Hypocrisy hardly begins to characterise the trespass on civil rights experienced in Germany in aid of propagating uncritical cultural consumption of war crimes that the state is treaty-bound to inhibit. Debate in Germany (and elsewhere) refuses the legitimacy of contextual explanation for Hamas' militancy on the grounds that (i) it is a proscribed terrorist organisation that (ii) committed atrocities in Israel on October 7 2023 (notwithstanding that serious breaches of established international humanitarian law do not justify their commission by another party). This refusal, as cited above, extends to criminal prosecution of those who might publicly contest it.

It also obstructs understanding of the underlying grievances that drive hostilities. For example, that the kidnapping of Israeli citizens mirrors and retaliates the perennial arbitrary arrests and administrative detention of Palestinians throughout the occupied territories - such are the dynamics of conflict. And it permits the launching of a myth of a silent majority of abused 'ordinary Palestinians' lacking political representation. Hamas won a landslide victory at the last elections held in January 2006 because the movement could provide an administration commanding popular support, untainted by allegations of corruption, which supplied extensive community-based education, healthcare and social welfare services. Far from unusual for liberation struggle, the movement has an armed wing that counters the military aggressions of the Tsahal. Contrary to the 'destruction of Israel' tangent, Hamas has long ago declared its readiness to recognize Israel, stripped of its Zionist exceptionalism, in return for a Palestinian state and recognition of all Palestinians' rights - overtures ignored. The pivotal point here is that intimidating free expression of contextual information undermines capacity for conflict resolution and, by the obverse of the same coinage, perpetuates discrimination and violence.

Hounding Muslim communities for not being sufficiently 'philo-Semitic' does not of course make a religiously tolerant society. Now, where historical context does command exceptional attention is in the case of Germany's post-war legacy. Vergangensheitsbewältigung - guilt for the Holocaust - is played by Israel, a game in which politicians throughout the Federal Republic are happy to participate: "Israel's security is part of Germany's raison d'état", [Vice-Chancellor Habeck, 2 November 2023].

Nationalsozialismus was annihilated by 1945 and at great cost to the world - such special 'historical responsibility' to which Habeck referred is an archaism that requires superseding by an imperative contemporary responsibility, resolutely opposing anti-Semitism, and recognizing the Israel conceived in 1948 has mutated into something very different today. Referring during the Marcus Lanz broadcast to the oppressive atmosphere in Germany, Ms Feldman said to Habeck: "At some point you are going to have to decide between Israel and Jews.'" She reflected, shortly after her appearance:

"I implored the vice-chancellor to understand why the only legitimate lesson to be learned from the horrors of the Holocaust was the unconditional defence of human rights for all, and that simply by applying our values conditionally we were already delegitimising them."

As Habeck replied that, with Germany's history, a politician cannot adopt that position, Feldman concluded: "at that moment, we arrived at a point in German discourse where we now openly acknowledge that the Holocaust is being used as justification for the abandonment of moral clarity." With Germany's history, a politician can neither turn away from complicity in a genocide playing out in real time.