On artistic freedom and intersectionality

Our affluent society occasionally suggests that art is a luxury and should be beautiful and pleasing. Walking out of the opera, theater or concert in the evening full of inspiration, sipping champagne or prosecco at the vernissage of a renowned visual artist or standing in the foyer after a contemporary dance performance. Yet cultural work and production do so much more. Above all, they still make fundamental and indispensable contributions to the political discourse. They can be used to expand the discourse space and offer an alternative to the established structures for social negotiation processes. This is because art also offers space to those who do not feel represented or seen by the majority, and it creates connections where previously none existed.

The German Basic Law, the constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany, was passed 75 years ago. The 20 fundamental rights enshrined in it, which are immutable, also include artistic freedom. However, this freedom seems to have come under increasing pressure in recent times.

Artistic freedom is an individual right that ensures the freedom of artistic work and its impact. Especially after the experiences of the Nazi cultural policy, which banned certain types of art and persecuted artists, it’s important that artists today can work without any state interference. Artistic freedom should only be limited when it collides with other fundamental rights, such as the violation of human dignity, the threat to physical safety or the impairment of personal rights. In theory, therefore, it is not threatened legally or by the state. The current debate about what art is allowed to do and where its limits lie is being caused by other trends.

Discussions about artistic freedom are increasingly characterized by terms such as "political correctness," "cancel culture" and "identity politics." The developments toward more diversity and a multiplicity of voices in society seem to be directly related to this. These are developments that many believe could ensure more justice, but dominant groups also see disadvantages, such as limits to free speech or even, some suggest, oppression. By this logic, the much-cited identity debates in particular are currently perceived as restrictive. The accusation is that the public discourse on art is being shaped by the needs of various minorities – and restricting artistic freedom.

Not so long ago, artists faced a seemingly monolithic, normative society and fought for the dissolution of rigid conventions. Today, the situation is somewhat more complicated. It’s clear that the demand for more diverse images of society is stirring things up in previously unknown territory. For example, where marginalized artists insist on visibility and participation and their positions shake up established structures of exclusion. Yes, we live in an era in which art has become the place where culture wars over sexism, racism, anti-Semitism and other forms of discrimination are fought.

In the midst of a debate about restrictions imposed by a supposedly "woke" left-wing bubble, art is currently being actively manipulated from the right in particular. As was recently the case with the play "LECKEN," which was canceled due to a lack of funding, but against which there was also strong agitation from right-wing circles. The play by the CHICKS* collective was intended to provide sex education to young people aged 14 and over by addressing various aspects of physicality and sexuality. Far-right groups such as Freie Sachsen and Der Dritte Weg had publicly called for the event to be disrupted and left hate-filled comments on the Facebook pages of the theater and the collective. A member of the Zwickau city council, who is a member of the Freie Sachsen, asked the mayor questions about the "management of taxpayers' money and the protection of young people" in connection with the collective's performance.

The instrumentalization of conservative values

In addition to fierce criticism of a left-wing "cancel culture," the far right in particular currently often deploys art as a weapon to promote its own ideological goals and spread discriminatory views. It incites hatred against pieces such as the one mentioned above. And it also uses the fear of social change to advance its agenda – to undermine sensitive debates on various topics. It does all of this without having majorities in any parliaments. It is a tactic that is not only hypocritical, but also dangerous, as it poisons the public discourse and divides society.

If we speak unthinkingly of a threat to artistic freedom, we overlook the fact that criticism and debate are essential components of a vibrant art scene. The freedom to criticize is just as important as the freedom of artistic expression itself. The real danger is if we allow an abuse of the discourse that only aims to spread intolerant and exclusionary ideologies. Not every consideration of a ban is immediately tantamount to censorship. This applies to cultural spaces as well as political ones, as the struggle for democratic values is currently connecting the social spheres in a complicated way.

A possible ban of the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), for example, is often interpreted as censorship and a restriction of democratic structures. However, this view fails to recognize the legal framework within which such a ban would take place. A party ban in Germany is not a means of suppressing unpopular opinions, but a legal instrument that is only used under strict conditions. It presupposes that the party in question is actively fighting against the free and democratic order. In the case of the AfD, demonstrable links to extreme right-wing structures and the promotion of racist and nationalist ideologies would be decisive factors that could provide the legal basis for a ban. The focus here is not on restricting democratic rights, but on protecting democracy and social values from extremist threats. And the latter, in turn, also requires the protection of artistic freedom.

Intersectional perspectives on artistic freedom

Within this context, it’s worth looking at the theory of intersectionality. This is because it emphasizes the complexity of social interdependencies, taking into account the fact that crises affect different people in different ways and that recognizing these differences is necessary to build empathy and effectively combat injustice and inequality. It allows us to analyze parallel and mutually reinforcing forms of inequality. The Center for Intersectional Justice explains the theory as "fighting discrimination within discrimination, tackling inequalities within inequalities and protecting minorities within minorities."

This type of analysis and critique is a thorn in the side of the far right because it challenges a simple, one-sided view of the world and highlights the power structures that underpin discriminatory ideologies. Anti-diversity forces feel threatened by intersectionality because it claims to combat all forms of discrimination simultaneously and thus directly challenges attempts to marginalize certain groups.

There is a clear connection between intersectionality and artistic freedom: Both concepts aim to recognize and protect the diversity and complexity of human experience. Artistic freedom allows artists to express and reflect on diverse experiences, while intersectionality ensures that the different and intersecting forms of discrimination are taken into account. By applying intersectional theory in art, we can gain deeper insights into social injustices and promote a more inclusive and equitable society. The far right is seeking to undermine these efforts by instrumentalizing artistic freedom for its own purposes while simultaneously portraying intersectionality as a threat. It is therefore crucial to recognize the true intentions behind such tactics and defend artistic freedom while protecting the space for intersectional analysis and criticism.

In the end, it's about finding a balance: Only through lively debate can art fulfill its role as a mirror and catalyst of society. Protecting artistic freedom therefore also means defending the freedom to criticize – without instrumentalizing it for political reasons. This is a task that we must all face up to.

This text is part of a series of articles accompanying THE ART OF STAYING MANY program. Elisabeth Wellershaus is in charge of the series, in which she looks at open and closed spaces in a fragile society with authors such as Esther Boldt, Nora Burgard-Arp, Zonya Dengi and Mirrianne Mahn. This text deals with questions that will also be part of the event program in Düsseldorf on June 7 and 8. For example, in the discussion between Helge Lindh and Jean Peters (Correctiv) about a possible ban on the AfD. Or in the work "LECKEN" by the Chicks* performance collective. Legal expert Dr. Lino Agbalaka will take a look at the tension between anti-discrimination measures and artistic freedom from a legal perspective. The program also includes the performance "LECKEN" by the Chicks* collective and the guest performance "Introducing Living Smile Vidya" by the Indian trans* activist Living Smile Vidya.