Civil Society and Memory in Postwar Germany

Abstract

Blending history and social science, this book tracks the role of social movements in shaping German public memory and values since 1945. Drawn from extensive original research, it offers a fresh perspective on the evolution of German democracy through civic confrontation with the violence of its past. Told through the stories of memory activists, the study upends some of the conventional wisdom about modern German political history. An analysis of the decades-long struggle over memory and democracy shows how grassroots actors challenged and then took over public institutions of memorialization. In the process, confrontation of the Holocaust has been pushed to the centre of political culture. In unified Germany, memory politics have shifted again, as activists from East Germany have brought attention to the crimes of the East German state. This book delivers a novel and important contribution to scholarship about postwar Germany and the wider study of memory politics.

The long-term impact of the location of concentration camps on radical-right voting in Germany

“…The process of remembrance went through several phases. While the initial post-war period was characterized by denial and unwillingness to give a voice to the victims, the student-led revolts of the late 1960s and centre-left governments of the 1970s brought about the preconditions for an active questioning of the past and critical engagement with German guilt (Wüstenberg, 2017: 33). As Art claims, this contestation has given rise to two ‘frames’ of German history: a ‘contrition frame’, focusing on the victims and the responsibility resulting from German guilt, and a ‘normalization frame’, promoted by the right, arguing that discussions of German guilt had to end to allow the country to develop a ‘normal’ national identity (Art, 2005: 10).…”

“…Facilities previously serving as concentration camps can be considered one of the most prominent and powerful places of memory relating to the Holocaust. Memorials, places of remembrance or lieux de mémoire are arguably distinct from other forms of memory such as public debates or events in that they are permanent fixtures with which every resident or visitor of the area is confronted (Wüstenberg, 2017: 11). This high visibility makes memorials particularly prone to be subjects of societal mobilization and contestation (Wüstenberg, 2017: 11).…”

“…In particular, we were interested in the impact of living in spatial proximity to a former camp on voting for a far-right party (FRP). Our reasons for choosing this empirical design are twofold: first, physical monuments can be considered a particularly prominent and contentious object of memory, as their presence is visible to everyone in the area and permanent in time (Wüstenberg, 2017). Second, we believe that the impact of the Holocaust on electoral behaviour in Germany deserves particular attention.…”

A Model for Coming to Terms with the Past? Holocaust Remembrance and Antisemitism in Germany since 1945

“…Initiatives inspired by the local history movement of the 1980s ("dig where you stand") certainly helped advance this discussion in West Germany and led to the establishment of memorials and local research centers, but they were largely driven by dedicated, left-leaning individuals. 17 Daniel Goldhagen's book Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust advanced this debate significantly in 1996, although, as Julius Schoeps noted in his anthology on the controversy over the book, the overwhelming majority of German commentators condemned it. 18 The main argument behind the hostile reactions in Germany was the rejection of the accusation of collective guilt, one that Goldhagen specifically did not make.…”

Reality Monitoring and Autobiographical Memory: Negotiating the Self

“…Here the conflict is between the State's bureaucratic power and civil society groups that have alternative ways to recount and explain the past. In between, here as well, there is a lot of nuance, including the valuable contribution of memory activists between States and individual groups (see Wüstenberg, 2017).…”