Germany (political culture) - Dr. Ali Fathollah-Nejad • Official Website
-1
archive,tag,tag-germany-political-culture,tag-97,theme-stockholm,qode-social-login-1.1.3,stockholm-core-1.1,woocommerce-no-js,select-theme-ver-5.1.7,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.0.3,vc_responsive

Germany’s Finkelstein Phobia

Renowned scholar and descendent of Holocaust survivors prevented by German Israel Lobby to speak about Gaza

Norman Finkelstein, an internationally renowned scholar of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, was due to talk about the state of the decades-old conflict and the situation in Gaza one year after the Israeli assault last week in Munich and Berlin. As part of a European speaking tour which would have led him to Germany for the first time since 2002, Finkelstein has been invited to speak in Prague at a number of prestigious institutions, such as the Institute of International Relations Prague, the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, and the Faculty of Philosophy and Arts at Charles University in Prague.

 

One of Finkelstein’s Berlin lectures was initially planned to be sponsored by the Heinrich Böll Foundation, an institution affiliated to the German Green Party. The event was scheduled to take place at the Protestant Trinitatis Church. In a statement announcing its decision to cancel the event, the church “regrets to have been implicated, against its will and its publicly known stances, in anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli polemics”. Soon thereafter, on 9 February, the Böll Foundation announced its pullback stating “Due to inattention, insufficient investigation and trust in our cooperation partners, we have made a severe mistake. In our judgment, Finkelstein’s behavior and his theses do not remain within the limits of legitimate critique.” It finally „thanked the many notes and interventions pertaining to this event.”

The other Finkelstein lecture was scheduled at the headquarters of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation (RLS), a German institution affiliated to the Left Party. But on 17 February, the Left Party think-tank also withdrew its support. It stated to have underestimated the event’s “political explosiveness”, saying further that for the sake of guaranteeing a “controversial and pluralistic debate” its proposition to provide for a counterpart to Finkelstein has been rejected by the organizers. Aside from the unusual insistence to invite a “counterpart”, Doris Pumphrey from the organizing committee stated that the RLS had not wanted to name this counterpart.

Finkelstein’s projected two lectures in Munich, one of them at the America House Munich, were likewise cancelled.

The German Israel Lobby and the Anti-Semitism Claim

The wave of cancellations came after a concerted campaign by neoconservative and pro-Israeli pressure groups, such as Honestly Concerned and BAK Shalom, which are known for their unconditional support of Israeli policies and the defamation of critics as anti-Semites. BAK Shalom, a pro-Zionist working group within the Left Party’s youth organization, was one of the main drivers behind the campaign to cancel Finkelstein’s public lectures. A statement, signed by BAK Shalom offshoots and like-minded groupings, reads that “Finkelstein is internationally popular among anti-Semites” while accusing him – a “self-proclaimed historian” – of “historical revisionism” and “anti-Semitism.”

Finkelstein, whose parents were survivors of the Warsaw Ghetto and of Nazi concentration camps, was awarded a Ph.D. in political science from Princeton University and is the author of many academic books on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. His Image and Reality of the Israel–Palestine Conflict (1995; 2003) has received much praise from eminent scholars such as Oxford University professor Avi Shlaim (“a major contribution to the study of the Arab–Israeli conflict”) and leading intellectual Noam Chomsky (“the most revealing study of the historical background of the conflict and the current peace agreement”). In 2007, after a denunciation campaign with the involvement of Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, despite academic approval he was denied tenure at Chicago’s DePaul University where he has been teaching. Dershowitz’ book The Case for Israel, whose scholarly integrity has been highly disputed by Finkelstein and others, has been publicized by BAK Shalom. Dershowitz has also called Finkelstein “a classic anti-Semite”.

McCarthyism à l’Israélienne vs. Jewish Humanism

 

Finkelstein has repeatedly argued for a settlement of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict according to international legal prescriptions and rulings while stressing that the lesson he learned from his family’s Holocaust suffering was to call attention to the Palestinians’ plight. His new book entitled This Time We Went Too Far: Truth and Consequences of the Gaza Invasion (OR Books) will be published in mid-March.

In a response to the pro-Israel lobbying groups, Professor Rolf Verleger, chair of the German section of the European Jews for a Just Peace (EJJP) – one of the sponsors of the Berlin lectures – rejected the claims put forward against Finkelstein. Instead, Verleger described him as “a proud and conscious Jew, who defends himself against the appropriation of Jewish tradition by Jewish blood-and-soil nationalism”. Criticizing those pressure groups for their lack of opposition to human rights violations and nationalism when it came to Israel, Verleger compared their tactics to McCarthyite agitation, this time directed against “un-Israeli activities”.

Verleger, who is the author of Israel’s Wrong Way: A Jewish View (PapyRossa, in German, 2nd edn., 2009), is a former member of the board of delegates of the Central Council of Jews in Germany but was not re-elected due to his open criticism of Israeli policies.

In a letter sent earlier to the Trinitatis Church in a plea to reverse its decision, Verleger rejected the idea that criticism of Israel’s policies would amount to anti-Semitism and instead talked of “Jewish responsibility” to do so. Verleger, who in the letter reminded that his father had died on the very day of the projected Finkelstein event in Berlin 45 years ago with an “Auschwitz number on his arm” and who had lost his family in Auschwitz, consigned Finkelstein to stand in the “humanistic tradition of German Judaism” à la Martin Buber, Hannah Arendt and Rabbi Leo Baeck.

