Claudia Diehl¹; Matthias Revers²; Richard Traunmüller³; Nils Weidmann¹; Alexander Wuttke⁴

¹ University of Konstanz; ² University of Hamburg; ³ University of Mannheim; ⁴ LMU Munich

We advance the understanding of so-called ‘cancel culture’ at the university by presenting the results of three survey experiments among university students. Designed in an ‘adversarial collaboration’ among researchers with competing perspectives, these experiments disentangle whether students’ preferences for curtailing academic freedom are based on viewpoint discrimination, professional academic standards, or pro-social concerns. Our findings show that a substantive share of university students support viewpoint-based restrictions of academic discourse. While they also apply academic and pro-social criteria, they do so only selectively for ‘conservative’ viewpoints. These results have important implications, as students’ demands may have contributed to the current perception of universities as unfree environments, which is often invoked in recent political attacks against academic freedom.

Marcus Eisentraut¹; Christian Czymara²; Pascal Kolkwitz-Anstötz³; Eldad Davidov¹; Peter Schmidt⁴

¹ University of Cologne; ² The Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute; ³ GESIS — Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences; ⁴ Justus Liebig University Gießen

The distinction between antisemitism and legitimate criticism of Israel has become increasingly contested, particularly following the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. This study examines how different dimensions of antisemitism—classical, secondary, and Israel-related—manifest in contemporary Germany and whether these categories remain conceptually distinct.

Using survey data from a quota sample of 2,082 respondents in 2024, we investigate key predictors of antisemitism, including religious fundamentalism, authoritarianism, and conspiracy beliefs. Our findings indicate that the boundaries between subdimensions like classical and Israel-related antisemitism have become increasingly blurred, with Israel-related narratives often serving as a vehicle for traditional antisemitic tropes.

Political ideology also plays a crucial role: left-wing respondents tend to reject classical antisemitism but may endorse Israel-related antisemitism when framed within anti-imperialist discourse. Conversely, right-wing individuals more frequently express classical antisemitic stereotypes while simultaneously supporting Israel as part of a nationalist or anti-Muslim agenda.

The study highlights strong correlations between antisemitism and authoritarianism, as well as reinforcing previous findings on the role of conspiracy ideologies. Our results emphasize the need for a nuanced approach to differentiate between a) legitimate criticism of Israeli policies and antisemitic rhetoric and b) the different dimensions of antisemitism. Policymakers and researchers must refine existing measures to capture the evolving nature of antisemitism and ensure that efforts to combat it remain effective in the current socio-political landscape.

Thomas Hinz

Universität Konstanz

This presentation reaches out for the delineation of pro-Palestinian protests and possible antisemitic attitudes on the part of protesters. It begins with an oft-repeated statement that protest against Israeli policy or government is not per se antisemitic – i.e., it is not automatically an expression of hatred against Jews or Israel as the Jewish state. However, in light of the development of the Hamas-Israel war after October 7, the current anti-Israel protests on many university campuses often displayed – at least to most media observers – strong antisemitic attitudes, especially when highly ambiguous elements questioning the legitimacy of the State of Israel (“from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”) were used to mobilize participation in the protests. One key aim of this presenation is to analyze the extent to which antisemitism is a trigger for current protests. Data from two recent student survey studies in Germany will be used. Results indicate that Israel-related antisemitism is a reality among students in Germany: about 15 percent of students share this modern form of antisemitism. Pro-Palestinian protest is particularly fueled among these students with pronounced resentment.

Deike Ohse; Holger Lengfeld

Leipzig University

This paper examines the relationship between socio-economic status and perceptions of ethnic discrimination among employees holding a migration background in German federal authorities, contributing to the debate on the ‘integration paradox’. While the paradox suggests that higher integrated individuals report more ethnic discrimination due to greater awareness and exposure, assimilation theory posits the opposite: increasing status leads to greater social acceptance and thus lower (perceived) ethnic discrimination. To test these assumptions, we use data from the InRa employee survey 2023 (N = 1,925), a survey carried out in four German federal authorities where employees have professional contact with citizens. We examine two status indicators—educational level and occupational status—alongside factors such as opportunity structures and awareness of discrimination. Findings show that educational level does not significantly affect perceptions of discrimination, contradicting both the integration paradox and the assumptions of assimilation theory. In contrast, occupational status proves to be a relevant factor: employees in higher-status roles report fewer experiences of racial discrimination. This finding supports the integration paradox’s emphasis on opportunity structures—lower- and mid-level employees, who typically have more direct contact with the public, are more likely to perceive discrimination. Contrary to assumptions of assimilation theory, increased contact with mainstream society does not reduce perceived discrimination. Additionally, awareness of racism does not mediate the relationship between education and perceived discrimination in this specific occupational context. The study provides novel insights into how workplace-specific dynamics shape the perception of discrimination and challenges the generalizability of integration paradox mechanisms beyond the general public.