Another way in which Germany (and other countries involved in the holocaust) have memorialization of the holocaust ingrained in their culture is through laws prohibiting the denial of the holocaust, and through their elimination of the death penalty. I was reminded of this TED Talk, given by American human rights lawyer, Bryan Stevenson, in which he talks about the mass incarceration of people (primarily men) of color, and the way in which American's discomfort with talking about race contributes to a justice and prison system that disproportionately hurts black men. At one point in the talk he makes a particularly interesting point as he compares the way in which Germany's ownership of the holocaust has impacted their justice system in a way that is very different from the manner in which America deals with a past that is based in racism and oppression. He says,
"I was giving some lectures in Germany about the death penalty. It was fascinating because one of the scholars stood up after the presentation and said, 'Well you know it's deeply troubling to hear what you're talking about.' He said, 'We don't have the death penalty in Germany. And of course, we can never have the death penalty in Germany.' And the room got very quiet, and this woman said, 'There's no way, with our history, we could ever engage in the systematic killing of human beings. It would be unconscionable for us to, in an intentional and deliberate way, set about executing people.' And I thought about that. What would it feel like to be living in a world where the nation state of Germany was executing people, especially if they were disproportionately Jewish? I couldn't bear it. It would be unconscionable."I thought this was such an important subject to bring up, and it very much related to "The Reader" and our discussions surrounding it. Just as Bernhard Schlink brings up the discomfort that exists in a recognition of the horrific events of the holocaust, and the way in which that discomfort effects whether or not justice can be had for the victims and those effected by it, Bryan Stevenson discusses the way in which the American desire to avoid discussing our country's racially oppressive history results in a lack of understanding regarding "what it's meant to do the things we've done historically." And further, how that discomfort fuels an "unwilling[ness] to commit ourselves to a process of truth and reconciliation."
What do you guys think? What does cultural ownership and memorialization of a horrific and oppressive past look like? And in what ways is quiet shame and discomfort debilitating to the pursuit of justice?
The Stevenson video is a bit long, but I highly recommend watching it! It's very relevant to our class.
I think the contrast between how Germany and American have dealt with their pasts is very interesting. It seems that remembering the Holocaust and making it illegal to deny it has had a progressive impact on Germany's justice system. In America's case, even though students are usually taught about the history of slavery and racism, it has not had the same effect. Racism obviously still exists and it seems those who wish to do so "forget" or downsize the importance of our history. It's actually quite amazing how seemingly unaware people are to America's horrible past. I think if America were to memorialize on such a large scale as Germany did, it might make an impact on those who hadn't thought about the importance of acknowledging wrongdoing.
ReplyDeleteIt's also interesting to reflect on the fact that we have a Holocaust Museum on the National Mall, but not a museum of slavery. Which event is more constitutive of our national history, the Holocaust or slavery?
ReplyDeleteI feel like the reason we have a Holocaust Museum and not one for Slavery has to do with blame. I think it is easier to point fingers than to accept that one was involved in a wrong-doing. It is easier to share some guilt for the Holocaust, something that we didn't start, than to take responsibility for what we did during slavery.
ReplyDelete