https://www.reuters.com/article/us-poland-holocaust-idUSKBN2A91M7
QuotePolish court orders historians to apologise over Holocaust book
WARSAW (Reuters) - A Warsaw court ruled on Tuesday that two historians tarnished the memory of a Polish villager in a book about the Holocaust and must apologise, in a case some academics warn could deter impartial research into Poles' actions during World War Two.
More than seven decades on, the conflict remains a live political issue in Poland, where the ruling nationalists say studies showing complicity by some Poles in the killing of Jews by Nazi Germany are an attempt to dishonour a country that suffered immensely in the conflict.
The court ruled that Barbara Engelking and Jan Grabowski, editors of the two-volume work "Night without an end. Fate of Jews in selected counties of occupied Poland", must apologise for saying Edward Malinowski gave up Jews to the Nazi Germans.
But it stopped short of ordering them to pay compensation.
"The court's ruling must not have a cooling effect on academic research. In the opinion of the court the demanded sum of 100,000 zlotys ($27,017) would constitute such a factor," said judge Ewa Jonczyk.
Polish academics and Jewish organisations such as Israel's Yad Vashem had expressed concern that the trial may undermine freedom of research, and Engelking said the case aimed to have such an effect.
"There is no doubt this is some sort of an effort to create a freezing effect, to show academics that there are issues on which it is not worth focusing on," she said.
The World Jewish Congress said in a statement it was "dismayed" by the ruling.
Engelking and Grabowski plan to appeal Tuesday's verdict.
BATTLE OVER THE PAST
The case had been brought by Malinowski's 81-year-old niece, Filomena Leszczynska, and funded by the Polish League Against Defamation, which opposes claims of Polish involvement in the murder of Jews.
Leszczynska's lawyer, Monika Brzozowska-Pasieka, argued that Engelking and Grabowski failed to follow correct research methodology when compiling the book, an accusation Grabowski denied.
"Filomena is extremely pleased with this verdict," Brzozowska-Pasieka said after the trial. "The question of compensation from the beginning was a secondary issue."
Almost all of Poland's 3.2 million Jews are understood to have died during more than five years of Nazi rule, accounting for around half the Jews estimated to have been killed in the Holocaust. A further 3 million non-Jewish citizens also died under Poland's Nazi occupation.
A significant body of research suggests that, while thousands of Poles risked their lives to help Jews, thousands also participated in the Holocaust. Many Poles do not accept such findings.
In 2018, an international backlash forced the ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party to drop a law that would have made it a crime to suggest Poland bore any responsibility for Nazi atrocities.
Grabowski told Reuters before Tuesday's ruling that the case covered similar ground to the proposed law by attempting to establish offence to national dignity as grounds for suing over any such claims in the future.
Brzozowska-Pasieka denied the case aimed to introduce new avenues for litigation, but simply sought to protect her client's personal rights.
This seems to be a particular sore sport for Poland. They're keen to paint the war as black and white as possible with absolutely no collaboration or dodgy actions by the resistance.
Its fascinating how Poland is so divided between pretty decent young progressive folk in the cities and this utter idiocy. Guess we just have to hope with the passing of years this shit dies out as the young take over.
They really like to make sure the world remembers their collaborators.
At one hand they have a right to want this be represented properly and proportionally - they suffered incredibly from German and Russian occupation (just look at statistics), and most certainly there were plenty of heroic cases of helping Jews. Things like a couple of German papers calling the camps "Polish deathcamps" I totally understand being upset about.
On the other hand, it looks like they themselves turn the discussion into "just how evil were Poles in WW2" by challenging every single mention of collaborators.
Quote from: Tyr on February 11, 2021, 04:39:53 AM
Its fascinating how Poland is so divided between pretty decent young progressive folk in the cities and this utter idiocy. Guess we just have to hope with the passing of years this shit dies out as the young take over.
I almost never buy this generational shift take of politics. But even if I did, a lot of the young and well-educated have moved to the rest of Europe. I posted a map of the youth and brain drain from CEE a while ago and I do wonder. It feels almost like you could apply the whole "left behind" analysis on a European level to entire countries: post-industrial, with the odd liberal/university town, young people moving away and in the case of some CEE states a legit demographic crisis.
This shouldn't be in the court. But I can see how this is difficult - Poland wasn't France, or Benelux. Poles suffered as much in the war as any other people, except for Jews, Roma etc. It took a generation or two for Western European countries to start to acknowledge their complicity in the Holocaust, I think it will take longer in CEE (not just Poland - Ukraine, the Baltics etc). Partly because of Soviet bloc education/narrative of the war but also it is more difficult to acknowledge wrongs when you were also a victim.
And it's interesting that this story came out yesterday when I also saw the story about Ukrainian anger at comments by the German President:
QuoteGermany's Steinmeier angers Kyiv with his comments on Nord Stream, WWII
The president pointed to the "bigger picture," including Nazi Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union, when asked about the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This did not go down well with Ukraine.
Ukraine's ambassador to Berlin on Tuesday slammed "questionable historical arguments" made by German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier regarding the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.
Andriy Melnyk's reaction came as officials from Ukraine and many other European countries have grown increasingly frustrated with the German government's insistence on completing the project and effectively doubling the amount of gas that Germany imports from Russia.
In an interview with the German newspaper Rheinische Post, Steinmeier defended the pipeline by saying that fuel sales were "one of the last bridges between Russia and Europe."
"I believe that burning bridges is not a sign of strength," Steinmeier said.
"For us Germans, there is another dimension," the president said, noting that June will mark 80 years since the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union. He said 20 million Soviet citizens were killed in World War II.
"There have been phases of fruitful partnership, but even more times of terrible bloodshed," Steinmeier said.
"This does not justify any wrongdoing in Russian politics today, but we must not lose sight of the bigger picture," he added. "Yes, we live in the presence of a difficult relationship, but there is a past before and a future after."
