(Un)sicherheit in der Zeitenwende

Transkript: Tektonik der Werte und Interessen

ACHTUNG: Das Transkript wird automatisch durch wit.ai erstellt und aus zeitlichen Gründen NICHT korrigiert. Fehler bitten wir deshalb zu entschuldigen.


Florian Binder
A warm welcome from me to all of you,
My name is and I'm going to moderate today's session which is as you might have been already been able to guess going to be in English.
So we have already taken a deep dive,
Into some of the major facets and areas of interests surrounding the site and bender or turning point,
The tectonics of values,
Climate crisis COVID and the war in Ukraine to name about a few the liberal order is under immense pressure.
After the end of history at the turn of the twenty-century we are witnessing another shift in what global European and German politics will look like.
Today we are going to engage with the big questions of values and interests surrounding the turning points we are living through.
So joining us in this endeavor today are two great scholars yelling at two patch and if that I want to quickly introduce,
Is a post doctoral research fellow in the recent,
Professor of sociology at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the school for advanced studies in the social science in Paris,
So both,
We'll give a 10 minute presentation and as always we will invite to other participants today Nicholas from the OCD and the from the vits of,
To join them in a 20 minute discussion before we open up the conversation to your questions that you can post in the chat.
And now, without any further ado, the floor is yours.
Eva Illouz
Thank you very much Florian.
Don't consider myself a specialist of international affairs so my.
Very brief presentation things should be taken as a presentation of an ordinary citizen,
So we've had in succession two events likely to produce very high levels of descendation and anxiety.
The pandemic and a war.
Because we may sermise that Putin was betting on the west tiredness with the pandemic.
And the west great desire to move out of the crisis and to move on.
Self absorbed in different.
And I think without being what I would call historical approach
They can be an opportunity to confront in a way the limits.
Of our own political categories in thinking.
Of course there is much to say about such a big topic can I be extremely brief and sketchy.
The social.
What did you change.
In order to.
I think.
That of course there are many issues that the social democratic left can and should rethink.
The first is what I would call the question of the technology.
To doubt the authority of experts.
And we may even say that.
A participated in this in junction in a letter to Arnold Ruge.
Ruthless in the sense that this is neither afraid of the results in the teams.
And I think this has become.
For a long time which doubted,
The basis for much of conspiracy thinking.
Which does not believe in any voting, counting procedures, principles of urology, scientific messages,
Of drugs certification or even in global warming or.
Which can even claim that Putin is the aggressor and that he's on the moral mission to defy Ukraine.
Conspiracy theories defy experts and science since truth has actually become the truth of those it benefits.
And so the notion of hidden interest I think has come to really structure the political thinking at large of the left and of the right.
Has our guilt that conspiracy theories are a property of modernity.
By the fact that for I would say football team thinking.
Post modern thinking has put into question any notion of truth.
And has put into question the moral and epic validity of the search for truth.
Entire generations trained in local unism.
Despite.
And I think that for Co and his impact on the left.
Has had the effect of making science.
And this is intellectual position in turn could only legitimate the legitimize the facts that in return not believing in science was also a question of belief.
And so what do we have witnessed I think during the these two crisis.
Is a new,
And questions of epistamy authority and this.
Of course is very clear around the issue climate change but it was also very clear during the health crisis.
In the US the Republican and Democratic camps were deeply and very neatly I would have to say.
The election results.
So historically conspiracy theories have existed on the right and on the left and but recently it seems to have become the ideological weapon of the far right and of the populous.
It's so.
To just discuss questions of epidemology.
To discuss to convince about the effectiveness of vaccines.
Or about the fact that Putin is a real aggressive,
Which is why I think that estemology is one is a question that is going to decide the future of our politics.
I think it'd be emojis now at the heart of our democracy.
And in its future and I think that the left must bring back the question of truth.
And the.
And without the possibility of talking discussing knowing what is true at least as a horizon.
You cannot generate trust.
