We do not have the capacity—nor do we claim to have it—to discuss political issues in all their complexity and reach a consensus. This takes place in other contexts where we are organized. There is a high turnover within the group, and our collaborative work is shaped by the practical demands of organizing a large camp.

The System Change Camp aims to open up spaces for discourse. We believe that respectful debate on political issues is important, and we feel that the willingness to engage in such debate is on the decline. We believe it is important to foster a culture of respectful debate and are aware that being confronted with different political opinions can be challenging. Above all, we see ourselves as a group that offers a space to various movements through the organization of the camp. Our goal is to strengthen common ground and foster the ability to tolerate contradictions.

We must accept that, as an open space, the camp cannot be a safe(r) space for everyone.

When it comes to the program, the short descriptions are usually the only thing we know about the content of a submission. We can’t afford to do background research on every submission. At the same time, it’s also important to us to open up spaces for discussion at the camp and to talk to one another as people on the left—with more and more diverse opinions than you’d find elsewhere. However, the groups and speakers themselves are primarily responsible for the specific content, and therefore criticism of that content is best directed to them. This applies in particular to the Open Spaces, since we, as the camp organizers, have absolutely no information about the content in advance.
But it is also important for us to know if groups, speakers, or contributions that counter the struggle for a liberated society have made it into the program. In such a case, we will address the criticism in order to learn from it for the coming years and draw any necessary conclusions.

Red lines arise primarily where, in our view, there is no shared basic understanding of certain values or ideas about transformation and/or utopia. In other words: When fundamental philosophical and theoretical stances are too far apart, solidarity-based political debate is not possible for us—at least within the context of a camp. Red lines can also arise from our experiences in practical work. If we have repeatedly found in the past that constructive collaboration has not been successful, this can also constitute a red line for collaboration on our part.

In this context, another point is relevant:
Some people on the camp organizing team often work at their limits for weeks and months on end, and the period immediately surrounding the camp—and the camp itself—are particularly stressful. Our goal of creating a diverse and therefore controversial space, and the reality that escalations can push people involved in the team beyond their limits and seriously endanger their mental and physical well-being, create a tension for us. At this point, we expect all participants to act in a spirit of solidarity, recognizing that we are not unconditionally willing to wear ourselves out so that every conflict can be resolved during the short duration of the camp. We understand that this can be painful and difficult to bear, especially when it seems that the issue in question is not being given the necessary space elsewhere either.
As mentioned, this creates a tension because we want to open up spaces for controversial discussions while at the same time not having the capacity or ability to do so in every instance. In this regard, we welcome the numerous other camps, conferences, demonstrations, etc., that—with more specific focuses—can open up different spaces than we can.

We would like to make some of these red lines transparent here. This list does not claim to enumerate all of our red lines, as these often only become clear in the course of specific conflicts. However, it is intended to provide guidance to all participants regarding what we, as the camp organizing committee, do not support or for which we do not wish to assume responsibility:

We uphold an anti-authoritarian stance and fight for a world with fewer hierarchies. We expect the same from all camp participants.

The camp is a place for discussion and pluralistic exchange. Different groups should be able to occupy space here on an equal footing and are welcome to make themselves visible to others through symbols and/or conversations. However, no single group should dominate the discourse or overly shape the character of the camp through the excessive display of organizational symbols or flags. We want to engage with one another honestly and as equals.

If organizations exploit the camp for their own purposes and instrumentalize or co-opt camp processes, that crosses a clear line for us. We do not want our own group or ideology to be promoted constantly and aggressively, for example through the intrusive distribution of flyers or the disproportionate domination of discussion groups. We object to people being recruited for an organization at the camp without those from the organization being honest about it.

We do not tolerate manipulative or hurtful verbal behavior, physical violence, or the disclosure of real names.

Our work as the SCC team is not a service. We strive to offer a diverse program and cannot guarantee that problematic behavior will not occur.

We hope for a self-organized approach, a healthy culture of debate, and equality. We want to create a space at the camp where people can make conscious decisions.

We ask all participants to handle this area of tension with sensitivity and, in the event of conflicts, to independently and critically examine which symbols—and the histories associated with them—are visible at the camp. In doing so, we want to draw particular attention to the fact that flags have different meanings for different people and can be triggering. We therefore ask, especially in this context, that we treat one another cooperatively so that there is room for different needs in this regard. We stand in solidarity with people’s struggles against oppressive, violent, and hierarchical structures.

We see the camp as a place to put the utopian ideals we aspire to into practice. We want to fight together for a more liberated and more just world and to live up to these values in how we treat one another.

We know that safety can mean something different to each person and that no single place can meet all these different needs. Nevertheless, we want as many people as possible to feel safe at the camp. We hope that participants and visitors are aware that they play a role in determining how safe people feel at the camp.

This naturally applies to physical safety—we therefore reject any form of physical or psychological attacks at the camp.

We are also expressly opposed to any form of discriminatory behavior*.
We are aware that discrimination is perpetuated by each and every one of us and is part of our actions, statements, and structures. We view it as everyone’s responsibility to ensure that we interact with one another in a manner that is sensitive to discrimination. This includes critically examining our own behavior and attitudes, being sensitive to discriminatory remarks or actions in our own circles, and, when in doubt, calling them out or discussing them.
To this end, you can use the “Haufen” Meetings, and you’re always welcome to talk things over with one another. If you need emotional support in this process, you can also reach out to Awareness, and in the event of a conflict, to Mediation.

At the same time, we see such a diverse camp as an opportunity to create a learning space where people with very different experiences of discrimination and levels of knowledge come together. We hope that everyone will work toward treating one another with care and respect.

* This includes, among other things, forms of discrimination such as sexism, ableism, classism, any form of antisemitism, any form of racism (for example, anti-Muslim racism, Gadje racism, anti-Black racism, …), queerphobia, ageism, ​​​​​​​​​​​… to name just a few examples.