In time, the narrative must be told of how the Antideutsch movement, originally emerging in the late 1980s as a stance against German nationalism, evolved into a platform for Islamophobia and genocide denial. Despite its self-image as heroic, this shift opened the door for the return of fascist policies.
Clement Greenberg, the American critic, took two decades to reassess the transition of 1930s anti-Stalinist Trotskyism into a form of triumphant liberalism by the 1950s. Today, a similar dialectic can be observed in the strained responses of the German intelligentsia to global condemnation of Western support for the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza. Last month, the Berlinale, which had shown solidarity with Ukraine and Iran, was urged to support Palestinians. Jury president Wim Wenders responded that “film is the opposite of politics,” attempting to shield Europe from scrutiny rather than protect art.
What is notably surprising is the fervor with which discourses once identified with leftist critiques of power now race to create a political stranglehold that avoids accountability. Even when this requires dismantling the postwar legal framework established in response to Germany’s own past atrocities, unwavering support for Israel persists.
The September 2025 edition of OnCurating, a journal based in Berlin and Zurich, titled Let’s Talk About… Anti-Democratic, Anti-Queer, Misogynist, Antisemitic, Right-Wing Spaces and Their Counter-Movements, reflects this trend. Editors Michaela Conen, Daniel Laufer, and Dorothee Richter use terms like “anti-democratic” and “misogynistic” to stage a clash of worldviews, reminiscent of civilizational clash theories and the war on terror rhetoric. Their introduction positions liberal democracies against “authoritarian, patriarchal ideologies” with antisemitism as a central battleground.
OnCurating fails to address contradictions within democratic societies accommodating right-wing movements or the escalation of artist censorship aligned with Palestinian solidarity. In the United States, the Trump administration has used a rarely invoked 1952 law to target pro-Palestine activists. Meanwhile, in Germany, repressive measures have been documented against student activists. The journal also overlooks the use of women’s and LGBTQ+ rights to further Islamophobic agendas.
The edition’s narrative traces a historical line from German Nazism to contemporary struggles against Palestinian and Islamist fundamentalism, presenting the 1970s left as ideologically linked to Nazism. Jutta Ditfurth, interviewed by Richter, connects the infamous 1941 meeting between Haj Amin al-Husseini and Hitler to the Palestinian liberation cause, dismissing it as a facade for reactionary ideologies.
Throughout the issue, material history is often neglected. Oliver Marchart challenges Black Lives Matter activists about erasing Churchill’s memory, suggesting a need to reconcile Churchill’s colonialism with his anti-fascist stance. However, Churchill’s opposition to Hitler was more an empire rivalry than an ideological battle against fascism.
Discussions also misrepresent historical events, such as the murder of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht by Freikorps, glossing over centrist complicity. The issue further explores perspectives on violence using Theweleit’s 2015 book, but fails to mention recent videos by the Israel Defense Forces mocking Palestinian suffering.
