The German “Querdenken” movement and its Framing of Law and Justice: An Analysis of self-ascribed expertise on Telegram

The COVID-19 pandemic gave rise to various social groups and movements that interpret and explain the far-reaching crisis in the light of conspiracy theories. In Germany, one of these groups, the so-called “Querdenken” movement, fundamentally challenges the legitimacy of governmental responses to the crisis and regards itself as a defender of democracy and the rule of law, which in its view is threatened by sinister schemes of powerful groups from the state, media, and academia. Communication and mobilization of “Querdenken” often takes place digitally via messaging services, in particular Telegram. It can be observed that the framing of governmental measures as a part of a global conspiracy is often carried out by a small group of individuals (with law or medical backgrounds) who use their Telegram channels to position and define themselves as “alternative” professional experts to themselves and thereby legitimize themselves to other movement members and the broader public. The communicated knowledge is ranging from the dissemination of specific strategies for action, i.e. the 'right' behaviour at demonstrations, to the proliferation of frames of the overall state of society. An important field of attribution of expertise here concerns the topics of law and justice. Self-attributed legal experts, who are dedicated to the goals of the movement as “cause lawyers”, attempt to interpret the application of law, jurisprudence and legislation. In our paper, we analyse the content of 10 key Telegram channels run by self-attributed legal experts who identify themselves with the movement. First, we determine central issues by using an exploratory topic model. Second, we reconstruct the attribution of agency in selected postings by means of a qualitative content analysis. The aim of this mixed-method approach is to systematically explore the framing of law and justice and the related attribution of subject positions. Furthermore, we intend to contribute to the emerging research field on the influence of digital communication on social movement dynamics. By closing their communication off from other epistemic regimes and possible dissent, the digital environment of Telegram enables the channel operators to construct themselves as “critical citizens” and lawyers who defend the rule of law through their resistance against stripping people of their rights and restricting their freedom. This view is legitimized by a framing that naturalizes law as pre-political in the sense of Hannah Arendt. The state, the media, academia and the corporate sector are seen to be deliberately exploiting the law as a weapon of domination in order to establish a supposed “hygienic dictatorship”. In the view of some channels, this leads to a “new German fascism”. On the basis of the societal diagnosis, which by equating relativizes historical National Socialism, the legal prosecution of the supposedly guilty conspirators is proclaimed. The distinction between one's own subject position and that of the other is established by contrasting legitimate resistance with illegitimate stripping of rights, and legal prosecution with dictatorial despotism.