It's odd to talk of continued censorship when criticism of Israel is everywhere online and in newspapers as well, including this article in the Guardian and Gessen's article in the New Yorker. Are...
Germany must revoke its non-binding resolution. Lest it continue to censor what people can and cannot say about the state of Israel.
It's odd to talk of continued censorship when criticism of Israel is everywhere online and in newspapers as well, including this article in the Guardian and Gessen's article in the New Yorker.
I've been living in Germany for the last few years, so I'm not really an expert here, but I think the article is drastically overstating the importance of this resolution. It is certainly not a...
I've been living in Germany for the last few years, so I'm not really an expert here, but I think the article is drastically overstating the importance of this resolution. It is certainly not a major part of the discussion here.
That said, Germany has a complex position when it comes to Israel and antisemitism. I heard (secondhand) from a German diplomatic in Israel that one of the rules of thumb they have to work by is that Germany can never be the first nation to criticise or condemn Israeli actions. They'll sign on to motions others have written, but they'll not criticise Israel directly, because of the history.
When the attack happened, there were immediately billboards up in Germany saying that the Government stands behind Israel completely, and Scholz gave a statement saying that we could trust that the Israeli Government wouldn't do anything illegal or wrong. There was generally this immediate response supporting Israel, partly in the sense of condemning antisemitism, but I think also out of a sense of needing to be whiter than white, and not even giving the appearance of criticism.
That said, this is the high level position of the German Government, and I don't think matches the view of the nation as a whole, which is decidedly more mixed. I think a lot of the difficulty comes from groups who, if Israel weren't Israel, would very openly condemn a lot of Israel's more extreme actions, but also don't want to even give the appearance of antisemitism. (Not for fear of official sanctions necessarily, but more because of the national guilt that Germany has over the Holocaust.) In this case, I believe the foundation offering the prize money backed out because they were criticised by a German-Israeli society specifically, which I can understand being a bad sign if you're trying to guard against antisemitism.
TL;DR: Germany as a whole is definitely in a precarious position with regards to Israel, and struggles to thread the needle between appearing to be too critical of a Jewish state, and condoning actions it disagrees with. That said, I don't think one non-binding motion is the deciding factor here: fundamentally, Germany is in this position because if its own history and the actions of the Nazi state. While the German Government has come down fairly explicitly on the side of Israel, there is plenty of discussion and disagreement in the discourse that I've seen - but again, with the constraints around wanting to avoid being seen as antisemitic in any way.
I'm an American immigrant to Germany, so my perspective won't necessarily be the same as someone born here, but I think Germany is particularly grim when it comes to censorship of anything but...
I'm sympathetic to Germany's historical position when it comes to Israel. I think the idea that they shouldn't be the first to criticize Israel is sensible, but this has been amplified far past that point. It's made me feel uncertain of my future here, and I'm a white citizen of the country that keeps vetoing calls for ceasefire. The ways Germany is currently demanding all immigrants profess full-throated support of Israel and its warcrimes is definitely unfair and indeed does reek of censorship even if international media is not constricted by it.
As someone born, raised, and living in Germany I would want to add however that it is important to recognize how different the debate is this time. I haven't in my lifetime seen that much...
As someone born, raised, and living in Germany I would want to add however that it is important to recognize how different the debate is this time. I haven't in my lifetime seen that much criticism of Israel in the German public sphere - not just "on the streets", but also in talk shows etc. Both sides are hitting each other hard, but its necessary to simply acknowledge that for the first time there are actually two perspectives represented in public debate in Germany on the relationship between Israel and Palestine. Sure, one tends to be pushed hard by the "political class", but even the median voter recognizes that the situation is really complicated: both in terms of the situation in Israel/Gaza, as well how it all relates to German history.
The overall level of discourse is still abysmal, though. Both sides present their sides in exhaustingly un-nuancced ways. But I guess that's a global problem and not a German one per se.
The institutional moves like the citizenship thing have been the most frightening to me (in large part due to its potential direct impact on me, ofc), but this is the first time there's been a big...
The institutional moves like the citizenship thing have been the most frightening to me (in large part due to its potential direct impact on me, ofc), but this is the first time there's been a big "flare up" about Israel/Palestine since I've moved to Germany so idk whether that part is unprecedented. It has definitely sparked a lot of consideration on my part of whether it's worth it to stay here and invest my time and energy into further integrating.