About the kind of values that we need to rediscover and put on the agenda of a social democratic.
The second point is the notion of solidarity inside the EU as you know the French left has been.
But more than the left in fact the top five candidates for the April 2022 elections except for manual Emmanuel Mac home.
Have all.
And this is not only something that the French candidates represented we know that 65% of the French electorates.
I've actually suffering this tendencies.
On the right for example they contest mostly in the European.
And on the left of most.
So I think for me the war has displayed a very high level.
It has also showed that solidarity cannot go without.
And the international sanctions that have been deployed.
Have been I think I've showed an extraordinary level of coordination between various countries.
Which is more much more I think that simple bureaucratic efficiency it has been.
The effect I think of a true solidarity.
It is perhaps ironic that an institution that was created to ensure peace.
But we must take I think this opportunity to rethink the vocation of the European Union.
Which was accused of being a cold bureaucratic.
To be an institution that has a great deal of energy and vigor and humanity.
To my poet here is to say that this might be an.
Put an emphasis on cross border solidarity,
Which should which is which should be at the center of the European reunion this does not mean I think that this solidarity should go hand in hand,
Whether you're European constitution,
Basic laws it doesn't have to be as binding as a constitution given that many are sovereignist.
And it should also go along with a thinking about.
The globally the effect the economic effect of economic globalization.
Should be again.
And.
We invoke the left,
You can also was against the war.
Excorated my long song for changing his position.
And the main arguments of the socialist left was that.
This war can only divide Russian and the Ukraine working classes that the war plays into the hands of American and European imperialism.
And that the main responsibility for the world lies with nature and and the especially with Washington which did everything to promote Moscow.
That is quite different from this one and then we take my inspiration.
From Leonard Hubhouse who was a British intellectual and sociologist the actually contributed to.
And he was also disappointed he was left when Liberal intellectual who was disappointed with the,
Also tended to be imperialist and to support British imperialism.
Post the billboard and his sister.
He initially opposed the first World War but later he came to support that world war effort.
He was an internationalist.
I mean in general he was an internationalist but during the war he changed his mind.
Responded to manifest of 93 Germany.
In which they claimed that Germany was not responsible for the war. First World War.
This here reply that it was the behavior Germany Belgium that is the German you know declared word on Belgium and proceeded to start the battle of years,
And in France.
Who is very much in favor of neutrality much like many left wing people are arguing today.
And in this letter he stated.
He was against the war there.
In once the war has broken out we cannot i fear maintain public criticism of the policy of the government as weakened as it has been in the past.
I take inspiration for him from him.
Let's in that sense I think the struggle against Putin.
Slightly.
Towards greater equality to fighting fascism itself.
Seems to be for me the order of the day so it'll esthenology.
And the struggle against fascism for me are three fundamental values that we can use in order to renew the agenda of social democracy.
Jelena Cupać
Thank you very much. Claudia. And thank you for inviting me to this very interesting event. I'm very glad to see so many people this early in attendance.
In my input today I will,
And it is not that we have not had,
A lot of reason to color age the age of anxiety before the war in Ukraine erupted it is just my claim that you that the war in Ukraine has exacerbated many of these,
Anxiety is in international relations the discipline which I study the the concept of anxiety is most.
Security this this is the concert that has come,
To international relations from sociology it was introduced in sociology by the sociologist Anthony Gidens and I will give you a
A very quick kind of theoretical background
Of what these concepts mean. So the concept of autological security denotes state in which an individual or in fact
A community has a very stabilized dentistry but not only the identity also the socio
Material environment of this individual or of this community is very stable there is this sense that when we wake up in the morning our world will be
The same as yesterday. So it means that we know who we are and we know how to move.
Move in the world. An opposite to the state of anthological security is a state of ontological insecurity. We
Which is mostly used synonymously with anxiety. The opposition here consists in this feeling that when we wake up, we cannot reach certainty say that our world.
