CEU eTD Collection dio: Professor András Advisor: Kovács In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Nationalism Studies Program University European toCentral Submitted By Krzysztof Pa on the shape of Polish nation. Anti-Semitism in the Polish cultural code and the discussion Fear andLoathing. á osz Budapest, Hungary 2008 CEU eTD Collection I would liketodedicate thisworkwho tomy Dad, hasbeen ahelp me for throughout theyear, andwho ishappyforwhat doing. I’m My specialthanks to bubliki theirclose for friendship, and toJuli, who isalways wonderful. CEU eTD Collection Bibliography...... 76 ...... 71 Conclusion. 5. The significance of the discussion...... 59 4. The discussion...... 40 3. Historical revisionism...... 26 2. Polish ...... 16 identity. 1. History and memory...... 8 Introduction...... 2 5.5 Narratives 68 reconsidered? ...... 5.4 Deconstructing 63 narratives...... 5.2 Why is the discussion 61 significant ...... now? 60 5.2 What is ...... the message? 5.1 Was it 59 necessary?...... 4.4 Stands in the 53 discussion...... 4.4 The state 50 responds...... 4.3 Why is discussion 49 so heated?...... 4.2 What is the discussion 42 really about?...... 4.1 “Fear” 40 and its ...... propositions. 3.4 Anti-Semitism and a challenge of 38 Polish narrative...... 3.3 Challenging historical memory 34 and identity...... 3.2 European trend 32 of challenging ...... past. 3.1 Polish-Jewish relations in the 20 2.3 Competing visions of nation and identity...... 22 2.2 Anti-Semitism 19 and Polish ...... identity. 2.1 The shaping of the 16 identity...... 1.3 Memory, history and creation of 12 identity...... 1.2 History and collective memory...... 9 1.1 History as a problem...... 8 .. usinn...... 57 4.4.3 Questioning...... 55 4.4.2 Acceptance...... 53 4.4.1...... Rejection. th Cnuy ...... 26 ...... Century. 1 CEU eTD Collection political void, their needed representatives delve to intoin history for the legitimization,quest Catholics andis devout on other, newlythe createdparties still ongoing. Since appearedina patriots and on rightists, and side, one liberals, leftists secularists between which appearedthen struggle basis;the ethnic-national civic-national or on should whether be defined, new state neutrality?” religious official through transcending membership in religious with astate secularunderstood terms, be Polishness should or confessional, be state the should therefore and for, calls faithful) always Constitutional Debates,” motto traditional its as Catholicism, by “defined be should it askingifPolish discussion future, about that of amajor question Geneviève Zubrzycki describes Polish reopenedpost-1989 state understanding the the discussion “nation.”about the of Catholic, nationalist and anti-Semite –dream of an ethnic state. The building of a new,legitimate ideology, in an ironically pro-nationalistmove, the Party fulfilled Roman Dmowski’s – a virulent ananti-Catholic of Polishon Jews. Based the 30.000 around remaininggroup tensions towards 2 by W by Jew-free country. The government, originally creating social divisions along class lines, now,led 1 Introduction. Geneviève Zubrzycki, " Zubrzycki, Geneviève Jerzy Jedlicki, “How to Deal with This,” á adys The 1968 anti-Zionist, Communist regime steered campaign virtually campaign The Communist Polandrendered steered 1968 anti-Zionist, a regime á aw Gomu aw Theory and Society 2 á The 1989 transformation then triggered a debate on how the nation in the nation the how on a debate triggered then transformation 1989 The talking about and what they think they believe in. believe they think they what and about talking appropriate knowledgeexperiencewhosebut members or of topicthe respondtothe no have who generation young the infect in to crept has anti-Semitism of signalsvirus The ineffective. is revisionism] historical [concerning therapy Sleep and slogans. Let them at least know what they are We, thePolish Nation ka, used the negative anti-Jewish sentiments to redirect antigovernment redirect to sentiments anti-Jewish negative the used ka, Polityka, , Vol. 30, No. 5, (Oct., 2001), 632. : Ethnic Civicand Visions of Nationhood inPost-Communist February 10, 2001. 2 Polonia semper fidelis 1 (Poland CEU eTD Collection 3 build will generations next which along lines the and society, Polish of majority the of identity of theshape thusdebate determines That non-existent. hitherto was ideology wherepluralism of intaking Poland since1989,apartof placein a wider the trend post-Communist countries, describes word the a German, In struggle society. pluralistic in a inevitable revaluation, to come to terms opposition Such fall of a process neverfailsa prey to of past the since discussion, preventthe however cannot withindignation. its voices one’sopposition strong past, own glorious of memories past. with clashes Such an identitymaintenanceand identities. When of those thehistory new be is and vision to challenged this debate has been creation for allow thereof, large parts or by society, shared history visions of acertain therefore position of which can go in either of directions. This thesis treats of that struggle. and middle, in the is that one that majority, undecided the for fight the is nation the defining for fight case,the Inany post-Communists. leniencetowards of accusation the replied with other views, andthe holding of anti-Semitic right liberals the conservative of accused group of matter paper–beganin the the a subject perception 1990s, when the of early past– the the Challenging tolerance. of home and cultures of variety of that Commonwealth, Jagiellonian the patriotic perception of Poland, while inclusivistthe civic-nationalistsfind would their in heritage and conservative their with ND) Democracy, (National Endecja and Poland interwar inthe roots se ofascontradictory latter the supporters by stringent the benefit, perceived national of matter superior theso-calledcosmopolitism and in between an also struggleopposition wasreflected inindiscourse. political the it reemerged Poland, wassignificant “Jewish andquestion” as (PolgArt, Budapest: 2005). Similarly András Kovács writes in his book his in writes Kovács András Similarly . Finally, those (ethno-nationalists). Finally,secondingvisionthose state the anethnic of find would their The identity intrinsicallyis connected history tothe and memory nation’s of the past, A kéznél lévõ Idegen.A Antiszemita elõítéletekmai Magyarországon. a 3 Vergangenheitsbewältigung 3 This per CEU eTD Collection person the more he or she is likely to critically reconsider the history. the moreshe reconsider critically the is likely heor person to the secular more the therefore notion, patriotic mentioned the higher the is, person the religious to level more closely the naturally persuasion. The Catholic the of of connected religiosity, is nation vision the of andpurist patriotic presented, belater itwill In Poland, as twenty percent. morePoles havenobly acted 1992 nations.than other this Compared to numbergrewby almost Krzemi Ireneusz discussion, Polish pastgenerations?is 2002,that the According to immediately published Jedwabne the after changed the Polish memory of that period? Has this debate eradicated the heroic notions about 4 less critical view on Polish history lesswould much frequently (50%) admit Jewish greater live thepast with learn andto digest attempt analyze, who to Those, Polish sufferings. war the religious the views, the more idealized theperception history of and amore prevalentnotion of crimes by of president the PolandKwa Aleksander for the apologies with andended months lastedseveral debate againstJews.This crimes directed of several activeperpetrators suggested Polesbook that were memory.Polish The historical in is Jewish important bewas very question that aswill presented, emotional,A since, debate “Neighbors,”book which adiscussion triggered on behaviorthe of duringWW ethnic Poles II. historian, and sociologist a Polish-Jewish Gross’s, T. Jan of publication the with commenced is denial,tainted history perceived through various stereotypes. where preconception- it inatraditional it and dwell will reject or moveforward, and truth accept the itwill either memory; historical creating identity the vis-à-vis certain stances accept have to voice, which will itsdecisive has in that, Themajority society, democracy of their character. Ireneusz Krzemi The 21 st Ĕ century discussion, concerning the dark past of of past relations,century discussion, was Polish-Jewish the dark concerning ski, Antysemityzm w Polsce ina Ukrainie. Raport z Bada Ĕ ski’s report on Polish anti-Semitism, 65% of Poles claimed that claimed Poles of 65% anti-Semitism, Polish on report ski’s 4 Ğ niewski. Has discussion this and its outcome Ĕ . (Warsaw: Scholar, 2004), 135-136. 4 All in all, the more the all, in All CEU eTD Collection intellectuals, politicians finally,and, by historians.professional Long-lasting notions, although common people, by They areemployed accusations. Gross’s against tools of defense (Kraków: Znak, 2008). as ‘ as the Jew as a (threatening) other. The synergy of various conceptions embedded in that code, such in The are is premise cultural notions presentingunderlying anti-Semitic present Polish that code in narratives itresponses and intotriggers. look see debate the is what to identity. The aim creation then of historical of competition of discussion broader a in fits inevitably which book, sources and, most importantly,his generalizations of anti-Semitism on the Polish society at large. lackofhistoricalmediadebate in background,useof Polish questions a general author’s the history.ferventpost-1945, understandingi.e.and Theongoing Polishthe contemporary, of prevailing challengethe be to to seems main goal Gross’s that be stated it should here, stall details Not to the over stereotype. asananti-Semitic meticulously dismantles, which he Random House, 2006).Polishedition: Jan T. Gross, 6 events in Poland, with thesalient main focus thereafter, on the and leastbutremained Worldat as only beforenot war, War IIandthe during Semitism existed there exist a clear continuitywas recently (January 2008) published in Poland. In short, the author arguesof that, in Poland, anti-those attitudes. He analyses the postwar 5 memory. with lost history incorporate newthose historical propositions has been overcome bya defensive rejection. The (70%). remaindersociety. of the compared to sufferings Jan T. Gross, T. Jan Krzemi ĩ ydokomuna’, and their accessibility in the Polish collective memory, provides for a palette a for provides memory, collective Polish the in accessibility their and ydokomuna’, Ĕ In this paper, all those arguments will be presented as reflected in the discussion in the theon discussion as reflected willbe presented arguments In those paper,all this A subsequent, after “Neighbors,” challenge to history Gross expressed in expressed Gross history to challenge “Neighbors,” after A subsequent, ski, 145. Fear: Anti-Semitism in Poland after Auschwitz: Strach. Antysemityzm tu Kielce 5 pogrom, and the myth of ‘ an Essay in Historical Interpretation 5 This data shows that the eagerness to eagerness the that shows data This Ī powojnie.Historia moralnejzapa ĩ Fear ydokomuna’, (New York : , 6 which Ğ ci CEU eTD Collection which notions are accepted into the cultural code by the society. I expect to find anti-Semitic 7 pogrom a reaction users’ Internet calls the fora (Mancewicz andInternet debates, public after magazine interviews from immediateperiod and publication articles the “Fear”,the of order to investigate acknowledgedof part a Polish expressedcode, cultural inpolitical andidentity In discourses. less or more a is anti-Semitism because consciousness, in Polish latent this prejudices, Semitic Polish hidden anti-identity focused Thosedebates, wake the around whostill events. those remember debate, those, by transmitted narratives and memories by reinforced I further, is, It will“Neighbors.” about turn to “Fear,”and earlier around debates memory one as the suchstrong cause which challenge that an analysis That periodis thus crucialof in determining the shape of the nation. That isPolish why historical attempts, newspaper inidentity defining the interwar is periodsandduring of creation, period the that war. Polish the during present were they because and formation, identity for important very is and events history Jews in forof Poles Poland? Thispaperargues, that afavorable memory historical the of inanti-Semites, andnot with sopreoccupied interested matters, particularly the nor Jewish bonesociety Why are to, neither inpublic of people,today, a contention connected discussions? Polish in position negligible their despite Jews, of memory and history is Why debate? Polish in still present tropes anti-Semitic Why arethe discourse. in present-day the existent myths still andjudges, prosecutors regime. whoserved Communist the e.g. numbers still facts,the Jewish of are consideredashistorical continuously rebutted, Stanis á aw Mancewicz, “Od apelu doapelu,” apelu “Od Mancewicz, aw The goal is to understand why are the long dismantled and invalidated arguments and isarethelongunderstand invalidatedarguments The and dismantled to why goal 7 ), which to an extent, represent the majority of the opinions among the society, and show Gazeta Wyborcza Kraków,January 25, 2008. 6 virtual CEU eTD Collection 9 Wyborcza. Gazeta look ”deep into ownhistory, ”deep inlook our conscience.” deep our states that “this book is an element of a Polish-Polish Michnik Adam dialogue,”Similarly, Poles. about and in fact is effectit – of relations which andPolish Jewish should or Poles and be a one second stances. of the to convinced be can who and majority, the constitute who center, in the those and utterances, Gross’s support who those premises, book’s the rejecting those book; the towards themselves position they 8 repentance bereally performed. society can, critical view on society.of thedevelopmentPoland Becauseonly asademocratic,in andtolerant open, such a history, the disclosure of thethe grievances presence kept in secret assumes TheThe author a stanceunderstanding paperfinally in respect. arguesskeptical that that and full of majority of society and isit really identitiesinfluencing the of membersthe of large?society at today’s incorporate notions,to questionthose be should another reaching discussion the posed–isthe anti-Semitism enough mature are however, a they, If nation. of vision already established to threat unnecessary the inherited in the responsibility,historicalnation. the of shape the thus and ischallenged, memory that on founded Theidentity, become Holocaust, revaluated. inhelpingCatholic Jewsescape the Poles memoryor if of mobilization popular the or theyminorities, towards benevolence Polish by characterized as wantis a totouchstone altogether dismiss of the historical criticism as an media. in those all utterances Adam Michnik, “Z antysemityzmu trzeba si Two maindaily newspapers will be analyzed: right-wing conservative The present paper suggests that the discussion surrounding the book is not about Jews about not is book the surrounding discussion the that suggests paper present The It is important to observe if Poles are eager to accept the proposed facts and humbly carry facts andhumbly proposed acceptthe to areeager if Poles toobserve is important It Other dailies and weelkied will be also consulted. 8 This paper recognizes three groups of Poles, according to how This threegroupsof accordingPoles, to paper recognizes Ċ spowiada ü 7 ,” debate in Kraków, January 24, 2008. 