#53 No discussion! The public as a prohibited zone
The public sphere is currently in a poor state as a place for argumentative debate. In all camps, the aim often seems to be to discredit dissenting opinions as unacceptable. What runs counter to one’s own convictions is branded as dangerous and should be banned from the public sphere, from publishing programs, museums or curricula, some criticize. Others explain the recurring controversy as a process of developing a more just society.
But who is right? And is it really a question of what we are still allowed to do? In any case, the ability to empathize with others no longer seems to be highly valued. Instead, the arrogance of one’s own infallibility prevails in many places. And where public debate should actually take place, it is canceled.
An occasion for the Römerberg Talks to ask how reason can still be established in public discourse when the guard rails are becoming ever narrower. What reasons are there for deeming certain opinions and ideas no longer worthy of discussion, and when do good intentions turn into their self-righteous opposite, into narrow-mindedness or even ignorance? Between wokeness and cancel culture, where is the space for a constructive argumentative struggle for the best solutions to the pressing problems of the present for everyone?
Moderation: Hadija Haruna-Oelker and Alf Mentzer
10:00 – Welcome
10:15 – Adrian Daub
Really true? Cancel culture and anti-woke policies as social phenomena
11:00 – Sigrid Köhler and Wolfgang Ullrich
Is that (still) allowed? The dispute over the autonomy and relevance of art and literature
12:00 – Uwe Volkmann
The law and opinions. On the connection between the constitution and political culture
13:00 – LUNCH BREAK
14:00 – Julian Nida-Rümelin
Cancel Culture: The End of Enlightenment? A plea for political judgment
15:00 – Simone Dede Ayivi and Meron Mendel
Ohne Keule! Talking about anti-Semitism and racism
16:00 – Sophie Schönberger
“Hell, it’s the others.” On exclusion and endurance in democracy
17:00 – END