Ukraine not happy
Melnyk said Steinmeier's stance was met by "surprise and indignation" in Kyiv. The comments "struck deep" into the hearts of Ukrainians, the ambassador said, according to Germany's DPA news agency.
Steinmeier's comments ignored Ukrainian victims of Nazi Germany, Melnyk said. Ukraine was a part of the Soviet Union during the war, and millions of Ukrainians also lost their lives. Kyiv is currently engaged in a prolonged conflict with Moscow, and the completion of the pipeline could deprive Ukraine of valuable gas transit fees.
On Tuesday, Steinmeier's office dismissed Melnyk's complaints by saying it was met with "complete incomprehension."
"The text of the interview speaks for itself," they said.
Facing the heat
When asked about what the Biden administration has contacted him about the pipeline, which the previous Trump administration sanctioned, Steinmeier said dialogue "on this issue has not even begun."
Germany has come under pressure for continuing to work on construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany via the Baltic Sea. France told Germany last week that it should halt production due to Russia arresting and sentencing opposition leader Alexei Navalny to more than 2.5 years in prison. Germany has demanded that Navalny be released.
Construction on the pipeline resumed earlier this month. Just 150 kilometers (93 miles) of pipeline from the more than 2,300 long pipeline remained to be built as construction resumed.
I think the memory of the occupation of Eastern Europe and the Holocaust and then the (re-)occupation by the Soviets is just still so much more messy and unsettled and contested than for countries in Western Europe. Poland and Ukraine are very good, if extreme, examples of this. The countries that were occupied and that suffered huge atrocities against their people, also had many collaborators who committed atrocities against Jews especially and many of the people who were, if not collaborators, then anti-semites subsequently resisted the Soviet occupation.
Edit: Basically what Tamas said more succinctly :blush:
So not just Schröder as a Gazprom sellout in Germany? Good to know.
People in Eastern Europe just don't like Jews, for whatever reason hating Jews is very important to them. The Poles felt that there were too many Jews in Poland in the 1960s. In Vilnius today the one synagogue left (of a hundred) has to have fences and cameras and guards.
Quote from: The Brain on February 11, 2021, 05:53:11 AM
People in Eastern Europe just don't like Jews, for whatever reason hating Jews is very important to them. The Poles felt that there were too many Jews in Poland in the 1960s. In Vilnius today the one synagogue left (of a hundred) has to have fences and cameras and guards.
So basically like any synagogue in a muslim-rich suburb in Western Europe. :(
Very good point Sheilbh, in Hungary it is still very much messy, and I don't think it will ever get properly resolved - as the generations go by the culture will settle on a common narrative but that's it.
You have a whole mix of things like the list of agents and informants working for the communist state. They are basically semi-public and wielded as a political tool. It is a very complex subject because a lot of informants were coerced into signing up and never provided a single shred of actual evidence on anyone, then there are the ones who did sign-up willingly due to the perks and were enthusiastically ratting on people thought them to be their friends. And I am sure a lot of people in between. Yet, technically all of them are on the same list and wearing the same designation.
Then there is the matter of our gruesome far-right history before but especially during the Arrowcross coup following the German occupation. The symbols of those bastards have been taken over by the modern far-right and little is known and less is done about that by the general public. There was actually a recent documentary done on a particularly nasty case where basically a statue glorifying one of the far-right symbols of the time ended up being put on the scene of some of the worst Jewish pogroms and executions. There are English subtitles if you are interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ygZB1MTRR4
And there is the matter of the 1956 revolution. It went from being a counter-revolution officially to a revered holy event officially with little to no transition period, while it is a far more complex topic than that.
Quote from: The Brain on February 11, 2021, 05:53:11 AM
People in Eastern Europe just don't like Jews, for whatever reason hating Jews is very important to them. The Poles felt that there were too many Jews in Poland in the 1960s. In Vilnius today the one synagogue left (of a hundred) has to have fences and cameras and guards.
TBF that seems little better in Western Europe nowadays. Maybe their re-discovered anti-Semitism is of Middle Eastern import, but that matters little for practical effect.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 06:47:40 AM
Quote from: The Brain on February 11, 2021, 05:53:11 AM
People in Eastern Europe just don't like Jews, for whatever reason hating Jews is very important to them. The Poles felt that there were too many Jews in Poland in the 1960s. In Vilnius today the one synagogue left (of a hundred) has to have fences and cameras and guards.
TBF that seems little better in Western Europe nowadays. Maybe their re-discovered anti-Semitism is of Middle Eastern import, but that matters little for practical effect.
Yeah there's a Jewish centre in Central London with all the same security measures.
I don't think it's limited to eastern Europe, apart from the heavy-handed government meddling. Questions about Dutch involvement in the SS, and the harsh treatment of Jews returning after the war, are now being asked but hardly acknowledged publicly. I think it will remain more or less taboo until everyone involved has died.
Quote from: Maladict on February 11, 2021, 07:59:40 AM
I don't think it's limited to eastern Europe, apart from the heavy-handed government meddling. Questions about Dutch involvement in the SS, and the harsh treatment of Jews returning after the war, are now being asked but hardly acknowledged publicly. I think it will remain more or less taboo until everyone involved has died.
Interesting. I suppose I associate the Western European recognition/acknowledgement as starting with sort of the 1968 generation and then Chirac's recognition of the role of the French state in the Vel' d'Hiv round-up (which was, of course, echoed when the same location was used to hold Algerian protesters in 1962 and Maurice Papon who had participated in the round-up of Jews was, by that point, the Prefect of Police in Paris).
Edit: Out of interest have there been official acknowledgements by the Dutch government?
