Rebecca and Tino from XR in conversation with a Holocaust researcher
Roger Hallam's Holocaust comparison and relativization triggered an earthquake in our movement. Many of us were outraged and stunned by his words. People also began to leave XR. Many are unsure what to do, and want to wait until the storm passes. Some defend him. Others see us hanging by a thread. We hope that our movement sees this crisis as an opportunity, learns important lessons, and further develops.
The debate about Hallam's utterances is highly emotional within XR. Even though emotions should have a place for us, they must not solely determine the debate. In order to evaluate Hallam's statements, we also have to deal with what has happened. Whether Hallam's remarks were anti-Semitic or not is not a matter of taste, it's about rational arguments. To better understand these, we asked Professor Jürgen Manemann, an expert on post-Holocaust philosophy and theology, for his evaluation. On this basis, we have formed our own opinion,
which we explain in the following statement.
What happened?
Hallam's statements about the Holocaust* were a planned coup to attract media attention - as his publicized email with instructions proves. According to Jürgen Manemann, such instrumentalization is anti-Semitic: "Roger Hallam not only relativized the Holocaust, he purposively relativized the Nazi extermination of Jews in order to strengthen his own power, and to divide and harm others. He deliberately mocked and abused the victims of the Holocaust. That is anti-Semitism.”
The comparisons with the climate crisis are also anti-Semitic, according to Manemann: "Comparisons with Auschwitz often seek leveling it down and aim at forgetting.” And these comparisons are, in fact, wrong: “The climate catastrophe is not comparable to Auschwitz. In the climate crisis, we can exactly know how and why it came to today's situation, as well as why nothing has changed. In contrast, even today, the 'belief' and 'vision' of the 'Final Solution', enacted through a political, bureaucratic and technological system of an advanced industrial society is incomprehensible. What is incomprehensible is totalitarianism, which, on the one hand, consisted in the intentional desire to wipe out and destroy Jews throughout the world, and, on the other, to include other large parts of the population in the extermination process."
According to Manemann, the danger of Hallam's belittling is that "revisionists and fascists see themselves confirmed by Hallam's remarks." Such an endorsement in principle poses a threat to the Jewish community, and even more so in the present: new right-wing groups are growing rapidly in Europe, with Germany playing a central role in this rise. Antisemitic ideas are increasingly being established in our society and the landscape of our political parties. These developments recently found a culmination in the murder of a German politician and an antisemitic attack in Halle. Hallam's statements also pose a danger to XR. According to Manemann, they could encourage fascists to join us and form a so-called “Querfront”. That would be a movement that is at odds with both left-wing and right-wing political views, as an attempt to establish an anti-emancipatory agenda.
What now?
The next steps are clear. In XR, we need to continue our effort to distance ourselves from Roger Hallam. Instead of defending ourselves, or pulling in our heads, we need to seize this opportunity to begin a learning process. It is important to demand and accept well-founded critique and expert opinions.
According to Manemann, there is only one answer to anti-Semitism: "to name it clearly and to resist it with all means at our disposal." That means to make clear, that those who compare the Holocaust to the climate crisis, act anti-Semitic. With no ifs and buts. Such a process has begun with XR Germany's quick and decisive distancing from Hallam following last week's interview. We have made it clear that Hallam has violated the "principles of XR" which do not tolerate anti-Semitism. Consequently, Hallam is no longer welcome at XR Germany. This process of reflection must, however, continue in the future. The mere naming of anti-Semitic positions is not enough; we must also resist them. This means setting limits. Josef Schuster, chairman of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, makes it clear what such a limit should look like. We must make it clear to Hallam that we do not tolerate such views in our ranks. And that we will not tolerate people who express anti-Semitic views; they cannot be part of our movement. The inclusiveness of such world views must have its limits when they hurt or endanger others. Human dignity is inviolable. The 6th principle of XR is very clear about this need:
"Everyone is welcome - the way they are: we are actively working to create a safe and accessible environment." It contains an addendum that illustrates the implications of this principle: "Racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, Homophobia, disability, class discrimination, age prejudice and all other forms of discrimination, including insulting language, are not accepted, either personally or online."** Creating a safe environment means not tolerating discrimination.
But these limits mean little if we do not simultaneously demand that they are respected. People who deliberately injure and endanger others must be excluded. So too - but not only - Roger Hallam. It's about having a clear attitude towards positions - not people. No one is speaking against anyone having a second chance when people credibly acknowledge that their positions were wrong and hurtful and that they have changed. But Hallam's apology reads like a justification. He continues to pursue his strategy in his statement by making further horrendous trivialities and comparisons.
"Tell The Truth" also means being honest with ourselves. In a process of reflection and self-criticism, we have to talk about structural problems, hidden ideologies and power hierarchies. We also have to talk about humanity, even within our abstract discussions about the climate crisis. The hidden ideology behind Hallam's utterances is one that is purely numerical, and thus ignores human motives. It is a deliberate oversimplification, and is based on a logic in which the ends justify all means.
If this position is not reflected on and challenged, then it threatens the integrity of the entire climate movement. It is necessary to critically analyse Hallam's texts in order to counteract their ideological influence on our movement. And it's about organizing education - as rebels have done for our upcoming national meeting. Hidden power hierarchies have also been revealed by Hallam's attempt to abuse XR Germany for his perfidious strategy.
We can be autonomous from XR UK, but so long as Hallam is perceived in the public as the face of our movement, it grants him a tremendous power over us. Many founders of XR do not oppose power concentration, as our seventh principle foresees, but actively seek it. We have been too naive as we have simply relied on our principles of power mitigation and decentralization. We have to demand them instead. Other structural weaknesses add to this problem. Our 8th principle, which aims to protect us from naming and shaming, can prevent people from being held accountable. And the nature of the climate crisis also presents us with challenges. Since it tends to be thought of in abstraction, it lends itself to thinking purely in numbers. It's important to actively protect our own humanity. Manemann reminds us that the philosopher Theodor W. Adorno repeatedly pointed out that "Auschwitz would not have been possible without a coldness in human relationships. If we want to fight extinction, then we must also resist this coldness." According to Manemann, our regeneration culture should confront this social coldness.
We are the direction
Given XR's decentralization, decisions about the future must be made by the whole movement. Providing everyone with the necessary information to conscientiously make that decision presents us with a huge challenge. That's why we call on all the local (city) groups: Let your rebels read this position, and our recommendations, in order that they can respond to it. Let them discuss the positions they want to represent XR and the changes they think are needed. Carry these perspectives to the nationwide meeting, so that can we decide there how we will continue in the future. If we do not act, the latest emissions gap report shows that even if all the countries of the Paris Agreement achieve their climate goals, we would still be on the course of a global warming of 3.2 ° C***. – with parts of the world becoming uninhabitable. These figures make it clear that we need our determination in the fight against the climate crisis. And an attitude that does not allow despair to slip into inhumanity. For us it is clear: This is not the right time for personality cults, self-defensiveness, and division. It is the time for memory, reflection and development. It is the time for humanity. And it's time for Roger Hallam to go.
Rebecca Fleischmann, Tino Pfaff
28 November 2019
