“Hegel and Colonialism.” In this video conversation, hosted by The Philosopher as part of its ‘On Philosophy’ series, Franz Knappik, Jamila Mascat, and I discuss Hegel’s views on colonialism and transatlantic slavery, their connection to his broader philosophical framework, and his ambivalent legacy. We examine how Hegel justified colonial domination through his concepts of freedom, history, and racial hierarchy, and how his ideas influenced both pro-colonial thinkers and anti-colonial movements. The tension between the oppressive and emancipatory potential of Hegel’s philosophy is a central theme as we analyse how figures such as C.L.R. James, Frantz Fanon, and Angela Davis have critically reworked his dialectic to expose colonial oppression and enslavement and to develop accounts of anti-colonial, anti-racist liberation. Finally, we reflect on the importance of critically engaging with Hegel’s legacy, not only to confront the ways his ideas have been used to justify oppression but also to uncover resources within his philosophy that can inform contemporary debates on racism and colonialism.

“Racism and Colonialism in Hegel´s Philosophy.” In this conversation, hosted by the Cambridge Core Blog, my co-editor, Franz Knappik, and I discuss our work on the Hegel Bulletin themed issue “Racism and Colonialism in Hegel’s Philosophy.” The issue explores themes such as Hegel’s views on race, slavery, colonialism, and their intellectual afterlives, addressing how his ideas were appropriated by figures ranging from defenders of colonialism and transatlantic slavery to anti-colonial thinkers like Frantz Fanon and C.L.R. James. We explain the motivation behind addressing Hegel’s problematic legacy, discuss our efforts to foster inclusivity in scholarship, and reflect on the ethical and political obligations tied to the history of philosophy, particularly its role in public memory and the potential of new historical narratives to reshape our understanding of its legacy.

“Warum wir über (das Wort) ‘Rasse’ reden müssen.” In July 2024, I delivered a public talk at the University of Gießen addressing the challenges in Germans’ normative approach to the word “Rasse” [race], which I describe as a form of “colour-blind eliminativism.” I argue that, while avoiding race talk is understandable given its historical baggage, colour-blind eliminativism impedes efforts to track and, consequently, tackle racial discrimination. Instead, I propose replacing “Rasse” with “rassifizierte Gruppe” [racialised group], particularly in the context of social-scientific research. However, I also contend that there are contexts where the use of “Rasse” is called for—especially when calling out some Germans’ tendency to hide racialised thinking behind euphemisms like “ethnicity”.

“Warum wir über Rassismus streiten (und warum das OK ist).” In March 2024, I gave a public talk at the Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf on “Why we disagree about racism (and why that’s OK)”. In this talk, I explore why the concept of racism is so contested, both in academia and in the public sphere. I identify three key features that contribute to its contestedness. First, as an empirical concept, ‘racism’ has an open texture, allowing it to be applied to new and unforeseen phenomena. This makes the term ‘racism’ adaptable but also prone to polysemy. Second, it is a ‘thick’ ethical concept that both describes and evaluates the phenomena to which it refers. Since its evaluative component allows for normative inferences, labelling something — be it attitudes, social structures, or entire social systems — as ‘racist’ implies a call to action. Third, because different conceptions of racism require different responses, choosing one over another involves what Buskell might call ‘ontic risk.’ In other words, there is much at stake in how we define and understand racism, and these stakes significantly fuel the contestation surrounding the concept.

I argue, however, that scholars of racism across disciplines need not seek to eliminate the polysemy of ‘racism,’ but should in some ways embrace it. Building on Haueis’s ‘patchwork approach’ to the polysemy of scientific concepts, I argue that the open texture of the concept of racism allows for a productive ‘patchwork’ of conceptions, each serving specific theoretical and practical purposes within its field. This patchwork can facilitate interfield exchange, allowing a flow of information between fields such as psychology, sociology, and philosophy. To avoid talking past one another, however, we need to acknowledge what is at stake in the contestation over racism.

“Kann man Hegel de-kolonisieren, Herr James?” In March 2023, I was interviewed by the Philosophie Magazin about Hegel (anti)kolonial (in German, paywalled). You can access the interview on my academia.edu page here.

“Black History Month: Warum wir deutsche Philosophiegeschichte neu denken müssen-“ On the occasion of Black History Month in February 2023 (in Germany and the United States), Kevin Harrelson, Kimberly Ann Harris, Franz Knappik, Jason M. Yonover, and I co-authored a newspaper article on why engaging black thinker’s reckoning with Hegel should also compel us to rethink the history of German philosophy and explore its entanglement with the black intellectual tradition. The article was published in German in the Berliner Zeitung.

“Wer zählt in amtlichen Statistiken? Zur Begriffsethik von ‘Migrationshintergrund.’” In October 2022, Tereza Hendl and I contributed to a debate on the statistical category ‘migration background’ initiated by Anne-Kathrin Will and hosted by the Migration Council (Migrationsrat). The contribution was published on the website of the Migration Council.

“Rassismus bei Hegel? Eine Last der Vernunft.” In October 2021, Franz Knappik addressed and I the question of how to deal with racist and pro-colonialist elements in Hegel’s philosophy in a newspaper article that was published in German in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (paywalled). You can access the article on my academia.edu page here.

“Die Philosophie der Vergesellschaftung.” In July 2021, in view of the then pending referendum on the socialisation of the Berlin housing companies Deutsche Wohnen and Vonovia, Heiner Koch, Esther Neuhann, Tim Wihl explored how property affords freedom and whether there is freedom-based argument for socialisation in a newspaper article in the Tagesspiegel.

“Das Untote bei Hegel. Warum wir über seinen Rassismus sprechen müssen.” In May 2021, Franz Knappik and I raised the question of how racist and pro-colonialist elements of Hegel’s philosophy are connected with core elements thereof (including his theory of personhood and property and his philosophy of history) in a blog article that was published in German at praefaktisch.de. In response to objections, we elaborate our discussion in two follow-up articles:

“Warum wir über die rassistischen und pro-kolonialistischen Elemente in Hegels Denken reden müssen.” at praefaktisch.de.

“Was meinen wir mit „Rassismus“, wenn wir von Rassismus in Hegels Philosophie sprechen?” at praefaktisch.de.

“Struktureller Rassismus: Verteidigung eines Begriffs.” In March 2021, I replied to a critical comment by Philipp Huebl on the concept of structural racism in German at Deutschlandfunk Kultur. This comment was followed up by a debate with Huebl at the same venue.

Podcast: “muss nicht” Rebekka Hufendiek and I also have a podcast called muss nicht, in which we discuss various social and political issues from the perspective of social philosophy and philosophy of science(in German).