The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

Berlin’s Antideutsch Bars Love Israel but Don’t Like Jews

Interview with Yuval Carasso about Bajszel, ://about blank, and Syndikat, “antideutsch” spaces presenting themselves as victims of antisemitism but have a history of excluding and assaulting Jews.


14/02/2025

The sure sign of a leftist bar, cops sitting outside of Bajszel. Photo by the author.

A number of left-wing bars and youth clubs in Berlin have formed a coalition against “threats, violence, and boycott.” These are all non-Jewish, antideutsch spaces who claim that they are victims of antisemitic attacks because they have been criticized for supporting genocide. These “anticapitalist” spaces have been praised in the right-wing bourgeois press, while queer groups are boycotting them. The most strident antideutsch space is the bar Bajszel in Neukölln. Can you tell us about the last time you were at Bajszel?

In September 2023, I went to an event at Bajszel about Mythos#Israel1948. This pamphlet claims that the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948, the Nakba, is in fact a myth. The panel speakers, all non-Jewish, talked for about half an hour, and then a security guard approached me and told me to leave, accusing me of filming without permission. I wanted to say something before I left.

Why was it important for you to say something?

I know this reality up close. When they say there is no apartheid in Israel, I know from my own personal experience this isn’t true.

My grandmother was in Palestine during the Nakba. She saw firsthand how the Zionist dream that had been sold to her — the idea of “having our own state” — materialized as a mass ethnic cleansing. Growing up, she told me about the Palestinians being expelled from their land and remained deeply critical of Zionism.

I know the early reality of Zionism from my grandmother’s family. Her uncle, Enzo Sereni, was a Zionist leader in Palestine who founded a kibbutz. Before being murdered by the Nazis in the early 1940s, he opposed the emerging Zionist society, arguing that it was turning into a class-based structure of masters and slaves.

Her other uncle, Emilio Sereni, was a partisan, communist and an anti-Zionist — he became a leader of the Italian Communist Party and briefly served as a minister in the national government.

In a statement, the organizers said you were “aggressive” and “insulting.” I’ve seen a video of you. You spoke for about 30 seconds, and looked rather emotional, but also picked up your things and left peacefully. What happened then?

After I had left the hall and reached the corridor, accompanied by a security guard, two men attacked me. One of them was choking me while the other covered my eyes. Immediately after, they slammed me into the floor. They were police, but they hadn’t identified themselves as such.

A brief, emotional statement doesn’t seem like grounds for an assault. Were there any other Jewish people at the event?

After I left, when the audience had the chance to ask questions, Udi Raz asked if there were any Jewish people present. She was the only person who raised her hand. The only other Jews in the room were me, who had already been kicked out, and another person who left at the beginning because they felt uncomfortable with the ban on recording the event. 

It sounds like they expelled all Jews from their event about antisemitism. You were put on trial for resisting arrest in July 2024. How did that end?

The judge had already looked at video and audio recordings. He said that if the police didn’t have a good reason to detain me, they would be subject to an investigation. So the police officer who forced me to the ground declined to testify. I was declared not guilty of any wrongdoing. Among other things, the recordings raised serious doubts about the legality of the arrest.

So is that the end of things?

The police are investigating and I am waiting for the results.

This appears to be the worst attack on a Jewish person in Neukölln in many years. 

First, let me say that this is just a drop in the ocean of the violence against supporters of Palestine in Berlin — the vast majority of the police brutality is against Palestinians. 

Definitely. But the German cops also have a record of beating up Jews in the name of “fighting antisemitism.” Like at the eviction of the Humboldt University in Berlin, at least four Jewish students were assaulted — in the name of “protecting Jewish students,” of course. Anyway, did the owners of the bar reach out to you to apologize? Did the newspapers interview you? Any local politicians? What about all those Antisemitism Czars?  

The owners of Bajszel were supposed to come to the trial as witnesses, but they didn’t show up on two separate dates. They haven’t reached out to apologize. The only reporting was in Englishlanguage stories.

Have you experienced antisemitism in the Palestine solidarity movement in Berlin?

No, quite the opposite. Without the people from the solidarity movement, this experience would have been much harder for me. They supported me throughout. A brave woman whose family was expelled from Palestine during the Nakba followed me out to check on me and was interrogated by the police as a result. Other people offered support in court.

