Germany, the ICC, and another Genocide

A Winter’s Tale – The Decline of German Idealism. By Dr. Bita Kahlen

[Editor’s Note: Text by Dr. Bita Kahlen in reaction to the ICC’s arrest warrant of Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant]

In the sorrowful month of November,
The days grew dark and drear,
The wind tore the leaves from the trees,
As I journeyed back to Germany.

– Heinrich Heine, Deutschland. Ein Wintermärchen

The foreboding tone of Heine’s opening lines resonates eerily with the state of modern Germany—a nation that once illuminated the world with its philosophical rigor and universal ideals, now caught in the cold winds of moral and political decay.

Germany’s raison d'état, long enshrined in its unwavering allegiance to Israel, has taken on a new and troubling form. Since the outbreak of the war, it has been de facto placed in the hands of Benjamin Netanyahu, a leader whose policies have culminated in systematic ethnic cleansing and acts of genocide against the Palestinian people.

By tethering its moral and political identity to an architect of such atrocities, Germany has abandoned the universal principles of justice and human dignity, compounding its historical obligations with complicity in one of the gravest humanitarian crises of our time.

Today, the world witnesses a stark and unavoidable reckoning: Netanyahu, now officially branded a war criminal by the International Criminal Court (ICC), stands as a monument to the hypocrisy and moral blindness that have tainted both Israeli and German political praxis.

The ICC's indictment, while long overdue, exposes the moral failure of Germany’s selective solidarity, which has sacrificed the principles of justice and human rights on the altar of historical guilt and political expediency.

From Kant’s Universalism to Germany’s Ethical Relativism

Germany has abandoned the philosophical heritage of Kant and Hegel in favor of a dangerous and selective moral relativism. Kant, whose categorical imperative demanded that humanity be treated as an end in itself and never as a means (Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, 1785), provided one of the most profound ethical frameworks in history. Yet even he faltered, constrained by the Eurocentric prejudices of his time, relegating non-European peoples to a status of moral and rational inferiority (Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View, 1798).

The irony is palpable: Kant, whose universal ethics promised a pathway to moral clarity, himself succumbed to the prejudices of his time.

This Eurocentrism persists in the fabric of German political praxis today, not as a relic of the 18th century, but as an active framework for moral relativism. Instead of embodying the universalism of Kantian ethics, Germany’s modern raison d'étatinstitutionalizes the very particularism that Kant’s philosophy sought to dismantle.

Germany’s professed universalism has been reduced to a hollow shell, where the ethical framework of the categorical imperative is cynically applied to some while being denied to others. The systematic oppression and dispossession of Palestinians—now formally condemned by international legal bodies as apartheid and genocide—illustrates the depth of this moral collapse. Germany’s uncritical allegiance to Israel has become an act of moral relativism that directly contradicts the universalist foundations of Kantian and Hegelian ethics.

Hegel’s Dialectic and the Contradictions of Power

Heinrich Heine, a devoted student and admirer of Hegel, once envisioned German philosophy as a force capable of grappling with and resolving the contradictions of history.

Hegel’s philosophical vision stands in stark contrast to the ethnocentric and exclusionary ideologies of thinkers like Joseph Marie de Maistre and Edmund Burke, both of whom denied the universality of human rights and celebrated hierarchical systems that privileged the so-called "natural order."

De Maistre’s infamous declaration encapsulates the foundation of Herrenvolk ideology: "I have met Frenchmen, Italians, Russians, etc., but as for man, I declare I have never encountered him." De Maistre’s words reflect a worldview that denies the universality of human rights, reducing identity and moral worth to the confines of nation, ethnicity, or race. It is a philosophy that elevates the "Herrenvolk"—the master race or ruling people—above others, legitimizing oppression and inequality under the guise of divine or natural order.

Hegel, by contrast, rooted his ethical and political philosophy in the universality of human dignity and the dialectical unfolding of freedom. In his Philosophy of Right (1821), he writes: "Man is valued as man, not as Jew, Catholic, Protestant, German, Italian, etc." For Hegel, humanity’s moral worth transcends particularist identities. His vision challenges the very premise of de Maistre’s thought by insisting that human beings are defined not by their accidents of birth, but by their participation in the rational and universal structures of freedom and justice.

The contrast could not be more stark. De Maistre’s philosophy underpins systems of exclusion and domination, from colonialism to fascism, where only the chosen people—the "Herrenvolk"—are granted full moral and political agency. It is a vision that normalizes slavery, apartheid, and genocide, legitimizing these atrocities as necessary to maintain a hierarchical world order.

