Abstract: The pro-Gaza demonstrations that marked the summer of 2014 were trailed by a concern over the intensity of anti-Semitism among European Muslims and accusations of ‘double standards’ with regard to anti-Muslim racism. In the Netherlands, the debate featured a nexus between the Holocaust, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, freedom of speech and the limits of tolerance, which beckons a closer analysis. I argue that it indicates the place of the Holocaust in the European imaginary as one of a haunting, which is marked by a structure of dis/avowal. Prescriptive multicultural tolerance, which builds on Europe’s debt to the Holocaust and represents the culturalized response to racial inequalities, reiterates this structure of dis/avowal. It ensures that its normative framework of identity politics and equivalences, and the Holocaust, Jews and anti-Semitism which occupy a seminal place within it, supplies the dominant (and in the case of anti-Semitism, displaced) terms for the contestation of (disavowed) racialized structures of inequality. The dominance of the framework of identity politics as a channel for minority populations to express a sense of marginalization and disaffection with mainstream politics, however, risks culturalizing both the origins and the solutions to that marginalization. Especially when that sense of marginalization is filtered and expressed through the contestation of the primacy of the Holocaust memory, it enables the state, which embeds Jews retrogressively in the European project, to externalize racialized minorities on the basis of presumed cultural incompatibilities (including anti-Semitism, now externalized from the memory of Europe proper and attributed uniquely to the Other); to erase its historical and contemporary racisms; and to subject minority populations to disciplinary securitization. Moreover, it contributes to the obfuscation of the political, social and economic dynamics through which neo-liberal capitalism effects the hollowing out of the social contract and the resultant fragmentation of society (which the state then can attribute to ‘deficient’ minority cultures and values).
Abstract: Bohemia and Moravia, today part of the Czech Republic, was the first territory with a majority of non-German speakers occupied by Hitler’s Third Reich on the eve of the World War II. Tens of thousands of Jewish inhabitants in the so called Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia soon felt the tragic consequences of Nazi racial politics. Not all Czechs, however, remained passive bystanders during the genocide. After the destruction of Czechoslovakia in 1938-39, Slovakia became a formally independent but fully subordinate satellite of Germany. Despite the fact it was not occupied until 1944, Slovakia paid Germany to deport its own Jewish citizens to extermination camps.
About 270,000 out of the 360,000 Czech and Slovak casualties of World War II were victims of the Holocaust. Despite these statistics, the Holocaust vanished almost entirely from post-war Czechoslovak, and later Czech and Slovak, historical cultures. The communist dictatorship carried the main responsibility for this disappearance, yet the situation has not changed much since the fall of the communist regime. The main questions of this study are how and why the Holocaust was excluded from the Czech and Slovak history.
Abstract: In October 2021, Imperial War Museums (IWM) opened its new Holocaust Galleries in its London branch, replacing its first Holocaust Exhibition (from 2000) that had become a landmark in British Holocaust memory. Because of its comprehensive nature and intricate scenography, the new Holocaust Galleries are at the centre of almost all recent major narrative, political, and ethical debates about Holocaust representation in museums. The book provides an ideal global case-study understanding the possibilities and limitations of re-presenting trauma and violence in museums today and whether Holocaust exhibitions can promote democratic, civic, or human rights values, making it an important resource for museum practitioners, public history educators, and university researchers alike, interested in Historical, Museum, Memory, Holocaust, Genocide, or Cultural Studies. The volume brings together texts written by museum practitioners and academic scholars. It is divided in three parts: a long essay by James Bulgin, Head of Content for the new Holocaust Galleries, about the genesis and implementation of the exhibition, supplemented with briefer essays by educators and community members involved in the development of the exhibition, an extensive interview by Stephan Jaeger with IWM researchers James Bulgin and Suzanne Bardgett, and an extensive part with six critical essays by university scholars analysing the new Holocaust Galleries from numerous theoretical angles.