 

Leftist Raison d’Etat

 

In particular, the withdrawal of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation (RLS) engendered ongoing protests. In an open letter some Left Party Members of Parliament and leading sympathizers criticized the foundation’s handling of Norman Finkelstein. Therein, they consider the denunciatory claims against Finkelstein as “absurd”. In another open letter, former and current RLS scholarship holder conclude that the foundation might lose its “character as location for Leftist debates and controversies” if it were to continue to avoid criticism of Israeli government policies. Also many other Leftists voiced criticism of the RLS’s decision noting that the latter would be unworthy of the Jewish philosopher and activist Rosa Luxemburg’s famous quote of “Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently.”

 

The RLS had come under harsh criticism last summer when allowing three well-known war-mongers – amongst them a leading representative from BAK Shalom – to speak at its largest students-led annual conference. The Left Party and its think-tank find themselves in an internal strife on the question of anti-Zionism and anti-imperialism, not at least since the chairman of the party’s parliamentary group Gregor Gysi advocated in spring 2008 to reconsider those principles. This was seen as an effort to align the Left Party with German raison d’état. In a speech before the Israeli Parliament (Knesset) in March 2008, German Chancellor Angela Merkel had said: “Here of all places I want to explicitly stress that every German Government and every German Chancellor before me has shouldered Germany’s special historical responsibility for Israel’s security. This historical responsibility is part of my country’s raison d’être. For me as German Chancellor, therefore, Israel’s security will never be open to negotiation.” Displaying “unconditional solidarity” with Israeli policies, two days into Tel Aviv’s military operation “Cast Lead” in Gaza, the German Chancellor and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert “agreed that the responsibility for the development of the situation in the region clearly and exclusively lies with Hamas.” Such an assessment had also been echoed then by the chairman of the Left Party in Berlin at a pro-Israel rally.

After the cancellations of venues for Finkelstein’s lectures, at the end the junge Welt (“Young World”) – an independent left-wing daily known for its staunch opposition to illegal wars – had stepped in by offering its rather small-spaced shop in Berlin.

 

Finally, in a statement issued on 20 February, Finkelstein explained why he would not travel to Germany: “Some Germans seem determined that their fellow German citizens only hear opinions on the Israel-Palestine conflict that support the policies of the Israeli government. Such intolerance is not good for Palestinians who are living under a brutal military occupation. It is not good for Germans who want their country to support human rights and international law. It is not good for courageous dissenting Israelis who need support from the European Union.”

Finkelstein was also going to elaborate on the Goldstone Report, commissioned by the United Nations, which finds Israel guilty of war crimes in its assault on Gaza during the winter of 2008-2009. Further, in violation of domestic and EU laws that would prohibit the selling of arms to conflict-torn regions, Berlin has been continuing to do so.

Precedents of Handling Critics of Israeli Policies

There have been a number of occasions most recently in Germany where critics of Israel’s policies have been faced with comparable treatment. In January this year, three female Left Party members of the German Parliament (who also signed the above mentioned open letter to the RLS) had been attacked by similar groups in concert with Evangelical clerics for not offering standing ovations after Israeli President Shimon Peres’ Bundestag speech on Holocaust Memorial Day. The parliamentarians, who had paid tribute to the victims of Nazi crimes at ceremonies ahead of Peres’ talk, explained their rejection by pointing to the Israeli President’s exploitation of the event for a pro-Iran war call. In his speech, Peres considered Iran’s government to be “a danger to the entire world”. In spite of ongoing Israeli calls for a military strike on Iran, the Israeli President also said “we identify with the millions of Iranians who revolt against dictatorship and violence.” The German section of the EJJP had criticized the invitation of Peres in the first place.

In early 2009, a projected discussion on Germany’s major political TV show “Anne Will” about the Israeli military offensive in Gaza was cancelled only a few days before, in what was considered to have occurred after political interference.

In October 2009, following a lobbying campaign similar to the Finkelstein case, a projected talk in Munich by the exiled Israeli historian Ilan Pappé was cancelled by the city’s authorities. In an open letter, Professor Pappé – who was then speaking at a different venue – wrote that his father “was silenced in a similar way as a German Jew in the early 1930s”. Like himself, he went on, his father and his friends were regarded as “’humanists’ and ‘peacenik’ Jews whose voice had to be quashed and stopped”. Pappé said he was “worried, as any decent person should be, about the state of freedom of speech and democracy in present day Germany” as witnessed by the decision to censor his talk.

Both Finkelstein and Pappé have authored leading studies on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and are considered as eloquent advocates for a just and legal settlement of the conflict. Their Jewish background makes them especially troublesome for hardline defenders of Israel who frequently resort to labeling critics of being anti-Semites or even “self-hating Jews”. One might argue that such a distinction between “good” and “bad” Jews would in itself amount to a sort of anti-Semitism.

 

Update | Norman Finkelstein’s projected talk at the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic on “Prospects of Peace in the Middle East, Current Situation and the Goldstone Report on Gaza” was cancelled by the Academy on very short notice.

SOURCE

Ali Fathollah-Nejad (2010) “Germany’s Fear of Finkelstein”, The Palestine Chronicle, 2 March

republished on Eurasia Review, 02/03

republished on uruknet.info, 02/03

republished on CounterCurrents.org, 03/03

republished on Information Clearing House, 03/03

▪ republished as “Germany’s Finkelstein Phobia” on Pacific Free Press, 04/03

▪ republished as “Silencing Critics of Israel: Germany’s Finkelstein Phobia”, Global Research, Montreal: Centre for Research on Globalization, 04/03

republished on INCnews Global Intelligence, 04/03

republished on Political Theatrics, 04/03

slightly edited version published on Monthly Review Webzine, 01/03 (top story of 1 & 2 Mar.)

▪ republished on the website of Jews for Justice for Palestinians (JFJFP), 10/03.

