Science Against Fascism - 7 Questions for Prof. Gerhard Paulus

During the week of June 1–7, 2026, German universities are being called upon, as part of the “Science Against Fascism”  or “Wissenschaft gegen Faschismus” initiative, to address the responsibility of academia in the face of the growing fascist threat. Many German universities are planning special events such as panel discussions as part of this initiative, or are opening up their regular seminars to address the topic there. 
To contribute to this initiative and encourage reflection and discussion, our MPSP Fellow Prof. Gerhard Paulus has provided answers to seven questions on the topic “How nationalism and stricter migration policies are unsettling international students—and thereby influencing research, innovation, and high technology in Germany.”

Prof. Dr. Gerhard Paulus holds the Chair of Experimental Physics/Nonlinear Optics at Friedrich Schiller University in Jena and is also a member of the Executive Board of the Helmholtz Institute Jena. As part of the “Science Against Fascism” or “Wissenschaft gegen Faschismus” initiative, he answered seven questions on the topic “How nationalism and stricter immigration policies are unsettling international students—and thereby affecting research, innovation, and high technology in Germany.”

 

Professor Paulus, to what extent does cutting-edge research in Germany—particularly in photonics—depend on international students and researchers today?

In answering this question, I would not separate photonics from other high-tech fields. Instead, I would point to the history of American science. Until the early 20th century, there was not much to speak of. Then Germany expelled its Jewish citizens, many of whom emigrated to the United States. After World War II, scientists and students from all over the world flocked there. Within just a few decades, the United States became the world’s leading scientific nation thanks to its welcoming culture. When I was a professor in Texas, about half of my colleagues were not native-born Americans.

Do you see any signs that young talent in photonics is choosing not to come to Germany—or is considering leaving—because of nationalist rhetoric and calls for stricter immigration policies?

Our good fortune in this respect—and only in this respect—is the misfortune of the rest of the world. More specifically, nationalist, racist, and illiberal ideologies have advanced even further in many other countries than they have in Germany. This is particularly true, ironically, for the United States, which for decades was the most attractive destination for talented people of all ages. When talented young people from countries with limited educational opportunities look for a host country with strong universities, Germany remains a very attractive option today.

Germany as a whole? There have been question marks for quite some time, not just recently. I very much hope that Jena can preserve the hard-earned reputation it has built as an open and internationally minded city.

How important is international mobility for Germany’s technological competitiveness, particularly in optics and photonics?

That is an excellent question. The importance of mobility—of learning and working in different places—for innovation and competitiveness has long been demonstrated by the traditional German craftsmen’s journey, the Wanderschaft, which dates back to the Middle Ages. To become a master craftsman, one had to spend years traveling and working elsewhere: three years and one day, to be exact. Applied to photonics, the field often serves as what we call an enabling technology. As a result, the greatest opportunities frequently arise not only from inventing something new, but from discovering previously unrecognized applications. Such discoveries are not made solely within the high-tech bubble; they often emerge from creative engagement with society’s needs and challenges. Spending a few years studying or working in another culture can be enormously valuable in that regard. It inspires new ideas and opens up new perspectives.

What connection do you see between an open society and scientific innovation?

Authoritarian regimes almost inevitably lead to corruption, excessive control, and weak rule of law. All of these are toxic to science—and certainly not only to science. China appears to be a counterexample: undoubtedly a dictatorship in which the aforementioned characteristics are sometimes more pronounced, sometimes less so. However, one certainly cannot attest to a lack of scientific innovation in China. We will see how things develop there.

What responsibility do scientists have in times of growing social polarization?

First and foremost, they have the same responsibility as every other citizen: when a democracy dies, it dies because there are too few democrats. Scientists should also speak out—both privately and publicly—on social issues that are closely connected to science. I am thinking of energy policy, climate change, and the COVID pandemic. We should help educate the public. Now and then, we should remind ourselves that society has invested heavily in our education, that we are privileged, and that we have a responsibility to give something back. But, to be honest, I don’t have much hope that scholars will make a difference in the fight for our democracy. If Höcke comes to power in Thuringia, most scholars will quickly come to terms with the situation, just like most other citizens.

 

What should policymakers do to ensure that Germany remains attractive to international students and researchers?

We should not always point the finger at politicians first. Of course, immigration law and bureaucracy should be designed in a way that makes the people we want to attract feel welcome. But just as important is the role of ordinary citizens. We must actively defend our open society. We need to show appreciation for our international colleagues and students, and we must stand up for them when they are attacked. That said, Germany is attractive to international students and scholars if it is not only cosmopolitan but also economically strong. As we all know, there’s still some work to be done in that regard!

In addition to addressing these major challenges, Germany should finally give real meaning to the celebrated phrase wehrhafte Demokratie (robust democracy).  It may not be necessary to seek an outright ban of the AfD before the Federal Constitutional Court, but the most dangerous individuals and regional party organizations could and should be challenged more vigorously.

What message would you like to send to young international researchers who are currently uncertain about Germany?

There is genuine reason for concern. That cannot be denied. On the other hand, my impression is that Germany’s current situation is still among the best in the Western world. Take advantage of that. No one can predict how things will develop in the future.

Keep your eyes open.