Abstract: Cet article aborde la restauration de la mémoire de la Shoah en Ukraine, ainsi que le rôle, dans ce processus, de différents acteurs de la mémoire et de leurs actions. Cette question sera étudiée à la lumière des changements intervenus dans la politique historique ukrainienne au cours des années 1990-2010, à travers le prisme de l’interaction entre un récit national ethnocentré et la mémoire de la Shoah. Les choix mémoriels de l’Ukraine s’inscrivent dans ce qu’on pourrait qualifier de « modèle est-européen » au sein duquel domine un récit focalisé sur le groupe ethnique majoritaire qui y tient le rôle principal. L’histoire de l’Ukraine est celle des Ukrainiens ethniques et est racontée comme le long cheminement d’un peuple vers la création d’un État national (ou vers le rétablissement de celui-ci). On y observe enfin surtout des discours post-traumatiques et postcoloniaux, ainsi qu’une lecture des relations avec les pays voisins fondée sur des rivalités. Dans ce contexte, l’appropriation de la mémoire sociale (culturelle) de la Shoah et son inclusion dans le récit mémoriel officiel font inévitablement face à des difficultés.
En Ukraine, cette intégration rencontre les mêmes obstacles qu’ailleurs en Europe centrale et orientale et dans les pays baltes :
Premièrement, nous l’avons dit, on ne peut brosser le tableau complet de la Shoah sans se heurter au récit national canonique dans lequel la mémoire de la Shoah, que ce soit sous sa forme nationale ou transnationale, n’est pas présentée comme faisant partie de la mémoire collective…
Abstract: To be valid, history must be predicated on absolute, uncompromising truth, not manipulation. Eighty years ago, 48,000 Jews were not deported from Bulgaria — while 11,343 other Jews were cruelly loaded on trains bound for Treblinka where they were murdered. These are two interdependent realities that cannot be and must not be allowed to be uncoupled.
Il suffirait de si peu. Au regard de maints États européens alliés, satellisés ou occupés par l’Allemagne nazie, la politique de la Bulgarie envers les populations juives pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale se prête à une lecture moins sombre. Signataire du Pacte tripartite le 1er mars 1941, le pays ne participa pas à l’offensive allemande de juin 1941 contre l’URSS ; son armée ne prit aucune part à la « Shoah par balles » et ses citoyens n’apportèrent pas de contribution aux exactions des Einsatzgruppen, ces unités mobiles d’extermination du Reich. Le « vieux royaume de Bulgarie » (frontières d’avant avril 1941) ne procéda pas à l’internement systématique et à l’extermination sur son territoire de ses citoyens juifs à la différence, par exemple, de l’État indépendant croate ustaša, né du démantèlement du royaume de Yougoslavie après son invasion par les nazis en avril 1941. La Bulgarie ne connut pas non plus les atrocités des pogroms de Bucarest et de Iaşi perpétrés dans la Roumanie de 1941, cet autre allié du Reich. Enfin, la presque totalité de la communauté juive de Bulgarie, soit environ 48 000 citoyens, survécut à la guerre après que le gouvernement eut reporté, puis renoncé à déporter une partie, sinon de la totalité, de cette communauté…
Abstract: Lors du festival Open City organisé à Lublin, en octobre 2019, l’artiste Dorota Nieznalska a présenté une installation intitulée « Judenfrei (Bûcher numéro 1) ». Cette œuvre présentait un bûcher recouvert de pancartes partiellement brûlées, sur lesquelles figuraient les noms de localités où, entre 1941 et 1946, des pogroms contre les Juifs furent perpétrés par des Polonais. À proximité de l’installation, les organisateurs avaient disposé un panneau explicatif précisant que ces crimes furent commis en toute connaissance de cause par des membres des communautés locales, animés par des instincts bas, la haine, l’antisémitisme et l’appât d’un enrichissement facile. Przemysław Czarnek, alors voïvode de la région de Lublin et futur ministre de l’Éducation et des Sciences au sein du gouvernement du parti Droit et Justice (PiS), a vivement réagi. Il a dénoncé publiquement l’installation de Nieznalska, la qualifiant d’« acte antipolonais », tout en fustigeant le panneau d’information qu’il a accusé de véhiculer un « mensonge ». Il a exigé du maire de Lublin qu’il fasse retirer cette œuvre controversée. Face à cette critique, la chercheuse Joanna Tokarska-Bakir, spécialiste des pogroms, a dénoncé l’ignorance du voïvode et s’en est indignée : « Comment peut-on laisser libre cours à ses intuitions face à des études scientifiques irréfutables qui attestent l’existence des pogroms dénoncés par l’artiste ? »
Malheureusement, les seules intuitions de Przemysław Czarnek ne sont pas le cœur du problème…
Abstract: Depuis les années 1990, l’usage des termes « révisionnisme » et « révisionniste » s’est imposé dans l’espace intellectuel et médiatique pour désigner, au-delà des auteurs d’extrême droite et faux savants niant l’existence des chambres à gaz, qualifiés de « négationnistes », tous ceux qui, d’une manière ou d’une autre, relativisent le génocide des Juifs et la complicité criminelle du gouvernement de Vichy. La négation d’un côté ; la minoration de l’autre. Dès 1990, l’historien Henry Rousso, auquel on doit l’introduction de la notion de « négationnisme » en France, évoquait une « histoire “révisionniste” de Vichy » à propos d’un ouvrage de François-Georges Dreyfus, Histoire de Vichy (Perrin), qui reprenait un certain nombre d’arguments pétainistes.