Today will be the same as it was yesterday meaning that we are very slowly using
Losing a very a cognitive mastery over our environment, and I think it's very obvious when these things are defined in this way that we are in fact living in the.
Age of anxiety that with the pandemic before with climate change with technological changes we really couldn't say we certainly that our world tomorrow will be the same as today
With a war in Ukraine especially in Europe we cannot make make this claim
Obvious thing it is a feeling that we that we have and perhaps it would be almost intellectually lazy just to to state this what has troubled me in the past weeks and what I think it's also source of anxiety that we do not readily acknowledge
Concerning the war in Ukraine. Is this very fact that we are now three 3 months into this war and we cannot say with certainty and I think this
Goes very well into this question of kind of epistemological doubt that we have about our world
We are 3 months into this war and we cannot say we certainty what the cause or the goals of this war are
And that to me was very puzzling in the beginning. I was very tempted to take side. I had this kind of.
Intellectual self confidence that I can say we certainly what is it that put in once and why is it that he started this war but after engaging with other
Other academics with other pundits
And so far, I have realized that our problem in fact is that we do not know what the cause of this war is and that this creates an underlying sense of anxiety. I would just remind you
What are the kind of causes that are now being floated floated
Around the first one of course in the beginning was very strong the the idea of Nato's expansion then there we have had.
John Newshimer who propose this almost very simple but a kind of very intuitive
Reason why this war was started and I think many of the on the left.
Also accepted pirates of this disunding not necessarily following John Newshimer they have came to the same conclusion for other reasons but this idea that in 2008 when Georgia and Ukraine were given a signal the day might join
May you in the future that really provoked a Russia and and justly so Russia was
Some some intellectuals or some politicians as well are you the trasher was in fact provoked by this
Strand or other understanding why putting started this war and it goes to his fear of regime change here we have putting portrait as a very pragmatic,
It's a very pragmatic leader. He's
Rain in Russia was marked by colored revolutions in Ukraine in Georgia in.
Stop it in a way so he he landed a helping hand to to Syria also to in Libya we see Russian presence in Yemen and so forth and here we had the port portrayal of.
Hey I've put in as a very
What is the war started? We have also moved to kind of portraying him not as a primatic leader but as a as an ideolog. So before we might have denied
The ideology to the Russian regime but now we say oh no wait.
Put in actually has a very strong ideology and he wants to revive Russian Russian empire. He has engaged in a very
DP historical revision is we have a lot of mythization of Russian history denial of Ukraine Ukrainian statehood did this
Deny all of Ukrainian identity this idea of the Russian world of the orthodox slaving sealization and and so forth and so forth and Sam also done very nice
In trying to parcel what the reasons for this war are
And we are also disoriented by what Putin tells us so he he does kind of give us clues to all three of these reasons but he also tells us that he's.
That he has decided or he's invading Ukraine because he's fighting Natism because there are messages that is happening
Against Russian speaking populations, and and Russia.
Which by default brings the sense of anxiety and I will say in in a short while also a deep sense of fear.
But this very thing that we cannot have cognitive mastery of why is this what happening and then I have also tried to jump to a kind of
Meet a question there why is it that we don't know why how is it possible that we don't know why is this war why is this war happening is this normal?
Have we had wars in the past where we really couldn't say we certainly are at least former consensus around Y award is happening.
And I wasn't successful in trying to figure out why is this happening so I was flattering between this really being putting tactics and is going back to to really seeing putting as a very pragmatic very skillful in playing these sorts of games but I was also thinking maybe,
Maybe he thinks that he's reasons are very self evident in that sense that the reason why he's engaging in war should be self evident to us because the west has also engaged in many of the kind of provocations I mentioned.