Hegel’s universalism, however, points to the inherent contradictions of such systems. He critiques the narrow self-interest of exclusionary ideologies, noting that they undermine the very principles of freedom and rationality they claim to uphold. Hegel’s dialectic exposes the fallacies of de Maistre’s worldview: the refusal to acknowledge the universality of human rights ultimately negates the oppressor’s own humanity, as they become trapped in a cycle of domination that denies true freedom to all, including themselves.

What a pity that Germany, the land of Hegel and Kant, now stands on the wrong side of this divide. By upholding Zionism—a modern-day embodiment of Herrenvolk Democracy—Germany abandons its legacy of idealism and the universality of human rights.

Germany’s raison d'état has subordinated universal human rights to geopolitical expediency, aligning with a state that privileges an ethno-religious identity at the expense of international law and basic human dignity. Hegel’s dialectic, which frames history as the unfolding of freedom through the resolution of contradictions, starkly reveals the ethical bankruptcy of this position. Instead of advancing universal freedom, Germany has entrenched itself in the particularism of power politics, betraying the very principles it claims to uphold.

The Relativism of Power: Imperial Logic and German Complicity

After World War II, Germany realigned itself under the tutelage of the United States, adopting a new geopolitical identity framed by the Cold War. This alignment, far from embodying the lessons of universal justice, perpetuated the imperial logic of domination.

The United States, proclaiming itself the global champion of "freedom and democracy," systematically undermined these ideals through alliances with fascist regimes, manipulation of public opinion (Operation Mockingbird), and a series of coups against democratically elected governments in Chile, Iran, Guatemala, and beyond.

Hegel’s insight into the contradictions of freedom is deeply resonant here. In the Phenomenology of Spirit (1807), he wrote: “The true is the whole; the whole, however, is only the essence consummating itself through its development.” The U.S. narrative of exporting democracy remains an incomplete project riddled with contradictions, and Germany’s uncritical alignment with this imperial logic amplifies these failures.

Nowhere is this more evident than in Germany’s tacit endorsement of Israeli policies condemned by the ICC and numerous human rights organizations as violations of international law. The systematic ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and their erasure as a political and cultural entity are nothing less than genocide. Germany, through its unwavering solidarity with Israel, has entangled itself in a moral paradox: the betrayal of universal justice in the name of historical obligation.

Goethe’s Vision and the Failure of Universalism

Goethe, whose West-östlicher Divan celebrated the unity of humanity across cultural and geographical divides, offers a prophetic critique of the current political reality. His lines,

Who knows himself and others well,
No longer may ignore:
The Orient and Occident
Are separated no more,

capture a vision of unity that is profoundly at odds with the ethno-religious exclusivism driving modern geopolitics in the Middle East. Germany, in its selective application of justice, has abandoned Goethe’s call for universal recognition. Goethe’s admonition in the Divan, “Let man be just in reconciliation, No nation may exalt itself above another,” is a stark reminder of the moral ideals Germany has forsaken. Instead of fostering reconciliation, Germany’s policies deepen divisions and entrench the hierarchies of power and privilege.

The Collapse of German Idealism

Hegel reminds us in his Philosophy of Right: “The absolute right is the right to have rights.” Yet this right is systematically denied to Palestinians, whose existence and agency are erased by a geopolitical order that privileges power over justice. Germany’s alignment with this order represents not only a failure of political courage but also a profound philosophical betrayal. Heinrich Heine, deeply influenced by Hegel’s thought, would have viewed Germany’s current trajectory as a catastrophic abandonment of its intellectual and moral heritage. In his Winter’s Tale, Heine lamented:

The flame of the pyre here devoured both books and human beings;
The bells were rung during the feast,
And Kyrie Eleison was sung in mourning.
Here, stupidity and malice courted like dogs in an open street;
Their offspring can still be recognized today
By their hatred of other beliefs.

Nearly two centuries after these words were written, Germany stands no wiser. Shackled by a legacy of moral relativism and selective memory, it has traded its ideals for geopolitical convenience. Rather than emerging as a champion of universal justice, Germany now appears before the world as a nation whose values are compromised, its raison d'état a symbol of hypocrisy rather than enlightenment.

“Noble be man, helpful and kind,” Goethe wrote in The Divine. How far we have strayed from this ideal! Germany’s complicity in supporting a regime now condemned as genocidal is a glaring indictment of its failure to uphold the principles of universal dignity and justice. Goethe’s words challenge us to reflect on the chasm between our professed ideals and our political actions.

Author: Dr. Bita Kahlen

Original Title: “Germany: A Winter’s Tale – The Decline of German Idealism”