Mais, étonnamment, cet usage reste rarement explicité, alors qu’il a une histoire. L’objet du présent article vise à établir la généalogie et à retracer les évolutions et les lignes de force du contre-récit historique sur Vichy et les Juifs, de 1945 à nos jours. Pour cela, il se fonde sur l’étude de nombreux écrits et d’archives privées d’auteurs désireux de réhabiliter les dirigeants du régime pétainiste, de proposer une vision « pacifiante » des années noires ou d’aller à l’encontre d’une supposée doxa sur le sujet.Jusqu’à la fin des années 1960, les écrits justifiant la politique de Vichy et niant ou minimisant ses crimes sont d’abord et avant tout le fait d’avocats ou de parents des grandes figures liées à l’État français.
En juillet-août puis en octobre 1945, Philippe Pétain et l’ex-chef du gouvernement de Vichy Pierre Laval ont été jugés et condamnés à mort par la Haute Cour de justice pour trahison – la peine du vieux maréchal a été commuée en détention perpétuelle…
Abstract: La culture mémorielle de l’Europe de l’Est a subi une transformation radicale après l’effondrement du communisme, du fait de l’« américanisation » de la Shoah, c’est-à-dire, pour reprendre les termes de Winfried Fluck, spécialiste de la culture allemande, un processus de démocratisation consistant à éradiquer toute complexité afin de rendre accessibles à un vaste public des événements complexes. De nouveaux musées ont été créés pour réécrire l’histoire de la Seconde Guerre mondiale d’un point de vue anticommuniste. Le langage utilisé ne correspondait ni à la culture mémorielle nationale, ni à la conceptualisation religieuse de la Shoah, ni au contexte linguistique et culturel de la vie dans l’Allemagne nazie avant et pendant le conflit. Divers auteurs ont analysé le phénomène des pays européens qui n’opposèrent aucune résistance à l’hégémonie de l’Allemagne nazie et de son programme politique. Ceux-ci s’accordent à dire que l’analyse devrait dépasser le clivage bourreaux-spectateurs-victimes.Il existe une contradiction flagrante entre la terminologie employée par la muséologie antifasciste avant 1989 et celle qui est en cours dans les nouveaux musées construits dans les années 2000. L’idée d’une coexistence avec l’Allemagne nazie est une question idéologique et politique majeure, notamment, aujourd’hui, avec la mise en relief illibérale de zones d’ombre précédemment ignorées dans le discours muséologique. Le présent article soutient que le terme « collaboration » n’est pas un bon critère de mesure des phénomènes qui ont fait l’objet de travaux récents…
Abstract: This volume considers the uses and misuses of the memory of assistance given to Jews during the Holocaust, deliberated in local, national, and transnational contexts. History of this aid has drawn the attention of scholars and the general public alike. Stories of heroic citizens who hid and rescued Jewish men, women, and children have been adapted into books, films, plays, public commemorations, and museum exhibitions. Yet, emphasis on the uplifting narratives often obscures the history of violence and complicity with Nazi policies of persecution and mass murder. Each of the ten essays in this interdisciplinary collection is dedicated to a different country: Belarus, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, North Macedonia, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, and Ukraine. The case studies provide new insights into what has emerged as one of the most prominent and visible trends in recent Holocaust memory and memory politics. While many of the essays focus on recent developments, they also shed light on the evolution of this phenomenon since 1945.
