Omri Boehm Calls for the Nation State to be Overcome
ORF (Austrian Public Broadcasting), Gerald Heidegger, May 7, 2024
German original: https://topos.orf.at/wiener-festwochen-omri-boehm100
Those who want to defend human dignity cannot do so in the categories of the nation state. The German-Israeli philosopher Omri Boehm appeared on Vienna's Judenplatz on Tuesday evening with a perspective on how universal values could also overcome the sovereignty claims of victim groups. His “Speech to Europe” was accompanied by protests. At the beginning, Boehm called on the protesters from the Jewish community standing in front of him to listen and respect each other. He would also listen to them.
Boehm also positioned himself in the current dispute over the interpretation of the Middle East crisis with a call to abandon one's own myths and to defend one's own universal values against the burden of one's own history. His “Speech to Europe” (“Shadows of History, Spectres of the Present: The Middle East War and Europe's Challenge”) was held in front of Rachel Whiteread's Shoah memorial on Vienna's Judenplatz amid protests from Jewish groups. The Jewish Community had raised serious concerns about Boehm's speech at this location last week.
Anyone who wants to defend human dignity today must abandon the concept of national sovereignty, Boehm said, also referring to the history of Israel's founding based on the experience of the Holocaust. “We must respect history because we are committed to its ideals,” said Boehm. However, ideals could degenerate into myths, not least “national myths”. Now that right-wing governments are using national myths, the unifying ideals of history must once again be upheld, said the philosopher, who also recalled that the personal history of his wife and her expelled Jewish family from Vienna connected him to the Judenplatz.
“The proposal to begin an Israeli constitution not with the sovereignty of the Jewish people, but with respect for human dignity as the origin of law, would, so the argument goes, amount to imposing European cosmopolitan ideals on them, thus calling Jewish sovereignty into question. One side interprets such a universalist policy as racism or colonialism, the other as anti-Semitism. And since all sides see this sovereignty as a zero-sum game and a condition of their own existence, these doctrines are now no longer just in conflict, but on a collision course: the situation is so violent and the debate so heated, not because the two sides are so different, but because they are so similar. It is our task to understand where this logic comes from and to overcome it.”
- Omri Boehm at Vienna’s Judenplatz
If Europe proclaims that human dignity is inviolable, then it must see this against the backdrop of its own history and the transgressions of this history. Because even the sentence that human dignity is inviolable can quickly turn into a myth.
Europe and the overcoming of national sovereignty
In its founding, the European Union was the only productive answer to the question of what would become of the world after the end of the great empires. It is not the national sovereign, but the overcoming of this principle that is Europe's mission.
The decisive question for Boehm was whether the European doctrine of overcoming national sovereignty could also be applied to the victims of European history, specifically the Jews and the Holocaust. For only in a sovereign nation, according to the victims' doctrine, was it possible to escape systematic persecution and murder. And how, according to Boehm, could an Israeli constitution be based on historical experience, not first and foremost on the sovereignty of the Jewish people, but on universalizable human rights? This question is now being applied by some to the situation of the Palestinians - what, some Europeans ask, could lead us to criticize the Palestinians in their use of violence when they themselves are not protected by any law?
If Europe's answer to the downfall of empires is that human rights should be the guiding principle, the victims on the other side have always relied on the right of national sovereignty. Europe could only stand by its universal principles in the face of this conflict. The constant focus on its own historical responsibility could ultimately only lead to the contradictions described above.
“You are lying”, some of the Jewish demonstrators on the square countered Boehm. Some of their placards described October 7 as a continuation of the Shoah. On the square, the executive made an effort to give all voices their due and to maintain the boundaries between lecture, audience and protest.
ORFOmri Böhm also recalled the fate of his wife's family, who came from Vienna, on Vienna's Judenplatz
Milo Rau is surprised that Boehm is polarizing
The speech is jointly organized by the Institute for Human Sciences and the Festwochen. The First Foundation recently withdrew its support following protests from the Jewish Community.
In his introductory remarks, the new director of the Festival, Milo Rau, was surprised that a speaker “who wants to reconcile” like Boehm had led to the negative reactions in the run-up to the event. Rau also recently stated in an interview with journalist Heinz Sichrovsky in the magazine “News” that anti-Semitism was being “carelessly used and instrumentalized”.
“The term anti-Semitism has recently been extended by right-wing parties to more or less any position that doesn't suit them. But anti-Semitism is a crime, the term stands for the desire to persecute, marginalize and exterminate Jews all over the world. [...] The justified sensitivity of the two perpetrator nations, Germany and Austria, is being instrumentalized here, which is completely counterproductive and also absolutely transparent. Especially for me, who also has Jewish family roots, this is terrible and unacceptable. We have lost our moral compass in the political infighting between left-wing and right-wing parties.”