9 Therefore such ofhistory perceptions Rzeczpospolita and liberal left-oriented CEU eTD Collection 12 11 manner, where “a historical book is the one that problemizes the question, not simply describes simply not question, the problemizes that one isthe book historical “a where manner, a declaredinGross that hehistorical aninterviewhisbook, in wrote concerning work a Western search for additional tools provided by history, economics, anthropology or sociology. according thatconcept,historian to not avoidingshould only stop any extra-discipline aid,but of just political history and an interdisciplinary approach, required tofulfill the two first. And so, of by events analysis, withproblem-oriented concern a wholehuman rangeof activities instead narrative is of traditional the by: movement, substitution characterized approach Burke suggests historical “examine rhythm the of anddetermine processes.” isto historian’s task of and speed, rates different at which history proceeds according to in 20 of the beginnings the was developed concept longue duree The dimension. sociological its and time of period long a over persistence its in both expressed scholars –recognizes the complexity Jewishthe of in problem Poland andanti-Semitism, contemporary other some with who–along Gross, T. “Fear,”Jan of author the of writing of is style the concept of that for theacceptance reason The analyses. require total which duree) a problem. as 1.1 History 10 1. History and memory. Peter Burke, Peter Jacques LeGoff, Jacques Anthony D. Smith, This paper understands history in long-termcontext of historical (la longuestructures TheFrench historical revolution: the Annales School, 1929-89 History andMemory Myths and memories of the nation history to processesofmodernization.history the or anda particular duree), not tie andformation to their existence of period longwell future theirpossible course, over of as period time longue (la and nationalisms, andgrasp the If we nationsmodern power the understand shapeof want to we must trace the origins and formation of nations, as (New York: Columbia University Press, 1992), xxi. (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1999), 10. 8 11 The Annales School’s, or as Peter th (Oxford : Polity Press, 1990). century by the Annales school, Annales bythe century 10 12 Jan T. CEU eTD Collection 16 15 14 13 it.” has been so captured byLe mythic,has been“[Collective so memory]appears as essentially deformed, captured Goff: memory both.Relationship thepresented pertaining relationship to between and history between memory. collective and 1.2 History to a reversible influence of history on the memory. amounts history and memory between the relationship characterizes that process The dialectical event,” to “return suggests Nora Pierre historical –along latter the historiography “seek with – hasto objectivity and belief basedon remain in the memory is an mistakeoften –memory is araw material for history and cannotbemixed.And history and of conflation the of school the representative JacquesLeGoff, another to According draw view of events. apanoramic the in to views, order political and ideology practice, problems. analyzed the of explanation complex for look and anti-Semitism in reflects his find striving to connections periods between of suchastime, prewar and postwar Warsaw. followsthen Gross traditionthe la of longue duree the ofhistory, alsoperception which in based Institute Historical Jewish the of archives in the collected or interviews personal through gathered both testimonies, first-person of full are books His writing. of type such of an example servesas written are books Gross’s JanT. in which style The writing. history of type journalistic Le Goff. Le Stuart Clark, Stuart Pierre Nora, Pierre Jan T. Gross, “Strach polski, Strach 13 With With hethose words joins longue the dureeschool historiography.And,of accordingly In order to capture the dynamics of history and memory conceptual be will conceptual tools and memory history dynamics the capture of to In order Finally, history be every should a separatehistory, butsocial also to able compare to the truth Realms of Memory The Annales School: Critical Assessments .” Importantly, it is the memory that is more likely to be distorted than history. than be distorted to likely more is that memory is the it Importantly, .” v.1 ( Ī New York: Columbia University 1996-1998).Press, ydowski,” interview for 14 history-as-testimony which places history close to the to close history places which history-as-testimony 9 (London: Routledge, 1999). 16 Polityka no.28, 2006. 15 CEU eTD Collection 21 20 19 18 17 epoch. of a particular society, of the thoughts memory collectivean image reconstruct to is of inaccordwith pastwhich the predominantthe preserved, they livingstart their lives. own pastare tothe notions certain pertaining underground anti-Communist descendants of the group. continues within one that modesof of and perception past the andthatmembershipconduct suggests different to, belongs errors.” its rectify it help and memory illuminate must History history. traditional atschools,historians, and popularized –onecould hope–by mass media)the this false correct present and between relation never-completed of livedthe the reality itconstitutes But and anachronistic. past. It is desirable that historical information (lavished on us by professional representation, making the past frequently distorted in frequently makingdistorted actof past the deconstruction. the representation, encompass memories all isolatedand details retain only elements and of discontinuous our to however, fail, They conversations. verbal the are memory collective of frameworks the intelligentsias.” popularbe, by living and and cannational pasthasbeen, modern rediscovered reinterpreted are the myths, memories, power its nationalists the gives “what says: and substantialists and modernists of nationalism to traditions, approaches the reconciling theory ethno-symbolism historical the andintroduces Smith, D. Anthony symbols of nationalism, ethnic to approach ethno-symbolic the on book his In heritagescomplex. and nuanced more and the ways in which a Ibid., 182. Halbwachs, 40. Maurice Halbwachs, Maurice Smith, Le Goff, 111. Myths Maurice Halbwachs speaks of frameworks, Maurice Halbwachs instrumentsthe speaksof collective usedby the , 9. 18 The collective memory is thus selective perse, depending which one group On Collective Memory 19 And so, if in WWIIor of Polish agroup Andso, of combatants ( Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992). 20 10 The most elementary and the most stable among stable most the and elementary most The 17 The history is history The 21 Halbwachs CEU eTD Collection 26 Transaction Publishers, 1994), 144. 25 social order must presuppose a memory," shared must presuppose social order 24 23 Cultural History/Cultural Studies,(Spring - Summer, 1995), 126. past.” work of large numbersa not is memory collective of people, who are all trying to secure the narratives. “publichistorical articulation andgroup social is socially mediated. Socreated memory, defines includesit, Nora as Pierre for the reciprocity of roles, thematic instability, and disorganization,” and instability, thematic roles, of reciprocity is memory by memory. “characterized nonspecialization, a high cultural degree of The inherent thing to be passed on but a resource to beinherentthing be mobilized…. to passed onbut toJewsmighta resource be rememberedin situation. an actual contemporary and to its knowledge Finally,past. memory cultural though a processworks of reconstruction,is,it always that relates the of description an“accurate” represents latter the so that memory, the reshape and influence judgments absolveof from “not accuracy.” does it butthat withfindings – historical contrasted – even version past mediated the of selective and a both is memory collective that claims author The principles. the to as disagreements frequent 22 the is oneseparating the established, groups of people. recollections eventsof and accounts certain or state institutionalized through context, a collective in only function can memory human that argues Ibid., 145. Iwona Irwin-Zarecka, Iwona Paul Connerton, Nora. JanAssmann and John Czaplicka, “Collective Memory and Cultural Identity,” 25 And this is the reason why there are differences in perspectives and opinions as well as In his essay on the Polish collective memory of Jews, Zvi Gitelman writes: “[it] is not an isnot “[it] writes: Gitelman Zvi Jews, of memory collective Polish the on essay his In As Jan Assmann and JohnCzaplicka suggest, themost importantdelimitationbe to How societies remember 23 Frames of Remembrance: the Dynamics of Collective Memory Paul Connerton asserts that "it is an implicit rule that participants in any natural result historical of experience,but a product of a great deal of ( Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press, 1989). communicative 11 26 24 Therefore, the findings of history should or and Iwona Irwin-Zarecka argues that argues andIrwin-Zarecka Iwona everyday 22 that memory is confined to a memory from the cultural the from memory New German Critique (New Brunswick [N.J.] : , No. 65, , No. CEU eTD Collection 30 Commemorations. The Politics of National Identity 29 descriptive, serving particular interests and ideological and ideological positions.” interests serving particular descriptive, than rather inscriptive selective, highly are memories and “Identities versa. vice and memory, idea of onthe identity depends “notion the of that asserts author same the identity relationship, to acompilation of essays concerning the commemorative activity as adepiction of memory-the 28 Press, 2002), 278. Contested Memories:Holocaust PolesandJewsduring the anditsAftermath 27 in identity social a possess also personal, their besides individuals, that claims theory identity Social identification agroup. fulfillinga sensecommunity a psychological needof with of remembering;is and what isdefinedremembered by identity.” assumed the individual groupidentity,or namely, sameness the over time andspace, is sustained by ofidentity. creation and history 1.3 Memory, much influencestronger and challengingit by history causes denial of history.” “book the has memory identity; creating in roles different play both also They debates. public and media in history and memory amounts toa discernment: formerthe is expressed in writing while the latter between In difference case, influencehis work. hismemory any the emotions from coming Communism.” of advent the and republic prewar the of failures the explain to order providing an outlook characterized by all shades of characterizedproviding byallshadesof grayness, anoutlook critic, whodefined memory as a blackand history andfragment-focused white while as relationship between memory and history was on by Andrzejreflected Paczkowski, Gross’s Gillis, 4. JohnR. Gillis, “Memory Identity:and the History of a Relationship,” introductionto JohnR.Gillis (ed.), Andrzej Paczkowski, “Gross, historyk z misj z historyk “Gross, Paczkowski, Andrzej Zvi Gitelman, “Collective Memory and Contemporary Polish-JewishRelations,” in Joshua Zimmerman, ed., John R. Gillis sodefines identity and the way itis preserved: meaning “Thecore of any ą ,” Television debate, ,” Television (Princeton and New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1994), 3. 12 TVN January 19, 2008. 28 and criticized Gross for letting for Gross criticized and (New Brunswick: Rutgers University 30 Its purpose is then to create 29 Inhis introduction 27 The CEU eTD Collection 34 1991). 33 Directions,” 32 manipulation, a stance somewhere between social constructionism social essentialism. and between constructionism astance somewhere manipulation, 31 Stanis and from poems epics patriotic Sienkiewcz’s battles, Polish great of painting historical monumental Matejko’s Jan where becomes way, inanationalist Theculture later. perceived which will bediscussed Polish identity harkens back tothe Partition especiallyinperiod, post-1880 phase, later, the of crucial elements two those of conflating process The differentiation. of criteria religious Poles are among those ethnic communities,and its elements – values, symbols,singledmyths and traditions, often codified in outcustoms and rituals.” by Smith, whose identities ofculture on alignments based and they’re andsocialization, communication spheres of from the are based on cases as Poland, cannotbe construed as irrelevant. “Religious identities,” Smith suggests, “derive inidentity such thereligious Therefore create apowerful mixture. with to each other conflate even be asoften upor pair they refuted, should identity. approach creation the a national This of identity. dismantling the memories, thus strengthening the particular of understanding national the nationalism,historianssuggesting a that play crucial in reinforcingrole understanding, or preserving memory. symbolic forof sites ethno-symbolic the argues Smith approach to manipulation is achievable through commemorations of events,past particularideology or identity,which various belong, groupsto they this thesis deals with, is a product of both Smith, Anthony D. Smith, For the review of the literature on identity see: Karen A. Cerulo, “Identity Construction: New Issues, New Henri Tajfel and Colin Fraser(ed.), The role of religion is often neglected when it comes to the problem of nationalism and nationalism of problem the to comes it when neglected often is religion of role The National, 33 Annual Review Sociologyof 6. National identity á aw Staszic are praised for the expression of the essence of Polish nation. of Polish essence the of expression the for praised are aw Staszic Introducing social psychology Vol. 23,(1997), pp.385-409. (Published London: PenguinBooks, Reno:University of Nevada Press, 31 with a nation as an especially salient one. National 13 (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1978). natural continuity and conscious 32 Such 34 CEU eTD Collection punctuated by punctuated resentments,andinheritedrumors, silences from waryearsthe years and the war of the narratives “Polish private however Communism,” to resistance popular of cornerstone 20 perception of inthe media,role acrucial isplaying of one to the next narrative, rolepersonal of Poland, the Poland. in today’s observable a phenomenon identity, the about insecurity is there when rises memory with preoccupation Thence, identity. to a challenge also memory of challenge making a its shape, at memory focus atcollective maydirect forces external threatening 36 35 valorized. becomes latter the problemized, is former the if that such, is memory 6á mainand whose irony,mockery, weapon satirewas and Antoni suchasJulian or Tuwim writing of way classical the follow not would who origin, Jewish of writers hand, other the On as by remembering.” regard themselves having history.as acommon Theyare“bound asmuch together by forgetting however who but another, one of heard or met never have who people by is shared memory bases identity the of are undermined, is identity the Gillis too. suggeststhen thatthe national Supreme Court on the basis of being incoherent with the expectations of the Polish society. has that been Kaczy Minister in Poland, recently when Prime done “will i.e. Polak-katolik, (andpeople people” the of inasenseof somethingthe Pole-Catholic) “otherness”model the actionsjustified beJewish culture. ethnicby of Inthe can appeal the an to strengthenconsideredinterwar in anti-nationalist, would which period, amount theto only the Allan Megill, “History, Memory, Identity,” Gillis, 7. onimski are disowned by the supporters of the ethno-nationalist vision of the nation. They are They nation. the of vision ethno-nationalist the of supporters the by disowned are onimski On the role of a historical narrative as recorded in memory, Steinlauf notes that in that notes Steinlauf in memory, as recorded narrative historical a of role the On National identities are historically then and reconstructed,constructed whenthus the th century events. He emphasizes the role of Polish private narrative “a narrative private Polish therole of Heemphasizes events. century 35 And as Allan Megill suggests, the relationship between identity identity between and relationship the Allan Megillsuggests, And as History of the Human Sciences 14 , vol.11 no.3, 1998. no.3, vol.11 , Ĕ ski criticized a ruling of ski criticized a of the ruling 36 Thus the Thus CEU eTD Collection transmitted image, not a personal memory,” a is Jews of memory the increasingly, Poland, “in postwar out, points rightly Gitelman Zvi As group. own one’s of perception positive and identity common of sense the to obstacle an burden, History behindaccounts offamilycanbe andfriends, andtransmitted doors. a closed was Polish knowledge periodthe of history about through was Communismpreserved inpersonal 38 University Press, 1997), 74. 