Current activity levels are high regarding the Sylt video production.
It's not wise to ignore the racist proclamations heard on Sylt as a mere "mistake made while intoxicated," remarks Pia Lamberty. She's the joint managing director of CeMAS, a think tank that handles conspiracy theories and right-wing extremism. In an interview with ntv.de, she clarifies why the clip is an exhibition surface and why the current hubbub is insufficient.
ntv.de: The revellers who casually let loose with racist proclamations in a Sylter elite club have provoked nationwide uproar. Can this still be explained as a drunken faux pas or mere pill-induced idiocy, or are we truly up against right-wing fanatics?
Pia Lamberty: It's hard to investigate individuals' thoughts. However, I urge caution when describing this as a drunken blunder, because these remarks must have a root. Not all intoxicated people spout racist or right-wing chants. There must be some degree of openness to ideologies.
Yet does ideological openness automatically brand the revellers on Sylt right-wing fanatics?
Both are potentially hazardous. It's important to remember that right-wing fanatics don't work in isolation. There are also those who might not be categorized as extremists but provide these ideologies with a broader foundation.
The mix of the "L'Amour toujours" song and right-wing slogans has been circulating on social media for a while. Previously, recordings from Mecklenburg-Vorpommern were circulating in which attendees of a folk festival loudly sung the lyrics. Why has the Sylt video prompted such a visceral response now?
This is likely due to shattered expectations. Extremist-related discourse frequently perpetuates the pervasive myth that they're all alcoholics, gang members, and jobless conservative voters. This time, however, the stereotype of the village festival is discarded, and the "rich and beautiful" are in the spotlight. Moreover, lately, there has been considerable debate about the causes of extremism and the role of the middle class in it. It's necessary to recognise that extremism isn't solely attributable to poverty and under-education; it has widespread social ramifications. The Sylt video serves as a lens through which individuals can project their own beliefs.
Many are appalled by the incident and condemn it vociferously. How do you evaluate the responses?
It's gratifying to see that individuals exhibit civil courage and oppose extremism. The police have received complaints in the past when this song was sung. But there's also a lot of activism at this moment because the video is so publicly audible.
How does this activism manifest itself?
People now seek answers. Practically, they question who precisely is in the video, forming a vigilante mob to trace and potentially ruin the lives of these individuals. The democratisation of information and digital tools makes it possible for anyone to become a potential vigilante. But it'd be far more useful to establish a society where the lives of people subjected to racism are valued and protected.
What form could a sustained resistance take?
The centrestage shouldn't be the video itself, but rather what it symbolises: the daily struggles faced by non-German individuals in Germany. The social media responses from persons of colour were diverse, ranging from outrage to resignation. While this moment of collective anger is powerful, it's crucial to view it as a catalyst towards long-term change. In 2023, a report on politically-motivated crime was published. The number of crimes committed against refugees escalated by 75% - a statistic that was barely mentioned. This incident overshadows a more sinister thread running through your society.
The video spreads like wildfire: where does this leave us?
Accusations against individuals aren't unusual, but what's uncommon is that everyone hears the same song playing simultaneously. This intentional appropriation is designed to normalise racist views and establish a code language. We must ask ourselves how we, as a society, have arrived at discussing this video while inadvertently propagating it.
Why is a 25-year-old pop song used for this cause? What's happening?
I'm unsure why this specific song is chosen. Perhaps it's because of its infectiousness. Additionally, it functions as part of the extremist tactic to claim spaces. By connecting songs to extremist narratives, they engage in a strategic propaganda success.
Can we attribute this to the normalisation of right-wing thought?
The video portrays this normalisation perfectly: it's received intense coverage. The song and its associated chants will be etched in the minds of millions of people. This is a victory for right-wing fanatics in terms of perceivability and potent propaganda.
It's tough to quantify that. Definitely, the occurrence took place during a period when the AfD was becoming more extreme. However, this didn't seem to affect their popularity. For a while, right-wing extremist songs have been sung in specific circles. But what makes it distinct when it happens in a setting like Sylt, where people go to a club and intend to have a good time? The chants might've been audible and visible, yet there was no proof of any form of resistance. In a way, that's a form of approval, as it implies: If no one speaks out, then it can't be too bad. And if it appears as if these chants are directed towards you, it gives you a sense of comfort.
Read also:
- Floods: water levels remain critical in many places
- Snow chaos further restricts Bavaria
- Continuous operation in the flood areas
- Flood situation remains tense in many places
The incident on Sylt, where individuals made racist proclamations, has sparked international discussions about right-wing extremism, underscoring its global reach. Pia Lamberty, a renowned expert on conspiracy theories and right-wing extremism, emphasizes that the Sylt video should not be dismissed as mere drunken mistakes, as some might suggest, but rather as an exhibition of ideological openness that can be a stepping stone towards more extreme beliefs.
Source: www.ntv.de
