Bandera: memorialization and commemoration

Liebich, André; Myshlovska, Oksana

doi:10.1080/00905992.2014.916666

Cited by 31 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The rehabilitation of Stepan Bandera, which as we will see later in the Georgian context can be compared to what has happened to Zviad Gamsakhurdia, involves a whitewashing of the complex and problematic, and at best muddled, history of his organization's involvement with Nazi collaboration and ethnic cleansing (Liebich and Myshlovska 2014;Marples 2006). Ukrainian nationalists have facilitated and reproduced a specific, idealized, and narrow narrative which fulfills a nationalist agenda.…”

Section: Research Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 98%

Collective memory and reputational politics of national heroes and villains

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The politics of memory plays an important role in the ways certain figures are evaluated and remembered, as they can be rehabilitated or vilified, or both, as these processes are contested. We explore these issues using a transition society, Georgia, as a case study. Who are the heroes and villains in Georgian collective memory? What factors influence who is seen as a hero or a villain and why? How do these selections correlate with Georgian national identity? We attempt to answer these research questions using a newly generated data set of contemporary Georgian perspectives on recent history. Our survey results show that according to a representative sample of the Georgian population, the main heroes from the beginning of the twentieth century include Zviad Gamsakhurdia, Ilia Chavchavadze, and Patriarch Ilia II. Eduard Shevardnadze, Sergo Ordzhonikidze, and Vladimir Putin represent the main villains, and those that appear on both lists are Mikheil Saakashvili and Joseph Stalin. We highlight two clusters of attitudes that are indicative of how people think about Georgian national identity, mirroring civic and ethnic conceptions of nationalism. How Georgians understand national identity impacts not only who they choose as heroes or villains, but also whether they provide an answer at all.

show abstract

Section: Research Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 98%

Collective memory and reputational politics of national heroes and villains

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since no monument to far right leaders survived the post-WWII iconoclasm, the far right either appropriates the sites’ significance or establishes new sites. In Ukraine, several monuments to Nazi-collaborationist Stepan Bandera, established since the 1990s by the far right with the approval of local institutions, have been contested without success by the Russian minority (Liebich and Myshlovska, 2014). The far right also establishes new sites of memory for highlighting the martyrdom of their comrades for the national cause, as it is the case for Bleiburg, Austria, where Yugoslavian partisans killed several collaborationist ustasha at the end of WWII; the contestation of the ustasha symbols on the site became a national matter in Croatia in the 2000s and led to the partial downplaying of openly nostalgic ceremonies (Radonic, 2019).…”

Section: Far Right Sites Of Memory and Their Contestationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making and contesting far right sites of memory. A case study on Romania

Zavatti

2021

Memory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among the strategies followed by far right groups for normalising their messages of intolerance in contemporary Europe, sites of memory play a pivotal role. Adopting an actor-centred and instrumentalist perspective of memory work and memory politics, the article considers sites of memory as products of the framing and staging of the past by the memory entrepreneurs, leading figures within the community of remembrance who, mastering the art of memorialisation, strive to establish their revisionist history within the state-endorsed memory politics. The far right memory entrepreneurs spatialise their memory work in sites of memory that downplay the history of violence of their group and present its heroic and patriotic side. The degree of success in contesting such sites shows whether the memory entrepreneurs have succeeded in normalising their messages. The article analyses the making and the contestation of a site of memory established by the far right in post-communist in Romania.

show abstract

“…In addition to the spread of symbolic mounds, other monuments, memorials and museums dedicated to the nationalist leaders were constructed across Western Ukraine. 35 The first monument to Stepan Bandera, the leader of a radical OUN faction, in Ivano-Frankivska oblast was opened on 14 October 1990, several days after the decision to dismantle the monument to Lenin in Ivano-Frankivsk. Local authorities, along with the clergy, nationalist organizations and political parties claiming the legacy of OUN and UPA, participated in commemorative ceremonies dedicated to the national-liberation struggle.…”

Section: Undoing the Soviet Past And Forging A New Political Memory In Western Ukrainementioning

confidence: 99%

Delegitimizing the Communist Past and Building a New Sense of Community: The Politics of Transitional Justice and Memory in Ukraine

Myshlovska¹

2019

HCM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article studies the way in which the crimes of the communist regime have been dealt with since the late Soviet period, and the way the legacies of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) have been subject to reevaluation. During the Soviet period, policies such as the rehabilitation of victims of mass repression were initiated from above, while the documentation of human rights violations and revelations of mass repressions and death by hunger were undertaken by the dissident movement from below. Since the late perestroika period, the focus on the crimes of the communist regime has been used by the opposition in Ukraine in the struggle for the restitution of group rights. Affirmative action concerning the Ukrainian language, culture and history was seen as the restoration of historical justice. This resulted most recently in the adoption of so-called ‘decommunization’ laws, which has been a controversial and contested issue in Ukraine. The article discusses the factors that shaped the way Ukraine has handled the communist past and constructed new narratives, and reflects on the reason why a ‘politics of regret’ has not resonated yet with political actors involved in the state legitimization struggle.

show abstract

Bandera: memorialization and commemoration

Cited by 31 publications

References 8 publications

Collective memory and reputational politics of national heroes and villains

Collective memory and reputational politics of national heroes and villains

Making and contesting far right sites of memory. A case study on Romania

Delegitimizing the Communist Past and Building a New Sense of Community: The Politics of Transitional Justice and Memory in Ukraine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About