IN FRENCH |Finkelstein fiche la trouille à une certaine Allemagne”, trans. M. Charbonnier, Palestine – Solidarité, 04/03

republished as “La phobie Finkelstein en Allemagne“, Mondialisation.ca, Montreal: Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation, 04/03

republished as “L’Allemagne a peur de Finkelstein“, trans. M. Charbonnier, edit. F. Giudice, Tlaxcala, 05/03.

IN ITALIAN |Zittire i critici di Israele: La fobia della Germania de Norman Finkelstein“, Arianna Editrice, trans. A. Carancini, 07/03

republished on Global Research, Montreal: Centre for Research on Globalization, 08/03.

IN CZECH |Německé obavy z Finkelsteina a umlčování kritiky Izraele”, Outsider Media, 08/03.

IN JAPANESE | In excerpts.

About the article | “Germany’s Finkelstein Phobia” by Ali Fathollah-Nejad touches on the background of a series of cancellations of projected talks by the renowned scholar on the Israel/Palestine conflict Norman Finkelstein in Germany.

A conversation with Feridun Zaimoğlu: “You’ve got to swing your hips!” | Feridun Zaimoğlu im Gespräch mit Ali Fathollah-Nejad: “Man muss mit den Hüften schwingen!”

PRAISE

»a refreshingly vivacious interview«

(Carl H. FrederikssonCo-founder & editor-in-chief, Eurozine; president, Eurozine – Verein zur Vernetzung von Kulturmedien; Permanent Fellow, Institute for Media and Communication Policy, Berlin)

 
German author Feridun Zaimoglu, pioneer of the “Kanak” school of fiction (the migrant underworld described in the vernacular of its young male protagonists), has begun narrating from the Muslim woman’s perspective. In his latest novel Leyla, a Turkish woman tells about her life in Germany; while in a new work for theatre entitled Schwarze Jungfrauen (Black Virgins), young Muslim women talk openly about sex. In March 2007, Zaimoglu ruffled feathers when he gave up his place at an official conference on Muslims in Germany in protest at the non-attendance of young ordinary Muslims and criticized feminist former-Muslims for demonizing young Muslim women. With characteristic verve, he explained to Ali Fathollah-Nejad why the discourse in Germany operates double values when it comes to the questions of multiculturalism and integration.
 

Ali Fathollah-Nejad: Following your work as a reader, there’s one shift in your writing I find particularly interesting. One daily paper said of Kanak Sprak[1] that there’s an “incredibly hard beat” behind it. Reading your new stories – and also your new novel Leyla – this beat has become a melody. What led to this change in your “writer’s dance”?

Feridun Zaimoglu: I really enjoy writing from different perspectives. It wasn’t just Kanak Sprak, but also Abschaum[2] that made my name. I slipped into the role of a suburban gangster. At the time I used to wear my hair a bit longer and for a few years I only made appearances in a suit. Anyone who saw me always thought “What a joke! He reckons he’s writing about the life of a junkie, the life of a gangster. But that’s his own life!” So, I really like taking on different roles. With every book I write I look at how I can do justice to the person. In Leyla I just felt like telling the story of an ordinary woman who ends up in Germany. And then I almost couldn’t help making the book quieter. And that’s when I’d like to think that I discovered the right narrative tone.

AF-N: You read from Leyla and people ask you “Is that how things really are?” In a way you’re a kind of cultural mediator, you explain to many Germans aspects of foreign cultures that they don’t really understand, or at least you provide a way into those cultures.[3] That clearly entails a massive responsibility. How do you find that?

FZ: Responsibility! Responsibility? Either you can take pleasure in the whole thing, or you can sit there with buttocks clenched. Open the book, read, get excited, and then come the questions. Cultural mediation? Yeah, well, if what I write has this added value in some way, then great. But that’s not an intention of mine. It’s all about telling stories. But “cultural mediator”, “cultural broker”, good God! I got labelled “the Malcolm X of the Turks”, “the Rudi Dutschke of the immigrant Germans”, and then some people got cross when I said “German, enough said!” They don’t know what goddamn time it is! They don’t know that this whole ethnic thing gets made into the object of political conflicts. This whole ethnic crap gets on my nerves. And then people look at me if I say “German”! I know that over ninety per cent are thinking “You look like what you look like. With your name? Mate, with your face? No one but you is gonna believe that!” I couldn’t care less about that. What’s the one thing that matters? The way I see myself! I’m not dependent on other people’s opinions, but I am a sucker for the limelight. I love being on stage and vanishing into these roles instead of pushing my own boring life to the forefront of what I do. And that’s when things start buzzing…

AF-N: Kanak Sprak performed an important function at the time. You were seen on numerous TV debates on racism with long hair and a smart beard. You were very political, very subversive and radical in your opinions. What triggered this shift towards being a writer who devotes himself to classical themes, rather than the kind of underworld themes that you started out from?

FZ: Have I really changed? I think it is a political act to tell the story of those women who – and I don’t want to draw representative figures here – didn’t appear in those public debates, or even in the political discussions. When I was writing Kanak Sprak, I said that I wanted to make visible those people who don’t get a chance to speak. My heroes and heroines are not middle-class. That’s because what I find exciting – what seethes, ferments, grows wild – I don’t see in Germany in the middle class, in the bourgeois. I find the world of the unsophisticated – sometimes negative as it is, but even so, alive – in the world of the white trash and in the ethnoproletariat. I don’t want to write about middle-class people; I don’t get this discreet, decadent charm that the bourgeoisie are supposed to have. And nothing’s changed there. It would be a great shame if at 41 I were still playing the neighbourhood radical, fist clenched, yelling “Kanak Attack”[4]. I don’t think I’ve started to behave myself. I think it’s more that I’m not making it so easy for myself anymore.

AF-N: Do you think that other people in Germany have a responsibility to write as radically as you have done?

