Historisk tidskrift 125:4 • 2005
Innehåll (Contents) 2005:4
Uppsatser (Articles)
Förintelsemonumentet som slutpunkt. Tysk historiepolitik från
Kohl till Schröder
Jan Selling
Fulltext (pdf)
Summary
The Holocaust Memorial as Terminal Point. The Politics of
History from Kohl to Schröder
This article discusses the meaning of the Memorial to the Murdered
Jews of Europe, which was inaugurated in Berlin on the 10th of
May as the terminus of the 60th anniversary of the fall of the
Third Reich. It begins in Norbert Frei’s claim that generational
experience is the main determinant of German discourse on Nazism
but develops it further by adapting Jan Assmann’s theory of cultural
memory. According to Assmann, history is part of cultural memory,
which in turn is a framework for the construction of experienced
and communicated notions of ”living history”. From this perspective,
the intense German historical discourse of the last decade might
be understood as a hegemonic conflict about the selection and
rearrangement of public recollections in order to establish a
new equilibrium in the cultural memory of German society; A necessary
condition has been the decline of the communicative memory due
to generation change, which in turn has increased the ideological
role of elite discourse. Central to this transition was the collapse
of the German Democratic Republic in 1989 and the reestablishment
of a nation-state in 1990, which ”normalised” the discourse on
German national identity. This development has been favourable
to the political efforts to ”normalise” Germany, not only in
the sense of re-establishing a positive national identity, but
also in the sense of ”normalising” Germany’s new position of
power. In contrast, the presentist use of Vergangenheitsbewältigung
(working through, or mastering the past) by the left-liberal
”constitutional patriots” has lost much of its relevance.
The
third part of the article discusses some discursive events related
to the 60th anniversary that indicate the nature of the new consensus
being established at the turn of the last century. First, the
notion of the 8th of May as day of liberation is no longer, as
in 1995, an issue of political conflict. Second, the Holocaust
is now indisputably part of the cultural memory and indeed the
core of national identity politics. Third, the expiration of
living memory is often being understood as the end of Vergangenheitsbewältigung,
which in turn is being seen as an argument for further ”normalisation”.
In the ”normalised” discourse on Germanness and history, the
increasing metaphorical use of the Holocaust as moral argument
without specific meaning is evident. Hence, the Holocaust could
be used by the Catholic Church in its campaign against the right
of abortion as well as by the Schröder government to justify
German military engagement against potential genocides. Finally,
the contradictory genesis of the Holcoaust memorial is analysed
in relationship to the national monument created by the government
of Helmut Kohl in 1993: ”Neue Wache Unter den Linden.” Whereas
”Neue Wache” must be seen in the tradition of anti-totalitarianism
and national self pity, the Holocaust memorial was clearly a
product of the left-liberal Vergangenheitsbewältigung of the
1980s. Hence, the latter monument can be seen as a counter-monument
to the former and necessary for its acceptance. However, the
acceptance of the Holocaust memorial by conservatives as well
as by the left is mainly due to its functionality for national
identity politics and its claim to responsibility for the past
without constraints or obligations for the present: built by
the Germans of today for the Jewish victims of the past. The
two voices expressed in those two monuments of the reconstructed
German capital may be understood as a dialectic answer of the
normalisation dilemma at the end of Vergangenheitsbewältigung.
|
|