37 distortion.” to subject primarily legacy a were following, immediately Gitelman, 276. Steinlauf, C. Michael Bondage :Poland to theHolocaust dead and the memoryofthe 38 embedded in the cultural code of the society. 15 37 ( He suggests that the Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse N.Y.: Syracuse, CEU eTD Collection nation 39 markers of Polishness. The one, who was to be accepted among the Poles was to speak Polish at of turn the 18 in only however, reality, In recipient. the of identity the define which history, of aspects different for fish to filters areemployed different Here, Poland.” “Jagiellonian state, multicultural multiethnicwhichthose supportthe and heroic of Polish vision opponents past, of the the by used also interestingly is which period time is the This society. of layers all among language, spoken prevalent always the was Polish by ethno-nationalists, shared narrative popular the In cause. higher for sacrifice its and Christianity of a stronghold as nation the glorifies – “Golden Age” of nation Polishthe – acoherent of group Polish-speakers, Catholics and patriots centuries is remembered strongest influenceas on shapingthe of identity.Polish from period Particularly the 14 a climax of Polish statehood and power. The use of certainthat events and which of them are especiallyso-called salient. interprets memory Polish the how else, or formed, was identity the how shows chapter This all minorities – be they national, religious or ethnic – amount to merely 4 per cent of ethnic makes composition the Poland one mostof the societies homogenous in world,insociety. which the oftheidentity. shaping 2.1 The 2. Polish identity. Eric J. Eric Hobsbawm,“Ethnicity Nationalismand in Europe Today”Gopal In: Balakrishnan (ed.), ( London: Verso, 1996),255. In the Polish identity creation process certainPeculiar maintenance. its and formation identity eventsin Polish role agreat plays Religion are emphasized as having the th and 19 and nation is the is past. the nation [N]ation without a past is a contradiction in terms, as whatmakes the th centuries, language, along with centuries, language, along Catholicthe became the denomination, 39 16 th to mid-18 to Mapping the th CEU eTD Collection 42 consciousness was cultivated above all intheChurch.” above all cultivated consciousness was “duringnational Austrian and rightly outthat Polish Partitions, Empire. the points Steinlauf 41 40 elements of history,martyrological the highlight to atrend witnessed Poland century twentieth the accordingly, with its dramatic battles fought to repel the enemy, usually –asa Adam Mickiewicz ofbe after called– to nation was a different of layers Polishness. very atthe an deepest attack constitutes Church the important factor influencing Polish society and culture, and that is exactly why Gross’s attack on most the been always has Catholicism that suggests also Radzilowski John Today, nation. a20 created that Catholicism,that auniversal in religion, Poland became by appropriated nationalists,Polish and makes thePolish conflation religion of nationalismA unique.and so consequence of was, that which building, nation Polish and identity Polish for Catholicism of significance the of rise of dismemberment of the 18 hostility. be exposedlikely to more conspicuousness to inlargecities, werebytheir lived Poles among but Commonwealth, former of borders eastern the to limited – centuries the of turn in the other makingminorities perceived asforeign. Especially Jews, whowere not– unlike most of the criteria, those on based was exclusion the analogically, And Catholicism. profess and home the communal past and to moral obligation of sense the reinforces sharedsuffering of narrative the that Zarecka argues the sense of solidarity among those who share these Irwin-Zarecka. John Radzilowski, “ Steinlauf, 7. This is also the time when the Polish romantic messianism was born, in which the Polish the in which born, was messianism romantic Polish the when time the also is This The origins of the shift in understanding Polishness can be traces back to the th Strach century perception that borders of the religion overlap with the borders of borders with the overlap religion of borders the that century perception i rewizja polskiej historii,” th century Poland by three neighboring states; neighboringby century states; Russia Prussia, Tsarist Poland three Rzeczpospolita, 17 40 And that is coincidence a peculiar And when that Christ ofNations March 01-02, 2008. 41 . In that context Irwin- context that In . memories . 42 And CEU eTD Collection 46 Press), 41. 45 ( 44 Mendelsohn was in the Polish case “accompanied by anti-Semitism,” suggests thenationbecamethat a means of establishing identity, collective and thisaccording to same shared the Polish andspoke values was nowamember. cultural The adjective 43 multiplicity,” irreducible of a world against set singularity, and coherence for search intelligentsia’s “the was It formation. identity with relations Jewish stance,” honest only “Thisisthe is cast. judgment a before to listened be should thence and victim a is Poland interpretation, this In colonialism. of aperspective from behistory understood should Poland’s Partitions, of the thatbecause writes J. Chodakiewicz Today Marek market. nationalist thedemandon day, reflects tothis which continues novels, 17 turbulent the was Henryk sort author of the extremelythe (1846-1916), Sienkiewicz popular trilogy describing persuasion; OrthodoxSwedes Protestant Russians. or main The supplyingliterature writer of that 19 in mid- the nation the fightfor Porter, the According to characteristics. those around nation the the shifted of vectors toward power publiconto the stage andthe burst movements mass various as irrelevant became culture political elite of forms “old the when is That emerged. nationalism of form new a when and world modern the entered Poland when victims – should have the exclusive right towrite their own history. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 3. Porter, 6. Porter, Ezra Mendelssohn, Ezra Brian Porter, Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, “Historia jako wycinanka,” jako “Historia Chodakiewicz, Jan Marek th century century and the onein beginnings the 20 the of szlachta Brian notes thethat fundamentalPorter in shiftdefinition the placeof identity Polish took (nobility) and intelligentsia that had hitherto defined the nation, but everyone who everyone but nation, the defined hitherto had that intelligentsia and (nobility) When Nationalism Began toHate: Imagining Modern Politics inNineteenth-Century Poland th century,fights and with andSwedes, Turks Ukrainians. The popularity of those The Jews ofEastCentral Europe between the Word Wars Rzeczpospolita 18 th was a fundamental change in its nature, its in change fundamental a was 46 November18, 2006 that heavily contributed to building to that heavilycontributed the people (Bloomington: Indiana University 43 understood as Poles – as 45 .” entwining the Polish- the entwining 44 . Therefore, not only modern CEU eTD Collection Their presence throughout the ages should be seen through the ongoing dynamic process process of theongoingbe the agesshould dynamic seenthrough throughout Their presence in society. and Polish the assimilated never acculturated whohave place, they areoutsiders, memory. collective in the alive remain conflicts distant even victimhood, Polish perceived asthe such involved, are injustice of feelings 50 also pinned down by a Polish scholar Alina Ca Alina scholar aPolish by down pinned also Essay,” 10 of NebraskaPress, 2006). Jew as a Jew as 48 47 byastruggle was while former characterized the and, to a lesser extent, still represents the defining the represents still a lesser extent, to and, Jewrepresented the formation for identity the that until argues Michlic Joanna post-1880 today, the in Jew the of image the on study her In society. the of majority the to inimical tissue alien an nationalism – of scholars the among -whichisapopular assumption “other” presence of the identity. Polish and 2.2 Anti-Semitism conditioned former.” the latter of representations the of interpretations certain through Therefore, context. Polish the in modernity modernity define came imagined the way nation, the this to that butthe Polish intelligentsia it only not was then hatred; into evolved eventually that of exclusion, by a rhetoric characterized fight a Gitleman, 277. Alina Ca Joanna Michlic, Ibid., 8. us and Polin I against The formation of the identity and the type of nationalism is strongly stigmatized by by the stigmatized strongly is nationalism of type the and identity the of formation The determinant of Polishdeterminant national of consciousness them á a, Question “The of Assimilation the of Polish the inJews Kingdom (1864-1897): An Interpretive (1986): 130-150. external and internal enemies in an attempt to create a unified nation. It was then , “nationalism and historiosophy of the nation were contested and variable, and the Poland's Threatening Other: the image of theJew presentfrom 1880 tothe 47 50 In that collective memory Jews occupy a particular occupy Jews memory collective Inthat á 19 a. 49 for Zvi Gitleman accordingly suggests thatwhen Zvi suggests Gitleman accordingly ideals of freedom and justice, the latter was latter the justice, and freedom ideals of threatening other in the second part of the 19 . 48 The significance of the of significance The (Lincoln: University th Century was CEU eTD Collection 53 Antisemitism 52 Population 2002,” American JewishBook, Year 102, concept of concept 51 terms. in both andsecular religious be interpreted the to thanks possible was transmission modern This culture. toa transmitted easily Judaismwas hatred towards Christian centuries-old dwell latentin Polish ideological repository. Inthismanner, Yehuda Bauerexplains the way the society. Jew-free survivein itallows admittedly to for the that something and culture, preceded reality. in evethe of created 20 country, culturally, ethnically and religiously, recipe the forPolish understanding of a nation homogenous Polandbecame analmost occurred, changes andpolitical geographical postwar model Polish prewar legacy, aprevalentWhen determined of identity. which postwar the the butfear alsoof asaneffect the of Germansnot only in WorldWar II Jews the after during and unfavorable toward attitudes all Steinlauf Gross, andMichlic, suggest that longue concept, duree the with In accordance other. influence each that generations, of attitudes of as acontinuum but events, of set a as not consideration into be taken should history Therefore nation. the creating rising importance of Catholicism as a center of Polishness understood in linguistic and religious and linguistic in understood Polishness of acenter as Catholicism of importance rising Polish version of anti-Semitism as embedded in culture. Especially a peculiar combination of the Semitism intoa short-hand substitute of an entire culture.” [whichit] calls made of anti-modern Weltanschauung…. a“nationalistpossible the transfer anti- she in something modernity thatJewsrepresent suggests Code,” aCultural as “Anti-Semitism Shulamit Volkov “Antisemitism as s Cultural Code,” In: Yehuda Bauer, “In Searchof the Definitionof Antisemitism” In: Michael Brown(ed.): Sergio Della Pergola assesses the number at 3,500 Jews in Poland in 1992 In: Sergio DellaPergola, It is valid then to consider anti-Semitism as an ideology inherent to the Polish tradition (New York, Jerusalem: American JewishCommittee, 1994). cultural code th century was already waiting to be applied. to this century In waiting was already case, perception the serves as an explanation for the accessibility of stereotypes, which stereotypes, of theaccessibility for explanation asan serves tradition (New York, 2002) 20 of perceiving the Jew asanOther,which could Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook 52 Shulamit Volkov, in her famous article 53 . Those two elements fit ideally in the , XXIII,, 1978, 38. “World Jewish “World Approaches to 51 The CEU eTD Collection interwar period signalized the expectations of society means andgoals of political signalizedsociety the regarding expectations interwar the period between ethnically understood “us” and the rest –“them.” The later significance of the ND in the impermeable division an of is perception the presence history and to approach nationalist ethno- Their (ND). Democracy National ethno-nationalist core the by politics national of circles. In 1880s, asMichlic points out, the anti-Jewish tropes were introduced into the discourse Catholic Roman and traditionalist conservative, the towards leaning society the of consolidation abovementioned the was sentiments anti-Semitic in rise that on Influence outsiders. as failedyet moved another uprising, inclusive tothe positions, with Jews increasingly considered Jewstowards from ethnicthe in Poles, who light of solidifying nationalism and discontentwith hostility increased an by accompanied was sentiments anti-Jewish Russian of rise The region. redefinition which continued until 1884 andcausedacomplete ofJewsin position the of the former Polish territory (covering the Paleof roughly Settlement anti-Jewish the around spurred awaveof all pogroms incorporated to Tsaristfact which a woman, wasaJewish thecrime of of organizers one the in Petersburg, assassinated Russia, and to which Jews andThe 1863-64). situation year 1881,whenchanged around were TsarAlexanderthe IIwas limited to live) in majorfavorable both during the period, Partition when e.g.Jewsfought (1830-31 uprisings grew rapidly. ideology anti-Semitic setting, particular stance. In this that reinforced anti-Judaism of tradition Catholic secondly the and others, as Jews stigmatized nationalism of exclusiveness the firstly, way: in atwofold defining the nation. This centrality ledCatholicismof tostrengthening the anti-Semitic attitudes in role extraordinary an plays Catholicism which in nationalism, of dynamics Polish special sense, with the wave of nationalisms that swept through the late 19 The history of the Poles’ attitudes towards minorities, and Jews in particular, was rather 21 th century Europe, created a century Europe, CEU eTD Collection ( way process, thereforeidentity. and of nation visions 2.3 Competing the myths and perceptions in voice given publicarena.” the offirst were anti-Semitism of forms modern the “that from those was it and intelligentsia” Polish the of Polish frustration political and “economic nations caused Jews of movement city-bound The assimilation. often are reinforced solvingemancipation problem presenceJews,through asdistinctively ofJews and the the of and 55 54 term infamous the of memory the invoking Polish, truly be considered to not still was Polish, fluent spoke already who faith, his leave to wished who A Jew, attainable. easily not was conversion, demanding of process assimilation, the now Polish nation, the into integration for allowed positionthe is ofconverts inWhile Poland. conversion hadwould have in centuries previous furthered by ethno-nationalists. The peculiarity meaningthe of of is Polishness visible in easily and themselves insinuate into Polish society.” to for trying resented were often they like Poles, eat and speak, dress, and markers external race-based anti-Jewish views in Eastern Europe, referred to as a referredto Europe, inEastern views race-based anti-Jewish on a of late 19 the structure prevalenteconomic hitherto strongly anti-Semitic ideology. into a of patriotism independence-driven the transformation the for allowed century politics, Ithaca: Cornell University Press,2005). Robert Blodaum’s introductionto Robert Blobaum(ed.), Gitelman. sociological collisioncourse marrano The discursive shaping of the identity between the intellectual elites and society is andsociety a two- intellectual elites between the identity the of shaping The discursive Keely Stauter-Halsted suggests that the process of modernization implemented in implemented the modernization process of thatthe suggests Keely Stauter-Halsted . Zvi Gitleman writes: “Even when more. ZviGitleman writes: “Even when began andmore lose Jews to their 55 . Naturally, those processes fit in a broader trend in rise of the 22 54 The language of apartof 20 the exclusion, th