FZ: But of course. How vain, how stupid, how ignorant it would be for me to say: “That’s what I wrote then and because I wrote it, that’s that.” The reason I’m so positive is that there really are a great deal of radical approaches, because there are loads of people out there, in the cultural sphere as well, who really are pretty smart and are pushing the envelope. I haven’t de-radicalized! Some people will be surprised to hear that.

AF-N: You did have a pioneering role. Looking back, there’s been a wave Germans with a foreign background in the cultural scene who have tried to push their way into the public eye – the film director Fatih Akin being a prominent example. What do you think of this movement?

FZ: Shake, rattle and roll! I think a lot of it, I really do. There are a whole lot of great talents out there, great people. Something’s caught fire. And I think it’s going to get pretty intense over the next few years, because the fights over allocations and the rat race for jobs and training vacancies are getting fiercer, and because even schools and universities are geared towards selection according to historical and cultural criteria. Who gets the big prizes and who gets excluded? These mechanisms persist. Well, one of these days it’s going to be “Wakey wakey!” The state is retreating from the cultural and social sectors and private individuals can’t fill the void, and that means social conflicts in the future. There’s a time bomb ticking away there.

AF-N: Doesn’t it make you sad that this discourse still exists? Nothing’s changed at all!

FZ: Absolutely right.

AF-N: What needs to be done in order to make this discourse crumble away, to change it – especially from the immigrant point of view?

FZ: I’m not an immigrant, I’m German! That’s the first step. You can start by choosing the right terms. It’s like slam poetry – who’s at the mike, who isn’t! It’s still a struggle for cultural hegemony. That’s not going to go away in ten years – not in 20, 30 or 40 years. But Germany is changing. Some people smile at me as if to say “Hey look, the Kanak guy’s written the leader in Die Zeit.[5] These idiots don’t know what they’re talking about! With all due respect, they haven’t got a clue. They haven’t understood the rules of cultural hegemony, because that’s a tough job, a hardcore job.

AF-N: Do you mean that radicalism is needed to change the discourse?

FZ: Radicalism bound by dogma is doomed to failure. It’s a kind of minority within a minority within a minority.

AF-N: So what about a progressive radicalism, one you used in Kanak Sprak by letting people speak, or by trying to speak on behalf of those who have no voice in the German public sphere?

FZ: Something many people may find intolerable is that there’s no uniform line. You’ve got to swing your hips! Opportunism is another thing. There are lots of people in politics who are opportunists. They’re the kind of party bores who have nothing better to do at parties than sit around and jabber. Then there are people who are on the dance floor. They’re moving their hips. It’s that simple. Either be in the thick of it, or stuff yourself with crisps on the sidelines and say “What a dull party!” It’s not the party that’s dull, it’s them. There’s a big difference. That’s how it is in politics.

AF-N: You just mentioned your article in Die Zeit. I’d like to move on to the situation in the media. There was all the fuss about the Rütli School.[6] I think you’ve contributed a great deal to the debate through your publications, but I still have the feeling that in the media in general there’s a certain atmosphere of inertia. I get the feeling that not a lot is changing. What’s your view?

FZ: I’ve given hundreds of readings in schools, mostly in Hauptschulen and in youth clubs. So these experiences are the basis for my views. One thing is that the three-tier school system is also subdivided according to ethnicity. There are the failures – who aren’t failures at all; dammit, I very nearly ended up in a special school. It’s true – I was that close to landing up there! Your typical Turk is generally seen as a PISA [7] failure and a playground yobbo. That stereotype exists. There’s a male problem going on, a problem with boys. This crap about male honour. If what that amounts to is some nasty coward who goes and shoots his sister, what do we do with him? There’s no straightforward answer to that. It’s different from case to case. You’ve got to look at it carefully, talk to people. I’m not surprised – the notion of a dominant German culture, a Leitkultur, the cartoon controversy, then Necla Kelek,[8] Seyran Ates,[9] and now there’s open season on all male, Muslim, immigrant adolescents. That’s why I say to people “Wakey wakey!” Did they think the class society no longer exists, or what? It still exists, and will continue to exist. And the ethnic factor is how the ruling class wants to look at it. It’s as simple as that. And anyone who comes along with their neoliberal crap, who stops thinking politically and starts looking at things ethnically, is behaving just like the ruling classes – and that includes the media and its movers and shakers. They talk about school and then they lay into the teachers. Yes – but if you thought politically, you would look at what is being done in schools. What funding has been slashed? What’s left in the pot? What’s happening on a day-to-day basis? That’s one thing. But the other thing is then also to say: “You know, guys, your honour, you can stick it up your immigrant arses. Your fucking male honour!” What is that? That is a crime. Those people are criminals. That’s how it needs to be discussed. The rightwingers always step in and say “Hey, they come from a different cultural background.” True, we mustn’t trivialize things that come from this different cultural sphere either. That would be idiotic. But nor should people play the white man by coming along as a feminist activist and to a certain extent shooting down these kids, then talking about religion and making their ethnic background the topic of discussion. These people are the white man’s little women. And these little women come and go and come and go. Here you might see the label “feminism”, there it’s “a particularly self-assured Green”, or whatever all these opportunists are called. You look at all that, but you must never stop looking at it politically. The political viewpoint rocks!

AF-N: But politics is only possible through participation. Yet in our society there aren’t that many people with a non-German background who take part in public discourse.

FZ: That’s changing.

AF-N: But it can only be changed through education?