It seems that all these “left-wingspaces against antisemitism” have difficulties with Jews. When I asked Bajszel for comment about the assault on a Jewish person, they simply denied it. The club ://about blank advertised an event about left-wing antisemitism with no Jewish speakers, and denied entry to a number of Jewish activists. I was disappointed to see Syndikat has joined as well, I assumed they would express solidarity with an Israeli anarchist like you. Instead, their solidarity is for the German government. Have you had any other experiences with these “antideutsch” spaces?

When I spoke at the Anarchist Days Dresden in September of last year, people attacked the event online for inviting an “antisemite.” But the organizers stood with me, and there was no physical protest.

Free Palestine!

Text of the Palestine flyer that was distributed by die Linke Neukölln in the neighbourhood during the election campaign


13/02/2025

Stop the Genocide, Break the Silence 

The situation in Palestine is drastic. Since October 7th, 46,000 people have been killed, hundreds of thousands go hungry and the Gaza strip lies in ruins. The German government stays silent and continues to export weapons to Israel. Here in Neukölln, those who call attention to the situation are met with police and infringements on their civil rights. This is an attack on our fundamental rights. Here in Neukölln, we will not stay silent. Our history, our grief and anger must be heard. The occupation must end. We need a permanent ceasefire and an end to German weapons exports to Israel.

A Safe Stay for All

Many of our neighbours and friends have no permanent residence rights in Germany, living only with the threat of deportation temporarily suspended.  Despite living here for years, they can’t vote and thus can’t have an impact on the policies that influence their lives. As Leftists we demand that all those who have lived here for five years be granted the right to be citizens here, too, without having to give up their first citizenship. No one should be treated as a second class citizen in their own home. 

Against Anti-Muslim Racism

Our Muslim neighbours have been experiencing daily racism since before October 7th. Their shops are searched without reason, they are antagonised on the streets and their children face discrimination at school.  After October 7th, this structural racism only got worse. Police checks and surveillance increase and Muslim communities are seen as generally suspect. We have to fight back together. Neukölln is our home and we won’t allow our neighbours to live in fear. 

A Loud Voice Coming From Neukölln

Since before October 7th, I have been standing up for the rights of Palestinians and against anti-Muslim racism. I have criticised the occupation of the Palestinian territories and oppression of the Palestinian people through Israel’s politics. I have regularly questioned the situation of the Palestinians and consistently protested against the restriction of fundamental rights on the ground—as the only Berlin member of parliament doing so.  

Changing Politics for Neukölln and Palestine

My name is Ferat Koçak. My story is the story of many in Neukölln. My grandparents came from Anatolia to Germany in search of a better life. Money was always tight, but our family stayed strong together. My friends were Kurdish, Palestinian, Lebanese, Turkish, Polish, Albanian, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and German. Neukölln is our home. 

I am running for a seat in the Bundestag to change politics together, here at home. Even before election campaigns began, I rang 10,000 doorbells here in our neighbourhood. The concerns you shared with me on your doorsteps are the focus of my platform. Exploding rent prices, overflowing trains, increasing grocery costs and streets littered with trash affect us all. Many of you also reported constant worries about family and friends in Palestine. 

Stop By!

▶ Rally: ‘For a Just Peace in Palestine and Israel’ Saturday, 15. February, 2 PM, Spreebogenpark am Kanzleramt 

▶ Be Ferat’s Guest: Big winter festival with tasty food and good music. Sunday, 16. February, 2-6 PM . Kiezkapelle Hermannstr. 102

Let Francesca Albanese Speak at LMU!

Open letter from students and staff at Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich


11/02/2025

We, students and staff of Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, strongly oppose LMU’s decision to cancel Francesca Albanese’s lecture on international law which was scheduled to take place on February 16th at the LMU’s main building. 

As the UN Special Rapporteur on the Palestinian Territories, Ms. Albanese’s work extends far beyond the current crisis in Gaza—it began long before the October 7th attacks and has consistently focused on upholding international law and humanitarian principles. Her efforts are critical in ensuring accountability and justice, particularly through the ICC and ICJ.

The cancellation sets a dangerous precedent for universities- one in which shunning international human rights lawyers and UN representatives becomes a reality and can be repeated. Article 5 of germanys constitution protects the freedom of “the arts and sciences, research and teaching”, and as a publicly funded university, the LMU, like all other German universities, must uphold the principle of academic freedom. Universities must remain bastions of free speech, and academic exchange cannot be subject to the whims of one administration or another. The academic integrity of the LMU is in jeopardy. 