Anti-Semitism and Opponentsits in Modern Poland century Galicia, placed Jews and Catholics Jewish question Jewish , concerning pass th CEU eTD Collection 58 57 2000), 5. unpronounceable languages.” George Schöpflin, good reasons for this evolution, not merely the cussedness of people who speak – insist on speaking – obscure and salient. Eric Hobsbawm’s modernistradical approach,has been not forcriticized paying credit to regained its independence in ethnic1918, the perception of nationthe became very accordingly map. which In Poland, majorEuropean back the the of WW I,anddatesto reshaping preceding vision.competing Theethnic isof awithperception a nation new itsrelatively concept, origins a with confronted when stance own one’s of radicalization easy an for provides memory eastern nationalism as 56 of gray. shades all with facts, the of representation objective asan construed latter the history, memory,the not around the is concentrated discussion the its outcome will determine the place of Poland in the twenty-first century.” visions of nativist otheroutward-lookingPoland, one andxenophobic, the andEuropean…. and its between between of a widerdispute haslong opponents two anti-Semitism and been part “[t]he conflict twoideal Incontemporary models. alongPoland those stances polarization of the and society Polish the exists within that of division the describe character the to best serves they render the nature of that opposition. cultural option (ethno-national) would beimplemented.Naturally, are ideal those models, but inclusivesecular, ratherversionnational) civic (civicor the exclusive, religious and mono- needed be thismulticultural,would to defined.Theshapeof state nation bebasedoneither the a identity pluralismbe could nowfully expressed. Inotherwords, nation,the was toinhabit that suppressed hitherto the also changes, political and economic the Along with life. everyday of Polish spheres changes inall brought 1989transformation alegitimacy. The equippedwith Jan T. Gross, “Gross, historyk zmisj Introduction to Blobaum, George Schöpflincriticizes this simple divide civic against ethnic as going along the east-west lines, seeing According to Gross, the clash between two camps representing two opposing stances in stances opposing two representing camps two between clash the Gross, to According tribal Anti-Semitism and brutish ą ,” Televisiondebate, , and he says that “if there is an is there “if that says he and , , 18. Nations, identity, power 56 This model – its shortcomings notwithstanding – 23 TVN January January 19, 2008. 58 (New York : New York University Press, The black and white character of character blackand white The Eastern nationalism, there are perfectly are there nationalism, 57 CEU eTD Collection 63 Jew,” 62 Societies 61 1939-41, andthe Stereotype of Anti-Polishthe Pro-SovietJew.” and of Occupation Poland,“The Soviet article inJoanna Michlic’s nation, Polish waspresented the source when combined with other discourses, such as nationalism.” religion in in Eastern Europe early the suggeststhat “religion1990s can still be apowerful prominence needs less inmeetingthe of the successful of American, were widersociety, the about process the of insecularization modernity, thatalthough argues Churches,European unlike writes who Thompson, Kenneth nationalism. Polish for understanding very accurate appears it in case, any nationalism, of content and origins describe the to best seems concept Smith’s thereof. sources finds early pre-modern nation, the of concept the modernity of historical the 60 59 history.” social “critical from shy not away whodo those for is a place there scene, historians’ Polish of the picture in Michlic’s spectrum endof the other included. gameJewsOn the ages, fighting all enemies, with azero-sum victimized throughout handful of prominenthistorians, who seePolish in nation a uniquely light;favorable a group a names She today. history in writing stereotype the use historians (ethno)nationalist how Jew as asupporter of else,Communism, notion or a popular Judeo-Communism,of she presents states, territorial ethnic-linguistic into Europe dividing of plan Wilsonian the War Iand World the of outcome tothe asbecontributed should ethnic states the perception of mixed This European approach, etc. the beliefs inchoseness ethnicthe myths, and origins to integrate the national minorities into Polish history, a new trend that has been introduced to introduced been has that trend new a history, Polish into minorities national the integrate to Ibid., 136. JoannaMichlic, “The Soviet Occupationof 1939-41,Poland, and Stereotypethe Anti-Polish ofthe andPro-Soviet KennethThompson, “Religion, Values, andIdeology.”In: StuartHall, Smith, Hobsbawm. Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, Society An interesting analysis of two inhistoriographytrends opposingreflectingvisions two of (Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell, 1996), 404. Myths. n.s.13, no.3 (Spring/Summer 2007). 24 63 Their greatest contribution is the will Modernity: anIntroduction toModern 61 62 So is the case of Poland. By using the image of the 59 acknowledging 60 CEU eTD Collection rewizja polskiej historii.” rozlicza 64 identity debate. in place important an such has issues, historical certain about writing of way the changing ethnic and composition isreligious new.is relatively And that whyhistorical revisionism, that is argue whetherinclude to Jews inhistory memory,and thus Poles sothat remembercurrent that unfavorableis outcome, level atthe rejected of methodology. Thosecompeting historiographies any approach, yieldingresistance to of new historiography, perceiving adifferent method where traditional, ‘good old’ school history writing.of Western school of “postmodern society Thewhich views distorted the obsession methodsthey represent. about of wrong and history” is memory,history not only identity, historians,bulk amongand butalso thus among of a the clearly visible in writings of the championsitis that rejectcertainhistory-revisingcase, or accept propositions. not only ethno-nationalists of the any In cases. interesting areequally omitted Therefore, stances. the radical only shows approach notfitbedo Manichean qualifiedmemory asethno-nationalistthis theirwhich cannot –as and notions becausethey certain whichreject history –those writing spectrum of a broader kinds of accepting only Polish sufferings and the benevolence of the Polish state. Here Michlic fails seeto history, vision of aheroic advocate historians ethno-nationalist a variedpace. The at proceeds transformingintoan inclusive, Poland openandtolerantcivil society, which – asIargue of islarger-scale phenomenon a apartof This process style. very (ethnic)nation-centered hitherto For example: Marek Jan Chodakiewicz: “Historia jako wycinanka,” and the same historian “Ludzi nale “Ludzi historian same the and wycinanka,” jako “Historia Chodakiewicz: Jan Marek example: For ü Different styles of writing history reflect on the eagerness and readiness to challenge to readiness and eagerness the on reflect history writing of styles Different indywidualnie,” an interview for Rzeczpospolita 25 64 November 18, 2006,also Radzilowski, John “ This dismissal of postmodernism indicates a indicates postmodernism of dismissal This Strach Ī i y CEU eTD Collection 69 universities and the 1938 attempt to ban universitiesto 1938attempt the and his nationalist party. Dmowski secularized Roman Poles. ethnic with them replace and circles intelligentsia the from Jews eradicate Jewsandto be brutal many attacks toward attempts solved,evoking of list problems to 68 (2001), pp. 291-305. sanctioning of pogroms, several with virulent, particularly be to out turned events anti-Jewish when then, economy. efforts to, by employing the language hatred,of dislodge Jewsfrom their positions in urban the nationalists, uniting moment, breaking a as came War World First the of large. outbreak The at society the of tissue the entered tropes anti-Semitic Therefore, LeoXIII. of Pontificate the of beginning the with associates Porter Brian of which 67 66 65 3. Historical revisionism. well, either for the reason of lost faith in faith lost of reason the for either well, 20 inthe relations 3.1 Polish-Jewish shared by See also: Monika Natkowska “Numerus clausus, numerus nullus i getto Jan T. Gross, Robert Blobaum, “The Politics of Anti-Semitism in Fin-de-Siecle Warsaw,” Introduction to Blobaum, Le Goff, xviii. The post-1935 period cameThe post-1935 be known to as a“ghastly decade” After the 1905 Russian revolution, Endecja’s exclusivist anti-Jewish ideals came to be 67 liberals the religious anti-Judaism and turned it into a political anti-Semitism, a platform of a platform anti-Semitism, a political into it turned and anti-Judaism religious the Between the wars, the Jewish question reached the supreme place on the Endecja’s the on place supreme reachedthe question Jewish the wars, Between the Upiorna Dekada numerus clausus andprogressives andby representatives of the Roman the Catholic Churchas will to transform it.” hinges a on history the of interpretation the that toobserve is“It legitimate Anti-Semitism (Kraków: Austeria, 2007). (which, at a point, transformed to . assimilation 65 kashrut 26 th Century. . A constellation of majorfactors three of . A constellation progressives or by the threats posed by modernity, posed by or threats the á awkowe,” , and Catholic clergy intheir clergy Catholic and , Journal of Modern History 68 for Jews in Poland. It is numerus nullus 73, no.2 73, 69 66 ) in ) all CEU eTD Collection that Jews embodied, as particularly threatening to the Church’s own power and authority in andauthority Church’s to the power own threatening Jews embodied, that asparticularly the support for conversion to the policy policy of the forto conversion support the century Konrad Catholic thatthe from suggests shift anti-Semitism. Church’s Polish Sadkowski 20 the to heavilycontributed Jews agroup, later as Judaism, and toward its hostileand attitude of nation today. visions for the competing well as abone of contention As identity. Polish of standpoint the from relevant so time that memory, Polish for important Endecja constitutes embodimentthe of Polish specificity,becauseis and interwar period so enemy within, as – using the anti-Zionist phrase from-1968enemy the anti-Zionist as–using within, phrase –a notion of Jews as disseminators of prostitution etc., all combined for a synergic perception of a the experience, personal everyday an with together taken reasons, Those actions. anti-Jewish moment, even those who did not share ethno-nationalistparticular Atthat concept. that which furthered Endecja, of andpopularity rise of anti-Semitism views were eager to supportwealthy influentialand Those elementsgroup. a created special dynamics, which allowed for the Endecja’s a of one wasthe image their factory owners aswell as doctors, lawyers or as professions, in freelance issince wereoverrepresented Jews purely finalfactor The nation. economical; Polish the poison to attempting tavern-owners, or Judaism, but religion other any to hostile tradition both mythologization deriving and religious from secular Jews as Christ-killers, of which lay foundations for the ‘ after Union with collaboration warwagedby Sovietduring the the endlatter WW the of I, with fear indicted Jews constantlosing popularly of independence. the just-regained were is a first The setting. Polish in anti-Semitism of penetration extraordinary this to contributed Alongside the political anti-Semitism of Endecja, Catholic Church’s influence on society on influence Church’s Catholic Endecja, of anti-Semitism political the Alongside ĩ ydokomuna’ concept. The second factor was the anti-Jewish struggle 27 derived from the perception of a civic state, a civic of perception from the derived fifth column fifth . The program of . Theprogram th CEU eTD Collection 1939-1945,”Blobaum, in 73 72 71 Lublinthe Region, 1918-1939,” Blobaum,in: 70 War II under a significantWorld during and Jews Poles of situation the on book in their example, For of society. all strata title “Unequal Victims,” period. scopeof infiltrated postwar The very anti-Semitism continued and wide tothe was over Krakowski and Gutman suggest that anti- society. being that of of compassion being and that Polish clergy did not difficultprovide expect to more effective aid toJews from such a clergy during the present war, since the assistance following:would Jewsand been have the “It Holocaust eventowards Catholic attitude the priests’ when they were in book on a Polish-Jewish positionrelations during World War II,and written during the war, commented on to do so.” struggle. influencing eventhe post-transformation historians and still importantplay an role in political in however succeededonly in they born 1989, theafter 60swerechallenged conceptions, society as Polish the of correlated religiosity high the of other, the and Jews saving in clergy of involvement serious with the scale of an notionandit relationshipeffectivebeingconceptions ofa between of Church, the the Jews one a about help to Jews.sanctioned and tothis survived day. The author claims thatCommunists in by being in 1968, and referred anumberit to became of publications, Catholic those a greathelpJews brought by Churchduringthe war,comes the from a publication by ordered the myth that the of “Fear” Dariusz after Libionka suggested thepublication of conducted interview Dariusz Libionka, “Anti-Semitism, Anti-Judaism, and the PolishCatholic Clergy during the Second World War, Dariusz Libionka, “Oni nie s Emmanuel Ringelblum, Emmanuel Konrad Sadkowski, “Clerical Nationalism and Antisemitism: Catholic Priests, Jews, and Orthodox Christians in 70 73 This attitude continued to the post-1939 period. continued post-1939 Emanuel Thisattitude the of to author Ringelblum,the the All Jews nearnowhere wartime the in towards was attitude during all, Church’s the Anti-Semitism. Polish-Jewish Relations During World War II ą z ojczyzny mojej,” interview for doing everything that couldhavebeendone doing everythingthat 72 Anti-Semitism. As Libionkasuggests thatthereare Polish two historical 28 Gazeta Gazeta Wyborcza (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1974). , February 2-3, 2008. , and these attitudes 71 Inan CEU eTD Collection 77 of NebraskaPress, 2006). 76 183. Jewish relations be cannot described solely by anti-Semitism,but also by a trauma causedby stereotypes about the “Communist Jew.” becauseit prewar the reinforced relations, consequences Polish-Jewish for 1941 haddisastrous emerge. exclusion longto by The22-month between occupation Poland of andSoviets 1939 of politics it for the whichmadeeasy was homogenous, ethnically state underground the Alllost for inhad anyofits some urgency its all, culture not purification advocates. of Polish of of Nazism. influence Jewish actions,in conditions where only an admittedly small percent of the society was anti- under the postwar and war the for allowed that society the among views ethno-nationalist of strength anti-Semitism seemedtohave vanished completely (May there.” 20, 1942). ghetto…. the into bring children little have would he which Jews, the for bread of quota a special in large measure, the Jews from Brzeziny owe them their lives. They tell of one baker who baked theJewsand, toward inclined favorably very particularly were Poles, the [..] population civilian Poles living on the “Aryan side” far exceed the negative ones. One of the records reads: “The 75 Holocaust Library, 1986). 