FZ: It can be changed above all by means of the German language. For the sake of the children’s future we shouldn’t moan about German being compulsory. That’s yet another piece of ethno-nonsense. And then all these Turkish spokesmen come along, and these lefty liberals, all these jokers, and they tell us “Oh, but we can’t ask that of the children.” You twits! How much do you earn in a month? You’ve got it made. What is participation? Involvement starts from early childhood. When my parents couldn’t go through my homework with me at primary school, what are we supposed to say about that? That’s a built-in disadvantage right from the off. Yeah, so what? Did I cry? Did I hell! I fell for Petra at school and wanted to impress her. I wanted to stand out a bit by using classy German. You can’t say “Oi, mate!” to a woman! So what sources of motivation do people have? Politics is all well and good, but when the political class ignores the human situation, it gets detached and loses touch with reality. You’ve always got to look at what’s going on at the bottom!

AF-N: Is Leyla in Wonderland just a working title? Or is Germany a wonderland?

FZ: Yes. It really was the economic wonderland that my parents set out for: my father who worked with leather, my mother a cleaner. They kept drumming the basic principle into me: “Don’t spit into the bowl you’re eating from! Don’t put down the Germans, you arsehole!” And I thought “That’s right! This is a nice country! It’s great here!” What would have become of me if I hadn’t come here? A Muslim farmer, or what? Great career! Why shouldn’t people also say “Germany, my opportunity”? Does that sound emotional? Well it is! And that’s the crucial point: feelings play a major role. We mustn’t burn ourselves out – we can’t run out of breath. I mustn’t judge others by my own standards – nor do I. I haven’t lost touch with reality. So I can tell one thing from another. I’m in great spirits. But it’s really important to maintain one’s energy. The rebellious aspect too. In the meantime every CDU bigwig has become a rebel. I’m ready any moment for Mrs Merkel to come out, for her to say “Oh yeah, I used to wear a biker jacket and hightail it through the neighbourhood.” I don’t mean it like that, of course. What I mean is: rebellion has a good aura about it. Later, you look in the mirror: you kept getting on the wrong end of the coppers’ truncheons, but you were out there and did this and that. Maybe it wasn’t that much of a success, but man, was it exciting! The middle-class conservatives come at it from their rightwing angle. All that stuff makes them sick! And nothing’s changed about that. But they’re more successful now too. And you know what – screw their villas! Good God. Amen to that.

[1] The title of Feridun Zaimoglu’s notable debut, Kanak Sprak: 24 Mißtöne vom Rande der Gesellschaft (Kanak Sprak: 24 Notes of Discord from the Margin of Society), Hamburg (Rotbuch), 1995.
[2] Feridun Zaimoglu: Abschaum. Die wahre Geschichte von Ertan Ongun (Scum. The True Story of Ertan Ongun), Hamburg (Rotbuch), 1997
[3] Zaimoglu took part in the first sitting of the German “Islam conference” in September 2006, a “summit meeting” between the German state and representatives of Muslim organizations as well as “cultural Muslims” critical of Islam. Zaimoglu resigned from the second conference in May 2007 in protest at what he saw as the absence of second and third generation “neo-Muslims”; his seat, he argued, could be better occupied by a young Muslim, whom the conference was supposedly about. Zaimoglu’s advocacy for young Muslims’ religious freedom, especially that of young Muslim women, and his critique of what he saw as the conservatism of feminist criticism of Islam, was controversial yet met with widespread sympathy in the liberal press. For more on the German Islam Conference see: Claus Leggewie, “Between national Church and religious supermarket” in Eurozine.
[4] Slogan of a radical immigrant movement.
[5] See “Mein Deutschland” in Die Zeit, No.16, 12 April 2006, p.1, by Feridun Zaimoglu. In English, “My Germany” in signandsight.
[6] The Rütli School is a Hauptschule (secondary modern) in Neukölln, Berlin. In 2006, the school’s headteacher, unable to control the violence in her school, made an appeal for help to the Berlin Senate. This led to a debate about the school system in Germany, violence in schools and the integration of the children of immigrants.
[7] Programme for International Student Assessment
[8] Germany’s foremost critic of the treatment of women in Islam, also present at the Islam conference.
[9] A Turkish lawyer and women’s rights activist, she gave up practising in 2006 following threats from legal opponents.

SOURCE

Ali Fathollah-Nejad (2007) “»You’ve got to swing your hips!« – A conversation with Feridun Zaimoğlu”, translated from German by Saul Lipetz, Eurozine, 16 November.

* * *

Man muss mit den Hüften schwingen!

Ein Gespräch mit dem Schriftsteller Feridun Zaimoglu

Ali Fathollah-Nejad sprach mit Feridun Zaimoglu in Münster über seine Lust am Geschichtenerzählen, über Politik und Schriftstellerei und über Deutschland.

Ali Fathollah-Nejad: Wenn man Dich als Leser begleitet hat, dann war ein Wandel besonders interessant: Eine Tageszeitung hat einmal über Kanak Sprak[1] geschrieben, dass dahinter ein unglaublich harter Beat stecke. Wenn man jetzt deine neueren Erzählungen – und auch deinen neuen Roman Leyla – nimmt, ist aus diesem Beat eine Melodie geworden. Wie kam es zu dieser Veränderung in deinem schreiberischen Tanz?

Feridun Zaimoglu: Ich habe große Lust und große Freude daran, Rollenprosa zu machen. Ich bin ja nicht nur mit Kanak Sprak, sondern vor allem auch mit Abschaum[2] auffällig geworden. Ich bin da in die Rolle eines Vorstadtgangsters geschlüpft. Damals trug ich die Haare etwas länger, und ein paar Jahre lang bin ich sogar nur im Anzug aufgetreten. Wer mich gesehen hat, dachte immer: “So ein Blödsinn! Der behauptet, er würde jetzt über das Leben eines Junkies, eines Gangsters schreiben. Das ist sein eigenes Leben!” Also, ich habe große Lust, in verschiedene Rollen zu schlüpfen. Ich gucke mir natürlich bei jedem Buch, das ich schreibe, an, wie ich der Person gerecht werde. In Leyla hatte ich eben Lust, die Geschichte einer einfachen Frau zu schreiben, die es nach Deutschland verschlägt. Da hat es sich geradezu aufgedrängt, das Buch leiser zu schreiben. Ich habe da den erzählerischen Ton entdeckt.