We ask you to sign this petition, demanding that the LMU allows Francesca Albanese to hold her talk at the main building, in accordance with article 5 of the German constitution, and in accordance with the university’s own commitment to academic freedom and academic integrity. 

You can sign the petition and see a list of existing signatories here.

***This petition is managed by LMU staff and students. We will handle your data responsibly.**


Wir, Studierende Mitarbeiter:innen der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, wenden uns entschieden gegen die Entscheidung der LMU, die Vorlesung von Francesca Albanese zum Völkerrecht abzusagen, die für den 16. Februar im Hauptgebäude der LMU geplant war.

 Als UN-Sonderberichterstatterin für die palästinensischen Gebiete geht die Arbeit von Frau Albanese weit über die aktuelle Krise in Gaza hinaus – sie begann lange vor den Anschlägen vom 7. Oktober und konzentrierte sich stets auf die Einhaltung des Völkerrechts und humanitärer Grundsätze. Ihre Bemühungen sind von entscheidender Bedeutung für die Gewährleistung von Rechenschaftspflicht und Gerechtigkeit, insbesondere durch den Internationalen Strafgerichtshof und den IGH.

Die Absage stellt einen gefährlichen Präzedenzfall für Universitäten dar – einen, bei dem die Ablehnung von internationalen Menschenrechtsanwält:innen und UN-Vertreter:innen zur Realität wird und sich wiederholen kann. Artikel 5 des deutschen Grundgesetzes besagt dass „Kunst und Wissenschaft, Forschung und Lehre sind frei“, und als öffentlich finanzierte Universität muss die LMU, wie alle anderen deutschen Universitäten, das Prinzip der akademischen Freiheit aufrechterhalten. Universitäten müssen Bastionen der freien Meinungsäußerung bleiben, und der akademische Austausch darf nicht von den Launen der einen oder anderen Verwaltung abhängig gemacht werden. Die akademische Integrität der LMU ist in Gefahr. 

Wir bitten Sie, diese Petition zu unterzeichnen, in der wir fordern, dass die LMU Francesca Albanese erlaubt, ihren Vortrag im Hauptgebäude zu halten, in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5 des deutschen Grundgesetzes und in Übereinstimmung mit der Verpflichtung der Universität selbst zur akademischen Freiheit und akademischen Integrität. 

Diese Petition wird von Mitarbeiter:innen und Studierenden der LMU verwaltet. Wir gehen verantwortungsvoll mit Ihren Daten um.

French Fascism and Marine Le Pen

Marij from Sozialismus von Unten interviews John Mullen on France’s fascist movement

John Mullen has been engaged in political activism in Paris since the 1980s. Here’s what he has to say about the current political state of France.

Marij: In June last year, French Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron dissolved parliament prematurely and called new elections for the end of June. What was the reason?

John Mullen: He called elections at the shortest notice possible, because he was convinced that the Left would not unite, and that, because of the two-round election system, he would be able to present his own party as the only alternative to Marine Le Pen’s, and regain a solid parliamentary majority. His plan failed.

M: Why was the RN able to gain so many votes so quickly?

JM: The fascists got nearly nine million votes in the legislative elections of June this year. This is fewer than the 13 million they got in the second round of the presidential election of 2022, but far more than the four million they got in the legislative elections that year. They also got fifty more members of Parliament than they had previously. The main reason is the collapse in support of the traditional right wing and left-wing parties of government. However, the lack of a permanent, national mass movement against fascism has certainly helped the far right tremendously.

M: How did the other parties react?

JM: The terrifying results of the fascists in the first round of the elections led to a historic anti fascist mobilization between the two rounds. This was the most dynamic left election campaign for fifty years. The result was that, whereas everybody expected the fascists to have more Members of Parliament than any other group, they actually came third. First place, and therefore the largest group of members of parliament, went to the left electoral alliance, which took the name “New Popular Front”.

M: The RN had been “restructured” in a process that took several years. What were the main steps?

JM: The name of the party was changed from “National Front” to “National Rally”. A series of members were expelled for expressing too openly antisemitism or fascist sympathies. These included the founder of the party, Marine Le Pen’s father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who could not refrain from making “jokes” about the extermination of Jews by the Nazis. The organization also stopped calling for street demonstrations, because they were moments when open Nazi supporters might show themselves.

M: Did this change the character of the party?