74 of occupation Nazi the under life Jewish of accounts of collection admittedly manyPoles, courageous whohelped saving LucjanJewish lives. In Dobroszycki’s Army, Semitism was of Anders, intheArmed Anders Forces so-called openly practiced General Ibid., 174. Joanna Michlic, Lucjan Dobroszycki, Lucjan Yisrael Gutman Yisrael Shmueland Krakówski, 74 Seeking reasons for high the still Seeking after the 1945,Joanna suggests anti-Semitism Michlic reasons While Gross writes of a “ghastly decade” and almost universal anti-Semitism, there were which is almost unanimously praised in historiography.today’s Poland's Threatening Other: the Image ofthe Jew Presentfrom 1880tothe The Chronicle ofthe 76 Even during the war, she argues, the ethno-nationalist project of the of project ethno-nationalist the argues, she war, the during Even Unequal victims : PolesandJewsduring World WarTwo à ód Ĩ Ghetto, 1941-1944 77 Bo 29 Ī ena Szaynok argues that the postwar Polish- postwar the that argues Szaynok ena (New HavenYale University : Press, 1984), à ód Ĩ , positive references to references , positive 75 ( Lincoln: University (New York: CEU eTD Collection easily accessible tool. The factor contributing to the persistence of anti-Semitism wasthe persistence of anti-Semitism tothe contributing factor tool. The easily accessible an was anti-Semitism and society, from legitimation obtaining of need in were Communists 1949, when both internationalthe and internal situations changed significantly.And indeed, leftists, Communist authorities,nations, Jewsincluded. Polish the of members all from legitimacy obtain to an attempt was government but postwar Polish the truth iswere. that Dobroszycki they weresuggests than really there many more survivors, were there that made impression an It safety reasons. either that the initialold especially high clingsince tended to andthey together settle inlarge predominantly for cities, Communists invitation of Jews, or suchcommitted as Sommerstein, into the perceived bymany as of a “re-inundation byJews.”Poland 1959) was Jewsfrom USSR (upto 200.000 of over Andaccordingly, return members. the Party estimates(Communist various of –according –couldPoland) be to ashigh 25% as of all in numberregime, the that of Jews inKPP propose Communist excessively overrepresented suggestingJews thatwere before Soviets supporting and during thewarandafterwards were 81 80 79 1947. presents, around 275,000 Jews lived in Poland between summerthe of 1944 and the spring of 78 ‘ the of strength the with confronted when especially underestimated, be altogether cannot anti-Semitism sheadmits, however Holocaust, Gutman and Krakówski. Dobroszycki,15-16. Gutman and Krakówski, 364. Bo Ī ena Szaynok, “The Role of Anti-Semitism Postwar Polish-Jewish Relations,” in Blobaum, 81 Supporters of Supporters ‘ the nowhere near similar the typical Polish typical the similar near nowhere 80 The main argument is The mainargument there that were highly-ranked Jewsin the ĩ ydokomuna’ myth, verybasis the of anti-Semitism in today’s Poland, ĩ ydokomuna’ myth. ydokomuna’ 30 shtetl Jews. This situation lasted only until only lasted situation This Jews. 78 79 According to the estimates he estimates tothe According Their conspicuousness was Theirconspicuousness Anti-Semitism. CEU eTD Collection denotes that another controversy, which erupted soon after, namely the publication of publication the namely after, soon erupted which controversy, another that denotes memory,” 1980-1981 “Polish-Jewish move began newthe relations to into contested terrain and of movement(Committee for Defensethe of 1976)and Workers, the againstSolidarity. Around The UniversityThe of Press,Chicago 2006). in 1998during the peak their with period post-transformation the to continued situation That those. vis-à-vis nation of the theshape intellectual Polish-Jewish relations and on the discussion an insultand entered cynical. the documents factors, by many political caused slogans was anti-Semitic useof the Stola although argues that and paranoia, as well as entailed irrational impulses were too sincere to be 86 85 the outbursts of anti-Semitic attitudes. 84 1954-1956 Joannaalso within that government. the Michlicsuggests between Jews and regime, thewar not anti-Semitism survived in only large, society the at but popularity. realpolitik 83 82 something completely contradictory to the ‘ then, government the of discourse in the rise Its hometowns. their from removed forcibly question of the restoration of the property, Geneviève Zubrzycki, Geneviève Introduction to Blobaum, Dariusz Stola, “Fighting against the Shadows: The Shadows: the against “Fighting Stola, Dariusz Michlic, Ibid., 369-370. Anti-Semitism, contrary to what many people in Poland believe, i.e. the close connection close the i.e. believe, Poland in people many what to contrary Anti-Semitism, 84 Poland’s. Anti-Jewish rhetoric was too used by the Communist regime against the KOR the against used bythe Communistregime too was Anti-Jewish rhetoric 85 – siding with Jews would simply –sidingin Jews scarce, Communists with deprive would anycase simply of, when the tone of the discussion about Jews left the realm of convenient political War of the Crosses the of War The Crosses of Auschwitz: Nationalism andReligion inpost-Communist Poland Anti-Semitism , 15. 83 , to borrow Geneviève Zubrzycki’s term. In his essay on In his essayon 1968anti-Zionistthe campaign, Dariusz 82 ĩ Anti-Zionist ydokomuna’ proposition, should be attributed to its that had been occupied by Poles after Jews were 31 Campaign of 1968,” inBlobaum, political thaw 86 Janine P. Holc Anti-Semitism. allowed for (Chicago: CEU eTD Collection could be an anti-Semite and also a patriot. Popular notion, amounting toa statement thatin nowith one in wasvirtually Nazis, thus is there that erupted, Poland whereHitler, discussions opinions. controversial – often so – ever their voiced history modern the on views different of champions 20 the of memory Polish the for crucial also is it – since and controversies, of magnitude a evoking one the still is regime 20 evaluation of the Soviet and Nazi regimes; ideologies that not only dominated the politics of afterthesuch issuesas 1989concerned in challenged nation.Europe Some issuesthatwere of the of memory by tainted popular preconceptions, which strongly influence historical perception of a past. challenging of trend 3.2 European considered as a Zarecka rightly outthatpoints only 1990didafter fate of the Polish Jewry to bestarted for those who saw it now in the right wingJews inhistory was considered coexistence aspeaceful and problem the of anti-Semitism, except parties programs, was left aside. In continuityany of political case,ideology and tradition as well as Irwin-legitimation were sought. The presence of debate. “Fear” the toreflect years –beagain seven used after 88 Blobaum, 87 an by marked event an was “Neighbors,” Zarecka. Janine P. Holc, “Memory Contested: Jewish and Catholic Views of Auschwitz in Present-Day Poland,” in th century butalso in century highestdeath caused history.Europe, thetoll the World’s TheNazi The difference in the war experience between Poland and countries collaborating with collaborating countries and Poland between experience war in the difference The places certain revisiting on focusing phenomenon, isawide-spread history of Challenge The memory of the interwar period and war were very strong in the early 1990s, when a when 1990s, early in the strong very were war and period interwar the of memory The Anti-Semitism. loss . 88 th century – few examples of discussion will be presented, in which presented, be will discussion of examples few – century obsession with obsession innocence 32 , 87 an expression that can – can that expression an CEU eTD Collection 92 Gross, In: by omission.” “collaboration 91 90 Germany between left-wing and right-wing intellectuals. The late 80s witnessed an important an witnessed 80s late The intellectuals. right-wing and left-wing between Germany erupted ininterpretation in West adebateaboutthe quarrel,” history,of that German Holocaust 89 offer. their scorned he that cooperating, Poles want not did Hitler because collaboration no was there that claims Konstanty Polish isalso amyth. nation a popularjournalist Gebert, Jewish origin, of openly Poland there could have been no collaboration with Hitler, because of the resistance of a patriotic witnesses Poles had committed no crime thus there was nothing to expiate. to nothing was there thus crime no committed had Poles witnesses self-image good to the becauseas of of Poles, ascontributing witnessing, subjective nature imposed imposed by foreign agents. themselves from it. Inthis way theyjustified the cooperation with asbeingHitler, virtually distance thus and Nazis, of tothe anti-Semitism in any casesimilar state Hungarian laws of the the see not did however they anti-Semitism, war the condemned openly while and mainstream, aconservative from came views such of Disseminators regime. Horthy the on forced was with Hitler siding in which circumstances, external setof the Nazis on is then notunique as a fact, yet it is specific in character. nation, atblamingdirected historical atits whitewashing. titularthe revisionism butrather Polish is not revisionism the countries collaborating in those is opposite, trend the where in Poland “being a case, where Polish in the difficult very thus was exculpation The Hungary). (France, treason to amounted as it rejected much easier later was place, anti-Semitism wartime the took Nazis the with Semites As András Kovács argues in: András Kovács, a as Jews, against atrocities Nazi towards indifference all treat to proposing approach, that challenges Gross Steinlauf, 32-33. Konstanty Gebert, “Kto si In Hungary a discussion of early 1990s was characterized by blaming cooperation with by blaming cooperation characterized of 1990swas early adiscussion In Hungary 89 Ironically enough, in those countries where a political collaboration anti-of good Pole Ċ boi Strachu.” interview for 92 Another example is the is example Another and detesting Jews easilycoexisted.” anddetesting Upiorna . A kéznél A 33 . Gazeta Wyborcza Historikerstreit , January 18, 2008. enforced , or else the “historians' elsethe , or 90 Steinlauf analyzes the analyzes Steinlauf 91 interwar anti-Jewish interwar Inany case, unlike CEU eTD Collection regime) of the former Communists and members of secret service was a priority for all non-left all for priority a was service secret of members and Communists former the of regime) services of Communist the secret with cooperation figures concerning verification public of 94 (New York Oxford:and Oxford University Press, 1996), 41-55. at a various pace. While the murder of Polish citizens inKaty citizens murder of at avarious pace.Whilethe Polish challengingin andfacing past the Poland, hasbeen through going a variedstages and proceeded of rather The process back memory, between generations. historical history,the to or transmitted heritage. ethnic its of analysis and transmission, rediscovery, the in and nation the of delineation the in play historians that role central the nationality.” principle of] for a [the danger often constitutes in studies historical progress is why a nation,which in the creation of is factor error, acrucial “What is a Nation?” afollowing thing:“Forgetting, Iwould so far evengo tosayhistorical as identity. and memory historical 3.3 Challenging citizens of which try to find some positive anchorage in their past. 93 the for characteristic is thus trend reinterpreting Such liberalism. classical of crisis the to asaresponse of perception of the Nazism by supporters conditions, wereunderlined Hungarian itcase was Germandominance the inevitability –notthe Nazism inof German in the challenge, Bolshevik the –here factors external in Hungary, as here, Also conservatism. Germans were which thus movement clique, a small a sawNazism developed.totalitarian Others was criminal victims of had society German way of the result inevitable the was Nazism that aconception disseminated Nazism and it visionsopposing Oneside history, clashed. where two debate on the contemporary German had no connection to the strong interwar German Smith, Ernest Renan “What is a Nation?” in: Geoff Eley and Ronald Grigor Suny (ed.) Ernest Renan stated in his lecture delivered at the Sorbonne on 11 March Sorbonnethe on11March 1882,entitled delivered inhis at lecture Renan Ernest stated Myths. 34 94 And thus, the dispute about the nation reaches nation the about dispute the thus, And 93 Accordingly, Smith emphasizes Smith Accordingly, Ĕ and lustration (process of (process lustration and BecomingNational: AReader. guilty countries, CEU eTD Collection To 96 95 topics.” controversial any avoiding without history nation’s the into pry brutally and ruthlessly heargues“thatmethodology,” would must“Historians devisea Polish past. history Polishneeds suggested thatwriting Polandits – subjects.” their to themselves legitimate to governments Polish of postwar efforts tothe crucial was aprocess years, war of the narrative acceptable of Andsociety. indeed,“the in many-sided ahost development, of contexts and mediums, of an majority of the views ethno-nationalist to satisfy yearspresented wasso war of the interpretation ideologically Communistinthe influenced, words, the developed other was period throughout that narrative historical “Fear”. The Gross’s in voiced also was a thesisthat popular support, the memory non-elitesby was shapedandby in the Communist accepted for exchange regime the Steinlauf, this to According rare occasions. on publicentered only discussion of Holocaust strongly influenced by pro-nationalthe propositions of Communist historiography. memory The debate. opposingissues lustration), other somewheredwelled onthefringe of a publicmainstream governments after 1989(leftin Poland consists of so-called post-Communists,obviously of dismantling conceptions and narratives that were influenced andnarratives And thatwere of byCommunist propaganda. conceptions dismantling Semitism and post-war banditry.It is thenvalid tostate that there was a consensus as tothe need anti- Communists, and Nazis with collaboration writing; Gross’s in challenge would he that ones inimportantemployed The these most issuesneed attempts. he suggests dealingare the with admittedly, positive proposition the crucial role is played by the tradition of writing that is Marek JanChodakiewicz, Marek Fragebogen,” “Poland’s In: MarekChodakiewicz, Jan Radzi John Steinlauf, 68. á czyk (ed.), In 2003, Marek Jan Chodakiewicz – who represents the very conservative school of school conservative very the represents who – Chodakiewicz Jan Marek 2003, In was narrative, anti-Communist an by molded generally although memory, Polish The Poland’s Transformation. A Work in Progress 35 (Charlottesville: Leopolis Press, 2003), 254. 95 Fragebogen , a questionnaire concerning questionnaire , a á owski, Dariusz 96 In this, CEU eTD Collection 98 97 a newly regained to a threat perceived period, whenwere for thepost-1918 also characteristic 1990s, the background for thatdiscussion,began with anti-minority general sentiments, Michlic sees the Poles’ attitudes towards Jews are alitmus test of “Polish democracy.” The early historical memory, legitimacyon which to bebuilt the was upon, and inthisstruggle Joanna recollections.” personal notions, and prejudices preconceived filter of a thick through information available passing of between erected a well-researched historical and“popular beliefs formed knowledge by the real a properthe inquiryishindrance to into mater, the limited the notwithstanding, scholarship Jerzy so, Jedlicki, has been on aprolific Polish-Jewishthe who writer suggested relations, that 99 Jews and other minorities,Jews beganinthepost-Communist and other period. of inclusive nationalism, pluralistic and civic and diversity cultural of intolerant and Jews toward in “Fear”discussion. the insignificant is not argumentation of thread That built. be should future the which upon identity, destroy to with memory the which soconflicts past, the of evaluation from any critical refraining scoundrels.” “sinister are can in of onsuchgroup members aperception of future groups that build which past, a common untouched if the culture and society aresurvive,” to and, as the author further argues, none of the muststay history traditional the of theessence and amended, canbe reinterpreted common past inlight“although past argues otherwise, andsuggests,of of new evidence,certain elements accepted do.Johnopinions, supporter Radzilowski,of idealistic establishedthe vision of Polish generally ascontradicting be rejected should that of anumber those whereas filter,the through Radzilowski, Jedlicki, “How to Deal with This,” 234. Michlic, Undoubtedly, realbattle the between backward-looking ethno-nationalism, exclusive Poland’s Strach. , 261. 