Social and economic participation is the magic word

When the first brunette woman became a spokeswoman for the “Tagesschau”, it was a small cultural revolution. Until Susanne Daubner was allowed to appear in 1999, female voice actors were always blonde. It was only when the blonde monopoly broke up that many became aware that it had existed, informally, without regulation.

The unconscious formula had been: German television, German announcer equally blonde. Nothing is known of protests by dark-haired people from before that. But then it dawned on many how discriminatory the practice was, which bore biological, racist traits.

Society today seems to have changed fundamentally. Women are not only speakers on television, they even present. More and more men and women in politics, media or business have different skin colors or backgrounds. With Anshu Jain, a manager of Indian origin became head of Deutsche Bank in 2012, in the “crime scene” investigators with a history of migration.

Nevertheless, or precisely because of this, the general public is becoming more aware of racist discrimination.

Study provides sobering and startling data

But how effectively is racism reduced? That’s what the “National Discrimination and Racism Monitor” wants to find out, and interviewed around 5,000 people on the phone for a study. Sobering, startling data are now being presented. According to this, around 90 percent of all Germans know that racism exists.

Two thirds state that they have experienced discrimination as witnesses or victims, women more than men. The conclusion is that the fact is still often denied, and about half, including mostly less educated people, still believe that people can be categorized into “races”.

How much does the term “Serbian bean soup” harm integration?

The research funded by the Ministry of Family Affairs is intended to provide a social science database to objectify debates on social transformation. This educational approach has enormous relevance for the prospects of those affected in education and work. Unfortunately, however, the study itself attacks the term “enlightenment”. This is currently the academic fashion, where enlightenment is considered “colonial” and “white”, since only science brought about racism in the first place. Ethnic prejudice and xenophobia, however, existed long before the Enlightenment, and debasing them gets us nowhere. Some things in this study are ideologically overused and distract from the core of the cause. Talking about “racist stocks of knowledge” is also questionable. Racism has nothing to do with knowledge, but with limitations and ethnic stereotypes, which unfortunately can be found on all continents.

If many respondents find those affected “too scared”, this does not have to be racist, but can also be an encouragement not to be intimidated. And if terms like “Serbian bean soup” disappear from everyday usage, is that really a boost for integration?

What matters most is crystal clear: appropriate social and economic participation. Actively controlling this process is primarily the task of the state. More diversity of faces on television and in the cultural scene is good, more attention in everyday life is right.

Society is effectively changed by all the things that don’t sound very hip: Better schools, early intervention, free tutoring, teacher training. That costs millions. Getting a few words out of the language doesn’t cost anything.