The citizenship-measure is one of the instances that are frustrating to me in the whole debate. I do understand the intention: reduce the prevalence of anti-semitism in the population. Who could...
The citizenship-measure is one of the instances that are frustrating to me in the whole debate.
I do understand the intention: reduce the prevalence of anti-semitism in the population. Who could be against that? But then politics operationalizes that goal in a way that makes every critique of the (foreign) policy of Israel seem to be potentially a marker for an antisemitic worldview. I understand though that it really depends on the exact wording in the process - which I don't know at the moment.
All the while, as the German society, we side-step another major question: it is really helpful to tie our identity as a nation and German individuals to a to position in which one foreign state actor (that we have no control over) has our unwavering support to the extent that they can attack democratic institutions internally and try to solve their external challenges systematically in a non-peaceful manner?
Of course I can't speak to your personal situation. I just hope you feel welcome here regardless of this specific question.
This comment really lays it out in a good way I think, thanks for sharing your perspective. In practice I feel reasonably welcome in Germany myself as I'm a relatively well-off white American, but...
This comment really lays it out in a good way I think, thanks for sharing your perspective. In practice I feel reasonably welcome in Germany myself as I'm a relatively well-off white American, but I feel more and more distant from the country as it implements policies like this and politicians feel less and less shy about anti-immigrant and specifically anti-Arab sentiment. My wife is Norwegian and we're in Norway for Christmas and there's pro-Palestinian messaging everywhere -- there was an official ad on the airport shuttle train. I've seen more graffiti that says "Free Palestine" here than I have in Berlin and given the relative graffiti quantities that's wild.
I agree with Skybrian here. It's odd how anti-zionist / anti-israel viewpoints claim they are being censored. One example, I seem to have forgotten the name of the person, is a german anti-israel...
I agree with Skybrian here. It's odd how anti-zionist / anti-israel viewpoints claim they are being censored. One example, I seem to have forgotten the name of the person, is a german anti-israel jew, and she's been touring german political talk shows since october; meanwhile complaining in international media that anti-israeli viewpoints are being censored in Germany. I don't think there's much truth to that, it's just quite the minority opinion and not given too broad a forum.
While official foreign policy positions are usually biased in favor of supporting Israel, unless there's very strong reasons not to, the same isn't true for public discourse. The vibe I'm getting is that the bulk of Germans are at least critical of Israel in some respects, but broadly agree that Israel has a right to exist; anti-semitism is a fringe opinion. However, holocaust comparisons are (rightfully IMO) viewed extremely skeptically, particularly when it comes to Israel itself. In my opinion, comparing the current situation to the holocaust is only being done because jews are involved again, and that should make anyone pause. If it was any other nation doing this, we'd hear criticism and calls for a ceasefire and all that jazz, but IMO no holocaust comparisons.
What I do find curious, though not necessarily surprising, is that the loudest anti-israel voices are jewish. I presume because others amplify them, because their jewishness adds authority and impartiality. No doubt if you state anti-israel opinions, people might try to put you into one or another corner of political extremes.
Side note, what's up with this:
This moral obligation to compare means [...] that all people have a right to exist freely everywhere, regardless of where they appeared in the world by chance of birth;
How does that follow at all? Where does this "no borders" stuff come from? Also, how come Israel of all places should be the ones to start that utopia? This side point colors the whole piece and the author imo.
I think it's a very specific statement in regards to the very specific political environment that is in place in the overarching Israeli–Palestinian conflict which has been going on for over a...
How does that follow at all? Where does this "no borders" stuff come from? Also, how come Israel of all places should be the ones to start that utopia? This side point colors the whole piece and the author imo.
I think it's a very specific statement in regards to the very specific political environment that is in place in the overarching Israeli–Palestinian conflict which has been going on for over a half-century. The closest corollary I can think of that is a little better understood is the Berlin Wall. In the one sense, many individuals are trying to discuss this in a purely political standpoint, which while it is far from straightforward, has a pretty clear conclusion to draw over which state is the aggressor. On the other hand, we have the fact that both Israel and Palestine are closely identified with specific religions and ethnic religions. And even outside of religions, we know that the Jewish people have been singled out as an ethnic group, and discriminated against in the past. We basically have a situation in which it is impossible to even discuss the political situation without it being able to be interpreted, or straw man argument-ed, into a form of racial discrimination. I think this is being taken advantage of by people in power in the U.S. government, for starters. It was worse 4 years ago, but it still appears to be ongoing.