- Milo Rau in the current issue of “News”
Boehm sticks to his ideas on the Middle East
In the run-up to the event, Boehm defended the concept and the Judenplatz as the venue for his speech. “I am deeply connected to the history of the Holocaust and therefore also to the need to pay respect to its memory,” Boehm said on ZIB2 on Sunday evening: “But I believe we have developed ways of being disrespectful to this memory when we sometimes misuse it for the wrong purposes.” The Jewish Community (IKG) had spoken out in favor of moving Boehm's speech.
The philosopher maintained his criticized view of the Middle East conflict and the future vision of a “binational Israel” in the TV programme. He argued that the Middle East conflict could only be resolved through an Israeli-Palestinian federation, even if this was currently difficult to imagine. A two-state solution was unrealistic for various reasons.
The philosopher also told the “Standard” (Monday edition): “I understand the doubts about the federal direction, which I support. The situation has become unbearable since October 7. But it would be much further from reality to speak of a two-state solution today. Or that there is no need for mediation. These two illusions have led us to the current catastrophe.” His demands are more realistic than a two-state solution, which also breaks down in reality, for example when land claimed by Israel leads to Palestinians being “deprived of their democratic rights” at the same time.
In his book essay “Israel - A Utopia”, published in 2020, Boehm sees a blatant contradiction between a Jewish state and a liberal democracy. He advocates the vision of an “ethnically neutral state”, which would also overcome its Zionist foundation.
“It is perfectly consistent that he should actually say that as a utopia it must be possible, desirable and aspirational for Jews and Palestinians to live as equal citizens in a democratic state at some point. I understand anyone who says that this is too utopian for me, I have objections, I have a need for discussion, but I cannot understand someone who then says that it is a disgrace that such a person should step forward, appear and speak in this or that place.”
- Daniel Kehlmann on Ö1-Mittagsmagazin
Muzicant against Boehm in the run-up to the event
If he were 30, he would go to Vienna's Judenplatz and throw eggs. This is how the former president of the Jewish Community (IKG), Ariel Muzicant, commented on Boehm's appearance on Vienna's Judenplatz in the run-up to the event. Muzicant, currently Interim President of the European Jewish Congress and Vice President of the World Jewish Congress, considers the square to be an unsuitable location for the Jewish philosopher's speech. According to his own statements, he intervened with the City of Vienna and the Erste Foundation, one of the sponsors of the event. This was successful with the Erste Foundation (which withdrew its support for the event), but unsuccessful with the City of Vienna. City Councillor for Culture Veronica Kaup-Hasler was in New York when the debate broke out and discussed the roots of anti-Semitism in Vienna around 1900 at an international conference.
Boehm called Muzicant's criticism “disrespectful” because it could encourage people to throw eggs at this very place of remembrance. “People like Muzicant” who complain that he introduces post-colonial thinking into the Israeli context are ill-informed, Boehm said: “I am a vocal opponent of post-colonialist thinking, theoretically and in the Israeli-Palestinian context. What seems to bother Muzicant about my position is not my alleged 'postcolonialism', but the fact that, with Kant, I represent the universalism of the Enlightenment. That is of course legitimate, albeit worrying.”
Edtstadler: “Pure anti-Zionism and therefore anti-Semitism”
IKG President Oskar Deutsch recently criticized the fact that requests to postpone Boehm's speech had been rejected. Sharp criticism was also voiced on Monday by Constitutional Minister Edtstadler, who is currently holding an international conference on anti-Semitism herself. It is high time to reconsider actually giving someone who criticizes Israel here, which is not criticism of Israel, but pure anti-Zionism and therefore anti-Semitism, a stage in the middle of Vienna, Edtstadler was heard saying on Ö1-Mittagsjournal.
The difficult mission for peace: Interpreted by British artist Banksy in Bethlehem 2007 | Jim Hollander / EPA / picturedesk.com
Kehlmann outraged by Muzicant
Boehm's companion Daniel Kehlmann defended Boehm's approach on Ö1-Mittagsjournal on Monday. According to Kehlmann, Boehm represents the idea that ethical norms, rights and human dignity cannot be divided into groups in any way: “And for this reason, it is completely consistent that he must actually say that as a utopia it must be possible and desirable and aspirable that at some point Jews and Palestinians live as equal citizens in a democratic state. I understand anyone who says that this is too utopian for me, I have objections, I have a need for discussion, but I cannot understand someone who then says that it is a disgrace that such a person should step forward, appear and speak in this or that place.”
Of course, according to Kehlmann, Boehm's proposals touched on an internal Israeli debate. “But there are also many Israeli intellectuals, such as my close friend Etgar Keret, who also say that there must be a way to live Jewish lives safely and peacefully in Israel without having to define the state as Jewish in any way.” There must also be the idea that Israel can be a state like any other, without having to put up with threats of violence when advocating this position. “Anyone who throws eggs is quick to throw something else. I find that absolutely outrageous,” said Kehlmann, addressing Muzicant.