Critical inquiry into the relationship of antisemitism and racism is more urgent than ever. In many parts of the world, and not least in Europe and in Germany, the proliferation and acceptance of antisemitic and racist views is dramatically increasing. Both ideologies often appear together and relate to each other. However, the conceptual and historical relationship of antisemitism and racism remains both strongly contested and unclear. The research on antisemitism and the research on racism are largely segregated and disconnected. It was therefore the conferences' aim to open an interdisciplinary space for a discussion of these topics. Seeking an entangled view, yet attentive to the specifics of different manifestations of antisemitism and racism, the program was structured along perspectives within theory, history, and politics.

The first panel was dedicated to theories of race, racism, and antisemitism, their intersections as well as differentiation. CHRISTINE ACHINGER (Coventry) emphasized that in the analysis of the emergence and function of processes of othering, the connection between different constructions of the other should be shown, but at the same time, the specificity and difference of antisemitism and racism must be part of the analysis. She suggested using the concept of “constellation,” derived from Adorno’s and Horkheimer’s Critical Theory, to tackle the intersections of antisemitism and racism. CLAUDIA BRUNS (Berlin) described the historical entanglements of anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim discourses, as well as of anti-Black racism and antisemitism. She emphasized the importance of religion and the proximity of racist and religious discourses in the longue durée. DEMETRIUS EUDELL (Middletown, CT) analyzed the entanglements of race, religion, and alterity in the process of othering. He pointed out that throughout the centuries, the role of religion remained fundamental. In consequence, religion gave birth to a social order that is highly intersected with race.

JAY GELLER (Nashville, TN) spoke about the entanglement of antisemitism, racism, and the human-animal divide. Giving numerous examples, he showed how processes of dehumanization through human-animal comparisons work in both racist and antisemitic discourses. Analyzing these relations, Geller's claim was not to neglect the differences between racism and antisemitism, but rather to direct the focus to the shared generative loci. SANDER L. GILMAN (Atlanta, GA) focused on the genesis of the term xenophobia and discussed if this concept can explain transhistorical categories of racism and antisemitism. He identified the 1993 World Conference of Human Rights as an essential moment during which the “Vienna Declaration and Program of Action” was adopted, condemning xenophobia as a political category. Gilman pointed out the importance of exactness in the analysis of racism and antisemitism. For each decade under consideration, scholars must ask whether these categories were thought of and applied psychologically, politically, collectively, or individually, to avoid potential analytical problems.

During the second panel, the role of conspiracy narratives in both racist and antisemitic discourses was discussed. MARCEL STOETZLER (Bangor/Seoul) explored the question of whether the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” is a racist text, as they refer several times to the category of “human race“. In his concluding words, Stoetzler pointed out that antisemitism is a key to the understanding of racism. FARID HAFEZ (Salzburg/Washington, DC) examined how conspiracy theories are part of antisemitic and Islamophobic discourses both in history and in the present. Relating antisemitism and Islamophobia to each other, he argued that similar to antisemitism, Islamophobia includes the attribution of political power and influence on public individuals. In the discussion, Hafez cautioned against the provincialization of antisemitism research in relation to racism research. At the same time, scholars should be aware of the limitations of such a relational lens.

The following panel addressed the histories and the relation of antisemitism and Jewish identity in different geographies. SHIRLI GILBERT (London) provided an insight into her research on the commemoration of the Shoah in South Africa and how this affects Jews' relationship to “other racisms”. Previous research on Jews in South Africa has ignored the specific, relational ways in which racism and antisemitism are often commemorated in racialized societies. In South Africa’s memory culture, the commemoration of the Shoah is embedded in a universal commemoration of humanity. This, she said, is a strategy that can also help us in understanding apartheid. MARTINA WEISZ (Jerusalem) talked about the possibilities of multidirectional memory in the commemoration practices in Argentina. Analyzing the story of Sara Rus and her family, who came to Argentina to escape Nazi persecution, she showed the interconnectedness of different events of persecution, state violence and mass murder throughout Argentinean history.