JM: No. The core of the RN leadership is fascist. They still use the flame logo taken from Mussolini.They still aim at banning Muslim headscarves in all public places, banning immigrants from social housing, allowing impunity for racist police murderers. They try to hide their links with open fascists. However, recently it has been shown that they have close links with the women’s group “Nemesis” who specialize in turning up to feminist demonstrations with placards claiming that all rapists are immigrants. A study this year shows that at least 80 of the RN candidates for the June elections had been involved in openly racist or antisemitic activity. One of them wrote, “distinguishing between races is common sense and is useful in a certain number of debates”.

When openly antisemitic Jean Marie Le Pen died recently, Marine Le Pen declared she would never forgive herself for having expelled him from the party. Other RN leaders explained that she had been obliged to do so because of the damage he was doing to their image. None of them claimed he had been expelled because the party’s ideology had fundamentally changed.

Since the RN is very much an unprincipled and opportunistic party, they frequently change their discourse. Right now, they are confident they have a solid voter base among the poorer parts of society, so they are concentrating on slogans like “avoiding chaos” (by refusing to oppose the right-wing government’s austerity budget), while insisting that Macron’s racist measures do not go far enough.

M: Are there any hopeful signs of activity against the RN?

JM: The historic mobilization last year, when hundreds of thousands of people moved into action in order to stop the fascists becoming the government, in a situation where opinion polls said this was the most likely outcome, was obviously extremely encouraging. Tens of thousands of people joined radical Left groups for the first time, in particular the France Insoumise (France in Revolt). Since the National Rally has put elections at the center of its strategy, persuading voters that these people are fascists and have nothing to offer working people is extremely important.

Nevertheless, there are considerable limitations on antifascism in France. It is extremely common on the Left either to believe that Macron is a fascist anyway, and therefore specific campaigning against the National Rally is not necessary, or to very much underestimate the importance of stopping the National Rally from building their party structures. In many hundreds of towns, the National Rally has almost no local structure. Building this is their priority, and stopping them building it should be ours. However, most left organizations consider that proposing an alternative left program will be sufficient to marginalize the fascists. This is a mistake, and vigorous debate is necessary. There are regularly local initiatives against fascist meetings or activity, but a national campaign is needed.

M: We are on the brink of new elections in Germany—the bourgeois parties are acting as stooges for the AfD in the election campaign. What can we learn from the French experience? 

JM: [That] established right wing parties will always prefer the fascists over the radical left. Macron argued for years he was the only alternative to the far right, before changing his discourse to proclaim that he was the only alternative to “the two extremes”. Then he refused to allow the Left to form a government although they had the biggest parliamentary group, and he strengthened the fascists immeasurably by appointing hard racist ministers, and treating the far right National Rally as a  respectable mainstream party.

This article first appeared in German on the Sozialismus von Unten website.

Are There Any Leftist Candidates in Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg?

The once rebellious district was long represented by the legendary Hans-Christian Ströbele. He died in 2022, and his replacement is retiring. Who can lefty Kreuzbergers and Friedrichshainers vote for?


07/02/2025

Kreuzberg and Friedrichshain don’t fit together at all, but each neighborhood has a long history of rebelliousness. In Kreuzberg, people started squatting buildings in the late 1970s. Friedrichshain, in turn, became the center of Berlin’s counterculture in the 1990s, with numerous squats of its own. The two districts on opposite sides of the Spree were put into an uneasy marriage in 2001. For 15 years, from 2002 to 2017, Fhain-Xberg was represented in the Bundestag by the silver-haired, soft-spoken rebel Christian Ströbele.

Ströbele won his legendary status back in 1969 when he founded the Socialist Lawyers Collective to defend left-wing activists, including members of the Red Army Fraction (RAF). In the late 1970s, he helped found the alternative daily paper taz and West Berlin’s Alternative List, which eventually folded into Die Grüne. Until just a few years ago, Ströbele could be seen at just about every demonstration on his signature red bicycle. 

Over the decades, Die Grüne got closer to power and abandoned every single one of their principles. Within one generation, they went from protesting against NATO missiles to being the most pro-NATO party in Germany today. In the late 1990s, die Grüne launched Germany’s first war of aggression since 1945, and carried out the biggest social cuts program in the history of the Federal Republic.

Thousands of old-school greens turned their backs on the party. Ströbele stuck around, though he consistently voted against his party. He retired in 2017, and died in 2022. His replacement, Canan Bayram, was Kreuzberg’s Die Grüne representative for two terms. Last year, however, Bayram declared that she “didn’t want to be a fig leaf” for such a right-wing party — she’s not even campaigning for Die Grüne this time around.

So who can leftists in Kreuzberg and Friedrichshain vote for?