Earlier. So, this is just something that I wanted to put out there as a kind of debate. Why is it that we don't know an arguing that this not knowing creates also a very big sense of anxiety because it will also determine how we
Engage to kind of stopping this war or mitigating
I have said that I will say something about fear as well so when we speak about anxiety in this context of anthological security onto logical insecurity fear anxiety and
Use the term the the TikTok change so anxiety is produced when we are really standing on tectonic place not knowing which way it will go whereas fear has a very
With certainty what the cause of this war is what we know we certainty is that we think
The use of power and the war is a legitimate way of achieving his goals. This is something that you're up.
Was not possible or at least among other European state war was a kind of unthinkable unthinkable category.
And by bringing war to Europe in this large scale he has also opened a fear of a kind of nuclear nuclear war so we had this anxiety couples with his fear but
But there are also elements of strong kind of photological security now in Europe and I think that
Ever has talked about it a little bit and this fact that the western the rest of the Europe have rediscovered their identity because one very important anxiety relieving
I strategy is through research once identity. So although we do not know how the world will reproduce in the future we at least know who we are. Who we are in this world. That is the part of my input where I.
Wanted to engage with the Warrior Ukraine but some of the questions that you put forward to us
In preparation for the inputs for today. Also concerned kind of
Al Germany and the the Germans turn Germany's turn,
Political turn at this 180° turning in maybe kind of supporting military engagement investing in military and so forth and I have been thinking that
This indeed is a big historical turn. It is.
It is the the exchange in time in the sentiment. It has elicited a lot of debate. But coming from the Falcons, we have been talking before that I come from the Balcons. I must say that my.
My sense is that the Germany and Europe in particular have made a very important and difficult paradigmatic shift
The idea that peace can exist only between democratic state concrete in the balcons.
Up until maybe 2010 there was a very strong understanding that the peace in the Balcons can exist only if the balcon states are democratic states
Somewhere after the economic crisis
In the Balcons and I would assume that this also kind of extends to to put in an especially German is engagement with with Russia in this period that
Please can actually exist among other critic states or between democratic and autocratic states. I think this paradematic shift has undergone
Has been not as noticed but I think it is perhaps it perhaps paved the way to what we see now as this very obvious shift in Germany and
Also European European politics but I think the the big big shift really happened some 10 years ago when the idea of the peace existing only among democratic states was slowly slowly abandoned and when this I would
I would finish my talk and I I hope I have put some of the questions and issues there there for the baits. Thank you very much.
Florian Binder
Thank you very much Elena. So I would now like to welcome Young Bitzel and Nicola Grant into our discussion and ask them and maybe Nicola can start,
And ask them to yeah comment maybe on the input or ask any questions that they have.
Come up with during both presentation. So, yeah, please Nicola, you can go ahead.
Nicola Brandt
No. Thank you. So two really very.
Talks I would say that open many questions,
Beams, epistemology, solidarity, and then fight against fascism.
The the definition of historology and I saw I hope it's right there so that philosophical study of the nature region and limits.
Of human knowledge and I think they are yelling us talk it comes in very nicely because she talked about the uncertainties we are facing in the.
War and and I think I want to build my my question on my comment on on that because also you talked about the pandemic ever.
And you said that there's a lot big element now of conspiracy theory being used as a political arm in particular in Bright Wing parties.
We were faced all along and we're still faced with many many uncertainty.
And when you say well we have to fight or the left has to fight for the truth or we as a society have to fight for truth.
I wonder whether it's going the right way and so I think there's a lot of
Debate on this on Messenger. We have to fight misinform
Whether we give enough space to uncertainty.
For example I mean there's some certainties for example the vaccine is highly or I think it's a.
Against severe disease so it's a good idea to.
On the other hand there are sometimes policies being promoted that would make sense in democratic countries that won't make sense if the vaccine also stops transmission and infection.
Which should probably doesn't.
Downs and there are different elements
Collected the data sometimes there's no to my knowledge randomize control,
Mask wearing in the general.
Does this tendency so this is what you called autological,
Does this dresses age of anxiety does this drive us to political debate that's very polarized in the end,
Doesn't seek to search for truth but basically built scams either your four your green or you against it there's no nuance,
You know, thinking about what caused the war, how can we best end it? So that it's acceptable for both parties. Is it right to have a gossip now?
