Maintaining or neglecting communist memory
The concept of totalitarianism remains a key topic in the political and social debate. In the context of European remembrance, various initiatives have been taken since 2006 to ensure the “condemnation and education of communist crimes” in Europe more thoroughly, supported by the Czech Government and Prague’s Declaration of 2008.
However, discussing communist legacy today is often compared to the one of the Nazi totalitarian regime and the crimes committed under its rule. It would be an oversight to neglect one of the foremost contemporary debates about the comparability of the crimes of Communism and Nazism.
One of the prominent portrayals of the communist reality is depicted in the book “The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression” published in 1999 and co-authored by several European historians. In the introduction, the French historian Stéphane Courtois describes the cruelty of communism, supporting his argument with a numerical comparison of Communism and Nazism. Although this topic has prompted a lot of discussion, it is interesting to focus on how the directly affected post-communist nations and their governments are handling the commemoration of this chapter in their history. Are they choosing to ignore, denounce, or subtly glorify this period and regime?
Erasing communist symbols in Eastern Europe
Since the fall of the USSR, as well as the rise of the European Union, several post-communist countries have been involved in the “decommunization” process, by removing monuments, renaming streets, and transforming certain emblematic places, while some others have opted for a different approach.
Following long debates after the fall of communism, post-socialist politicians in Bulgaria sought to erase memories of the previous regime and its symbols. In 1999, they removed the mausoleum of Socialist leader Georgi Dimitrov. Czech Republic and Poland are countries which have quickly adopted various laws condemning “the Illegality of the Communist Regime and on Resistance against it.”, with the first one in July 1993 from the Czech government, and several more recent initiatives taken in modern times.
On the contrary, post-communist countries such as Hungary chose to found the “Public Foundation for the Research on Central and East European History and Society” as well as “The Terror house”, aiming to enhance the recognition and visibility of the communist page of Hungarian history rather than dismantling it.
How has the current Russo-Ukrainian conflict impacted the memory of communism?
Since the Russo-Ukrainian conflict all of the post-communist countries have taken an increasing determination to abolish Soviet constructed traces in their countries. In 2023, in Sofia Bulgaria, after heated demonstrations and vandalisms, the Soviet Army Monument was removed from the city center.
Equally, in an effort to manifest their opposition to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Polish Institute of National Remembrance (INR), quickly accentuated the importance of removing post-soviet monuments still standing in the country. Since February 2022, they have removed 40 out of the 60 objects glorifying the Red Army terror. Other countries like Latvia, Czechia, and Lithuania have decided to move in the same direction.
The rise of decommunization in our current geopolitical context raises one significant question: Is the removal of Soviet-era monuments simply an effort to erase traces of a past regime, or is it part of a broader attempt to reshape national identity in opposition to Russia?
By Marianthi DIMOU
To go further on our April file dedicated to memory policies, you can read our culture and international relations sections’ articles on our blog.
Follow MINERVIEWS
