The central question of this essay is if the actions performed by the Identitäre Bewegung to communicate an openly racist view of life can be seen as legitimate civil disobedience as defined by Celikates very broad and open take on civil disobedience in general. This will be done by examining certain actions executed by the Identitäre Bewegung and questioning if Celikates´ definition would possibly qualify them as civil disobedience as a political practice.
They are young, they present themselves in a well-educated and intellectual way through referring to literature and juristic paragraphs, and they officially distance themselves from right-wing extremism, but mainly they are one thing: confrontational in a very present way. The Identitäre Bewegung is a relatively new movement inspired by a similar development in France.
In the increasing immigration of refugees to Germany in 2015 the movement sees the initiation of unjust ruling and measures of the German government. Without regard for its citizens´ safety an unlimited as well as unregulated flood of strangers was granted entrance into the country.
In their opinion the only possibility to antagonize the German state's unjust actions are acts of civil disobedience. The Identitäre Bewegung is performing actions which aim at creating as much public attention as possible by being extreme and extraordinary. Examples are climbing the Brandenburger Tor in Berlin or trying to gain access to the German ministry of justice.
The theoretical framework viewed in this essay is the radical democratic take on civil disobedience as worded by Robin Celikates. His theoretical approach and definition of civil disobedience will be contemplated in-depth before the Identitäre Bewegung, it’s origin and ideological position, will be generally defined.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Robin Celikates´definition of civil disobedience and its difference to the liberal point of view
2.1 Appeal to the majority´s sense of justice
2.2 The question of non-violence
2.3 The relation between symbolic value and real confrontation
2.4 Fidelity to law
3. Identitäre Bewegung
4. Analysis of actions performed by the Identitäre Bewegung
4.1 Occupation of the Brandenburger Tor in Berlin
4.2 Blockade of the German Department of Justice
4.3 The case of militant actions in general
5. Conclusion
Objective and Thematic Scope
This essay explores whether the political actions of the Identitäre Bewegung can be classified as legitimate civil disobedience based on the radical democratic theoretical framework proposed by Robin Celikates.
- Theoretical definition of civil disobedience in contrast to liberal models.
- Ideological analysis and communicative strategies of the Identitäre Bewegung.
- Evaluation of specific protest actions against the backdrop of Celikates' criteria.
- The tension between symbolic confrontation, non-violence, and potential revolutionary tendencies.
Excerpt from the Book
2.2 The question of non-violence
A main aspect of concern for Celikates is the liberal necessity of non-violence when performing acts of civil disobedience. In his opinion it´s theoretically highly problematic to exclude violence from civil disobedience in general. It is often unclear what is exactly defined as violence and what is not. This often results in a very broad interpretation of acts which are classified as acts of violence. An example for this are various international court decisions which asses illegal trespassing of private property, damaging objects or the blocking of a street by activists as acts of violence (Celikates, 2016a, p.983). With the possibility to classify so many actions which aren´t directly threatening a person´s physical integrity as acts violent, Celikates doesn´t agree with a categorical exclusion of violence from civil disobedience.
He also points out, that by classifying a broad variety of actions as violent a government has the possibility to criminalize a lot of forms of political protest performed by the society, which could be a threat to the existing powers. This criminalization of acts of protest based on the necessity of non-violence can then be used to maintain a potentially unjust government by non-objectively declaring them as violent (Celikates, 2016a, p.984).
Celikates states that “as long as they are to some extent self-restrained and can also be seen as communicative effort” (Celikates, 2016a, p.984) potential acts of violence can be acts of civil disobedience.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Presents the Identitäre Bewegung as a confrontational movement and outlines the essay's goal to apply Celikates' radical democratic framework to their actions.
2. Robin Celikates´definition of civil disobedience and its difference to the liberal point of view: Discusses core criteria like non-violence, symbolic value, and law fidelity, arguing that Celikates' definition is broader than traditional liberal theory.
3. Identitäre Bewegung: Details the origin, metapolitical nature, and communication strategies (activism 2.0) of the movement.
4. Analysis of actions performed by the Identitäre Bewegung: Examines specific cases like the Brandenburger Tor occupation and the Department of Justice blockade, questioning their legitimacy as civil disobedience.
5. Conclusion: Summarizes that due to the open nature of Celikates' definition, it is theoretically possible to classify the movement's actions as civil disobedience, noting the associated risks for a pluralistic society.
Keywords
Civil disobedience, Robin Celikates, Identitäre Bewegung, radical democracy, political protest, non-violence, symbolic confrontation, metapolitics, activism 2.0, legitimation, state power, democratic practice, law-breaking, social discourse, political resistance.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper examines whether the actions of the Identitäre Bewegung can be defined as civil disobedience using the radical democratic theory of Robin Celikates.
What are the central thematic fields?
The themes include the theoretical definition of civil disobedience, the ideological positioning of the Identitäre Bewegung, and the analysis of their specific confrontational protest methods.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to determine if Celikates' inclusive definition of civil disobedience potentially justifies the political actions of an extremist group.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author uses a qualitative theoretical comparison, applying a specific political philosophy framework to analyze recent real-world political protest actions.
What topics are covered in the main section?
The main part covers the divergence between liberal and radical democratic views on civil disobedience, the "activism 2.0" strategy of the movement, and detailed case studies of their protests.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key concepts include Civil Disobedience, Robin Celikates, Identitäre Bewegung, Radical Democracy, and Political Protest.
Does the author support the Identitäre Bewegung?
No, the author explicitly states that the essay is not intended to prove that Celikates supports the movement's ideologies, but rather to analyze their actions within a theoretical framework.
How does Celikates' view on violence differ from liberal theory?
Celikates rejects a categorical exclusion of violence, arguing that narrow definitions of violence are often used by governments to criminalize and delegitimize political protest.
Why is the "element of real confrontation" considered crucial?
According to the analysis, real confrontation is necessary to give an act of civil disobedience sufficient symbolic intensity to be impactful.
What conclusion does the author draw regarding the risks of the theory?
The author concludes that because Celikates' definition is very wide, it becomes compatible with a variety of extreme beliefs, which poses significant risks for a pluralistic society.
- Quote paper
- Felix Früh (Author), 2018, Robin Celikates' Definition of Civil Disobedience. A Theoretical Foundation for the Activism of the Identitäre Bewegung?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/997003