AF-N: Du liest aus Leyla und die Leute fragen dich “Ist das wirklich so?” In gewisser Weise bist du Kulturvermittler, du erklärst vielen Deutschen einen Teil der ausländischen Kulturen, die sie so nicht verstehen, zumindest bist du ein Zugang dazu. Da steckt sicherlich eine Riesenverantwortung dahinter. Wie findest du das?

FZ: Verantwortung? Man kann das Ding entweder mit Lust und Laune machen, oder man kann mit zusammengekniffenen Arschbacken da sitzen. Buch auf, lesen, brennen, und dann kommen die Fragen. Kulturvermittlung? Na ja, wenn es gewissermaßen diesen Mehrwert hat, wunderbar. Aber das liegt doch nicht in meiner Absicht. Worum es geht, ist, Geschichten zu erzählen. Und “Kulturvermittler”, “Kulturmakler”, mein Gott! Ich wurde etikettiert als “Malcolm X der Türken”, als “Rudi Dutschke der Deutschländer”, und dann waren auch einige Leute böse, als ich sagte “Deutscher und Schluss!” Die wissen nicht, wie spät es ist, verdammt noch mal. Die wissen nicht, dass diese ethnische Geschichte zum Gegenstand von politischen Auseinandersetzungen gemacht wird. Dieser ethnische Blödsinn geht mir auf die Nerven. Die Leute gucken ja auch, wenn ich sage “Deutscher”! Ich weiß doch, dass über 90 Prozent denken: “Du siehst aus, wie du aussiehst. Mit deinem Namen, Alter, mit deiner Fresse? Das glaubst auch nurdu!” Das ist mir doch so was von egal. Es kommt auf was an? Auf mein Selbstverständnis! Ich bin nicht auf die Meinung von Leuten angewiesen, aber ich bin eine Rampensau. Ich liebe es, auf der Bühne zu sein und nicht mein eigenes langweiliges Leben in den Vordergrund zu stellen, sondern in diese Rollen zu tauchen. Und ab geht die Post!

AF-N: Kanak Sprak hat damals eine wichtige Funktion eingenommen. Man hat dich bei sehr vielen Rassismus-Debatten im Fernsehen mit langem Haar und feinem Bart erlebt. Du warst politisch sehr engagiert, sehr subversiv und radikal in deinen Aussagen. Wie kam dieser Wandel zu einem Schriftsteller, der sich klassischen Themen zuwendet und nicht mehr solchen Milieuthemen, aus denen Du entsprungen bist?

FZ: Habe ich mich tatsächlich gewandelt? Ich glaube, es ist ein politischer Akt, die Geschichte jener Frauen zu erzählen – ohne jetzt repräsentative Figuren zu zeichnen –, die in den öffentlichen Debatten, auch in den politischen Auseinandersetzungen, nicht vorgekommen sind. Als ich mit Kanak Sprakunterwegs war, habe ich gesagt, ich möchte diejenigen, die nicht selber zu Wort kommen, sichtbar machen. Meine Heldinnen und Helden sind nicht-Bürgerliche. Das kommt daher, dass ich das Spannende, das Gärende, das wild Wachsende eben nicht in Deutschland beim Bürgertum, bei den Bürgerlichen sehe. Ich sehe das Unaufgeklärte – manchmal auch das Negative, aber das Lebendige – beim White Trash und beim Ethnoproletariat. Ich habe keine Lust, über Bürgerliche zu schreiben, ich entdecke nicht den diskreten, dekadenten Charme der Bourgeoisie. Und daran hat sich ja nichts geändert. Es wäre sehr schade, wenn ich mit 41 Jahren immer noch mit geballter Faust in der Tasche den Kiezradikalen mache, der “Kanak Attack” brüllt. Ich glaube nicht, dass ich brav geworden bin. Ich glaube eher, dass ich es mir nicht mehr so einfach mache.

AF-N: Findest du, dass andere Leute in Deutschland heute die Verantwortung haben, so radikal zu schreiben, wie du es gemacht hast?

FZ: Aber selbstverständlich. Wie eitel, wie bescheuert, wie ignorant wäre es von mir zu sagen: “Ich habe das damals geschrieben, und weil ich es geschrieben habe, ist damit Schluss.” Ich bin so guter Dinge, weil es wirklich sehr viele radikale Ansätze gibt, weil es sehr viele Leute da draußen gibt, die auch im Kultursektor echt was los haben und was schieben. Ich habe mich nicht entradikalisiert. Da werden sich einige Leute wundern.

AF-N: Du hast ja eine Pionierrolle gehabt. Im Nachhinein gab es eine Welle, verursacht durch Deutsche mit ausländischem Hintergrund, die versucht haben, in der Kulturszene an die Öffentlichkeit zu treten – prominentes Beispiel ist Fatih Akin. Was hältst du von dieser Bewegung?

FZ: Es rappelt mächtig in der Kiste. Und ich halte viel davon, sehr, sehr viel. Es sind sehr viele großartige Talente, großartige Menschen unterwegs. Da hat etwas Feuer gefangen. Und es wird, wie ich denke, in den nächsten Jahren ziemlich heftig werden, weil die Verteilungskämpfe und das Rattenrennen um Jobs und Ausbildungsplätze heftiger werden, und weil auch die Schulen und die Universitäten darauf ausgerichtet sind, geschichtsspezifisch und klassenspezifisch auszusieben. Wer darf an die goldenen Krüge und wer wird ausgeschlossen? Diese Ausschließungsmechanismen gehen ja weiter. Tja, irgendwann hieß es’”Guten Morgen, Freunde!” Der Staat zieht sich zurück aus Kultur und Sozialem und die Privaten können die Lücke nicht füllen, was bedeutet, dass es in Zukunft soziale Konflikte geben wird. Das ist Brennstoff, das gärt.