And I I have this officer that all these things are debated in a very.
Pause a threat to democracy and good decision making that would be my question building.
Very interesting and inspiring.
Florian Binder
Both of our speakers to briefly reply to that before can ask his question given that we have.
Eva Illouz
You could I I don't I'm not sure I have an answer to your question.
You know both with regard to the disease and with regard to the war.
Narratives.
Some of them are legitimate narratives such as I think the Kennons.
Slash nurse myers.
There.
Put in aggression.
And viewing this as an expansionist move.
Between these two narratives.
And they are legitimate narratives.
So it's a matter I think of.
With regard to the many things that have been floated around.
I think we cannot we cannot say it all comes down to.
But this is within the frame of.
With non legitimate.
Idea that the virus or the vaccine sorry that the vaccine.
What's the point.
In order to control us or survey us
Narrative. So, that would be my first point. I think the public arena should make this distinction.
But I want to establish this point first.
You can really judge politics.
Or to public opinion with regard to policy makers policy makers have
They do not afford the luxury of uncertainty. They have to take a stand
And that is their vocation I want to say I do not think you and I would like to have a very uncertain.
Petition leading the way in these events.
Which do not have the same problem
Complete sympathy for your point of view I'm not sure I saw
A lack of discussion.
So much so that again I think Yelenas was pointing to precisely the very difficulty of forming a an opinion just about the intentions of.
Put in was he.
You know, it's it was not, easy, crazy, as many articles actually, reported, or is he entirely in,
Full capacity
You know the intelligence agency of the world which some of them the American intelligence agency proof to be very very good.
Out.
I
It took me time actually to form myself an opinion and to decide.
That you know this is a case where the the west should stop.
Planning itself and we hashtag it's mistakes and actually be more decisive there are historical circumstances.
Where self doubt?
Just want to this is true for individuals and it is certainly true for.
So the question I guess if we agree on that.
Is whether we this is a historical moment in which,
When I say us I mean the the that vague amorphous entity called the west,
So for me it's a moment to recuperate our values to clarify our values and to fight for them how.
We should fight for them,
Is entirely open for discussion. Yes.
And I see a great deal of discussion about initiatives.
Florian Binder
Thank you so quickly Yelena that before we go to your question.
Jelena Cupać
Yeah I would be very short because I agree with with my
I want whatever has said I would just say
What amounts to a good debate in the timer crisis i think we would all agree that
A debate should be in democratic society is a very high value if if not the highest but do the terms of a productive and democratic debate change in the context of
A crisis I think that's the question we should think about and I I think it's the question we are grappling with.
At the moment so I will not expand it expect it more than that.
Florian Binder
Okay, thank you. So, now, again.
Jan Wetzel
The app
Also try to keep it short like my first question kind of adds to what was said before it's on our episode on health Stephan Village for example criticized,
The scientific debate in the pandemic was polarized. So people even if they criticized on the scientific basis,
Or the talk down to not seen as not taking the,
And the problem was that the Spanish step on video said what's that was pretended science consistent of immutable facts,
We're a quick development so you can see before. One example the label theory was really illegitimate.
Until the WHO started domesticating and they're still discussion around us. I'm not proclaiming that lovely periods too but,
It's very completed as soon as you really get into the fact this was set before
My question now is what is the role of science in itself so we we've kind of now modeled through science the public politics
So altogether maybe we can or you can comment on what is the role of science especially in difference.
Public indifference to politics maybe maybe you can hear comment on that.
And my second question is this kind of follow us on from if us comment and question of solidarity in the Europe you,
Like in Germany passive person was kind of a weary important in the post by the people.
Period. The army, the,
We kind of have to rethink the role of the fans due to the external threats that is of course for chance of shorts on
Mend with the type and bender and to Eva as we said as kind of an informed citizen,
What are the expectations maybe you can comment on that thank you.
