"The end of the common good?" - Results of the student conference

Although it is difficult to summarise the findings of an entire day full of exciting presentations and discussions in a nutshell, here are a few highlights of important insights:

Climate crisis

The climate crisis was consistently described as the greatest challenge of the 21st century - not as a moral project, but as a scientifically proven reality with far-reaching consequences for the economy, health and social security systems. It became particularly clear: The burdens hit economically disadvantaged and marginalised groups first and hardest. Climate protection will only be socially viable if it is organised in a socially just way. Positively formulated future narratives, clear assignments of responsibility and solidarity-based solutions were emphasised as key levers for regaining the ability to act politically and overcoming social resignation.

Equal distribution and participation

The discussions on social inequality made it clear how closely economic inequality and social polarisation are intertwined. Poverty and income inequality are reaching historic highs, while wealth remains highly concentrated or is becoming increasingly concentrated. For many people, this means less social security, less political participation and more anxiety about the future. Populism thrives where social insecurity is high. A stable common good therefore requires targeted measures against inequality and for fair access opportunities.

Samah Al Hashash (DeZIM) used the NaDiRa monitoring report to show that racialised people in Germany are disproportionately affected by poverty, discrimination and exclusion. Prof Dr Susanne von Hehl used her data on 7.9 million severely disabled people and the high prevalence of mental illness to highlight the huge gap between legislation (SGB IX, Disability Equality Act, UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) and actual participation. Prof Dr Constanze Spieß showed how right-wing populist actors use these gaps in their communication to stir up mistrust, devalue institutions and weaken social solidarity.

An important further impulse came from Lukas Scholle (editor-in-chief of Surplus Magazine). He argued that the welfare state is often portrayed as a cost factor, especially in times of economic hardship. However, the term "cost explosion" is misleading. The welfare ratio, i.e. the share of social spending in GDP, remains remarkably stable. The public discourse nevertheless follows the frame that the welfare state is "too expensive". Scholle emphasised the extent to which such narratives restrict the scope for political action, even though they are empirically untenable.

In conclusion, Emilia Roig provided an impetus with a strong focus on structural problems. She argued that social transformation does not come about through a "trickle down" - in other words, by moving more people into existing, often exclusive structures. Instead, a "trickle up effect" is needed: changes that originate from the groups whose participation has been systematically restricted to date. Intersectionality is not an academic add-on, but a central principle of transformation. Participation must challenge existing systems and make visible why and where they exclude people.

Roig also emphasised that differences between people are not the problem: it is their hierarchisation that makes them a basis for discrimination. Gender is not a static characteristic, "not something we are, but something we do". From this perspective, it becomes clear that discrimination cannot be overcome by individual measures or appeals, but is a structural problem that requires structural changes.

She was particularly critical of the fact that inclusion in Germany is often seen as a debt to be paid by people with a history of migration: Those who want to belong have to adapt and remain "wrong" if they deviate. This logic shifts responsibility: it is not institutions that should become more inclusive, but those affected who should adapt. In this way, the exclusions that should actually be overcome are reproduced.

We would like to thank you for the lively dialogue and the many thought-provoking ideas. The conference has shown how great the need for open, scientifically sound and solidary debates is. Many thanks to everyone who made this day possible and filled it with life.

Speakers: Dr Dorothee Spannagel, Astrid Schaffert, Lukas Scholle, Wolfgang M. Schmitt, Matthias Meyer, Prof. Dr Constanze Spieß, Dr Emilia Roig, Samah Al-Hashash, Prof. Dr. Susanne van Hehl

Moderation: Professor Gert Scobel

Organisation: Christian Kessler, Hanne Kossmann, Isabella Grabowski, Leon Ueberall

Text: Christian Kessler, Leon Ueberall, Photos: Juri Küstenmacher