles. The EU wants to reduce its lithium dependence on China by cooperating with the corrupt and authoritarian rulers in Belgrade. Serbia’s president was part of the Milošević government and shares responsibility for the war crimes (including genocide) committed during the Yugoslav Wars.

    Why are we in Germany being told so little about the student protests in Serbia? (Exceptions herehereherehere or here). Why are there no statements from EU politicians?

    On February 3, 2025, an article appeared in the Guardian that vividly captures the complexity of these protests, which have been taking place daily for three months, and addresses the silence of the EU. It is difficult for some of us who live in Germany in the diaspora not to think of this silence together with the silence that ignores the genocidal horrors in Gaza and the West Bank.

    With student-led activists reluctant to engage politically against well-entrenched regime, many are asking: now what?