Hopefully I've answered your question at least in part: the "no borders" stuff comes from the stringent and frequently moving borders put in place by Israeli government towards Palestine (with zero commentary being implied by me on whether or not that is right or wrong).
What I do find curious, though not necessarily surprising, is that the loudest anti-israel voices are jewish. I presume because others amplify them, because their jewishness adds authority and impartiality. No doubt if you state anti-israel opinions, people might try to put you into one or another corner of political extremes.
I think this is simply because they can voice an opinion on the matter without being seen as racist.
It's odd to talk of continued censorship when criticism of Israel is everywhere online and in newspapers as well, including this article in the Guardian and Gessen's article in the New Yorker.
Are things any different in Germany?
I know @vektor is German, we got any others in the house who can give insight on this?
I've been living in Germany for the last few years, so I'm not really an expert here, but I think the article is drastically overstating the importance of this resolution. It is certainly not a major part of the discussion here.
That said, Germany has a complex position when it comes to Israel and antisemitism. I heard (secondhand) from a German diplomatic in Israel that one of the rules of thumb they have to work by is that Germany can never be the first nation to criticise or condemn Israeli actions. They'll sign on to motions others have written, but they'll not criticise Israel directly, because of the history.
When the attack happened, there were immediately billboards up in Germany saying that the Government stands behind Israel completely, and Scholz gave a statement saying that we could trust that the Israeli Government wouldn't do anything illegal or wrong. There was generally this immediate response supporting Israel, partly in the sense of condemning antisemitism, but I think also out of a sense of needing to be whiter than white, and not even giving the appearance of criticism.
That said, this is the high level position of the German Government, and I don't think matches the view of the nation as a whole, which is decidedly more mixed. I think a lot of the difficulty comes from groups who, if Israel weren't Israel, would very openly condemn a lot of Israel's more extreme actions, but also don't want to even give the appearance of antisemitism. (Not for fear of official sanctions necessarily, but more because of the national guilt that Germany has over the Holocaust.) In this case, I believe the foundation offering the prize money backed out because they were criticised by a German-Israeli society specifically, which I can understand being a bad sign if you're trying to guard against antisemitism.
TL;DR: Germany as a whole is definitely in a precarious position with regards to Israel, and struggles to thread the needle between appearing to be too critical of a Jewish state, and condoning actions it disagrees with. That said, I don't think one non-binding motion is the deciding factor here: fundamentally, Germany is in this position because if its own history and the actions of the Nazi state. While the German Government has come down fairly explicitly on the side of Israel, there is plenty of discussion and disagreement in the discourse that I've seen - but again, with the constraints around wanting to avoid being seen as antisemitic in any way.
I'm an American immigrant to Germany, so my perspective won't necessarily be the same as someone born here, but I think Germany is particularly grim when it comes to censorship of anything but pro-Israeli messaging and in particular weaponizing it against Arab minorities here. The German state of Sachsen-Anhalt has already mandated committing to Israel's right to exist to obtain German citizenship, and similar measures have been widely popular across the board in Herman politics. German authorities have been cracking down heavily on pro-Palestinian protests and Berlin has given schools permission to ban keffiyeh and "Free Palestine" stickers. These types of actions obviously affect anyone living here who's pro-Palestine but it would be deluding oneself to ignore the disproportionate effects they have on Germany's sizeable Arab population, many of whom are refugees. The ways in which cracking down on anything anti-Israel is being used for good old-fashioned racism shouldn't be ignored.
I'm sympathetic to Germany's historical position when it comes to Israel. I think the idea that they shouldn't be the first to criticize Israel is sensible, but this has been amplified far past that point. It's made me feel uncertain of my future here, and I'm a white citizen of the country that keeps vetoing calls for ceasefire. The ways Germany is currently demanding all immigrants profess full-throated support of Israel and its warcrimes is definitely unfair and indeed does reek of censorship even if international media is not constricted by it.
As someone born, raised, and living in Germany I would want to add however that it is important to recognize how different the debate is this time. I haven't in my lifetime seen that much criticism of Israel in the German public sphere - not just "on the streets", but also in talk shows etc. Both sides are hitting each other hard, but its necessary to simply acknowledge that for the first time there are actually two perspectives represented in public debate in Germany on the relationship between Israel and Palestine. Sure, one tends to be pushed hard by the "political class", but even the median voter recognizes that the situation is really complicated: both in terms of the situation in Israel/Gaza, as well how it all relates to German history.