97 Notsurprisingly information never some then, piecesof itmake 98 The conclusion coming from that type of thinking amounts to amounts thinking of type that from coming conclusion The 36 99 The battlefield was the was battlefield The CEU eTD Collection “Polacy- There weremany camp atthe site. located plaques on formulated the site were of commemoration way words the victims, andchanging the numbersof “de-Polonizing” aimedatcorrecting the thecamp, was to both describes way the numbers the of Auschwitzthe victims were manipulatedduring Communism identity. rebirthing was perceivedto waschallengedhere,andthat of Communisthistoriography, the influence the of memory cleansing and as period Communist the rejecting continuity, historical in for tocreateroomfornation.newpast of andbeproud This search identities, order their identity national) endangered by like They makethis approach. would to a“clean break” with the ethno- necessarily (not national new a of creation the saw who and responsibility, any accept history,supporters wantof whodid from ethno-nationalistthe viewof not butalso those to own. their the second suggesting uprising, and ofWarsaw the victims of Warsaw the indifference toward ghetto inhabitants of the that the soldiers of Home Army would commit crimes against Jews on 100 “Neighbors”),B of werethose introduced (precedingintopublicGross’s relations, discourse –although which reluctantly, were Polish-Jewish the to pertaining conception certain a of thechallenge concerning debates, distinction was a reflection as well as a reason for the division in the society at large. The two big visible Church battle Closedindependence. Church; Church wasalso the –Open The within Jan B ĩ Revision of history touched also the notorious Nazi camp in O in camp Nazi notorious the also touched history of Revision boost áRĔ ydzi. Czarne karty powstania,” 100 ski, “Biedni Polacy patrz the number of Polish victims and lower the Jewish losses. The post-1989 process of They both were marked with a strong opposition. The strongest came from the from came strongest The opposition. astrong with marked were both They complaints about the adjusted numbers, coming from adjustedfrom numbers, whohadvisited aboutthe coming people áRĔ ą na getto,” ski’s article in 1988 and Cichy’s op-ed, first the 1988 and pointing out Cichy’s op-ed, ski’s article in Gazeta Wyborcza TygodnikPowszechny 37 , January 29, 1994. , January 11, 1987,and Micha Ğ wi Ċ cim. Zubrzycki cim. á Cichy, CEU eTD Collection 103 102 recognizing by equal victimhood fifteen (32,3 and almost percent 46,9). in46,1%, 2002 they 38,3%, concurrentlyto dropped risewith a significant intheanswers WarWhile in IIchangedsignificantly. 1992Jewish wereperceivedasby sufferings greater World during suffering andJewish year picturecomparing Polish ten the over the that period, probably by accepting the “ethno-nationalist” propositions. Moreover, Krzemi undecidednow moved who people, position tothe nation defendingof Polishidentity, and 101 were undecided, tothe debatesof whichshould also becontributed early the 21 13,5). (28and decreased moretwice than The numberundecided of andpercent. 18 27 respectively higher, versasignificantly was vice- than of benevolentmoreattitude Poles whilethe 51 percent, and grewto respectively, 45 by, wasvoiced A balancedgive-and-take with Poles. cooperation from Jews profited then more Jews with encounters from benefiting as people Polish saw respondents the of percent influencedidentity.learned heFrom in that Polish those 1992 and2002respectively 9,0and 8,5 collective reflected-self in and perception the between history,Jews hecalleda of something Poles relations bilateral the Jedwabne debate. In both of his studies on the anti-Semitic attitudes in Poland, Krzemi isyear onein is one after the 1992, that thetransition,after the2002,that and second right narrative. of Polish achallenge and 3.4 Anti-Semitism with thenumbers. competition it the was about as thepeople, somuch about not was figures. It with corrected wereconfronted whenthey fall of beforeCommunism site the the Krzemi Ibid., 120. Zubrzycki, Ireneusz Krzemi Ireneusz Ĕ ski, 113. The Crosses , 112-118 . In other words, he shows how the memory of Polish-Jewish relations Ĕ ski and his team conducted two extensive series of surveys, one in one surveys, extensive of series two his team conducted ski and 102 This shows that the Jedwabnerenderedthe fewer Thisshowsthat debate 38 103 Muchfewer people Ĕ ski’s study shows 101 Ĕ st ski tested century. CEU eTD Collection 106 105 104 hesitating byhalf. numberof reduced the and undecided therehadthat morebeen that notcould beenmeaning grewby have done 10%, debates thatthe couldbeen havedonetosave grewby in but numberthe Jews 5% 2002, of whothose claimed more couldclaiming that havebeen done. had have doneall by could they wasshared 86% of society,the with only ten around percent helpthe Jews given duringto war.Throughout the the yearten spanthenotion Poles havingof enabled resistance tools to oppose Gross. Crucial in light of the present paper is the perception of mechanism maybe Or defense their stances. strengthen recollections of those accessibility the war, of victim fell who family their in someone has in Poland families of majority happen. debatevictims,not awokecertainthe which obviously memories, and since Maybe did Jewish intoward be compassion would rise natural of debates, the character given However, the almost three fourth of of answers. fourth three almost reached guilt rejecting notion Polish of any andthenumberof grewby percent, indicators 3 both war– the Jewsduring of toward Poles behavior the about remorse concerning answers the most recent one is that surrounding Jan T. Gross’s “Fear.” possibility reshapingof memory by historical such shoulddiscussions, attempts betaken. The Ibid., 122. Krzemi Ibid., 123. Ĕ ski, 124. 106 Although thosefindings allow for a skeptical for prognosis a 104 The number of respondents who thought that more that thought who respondents of number The 39 105 Similar polarization appeared with appeared polarization Similar CEU eTD Collection 107 that state to afraid “not was who writer, only is the Gross that suggests Jedlicki Jerzy neighbors. own their of hostility feared Jews and strong, was war the after anti-Semitism – subtitle book’s the with in accordance – is that one main the but by Gross, proposed statements of range wide were possible because of the virulent anti-Semitism that was present in the society of the time. victims on the whole Polish isyielded number of Jewish wholeahigh of society the statement attitudes anti-Semitic that territory. Those in mainunderlying large, “Fear”the society at behavior of the ofthe a necessarily representation events,not discussed, was despiteevent a single “Neighbors” in while phenomenon; the of scale the the to pertains scale of witnessed refute. Thesecondharder is difference to andtheresponsibility byhiscritics) emphasized Holocaust, is period post1945 the of vicissitude applythe not admittedly, conditions(although, do war the Therefore, werediscussed. events only wartime in “Neighbors” whereas period, postwar Although period. timethe of Waris the in reflected widely itson “Fear”, main is focus the for the supporters of the first one to reject“Neighbors.” There are two mainthe differences betweensecond. the books, which in many instances, allow The first of these differences is the time propositions. its and 4.1 “Fear” 4. Thediscussion. Zarecka, 70. Zarecka, What are the arguments, propositions and interpretations offered by Gross? There is a There by Gross? offered interpretations and propositions are the arguments, What book, first author’s the of context the in be taken to have “Fear” of propositions The the participants themselves. remembrance; indeed, changing views people’s is often an explicitgoal of As such, they have the potential to wisdom, by critically exposing established the it as challenge well not, as crystallizing than often more the alternatives.disputes, public The 40 107 change the existing ways of CEU eTD Collection no. 5, supplement to 111 110 109 vision of 20 the actionspostwar and challenges contemporary by historiography,Polish distorted a patriotic 112 to Jews. to by Poles brought help the about discussion of lack of accusations to in reply help,” such of fruit too afraid,admit are, andoften “I to they still that accordingly myselfhelped. a am asserts Gross events. Thebook is moreover about the fact that those who had helped Jews during the war were for anti-Jewish tool explanatory important most the as serves which conception the dismantled, is Judeo-Communism of myth the Finally, town. the left had Jews after night over them by as their they help neighbors would not Jewsduring warandthe their that weretaken possessions that of by asense guilt murders werecaused proposes, fifth fear,the thesis with Along prejudice. by wascaused that itsit indifference more thus society,within the Church, was salientthe even in fourth was widespread proposesthatsince even The Holocaust. thinking the anti-Semitic after Jews, for popularSemitism of ispartof andan the dislike Polishthe explanation code, cultural anti- says that today, even valid paper as in present the seconded is also that one the thesis, third The anti-Jewish events. postwar for the Poles allowed indifference of the that proposes an exception, that Poles killed Jews side byside with Germans or even on their own. The second review hisbook, of helped people is who claimedthe Jews. that book about in Kielce, Gross debate organized 108 Germans.” andonly that after neighbors, theirfirst werescaredof place Jews in the Marcin Zaremba, “S Zaremba, Marcin Jan T. Gross, “Gross, historyk zmisj Jan T. Gross, “Strach w Kielcach,” debate in Kielce, January 21, 2008. Quotedby Anna Bikont, “Moi ch Jerzy Jedlicki, “Tylko tyle i a Young historian Marcin Zaremba, who was acclaimed by Gross himself for a balanced 112 In short, Gross rejects the popular notions of the purity of the underground state’s th century, and opens the discussion for the redefinition of memory. Gazeta Wyborcza 110 ą d Nieostateczny,” discovers six theses of therein. of theses six discovers Ī tyle,” á opi wymordowali moich , February 4, 2008. ą Tygodnik Powszechny ,” Televisiondebate, Polityka no. 3, 2008. 3, no. 41 TVN no. 4, 2008. ĩ 111 ydów. Portret Jana Tomasza Grossa,” January January 19, 2008. The suggeststhat Jedwabne first notwas 108 Du During a Ī y Formaty 109 CEU eTD Collection 117 116 115 114 Polish has asufficient he Jews, of name the in speaks Gross although that, states Blumsztajn Poles, fellow their from lot a demands who Pole, evidenceGross thatshould, more than anything as else,beconsidered andpatriotica romantic in marginal suchradical language encountered anda respectednewspaper. never he that admits who Beylin, Marek by criticized strongly is newspaper, nationwide 113 Rzeczpospolita, Poland. newspaper, just about a daily In happenstowrite who American,writer, outsider Europe; Eastern Central of realities geographical the intervention in Polish historical memory? Piotr Semka accuses Gross of lack of knowledge about anexternal rather it or between a discussion itself.Poles Is of“Fear” character and discussion facts. both sides admit that that Gross cites nothing new. The new element is the interpretation of those interpretation. ĝ Pawe andpolitician, sociologist Awell “Fear”known bring? does What memory. historical influencedan people’s hadahigh and,to “Neighbors” extent, resonance Polish identity. renewalinfluence of shape orrepression, onthe War eitherthe toward with during cango the about? really discussion the is 4.2 What piewak, points out that the current discussion isnot about the facts, but about the Henryk Wo Marek Beylin, “ Pawe Piotr Semka, “ Pawe á áĝ From this paper’s standpoint, the most significant is the issue of the nature of the relations Polish-Jewish about discussion historical the that predicted In 1997Steinlauf Lisicki, “ piewak, “Lekcja Strachu, ” interview for ”interview Strachu, “Lekcja piewak, Ĩ niakowski’s introduction to Mariusz G 113 Strach the book is plainly described as anti-Polish. ĩ ĩ Several threads appear in the course of discussion. The facts areknownandfacts The in of course discussion. the Several appear threads ydzi, Polacy i przesz ydzi, Polacy, Strach,” cofn ąá dialog o ca áRĞü áą Gazeta Gazeta Wyborcza epok ,” Rzeczpospolita Ċ ,” Newsweek Rzeczpospolita ą dek (ed.), 42 , January 12-13, 2008. 117 no. 4, 2008. January January 11, 2008. 114 therefore it is a Polish debate. Seweryn is debate. ita Polish therefore Wokó it seems that he considers Gross as an January 16, 2008. á Strachu 115 This rhetoric, presented in a (Kraków, Znak:2008), 12. 116 There is clear á CEU eTD Collection 127 September, 2006. 126 2008. 125 124 123 122 121 120 119 the lower chance for the necessary recovery. necessary for the lower chance the more we try to fight the pangs of conscience, the stronger we offend the memory of victims the that states Bauman Zygmunt conscience. andits move society, Polish on role atherapeutic fulfill Polish standpoint for Poles.” for standpoint Polish 118 narrative. Polish in the Jews of memory the incorporating by written, being is history way the modify would that historiography, in Polish is achange that writing, Gross’s changeit. wishesto Gross whereas world, describe the to Wi Gontarczyk, Piotr accordingly claimed duringdebate, atelevision write So book. the Andrzej Paczkowski Gross appeared in bookstores, is the differentiation between passion or mission, as incentives that made described events as a stain on my own identity.” hatred.” without country a Poland, better a wants who patriot, Polish historian, a Polish from book is a “it adds: and making “Fear”a“Polish conversation.” legitimacy, possibility of convincing those, who he really wants to reach: the “silent majority.” “silent the reach: to wants he really who those, convincing of possibility Zbigniew Nosowski factclaims Gross writes thatthe with that mission hindersonly the “Gross, historyk z misj Zygmunt Bauman, “Wyt Tomasz Wi Zbigniew Nosowski, “Bez okoliczno “Bez Nosowski, Zbigniew Piotr Gontarczyk, “Daleko od prawdy,” Paczkowski, debate “Gross, historyk z misj Jan T. Gross, “Gross: pisa Adam Szostkiewicz, “Egzorcysta Gross,” Adam Michnik, debate inKraków. Seweryn Blumsztajn, “Polski g “Polski Blumsztajn, Seweryn Ğ nicki finally calls it a national psychoanalysis. national a it calls finally nicki Another salient thread in the discussion, present in all media from the moment the book the moment the from media in all present discussion, in the thread salient Another Ğ nicki, “Katolickim wydawnictwom nie mo ą ,” Televisiondebate, á em 119 á umaczy Accordingly, Adam Szostkiewicz writes that Gross “writes from “writes from a Gross that writes Szostkiewicz Adam Accordingly, Strach á os Grossa,” 120 123 Gross says himself “I write this book as a Pole. And Iseethe asaPole. book this “Iwrite himself says Gross ü Ğ jako Polak,” interview forPolish Press Agency (PAP), January 16, 2008. niewyt ci both rejecting Gross’s theses. A supporter of the book, á Rzeczpospolita, agodz Polityka ą Gazeta Wyborcza .” TVN á umaczalne,” ą cych,” debate in Warsaw, January 2008. 