A Damnation of Genocide and creating Remembrance Cultures

[MichaSta]

A Damnation of Memory:

This weekends International Harald Tribune features a op-ed piece by Tmothy W. Ryback and Florian M. Beier on "A Damnation of Memory". It struck me as it trul;y illustrates the difficulty and challenge of remembering past atrocities and creating a remembrance culture that not only honors those murdered, but also illustrates and preserves the places of the perpetrators. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/opini ... ory&st=cse
The article talks about how to the State of Bavaria, Germany, deals with the remains of the Nazi, and particular, Hitler residence in Obersalzburg (Berchtesgaden), in which he and the Nazi high society resided and formulate many of the action plans of the Shoa and the war. They argue that while Germany as become proficient and sensitive in preserving the places of atrocities ("Opferorte"), like the concentration camps of Dachau, Buchenwald, Sachesnhausen, Bergen-Belsen, they still face difficulty and constant debate on how to deal with the places in which the perpetrators formulated the plans or lived ("Täterorte").
What do you think? How should a government deal with such places? Or should places in which the pepetrators lived and formulated their plans be dealt with? Should they be destroyed or preserved?
The area in souther Bavaria has seen a large amount of Hitler-pilgrims from all over Europe and the USA. Do you see a danger in preserving Hitler;s residence? Could it become a shrine for neo-Nazis and racists? Or must such a place be preserved in order to create and facilitate remembrance of the evil that resided in it?
How does Rwanda deal with such places?
What is the essence of the Rwandan remembrance culture of the genocide?
Are the perpetrators remembered and illustrated at all, besides in the remembrance of the murder itself?

I would be thankful to hear from you..

Micha

[ArianaS]

Micha, I had just used Germany and the Shoa (Holocaust) as an example to reply to Roei's questions on change. I am a believer is preserving. Preserving memory - and in aiding memory physical objects are often useful. Nazi's burned books because what the books stood for would remind people of ideas and history that went against Nazi ideology. To destroy historical sites would be like burning books, but of which there are no duplicate copies.

As for Hitler's residence- is this a site instrumental to remembering the Holocaust- perhaps not... perhaps it is a "shrine" to Hitler. Who makes the distinction? I don't claim expertise on this issue, I do, on the surface see it as a practical shrine. I did study neo-Nazis while worked with the Anti-Defamation League. Still, not an expert, I do think the home of Hitler serves a greater purpose to followers of his ideas and less to the purpose of preserving the history of the Holocaust.

I am very curious now on Rwandan sites... thanks for sparking my interest in this matter.

[AlexDavid]

Was reading your entrances and it reminded me of a very interesting article I read a few weeks ago about "Mein Kampf".(link here below if you are interested in reading it)

So to resume it a bit, the last edition of Mein Kampf is about to run out, the Bavarian authorities (who control the copyright) are trying to prevent new editions of this book from being published in Germany (where it has been banned) for they are worried that neo-Nazi groups will use it to disseminate Hitler's ideas anew.

So the author (Stephen M. Walt) is arguing the case, and saying the best way to counter hate is to use those texts and show their ridicule, as opposed to banning it and making it 'something special'
"But most importantly, the best way to deal with a book like Mein Kampf is to expose it to light, demolish its "arguments," and remind everyone where Hitler's world-view ultimately led. Apart from its obvious xenophobia and anti-Semitism, the book is filled with historical falsehoods, bogus prescriptions and sophomoric attempts at philosophy. If you want fascism to remain a marginalized social phenomenon, allowing qualified historians to dissect Hitler's ideas is a better antidote than censorship."

I quite agree with him and do not believe in destructing things, properties, artefacts. However, I do believe they should come with a sound analysis and explanation.

Same goes for Israel. A few years I read about a group that was writing the 'other' history too, that is the history of the Arabs in this country. They used to go to different towns that had a large Arab population, and Arabic street names, for examples, and post it next to its new Jewish one. Remembering! They argued that only when the Jews in Israel will acknowledge that there were other people living here before the Declaration of Independence, will it be possible to have an open dialogue. Robbing the Arab population of its Past does nothing to help solve the problem. Of course, they came under fire from a large part of the population and apart from that one odd article, I never heard of them again.

I do not believe that in the Israel/Arab case, to respect the other's past will solve the problem... and the more the time passes the more it seems unsolvable, but I do believe it is essential.

And yes I am also extremely curious about hearing how the remembrance is dealt with in Rwanda. from what I understood from the different readings and talks to Rwandan acquaintances, the race issue seems to be out of the game, in order to unite everyone, but, how do you deal with remembering when you are not allowed to use names?

Have a nice week, looking forward to your answers.
Alex
http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/02/05/how_to_discredit_mein_kampf

[yvette]

Dear AlexDavid,

how are you, I m Yvette from Rwanda, i read your message that you are extremely curious about hearing how the remembrance is dealt with in Rwanda. As you say in order to unite and reconciliate Rwandans, now there is no issue of writing race (ethnic group) in different documents such as identity cards, different forms filled in at schools, work place.....

But this not means that, we forgotten (as Rwandans even the international community) that there was a Genocide against Tutsi "so called ethnic group",it is our sad history which canot be forgotten, It is even our duty as Rwandans to remember such inhuman action. When we talk about this history ofcourse we are allowed to use names Hutu, Tutsi, and so on. But when it is matter of chating between us, recruiting staff, selecting students to go to the high schools or even primary and secondary , we do not look at those names as criteria of exclusion.

As we are aware, we are even in the period of 16th commemoration of Genocide Against Tutsi, and in all speeches, those names are said and written.

Further more, the so called "Tutsi and Hutu names are no the ethnic groups by its definition (we have the same culture, we speak the same langage,...). As you know it is even why the International community hesitated to confirm theat the crime in Rwanda in 1994 was Genocide against Tutsi, because that crime was not between 2 ethnic groups by its definitions many concerns were raised on this.


Thx a lot and hope to hear from you soon