Abstract: La memoria del Holocausto y los crímeLa memoria del Holocausto y los crímenes del nazismo comienza a tomar forma como fenómeno cultural en España desde, al menos, finales de la década de los setenta y se articula como objeto político a comienzos del presente siglo. Desde el año 2000 han proliferado una serie de políticas memoriales, fundamentalmente educativas y conmemorativas, del genocidio de los judíos europeos en España, así como políticas públicas de memoria e iniciativas del movimiento memorialista en recuerdo de los republicanos españoles deportados. Esta consolidación del recuerdo de dos eventos históricos, distinguibles analíticamente – el Holocausto de los judíos europeos y el encarcelamiento en campos de concentración nazi del exilio republicano español – pero solapados en el tiempo pasado y amalgamados en muchas de las expresiones memoriales del presente, como fuente de políticas públicas de memoria, recurso en conflictos por la interpretación común del pasado, y fundamento de producción de identidades nacionales, étnicas, ideológicas y activistas es el sustrato material que ha motivado la realización de la presente tesis...
Abstract: During World War II, Bosnia and Hercegovina was occupied by the Ustashe-led Independent State of Croatia, a Nazi collaborator par excellence. Ustashe, mostly Croats, Muslims-Bosniaks, and domestic Germans, overwhelmingly participated in the annihilation of more than 85 % of the Bosnian Jewish population during the Shoah. Beside the physical destruction of the community, these Nazi collaborators plundered Jewish assets in an estimated value of over one billion US dollars and robbed priceless cultural artifacts along with the communal archives. While witness accounts agree that looting of most movable property (books, artwork, and other valuables) was carried out in the first days of occupation by the Nazis themselves, the robbery of Jewish property (apartments, houses, businesses) as well as torture and killings of domestic Jews was committed by the Ustashe. What complicates the restitution in this country is the state and memory politics, but also the inexistence of a central registry of stolen items that could be claimed. Moreover, it is of the essence that the GLAM institutions (galleries, libraries, archives, and museums) within Bosnia and the former Yugoslavia region engage in conducting detailed provenance research of their respective collections.
Abstract: The Holocaust is the Philoktetes wound tormenting every European country occupied by Hitler’s armies between 1939 and 1945. Paradoxically, it may be the Germans who feel this pain the least, as they have nowhere left to escape the curse of their role as perpetrators. This article presents the results of research on the memory of the events in Hungary, the last theatre of Hitler’s European campaign against the Jews. The researchers returned to the sites of the drama that unfolded in the summer of 1944, searching for traces of the vanished Jewish life in both the physical and social-psychological spaces, where the void created by the destruction of the Jews is filled with fear, distrust, confusion, silence, and cognitive dissonance. Based on the research findings, it can be stated that 80 years after the Holocaust, in Hungarian villages, small towns, and Budapest, both within and outside the current national borders, today, in Macbeth’s words, “nothing is, but what is not”.