22, January Warsaw, in debate cych,” January 19, 2008. , no. 5,, 2008.no. 126 Paczkowski suggest that he, as a historian wishes 43 121 January 12, 2008. Ī 118 e by 125 Le Monde Diplomatique , January , 19-20, 2008. Adam Michnik agrees with statement,the It is often argued that the book to book tries the is arguedthat often It ü wszystko jedno,” 127 That argument captures the goals of goals the captures Thatargument Rzeczpospolita (Polishedition), no. 7, , January 23, 124 Tomasz 122 and CEU eTD Collection 135 134 133 130 129 2008. lively language and target audience of audiencelively language and target of awide range. bya ischaracterized style Western this history inwriting; of a tradition justdifferent written isanswering aquestion whetherit most historical to hisbook that – answers is,it certainly was culture.” history and theirunderstand own to capability of the deprives students 131 132 closely examined and thoroughly closelydescribed. examinedand thoroughly and suggestsscience, not phenomenon, a cultural is it thatthat says he when writing, his thereject to Chodakiewicz school to be followed is that of Raul Hilberg, where every document is claims that this approachRemembrance (IPN),called Gross “a vampireof historiography,” to history writing is “falsely called a not only an attack on Poland itself, [but] an attack its values: itself, an traditional on religion on Polandattack and not only attack [but] an leftistsecular, orliberal. the by Thus author, positioning himself anti-religious,makesas “ 128 style. writing ofthe deconstructionism in totalitarian countries.” in totalitarian pathological phenomena paradigm history longof writing, says and thatthe one practiced by isGross a“typical trademark of known in the US.” transform society…. This approach is approach society…. This transform to According religion. Radzilowski,it “radical aims at destruction to valuesof and the meaning of facts,in to order hostile is and society of model traditional the patriotism, on critically Radzilowski, “ PiotrGontarczyk, “Chodakiewicz kontra Gross: przypinanie Chodakiewicz, “Historia jako wycinanka.” Radzilowski, “ Janusz Kurtyka,Interview forRadio RMF, January 10, 2008. Gross, “Strach polski, Strach Chodakiewicz,“Ludzi nale Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, “Ludzi nale “Ludzi Chodakiewicz, Jan Marek What connects to that thread is the accusation of the postmodernism and postmodernism the of accusation is the thread that to connects What Strach Strach i rewizja polskiej historii.” i rewizja polskiej historii.” Ī 135 y rozlicza Ī ydowski.” Therefore, Gross is Therefore,condemn Gross allegedto is not everything which ü indywidualnie.” Ī y rozlicza 128 ex definitio The President of the State supported Institute of of Polish Institute supported State of the The President ü 133 indywidualnie,” Interview for Interview indywidualnie,” 44 Gontarczyk delves deep into the mass culture into the deep delves Gontarczyk nihilistic and closely resembles methods used methods resembles closely and nihilistic 134 In any looks case, Gross’s postmodernism á atek,” 131 The very same isargument usedby Rzeczpospolita critical thinking 129 while John Radzilowski , January 25, 2008. Rzeczpospolita , but in fact it 130 , January 18, Gross – Fear 132 CEU eTD Collection 143 142 141 140 139 Dziwisza,” open letter, January 15, 2008. Semitism is frequently voiced. is frequently Semitism anti- through facts the of explanation hisone-dimensional concerning an Finally,accusation Semite is bad, and sincenation, Poleswhich – ifare has notto partakeimage.bad, they inPolish war are– is self-perceptionalwaysnot anti-Semites, deeplyon rooted convictionthe that Poles are notanti-Semites. side Italso renders the paramount Polish self of hasthe victims.a strongseemsMancewicz) to according Beingcomponentto go an theanti- logic. of the perceived goodness of the Polish suggests that this is only one of the keys to understanding the postwar events, and rejects the person, though a Jew,” phrase, was no he “Agood such when inPoland, oft-repeated the as quotes anti-Semitism there that theconviction ridicules Jastrun War? the after and during before, popular really that anditisaccusation rejected, becomes he should indicting. suggested that of instead explain therefore the Polish version of history could not be defended. enslavement,” “Communistthe period, of because changed not inthe postwar has situation 138 137 136 argument– that although censorshipthe lifted –still was areavoided.certain subjects politics, historical so-called the patriotism.” Machcewicz, “Od apelu do apelu.” apelu “Od Machcewicz, do apelu.” apelu “Od Mancewicz, Tomasz Jastrun, “Znowu Strach,” Pawe Chodakiewicz, “Historia jako wycinanka.” Henryk Wo Marek Beylin, “ Chodakiewicz, “Historia jako wycinanka.” á The next assertion that is being challenged amounts to a question: Was anti-Semitism Machcewicz, “Odcienie czerni,” “Odcienie Machcewicz, 136 Ĩ The discussion is then about the shape of Polish historiography. The criticism of niakowski, “Odpowied ĩ ydzi, Polacy, strach,” 141 which with “I am not an anti-Semite, but…,” ( 142 both show that the lack of anti-Semitism is not only a myth, but a but myth, a only not is anti-Semitism of lack the that show both 143 Newsweek 137 Zaremba, who does not entirely agree with the book’s premise, voiced by the supporters of Gross’s style, connects with an Ĩ Gazeta Gazeta Wyborcza Tygodnik Powszechny Henryka Wo , no. 4, 2008. 4, no. , 45 Ĩ niakowskiego listna otwarty Kardyna , January 12-13, 2008. no. 2,2008. 139 The tone of the book, that of that book, the of tone The crystal ofanti-Semitism á a Stanis 138 140 This á awa , CEU eTD Collection zamiast historii,” 149 148 147 Holocaust alone. Holocaust isin to reduced the wartragedy usedwhich often Gross’s would argument, reiterate opponents thus has nothing to do with the reality. conscience,” in imbued Western is the strongly anti-Semites…. “Poles arepathological that crimes.” Polish of history adistorted only Jewish matter, nor there is anything about the history of Jews in the Communist Poland. There is 146 145 144 anti-Semites not criminals, of composed was margin this and Jews, killed anti-Semitism. of scale the of in diminishing trend removal of the first chapter of the Englishmanner. edition from the Polishattempts changeto in in trend this Poland, being perceived asrewritingin history an anti-Polish one. That chapter,inall intact neglected while historiography publicmakingthe Polish sphere, problem, the any “Poland hand,other after suggeststhat were there fewJewsonly in left Poland, anti-Semitism remained the of significance the overemphasizing and sufferings Polish diminishing close scrutiny.Accordingand ruthless to allows Gross toarguefor existencethe of anti-Semitismlarge, in society the at undergoes a then will. free people areequippedwith since be heldaccountableindividually should suggests, Chodakiewicz Lisicki, “ Chodakiewicz, “Historia jako wycinanka.” Gontarczyk, “Daleko od prawdy.” Chodakiewicz,“Ludzi nale Gontarczyk, “Daleko od prawdy.” “S Zaremba, Another theme is the issue connected to the perceived victimization of Jews. and Poles of victimization perceived the to connected is issue the themeAnother The main difference in the texts of the different language versions of the book, is the book, the of versions language different the of texts in the difference main The 146 ĩ Generalization of the invoked instances of crimes on the whole population, which population, whole the on crimes of instances invoked the of Generalization ydzi, Polacy i przesz ą d nieostateczny.” Rzeczpospolita 149 Centrality of Holocaust for the historiography of the war is attacked as is attacked war the of historiography the for Holocaust Centrality of Ī y rozlicza , January 11,2008. áRĞü ” and Tomasz P. Terlikowski, “ ü indywidualnie.” 147 Rzeczpospolita Chodakiewicz finally states that Gross’s proposition that finally states Chodakiewicz 46 144 Gontarczyk suggests that only a margin only that suggests Gontarczyk publicist, “in publicist, Strach , czyli propagandowy akt oskar Fear Shoah there is no Polish- no is there . Gross, on the on Gross, . 145 who, as who, Ī enia 148 CEU eTD Collection µĩ Poland. in Communism interwar the interpreting for instrument an and a reality, as ‘Judeo-Communism’ of introduction the discovers Poland and in post-1989 on published subject the Michlic works historicalanalyzes fact. and of ininterpreting asa occupation ‘Judeo-Communism’ are expressed Soviet (1939-1941) time the concerning writings historical in the visible especially are carries, myth the that Tropes nationalism. were against –becausethey Communists Jews reasoning, were the goes Moreover, safety in the Communist regime. A good example of the resentment to challenge Polish history Polish challenge to resentment the of example A good regime. Communist inthe safety divergentlook forperception, forced of that anti-Semitismprevailing which Jewsto Polish opposingforfaction support of the sees theCommunist regimeJews ingreater exactly a state, before, during and after the War, and this despite the favorable treatment of Jews by Poles, to do with Jewish culture or religion, asJews common for ‘ argument highly positioned Jews in Communistthe party – Hilary Minc and Jakub Berman. describing the postwar Gross and oftentend to oppose asenslavement, perceiveCommunism as understand term this reality. And so, Piotr Gontarczyk accuses Gross of not mentioning the 151 150 is so-called ‘ discussion, the inthe contention of main bone andthe argument, context-related tothat Connected argument. thelack most Therefore, isdescribed. context of probably invoked that most frequently the Soviet regime,rule.Soviet discusses Thischapter heroism Polish andlack of oppose any possibility the to which inAbandoned,” draws historical of a brief background warandthe introduction the postwar of some people’s perspective serves as an explanation of the crimes Michlic, Gontarczyk, “Daleko od prawdy.” ydokomuna’. While ethno-nationalists claim that Jews were keen supporters of of ydokomuna’. Whileethno-nationalists werekeen supporters Sovietthe claim Jews that The Soviet . ĩ ydokomuna’ whosupporters, consider ethnic whohave Jews, nothing ĩ ydokomuna’, and its presence in Polish historiography. Those who historiography. Those in andits presence ydokomuna’, Polish 151 The bone of contention is the origins of the stereotype of sensu stricto sensu 47 . They were born Jews, they stay Jews. 150 This isa This CEU eTD Collection 157 156 155 154 153 California Press, 1991). discussion would allow for asmooth continuation of great, well established relations. This shows 152 dialogue backby an epoch, manipulated by Communists. bejust because would Kielce any reaction appropriate, of Church tothe pogrom was the reaction the claims that “Fear”. Onegroup accept otherwise who bysome even rejected, strongly is naturally acollaboration, by as istacit Gross considered lack of protest war, whentheir Polish. into translated yet 1991, been,not since Jews,” has the“Communist of generation thewhole describes meticulously which Communists, Polish-Jewish the on book seminal the that fact the in lays Israel’s allies. Israel’s wing audience, it is very advanced at the momentis not clear in that matter and wants to sweep something underas the carpet?” Poland representsinforming Polesabout theirpast. “Maybe,” own he asks,is “it because so, Church’s conscience one of the closestWarsawinquires reasonforthe Uprising, about their towards attitude negative of process the the –Marek leader by last Pieronek Edelman, the harsh bishop of Dziwisz cardinal and the rejection violence. Jewish anti- prevent to than Communist the by manipulated be not important more was it theChurch Piotr Semka, “ Robert N Marek Edelman, “Powszechna rzecz zabijanie,” interview for interview zabijanie,” rzecz “Powszechna Edelman, Marek Pawe Wróbel, “Mord i starch,” i “Mord Wróbel, Jaff Schatz, á The interpretation of the role of the Church in the anti-Jewish actions, both during the during both actions, anti-Jewish in the Church the of role the of interpretation The Does the book, finally, jeopardize the Polish-Jewish dialogue? According to the right- the to According dialogue? Polish-Jewish the jeopardize finally, book, the Does Machcewicz in “Kto si Ċ cek, “ The Generation: thethe Rise andFallof JewishCommunists ofPoland 156 Strach Strach Semka, in his openingtheone of discussion, articles book the set that stated the 154 And as for the current approach of the Church towards the book, that is its is that book, the towards Church the of approach current the for as And cofn jest jak fa 152 Gazeta Wyborcza ąá dialog o ca Ċ boi Strachu.” 157 á 153 szywa moneta,” which means that he that means which To that, Gebert answers that it is deeply frightening that for that frightening is deeply it that answers Gebert that, To áą epok , July 29-30, 2006. Ċ ,” Rzeczpospolita, Rzeczpospolita 48 Gazeta Wyborcza Gazeta , January 16, 2008. a contrario January 21, 2008. , January 19-20, 2008. suggests that the lack of 155 (Berkeley: University of CEU eTD Collection 162 161 Rzeczpospolita 160 159 defense mechanism of those, whose memories are undermined by them, use arguments which are the challenged, are conceptions those When pride. national of landmark and independence of atime as period interwar the of interpretation is acertain so And memory. in Polish imbued are war, the ‘ memory, some of which are almost sacrosanct. The role of the Church in helping Jews during the 158 is understandable. rejection the therefore nation, the outside themselves places flawed, is it if even it, violates whoever study; itis a part of individual biographies as well.” of just a subject is not all, after history, Recent itself. experience collective the of proximity the on dependent much very is truth to claims historians’ the of authority “The writes: Irwin-Zarecka publication of version, English the would rightly guessed thatthebook become popular. reaction, wide a such expect not he did that admitted Gross although important. is the reaction important, isnot thatthebook asserts Joanna Tokarska-Bakir historians. professional of circles insmall debates caused or echo, without went controversial, by “Bondage the Dead” instanceMichael Steinlauf),which, equally subjectthe (for to soheated? discussion is 4.3 Why false.consideredeither unknownor Krzemi that Jerzy Pa 149. Zarecka, Maciej Koz Jan T. Gross, “ Joanna Tokarska-Bakir, “ Why is the book causing so much controversy? There have been several books written on written books several been have There controversy? much so causing book the is Why á ĩ osz, “Ró ydokomuna’ myth or Poland as only a victim of the war, not a perpetrator of crimes Ĕ , July, 15-16, 2006. ski’s survey results, showing anti-Semitic attitudes in one third of are in thirdsociety, the of attitudes one anti-Semitic showing survey results, ski’s á owski, “Fakty i uprzedzenia, czyli stracona szansa dialog,”na ĩDá Ī oba ze Strachu,” ne oblicza strachu,” Strach 162 w Polsce,” in G The book challenges several notions strongly embedded in Polish embedded strongly notions several challenges book The Przekrój Przegl , February 7, 2008. ą d , 24.02.2008. ą dek, Wokó 49 á Strachu 161 Mythology is a national sanctity and . 