Paper short abstract:

Research on Right-Wing Movements poses serious emotional and ethical challenges for ethnographers. Reflecting on fieldwork in EastBerlin, I argue that some wideheld assumptions about fieldwork need to be challenged, but that the principle of dialogical anthroplogy can still be upheld in most cases.

Paper long abstract:

Research on Right-Wing Movements poses serious emotional and ethical challenges for ethnographers, especially when being confronted with racism and violence. Based on ethnographic field-research with former hooligans in East Berlin, I argue that some wideheld assumptions about fieldwork need to be challenged, but that the principle of dialogical anthroplogy can still be upheld in most cases. Focusing on the the affective dynamics of fieldwork, I will highlight some recurring emotional and moral dilemmas and possible forms of reflexive engagement.

Fieldwork in right-wing miieus often has to deal with fear, repulsion and other kinds of "emotional walls" (Hochschild). While this proves to be a serious challenge, especially at the beginning, during fieldwork surprising sympathies and uncanny identifications with certain individuals might prove to be much more emotionally disturbing. A frequent moral dilemma occurs when research participants ask for help or small favors. For long anthropologists have felt the need for some kind of reciprocity, but with regard to right wing populism this might lead to rather troubling forms of support. However, in research practice the question of when and where to help (not) is often hard to answer.

Discussing such emotional and moral dilemmas, I argue for some forms of dialogical and reflective engagement, including an interest in persons beyond the actual fieldwork (and beyond politics), the sharing of manuscripts before publication or the discussion of texts/books afterwards. At the same time, researchers have to be highly aware of possible threats of intimidation and of likely attempts of political manipulation.