History in political culture of Germany:
genesis and modernity
MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia, firstname.lastname@example.org
elibrary_id: 402779 | ORCID: 0000-0003-4153-9128 |
MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia, email@example.com
elibrary_id: 1001988 | ORCID: 0000-0002-0209-5918 | RESEARCHER_ID: AAD-8008-2020
Article received: 2022.08.13. Accepted: 2022.11.08
Pavlov N.V., Pimenova E.V. History in political culture of Germany: genesis and modernity. – Polis. Political Studies. 2023. No. 1. P. 29-41. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2023.01.04. EDN: MTDAHS
The critical study of national history became an essential part of German political culture from the 1960s. Scientists, journalists, and politicians mainly focused on the period of the National Socialist dictatorship. After the German unification, the Germans made significant efforts to carry out a critical analysis of their history, primarily focusing on the study of the totalitarian regime in East Germany. It was widely covered in the media, discussed at all levels – from local government meetings to the Bundestag and the federal government. The authorities opened the archives of the Ministry of State Security of the GDR, conducted a mass lustration, published thousands of evidence pieces of violations of human and civil rights. This campaign could to some extent be compared to the denazification of the early post-war period. The focus on the negative aspects of its national history and the self-punishment at the time of chancellor G. Kohl in 1991-1998 were replaced by the concept of “national normality” under G. Schroeder in 1998-2005. After A. Merkel came to power, the formation of a collective national memory was consolidated. From then on, the German establishment narrative suggested that the negative associations with the Third Reich and the regime in the GDR should be balanced by the undeniable cultural, civilizational and democratic achievements of Germany in earlier historical periods. Currently, ajustments are still under way in the official approaches to historical events and processes in the philosophical and political dimension, as the collective narrative strives to take into account today’s domestic and foreign political realities, primarily the role and place of Germany in the world. So, the main goal of the article is to clarify the modern political interpretation of the national history of Germany through an analysis of the discourse of German politicians.
Allemann, F.R. (1956). Bonn ist nicht Weimar. Koln: Kiepenheuer u. Witsch.
Bracher, K.-D. (1955). Die Auflosung der Weimarer Republik. Eine Studie zum Problem des Machtverfalls in der Demokratie. Stuttgart: Ring-Verlag.
Halbwachs, M. (1967). La memoire collective. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Hellmann, G. (1998). Die prekare Macht: Deutschland an der Schwelle zum 21. Jahrhundert. In W.-D. Eberwein, & K. Kaiser (Ed.), Deutschlands neue Auβenpolitik. Band 4: Institutionen und Ressoursen (pp. 265-282). Berlin; Boston: Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783486829303.265
Koch, J. (2019). Dass du nicht vergessest der Geschichte. Staatliche Gedenk- und Feiertage von 1871 bis heute. Darmstadt: Academic in Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft (WBG).
Mann, T. (1954). Die Ansprache an Hamburger Studenten 1953. In Die Spur der Menschen. Jahrbuch der Freien Akademie der Kunste in Hamburg, 3, 31-33.
Munckler, H. (2011). Die Deutschen und ihre Mythen. Berlin: Rohwolt.
Steinbach, P. (2012). Der Kampf um politische Meinungen wird in Deutschland oft mit historischen Argumenten gefuhrt. Bonn: Dietz Verlag.
Wehler, H.-U. (1973). Das Deutsche Kaiserreich 1871-1918. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Alekseyeva, T.A. (2022). Agent-structure relations: methodology of constructivism. Polis. Political Studies. 4, 77-93. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.04.07
Assmann, A. (2019). Zabvenie istorii – oderzhimost‘ istoriej [Oblivion of history, obsession with history]. Мoscow: New Literary Observer. (In Russ.)
Denisenko, A. (2016). Intellectual roots of the secularization of post-Reformation Europe: historical, philosophical and theological aspects of the problem. Theological Reflections, Special issue „Reformation: Eastern European Dimensions“, 17, 180-185. (In Russ.)
Jaspers, K. (1999). Die Schuldfrage. (Russ. ed.: Jaspers, K. Vopros o vinovnosti. O politicheskoi otvetstvennosti Germanii. Moscow: Progress).
Maksimychev, I.F. (2009). Osobennosti germanskogo kul‘turno-istoricheskogo landshafta. Istoricheskoe nasledie [The features of German historical and cultural landscape]. In Germaniya. Vyzovy XXI veka [Germany. Challenges of the 21st Century] (pp. 741-776). Moscow: Ves’ mir. (In Russ.)
Miller, A., & Lipman, M. (Ed.). (2012). Istoricheskaya politika v XXI veke [Historical politics in 21st century]. Moscow: New Literary Observer. (In Russ.)
Pogorelskaya, S.V. (2001). Domestic political aspects of new German foreign policy. World Economy and International Relations, 7, 91-100. (In Russ.)
The Official Historical Narrative as a Part of Identity Policy of the Russian State: From the 1990s to the 2000s. – Polis. Political Studies. 2016. No6
Artamonov D.S, Tikhonova S.V.,
Memory policy on the Internet memes: from visualization of history to fakes. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No5
Paradoxes of Memory of the Recent Past: USSR Under Brezhnev, Russia Under Yeltsin and Putin in Perception of the Current Generation of Russians. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No5
Malakhov V.S., Letnyakov D.E.,
The collapse of hegemonial normality: migration and the politics of memory in the U.S., UK and France. – Polis. Political Studies. 2023. No1
The Commemoration in Russia of the Centenary of the 1917 Revolution(s): Analysis of Strategies of the Key Mnemonic Actors. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No1