AF-N: Macht es dich nicht traurig, dass dieser Diskurs nach wie vor besteht? An ihm hat sich ja nichts geändert.

FZ: Ganz genau.

AF-N: Was muss man machen, um diesen Diskurs zum Bröckeln zu bringen und ihn zu verändern, insbesondere aus Migrantensicht?

FZ: Ich bin kein Migrant, ich bin Deutscher! Das ist der erste Schritt. Man kann erstmal die richtigen Begriffe wählen. Es ist doch wie bei Slam Poetry – wer ist am Mic und wer nicht? Es ist immer noch ein Kampf um kulturelle Hegemonie. Der wird nicht in zehn Jahren, nicht in zwanzig, in dreißig, in vierzig Jahren zu Ende gehen. Aber Deutschland ändert sich. Ich werde belächelt von einigen: “Ach guck mal, der Kanakster hat den Leitartikel in der Zeit geschrieben.”[3]Die wissen nicht, was sie sagen, diese Idioten! Die haben keine Ahnung, mit Verlaub. Die haben die Gesetze der Kulturhegemonie nicht verstanden, denn das ist ein harter, knallharter Job.

AF-N: Sind das Gesetze, die Partizipation zulassen, oder muss Radikalität den Diskurs ändern?

FZ: Eine Radikalität, die Dogmen verpflichtet ist, ist zum Scheitern verurteilt. Sie ist gewissermaßen eine Minderheit in der Minderheit in der Minderheit.

AF-N: Was ist denn mit der aufklärerischen Radikalität, die du in Kanak Sprakbenutzt hast, indem du einfach die Leute zu Wort hast kommen lassen oder versucht hast, für jene zu sprechen, die in der deutschen Öffentlichkeit keine Zunge haben?

FZ: Was für viele Menschen vielleicht unerträglich ist: es gibt keine einheitliche Linie. Man muss mit den Hüften schwingen. Opportunismus ist etwas anderes. Es gibt viele Leute in der Politik, die Opportunisten sind. Das sind Partystinker, die auf den Partys nichts Besseres zu tun haben, als herumzusitzen und zu labern. Dann gibt es aber Leute, die auf der Piste sind. Die bewegen die Hüften. So einfach ist die Sache. Also entweder dabei sein oder am Rand Chips futtern und dann sagen: “Das ist ‘ne öde Party!” Nicht die Party ist öde, sie selbst sind öde. Das ist ein großer Unterschied. So ist es in der Politik.

AF-N: Du hast eben deinen Zeit-Artikel angesprochen. Ich möchte gerne an die Situation der Medien anknüpfen. Es gab dieses ganze Brimborium um die Rütli-Schule.[4] Ich denke, du hast durch deine Veröffentlichungen sehr viel zu der Debatte beigetragen. Trotzdem habe ich das Gefühl, dass in der breiten Medienwelt doch ein gewisser Stillstand herrscht. Ich habe das Gefühl, da verändert sich nicht viel. Wie siehst du das?

FZ: Ich habe so einige hundert Lesungen in der Schule gemacht, meistens in Hauptschulen und Jugendhäusern. Ich gehe jetzt einfach mal von diesen Erfahrungen aus. Das Eine ist, dass das dreigliedrige Schulsystem auch ethnisch gliedert. Es gibt die Versager – die keine Versager sind. Mein Gott, um ein Haar wäre ich in der Sonderschule gelandet. Es war so. Um ein Haar! Der Türke an und für sich kommt als PISA-Versager und als Pausenhofrüpel vor. Aber es gibt ihn. Es gibt auch ein Männerproblem, ein Jungsproblem. Dieser Dreck von Männerehre. Wenn der darauf hinausläuft, dass irgend so ein Hosenscheißer daherkommt und seine Schwester abknallt, was macht man dann mit dem? Eine eindeutige Antwort gibt es nicht. Von Fall zu Fall ist es verschieden. Man muss hingucken, man muss mit den Leuten reden. Es wundert mich doch nicht – Leitkultur, Karikaturen-Streit, dann Necla Kelek, Seyran Ates, und der männliche muslimische Migrantenjugendliche ist zum Abschuss freigegeben. Deshalb sage ich den Leuten “Guten Morgen!” Haben die gedacht, die Klassengesellschaft hat aufgehört, oder was? Die besteht immer noch, und die wird auch weiterbestehen. Und das ethnische Moment ist eine Begierde der herrschenden Klasse. So einfach ist das. Und wer mit neoliberalem Dreck kommt, wer aufhört politisch zu denken und anfängt ethnisch hinzugucken, tut es den herrschenden Klassen – und dazu gehören auch die Medienmacher und die Medien – gleich. Sie reden nämlich von der Schule und dreschen dann auf die Lehrer ein. Ja, aber wenn man politisch denken würde, dann würde man schauen, was wird an den Schulen gemacht? Was wurde an Geldern gestrichen? Was ist im Topf noch drin? Was passiert im Alltag? Das ist das Eine. Und das Andere ist, dann aber auch zu sagen: “Eure Ehre, Freunde, wisst Ihr, könnt Ihr Euch echt zwischen Eure Migrantenarschbacken rammen. Eure beschissene Männerehre!” Was ist das? Das ist ein Verbrechen. Das sind Kriminelle. So muss das besprochen werden. Die Rechten kommen immer und sagen “Hey, die kommen aus einem anderen Kulturkreis.” Man darf tatsächlich Dinge, die aus diesem anderen Kulturkreis kommen auch nicht bagatellisieren. Das wäre Blödsinn. Man darf ja auch nicht den weißen Männern das Wort reden, indem man als Frauenrechtsaktivistin daherkommt und gewissermaßen diese Jungs da abschießt, dann von der Religion spricht und die ethnische Grundlage zum Gegenstand der Erörterung macht. Das sind Weibchen der weißen Männer. Und diese Weibchen kommen und gehen und kommen. Da ist das Etikett “Feminismus”, da ist das Etikett “besonders selbstbewusste Grüne” oder wie immer all diese Opportunisten und Aufklärungsspießer heißen. Man guckt sich das an, aber man darf nie aufhören, sich das politisch anzusehen. Der politische Blick ist ein geiler Blick!

