Lanz dialogue about Islamism: “Nobody said that, Ms. Hübsch!”, Lanz intervenes | EUROtoday

“I don't know exactly,” Markus Lanz begins his present, “but I think it's a historic moment.” Because, if he's not mistaken, he's by no means had an episode of his ZDF speak present with solely Muslim company. Until Thursday, not less than, when journalist Khola Maryam Hübsch, extremism researcher Ahmad Mansour, lawyer Murat Kayman and theologian Mouhanad Khorchide sit down subsequent to him. It's not solely clear what precisely they're supposed to debate – the episode is introduced as a debate about an undefined “disturbance” felt by many Muslims. Ultimately, the present develops right into a sweeping assault that covers anti-Semitic demonstrations, the shouting of Nazi slogans and clan crime in equal measure.

“It was not easy to fill this round,” Lanz begins the dialogue, “because there were so many rejections, I think more than ever before.”

With this assertion, the panel is in the course of the dialogue, which can lengthen over the course of the published from Hamburg's Steindamm to Berlin's Humboldt University and all the way in which to Sylt: from the Islamist caliphate demonstrations to pro-Palestinian protests to the drunken “Foreigners Out” chants.

additionally learn

From a Muslim perspective, Hübsch says: “I can understand why people don't really want to sit in a group like that.” In her expertise, speak exhibits “often do not revolve around constructive exchange or diversity of perspectives or the fact that we ultimately want to strengthen cohesion.”

Instead, in and particularly after such codecs, it’s primarily “about defamation”. After appearances, she is “accused of the worst things”. For instance, after she lately tried to “objectify” phrases resembling “Sharia” or “Caliphate” in a chat present. At the top of April, Hübsch mentioned on “Hart aber Fair” that Sharia and Caliphate had turn into “political battle terms”, however within the Islamic world, “they are completely normal terminology”.

“There are so many different ways to understand Islam”

Hübsch continued on Lanz: “I understand that people are afraid of such terms, I absolutely understand that. But I think we have to move forward in our debate. We have to understand that we cannot stick with these simplistic alarm signals. Instead, we have to understand that there are so many different ways of understanding Islam. We should give strength to the voices that have a different understanding than the extremists.”

Murat Kayman, who was a lawyer on the Ditib motion, which is subordinate to the Turkish non secular authority, till he left, doesn’t wish to depart it at that: “Being Muslim is not understood as a confession of faith, as an understanding of faith, as religious piety, but as an identity. An identity container that must be defended against this society.” This additionally explains why the Lanz crew apparently had such difficulties in staffing the present with representatives of Muslim associations, for instance. “There is no willingness to enter into this criticism, this challenge, to discuss what can be done better in our own structures. And that is why they will not come (on the show).”

The dialogue strikes from the self-isolation of components of the Muslim group to attainable causes. And then we come to the notorious Sylt Pentecost social gathering video, in which you’ll see and listen to a gaggle of partygoers in a membership chanting the right-wing extremist slogan “Germany for the Germans, foreigners out” to the 90s social gathering hit “L'amour toujours” by Italian DJ Gigi D'Agostino. The incident sparked heated discussions, and several other of these concerned misplaced their jobs after their identities turned recognized.

additionally learn

But what conclusions might be drawn from the incident and its penalties from the group's perspective? How do you correctly talk about extremist incidents – and in addition the connections between several types of extremism, legal acts and misanthropy?

Mansour complains about double requirements: “What bothers me overall is that we now want to use this situation (in Sylt), want to exploit it to avoid certain debates. When we talk about clan crime, when we talk about foreign crime, then that is a legitimate debate. And that will not lead to any Nazis getting any reason to hate more foreigners. It is about criminals.” He then needs to know from Hübsch the place she “actually was” when anti-Semitic hatred was being expressed at German universities. “This selective outrage – only outraged when it fits ideologically – that bothers me.”

Kayman interjects that what he finds notably problematic concerning the Sylt video is that the folks proven clearly assumed that their slogans wouldn’t provoke any opposition within the Sylt membership: “They are counting on everyone thinking the same way.” And there’s a parallel to sure tendencies within the Muslim group: “It is the same phenomenon – devaluation, articulating hatred without being opposed in one's own social spaces is the same problem that exists in the Muslim landscape when it comes to the issue of anti-Semitism.”

“I think it’s dangerous to play one off against the other now”

At this level, the dialogue turns to the partly anti-Semitic pro-Palestine protests, wherein components of the Humboldt University in Berlin have been lately occupied. What was seen there, says Mansour – together with “From the River to the Sea” and Intifada slogans – has “nothing to do with criticism of Israel.” He asks Hübsch: “How can it be that we are so outraged by the 'foreigners out' (calls), but there is hardly any reaction here.”

Mansour's feedback provoke opposition within the group. Religious schooling trainer Khorchide interjects: “I think it's dangerous to play one off against the other.” Sylt is one factor, the protests one other. Hübsch begins: “To act as if everyone who wants to draw attention to the suffering in Gaza and the suffering in Palestine at the moment is anti-Semitic…”, earlier than Lanz interrupts her: “Nobody here said that, Ms. Hübsch.”

Finally, this system addresses the well-known query of how lengthy criticism of Israel is official as discontent with political selections and when anti-Semitic motives emerge behind it. Lanz exhibits scenes from Humboldt University, which was occupied by pro-Palestinian demonstrators for a part of the week. He asks Mansour to clarify the which means of the purple triangle that was seen on the college partitions after the occupation. “It means there is no Israel,” explains the Arab Israeli. “Hamas started using the symbol, the triangle, after October 7 to mark Israelis who were murdered a few seconds later. It is a military, terrorist symbol that can be seen at our universities.”

Hübsch agrees that the triangle as a logo is a “problem” that “must not be tolerated.” However, the slogan “From the River to the Sea” is a little bit totally different. “That's where it starts: At least two courts see it differently – it's ambiguous.”

additionally learn

Here the dialogue is changing into an increasing number of detailed: from the query of whether or not pro-Palestinian protests are anti-Semitic in themselves to the controversy about particular person symbols.

Lawyer Kayman takes the controversy again into the extra normal realm: “In large parts of the Muslim community there is a longing for the liberation of Palestine, a longing to liberate Jerusalem, a longing for there to no longer be an Israeli state.” He has not “heard a single sentence in the last six months about how – positively – the idea of ​​a Palestinian state should be turned into reality.”

Here once more, Hübsch intervenes: “Have you heard anything from the pro-Israel scene?” The drawback exists “on both sides.” And then you definitely’re simply as sensible as earlier than.