I don't know about all of Eastern Europe but I've read about Ukraine a lot and been to Ukraine a few times where the past is very contested (and actually you can see the creation of a "historic" memory happening in relation to both EuroMaidan and the Russian invasion). But because of the USSR this debate and appraisal of the past is something that's really only been able to start in the last thirty years after the imposed Soviet narrative and it is politically salient because Russia absolutely weaponises history in the region - particularly in relation to Ukraine. And the Soviet narrative is definitely an important part of that - going round cities like Kyiv or Odessa you will see plenty of Soviet war memorials or stars for Hero Cities - but there was a lot more to it and reconciling or even comprehending that is going to take a long time. Especially as you say when people are still alive, but also because history still has an impact on the present - particularly in relation to Russia.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 11, 2021, 08:14:58 AM
Quote from: Maladict on February 11, 2021, 07:59:40 AM
I don't think it's limited to eastern Europe, apart from the heavy-handed government meddling. Questions about Dutch involvement in the SS, and the harsh treatment of Jews returning after the war, are now being asked but hardly acknowledged publicly. I think it will remain more or less taboo until everyone involved has died.
Interesting. I suppose I associate the Western European recognition/acknowledgement as starting with sort of the 1968 generation and then Chirac's recognition of the role of the French state in the Vel' d'Hiv round-up (which was, of course, echoed when the same location was used to hold Algerian protesters in 1962 and Maurice Papon who had participated in the round-up of Jews was, by that point, the Prefect of Police in Paris).
You're mixing up events with Papon. Vél d'Hiv was used in 1958, not 1962, to hold Algerian French muslims. Vél d'Hiv was destroyed in 1959, with a new sport hall (Palais des Sports) being built somewhere else.
1961 was when a pro-FLN demonstration was violently suppressed, with historians still debating to this day the exact figures. "Massacre or not?" is now the debate.
1962, rue de Charonne, was an anti-OAS demonstration.
More and more people mix up the two or prefer to commemorate only one of them, i.e the last one, specially for the French left.
PS: back in 1976, one of the last Alain Delon classics dealt with the whole Vél d'Hiv' case, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsieur_Klein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsieur_Klein). Not a great success, but now seen as his last masterpiece.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 11, 2021, 08:14:58 AM
Interesting. I suppose I associate the Western European recognition/acknowledgement as starting with sort of the 1968 generation and then Chirac's recognition of the role of the French state in the Vel' d'Hiv round-up (which was, of course, echoed when the same location was used to hold Algerian protesters in 1962 and Maurice Papon who had participated in the round-up of Jews was, by that point, the Prefect of Police in Paris).
Edit: Out of interest have there been official acknowledgements by the Dutch government?
To be clear, none of it is contested, it's just that a lot of (mostly older) people prefer not to confront these ghosts of the past.
The city of Amsterdam sent returning Jewish survivors tax bills for 1940-1945 (plus interest, of course). Formal apologies were finally made in 2015, and some other cities are following suit now.
The PM apologized, unexpectedly, on behalf of the Dutch government on Holocaust remembrance day in 2020. It had been talked about for decades, but saying sorry seems to be very hard for politicians. The king then more or less apologized for the lack of support for the Jews from the royal family, on Liberation Day last May.
I don't really think it's the young people that are driving this, they don't seem to care about the war in any way. It's people our age, not (in)directly damaged by wartime trauma like the boomers were, but old enough to have known the people that lived through it.
Quote from: Maladict on February 11, 2021, 09:56:47 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 11, 2021, 08:14:58 AM
Interesting. I suppose I associate the Western European recognition/acknowledgement as starting with sort of the 1968 generation and then Chirac's recognition of the role of the French state in the Vel' d'Hiv round-up (which was, of course, echoed when the same location was used to hold Algerian protesters in 1962 and Maurice Papon who had participated in the round-up of Jews was, by that point, the Prefect of Police in Paris).
Edit: Out of interest have there been official acknowledgements by the Dutch government?
To be clear, none of it is contested, it's just that a lot of (mostly older) people prefer not to confront these ghosts of the past.
The city of Amsterdam sent returning Jewish survivors tax bills for 1940-1945 (plus interest, of course). Formal apologies were finally made in 2015, and some other cities are following suit now.
The PM apologized, unexpectedly, on behalf of the Dutch government on Holocaust remembrance day in 2020. It had been talked about for decades, but saying sorry seems to be very hard for politicians. The king then more or less apologized for the lack of support for the Jews from the royal family, on Liberation Day last May.
I don't really think it's the young people that are driving this, they don't seem to care about the war in any way. It's people our age, not (in)directly damaged by wartime trauma like the boomers were, but old enough to have known the people that lived through it.
It is hard for us relative old-timers to understand just how remote the events of WW2 are to younger people.
I was born in 1967 - 22 years after the end of WW2. That seemed a long time, but it isn't really - we are coming up on 22 years after the Millennium, an event that now seems very recent to me!
When I was growing up, I of course knew plenty of people who were involved in WW2, and so questions of accountability were pressing.
Now, it is increasingly ancient history. Already only the very elderly have any personal rememberance of it, and they are likely to all be gone soon. Now, it is 76 years ago - the same length of time from the American Civil War to partway through WW2. To my kid, it is something in the deep past.
Yes - and yet the importance of the Holocaust and other legacies of WW2 are still very present in modern day politics and "alternative" histories (from outright lies to solipsistic takes) are still circulating.
This isn't even just related to the European war. I read an article today which included a nugget that Chinese foreign policy thinkers view the growing British-Japanese alliance as a re-igniting of the old 1920s alliance; similarly I understand from Adam Tooze's writing that party documents will very often refer to the Chinese-Japanese war or even battles like Stalingrad because the war is a core foundational part of the People's Republic and the legitimacy of the Communist Party.
In many ways I think that the war is settled and non-contentious, with relatively little salience in contemporary politics (perhaps, except, in Britain? "very well then, alone") is an exceptional aspect of Western Europe and North America. From what I understand it still seems far more open and relevant in Asia and Eastern Europe.
