Why we need to rethink allyship and solidarity – A panel discussion at Spore Initiative
Drastic budget cuts, closures becoming the norm, and a growing climate of political pressure and control: The cultural landscape in Germany feels more tense than it has in years. Yet, as so often, moments of crisis in the arts reveal more than internal struggles. They expose deeper shifts within society at large.
The two-day event series “New Allies” was initiated in response to these fractures. It brought together different perspectives to explore a central question: what does solidarity mean in a time of uncertainty?
Curated by actress and transdisciplinary curator Ricarda Ciontos, the interdisciplinary panel discussions were initiated by SISUtheater e.V. in collaboration with the Spore Initiative, and supported by the Schöpflin Stiftung and Asociatia Centrul de Cultura al Romilor Dolj.
At its core, the discussion revolved around a set of urgent questions: How can we redefine what gives us a sense of security in an increasingly harsh political and cultural climate? And why is it more important than ever to speak about solidarity not only as unity but as resistance? What made the discussion particularly urgent was not just the situation within the cultural sector, but the increasingly hostile political climate it reflects.
I attended the panel on April 22, 2026, at the Spore Initiative in the heart of Berlin-Neukölln. The term “solidarity” is used almost excessively these days – often reduced to a buzzword rather than a lived practice. This made me all the more curious to hear the perspectives brought together on this panel. I arrived with the expectation of a conversation that wouldn’t just stay on the surface, but one that would be willing to confront the tensions beneath it. From the very first moment, it became clear how many different experiences, fears, and frustrations converge around this topic.
“New Allies“ brought together six distinct voices, each positioned differently within the cultural and political landscape, yet all grappling with the same underlying question: What happens to solidarity under pressure – does it endure, or does it fall apart?
About the speakers
Amelie Deuflhard
Amelie Deuflhard is one of the most influential figures in Germany’s independent performing arts scene. Having worked across Berlin’s free theatre landscape since the early 1990s, she has been shaping cultural production at the intersection of art and politics for decades. Since 2007, she has served as Artistic Director and Managing Director of Kampnagel in Hamburg, an institution known for its progressive programming and political positioning.
Antonia Alampi
Antonia Alampi is a curator, cultural organizer, researcher, and writer based in Berlin, where she serves as Director of the Spore Initiative. Her work focuses on community-based practices, collective knowledge production, and forms of solidarity that emerge beyond institutional frameworks.
Jean Peters
Jean Peters is a Senior Reporter at Correctiv, Germany’s largest non-profit investigative newsroom. Known for developing unconventional forms of investigative journalism, his work often operates at the intersection of research, activism, and media critique. At a time when journalism itself is under political pressure, his perspective expands the discussion beyond the cultural field.
Eva Yakubovska
Eva Yakubovska is a Berlin-based cultural activist, journalist, and curator, with a strong focus on promoting Ukrainian culture and history in Europe. Drawing from her experience of political upheaval and war, she brings a perspective that sharply contrasts with Western institutional frameworks. As a co-founder of Vitsche, her work is deeply rooted in civil society, challenging dominant narratives around power.
Mario Neumann
Mario Neumann is Editor-in-Chief of the medico newsletter and represents medico international in political Berlin. Medico international is committed to global justice and works with grassroots movements worldwide. His contribution shifts the conversation beyond the cultural sector, situating it within global struggles around inequality, conflict, and the role of civil society.
Myropi-Margarita Tsomou
The discussion was moderated by Myropi-Margarita Tsomou, a Greek cultural studies scholar, author, dramaturge, and curator. Her work engages deeply with queer feminism, performance theory, and political discourse. As a moderator, she navigated the conversation between theoretical reflection and concrete political realities.
Key insights from the panel discussion
As the discussion unfolded, it became clear that the tensions being addressed extend far beyond the cultural sector. Still, the cultural field is particularly affected. The panel opened with a widely debated statement by Welt editor Ulf Poschardt, who openly said that the cultural sector should be “afraid” of the conservative State Secretary for Culture Wolfram Weimer. A remark that raised more than a few eyebrows.
The following is a selection of questions and thoughts that felt particularly relevant to me.
Myropi-Margarita Tsomou: When it comes to solidarity, it’s important not to homogenize solidarity practices. We operate from different positions, which means different things are possible, and different responsibilities come with those roles.
Where do you feel pressure right now?