Florian Binder
Yeah so I would say maybe getting I can go first this time so on the on the roll of science and then kind of on the role of Germany and eh the reaction to that.
Jelena Cupać
Okay thank you very much and I think just a quickly on the role of science when we say science we usually think about natural sciences but then
If we think about social sciences I think we get into a very territory even more so we are already in a massive territory with natural sciences we
But with social sciences as I as I was trying to convey my input the very nature of social sciences is a debate
But in some crisis moments we cannot really say things with certainty from the social science point of you
In many cases not at all of that. In all of the cases. So I think there's just kind of deepens the the anxiety that this
That we are having a crisis but we also have this inability to find a very stable footing in what is happening at least in in
Agree with ever very much that for those who are decision makers they just have to act so they in a way have to choose and this might feel to us as stifling the debate but it might not be stifling the debate it might just be the pressure to act in a crisis situation which is why I said before I think we have to figure out what
What is the debating in crisis time what does it mean to debate about a war.
When we have to take these actions concerning how how Germany is seen in the balcons,
Especially in now in these context but but I would also look back at the time of Angela Merkel there it really pretty much depends on which state we are talking about and whether we are talking from the position of
The regimes in the balcons or the opposition. What I can say for those regimes that are authoritarian or authoritarian leaning
I think they were very satisfied with how Germany acted.
Before because there was a lot of piecement I would say on the part of Angela Merco she has
Essentially legitimize many of these many of these regimes to this idea that you can actually negotiate with autographs and this was very frustrating to the opposition.
Right? So, before it was more kind of lenient to the region now, it's it's seen as excertain much much more pressure.
Meaning that it is not seen in very positive terms from the part of the of the regime this of course changes if we look at
At at the opposition which might say, well, we told you so, right? You cannot negotiate with
With these people so so without going really deeply into nuances of about this means because we don't have have a lot of time I think the answer to your question would be that there is always some level of frustration with Germany in the region
Depending on from which.
Florian Binder
But before I let Eva answer I just wanna quickly remind you that afterwards she still have your questions to answer so if you have any please send them to me now while she's replying so yeah please ever go ahead sorry for that.
Eva Illouz
So
I'm not it's the technology is not my field at all but I will I will try something first of all I would not I want to clarify a few things I mean in the frame of search debate it's difficult to bring no ones.
You know.
The good reasons being that scientific knowledge.
And in fact we speak today more of communities of knowledge are scientific communities which I think is a better
Description of what science does that is you adopt a point of view a kind of a stemological point of view and then you discover what you can with the specific instruments and met a dollar you have chosen,
And if you switch field you will not discover the same thing even if you are studying the same.
So
This view we have come to the view that there is no truth.
Claim has been that everyone has his own truth. You know this very banana sentence. Now I think this is what we should fight. No everyone does not have his or her own.
And truth.
It's a very strong.
Tuesday's.
Because it forces you to admit it to and to afford and they are not five and if we agree on that then this is a departure point for you and I to form a community,
So what I want to say is so so that this is my first point you know,
To have a democracy of expert to social society of experts is no democracy.
And having the people make informed decisions with knowledge now what happens when the knowledge is completely invented and when,
For making a distinction between a fact and a belief.
The question of truth I think eh at the center of political discussions I think it would have to be only at taking into account the.
Critics that have been waged against Trump.
So what what would it look like I think you can establish fact you know holocaust denials exist along with the world.
And yet we have no problem.
So so history is able sometimes to establish facts that are facts,
The same facts differently seems to be.
That,
There is the function school and there is the internet intentionally school.
Disposing of that,
Is about plurality of opinion we should and we must let this blurry still opinions choose that not mean you and the debate but it means you lay out the basis for the debate
So, for me.
You know especially in the era of you know these platforms is also a platforms internet platform,
Which actually feed on lies and fictions and an invented stories,
There should be a way for example to regulate.
