154
‘Free speech is a facade’: how Gaza war has deepened divisions in German arts world (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/europe@feddit.de
79 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Less than 10 years ago, Germany, and especially Berlin, was held up as a beacon of openness and inclusivity in a western world rocked by Brexit and Donald Trump. Angela Merkel’s decision to take in thousands of refugees displaced by the war in Syria boosted her country’s reputation in progressive circles, with many international artists and academics choosing to make the German capital their new home.

Yet the conflict in the Middle East is showing Germany in a new light, highlighting fissures in society and the arts world that until now had been easier to ignore.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Sorry, but I couldn't find a single reference to "Jews against genocide" in any of these.
Also, open letters and opinion peaces by activists are by definition not neutral sources.

I'm not saying that police are necessarily acting correctly, but do you have any evidence that someone was arrested for “Jews against genocide”?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    https://twitter.com/derJamesJackson/status/1741488229201658142

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/10/germany-gaza-protests-crackdown

    The problem is that German mainstream media is not covering these topics and had a ridicilous pro Israel bias until the last few weeks since it becomes impossible to ignore the deliberate starvation of people in Gaza and the continued genocidal rethoric of the Israeli government in regards to invading Rafah.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    The problem is that German mainstream media is not covering these topics

    Well English media don't seem to provide any proof for the original claim either.

    Your first link shows a picture of a lady with a “Jews against genocide” sign flanked by two police officers.
    I see no arrest and at least at that moment in time she is still allowed to show her sign.

    Link two contains these passages:

    Her banner, which said she was ashamed to be German and that there was a “genocide” taking place in the densely populated Palestinian enclave being bombarded by Israel.
    Police let her and her sign go, and she joined the march.

    At about 4pm, police pushed into the crowd and, to calls of “shame, shame”, pulled Monika Kalinowska out.
    Her sign, written in red, read, “Israel is a terrorist state.”
    After she was frisked and her identification checked, she was told there was nothing wrong with her sign – even though it was confiscated – and she was allowed to leave. She could pick up the sign the next day, police said.

    Again, I'm not defending police here but the claim was that people were arrested, so I want to know who got arrested and for what?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrest

    An arrest is the act of apprehending and taking a person into custody (legal protection or control), usually because the person has been suspected of or observed committing a crime. After being taken into custody, the person can be questioned further and/or charged. An arrest is a procedure in a criminal justice system, sometimes it is also done after a court warrant for the arrest.

    I think you might confuse it with detention, where the police would keep you in jail for a limited time.

    As for who and what, from the article:

    The officer who briefly removed Kalinowska from the protest told Al Jazeera that there was no formal list or any particular guidelines to follow.

    “Really, I just use my intuition,” he said. “If I see something I think is bad, we go and get it.”

    And this is indivative of the wider problem here. Police can harass and attack protests without having to uphold a legal standard. So even if there is no legal basis to what they do, just storming into the protest and dragging someone out is used as an intimidation and punishment without crime tactic. It is always a violent act where not only the person apprehended, but also the protestors around them are physically attacked.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    I admit, it might be a language problem.

    taking a person into custody (legal protection or control)

    What does taking into custody mean then?
    Is police taking someone aside for 2 minutes to ask some questions an arrest?
    Because then I don't understand the outcry over it, particularly compared to far more heavy-handed police action that definitely does happen every now and again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent