Anti-Semitism and the Left Party: More analytical sharpness is needed

The frustration runs deep: With its clever campaign for solidarity-based housing, the Left Party in Berlin achieved a brilliant victory over the conservative establishment. Instead of approaching potential coalition partners from this position of strength, the party leadership has to contritely answer accusations of anti-Semitism.

This is not really possible at the moment. Also because the party has settled into a reassuring lack of understanding of anti-Semitism, which a skeptical public apparently does not want to let go this time. Instead of serious reflection, people are almost exclusively upset about the right-wing campaign politics.

While the party's usual circles downplay or defend their own anti-Semitism, the party leadership attempts a mixture of recognition and incomprehension: It is admitted that there is a general, society-wide problem with anti-Semitism, which can sometimes also be found in its own party. What remains unclear, however, is that Israel-related anti-Semitism has become the consensus in parts of the party as the most popular form of expression of resentment.

Attempts at justification like that of the deputy parliamentary group leader in the Bundestag, Luigi Pantisano, in the ARD “Report from Berlin” from September 27th sometimes show a striking lack of knowledge. Pantisano boasted that they were “some of the few” who “dare to publicly criticize what is happening in Israel.” The counterfactual speech of a pro-Israel opinion taboo is itself anti-Semitic coded. It makes an unspoken reference to a dark force that intimidates us from speaking the truth.

Even before the elections, the Berlin Left Party had tried to get the anti-Semitism problem under control. The top candidate Elif Eralp published a 5-point plan against anti-Semitism on May 8th, entitled “Strengthening and Protecting Jewish Life in Berlin”. The plan was repeatedly conjured up by the Left Party during the election campaign in order to certify that it was harmless.

He can also seem quite ambitious. For example, they want to “promote Jewish life”, “support Jewish diversity and take needs seriously”, “work together to create remembrance from below” and “recognise anti-Semitism in its various forms” – all democratic parties can easily agree on these headings. However, the text is less suitable for clarifying the internal party's relationship to Israel-related anti-Semitism: a program that talks about swastikas but does not mention the red Hamas triangle or “Yallah Intifada” cries with a single syllable avoids snubbing its own scene and therefore appears half-hearted to the outside world.

The red triangle has become the central symbol of anti-Semitic enemy marking after Hamas used it to mark targets during the October 7 massacre. Intifada does not simply mean “uprising”, but also refers to historical waves of terror against Israeli civilians, for example with bomb attacks on discos or buses. These symbols are omnipresent at demonstrations, which the Neukölln and Wedding district associations in particular have called for. Anti-Semitism can only be effectively combated by those who tackle it within their own ranks.

The party leadership asserted on election night that there is no place in the party for anyone who questions Israel's right to exist. In contrast, there are constant calls from the party's district associations for anti-Israel demonstrations or the election campaign of candidates with symbols of the anti-Israel movement and joint photos with Islamist actors.

In the summer of 2025, the Neukölln district association, together with the United Palestinian National Committee (VPNK), organized a summer festival under the motto “Neukölln stands together – solidarity with the people of Palestine”. The VPNK is an association of Hamas and PFLP supporters that was founded after October 7, 2023. Together with district associations of the Berlin Left Party, the VPNK in the “Internationalist Alliance” regularly organizes rallies at which the massacre is glorified as legitimate resistance.

This is about much more than criticism of the Israeli government's actions: Israel-related anti-Semitism transfers classic anti-Semitic argumentation patterns to the Jewish state, denies Israel's right to exist, justifies violence against Israelis or imprisons Jews for the Israeli government's actions.

The day after the election, BAG Palestine Solidarity and Solid Neukölln published a video on Instagram that echoed the party leadership's assertions. The complaint is that these are announced purges, which will affect at least 30 percent of the party. Citing the Jerusalem Declaration on Anti-Semitism (JDA), which the Left Party adopted in a federal party conference resolution as crucial for its work, it says: "We have a clear decision. The Jerusalem Declaration clearly states that the denial of Israel's right to exist and the rejection of Zionism are not anti-Semitic."