This is what we should push for. For example, to regulate much more with circulates on the internet and the kind of information that is allowed now,
This will be an infringement perhaps on the freedom of speech maybe but there this is a moment where we have to choose.
What's more important for us to me.
And,
In almost in the United States is for me today more urgent and more important.
There is.
Has a very specific history and that.
Germany's desire for pacifism and neutrality has very strong historical reasons.
And it has become a part of the moral identity of Germany.
In a way you know being the most powerful economic power of.
How would you do it I think is for Germans to figure out they cannot do it in the same way.
Or other countries because of their tangled history with war.
Florian Binder
We have a two questions now and I think if we are might be,
Over time at the end we'll still trying to answer them both first one coming from Obado also co host of this past,
And is it becoming more important to signal care and consideration for others and if you answers yes then hold us to the imperative to show solidarity
Relate to fine photos etiquette so ethics of responsibility and ethic,
Of conviction whoever wants to go first but very very briefly please.
Eva Illouz
Yes, of course. Moral divisions are getting relevant in many social fields. I mean, I think if anything with parents arises political debate for the last 20 years.
Is the fact that many political issues are transforming tomorrow issues,
And by the way the left I think and the right I mean if I look at the United States mostly but this is in Europe two as well.
So dangerous.
These are things that are not so much given to to negotiation.
So yeah and I view this as a characteristic.
No is it more important to signal care and consideration for others? I'm not sure the question. It's always important to signal care and consideration for others.
But if you're meaning a debate.
As political.
Transfer.
The.
So it it would be enough for me to simply have a frame in which we accept we don't even I think care and consideration is maybe too much to ask.
It would be.
Again as I said to accept.
For me it's solidarity we have to be translated.
In which we have showed in a way I mean we've been I think you know Poland for example has been extraordinary surprising,
Very adamant about accepting refugees,
Has accepted I think the largest number of regimes now.
That is.
Jelena Cupać
I would just quickly jump in I would be very careful in
Having less moral signaling than today. I think moral considerations are always implicated in in social opinions. I think what we have is a kind of
Breaking of maybe consensus or more competing moral narrative sloting around and I say this because I'm studying family Sandios and conservative angios in the UN and what we see there is that family stagnos have been in
In the UN since practically the founding of the UN. We cannot say that this was not a moral position by default feminist position comes with a strong moral.
Underpinnings but for a very long time there wasn't strong conservative opposition within the UN and we see this opposition rising in the past 10.
10 or plus years so what we have is a moral polarization rather than a kind of
Morality suddenly being introduced into opinion so I would be very careful in in characterizing our hour period as reach with moral arguments whereas before we have had some very,
Abstract rational rational discussion. Yeah.
Eva Illouz
Let me just very quickly you know 50 years ago the beauty center conducted a survey in the United States where it asked,
Bearing somebody,
Of a different race and then they also ask whether they would mind their child marrying somebody of the opposite political party.
So 50 years ago I don't remember exactly the percentage but the high percentage said they would mind their child marrying someone from a different religion or race,
They would not mind at all I mean the very few said that they would mind somebody marrying someone from the Republican order of what party.
50 years later the same survey was done and then the numbers flipped completely,
People did not mind their child marrying someone from a different religion,
And let's show,
But they reminded profoundly much more than in the past more than 50% reminded if they're child married so that means that political opinions now stick to identity,
And define the morality of people in the way that they did not in the past this is a shift about political identity and the place it plays now,
In identity at large.
Florian Binder
Okay. So, I think this is a good point to end on. We have reached the end of our discussion today and I think we have done the very good job in disintainling the very complicated web of values and interests in all the different.
Barriers it reaches and so again thanks to all of our participants but especially Yelena and Eva and also things young and Nicola of course for their great contributions and after a short break.
Take place on Thursday not Friday.
June and we will discuss education and recognition with our guests Nina Graham from the PH seriously and under the from the OECD this time in German again.
Sure to join us for this important insightful topic until have a good rest of your day.