Sexist heads of state and university rectors with relationship problems, left-wing intellectuals who see themselves as anti-imperialist and right-wing extremist thinkers with imperialist ambitions, European royalty and American financial aristocracy – the list of social groups that appear in the publications of the so-called „Epstein Files“ is endless and too diverse to paint a one-sided, politicised picture of an enemy. However, the personalities who corresponded with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein since the late 1990s do have some things in common: they are all part of an „elite“ – whether economic, academic or political – and they were all willing to remain silent about sexual abuse and human trafficking, to turn a blind eye to it or even to actively participate in it in order to remain part of this „elite“. 

The stories of corruption, abuse, and the abandonment of all moral principles in a disproportionately powerful fringe group in society, as revealed in the recent publications, would have been dismissed just a few years ago as the manifesto of a right-wing extremist conspiracy theorist or as regressive anti-capitalism peppered with antisemitic imagery. However, the publication of the Epstein Files has now provided evidence of these crimes and networks. Even the undogmatic left is faced with the question of how to formulate a systematic critique of this late-capitalist community of convenience, steeped in Silicon Valley ideology, that does justice to the extent of the crimes and corruption without resorting to individualisation and populism. Closely linked to the question of „elite criticism“ is the confrontation with a state whose highest representatives from many different countries were involved in the network spun by Epstein and whose executive bodies are unable – or unwilling – to ensure appropriate investigation and prosecution.

The question of whether to work with or against the (bourgeois) state and its institutions is not a new one for those who strive for progressive and emancipatory change in society. It is closely linked to the question of how social change can be achieved. However, in the first decades of the 21st century this question seemed to be answered relatively unanimously by the mainstream of the (German) left; it moved towards the state in two ways. Financial incentives and the promise of being able to bring about concrete improvements tied it structurally to state institutions. The temptation to become part of the mainstream opinion – which in certain spheres of the internet and traditional media in the 2010s was probably successful in the sense of a watered-down left-wing liberalism – came at the expense of a more critical position towards the state: one does not bite the hand that feeds one. 

In recent years, it seems increasingly as if disruption and radical criticism of bourgeois society have only been expressed by the right, while the left has slipped into the role of defender of bourgeois democracy without being able to counter this with its own positive visions. The publication of the “Epstein files” – originally a demand of right-wing populist anti-statist and anti-establishment politics – poses a challenge for the (Western) left. The involvement of part of the political, economic, cultural and, not least, state-supporting „elite“ in a clientelistic network that tolerates or even promotes abuse, and the inability and possibly unwillingness of state organs to prosecute the crimes committed accordingly, raise new questions.

That is why we would like to discuss in this issue what an undogmatic left-wing critique of the state and its institutions, as well as the „elite“ that supports them, might look like.

We would therefore welcome submissions on topics such as the following:

• What should a left-wing critique of the state look like? Is it still possible to fight for political change at this level?
• What are the pitfalls of this criticism of the state? What dangers does it harbour? At what point does it turn into authoritarian, regressive reflexes; when and how does it serve antisemitic resentment? 
• Can an autonomous left-wing scene that is currently dominated by authoritarianism and antisemitism even formulate an emancipatory, state-critical perspective?
• What analytical value does the concept of the ‚elite‘ have for a left-wing critique of power structures, and what pitfalls (populist, antisemitic narratives) does it have?
• What difficulties does the radical right face as a result of some of its leading figures being implicated in the Epstein documents? What can an anti-fascist left learn from this?
• How do rackets and corrupt structures develop in different political and economic systems? How do these groups enrich themselves and how do they exercise their power outside of state structures or by exploiting them?
• How can the concentration of inequality and the associated power, which is dangerous for society, be countered politically in an effective manner? Can a critique of these distorted recognition relationships develop transformative power?
• What ideologies lie behind economic and political „elites“? Does the ideology behind Silicon Valley, for example, pose a fascist threat?
• In addition to the revelations of systematic sexual violence in the Epstein system, the case of Gisèle Pelicot has shown how patriarchal violence is systematically inscribed in our present. How do these and other cases of abusive power structures show how patriarchal patterns structure our society?  

You are also welcome to contribute your own ideas that fall within the outlined area of topics.

The editorial team welcomes article suggestions at jungeperspektivends@gmail.com or on Instagram @jungeperspektivends. The finished articles should be approximately 10,000-12,000 characters in length. Alternatively, slightly shorter reviews of current books relevant to the topic are also possible – we have a few books in mind (write to us!), but we also welcome your own suggestions. Please submit article proposals (provisional title + short abstract) by 22 March 2026. Once accepted by the editorial team, articles must be completed by 15 May 2026. The articles will be published in the print edition of perspektivends and online at http://www.junge-perspektiven.de/.

Since issue 02/2016, „junge perspektiven“ has been an integral part of „perspektivends – Zeitschrift für Gesellschaftsanalyse und Reformpolitik“, which is published twice a year by Schüren Verlag and edited on a voluntary basis by the Hochschulinitiative demokratischer Sozialismus e.V. (HDS). The group’s guiding principle is critical scholarship that understands the world as structured unreasonably, but at the same time seeks to defend the strands of life and residual political reason within it. We believe that the constellation of theory, text, and practice can contribute to this.