The video illustrates the typical use case of JDA. In contrast to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's more common working definition of anti-Semitism, the JDA is usually not used to name anti-Semitism, but rather to fend off its criticism.

The party was also unsettled by its broken relationship with Jewish organizations: on the evening of the election, the Central Council spoke out against a coalition with the Left Party. A later published letter from 150 Berlin Jews for such a coalition changes little. Considering the size of Berlin's Jewish community, it is almost astonishing that it was apparently not possible to find more signatures for the letter.

It cannot be denied that the accusation of anti-Semitism is also being exploited by conservative forces in order to prevent a left-wing alliance in Berlin. Economics Minister Reiche was particularly perfidious, warning about anti-Semitism and expropriations through her ministry's official channels - as if they were somehow comparable things. Anti-Semitism is a potentially murderous ideology, socialization is a right enshrined in the Basic Law. What is more unconstitutional is the Chancellor's announcement that he wants to quickly introduce a law that would undermine this fundamental right.

Other politicians and commentators are once again dusting off the horseshoe model and are making a compulsive effort to equate the Left Party and the AfD. What is then called for is a firewall in both directions, although it is ignored that the AfD is a fascist party and the Left is a democratic one.

The mixing of party and economic policy ideas harms the naming of anti-Semitism because it raises doubts about the justified allegations. The intention would be more convincing if the conservatives also dealt with their own anti-Semitism. When Merz recently spoke of anti-Semitism as a form of xenophobia, he was using classic national anti-Semitism because he so implicitly denied Jewish nationality. The CDU-led Family Ministry also recently savagely cut funding for political education work against anti-Semitism.

The conservatives are using the attack surface that the Left Party has offered them. What is also remarkable is the relative certainty with which the media describes anti-Semitism. For example, instead of, as is usual in such debates, endlessly discussing the exhaustively discussed question of where criticism of the Israeli government's actions ends and anti-Semitism begins, people are now quite often asked how the party can deal with the problem.

Where such discursive progress in the problematization of anti-Semitism becomes apparent, prominent voices naturally also speak out who want to immediately unsettle the certainty again. Stefanie Student-Springorum, for example, head of the Center for Anti-Semitism Research, considers the allegations to be exaggerated, but does not qualify this assessment further.

Her predecessor Wolfgang Benz went further in an interview with the Tagesspiegel. He perceives “nasty words against the Land of Israel” from Neukölln, but: “That is not anti-Semitism, it is not hostility to Jews, but political hostility against the occupying power Israel.” When asked about anti-Semitic incidents and attacks, Benz replied: "But they have been saying that Jews are afraid for 50 years. Even before, it was said: We are sitting on packed suitcases. That is part of the self-justification of Jewish life in Germany."

The lack of analytical sharpness towards anti-Semitism, the trivialization of Israel-related anti-Semitism as a political conflict, goes hand in hand with Benz's ice-cold ignorance towards Jewish experiences. Fears of Jewish women: Brushing Jews aside in such a trivial way does not help against anti-Semitism or the Left Party.

The Left Party, on the other hand, can only credibly distance itself from anti-Semitism by strengthening criticism within the party. There are numerous people in the state working groups and the federal Shalom working group who name anti-Semitism in their own party.

This form of solidarity-based reflection is in the tradition of left-wing self-criticism: the most sophisticated theoretical discussions of anti-Semitism come from the political left itself. It is important to follow this tradition instead of taking refuge in the apparent security of lack of concepts and thus leaving the field to anti-Semitism.

This means, in particular, that when it comes to Israel-related anti-Semitism, we should abandon our constant defense and differentiate between legitimate criticism and anti-Semitism - because this differentiation is already a basis for the debate and does not have to be demanded.

The left is not accused of criticizing Netanyahu, settlement policy or warfare, but rather of tolerating members and making common cause with actors who justify violence against Jews. The Berlin election campaign has shown that the Left Party does not rely on this musculoskeletal system for mobilization, but can captivate people in the classic way with social issues.