Abstract: ‘Het was prachtig zoals de wielen van de wagons in het begin in Nederland rolden …’ aldus een trotse Adolf Eichmann, het organisatorische meesterbrein achter de deportaties van de joden uit de door nazi-Duitsland bezette gebieden naar de vernietigingskampen, enkele jaren na de oorlog. Hij had alle reden tevreden te zijn. In geen enkel ander West-Europees land werd zo’n groot deel van de joodse bevolking weggevoerd en vermoord, en dat had ook te maken met de medewerking van veel Nederlandse instanties. Een harde en pijnlijke waarheid, die velen in Nederland aanvankelijk niet onder ogen wilden zien. In dit boek worden geschetst hoe Nederland met de herinnering aan de Jodenvervolging is omgegaan, vanaf de eerste jaren na de bevrijding tot aan de opening van het Nationaal Holocaust Museum in 2024. Opvallend daarbij is dat de nazistische vervolging in Nederland al in de jaren zestig een belangrijke plaats kreeg in de nationale herinneringscultuur, vooral dankzij het Eichmann-proces en het werk van Jacques Presser. Het nationalistische beeld van de oorlog als een periode van ‘onderdrukking en verzet’, waarin de Jodenvervolging in de eerste plaats werd gezien als een illustratie van de Duitse terreur tegen het Nederlandse volk, bleek niet langer houdbaar. Vanaf de jaren negentig zou Nederland steeds meer onder invloed raken van de internationale herinneringscultuur die zich vormde rond het begrip ‘Holocaust’, een term die aanvankelijk buiten de VS geheel onbekend was. Dat proces laat zich goed aflezen aan het taalgebruik en de herdenkingsrituelen, maar ook aan monumenten, musea, media, film en literatuur. Rond de Holocaust ontstond een soort ‘burgerlijke religie’, die niet alleen politiek wordt beleden, in Europa, de VS en andere delen van de wereld, maar ook diep geworteld is in de cultuur en samenleving, te beginnen in Nederland. Nederland en de herinnering aan de Jodenvervolging biedt een diepgravend overzicht van de omgang met de herinneringen aan de meest pijnlijke en ingrijpende episode uit de moderne Nederlandse geschiedenis. Frank van Vree is em. hoogleraar Geschiedenis van Oorlog, Geweld en Herinnering aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Eerder was hij directeur van het NIOD en decaan van de Faculteit Geesteswetenschappen van de UvA. Hij publiceerde een groot aantal studies op het terrein van de moderne geschiedenis en historische cultuur.
Abstract: In all, 90% of Polish Jews, more than 3 million people, were murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust, and 90% of the survivors left Poland. The survivors and their heirs, most of them not currently living in Poland, saw their land confiscated by the Nazis, nationalized by the communists and reprivatized and sold to others. Poland is the only country in the EU not to have a comprehensive restitution law. The issue of land restitution is still present in current debate in Poland, as part of a broader discussion over the Second World War, communism, privatization and corruption. While Poland blocked all restitution claims in 2021, Jewish communities as well as other governments called Poland to adopt a comprehensive restitution law for everyone. Now, 30 years after the fall of communism, what justifies such claims? This paper argues that forward-looking collective responsibility is the most helpful concept to understand the Jewish restitution problem in Poland today, and claims that any future settlement of this issue should be based on it. By applying this concept, as developed by Iris Marion Young, to the Polish restitution case, we look into the past – not to look for people to blame, but to look for social connections that have implications for the present. This way, we can remember the past, learn from it and heal relationships between people without being slaves to it.
Abstract: This paper uses archival and ethnological research to analyze the fates of former synagogues during two totalitarian regimes in present-day Slovakia. The processes described here were catalyzed by the Holocaust. Between 1938 and 1945, over 100,000 Jews from Slovakia were murdered. Out of the 228 Jewish religious communities (JRCs) active before the war, only 79 were reconstituted after liberation. Most were later disbanded because of aliyah to Palestine/Israel. Their abandoned synagogues passed into the administration of the newly founded Central Union of Jewish Religious Communities (CUJRC). During the Communist era (1948-1989), the majority of these synagogues were sold because the CUJRC did not have sufficient resources for their maintenance.
The second section of this paper discusses synagogues in different parts of Slovakia to show how representatives of the CUJRC tried to ensure the temples’ new owners did not violate their religious dignity. Purchase and sale agreements generally prohibited using the synagogues for entertainment purposes, instead preferring their conversion into warehouses, silos, workshops, etc. Although, as soon as the 1940s, part of the community requested that the synagogues be used as cultural centers, this did not happen on a large scale until after the revolution of 1989. A synagogue is not defined by its four walls but rather by the activities that take place inside it. The repurposed buildings are frequently located in regions with no active Jewish organizations. They are mere relics of the past and, bar a few exceptions, do not contribute to the renewal of traditional Jewish life. Believers nevertheless tend to have a negative view of the events that are held in the former synagogues, with some going as far as to consider them disrespectful. Even many secular Jews feel that the former synagogues do not fulfil their original purpose and have definitively transformed into non-synagogues.