In relation to the Holocaust in particular I am very worried about our discourse once the last survivors die. And on both the Holocaust generally, and Poland, in specific, I think Lanzmann's Shoah is an extraordinary contribution.
Quote from: Malthus on February 11, 2021, 10:28:00 AM
It is hard for us relative old-timers to understand just how remote the events of WW2 are to younger people.
Yeah, it's like WW1 to us.
I am sometimes surprised by how remote and in the past the Vietnam War is to the younger generation now. When I was born it had only been over for two years. I find that fascinating considering how traumatic and very important that war was when I was a kid.
Quote from: Valmy on February 11, 2021, 11:32:30 AM
I am sometimes surprised by how remote and in the past the Vietnam War is to the younger generation now. When I was born it had only been over for two years. I find that fascinating considering how traumatic and very important that war was when I was a kid.
I also wonder if the whole 60s thing with the culture and all, which was still perceived as a Big Deal by me thanks to it being handled as such by the generation just before me, is of any consequence or interest to young people.
Not to mention 80s and 90s. Guns N' Roses is as old now as the bands of the late 50s were when they were new.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 11:36:41 AM
I also wonder if the whole 60s thing with the culture and all, which was still perceived as a Big Deal by me thanks to it being handled as such by the generation just before me, is of any consequence or interest to young people.
Not to mention 80s and 90s. Guns N' Roses is as old now as the bands of the late 50s were when they were new.
I think we're living through it. The Crown, Pride, It's a Sin, 120 BPM, the Deutschland series, Stranger Things, Pose etc. We're seeing a cultural sort of setting of what the 80s were and the 90s will follow. Some of it - especially Stranger Things and Deutschland and the music - are exploiting the nostalgia of people like me from the tail end of the 90s because we're now peak consumers.
But it's also as I say fixing a narrative of what the 80s were which will be very difficult to shift and stands in contrast to how the 80s were experienced by many. Just like the cultural "setting" of the 60s and 70s. But, yeah, Nirvana is to us what skiffle and other pre-Beatles trends were to them :lol: :ph34r:
Someone pointed out the other day that the show The Wonder Years debuted in 1988 and was set in 1968.
If you were to make a show with a similar premise now it would be set in 2001.
Maybe it's me but it seems there was a bigger cultural change 1968 => 1988 than there was 2001 => 2021?
Quote from: Syt on February 11, 2021, 12:03:29 PM
Someone pointed out the other day that the show The Wonder Years debuted in 1988 and was set in 1968.
If you were to make a show with a similar premise now it would be set in 2001.
Maybe it's me but it seems there was a bigger cultural change 1968 => 1988 than there was 2001 => 2021?
I think it's more of a psychological consequence of not being alive in 1968. Events within our lifetime will always feel closer to each other than events outside it, even if chronologically that's not the case.
We have changed a lot since 2001, just think i.e. of social media and the profound cultural effects it has had.
I mean 2001 was just a few years before Languish started. Maybe we should do a nostalgia piece about 2003 when we all started posting here.
But it doesn't feel like that much has changed since then does it?
But maybe people in 1988 felt the same way about 1968. I don't know.
People didn't walk around staring at phones in 2001, did they?
Quote from: Syt on February 11, 2021, 12:03:29 PM
Maybe it's me but it seems there was a bigger cultural change 1968 => 1988 than there was 2001 => 2021?
Yes maybe. As an unreconstructed nostalgic for my youth I have watched a few programs from sort of peak Cool Britannia era (we don't have a cringe emoji, alas) like Queer as Folk and Smack the Pony. On a purely aesthetic level it looks so very old and I feel like an ancient. There is a very specific late 90s - early 2000s aesthetic that is super-distinctive (for some reason the film that always springs to mind as an example of this is Brosnan's early Bond films).
However from about 2005-7 and the first iPhone release and Facebook I swear there's been an aesthetic flattening. Everything is similar all around the world - football styles, memes, fashion, films etc - and also have gone through less outlandish leaps of style as you saw in the 70s, 80s, 90s. I feel like what I wear now I pretty much could've worn about 15 years ago whereas 2005 - 1990 are world's apart. That's why we must, reluctantly, turn off the internet :( :contract:
Quote from: celedhring on February 11, 2021, 12:06:12 PM
We have changed a lot since 2001, just think i.e. of social media and the profound cultural effects it has had.
I guess. It was not like that wasn't around in 2001 but it was a bit different.
Of course we are definitely using an artifact from those days.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 11, 2021, 12:11:19 PM
People didn't walk around staring at phones in 2001, did they?
Using the internet on your phone in 2001 would bankrupt you quickly. They had draconian data charges plus the browsers were really primitive.
Here I am, crying into my old brick cell phone from 1990.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 11, 2021, 12:12:22 PM
However from about 2005-7 and the first iPhone release and Facebook I swear there's been an aesthetic flattening. Everything is similar all around the world - football styles, memes, fashion, films etc - and also have gone through less outlandish leaps of style as you saw in the 70s, 80s, 90s. I feel like what I wear now I pretty much could've worn about 15 years ago whereas 2005 - 1990 are world's apart. That's why we must, reluctantly, turn off the internet :( :contract:
Yeah my clothes have not changed at all since 2005, while I wouldn't be caught dead now in much of what I wore in the 1990s. I have wondered if that was just getting older, I do recall middle aged men in the 1980s and early 1990s wearing 1960s and 1970s clothes just because they weren't trendy at all, but it is not like the kids are wearing stuff that is all that distinctive either.
Quote from: Syt on February 11, 2021, 12:03:29 PM
Someone pointed out the other day that the show The Wonder Years debuted in 1988 and was set in 1968.
If you were to make a show with a similar premise now it would be set in 2001.
Maybe it's me but it seems there was a bigger cultural change 1968 => 1988 than there was 2001 => 2021?
I think the big change was around 2000, when the Internet started to truly connect the world, but still within the relatively carefree times before 9/11.
