Bauhaus-Universität Weimar: Events

Following a welcoming address by Bauhaus-Universität Weimar President Prof. Peter Benz and a short introduction by event organisers Dr. Gottfried Schnödl and Prof. Eva Krivanec, the workshop – attended by around 30 participants – began with a lecture by Prof. Jens-Christian Wagner entitled »Entgleiste Debatte. Wie der israelisch-palästinensische Konflikt den 80. Jahrestag der Befreiung des KZ Buchenwald überschattete«. Wagner’s recapitulation included, among other topics, the events surrounding the invitation and disinvitation of Omri Boehm, Professor of Philosophy at the New School for Social Research in New York, as well as the roles played by the institutions and individuals involved. Wagner also addressed current debates on the »culture of remembrance«.

In the second lecture, literary and cultural scholar Dr. Franziska Haug spoke on the »Funktion des Antisemitismus in queerfeministischen Debatten«. Her talk centred around her perspective on queer research that had taken on the task of breaking down assumptions about identity. Haug addressed the discrepancy between identity claims and the influence of antisemitic ideas exert on some branches of current queer research (and parts of queer activism) by referring to the declining importance of criticising capitalist society within this research: Antisemitism could have become a new common ground for Queer Theory and something that even the most diverse branches of Queer Theory could have drawn upon. The lecture referenced arguments made in an article by Haug, which can be read here: www.researchgate.net/publication/378053987_No_Pride_in_Israeli_Apartheid_Zur_Funktion_des_Antisemitismus_in_queerfeministischen_Diskursen.

Following a short coffee break, Dr. Gottfried Schnödl, one of the workshop’s two organisers, gave a presentation on »Reflex und Reflexion. Antisemitismus und die Konjunktur des Unmittelbaren in Kultur- und Geisteswissenschaften«. Schnödl presented on antisemitic thought patterns that have emerged in some theoretical approaches in recent years. He brought up the notion that these patterns are accompanied by a failure to critically reflect on concepts and issues. This failure has resulted in an intellectual short-sightedness on the one hand and the emergence of a new form of Manichaeism on the other, something which is apparent in various aspects of current theoretical development.

Prof. Stephan Grigat, Director of the »Centrum für Antisemitismus- und Rassismusstudien (CARS)« at the Catholic University of Applied Sciences in North Rhine-Westphalia and expert on the history of antisemitism, also held a presentation on the topic of »Kritische Theorie des Nahost-Konflikts: Welche Rolle spielt der Antisemitismus bei der Beschäftigung mit Israel?«. Grigat addressed the topic by examining the continuity of antisemitic mindsets in the Arabic world, something that existed long before the founding of the State of Israel and could be described in part as adopting National Socialist genocidal antisemitism. This includes, for example, the mediation of the Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammed Amin Hussein and the National Socialist radio station Zeesen, which broadcasts to the Arab world.

In the closing lecture of the day, Dr. Peggy H. Breitenstein, a teaching philosopher at Friedrich Schiller University Jena, addressed the debate on J.F. Fries at the Jena University’s Institute of Philosophy. She began by presenting an initiative developed together with students that highlights Fries’ antisemitic remarks and questions the choice made by the Institute and the city of Jena to honour him (in the form of a bust).

The second day kicked off with a lecture by Dr. Susanne Zielinski, Director of the »Recherche- und Informationsstelle Antisemitismus (RIAS) Thüringen«. The pointed title of the lecture, »Alle gegen Zionisten‘. Antisemitismus in akademischen Kontexten in Thüringen«, provided shocking insight into the current situation at universities. She documented antisemitic behaviour, statements, tags, and openly antisemitic acts by both students and teaching staff at universities in Thuringia. Zielinski also pointed out problems within administrative structures, noting, for example, that university anti-discrimination offices sometimes have difficulty recognising, naming, and countering modern antisemitism as such.

Science journalist Dr. Christoph David Piorkowski then spoke about the»Antisemitismus des guten Gewissens« in certain areas of academic theory development. In the misguided belief of moral superiority, this kind antisemitism stands not against the suffering of the Palestinians, but rather against the legitimacy of the State of Israel itself. If humanitarian goals were the aim, according to Piorkowski, then protests would be directed against Hamas, for a democratic order in the Gaza Strip, against incitement and warmongering, for the release of hostages, etc. However, this is obviously not the case, according to Piorkowski, referring to his article of the same name, which can be read here: https://www.philomag.de/artikel/vom-antisemitismus-des-guten-gewissens-teil-1.

Using an example of two murder cases in interwar Vienna, in which Hugo Bettauer and Moritz Schlick were the victims, Prof. Eva Krivanec attempted to trace the connection between »Antiintellektualismus und Antisemitismus«. The workshop organiser linked the Dreyfus affair and the emergence of the term »intellectual« as a defamatory label at that time with the murder cases, both of which had been presented and affirmed as antisemitic by the right wing.

Finally, Ilse Bindseil presented her lecture, »Auf den Begriff bringen. Nachruf auf eine starke Option«, which has since been published here: https://bruchstuecke.info/2025/12/31/vom-intellektuellen-gestus-des-durchblicks. In her presentation, she looked at the problems that can arise from rigidly defining antisemitism.

Doing so, she argues hinders self-reflection, resulting in thought becoming a fixed ideological position instead of remaining open and flexible.

Bindseil's thesis was once again the subject of lively debate in the workshop’s concluding discussion. Other discussion points from earlier in the workshop were also revisited and brought into connection with one another. Unsurprisingly, the question of the possibilities of opposing antisemitism also emerged.

The organisation team wishes to thank all participants for their conference contributions and productive discussions.