Select language:

Denying the Deniers

 / Главная / Russkiy Mir Foundation / Publications / Denying the Deniers

Denying the Deniers

11.03.2009

Discussion: Do we need a law on the denigration of historical memory?

From the editor: Sergey Shoigu’s initiative to criminalize the denial of the Soviet Union’s victory in the Great Patriotic War, by all indications, has found support in the State Duma. Yesterday, Boris Gryzlov, speaker of the State Duma, spoke on the usefulness of developing such a law in anticipation of the sixty-fifth anniversary of the victory (slightly revised to specify the denigration of historical memory). The Great Patriotic War, it seems, is one of the few historical events that can still find a response across the entire Russian world. The emergence of legal norms governing the discussion of this vast and complex subject is one of the few issues that can lead to a truly principled debate. In the end, the Great Patriotic War is one node that connects personal family history with the history of the country. As a result, the level of discussion says a great deal about both society and the state. To introduce this discussion, we offer a comment from the publicist Evgeny Levin.

A short while ago, news groups reported that Sergey Shoigu, the influential head of the Emergency Situations Ministry, had proposed that the denial of the Soviet Union’s victory in the Great Patriotic War be criminalized. “I believe that the time has come for our Parliament to enact a law that would criminalize denial of the Soviet victory in the Great Patriotic War ... It is time to use the law to protect our history and our country,” the Minister said at a meeting with veterans.

I must admit that at first this statement seemed like a bad joke to me, strange and indeed absurd. April 1, however, is still a long way away, so we have to believe it.

It is not difficult to understand what prompted Shoigu to come up with such an idea. Many European countries already have legislation that criminalizes denial of another historical event – the Holocaust. Not every plant can be easily transplanted to a foreign soil, however. When it comes to the Holocaust, we mean the actions of the Nazis and their henchman to purposefully destroy several million European Jews. Accordingly, revisionists who deny the Holocaust either dispute the number of those killed or challenge the extent to which the Nazis’ actions were deliberate. In the appendix to the bill “The Soviet Victory in the Great Patriotic War,” any denial borders on the loss of common sense and draws on schizophrenic fantasies unregulated by law.

After much reflection I have only been able to formulate one opinion that could somehow fit under the proposed wording without running the risk of doubting whether the person doing the talking is in his right mind: despite the fact that the Soviet Union achieved a “tactical” victory in the way – the political and economic situation resulting from this victory led to the inevitable collapse and disintegration of the country. These words could, perhaps, be seen as a “denial of victory,” although should people be judged or imprisoned for this?

Suppose during the course of work on the bill more successful wording is found. Would that mean that such a law would be appropriate and useful?

Let's return to the issue of Holocaust denial that Shoigu mentioned at his meeting with veterans. One can understand why European Jews have lobbied for such legislation to be enacted. Before the Second World War anti-Semitism was quite common in the public and political life of the Old World. Factions with a more or less radical anti-Semitic program were actively involved in the parliamentary life of Russia, Austria-Hungary and its “successors” – in particular in Poland and the Baltic States – as well as in France and, in fact, most other European countries. The situation changed only after the war when the world was shocked to learn about Hitler's Final Solution. As a result, anti-Semitism has come to be perceived as a phenomenon that cannot be tolerated.

It is clear that European Jews are well aware of what has led to their current well-being, and they are therefore ready to defend it by any means necessary. Russia, however, thank God, is a great power with a strong, efficient army. Is it really possible that it might not get by without such protection?

Furthermore, even if some thoughts cannot be made publicly, they will not disappear; rather, they will simply move into the underground press. Even during the Brezhnev era, the circulation of such literature could not be stopped. Imagine, then, the situation with today's realities of the internet in every home and domains that can be placed anywhere in the world, and with printers, which allow for the rapid reproduction of any text in any number. It is well known that any word coming from the underground is sure to be heard. Prohibitive measures, therefore, are only likely to increase the influence of the “wrong” books.

In addition, it must be noted that the emergence of vast revisionist literature concerning the Second World War (even of the worst kind) has yielded undeniable benefits. Prior to this, serious books about the war were mainly of interest to professionals and history buffs. The scandalous arguments made by revisionists have provoked numerous discussions, which have led to the emergence of a great number of serious and honest research efforts on the Great Patriotic War. More importantly, they have also led to an undeniable increase in readers’ interest in such literature.

Again, we should not forget that in the history of Russian scholarship there have been a number of cases when disagreeable views were met with prohibitions. One of the best known was the notorious campaign against the Weisman-Morgan school of genetics. Such episodes have also taken place in other disciplines, including history. Let us recall the harassment faced by the brilliant historian Alexander Zimin, who took the liberty of denying the authenticity of “The Tale of Igor's Campaign.” I think everyone would agree that such scandals bring nothing but shame and injury to Russian scholarship. Is it worth stepping on this same rake once again, even with the best of intentions?

Rubric:
Subject:
Tags:

New publications

Italian entrepreneur Marco Maggi's book, "Russian to the Bone," is now accessible for purchase in Italy and is scheduled for release in Russia in the upcoming months. In the book, Marco recounts his personal odyssey, narrating each stage of his life as a foreigner in Russia—starting from the initial fascination to the process of cultural assimilation, venturing into business, fostering authentic friendships, and ultimately, reaching a deep sense of identifying as a Russian at his very core.
Ukrainian authorities have launched a persecution campaign against the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), the biggest one in the country's modern history. Over the past year, state sanctions were imposed on clergy representatives, searches were conducted in churches, clergymen were arrested, criminal cases were initiated, the activity of the UOC was banned in various regions of the country, and monasteries and churches were seized.
When Nektary Kotlyaroff, a fourth-generation Russian Australian and founder of the Russian Orthodox Choir in Sydney, first visited Russia, the first person he spoke to was a cab driver at the airport. Having heard that Nektariy's ancestors left Russia more than 100 years ago, the driver was astonished, "How come you haven't forgotten the Russian language?" Nektary Kotlyaroff repeated his answer in an interview with the Russkiy Mir. His affinity to the Orthodox Church (many of his ancestors and relatives were priests) and the traditions of a large Russian family brought from Russia helped him to preserve the Russian language.
Russian graffiti artists from Moscow, St. Petersburg, Krasnoyarsk, and Nizhnevartovsk took part in an international street art festival in the capital of Chile. They decorated the walls of Santiago with Russian and Chilean symbols, conducted a master class for Russian compatriots, and discussed collaborative projects with colleagues from Latin America.
Name of Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko is inscribed in the history of Russian theater along with Konstantin Stanislavski, the other founding father of the Moscow Art Theater. Nevertheless, Mr. Nemirovich-Danchenko was a renowned writer, playwright, and theater teacher even before their famous meeting in the Slavic Bazaar restaurant. Furthermore, it was Mr. Nemirovich-Danchenko who came up with the idea of establishing a new "people's" theater believing that the theater could become a "department of public education."
"Russia is a thing of which the intellect cannot conceive..." by Fyodor Tyutchev are famous among Russians at least. December marks the 220th anniversary of the poet's birth. Yet, he never considered poetry to be his life's mission and was preoccupied with matters of a global scale. Mr.Tyutchev fought his war focusing on relations between Russia and the West, the origins of mutual misunderstanding, and the origins of Russophobia. When you read his works today, it feels as though he saw things coming in a crystal ball...