Merz’s Femonationalism
During a press statement in the federal state of Brandenburg, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated that, while his government has been successful in its migration policy, Germany still faces a “problem in the cityscape” (Stadtbild). He went on saying that this is why he supports the Interior Minister’s push for large-scale deportations. This was the Chancellor’s response to a journalist’s question about his efforts to counter the far-right AfD party. When he was later asked to clarify his statement, Chancellor Merz replied, “ask your daughters, ask your friends, what I might have meant. I suspect you’ll get a pretty clear answer about what I meant.” Following widespread public criticism, Merz then “clarified” that Germany needs migration for its labour market, but the problem specifically concerns migrants who do not work and lack legal status.
The implication of Merz’s “ask your daughters” was clear: migrant men threaten white German women and girls in public spaces and thus must be deported. This not only implies that a “German city” is marked by whiteness, but also that sexual and gender-based violence is a problem created by “others”.
Merz’s rhetoric exemplifies what sociologist Sara R. Farris has termed “femonationalism”, which is the strategic instrumentalisation of women’s rights discourse to justify racist and nationalist policies.
Femonationalism functions on two levels. Ideologically, women’s liberation is selectively invoked to depict non-Western states as inherently misogynistic, enabling politicians to present themselves as feminist advocates while pursuing anti-immigrant policies. Additionally, neoliberal integration strategies funnel migrant women into insecure care jobs while claiming to empower and “rescue” them from brown and Muslim men. This also reinforces the narrative that migration is acceptable only when it is economically exploitable. This fosters the “good and working migrant” versus “bad and useless migrant” narrative Merz referenced in his “clarification.”
And yet, while this kind of racist rhetoric is usually portrayed as a far-right strategy, femonationalism specifically highlights the convergence of far-right, conservative, neoliberal and sometimes liberal political actors. The reaction to Merz’s statements shows that this very racist logic is deeply enshrined in the so-called Volkspartei CDU (a term used to describe centrist parties supposedly representing the nation).
Members of the CDU swiftly defended Merz. Parliamentary group leader Jens Spahn stated in an interview that the Chancellor “only said out loud what the majority of Germans think.” He explained that this was never “about colour of skin”[1], but rather “about situations at main train stations, market squares, where we see urban decay/neglect, about streets and neighbourhoods where Jews, gay people, women don’t dare to go.” In his next sentence, he blames this crime on “young men from Arab and Muslim culture.” Steffen Bilger, the CDU/CSU parliamentary manager, doubled down on these sentiments, questioning whether “fully veiled women truly belong in Germany”.
The SPD, the social democrats, who are governing in a coalition with the CDU, mostly stayed silent. A few members suggested a conference to address cityscape issues, including safety and homelessness, but neglected topics such as racism and migration. SPD member Wiebke Esdar, who participated in the protests against Merz, was harshly criticised by the CDU.
When a chancellor perceived as mainstream or “centre” uses the language of protecting “our daughters” from racialised minorities in public spaces, he legitimizes the core narrative of the far-right party AfD: the presence of people of colour itself constitutes a threat; national identity – whiteness – must be defended against migration; some human lives are more valuable than others. When this “centre” party frames deportation policies as women’s safety measures, it not only normalises racism, but opposition becomes painted as indifference to violence against women.
This rhetorical trap makes challenging racist policies difficult without appearing antifeminist. Anyone opposing these racist policies risks being accused of not caring about women’s safety. This reminds us all too well of the misguided debate about the Cologne New Years’ harassments, when feminists were accused of protecting the perpetrators by advocating against racist framings. Femonationalism doesn’t make women any safer, as demonstrated by the lack of political and legal action after the Cologne events; instead, it reinforces state violence against migrants and people of colour. It defends white male supremacy by using white women’s bodies as a justification against men of colour.
White Feminism’s Complicity
Pushback against Merz’s statements came from an ad hoc coalition of feminists through social media campaigns and protests organised in several cities, under #WeAreTheDaughters. Initially, the campaigns were led predominantly by white women, rejecting Merz’s instrumentalisation of their bodies to frame migrant men as violent. Instead, these campaigns aimed to reframe the narrative of violence against women as a patriarchal problem, perpetrated by all men and more often in domestic settings.
Speeches on protests, such as from members and activists of the Green Party, highlighted that if Chancellor Merz really cared about the safety of women, he would legalise safe access to abortion, provide enough governmental childcare, and close the gender pay gap. The public debate also included women sharing their experiences of sexual harassment and domestic violence on social media or naming actual problems in the #cityscape, including the lack of proper infrastructure for people with disabilities, the homelessness crisis, as well as wider issues of poverty.
However, racialised activists in Germany – despite confirming the importance of raising these issues, especially in broader coalitions led by women of colour – called out most of this campaigning as white feminism. The central issue: white women centred their own experiences on these protests and statements, which marginalised the experiences of those who were targeted by Merz’s statement: racialised people in Germany, especially racialised men.
White feminism is a form of feminism that centres white women’s experiences as universal, treating “women” and “white women” as synonymous. Yet, the reality of white women often differs from that of racialised women, who experience not only gendered but also racist violence. When white feminists, in response to Merz’s femonationalism, push their own experience to the foreground of attention, using the political outcry as a platform to speak about their experiences of violence, it silences women and men of colour. Ultimately, the effect is – similar to femonationalism – the further marginalisation of racialised people in Germany. Thus, most of the debate fundamentally missed the point by failing to address racist migration and border politics, diverting the debate to violence against women.
Steve Amoo, a Black German influencer and trainer, criticises some of the speeches and statements in his social media post titled “it’s not about white daughters.” He notes that white women in Germany only stand up against racism when they feel instrumentalised, yet they overlook the deeply rooted structural racism within German society. He writes that many white feminist organisations have remained silent about the genocide in Gaza and recent racist statements by the government, thus, whenever it was not about white women.
A white feminist response that centres the safety and comfort of white women in public spaces, without interrogating why certain male bodies are coded as threatening while others remain invisible, reproduces the racial logic Merz exploits, including his femonationalism.
Normalisation of racism and implications for German politics
The concern about “dangerous men” in public spaces often reinforces precisely the surveillance and policing that most harm Black and brown communities. Lorenz A, a 21-year-old black German man, was killed by the police in Oldenburg in April 2025, shot dead from behind. In 2020, the white supremacist terror attack in Hanau led to the murder of nine people of colour – 8 of whom were men. These deaths reveal what is at stake when racism is not tackled actively.
Racism in Germany is both deadly and structural. It forms the basis of femonationalism, justifying deportations, border militarisation, and increased securitisation. Femonationalism cannot be outsourced to the far right but requires the convergence of political actors in the political mainstream. The responses and public debate after Merz’s statement by the so-called centre parties, like the CDU or the SPD, have demonstrated once again how racism is deeply embedded in the German political system and society.
While civil society and feminist mobilisation against Merz and solidarity with those targeted are not only important but crucial, the framing of the mobilisation matters.
It is essential for white women and civil society in Germany to learn how to de-centre whiteness, remain consistent in our solidarity, and centre marginalised voices – otherwise, we become complicit in the violence we claim to oppose.
[1] Notably, euphemisms like “skin colour” and “migration background” are used in Germany, instead of naming processes of racialization, which remain deeply taboo. This notorious and historic inability to name racial discrimination hinders efforts to meaningfully address racism.
Victoria Scheyer is a member of the RPRN and doctoral researcher at Monash University research the far right and antifeminism in Germany. Her research interests are antifeminist backlash, far right politics and feminist foreign policy.
Thanks to Charlène Calderaro and Lazaros Karavasilis for the comments.
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0