Topics: Attitudes to Israel, Attitudes to Jews, Holocaust, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Israeli-Arab Conflict, Israel Criticism, Main Topic: Culture and Heritage, Memory, Literature, Film, Television
Abstract: Examines an important relational shift in British and German cultural depictions of Palestine and Israel since 1987
Develops relationality as a critical tool to challenge mainstream ideas about Israeli and Palestinian narratives as separate and not connected to European histories of the Holocaust and colonialism
Argues that Israel and Palestine are used as geopolitical and imaginary spaces to discuss social and political concerns in the United Kingdom and in Germany
Examines works by authors and directors from outside of Israel and Palestine, including those with no direct link to the conflict, thus extending our understanding of Palestine and Israel as signifiers in the contemporary period
Offers a comparative analysis of British and German literature, TV drama, and film which focuses on country-specific case studies to identify common trends in imagining and reimaging Israel and Palestine since the first Palestinian Intifada
Discusses works published since 1987 which depict encounters between (Israeli) Jews and Palestinians since 1947 which depict encounters between (Israeli) Jews and Palestinians and their narratives since 1947
Isabelle Hesse identifies an important relational turn in British and German literature, TV drama, and film published and produced since the First Palestinian Intifada (1987-1993). This turn manifests itself on two levels: one, in representing Israeli and Palestinian histories and narratives as connected rather than separate, and two, by emphasising the links between the current situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the roles that the United Kingdom and Germany have played historically, and continue to play, in the region. This relational turn constitutes a significant shift in representations of Israel and Palestine in British and German culture as these depictions move beyond an engagement with the Holocaust and Jewish suffering at the expense of Palestinian suffering and indicate a willingness to represent and acknowledge British and German involvement in Israeli and Palestinian politics.
Abstract: NEW YORK, NEW YORK: January 23, 2025—The Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (Claims Conference) today released the first-ever, eight-country Index on Holocaust Knowledge and Awareness, exposing a global trend in fading knowledge of basic facts about the Holocaust. The countries surveyed include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Austria, Germany, Poland, Hungary and Romania.
The majority of respondents in each country, except Romania, believe something like the Holocaust (another mass genocide against Jewish people) could happen again today. Concern is highest in the United States, where more than three-quarters (76%) of all adults surveyed believe something like the Holocaust could happen again today, followed by the U.K. at 69%, France at 63%, Austria at 62%, Germany at 61%, Poland at 54%, Hungary at 52%, and Romania at 44%.
Shockingly, some adults surveyed say that they had not heard or weren’t sure if they had heard of the Holocaust (Shoah) prior to taking the survey. This is amplified among young adults ages 18-29 who are the most recent reflection of local education systems; when surveyed, they indicated that they had not heard or weren’t sure if they had heard of the Holocaust (Shoah): France (46%), Romania (15%), Austria (14%) and Germany (12%). Additionally, while Auschwitz-Birkenau is the most well-known camp, nearly half (48%) of Americans surveyed are unable to name a single camp or ghetto established by the Nazis during World War II.
On a more positive note, there is overwhelming support for Holocaust education. Across all countries surveyed, nine-in-10 or more adults believe it is important to continue teaching about the Holocaust, in part, so it does not happen again.
Abstract: In August 1945, a small group of Jewish industrialists was tried in absentia by the military court in Maribor, Yugoslavia. They were convicted of “war crimes” and sentenced to confiscation of property. Part of the nationalization policies of the new Communist government, the episode related to specifically Jewish experiences before, during, and after the Holocaust. Subsequent legal cases seeking redress involved agencies of Yugoslavia, Switzerland, Great Britain, the United States, and post-1991 Slovenia over several decades. This article reconstructs the sources, circumstances, and complex consequences of the legal cases in order to uncover structural and ideological factors underpinning the repeated failures of Jewish survivor claims. It sheds light on the memory wars shaping political life in Eastern Europe today, and it sharpens understandings that should facilitate efforts towards restitution of Jewish property.