Quote from: Valmy on February 11, 2021, 12:08:43 PM
I mean 2001 was just a few years before Languish started. Maybe we should do a nostalgia piece about 2003 when we all started posting here.
But it doesn't feel like that much has changed since then does it?
But maybe people in 1988 felt the same way about 1968. I don't know.
Netflix has a terrible new Katherine Heigl show where at least the first two eps have 2003 as the present.
When did texting become a thing?
One possible reason the entire 2000's seem the same is because the music has been so uniformly shitty.
Texting was definitely a thing in the early 2000s. I feel like the US has been a late adopter on texting and possibly other messengers, but that's just from the way it's depicted when I watch American things.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 11, 2021, 12:17:49 PM
When did texting become a thing?
I recall I put off texting for a very long time as AT&T charged me per text. Meanwhile when I came to UK in 2007 for study abroad everyone was texting as that was the cheaper option.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 11, 2021, 12:17:49 PM
When did texting become a thing?
One possible reason the entire 2000's seem the same is because the music has been so uniformly shitty.
1990s. Though you had to text using your phone keypad. People got really good at knowing they had to punch 5 twice for K and shit.
It wasn't until around 2007 texting as we know it came into being.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 11, 2021, 10:37:04 AM
This isn't even just related to the European war. I read an article today which included a nugget that Chinese foreign policy thinkers view the growing British-Japanese alliance as a re-igniting of the old 1920s alliance; similarly I understand from Adam Tooze's writing that party documents will very often refer to the Chinese-Japanese war or even battles like Stalingrad because the war is a core foundational part of the People's Republic and the legitimacy of the Communist Party.
This is definitely true. Chinese TV always has at least one long running drama about the heroic struggles against the Japanese invaders, and the great effort of CCP led patriots. Occasionally Nationalists get billed as decent but misguided and other times as bad, but the heroic struggle to free the country from the Japanese has been a constant theme for decades and decades.
And yes, one of the CCP's core claims to legitimacy lies in their claim that they expelled the Japanese (though really, the Nationalists did the bulk of the heavy lifting there), and kept the country together in the aftermath.
Quote from: Jacob on February 11, 2021, 12:25:01 PM
This is definitely true. Chinese TV always has at least one long running drama about the heroic struggles against the Japanese invaders, and the great effort of CCP led patriots. Occasionally Nationalists get billed as decent but misguided and other times as bad, but the heroic struggle to free the country from the Japanese has been a constant theme for decades and decades.
And yes, one of the CCP's core claims to legitimacy lies in their claim that they expelled the Japanese (though really, the Nationalists did the bulk of the heavy lifting there), and kept the country together in the aftermath.
One of the things I kind enoy about Netflix is that they're in every country and, as far as I can, tell in almost every country are making slightly nationalist/patriotic period dramas which are normally pretty good. But if you're like me and interested in that sort of thing it's cool - you can go and watch a Polish series about Warsaw resisting the Soviets in 1920 or Chinese patriots fighting off either corrupt(ing) ravenous imperialists in the 1920s or the Japanese in the 30s and 40s.
It's interesting to be able to see this national myths at least a little bit from the inside so easily.
Or maybe a show about the noble German Tribes defeating the arrogant Roman Empire.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 11, 2021, 10:37:04 AM
Yes - and yet the importance of the Holocaust and other legacies of WW2 are still very present in modern day politics and "alternative" histories (from outright lies to solipsistic takes) are still circulating.
This isn't even just related to the European war. I read an article today which included a nugget that Chinese foreign policy thinkers view the growing British-Japanese alliance as a re-igniting of the old 1920s alliance; similarly I understand from Adam Tooze's writing that party documents will very often refer to the Chinese-Japanese war or even battles like Stalingrad because the war is a core foundational part of the People's Republic and the legitimacy of the Communist Party.
OTOH, you no longer get movies in HK about the great Ming loyalists fighting a (desperate) war against the evil Manchus.
It is just impossible to separate out subjective impressions of time from the objective evidence when evaluating times one has actually lived through.
68-88 simply *seems* longer because it is more eventful to me, but it corresponds with my childhood through to early adulthood. It seems to me that the cultural changes, at least here in North America, were more fundamental, and a case could be made for that, but again it is hard to differentiate subjective impressions from objective facts.
Quote from: Malthus on February 11, 2021, 12:57:59 PM
It is just impossible to separate out subjective impressions of time from the objective evidence when evaluating times one has actually lived through.
68-88 simply *seems* longer because it is more eventful to me, but it corresponds with my childhood through to early adulthood. It seems to me that the cultural changes, at least here in North America, were more fundamental, and a case could be made for that, but again it is hard to differentiate subjective impressions from objective facts.
It just seems that way because you went from flaired jeans to straight legged jeans over a short period of time.
From State-sponsored, court-enforced revisionist history to 80s nostalgia.
Seriously, though, if you have time to write to U. Ottawa in support, it will be appreciated. Jan Grabowski is such a decent guy, and he's been receiving a lot of death threats about his research.
Quote from: Oexmelin on February 11, 2021, 02:19:48 PM
From State-sponsored, court-enforced revisionist history to 80s nostalgia.
Seriously, though, if you have time to write to U. Ottawa in support, it will be appreciated. Jan Grabowski is such a decent guy, and he's been receiving a lot of death threats about his research.
Do you have an email address or other means to pass on such support?
Quote from: Oexmelin on February 11, 2021, 02:19:48 PM
From State-sponsored, court-enforced revisionist history to 80s nostalgia.
Seriously, though, if you have time to write to U. Ottawa in support, it will be appreciated. Jan Grabowski is such a decent guy, and he's been receiving a lot of death threats about his research.
Wait, so these are not Polish historians? This is the Polish government trying to stifle discussion outside the borders of Poland?
Quote from: Barrister on February 11, 2021, 02:33:12 PM
Quote from: Oexmelin on February 11, 2021, 02:19:48 PM
From State-sponsored, court-enforced revisionist history to 80s nostalgia.