The panel continued with an input by DEKEL PERETZ (Heidelberg) who shared his analysis of the Zionist journal “Altneuland”, which was published in the German Empire between 1904 and 1906. He described the type of Zionism imagined by “Altneuland” as „German colonialism with a Jewish twist“ aiming for the reconciliation of a German and a Jewish identity through the colonial framing. ZEF SEGAL (Jerusalem) talked about the role of cartographies in the production of racist categories. With colors, arrows and symbols, maps were historically used to deliver political messages, for example by suggesting large numbers or fast movement of certain people. He also showed how due to the lack of officially recognized Jewish territories, Jews for a long time did not appear in maps at all. Jews are perceived as moving and being without a homeland, whereas the other in racist discourse is allocated to a certain territory.

The division and connection of the fields of research on antisemitism and Islamophobia was analyzed in the following panel. IVAN KALMAR (Toronto) shared his thesis that nowadays there is a part of the extreme right that has dedicated itself to ”anti-antisemitism“ in the sense of supporting and defending the state of Israel in order to free itself from the accusation of antisemitism. As an example, Kalmar showed how Hungary's extreme right-wing president Victor Orban used an antisemitic campaign against the U.S. philanthropist George Soros in his election campaign and at the same time professes a supposedly ”anti-antisemitism“ by seeking a close connection to Israel's then Prime minister Netanyahu. Second, REZA ZIA-EBRAHIMI (London) elaborated on his contested thesis of the weaponization of antisemitism against the recognition of Islamophobia. According to Zia-Ebrahimi, until the 20th century, Western anthropologists depicted the Muslim-Jewish coexistence as a harmonic one. With the rise of Zionism and the creation of the state of Israel however, Zia-Ebrahimi observed a discursive reconfiguration, leading to a “neo-lachcrymose” narrative, which depicts the Palestinian Muslim heritage as inherently antisemitic. Finally, ESRA ÖZYÜREK (Cambridge) shared her hypothesis that within present-day German memory culture, young male Muslims tend to be seen as a problem, since this type of memory culture is largely directed at Germans with a Nazi background. Based on her study of the project “Muslims in Auschwitz,” she argued that this perception of young male Muslims exerts great pressure on them and puts them in the (unfounded) worry of doubting their own ability to empathize with Holocaust victims.

The next panel covered the discussion about politics of memory of the Holocaust. AMOS MORRIS-REICH (Tel Aviv) argued that until the 19th century, antisemitism functioned as a cultural code in European culture that could be openly articulated. After the Holocaust, such open articulation has become a taboo, but without antisemitism itself disappearing. Morris-Reich stated that there is no longer one antisemitic code, but several incommensurable codes: the Israeli understanding of antisemitism is specific and different from the German or British one. Then, BEN RATSKOFF (Los Angeles, CA) presented his research about W.E.B. Du Bois' Pre-World War II texts and the connections he observed between anti-black racism and antisemitism. According to Ratskoff, Du Bois sees anti-black racism in the U.S. and antisemitism in Europe as a “ground for comparison,” but not as a “basis for equivalence.” DIRK MOSES (Chapel Hill, NC) analyzed the historical discourses on national socialism as imperial colonialism. He showed how the question of the singularity of the Shoah was discussed in the past and emphasized the relevance of Raphael Lemkin's differentiated concept of genocide, which was developed in the context of the Second World War but also related to a long history of colonial violence.

The following panel showed how history is not only apparent in intellectual debates and economic structures, but also in the affective and bodily repertoire of the past. VANESSA RAU (Göttingen) presented her ethnographic research on philosemitism in Germany since 1945, in which she examines how transgenerational Holocaust-guilt fosters an erotic desire of Germans towards Jews. ANNA DANILINA (Berlin) developed a critical theory of the somatic memory of antisemitic and racist violence. She suggested that epigenetic studies create new links and references between the Holocaust, Colonialism, Genocide, and other forms of racialized violence as well as between the targeted groups. Furthermore, she inquired in how far the epigenetics of trauma can be interpreted as a bodily memory of historical violence, but also which limitations and problems need to be addressed when using biomedical data and concepts for a critical analysis of race and racism.