Abstract: This book addresses the issues of memory (a more suitable word would be Marianne Hirsh’s term of postmemory) of the Holocaust among young Poles, the attitudes towards Jews and the Holocaust in the comparative context of educational developments in other countries. The term “Jews” is, as rightly noted Joanna Tokarska-Bakir (2010) a decontextualized term used here in the meaning of Antoni Sułek (2010) as a collective “symbolic” entity. The focus was on education (transmitting values), attitudinal changes and actions undertaken to preserve (or counteract) the memory of Jews and their culture in contemporary Poland. The study to which the book primarly refers was conducted in 2008 and was a second study on a national representative sample of Polish adolescents after the first one undertaken in 1998. The data may seem remote from the current political situation of stepping back from the tendency to increase education about the Holocaust which dominated after 1989 and especially between 2000 and 2005, nonetheless they present trends and outcomes of specific educational interventions which are universal and may set examples for various geopolitical contexts.
The focus of this research was not primarily on the politics of remembrance, which often takes a national approach, although state initiatives are also brought to the attention of the reader, but rather on grassroots action, often initiated by local civil society organizations (NGOs) or individual teachers and/or students. This study has attempted to discover the place that Jews have (or do not have) in the culture of memory in Poland, where there lived the largest Jewish community in pre-war Europe, more than 90% of which was murdered during the Holocaust. The challenge was to show the diversity of phenomena aimed at integrating Jewish history and culture into national culture, including areas of extracurricular education, often against mainstream educational policy, bearing in mind that the Jews currently living in Poland are also, in many cases, active partners in various public initiatives. It is rare to find in-depth empirical research investigating the ensemble of areas of memory construction and the attitudes of youth as an ensemble, including the evaluation of actions (programmes of non-governmental organisations and school projects) in the field of education, particularly with reference to the long-term effects of educational programmes. The assumption prior to this project was that the asking of questions appearing during this research would stimulate further studies.
The book is divided into three parts: Memory, Attitudes and Actions. All three parts of the book, although aimed at analysing an ongoing process of reconstructing and deconstructing memory of the Holocaust in post-2000 Poland, including the dynamics of the attitudes of Polish youth toward Jews, the Shoah and memory of the Shoah, are grounded in different theories and were inspired by various concepts. The assumption prior to the study was that this complex process of attitudinal change cannot be interpreted and explained within the framework on one single academic discipline or one theory. Education and the cultural studies definitely played a significant role in exploring initiatives undertaken to research, study and commemorate the Holocaust and the remnants of the rich Jewish culture in Poland, but the sociology, anthropology and psychology also played a part in helping to see this process from various angles.
Abstract: The article deals with two legitimate cultures that were created in Poland after 1989. "Legitimate culture" means the axiological frame of reference that defines the criteria of prestige and dishonor, that is, the criteria of supreme values and anti-values. No authority (in Poland or any other country) can exist without controlling legitimate culture. However, legitimate culture in Poland is threatened by a history of domestic violence against Jews (massive pre-war Polish anti-Semitism, the murder of Jews during the Holocaust, the murder and persecution of Jews in the post-war period). respect, any Polish authority must control Holocaust-related content. The first concept of Holocaust management, created within the framework of the first legitimate culture (corresponding to the legal and institutional arrangements of 1989–2005 and 2007–2015) treated the Holocaust and Polish attitudes toward Jews as: an affirmation of the need to weaken the “nation,” the religious community and other collective entities; a problem that each Pole individually solves on his/her own. The second legitimacy culture (2005–2007; 2015–2023) works to: recognize the Holocaust as a problem that only the Polish nation can resolve; criminalize claims that Poles murdered Jews; present (and justify) violence against Jews as a struggle against communism; and portray Poles helping Jews as the norm, which the majority met during the occupation. The first culture of legitimacy used the Holocaust to weaken the social bond; the second uses the Holocaust to reactivate nationalism. Both cultures are responsible for the current crisis of social communication, and therefore another legitimate culture is needed to emerge from this crisis.