Seriously, though, if you have time to write to U. Ottawa in support, it will be appreciated. Jan Grabowski is such a decent guy, and he's been receiving a lot of death threats about his research.
Do you have an email address or other means to pass on such support?
Yeah, what's the right address to contact?
Ok but:
1. Did the study claim Edward Malinowski gave up Jews to the Germans?
2. Can it be proven that he did?
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
Quote from: Oexmelin on February 11, 2021, 02:19:48 PM
From State-sponsored, court-enforced revisionist history to 80s nostalgia.
Seriously, though, if you have time to write to U. Ottawa in support, it will be appreciated. Jan Grabowski is such a decent guy, and he's been receiving a lot of death threats about his research.
I am not sure what support is necessary. A Polish Court issues an order that two academics need to apologize for what is in their work. Good luck to Poland trying to enforce that ruling anywhere outside Poland. This has consequences if they want to step foot in Poland again. But in that case I am not sure what a Canadian University can do about a foreign jurisdiction with totalitarian laws.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 03:30:58 PM
Ok but:
1. Did the study claim Edward Malinowski gave up Jews to the Germans?
2. Can it be proven that he did?
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
So are you telling me that all historians who say King John was a terrible king could be sued for libel? Not a very good analogy.
From the New York Times article on this:
QuoteJudge Jonczyk said she had ruled against awarding damages because court decisions "should not have a cooling effect on scientific research." She also rejected a demand that the apology describe the wartime mayor of Malinowo village, Edward Malinowski, as a "Jew-saving hero." The book had portrayed him as a thief and Nazi collaborator.
.
QuoteProfessor Engelking said the issues "we are supposed to apologize for have no basis in fact." She said her account of the wartime mayor's actions, which included both helping and betraying Jews, was based on the postwar testimony of a Jewish woman whom he had aided and also robbed.
Considering this mayor got condemned in the book as a collaborator based on one survivor's testimony, who actually was aided by the mayor but then robbed by him, I think stopping the case at an apology is fairly level-headed.
I mean what was the judge supposed to do? Declare that yes in fact, based on this one witness who was saved by the mayor, the mayor was a Nazi collaborator and a killer?
About their book from the same article:
Quote"The conclusion drawn from the numbers is grim: two out of every three Jews looking for rescue died — most often because of their Christian neighbors," the scholars wrote in the introduction.
Now, you see, I have trouble believing that nearly 2/3rd of dead Polish Jews died because their neighbours ratted them out. Maybe, but I don't think even Hungary could show such numbers and we were really short on Jew-saving.
So it would be good to know what they mean by that. Actively calling the Nazis on a Jew you knew is of course evil. Not willing to risk sheltering the poor souls is another matter and I would have trouble judging people for it - it was no joking matter.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 05:20:47 PM
So it would be good to know what they mean by that. Actively calling the Nazis on a Jew you knew is of course evil. Not willing to risk sheltering the poor souls is another matter and I would have trouble judging people for it - it was no joking matter.
I guess you could buy the book and read it?
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 05:20:47 PM
Now, you see, I have trouble believing that nearly 2/3rd of dead Polish Jews died because their neighbours ratted them out. Maybe, but I don't think even Hungary could show such numbers and we were really short on Jew-saving.
So it would be good to know what they mean by that. Actively calling the Nazis on a Jew you knew is of course evil. Not willing to risk sheltering the poor souls is another matter and I would have trouble judging people for it - it was no joking matter.
I parsed it as 'two third of Jews who went looking for rescue died" - not two third of all Jews.
Quote from: Jacob on February 11, 2021, 05:23:48 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 05:20:47 PM
So it would be good to know what they mean by that. Actively calling the Nazis on a Jew you knew is of course evil. Not willing to risk sheltering the poor souls is another matter and I would have trouble judging people for it - it was no joking matter.
I guess you could buy the book and read it?
Or I could base
Quote from: Barrister on February 11, 2021, 05:24:53 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 05:20:47 PM
Now, you see, I have trouble believing that nearly 2/3rd of dead Polish Jews died because their neighbours ratted them out. Maybe, but I don't think even Hungary could show such numbers and we were really short on Jew-saving.
So it would be good to know what they mean by that. Actively calling the Nazis on a Jew you knew is of course evil. Not willing to risk sheltering the poor souls is another matter and I would have trouble judging people for it - it was no joking matter.
I parsed it as 'two third of Jews who went looking for rescue died" - not two third of all Jews.
Good point I missed that in first reading.
Still I think the libel ruling was a measured one if the only witness to claim the mayor was a nazi collaborator was a Jewish person saved by the mayor.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 06:09:19 PM
Still I think the libel ruling was a measured one if the only witness to claim the mayor was a nazi collaborator was a Jewish person saved by the mayor.
How so?
Because if he saved her he couldn't possibly also have collaborated, or robbed her?
Quote from: Jacob on February 11, 2021, 06:10:40 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 06:09:19 PM
Still I think the libel ruling was a measured one if the only witness to claim the mayor was a nazi collaborator was a Jewish person saved by the mayor.
How so?
Because if he saved her he couldn't possibly also have collaborated, or robbed her?
No but if we have one witness saying he was and another witness (his niece) saying he wasn't, then perhaps presenting that he was as historical fact is misleading.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 06:12:40 PM
No but if we have one witness saying he was and another witness (his niece) saying he wasn't, then perhaps presenting that he was as historical fact is misleading.
Fair.
But are we sure that they're presenting it "as historical fact" rather than providing an accounting of all the facts they have?
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 06:12:40 PM
No but if we have one witness saying he was and another witness (his niece) saying he wasn't, then perhaps presenting that he was as historical fact is misleading.
The niece didn't say that. She said the historians " failed to follow correct research methodology."
As far as we know.
The niece went farther than that and claimed the mayor was a hero for saving Jews, which the judge refused to declare.