Addressing the legal framing of the past, HOWARD RECHAVIA TAYLOR (New York) gave an insight into his research of the ways the German government is dealing with transnational legal and political claims to repair the legacy of genocide in Namibia. Taylor showed how the Holocaust functions as a reference point within the trials, how Jewish lawyers were instrumental therein and themselves articulated a perceived connection between the Holocaust and the Namibian genocide. CENGIZ BARSKANMAZ (Halle/Saale) emphasized how a “German exceptionalism” in the view on racism has been established after 1945 and today still frames race and racism in Germany as incomparable, specific phenomena. This narrative reproduces the German nation as white, marginalizing post- and anti-colonial histories and the voices of people of color. Barskanmaz argued for a perspective on racism that simultaneously takes colonial and national-socialist history into account and would be open to a transnational debate rather than affirming its exceptionalism.

JASMIN DEAN (Berlin) opened the last panel with a talk on the discourses of division and solidarity among racialized communities in Germany after 1989. Dean held interviews with members of four different communities (Romnja and Sintezze, Muslim migrants, Black People und Jews) and compared the debates within these different communities. MANUELA CONSONNI (Jerusalem) gave a lecture on the politics of remembrance in the 21st century, which has repeatedly failed to create a more universal and democratic discourse. She also showed how the politics of remembrance of the Shoah always refer to other histories of violence, and how Shoah remembrance is still being renegotiated and contested today. In analyzing the Jewish participation in the recent antiracist Black Lives Matter movement, ELLIOT RATZMAN (Grinnell, IA) showed how the ways American Jewish communities talk about race have changed. Against allegations that critical race theory would go against Jewish interests, he argued that a rising number especially of Jews of Color actively joins antiracist movements and that growing parts of the American Jewish communities seek a stronger cooperation in the struggle against antisemitism and racism in the US.

DAVID FELDMAN (London) showed how the struggle against antisemitism was historically connected to cosmopolitan views and the overall struggle for minority rights. However, according to Feldman, since the Oslo Peace agreement broke down in the early 2000s, a shift towards a separate fight exclusively for Jewish rights and against antisemitism can be noticed. A prominent example is the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition on antisemitism, which does not relate in any form to other forms of racism. Finally, JONATHAN JUDAKEN (Memphis, TN) asked whether the current harsh mutual criticism of antiracism and anti-antisemitism can be called an ”auto-immunitory process”, based on Jacques Derridas’s conception of auto-immunization as a “strange behavior where a living being […] works to destroy its own protection.” Judaken strongly advocated a joint struggle against racism and antisemitism. Therefore, he rejected simplified notions of Zionism being racism and anti-Zionism being antisemitism, calling for a less binary way of thinking about antisemitism and racism.

All participants agreed that it is necessary to view antisemitism and racism in conjunction and to engage in a close conversation between the respective disciplines. As a whole, the presentations demonstrated that it is precisely the points of contact between antisemitism and racism, both theoretically and empirically, which offer promising new avenues of research. Yet even among scholars who agree on this necessity, such as those convened at this conference, there is no consensus on how exactly the relationship of antisemitism and racism works. While many consider antisemitism a variant of racism, others insist on different logics and functions of the two phenomena. At times, the thesis that antisemitism can be considered a type of racism seemed to be more postulated than deduced. In this respect, the conference opened a debate rather than providing its conclusion. It also demonstrated that a lot more research, especially empirical research, still needs to be done to arrive at a clearer picture of the ways in which antisemitism and racism are entangled with each other.

Conference overview:

Stefanie Schüler-Springorum / Felix Axster, Anna Danilina (Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung, Technische Universität Berlin), Stefan Vogt (Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main): Welcome and Introduction

Panel 1.1: Theories of Race, Racism, and Antisemitism in Conversation

Christine Achinger (University of Warwick, Coventry): Intersectionality and Critical Theory

Claudia Bruns (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin): Colonial Racism and Antisemitism

Moderator: Anna Danilina

Panel 1.2: Theories of Race, Racism, and Antisemitism in Conversation

Demetrius Eudell (Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT): Race, Religion, and Alterity

Jay Geller (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN): “Only an Animal”: Antisemitism, Racism, and the Human-animal Great Divide

Sander L. Gilman (Emory University, Atlanta, GA): Can “Xenophobia” Explain Transhistorical Categories of Racism and Antisemitism; or, How Far are We Away from Our Primal Ancestors Anyhow?

