In an interview, Frieder Otto Wolf, President of the Humanist Association of Germany, calls for a stand to be taken against the exploitation of refugee movements by nationalist, racist and xenophobic ideologies.
What do you consider to be the most important results of the Annual Delegates’ Meeting?
Frieder Otto Wolf: The conference for the Federal Main Committee and the meeting of the Presidium were not particularly spectacular in themselves; we mainly had to make some appropriately prepared progress. One is the new Humanist self-image, which was developed through a learning process and a few setbacks, and which has now met with a very positive response from the Executive Committee. It is a really important success for us that we have succeeded in developing a new self-image after all these years in which the old Humanist self-image served as our basic program. I also very much welcome the fact that we managed to develop a substantial position on refugee policy and reception at the weekend. This is one of the major crises of our time, in which we humanists are challenged not only to take a clear position, but also to get involved politically and in concrete aid. This year’s Federal General Committee has once again shown that we are in a position to take a clear stance on the major issues of our time and to develop and strengthen the corresponding perspectives of humanist practice. This underlines the fact that our association, where it actually pursues practical humanism, is in a position to develop its positions with contemporary relevance and focus.
When can we expect the new self-image to be adopted?
I expect a resolution to be passed at one of the next Executive Committee meetings, which will bring the discussion process to a provisional conclusion. This discussion process was necessary and important, because humanism, as we understand it, cannot be formulated in a timeless way, but must always be worked out in the respective debates of the present. However, the adoption of the new self-image as a basic program by the Executive Committee does not abolish the old one as a historical fact. This is only the case when it is adopted at the next Federal Delegates’ Conference.
More and more people are concerned about the large number of people seeking protection. Can you outline what characterizes a specifically non-religious humanist position on refugee policy?
Refugee policy is one of the major issues of our time. The causes include polarizing economic developments and polarization in zones of security and insecurity, especially in the European neighbourhood, i.e. in the Mediterranean region and in Africa. These are driving more and more people out of their home countries, where life is perceived as unbearable and threatening. This is first and foremost a fact that refugee policy must face up to. When formulating minimum standards of humane demands, we can refer to the statement of the United Nations Refugee Agency UNHCR, which was founded at the end of the Second World War: we are currently experiencing one of the largest – if not the largest – wave of refugees since then. As humanists, we must therefore take a clear stance against all attempts to exploit these problems with nationalist, racist and xenophobic ideologies. Even if there are burdens to overcome, we must make it clear in the face of such attempts that the humanist imperative of inclusion of all who are human and in need of help simply applies and must be implemented. If the dire situation in the countries of origin of those seeking protection – such as civil war or the collapse of state and public structures – is overcome, some will be happy to return, but we will also be able to welcome many of them permanently as an immigration country and experience them as an enrichment. As humanists, we agree with many religious initiatives, some of which have been active here for a long time, that the human right to admission must be guaranteed and that all attempts to deter people from fleeing are unacceptable. However, we can specifically point out that many people seeking protection leave their home countries because they are persecuted and marginalized for ideological reasons. This is often ignored by German reception and solidarity structures. We need to change this, because as non-religious humanists, we have an important responsibility here.
After the earthquake disaster in the Himalayas, the Humanist Relief Organization appealed for donations. How has the appeal been received so far?
The latest appeal has met with a pleasing response. And I am also convinced that the Humanist Relief Organization will play an even more active role in the future. To this end, some regional associations have prepared and announced a commitment, because it is clear that there is a lot to do in this area and that the willingness of non-denominational people to donate should not be linked to religious impositions and conditions, as is the case with various large aid organizations. A start like this always involves some effort, of course, but I am sure that it will be worth it in the long run. We have already supported a number of projects in the past, including the sponsorship of an Indian Dalit village. However, we will now move further into the area of concrete support, including development aid, in order to be able to take advantage of appropriate funding.
How do you view the current dispute over the representation of non-denominational interests on the ZDF Television Council?
I have the impression from the dispute that there was actually supposed to be an opening here, but that this was not implemented due to grand coalition considerations. I very much regret that the Social Democrats have not yet found any representatives who had the courage to risk a confrontation for this opening.
In recent years, the Humanist Association has initiated and launched various projects on topics relevant to national politics, such as the alliances on the topics of sexual self-determination and self-determination at the end of life. Can we expect further initiatives in the coming months?
The first priority is to continue the ongoing projects.
What will be the focus of the federal association’s work in addition to non-denominational equality and religious policy?
I think another thing that is developing is that we are increasingly being asked to speak out on religious policy issues and debates. This is particularly the case on the left, i.e. with the Alliance Greens, the Left Party and the SPD. It is no longer just the voices of non-religious people in the broadest sense that are needed here, but also those who can bring practical humanism with the same claim to religious politics into play. There have been numerous opportunities for this in recent months and there will be more in the coming years. We will also have to focus on another important and socially critical topic in the future: Work and the exclusion of work. On the one hand, there is a need for a stronger dialogue with trade union positions, but also with the many – often younger – people who are increasingly forced to find their way in precarious employment, as well as with women, who are still very often disadvantaged and marginalized as women in the structures of the world of work.
