Image source: Vor den Karren gespannt. Photo by hoch3fotografie on Unsplash
The antifascist congress “Counterform: Alliance against authoritarian formation” is scheduled to take place in Berlin on the weekend of 1 May 2025 [1]. Many well-known and distinguished speakers have been announced, including Thomas Ebermann, Andrea Trumann and Thomas Konicz. The congress aims to discuss current authoritarianism and fascism from a global perspective, focusing on antifascist struggles against authoritarian formations at the local level. It is grounded in a radical critique of capitalism without reformist appeasement and positions itself against “authoritarian” leftists. Given the crisis of the radical left and antifascism rightly identified by the congress, an intensive and broadly based discussion about the theory and practice of antifascism, bringing together as many anticapitalist antifascists as possible, would indeed be desperately needed. In contrast to the current reformist antifa debates in the Left Party and NGOs, as well as in radical left antifa groups, the re-establishment of a revolutionary antifascism would be the order of the day. [2]

However, the congress announced here counteracts such a discussion. It addresses neither the currently hegemonic anti-migration discourse nor the instrumentalisation of the concept of antisemitism by the German state. One must therefore ask to what extent it actually lives up to its own anti-German claim, and whether it in fact reproduces German ideology and sides with the German state. The congress should therefore be measured against its own antifascist standards in the sense of an immanent critique.

For what, if not a position against Germany, constitutes the content of being “against Germany”, i.e., anti-German? The anti-German movement originally emerged from the struggle against the annexation of the GDR by the FRG and the historical awareness that a “reunified” Germany would become the most powerful country in Europe. Precisely because of the industrial mass murder and war of annihilation perpetrated by this country, a new authoritarian or fascist Germany would have to be prevented at all costs. [3]

Anti-migration discourse
Not a single lecture or workshop on anti-migration discourse is programmed. However, this currently represents the main right-wing radical ideology and has been adopted by the bourgeois parties since at least last year. The consequences of this racist hegemony include a sharp rise in physical attacks on migrants and the likely impending further dismantling of the right to asylum. On the website, racism is mentioned only once – not to problematise racist hegemony, but to challenge the deportation fantasies of left-wing antisemitism critics.

Instead, the focus is primarily on a so-called “left authoritarianism” and especially Islamism – the latter featuring in nearly half of the presentations. One may not approve of the neo-Leninists’ authoritarianism, but to simply place it on the same level as Stalinism or racist violence is absurd. Criticising Islamism is quite important, but in Germany it would need to be compared with the current German ideology, which uses Islamism-bashing as a kind of official authorisation for anti-Muslim racism. (At least there is nothing about this on the website, and according to the report, this issue was not discussed at the preparatory event [4]).

A critical event on Islamism and antisemitism on the left, especially on 1 May in Berlin, would certainly be appropriate. This is because the autonomous 1 May demonstration in Berlin-Kreuzberg, which is central to the identity of non-migrant left-wing Kreuzberg, was organised last year by a strange alliance of neo-Leninist and postcolonial groups and was dedicated solely to the war in Gaza. While this exclusive repurposing of the workers’ day of struggle on 1 May may seem debatable, it would hardly be accepted on Women’s Day or the Day of Liberation from Fascism. Moreover, there were numerous symbols and slogans at the demonstration (which I briefly attended) that could be interpreted as antisemitic (and possibly actually were). The alliance is made possible by an emptying and authoritative reinterpretation of anti-Zionism, in which controversial positions are unwelcome. Little remained of the anarchic festival of Kreuzberg’s 1 May and its anti-authoritarian spirit. Yet the revolutionary 1 May demonstration could certainly connect to a historical revolutionary anti-Zionism, such as Matzpen, an anti-authoritarian communist and Trotskyist organisation from the Jewish-Israeli 1968. [5] In such a framing, striving for care, differentiation and historical awareness, in which of course much can still go wrong, criticism could take place. Instead, the framing of the congress is absolute and uncompromising: “antifascist struggle against antisemitism”.

German actors
While the focus of the congress is on Islamism and the left, there is hardly any mention of German actors who are driving the authoritarian turn. Although there are a handful of events on the radical right in Germany covering important topics such as the Berlin neo-Nazi scene and right-wing influencers, these hardly register quantitatively. It is at least peculiar that the AfD, the central right-wing radical organisation of our time, is virtually not addressed; or that the fascist philosopher Martin Heidegger is indeed discussed – but not in terms of his great relevance to the worldview of the radical right, but paradoxically for postmodernism. What on earth has that got to do with the authoritarian turn?

But the authoritarian turn in Germany is not only being advanced by the radical right, but by the bourgeois parties. The entire democratic party spectrum has shifted far to the right. The authoritarian reconstruction of the state in Germany is taking place today, not by leftists or Islamists, but by the bourgeois parties, especially the CDU, which continues to undermine the firewall and asylum law and promotes the militarisation of the country. These authoritarian processes often go unnoticed, precisely because they are directed against migrants and the left. With regard to the latter, the recent collective agreement in the public sector is remarkable, in which the unions agreed to an “extremism clause”. [6] None of this is mentioned.