The overall level of discourse is still abysmal, though. Both sides present their sides in exhaustingly un-nuancced ways. But I guess that's a global problem and not a German one per se.
The institutional moves like the citizenship thing have been the most frightening to me (in large part due to its potential direct impact on me, ofc), but this is the first time there's been a big "flare up" about Israel/Palestine since I've moved to Germany so idk whether that part is unprecedented. It has definitely sparked a lot of consideration on my part of whether it's worth it to stay here and invest my time and energy into further integrating.
The citizenship-measure is one of the instances that are frustrating to me in the whole debate.
I do understand the intention: reduce the prevalence of anti-semitism in the population. Who could be against that? But then politics operationalizes that goal in a way that makes every critique of the (foreign) policy of Israel seem to be potentially a marker for an antisemitic worldview. I understand though that it really depends on the exact wording in the process - which I don't know at the moment.
All the while, as the German society, we side-step another major question: it is really helpful to tie our identity as a nation and German individuals to a to position in which one foreign state actor (that we have no control over) has our unwavering support to the extent that they can attack democratic institutions internally and try to solve their external challenges systematically in a non-peaceful manner?
Of course I can't speak to your personal situation. I just hope you feel welcome here regardless of this specific question.
This comment really lays it out in a good way I think, thanks for sharing your perspective. In practice I feel reasonably welcome in Germany myself as I'm a relatively well-off white American, but I feel more and more distant from the country as it implements policies like this and politicians feel less and less shy about anti-immigrant and specifically anti-Arab sentiment. My wife is Norwegian and we're in Norway for Christmas and there's pro-Palestinian messaging everywhere -- there was an official ad on the airport shuttle train. I've seen more graffiti that says "Free Palestine" here than I have in Berlin and given the relative graffiti quantities that's wild.
I agree with Skybrian here. It's odd how anti-zionist / anti-israel viewpoints claim they are being censored. One example, I seem to have forgotten the name of the person, is a german anti-israel jew, and she's been touring german political talk shows since october; meanwhile complaining in international media that anti-israeli viewpoints are being censored in Germany. I don't think there's much truth to that, it's just quite the minority opinion and not given too broad a forum.
While official foreign policy positions are usually biased in favor of supporting Israel, unless there's very strong reasons not to, the same isn't true for public discourse. The vibe I'm getting is that the bulk of Germans are at least critical of Israel in some respects, but broadly agree that Israel has a right to exist; anti-semitism is a fringe opinion. However, holocaust comparisons are (rightfully IMO) viewed extremely skeptically, particularly when it comes to Israel itself. In my opinion, comparing the current situation to the holocaust is only being done because jews are involved again, and that should make anyone pause. If it was any other nation doing this, we'd hear criticism and calls for a ceasefire and all that jazz, but IMO no holocaust comparisons.
What I do find curious, though not necessarily surprising, is that the loudest anti-israel voices are jewish. I presume because others amplify them, because their jewishness adds authority and impartiality. No doubt if you state anti-israel opinions, people might try to put you into one or another corner of political extremes.
Side note, what's up with this:
How does that follow at all? Where does this "no borders" stuff come from? Also, how come Israel of all places should be the ones to start that utopia? This side point colors the whole piece and the author imo.
I think it's a very specific statement in regards to the very specific political environment that is in place in the overarching Israeli–Palestinian conflict which has been going on for over a half-century. The closest corollary I can think of that is a little better understood is the Berlin Wall. In the one sense, many individuals are trying to discuss this in a purely political standpoint, which while it is far from straightforward, has a pretty clear conclusion to draw over which state is the aggressor. On the other hand, we have the fact that both Israel and Palestine are closely identified with specific religions and ethnic religions. And even outside of religions, we know that the Jewish people have been singled out as an ethnic group, and discriminated against in the past. We basically have a situation in which it is impossible to even discuss the political situation without it being able to be interpreted, or straw man argument-ed, into a form of racial discrimination. I think this is being taken advantage of by people in power in the U.S. government, for starters. It was worse 4 years ago, but it still appears to be ongoing.
Hopefully I've answered your question at least in part: the "no borders" stuff comes from the stringent and frequently moving borders put in place by Israeli government towards Palestine (with zero commentary being implied by me on whether or not that is right or wrong).
I think this is simply because they can voice an opinion on the matter without being seen as racist.