Now of course the details in the book might paint a more convincing picture but based on these articles I think the judge made quite a neutral ruling.
Publishing an apology on a webpage ain't that terrible and u am fairly certain this brouhaha generated plenty of extra income on the book.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 06:33:36 PM
The niece went farther than that and claimed the mayor was a hero for saving Jews, which the judge refused to declare.
I can't find this in the article.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 05:20:47 PM
From the New York Times article on this:
QuoteJudge Jonczyk said she had ruled against awarding damages because court decisions "should not have a cooling effect on scientific research." She also rejected a demand that the apology describe the wartime mayor of Malinowo village, Edward Malinowski, as a "Jew-saving hero." The book had portrayed him as a thief and Nazi collaborator.
.
QuoteProfessor Engelking said the issues "we are supposed to apologize for have no basis in fact." She said her account of the wartime mayor's actions, which included both helping and betraying Jews, was based on the postwar testimony of a Jewish woman whom he had aided and also robbed.
Considering this mayor got condemned in the book as a collaborator based on one survivor's testimony, who actually was aided by the mayor but then robbed by him, I think stopping the case at an apology is fairly level-headed.
I mean what was the judge supposed to do? Declare that yes in fact, based on this one witness who was saved by the mayor, the mayor was a Nazi collaborator and a killer?
About their book from the same article:
Quote"The conclusion drawn from the numbers is grim: two out of every three Jews looking for rescue died — most often because of their Christian neighbors," the scholars wrote in the introduction.
Now, you see, I have trouble believing that nearly 2/3rd of dead Polish Jews died because their neighbours ratted them out. Maybe, but I don't think even Hungary could show such numbers and we were really short on Jew-saving.
So it would be good to know what they mean by that. Actively calling the Nazis on a Jew you knew is of course evil. Not willing to risk sheltering the poor souls is another matter and I would have trouble judging people for it - it was no joking matter.
And that is what academic discourse is for.
Not the courts. This would be thrown out of a Canadian Court with costs on a preliminary application. It is perfectly lawful to make conclusions based evidence.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 03:30:58 PM
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
Is it typical in Europe for dead people to sue for libel?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 11, 2021, 06:53:05 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 03:30:58 PM
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
Is it typical in Europe for dead people to sue for libel?
Already made that point, but it flew over people's head. So reverted to making the point that even if he was alive, this would not be actionable.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 11, 2021, 06:53:05 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 03:30:58 PM
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
Is it typical in Europe for dead people to sue for libel?
Dead people in Romania are known to British lawyers.
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 05:20:47 PM
From the New York Times article on this:
QuoteJudge Jonczyk said she had ruled against awarding damages because court decisions "should not have a cooling effect on scientific research." She also rejected a demand that the apology describe the wartime mayor of Malinowo village, Edward Malinowski, as a "Jew-saving hero." The book had portrayed him as a thief and Nazi collaborator.
.
QuoteProfessor Engelking said the issues "we are supposed to apologize for have no basis in fact." She said her account of the wartime mayor's actions, which included both helping and betraying Jews, was based on the postwar testimony of a Jewish woman whom he had aided and also robbed.
Considering this mayor got condemned in the book as a collaborator based on one survivor's testimony, who actually was aided by the mayor but then robbed by him, I think stopping the case at an apology is fairly level-headed.
I mean what was the judge supposed to do? Declare that yes in fact, based on this one witness who was saved by the mayor, the mayor was a Nazi collaborator and a killer?
Judges do not have to decide whether or not The mayor was or was not a good guy.
They could simply say that the case for libel had not been proven.
Did he rob her and give the money to the Nazis, or did he keep it himself?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 11, 2021, 06:53:05 PM
Is it typical in Europe for dead people to sue for libel?
Not sure about libel, but it isn't uncommon for privacy law or rights to still apply to the deceased - normally exercised by partner or heir etc. It's not universal, but does exist. I wouldn't be too surprised if there was something similar for "reputation" rights.
Is it conceivable that Polish law is different in this regard to Canadian and US law?
Quote from: Tamas on February 12, 2021, 06:18:44 AM
Is it conceivable that Polish law is different in this regard to Canadian and US law?
That's sort of the whole point of this thread.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 12, 2021, 06:24:57 AM
Quote from: Tamas on February 12, 2021, 06:18:44 AM
Is it conceivable that Polish law is different in this regard to Canadian and US law?
That's sort of the whole point of this thread.
The point of the thread if this was a politically motivated punitive verdict to discourage research into Polish collaborators. That was clearly the intention of the organisation supporting the niece making the claim, but I think the judge quite clearly refused to do this for them.
Quote from: Tamas on February 12, 2021, 06:26:15 AM
The point of the thread if this was a politically motivated punitive verdict to discourage research into Polish collaborators. That was clearly the intention of the organisation supporting the niece making the claim, but I think the judge quite clearly refused to do this for them.
I think it's fairer to say the point of the thread is the underlying Polish law is total crap and the judge's verdict is not as crappy as the law but still crap.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 12, 2021, 06:44:07 AM
Quote from: Tamas on February 12, 2021, 06:26:15 AM
The point of the thread if this was a politically motivated punitive verdict to discourage research into Polish collaborators. That was clearly the intention of the organisation supporting the niece making the claim, but I think the judge quite clearly refused to do this for them.
I think it's fairer to say the point of the thread is the underlying Polish law is total crap and the judge's verdict is not as crappy as the law but still crap.
It's a bit of a sparse information on Polish libel laws to draw sweeping conclusions isn't it?
Yeah I'm not convinced this should ever have been near a court and I'm very uncomfortable with a pressure group funding this sort of case - because you imagine they'll be doing it for any publisher.
It reminds me of a less extreme version of the David Irving libel trial. That got the right result but I'm not sure was quite right in terms of whether there should've been a libel case at all.