Also mentioned only marginally is the brutal authoritarian reconstruction of the state in the most powerful country in the world, which is currently destroying international alliances and carrying out authoritarian regime change in Europe. There is no mention whatsoever of the dissolution of the rule of law in Israel, its increasingly nationalist and religious government coalition, and the murderous, extremely destructive war in Gaza. While an antifascist congress in Germany would not necessarily have to address the processes of fascisation in Israel or Russia (it does address the latter), if a congress deals as massively as this one with hatred of Israel, antisemitism on 7 October and the Palestine solidarity movement, a look at Israel would be appropriate.

The reason for all these oddities is in the self-understanding: it is basically solely and exclusively about antisemitism. The antifascism of the congress is directed first and last against antisemitism; everything else plays merely an incidental role.

Antisemitism
Antisemitism is a fundamental ideology of modernity. In Israel on 7 October 2023, a large number of Jewish people were murdered by ultra-reactionary Palestinian antisemites. In Germany, Jewish people are exposed to increasing violence, in the Palestine solidarity movement there are widespread antisemitic stereotypes that are little questioned, and the open antisemites within it are only rarely challenged within the movement. The congress is right about all of this, even if it itself seems to lack an eye for the heterogeneity of the Palestine solidarity movement and would certainly contradict the observation that there are a large number of antisemitism-critical activists there.

Again, however, there is no reflection on the fact that the German state uses the concept of antisemitism to justify massive violations of fundamental rights. Since 7 October 2023, the state has used the concept of antisemitism to divide the left and to test the authoritarian turn in a racialised area of society, as it were, in an experimental field. It is both the practice of authoritarian practices by the police and the test of the extent to which the public accepts systematic violations of fundamental rights when these are racially charged. This is partly drastic: participants in Palestine solidarity demonstrations have, among other things, had their right to asylum revoked, and EU citizens are to be expelled. A critique of antisemitism under present conditions can no longer be carried out without a critique of the public devaluation of the concept of antisemitism by the state.

In the self-understanding of the congress, it states with regard to Palestine solidarity that antisemitism is suppressed by the state (although this is not sufficient because the state does not change the social conditions of antisemitism). If actual antisemitism were suppressed by the state, that would be good, but the question is: What does the German state understand by antisemitism here – and what does the congress understand? A workshop on “Psychoanalysis of Palestine Solidarity” by Christine Kirchhoff and Christian Voller is announced on this topic, who have already presented on the topic at the preparatory event: somewhat roughly summarised, Palestine solidarity is generally to be psychoanalysed as antisemitism. The congress thus provides support from the left for the state’s anti-antisemitism, without reflecting on its structural racism.

Against Germany
The tragedy of the present situation is that this left-wing anti-antisemitism and the toleration of antisemitism in the Palestine solidarity movement stabilise each other in their respective delusions through their loud mutual incitement. Nevertheless, left-wing anti-antisemitism in Germany has a different quality than antisemitism in the Palestine solidarity movement, which is suppressed by the police, while left-wing anti-antisemitism does not fight the authoritarian formation (as claimed in the title) but promotes it. One would have to write a different text if we were discussing in Gaza, Rojava or Iran. But we live in Germany and must fight German authoritarianism. What is it supposed to mean to be anti-German if, in this decisive historical situation, when all signs point to a new German authoritarianism, the anti-Germans do not position themselves against the German state but practically side with it?

Basically, the congress should ask itself whether it does not structurally promote racism or is even possibly racist in its own intention. The opportunity for a collective discussion of antifascist theory and practice, which is so urgently needed, is blatantly wasted here.

Emanuel Kapfinger

References
[1] This critique discusses the announced congress based on its programme (see https://gegenform.tem.li/). Since the congress programme was significantly modified in mid-April (paradoxically, only now have some events on the radical right been added), this critique is subject to the current programme (as of 17 April 2025).

[2] See Emanuel Kapfinger: Elements of a Theory of Fascisation. On the Critique of the Left Concept of Fascism. AStA-Zeitung of Frankfurt University, Winter 2025 issue “80 Years Never Again” https://asta-zeitung.de/artikel/elemente-einer-theorie-der-faschisierung

[3] Cf. on the origin of the anti-German movement and on large parts of this movement’s farewell to their own state and nation-critical positions: Gerhard Hanloser: Die andere Querfront. Skizzen des antideutschen Betrugs. Münster: Unrast, 2019.

[4] Thomas Land: Left-wing denial of reality. ND, 11.10.2024 https://www.nd-aktuell.de/artikel/1185930.antisemitismus-linke-realitaetsverweigerung.html

[5] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matzpen_(Organisation)

[6] Trainees should only be hired if they demonstrate “loyalty to the constitution”. https://www.nd-aktuell.de/artikel/1190425.verfassungstreuecheck-im-oeffentlichen-dienst-pflicht-zur-verfassungstreue-einfallstor-fuer-repressalien.html.