Antonia Alampi: A lot of what we are experiencing today could have been predicted. Speaking from the perspective of Spore as a privately funded institution, we are not exposed to the same pressures as publicly funded organizations.
At the same time, what we’ve seen over the past years is that many of the most meaningful forms of solidarity are not coming from institutions at all. They are coming from self-organized groups, communities, and civil society — people who are not funded, not salaried, and not doing this for visibility or recognition.
This raises a crucial question: what does solidarity mean when it becomes part of a paid role, and how does that differ from practices grounded in reciprocity? For me, the question is how the cultural field can begin to recognize, support, and stand behind what is already happening.
Amelie Deuflhard: At the moment, I don’t think it’s us who should be afraid of Wolfram Weimer. It’s him who seems to be afraid of us. We are a state-funded institution, but that does not mean we represent the federal government. We are part of a local structure, in our case, Hamburg. And yet, for the first time, it feels as though the work we do is no longer aligned with political support.
We have spent years working on issues like migration, equality, and inclusion, always assuming we were on the “right side.” Now, it feels as though we are increasingly positioned on the wrong side of the government.
At the same time, there are growing signs of pressure — cancellations, funding decisions being questioned, and increasing political influence on cultural processes. For me, this means one thing above all: we have to resist. We have to keep going, and we have to stand by the decisions we make. Even if that means stepping back as a jury when political interference undermines them.
“We have to resist.“
Myropi-Margarita Tsomou: Amelie, we both work within state-funded institutions. It’s important to acknowledge that working inside an institution is fundamentally different from working outside of it. Different possibilities come with it, but also different constraints. What can you do from within that position, and where are the limits?
Amelie Deuflhard: There are two aspects of my position that are a bit different from more traditional state-funded institutions. First, I come from the independent scene. I worked for many years without stable contracts, without a fixed income. Second, Kampnagel itself has a different history. It started as an occupied space, which sets it apart from many other institutions.
Today, Kampnagel is a large institution with around 150 employees. From the beginning, my aim has been to bring the flexibility and agility of the independent scene into this structure.
At the same time, one of the key questions for me has always been: who is actually represented in our institutions? We cannot change anything if cultural institutions remain spaces that are primarily shaped by white, German perspectives. If an institution is publicly funded, it should reflect the diversity of the city, and of society as a whole. This is why we have worked closely with many different communities, including marginalized groups. And today, this work becomes even more important.
Because these communities are not separate from the institution — they are part of it. With that comes a responsibility to protect them.
Myropi-Margarita Tsomou: Jean, as Correctiv, are you part of processes of solidarity? Who is part of your network — and what kinds of practices emerge from that?
Jean Peters: To keep it short: we are supported by donations. That allows us to offer free trainings and run projects like the Reporterfabrik, where many people work with us. We also go into communities, for example, with programs that focus on places where local journalism is disappearing, to help build it up again.
But beyond these programs, what matters most to me is how we work collectively. We have a policy of looking beyond traditional journalism CV. I never went to journalism school myself. We actively look for what my boss calls “misfits”. People who might never work at Spiegel, but who are brilliant in their own way of thinking and seeing the world.
This creates a different kind of diversity, not just within the usual ideological frameworks. You can really see throughout Correctiv how different people are.
And at a moment when we see the state failing to guarantee basic rights, the question becomes: how do we organize ourselves?
“We’re not powerless. We’re not in power.“
Mario Neumann: We should be very aware that when we speak of solidarity – and of course, I’m glad to sit here and talk about it – solidarity is not something practiced only by the left, by progressives, or by the cultural field. Everyone is asking for solidarity. And there are different answers to it, including from the right and the far right.
From a more global perspective, I would say that the dominant answer today is nationalism. In situations of uncertainty, rising inequality, and ongoing conflict, nationalism becomes the response: we are one, we fight as a nation, and internal differences are erased. So from my point of view, it is crucial to find a different model of solidarity. Not because we are powerless but because we are not in power.
Which means solidarity also has to be about organizing power. For ourselves, but also for others. For me, this implies a form of solidarity between unequal people.
The evening at the Spore Initiative did not end with a clear answer to the question of what solidarity and allyship mean today. Perhaps that was precisely the point. It made clear that solidarity cannot be reduced to a single definition.
Thank you for the invitation and for creating a space where these questions can be openly addressed. It was a discussion that stayed with me long after I left the Spore Initiative, and one that certainly deserves to continue.