Quote from: Tamas on February 12, 2021, 06:46:14 AM
It's a bit of a sparse information on Polish libel laws to draw sweeping conclusions isn't it?
No. Either the Polish libel law is reasonable, in which case the verdict is crap, or the Polish libel law is crap, and the judge's verdict fits a crappy law.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 12, 2021, 06:48:23 AM
Yeah I'm not convinced this should ever have been near a court and I'm very uncomfortable with a pressure group funding this sort of case - because you imagine they'll be doing it for any publisher.
It reminds me of a less extreme version of the David Irving libel trial. That got the right result but I'm not sure was quite right in terms of whether there should've been a libel case at all.
Fair point.
In general I don't like this, I just don't like dismissing the overall topic as silly East Europeans being butthurt. As discussed at the start of the thread there are a lot of sensibilities and tragedies behind these things and Poland in particular has the right to be sensitive about what the focus is on when it comes to their fate in WW2.
They of course themselves are causing most of the problem by making sure focus is on this, but still.
Quote from: Tamas on February 12, 2021, 06:51:08 AMFair point.
In general I don't like this, I just don't like dismissing the overall topic as silly East Europeans being butthurt. As discussed at the start of the thread there are a lot of sensibilities and tragedies behind these things and Poland in particular has the right to be sensitive about what the focus is on when it comes to their fate in WW2.
They of course themselves are causing most of the problem by making sure focus is on this, but still.
Sure. But the pressure group funding the case has close ties to Law and Order. There's also a deliberate (and unpleasant) troll in choosing the name "Polish League Against Defamation" given the century old Anti-Defamation League in the US which fights anti-semitism. That all makes the case more problematic than just a simple libel case.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 11, 2021, 07:20:59 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 11, 2021, 06:53:05 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 03:30:58 PM
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
Is it typical in Europe for dead people to sue for libel?
Dead people in Romania are known to British lawyers.
Raz, you ruined the joke. You left out a word, again.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:20:28 AM
Raz, you ruined the joke. You left out a word, again.
I thought it still worked.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:20:28 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 11, 2021, 07:20:59 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 11, 2021, 06:53:05 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 03:30:58 PM
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
Is it typical in Europe for dead people to sue for libel?
Dead people in Romania are known to British lawyers.
Raz, you ruined the joke. You left out a word, again.
I don't think adding the word "again" would make that Dracula joke any funnier.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:21:17 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:20:28 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 11, 2021, 07:20:59 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 11, 2021, 06:53:05 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 03:30:58 PM
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
Is it typical in Europe for dead people to sue for libel?
Dead people in Romania are known to British lawyers.
Raz, you ruined the joke. You left out a word, again.
I don't think adding the word "again" would make that Dracula joke any funnier.
You're an idiot. Fuck you!
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:21:46 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:21:17 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:20:28 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 11, 2021, 07:20:59 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 11, 2021, 06:53:05 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 03:30:58 PM
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
Is it typical in Europe for dead people to sue for libel?
Dead people in Romania are known to British lawyers.
Raz, you ruined the joke. You left out a word, again.
I don't think adding the word "again" would make that Dracula joke any funnier.
You're an idiot. Fuck you!
Fuck you? No, man fuck me!
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:22:12 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:21:46 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:21:17 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 12, 2021, 10:20:28 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 11, 2021, 07:20:59 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 11, 2021, 06:53:05 PM
Quote from: Tamas on February 11, 2021, 03:30:58 PM
Because the answers are 1. yes and 2. no, then I don't see the problem with the verdict, just one of the countless libel trials basically.
Is it typical in Europe for dead people to sue for libel?
Dead people in Romania are known to British lawyers.
Raz, you ruined the joke. You left out a word, again.
I don't think adding the word "again" would make that Dracula joke any funnier.
You're an idiot. Fuck you!
Fuck you? No, man fuck me!
Wait, what?
Whoa!
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 12, 2021, 06:44:07 AM
Quote from: Tamas on February 12, 2021, 06:26:15 AM
The point of the thread if this was a politically motivated punitive verdict to discourage research into Polish collaborators. That was clearly the intention of the organisation supporting the niece making the claim, but I think the judge quite clearly refused to do this for them.
I think it's fairer to say the point of the thread is the underlying Polish law is total crap and the judge's verdict is not as crappy as the law but still crap.
You've got a future in legal analysis if you want it.
Joan, do you ever watch this guy's clips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpgiAsJiooM
I'm curious what you think.
Clip picked at random.
Quote from: Tamas on February 12, 2021, 06:51:08 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 12, 2021, 06:48:23 AM
Yeah I'm not convinced this should ever have been near a court and I'm very uncomfortable with a pressure group funding this sort of case - because you imagine they'll be doing it for any publisher.
It reminds me of a less extreme version of the David Irving libel trial. That got the right result but I'm not sure was quite right in terms of whether there should've been a libel case at all.
Fair point.
In general I don't like this, I just don't like dismissing the overall topic as silly East Europeans being butthurt. As discussed at the start of the thread there are a lot of sensibilities and tragedies behind these things and Poland in particular has the right to be sensitive about what the focus is on when it comes to their fate in WW2.
They of course themselves are causing most of the problem by making sure focus is on this, but still.
The notion that academic work studying WW2 should be subjected to a court order reflecting the sensitivities of the country being examined is nonsense. That is the point.
I can't believe you guys hid an entire conversation about the cultural impact of time, the internet & american influence domination into a Poland bullshit thread.
Viper, we need you to make the same exact post for the trifecta.
Quote from: The Brain on February 12, 2021, 10:28:27 AM
Whoa!
That's fairly close to the reaction I get when I do that routine in a restaurant. I don't need to make reservations ahead of time because that always opens up at least one table.
What was the missing word in the Dracula joke?
Quote from: Eddie Teach on February 12, 2021, 10:35:55 PM
What was the missing word in the Dracula joke?
No, I don't think so.