Moderator: Anna Danilina

Panel 2: Conspiracy Theories

Marcel Stoetzler (Bangor University / Yonsei University, Seoul): Are the Protocols a Racist Text?

Farid Hafez (Universität Salzburg / Georgetown University, Washington, DC): Conspiracy Theories and Racism in the Case of Antisemitism and Islamophobia

Moderator: Uffa Jensen

Panel 3.1: Jews and Antisemitism in the Colonial World

Shirli Gilbert (University College London): Jewish Identity and Racism in South Africa

Martina L. Weisz (Hebrew University of Jerusalem): Jews in the Global Structures of Coloniality: Sara Rus and the Argentinian Case

Moderator: Stefan Vogt

Panel 3.2: Jews and Antisemitism in the Colonial World

Dekel Peretz (Universität Heidelberg): Exclusion or Empire. German-Jewish Colonial Fantasies in the Zionist Journal Altneuland

Zef Segal (Hebrew University of Jerusalem): Race as a Spatial Matter – The Role of Cartographers in the Invention and Affirmation of Racial Categories

Moderator: Stefan Vogt

Panel 4: Antisemitism and Islamophobia

Ivan Kalmar (University of Toronto): Anti-antisemitism and Islamophobia: Lessons from the Soros Conspiracy Theory

Reza Zia-Ebrahimi (King’s College London): Division and Politics in the Study of Antisemitism, Islamophobia and Race

Esra Özyürek (University of Cambridge): Generation Allah: Democratizing Young Muslim Men and Working through Holocaust Memory in Germany

Moderator: Stefanie Schüler-Springorum

Panel 5.1: The Holocaust: Historical Perspectives and Politics of Memory

Amos Morris-Reich (Tel Aviv University): From Cultural Code to a Semiotic Problem: Ambivalence towards Jews from an Israeli/Zionist Perspective

Moderator: Felix Axster

Panel 5.2: The Holocaust: Historical Perspectives and Politics of Memory

Ben Ratskoff (Occidental College / University of California, Los Angeles, CA): “Not at all analogous”: Du Bois before Warsaw, Fascism before Racism

A. Dirk Moses (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC): The Institute for Jewish Affairs, Antisemitism and the Holocaust

Moderator: Felix Axster

Panel 6: Emotions and Bodypolitics

Vanessa Rau (Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Göttingen): It’s Amazing what Guilt Can Do! Philo-Semitism, Exoticism as the Flipside of Antisemitism and Racism

Anna Danilina (Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung): The Physiology of Race, Racism and Antisemitism

Moderator: Uffa Jensen

Panel 7: Legal Perspectives

Howard Rechavia Taylor (Columbia University, New York): The Politics of Racism and Antisemitism in the American Courtroom: The Herero and Nama versus the Federal Republic of Germany

Cengiz Barskanmaz (Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology, Halle/Saale): “German Exceptionalism”? Or, What is Post-Holocaust in German Law?

Moderator: Felix Axster

Panel 8.1: Politics of Solidarity and Confrontation

Jasmin Dean (Technische Universität Berlin): Suitcases and Travel Bags. (Trans-)National Affiliation of Racialized Communities in Germany after 1989

Manuela Consonni (Hebrew University of Jerusalem): The Terminological Turn: History and Politics

Moderator: Stefanie Schüler-Springorum

Panel 8.2: Politics of Solidarity and Confrontation

Elliot Ratzman (Grinnell College, IA): Was the Holocaust “White on White Crime”? How American Anti-racist Jews Analyze Antisemitism

David Feldman (Birkbeck University of London): The Disentangling of Anti-antisemitism? From the Minorities Treaties to the IHRA Working Definition

Jonathan Judaken (Rhodes Collegem Memphis, TN): Judeophobia, Antiracism, and Anti-antisemitism: An Auto-immunitory Process?

Moderator: Stefanie Schüler-Springorum