On the 20th of April 2025, the US-American News Agency NPR reported that the German State, through the Immigration Office in Berlin, is seeking to deport one US Citizen and three EU citizens for their involvement in Pro-Palestine (better phrased as anti-Genocide) protests, despite these four people having no prior criminal convictions and the trials against them are still ongoing. The state cites that the reason for this deportation is “Staatsräson” : “The right of Israel to exist, its protection, and the integrity of the State of Israel are matters of German state policy”.
This sentence is a death sentence for Germany’s already very poorly conceived “lesson” from the Holocaust: it defecates on international law in exactly the same way as the likes of Trump, Netanyahu, Putin, Nixon and Hitler do and did. The illegality of the deportations (as no criminal convictions have yet been established) as well as the very association between protesting against genocide as being a violation of the interests of the German state, indicate, that the German Staatsräson does not care about international law when it is directed against the systematic murdering of people with less favourable identities – so called sub-humans.
I am getting very tired of the apologies and the prohibitions. For example, in Germany it is very common to assert that referring to the warcrimes against and systematic murdering of displaced Palestinian civilians as genocide is an insult to the memory of the Holocaust, or even comparing the situation in Gaza with that of the Warsaw Ghetto as an act of anti-Semitism because it underplays the victimhood of the Jewish people as well as the collective guilt of the Palestinian people, are arguments heavily steeped in bad faith. However, this exhaustion with the incredible arrogance of those deploying Jewish Exceptionalism to deny and at the same time defend genocide, is itself a sign of the success of kakistocracy. Being cultivated in bad faith, kakistocratic debating strategies primarily consist of false accusations, lies and gaslighting. Because those who embrace these strategies are corrupted by self-loathing, every one of their accusations is a confession.
However, by admitting that I am getting tired, I am also admitting that they are winning. These are the last breaths of someone who does not yet have to worry about the consequences of speaking freely, and can afford the luxury of being irritated by the corruption and self-loathing of those who are destroying the world. Those who have gone before me, those who are now threatened with deportation, those who have already been deported and those who have already been imprisoned, have gone before me. And before them are those who have been displaced, humiliated, tortured and murdered by states who do not have the courage to name their actions war crimes, because they rely on the lie that “their” right to exist has primacy over human rights. The genocidal state is not just the state of Israel, every government that has supported the IDF warcrimes after they had been reported is de jure and de facto complicit in genocide and thereby has ceased the right to exist under international law.
This is exactly the reason why Staatsräson defecates on International Law; it has become an obstacle, a worthless piece of paper which kakistocracy only uses to wipe its proverbial exhaust in a feeble attempt to regain a semblance of cleanliness. It is therefore perfectly logical that being anti-Genocide – at least publicly – is now being criminalized; it was already considered illegal to protest by advocating boycotts, divestments and sanctions before the latest genocidal escalations. Whereas for legal scholars, it may seem strange that exercising the right to freedom of expression – which BDS is – has been coded as anti-Semitic, especially because that association has no basis in reality as BDS was never directed against Jewish communities, only against the State of Israel’s use of the Occupied Territories, we could have seen the warning signs. Law is different when Staatsäson is put into play. The basis of the State is still arbitrary violence, Nomos rather than Logos, and the Law does not obey some kind of universal logic or ethics as much as it obeys the interests of the State.
The German State is under attack because its residual fascism is being exposed, and it defends itself in a manner that is perfectly aligned with fascism: if the Law seems to contradict the interests of the State, the Law must be changed. This is Hegelry in its ugliest manifestation.
Hegelry has to be understood as practice of self-immunization. It is based on the axiom that the Establishment – even if imperfect – is always-already the embodiment of Spirit. Philosophy stems from the Establishment and returns to the Establishment that which it needs to progress in its fulfilment. Hence, Hegelry immunizes the State through justification. Within the realm of imagination derived from Hegelry, every act of legislation, execution or jurisprudence needs to align itself with the Law that drives it, and thus every act of analysis, prescription judgment (which is th work of the PMC) also needs to align itself with the Law. The sanctity of the Law shall not be questioned.
But who speaks for the Law? That is where Staatsräson comes in. It is indeed the Sovereign Act that Carl Schmitt understands as the necessary condition for the territorial establishment of the Sovereign Law. It is indeed derived from a lack of doubt that dialectically corresponds with the anxiety and self-loathing of the libidinal economy of alienation. It is not I who speaks, but Staatsräson. It is not I who acts but Staatsäson. Befehl ist Befehl.
Disaffected Sociology 
Leave a comment