Katrin Schmidberger (Die Grüne)

The person the Die Grüne picked to replace Ströbele and Bayram is not really known for anything. According to Wikipedia, Katrin Schmidberger was once a parliamentary assistant to Ströbele, and has been a member of the Berlin parliament since 2011. Personally, I have yet to meet anyone who knows her name or what she stands for. Does she go to demonstrations? Hard to say. Her main topic — really her only topic — appears to be housing policy. 

To be fair, she doesn’t seem terrible on housing policy. In contrast to her party, which gets donations from realty speculators, Schmidberger supported the referendum to expropriate Berlin’s big corporate landlords, which 59% of voters approved back in 2021. At the same time, though, she was part of Franziska Giffey’s government coalition that actively sabotaged this democratic decision. 

Looking through parliamentary records and social media posts, Schmidberger has impressive message discipline: she talks about housing policy and nothing else. She wants more public housing, and any leftist would agree. But how does she feel about her party spending 100 billion extra on the military instead? What does she think about Annalena Baerbock’s support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza? What does she think about Robert Habeck’s plan to radically increase deportations?

In contrast to the antimilitarist Ströbele, it’s almost as if Schmidberger has never heard of the multiple wars getting active support from German imperialism and its Grüne administrators. But Friedrichshain and Kreuzberg have changed due to gentrification, maybe this is just the kind of Grüne that new residents wants.

Pascal Meiser (Die Linke)

For people who miss Kreuzberg’s old school Grünen, Pascal Meiser of Die Linke is presenting himself as an alternative. He is also particularly focussed on housing policy, but can be seen outside of parliamentary committees — you run into him at demonstrations fairly often, in fact. Meiser is doing a cool campaign where he puts posters on buildings: “Why are there empty apartments here?” In the middle of a housing crisis, speculators are keeping an estimated 40,000 apartments empty. You also see him when workers at publicly owned companies like Vivantes and BVG go on strike for better wages.

But there’s a big contradiction here. Berlin’s housing crisis was caused by the privatization of several hundreds of thousands of housing units in the early 2000s — a policy carried out by Meiser’s party, Die Linke. The same party was responsible for drastic cuts in wages for public-sector employees. So while it’s nice for a “left” party to show support at a strike, workers can’t forget that they are on strike against the very same party. As far as I’m aware, Meiser has never once protested against his comrade ministers carrying out neoliberal policies. Die Linke has also deported thousands of people from Berlin — without any objections from Meiser.

Meiser has the same discipline as Schmidberger when it comes to avoiding questions of imperialism. Over 15 months of genocide, the only reference I could find was a link to an Israeli propaganda page. By the standards of Die Linke, this is relatively good — at least Meiser is not aggressively supporting genocide, like Dietmar Bartsch, Petra Pau, Gesine Lötzsch, and numerous other “left” politicians. Yet this is an awfully low bar. Imagine a “left-wing” politician anywhere else who carefully refuses to say a word about their own government supplying weapons to be used in a genocide.

I asked his office if he voted for the resolution in Solidarity with Israel from October 12, 2023, but got no response. He was no longer in parliament for subsequent resolutions in support of genocide, but Die Linke abstained both times, and Meiser hasn’t said anything at all.

Inés Heider

Statistically, it is quite likely the Die Grüne will get the seat. They won 38% four years ago (compared to 18% for Die Linke). Eight years ago, though, they won by less than two points. With Bayram’s retirement, Meiser might have a chance. 

This time, there is a new candidate: the social worker Inés Heider is running on an anticapitalist program. She is also in favor of expropriating corporate landlords, like Schmidberger and Meiser say they are. Crucially, though, Heider is in favor of mobilization and self-organization. She doesn’t think progressive change can come around by getting elected to parliament and forming a government together with the SPD — as a communist, she calls for a workers’ government.

Heider is the only candidate to oppose all deportations — she openly calls for open borders, while Die Grüne want more deportations, and Die Linke are happy to keep deportations at their current rate. As an internationalist and anti-imperialist, Heider calls for blocking all weapons shipments to Israel, and for kicking both Putin and NATO out of Ukraine.

Generations of workers and leftists in Kreuzberg and Friedrichshain, even 150 years ago, voted for radical change instead of choosing the “lesser evil.” They were told they were “wasting their vote” — in reality, though, their support for independent, working-class candidates was preparing the future. This time, Friedrichshainers and Kreuzbergers can register their fundamental opposition to a rotten system.