Report of the 2023 summer event

The 2023 summer event began with an introductory welcome from Julia Zimmermann.
The program was presented and thanks were expressed to the planning group.
Jonathan Feik then began moderating the panel discussion on the topic
'Legitimacy and proportionality of forms of protest'. The guests invited to the
discussion were Sonja Manderbach (philosopher and cultural scientist as well as
press spokesperson and activist of the Last Generation), Dr. Dr. Maximilian Pichl (legal
and political scientist, former legal policy advisor at Pro Asyl) and Dr.
Kerstin Wolff (historian and research officer at the Archive of the German
Women's Movement).
The three Advisers first commented on the central question. Sonja Manderbach
defined that protest is legitimate and proportionate if the demand
is in the public interest. She considered the opposite to be the case for anti-democratic demands. In the
case of climate change, what serves the preservation of nature is non-profit. Furthermore,
non-violence is a central requirement for the legitimacy of forms of protest. There is an enormous urgency to
climate change that is not recognized by large parts of the population
. The last generation therefore responds to this perception deficit by
their forms of protest with protests that are as 'unignorable' as possible.
Kerstin Wolff put forward four theses. Firstly, she stated that forms of protest always
have a historical genesis and must adapt to current social circumstances
in order to become functional. Secondly, it is a prerequisite for the
success of protest that it 'makes sense' to the population, i.e. that the forms of protest must be read in a meaningful
way. The third thesis referred to the fact that protest always works in two
directions: On the one hand, forms of protest have an impact on the movement, where
for example strategic differences can arise. At the same time, joint
protest can strengthen the sense of community. On the other hand, protest always works out of the
movement into society, which can react with approval or rejection.
The fourth thesis is also relevant here. This stated that protest only ever takes place in real
terms when it is reported on. This is only the case if the protest
deliberately disrupts routine processes in society.
Maximilian Pichl differentiated between the political concept of legitimacy and the
legal concept of proportionality. Democratic forms have always had to be fought for against
state resistance. He believes this is also the case at present: for example,
it can be seen that the last generation is seen in public discourse as

defamed in public discourse as being anti-democratic and anti-legal. As an example, he cited the
smearing of paint on the Basic Law installation at the Reichstag building in Berlin.
The metaphor intended by the activists was to say that fundamental rights are 'drowning' in oil
. This was to protest for the intergenerational justice of fundamental rights
. Various parliamentarians interpreted the action as an attack on the
Basic Law and used terms such as 'anti-democratic',
'anti-constitutional' and comparisons to the Taliban. In addition,
state repression against the last generation can be observed. He analyzed
a flawed understanding of the rule of law in public discourse. This is the case when
it is demanded that action must be taken against the Last Generation 'with the full force of the rule of law'
. This is erroneous, as the rule of law does not mean interventions by security authorities against
the population, but on the contrary, the rule of law is constituted by freedom
and security rights for citizens against the state.
Overall, it emerged that in the case of climate change, the urgency of the
problem in particular has an influence on the assessment of the legitimacy and proportionality of
forms of protest.