AF-N: Aber Politik ist ja nur möglich durch Partizipation. In unserer Gesellschaft hingegen gibt es nicht so viele, die einen nicht-deutschen Hintergrund haben, sich jedoch am öffentlichen Diskurs beteiligen.

FZ: Das ändert sich. 

AF-N: Es kann sich aber nur durch Bildung ändern?

FZ: Es kann sich vor allem durch die deutsche Sprache ändern. Um der Zukunft der Kinder willen soll man nicht von Deutschzwang schwätzen. Das ist schon wieder so ein Ethnoblödsinn. Und dann kommen diese ganzen Türkenvertreter, dann kommen diese Linksliberalen, es kommen all diese Fuzzies und erzählen “Ach, das dürfen wir den Kindern nicht zumuten.” Ihr Deppen! Ihr verdient wie viel im Monat? Ihr seid hier fein ‘raus. Partizipation ist was? Beteiligung fängt von klein auf an. Wenn meine Eltern mit mir meine Hausaufgaben in der Grundschule nicht durchgehen konnten, was ist das da: Das ist schon mal ein Standortnachteil. Ja und? Habe ich geheult? Nee! In der Schule habe ich mich in Petra verknallt und wollte sie beeindrucken. Ich wollte ein bisschen glänzen durch so ein Bella-figura-Deutsch. Man kann ja eine Frau nicht “Hey Alter!” nennen. Was sind also die Initiativkräfte? Politik ist gut, aber wenn das politische Bewusstsein die menschliche Situation ausklammert, dann hebt sie ab, dann verliert sie die Bodenhaftung. Man muss immer gucken, was passiert da unten!

AF-N: Ist Leyla im Wunderland nur ein Arbeitstitel? Oder ist Deutschland ein Wunderland?

FZ: Ja. Es war tatsächlich das Wirtschaftswunderland, in das meine Eltern aufgebrochen sind: Vater Lederarbeiter, Mutter Putzfrau. Sie haben mir immer wieder die Grundlage angesagt: “Spuck nicht in den Napf, aus dem Du isst! Mach mir die Deutschen nicht schlecht, Du Arschloch!” Und ich habe gedacht “Stimmt! Das ist ein schönes Land! Das ist großartig hier!” Was wäre denn aus mir geworden, wenn ich nicht hierher gekommen wäre? Muslimischer Bauer, oder was? Tolle Karriere! Wieso soll man auch nicht sagen “Deutschland, meine Chance”? Ist das emotional? Ja! Und da sind wir an einem entscheidenden Punkt: Gefühle spielen eine große Rolle. Wir dürfen nicht ausbrennen, wir müssen eine lange Puste haben. Ich darf nicht von mir auf Andere schließen – das tue ich auch nicht. Ich habe die Bodenhaftung nicht verloren. Also, ich kann das Eine vom Anderen auseinanderhalten. Ich habe beste Laune. Aber die Lust ist sehr wichtig. Auch das Rebellische. Mittlerweile ist ja jede CDU-Nase ein Rebell. Ich rechne stündlich mit dem Coming-Out von Frau Merkel, dass die sagt “Oh, ich habe früher auch eine Motorradjacke getragen und bin da durch die Gegend geflitzt.” Das meine ich nicht damit. Was ich damit meine, ist: Das hat einen guten Duft, wenn man aufbegehrt. Später wird man in den Spiegel schauen: Du hast zwar den Bullenknüppel immer wieder gespürt, aber du warst da draußen und hast dies und jenes gemacht. Vielleicht war das nicht so erfolgreich, aber Mann, das ist doch aufregend! Die Spießer, die kommen aus der rechten Ecke. Das, das kotzt sie an! Und daran hat sich nichts geändert. Aber sie haben auch mehr Erfolg. Und: Ich scheiß auf ihre Villen! Mein Gott. Amen.

[1] So der Titel seines viel beachteten Debüts: Kanak Sprak: 24 Mißtöne vom Rande der Gesellschaft, Hamburg (Rotbuch) 1995.
[2] Feridun Zaimoglu: Abschaum. Die wahre Geschichte von Ertan Ongun, Hamburg (Rotbuch) 1997.
[3] Gemeint ist der Artikel “Mein Deutschland” in: Die Zeit, Nr. 16, 12.04.2006, S. 1 von Feridun Zaimoglu.
[4] Die Rütli-Schule ist eine Hauptschule in Berlin-Neukölln. Weil sie die Gewalt an ihrer Schule nicht mehr in den Griff bekam, schickte die Rektorin der Schule einen dramatischen Hilferuf an den Berliner Senat. Dies führte zu einer Debatte über das Schulsystem in Deutschland, die Gewalt an Schulen und die Integration von Immigrantenkindern.

QUELLE

Fathollah-Nejad, Ali (2007) “»Man muss mit den Hüften schwingen!« – Ein Gespräch mit dem Schriftsteller Feridun Zaimoğlu”, Eurozine, 16. November.

 

QUOTED IN: