20. Germany and its past

Dirk Moses - Catechism debate

• The Holocaust is historically treated as unique in Germany, but this “catechism” is outdated. History should be seen in broader context of violence, empire, and racism.

Key Points:

• Holocaust central to German identity → moral responsibility and strong support for Israel.

• “New catechism” accepted by postwar Germany, but may limit free speech and debate about other histories.

• Current approach creates hierarchy of suffering (e.g., colonial crimes overlooked).

• Holocaust not fully unique: Nazi violence linked to imperial and political goals.

• Calls for more inclusive historical understanding: respect all victims, not only Jews.

Neil Gregor - Catechism debate

• Supports contextualizing Nazism in broader European violence, but cautions Moses’ critique is too harsh and dismissive of prior generations’ memory work.

Key Points:

• Nazism rooted in long-standing European traditions: racism, nationalism, imperialism.

• Contextualization doesn’t fully explain why Nazism arose in Germany specifically.

• Debate on Holocaust memory should be respectful to encourage productive discourse.

Matt Fitzpatrick - Catechsim debate

• Holocaust should be understood alongside other violent histories; postcolonial perspectives enrich understanding.

Key Points:

• Comparisons important, but not all genocides are identical.

• Critiques Germany’s use of Holocaust to justify unconditional support for Israel.

• Encourages broader historical view without collapsing differences between events.

Udi Greenberg - Catechsim debate

• Contextualizing Holocaust within colonial violence is useful but has limits; Holocaust memory still valuable.

Key Points:

• Nazi extremity (industrial killing) unique; broader context doesn’t fully explain it.

• Critiques Germany’s political use of Holocaust to justify policies toward Palestinians.

• Holocaust memory can serve as model for remembering other injustices.

• Supports inclusion of colonial histories without undermining Holocaust remembrance.

Germans as Victims? (Robert G. Moeller)

• Postwar Germany engaged in dual memory: Holocaust central, but German suffering also remembered.

Key Points:

• Holocaust memorialization central to national identity; shaped postwar culture.

• German suffering emphasized via media, films, monuments (bombings, expulsions, POWs).

• East Germany: antifascism and Allied blame; West Germany: economic recovery + victim support.

• Public debates balanced acknowledgment of German suffering without denying Nazi crimes.

• Memory evolved: 1960s–1980s → focus shifted to Nazi crimes; post-Cold War → integrated, nuanced memory of all victims.

• Recognizes complexity: Germans could be both perpetrators and victims; memory shaped by social, cultural, and generational factors.

GDR dillusionment

• Promised freedom was not how it appeared to be

• Material comforts and benefits didn’t materialise

• Promises made (Kohl) were unfulfilled

• Widespread second class citizen felt by East

  • Dissatisfied with the unification process which some saw as a colonial takeover

• Unemployment increased

• Women faced greatest unemployment after unification - 70% East lost jobs after 1990.

• Commodities of GDR replaced by West brands

• Everything changed for the East, only 18% of East employees stayed in 1994 in the same company

• Privatisation of companies led job loss and bankrupcy for East

• Life in GDR revolved around work place community - lack of job - collapse of this community

• Disposable income was lower in East than west, demographic of young people was higher in west compared to rural East areas

• Different trends evident as more fly vaccines in east compared to west

Nostalgie:

• Some east constructed a retrospective where they idealised GDR as a stable and caring environment

  • Remained nostalgic of the benefits of the GDR: cheap food, child care, cheap public transport, employment security, social gender equality, community sense

  • Material culture of commodities replaced by west brands created nostalgia for familiar taste

• Yet: counter memory opposes official narrative which highlights repressive nature of the regime

legacy of GDR

• Conflicting representation of GDR

• Nostalgic of what it could been/ideal yet memories of dictatorship through repression

• Victory of democracy over communist

• Early historiography glorified perspective of GDR, then became critical

• Loss of dream of a socialist 'better Germany'

• 'of course it was a dictatorship. But it was not only a dictatorship' Mary Fulbrook

  • Why did the GDR collapse? Why did the GDR last so long? Conflicting perspectives - about its survival, yet it was economically the most stable state in the Soviet sphere - people made it work.

  • After 1989, those in GDR felt as they were denied agency which limited growing roles by people - unhappiness was prevalent.

Katja Hoyer - Beyond the wall (she grew up in the GDR, young when the wall fell)

• Felt GDR story was told wrong, dismissed, losing side of thew Cold war, Socialist East Germany contrasted to West

• Wanted to represent GDR beyond the Western propaganda which it was seen as

• In Germany, faced criticism as she was seen unifying the past, representing a different perception