By David Pan · Monday, June 28, 2021 The following commentary is based on a text that appeared originally in German in Junge Freiheit. An English translation of the interview with Hans-Georg Maaßen in Die Weltwoche has been posted separately today in TelosScope, here.
The interview with Hans-Georg Maaßen documents his reactions toward the charge of anti-Semitism against him by several German media outlets in the last few weeks since he announced his candidacy for the German Bundestag. The controversy has revealed more about the deterioration of the German media landscape than about Maaßen’s own views and character. Spurred on by a charge against him of racism and anti-Semitism by climate activist Luisa Neubauer on ARD’s political talk show Anna Will, media outlets scoured Maaßen’s writings with the hope of giving their accusations some substance. The dearth of the evidence against him led them in the end to an article that he published with Johannes Eisleben in English in TelosScope. But rather than engaging with the specific arguments of the article, the commentators have engaged in a kind of witch hunt.
Continue reading →
By Henryk M. Broder · Monday, June 28, 2021 The following interview appeared originally in German in Die Weltwoche on June 18, 2021. Translated into English by Xuxu Song. A separate commentary by David Pan appears here.
Hans-Georg Maaßen, President of Germany’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution from 2012 to 2018, is accused of spreading anti-Semitic ideas. The accusation comes from the milieu of the “Fridays for Future” movement. The timing, Maaßen suspects, is no coincidence and has nothing to do with the political climate. Rather, they want to prevent his election as a member of the Bundestag.
Continue reading →
By Mark G. E. Kelly · Monday, May 10, 2021 Michel Foucault’s name has never been far from scandal. Indeed, he has proven to be a perennially controversial figure. He rose to prominence in controversy, his ponderously scholarly 1966 book The Order of Things becoming a bestseller because marginal denunciations of humanism and Marxism therein brought it massive publicity in the form of shrill denunciations by elements of the French intellectual establishment. As Foucault himself wryly noted, he has been denounced by conservatives as an agent of the KGB and by communists as an agent of the CIA. I would suggest that this phenomenon is related to the disturbingness of Foucault’s analyses: as long as Foucault’s conclusions remain difficult for people to cognize, there will always be an attempt to dismiss them for ad hominem reasons.
Since one cannot libel the dead, there has effectively been open slather for accusations against Foucault, no matter how baseless, for almost four decades. After his death, it was alleged that Foucault had deliberately spread the virus, HIV, that had killed him, an accusation that hardly made sense given the state of knowledge about the virus at the time he died. In the opening two decades of the third millennium, the period of my career as a Foucault scholar, the dominant scandal narrative around Foucault has shifted twice. During the first decade, the period of the War on Terror, the great scandal was Foucault’s support for the Islamic Revolution in Iran, which was always interpreted baselessly to mean Foucault had endorsed the theocratic regime that was its ultimate result. During this period any public seminar or event on Foucault would seem to be attended by an audience member who would rise to denounce Foucault’s supposed sympathy for Islamism. The great scandal for the following decade was Foucault’s alleged support of neoliberalism, provoked by the publication of Foucault’s lectures on this topic, The Birth of Biopolitics, in English in 2008. The coordinates of this controversy were quite different from the others in that a number of serious Foucault scholars agreed with the allegations from a sympathetic standpoint, though I nonetheless maintain they were ultimately without foundation.
Continue reading →
By Russell A. Berman · Wednesday, April 28, 2021 Criticism of identity politics is hardly new. The insistence on—or “celebration” of—fractional community identities rather than a common good was presented as an explanation for Hillary Clinton’s defeat in the 2016 presidential election. No coalition of separate groups will ever be able to muster the political magnetism of an inclusive rhetoric of national solidarity. That is the first problem: how identity politics divides, rather than unites.
However in addition to the problems of fragmentation and exclusion, the very focus on “identity,” a cultural and psychological concept, has always distracted from material issues of political economy, redirecting debate toward symbols and selfhood. Christopher Lasch labeled this a Culture of Narcissism as early as 1979. At stake is both a tendency toward subjectification within contemporary society and a transformation of the—often primarily academic—discussion about this society, as critical attention shifted toward subjective elements rather than discriminatory conditions and economic processes. If you want to hide class difference, identity politics is just what you need.
Continue reading →
By Peter Brandt · Wednesday, April 28, 2021 The following blog post originally appeared at Blog politische Ökonomie. Peter Brandt is commenting on the controversy surrounding an essay by Wolfgang Thierse, translated here. See the related position paper here and a separate article by Brandt here. Translated by Russell A. Berman, with comments here.
During the past few weeks the debate over identity politics and viewpoint diversity in Germany has been unfolding. The starting point was an article in the Frankfurter Allgemeine by Wolfgang Thierse, not known for eccentric positions, concerning the conduct of the debate around the themes of racism, postcolonialism, and gender.
In his opinion piece, Thierse criticizes the claim by sexual and other minorities to define their own collective identity (hence “identity politics”), and what is right and tolerable or intolerable for them, rather than engaging in an open and controversial debate. The accusation that something is hurtful therefore, Thierse argues, often displaces an argumentative response.
Continue reading →
By Russell A. Berman · Friday, March 12, 2021 To read more in depth from Telos, subscribe to the journal here.
Former President of the German Bundestag Wolfgang Thierse mounts a powerful argument against identity politics in Germany and their political consequences. His comments here and originally here have elicited a robust discussion in Germany, especially because the current leaders of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), of which Thierse is a long-term member, reportedly responded that they felt ashamed at his “regressive” views. While the leadership represents the current left wing of the party, other voices from the center rallied to Thierse’s defense. At stake is the gap between alternative aspirations within this venerable party, once the foundational political organization of the German left with roots in the workers’ movement of the nineteenth century.
Continue reading →
|
|