159 Plus Minus Koz á owski, after the , supplement to 158 And 160 CEU eTD Collection originally published in the US. Chodakiewicz represents a specific, very one-sided version of version one-sided very specific, a represents Chodakiewicz US. the in published originally 165 Marek Jan Chodakiewocz’s book “Po zag “Po book Marek JanChodakiewocz’s responds. State 4.4 The roots for their currentidentities, sodeeply withentwined historical memory. deprive history,modern audience of the Church to paradigmsPolish the aretrampled concerning consensus of paramount memory as to certain interpretations of past events. The heroic and why words, other by pro-itwere peoplebecause bysayingisit?” provoked that it the challenges people upsetabout theclash between memory their and history presented in in books, Gross’s challenges the myths in an ultimate manner, leaving no space for even the slightest compromise. Polityka on;” glasses with white-and-red perspective, in-group an from book the “read important, is identity Polish whom to those “Poles,” MaliszewskiPolandin thesuggeststhat world.because Norbert uses abigquantifier Gross in book heinsulted an English, easily accessible from wrote American university an professor inside the country, butgrandchildren of fallen heroes,” whichon refers to the tendencythe to think of one another in a bad way outside be perceived as noble victims. And that is why when a book as a new sensation. new a as book is because of the author, who once shook Polish consciences and now the tabloid press dealt with 163 maincontradict book’s premises, suchasthatof ‘ 164 Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, Jan Marek Teresa Boguska, “Strach, gniew, debata,” Norbert Maliszewski, “Uprzedzenia: wolni od jawnych,sp , Concurrently to Gross’s book, IPN prepared another publication on the same topic, that is Taking allthoseelements wecanfind together, an question tothe “Why answer were March8, 2008. Po zag 163 In reference to the Polish self-perception, she uses a term “dwarfed sheusesaterm Polish Inreferenceto the self-perception, á adzie (Warszawa: InstytutPami Gazeta Gazeta Wyborcza á adzie,” (“After the Holocaust”) the (“After adzie,” 164 50 as a result assuming defensive positions. Gross ĩ ydokomuna’. thatit Teresa Boguska suggests Ċ , February 23-24, 2008. tani ukrytymi,” Ċ ci Narodowej, 2008). Niezb Ċ dnik Inteligenta 165 which had also been , supplement, to CEU eTD Collection of one or another, representing a battle between historiography schools. And so, comparing so, And schools. historiography between battle a representing another, or one of self-reflection is washed away. about,” talk to nothing is there so, – another sometimes and say:happenedin“It way one forpeople and to picture, allows the distorts ‘nuanced’ approach Jewish anti- of source a as anti-Semitism actions,rejects Chodakiewicz in all, All question. own his answers author the how and andis, it literature of kind what doubt no be should for there Anti-Semitism,” that he is orPolish of Underground the and of “Self-Defense titles readsthe of one one when chapters, the highly acclaimed relations of becomes blurred, explanation murders.Inanycase,thepicture postwar the forthe by many fighterspersecutors independenceof for wereprimarily andthisis Jewish an understandable of Gross’san extent,opponents. to if only even and government, in Communist overrepresented were really Jews that in show They the This eyes ofnuanced andbalanced picture of Polish-Jewishthe relations, baseda magnitude on of sources. the underground presentsa his book claims that Theauthor methods. historical concerning analogical debate an about bring at least or negative, state,be unequivocally should book Chodakiewicz’s of Evaluation they created newNKVD Polish or secretpolice, and ended with many Jewishinkilling survivors the process. a justified of members the attacked mainly They government. pro-Soviet the against partisan actions perception:organized war the after formation that military a (NSZ), Forces Armed theNational of apologist public 167 166 praised by the contesters contemporary mainstream history ethno-nationalist school of writing.” of Gross, wrotePolish his book “Po Zaghistory writing, which Michlic describes as “the most extreme spectrum of the ĝ Michlic, piewak,“Lekcja Strachu.” A bulk of the discussion, on both sides, focuses on juxtaposing those two works, in favor The Soviet , 152. 51 167 á adzie” from the standpoint of an andmanner in this anyneedfor 166 The author, widely Theauthor, CEU eTD Collection rule, PiS claimed that it has to create society. of model a new creating for strive the and theirintelligentsia own universities to build their owncountry atintellectual that time a base. from 2005 until from 2007 ( 2005 until in power was that (PiS), Justice Law of and government byapost-Solidarity introduced belief, inbeen, apopular has politics This a “historical politics.” pathof avery dangerous enter tries to by andhemuch in science, was audience. American aPolish only the acclaimed 173 Gross, with along Finally, it.” deserve “They – manner of a by Poles. killed Jews were than period of in hands after-war Jews the from morethe died Poles arguesthat Chodakiewicz truth history of itself will defend from andof attacks the witch-doctors scientific charlatans.” “the that Gontarczyk, by voiced assertion the consider should one context this In nationalists. isit how really happened,” of became book Chodakiewicz’s asortof obsession of ethno- the [while] 172 171 ”the book that states plainly 170 169 of“PoZag author 168 books, and Gross’s Chodakiewicz’s ĝ Gross’s afterward in G Libionka, “Oni nie s Chodakiewicz, “Po zag Chodakiewicz, Gontarczyk, “Daleko od prawdy.” Gontarczyk, “Chodakiewicz kontra Gross: przypinanie przypinanie Gross: kontra “Chodakiewicz Gontarczyk, piewak,“Lekcja Strachu.” The fact that the book is sponsored by a state institution, seems to prove that this state Fear pathetic work is built mainly on ignorance and manipulation.” and ignorance on mainly built is á ą adzie” for his good, old empirical school of history history Gontarczyk writing. of oldschool his empirical good, for adzie” z ojczyzny mojej.” ą á dek, adzie.” polityka PiS historyczna Wokó “Po Zag political counter-elite 170 Po Zag Libionka claims that it is worth entering a polemic, but not in a not but polemic, a entering worth is it that claims Libionka á . á adzie.” ĩ á adzie aryn rejects the former in favor of the latter, praising theformer of infavor aryn the latter, the rejects 171 is ascientifictransmitting work agreatknowledge, He suggests that every page seems to be screaming to seems every page that Hesuggests 52 172 á , which was characterized by the opposing atek.” ) party. he presents that Chodakiewicz does not mean not does Chodakiewicz that presents he ĝ piewak calls the group that led that the thegroup calls piewak 168 The attributes of truth “that and of truth Theattributes 173 Finally, at the end of their 169 CEU eTD Collection are, in his view, not only shocking but also very false. The thread of Germans plundering the plundering Germans of thread The false. very also but shocking only not view, in his are, were if as Poles an impression 174 in writing. Gross’s secularization” towards identity. very of theirperception influencing undermining life, butalso of Polish core the everydayPolish only negatively not tendencies and leftist secularist regards further narrative Their enslavement. for Communism blame to tend and period interwar the of memory the cherish they Church, the and religion to connected strongly generally are nation, homogenous culturally or ethnically identity? that tochallenge more eager of those fight for the established identity. What are the responses of those who dismiss Gross’sinjuring and what the spine of because of his sociological interpretations.historical In itisany case state valid that to by book, this memory or sources of use the of because arguments, Gross’s of of because of language the of because society, resulted in rejection.discussion. the in 4.4 Stands This rejection is then large.at society Such was a representation of the society, which aimed at dislodging intellectuals as alien to the 175 Radzilowski, “ Bogdan Musia What is really dangerous for the ethno-nationalist historians is the “leftist elites trends elites “leftist is the historians ethno-nationalist the for dangerous is really What Those, who4.4.1. Rejection. reject Gross’s writing in its entirety, are those who support a vision of The majority of responses to the book is that of rejection, whether completely or partly, á Strach , “Kto si i rewizja polskiej historii.” Ċ wzbogaci á en masse na maj ą tku beneficiaries of crimes on Jews. on crimes of beneficiaries ĩ 174 ydów,” Bogdan Musia Bogdan 53 Rzeczpospolita á suggests that Gross’s theses make theses Gross’s that suggests , January 19, 2008. 175 Those propositions CEU eTD Collection 181 180 179 178 177 176 Communism. against but Jews, against not former the state that wasdirected to of German Nazis, andthat Polish underground the deed.” than German a Polish of ismore Jews of murder the that animpression gives “book the that suggests Gross, victimization. Stanis of from Jews. Germans moreover plundered not only from Jews, but also from Poles, a typical trope occupied is making unable territories eveniftheyhadsteal present, Poles, wanted to, to anything published by a radicalnationalist publishing house was and“Fear”debates “Neighbors” the newspapers concerning from Polish selection articles of so brutal radical.” and andspeakalanguage correctness political Catholic patriotic-national- of type a certain break entirely so can one that agree not “do opposition in content,book incited bythelanguage of book the – Michnikis thatit suggests so because those the with along comes, Rejection anti-Communism. with it conflate and Poles off anti-Semitism Pawe anti-Semites. and fascists ignominious are Poles all that proposing propaganda, Stalinist to close is writing of style Gross’s that says Semitism were in fact victims of robbery or “fell from a truck driven by a drunk guy.” and after the war, and gives numerous exceptions,“organized tomurder all Jews and them deprive of their property.” showing that some alleged victims of anti- Robert Jankowski (ed.), Michnik, debate in Kraków. Machcewicz, “Kto si Chodakiewicz,“Ludzi nale Gontarczyk, “Chodakiewicz kontra Gross: przypinanie przypinanie Gross: kontra “Chodakiewicz Gontarczyk, Stanis In March, that is two months after “Fear” appeared in Polish, a book consisting of a of consisting book a in Polish, appeared “Fear” after months is two that March, In before anti-Semitism wide-spread of a popular, notion the reject seemsto Chodakiewicz á aw Meducki, debate in Kielce. in debate Meducki, aw Ċ 176 boi Strachu.” Gross sees reality as a “universal Polish conspiracy,” claims Gontarczyk, claims conspiracy,” Polish “universal asa seesreality Gross Cena Strachu á aw Meducki, a participant of the Kielce debate and strong opponent of opponent and strong of Kielcedebate the Meducki, aparticipant aw Ī y rozlicza (Warszawa:Fronda, 2008). ü indywidualnie.” 179 This is a recurring theme, which tries to lift aweight of á Machcewicz tries to separate the anti-Semitism of anti-Semitism the separate to tries Machcewicz 54 á atek.” Fronda . 181 All of those articles reject Gross’s 177 180 178 He then CEU eTD Collection Jewish actions but“Whatwere nothing else Jewish anti-Communists. about she children,” asks, BakirTokarska pro-Endecja that suggest diminish writers anti-Semitism,anti- arguing that 185 184 183 182 moremyth, and more often ‘ by Gross. used sources the about truth the showing articles of the as acompilation publication own advertising their foreword with a theses; proposed of the arguments behind the acceptance stances. They finally altogether reject the ‘ the reject altogether finally They stances. acceptance the behind arguments the of language. of the even sharpness the unbelievable.” as rejected instantly be would theses [Gross’s] alive, isstill events those of memory in the where Poland, because…. edition, Polish from the wereerased “many statements drastic that Jankowski writes Robert more shocking, and theses of historians.” as “majority anti-Polishreferred are historians to pogrom Those provocation. was aCommunist, by and and meticulously massacre Kielce planned conducted the and precisely was Germans, Jedwabne the narratives, those In events. of perception whole the change allegedly would which interpretation and a proper of interpreted, falsely details, accusations arebasedonfactographic while history.majority of the theses the None are accepted, of of Gross’s established perception includingothers, foreign historians, whose names are also seem evoked, beto seconding the Tokarska-Bakir, “ Ibid., 14. Ibid., 12-13. Jankowski’s foreword to The need for exculpation and inevitability of dealing with Poland’s own history 4.4.2 Acceptance. are some Unlike Gross himself,claims who that the language of Polish versionis much stronger 183 Strach w Polsce.” Cena Strachu ĩ ydokomuna’ written ydokomuna’ withoutwritten the quotation marks. . 55 182 184 All the authors cited therein, and therein, cited authors the All The disagreement thus reaches ĩ ydokomuna’ 185 Joanna CEU eTD Collection 191 interview for interview 190 188 187 186 uprisings. national and wars of museums building those patriotisms, other to similarly identity, national open and andsuch future, the are – indiscussions societies anorm which Western build a modern – will on opinion.Polishdependant public treating of samethe subject –is because itemploys a language,pungent andbecause is Gross not Similarly, Jedlickisuggests that the only themadereason book it through – unlike many others by scholars. accepted Polish hitherto sincerity, of standards is the boycotting Gross “fault” of ”victims of anti-Jewish actions, were they also considered Communist?” She admits that the only 189 be screwed from heis from because day beGross.” screwed one, accepted by those who reject acritical view of Poland’s history. She, then, writes: “Gross would been possibly not ithave could that Sheadmits author. already-hated the of because is easier book. the read ever have would nobody true.” is wrote Gross “what that states heotherwise generalizations, the agreewith entirely not he does although, And raged.” anti-Semitism occupation the after years first the “in that claims women, Aptowicz,innocent.” we’re “us of myth that challenges Gross who that good very is it And writes. as a Gross boy than differently completely occupiers was the with cooperation the remembers myth saved national from Holocaust by a collective effort of several Polish Szostkiewicz, “Egzorcysta Gross.” Adam Aptowicz, “Skoro Niemcy unicestwili spo Tokarska-Bakir, “ Jedlicki, “Tylko tyle i a Ibid. Gebert, “Kto si 190 Adam Szostkiewicz suggests that the minority patriotism of Gross might be a majority in majority be might a of Gross minority thatthe patriotism suggests Adam Szostkiewicz In a very straightforward manner Tokarska-Bakir suggests that the rejection of the book the of rejection the that suggests Tokarska-Bakir manner straightforward very a In Gazeta Wyborcza Gazeta Ċ boi Strachu.” Strach 191 Ī w Polsce.” tyle.” March3, 2008. 187 And if it had not been for that emotional language, emotional that for been not had it if And á eczno 56 188 As Konstanty Gebert rightly points out, Polish ü Ī Ğü ydowsk ą , niech zap á ac ą koszty jej upami 189 Ċ tnienia,” Adam 186 CEU eTD Collection 193 194 192 experience, which is absolutely foreign Poles.to Jewish the isit presenting that onthe fact rests publication of the importance the doubtful, counterpart nationalistto the historiography by promoted Institute the of Polish Remembrance. acknowledge for the inPoland, of beingexistence anti-Semitism they and book the a praise Church, Catholic the against accusations the refute who handthose, other Onthe generalizations. Gross’s courage to deal with topicthe of anti-Semitism,agree withnot although do the acclaim Many comments unequivocal. is theacceptance nor necessarily total, is not rejection otherwise have reacted differently. have reacted otherwise language,ithave would helped and the reception some book, the of reject whonow it, would Jewish history. suggests more that Bortnowska Halina had donetouseprecise been there work of mixing history with morality, which does not allow for aproper understanding of Polish- trying not to diminish the Polish guilt, in a way finds justification of those crimes. those of justification finds in away guilt, Polish the diminish to not trying In short, it was not what Poles had done, but what they andhad distance, resultswitnessed. of witnessing deaths ofmasses of people, allowed for anti-Jewish behavior. suggestion. “Bondage himself Hesupports with say Steinlauf’s book tothe stupor Dead,” to that violence of wasan Poles haddone duringoutcome what the occupation, main Gross’s Halina Bortnowska, “Gross, historyk zmisj Dariusz Stola, “Nieudana próba Grossa,” interview for interview Grossa,” próba “Nieudana Stola, Dariusz Bo Ī ena Szaynok, “Gross – moralista, nie historyk,” interview for The majority of the reactions, as was presented above, is that of this But is of rejection. that above, presented aswas reactions, majority of the The 4.4.3 Questioning. Bo Ī ena Szaynok writes that although the value of the book as a historical piece is 193 ą Dariusz Stola, rejects the notion that the anti-Jewish .” 57 192 Gazeta Wyborcza She also suggests that Gross makes a mistake a makes Gross that suggests Shealso Gazeta Wyborcza , January 19-20, 2008. 194 , January 15, 2008. He therefore, although Hetherefore, CEU eTD Collection 195 Zbigniew Nosowki “willasserts, not be convinced by book.” this type of writing and debate about their own nation’s past. In other words, “those unconvinced,” as Nosowski, “Bez okoliczno “Bez Nosowski, What does suggests Whatdoes middle that peopleshow? whoarenotyet position It ready for that Ğ ci á agodz ą cych.” 58 195 CEU eTD Collection 198 Oficyna Wydawnicza: Warszawa, 1992.) thathe Theauthor shows thatmission, isledby then “Of Is a mission. answers course.” freedom, toprotect in hequickly fear, order if and anti-Semitism about hewrites Finally,asked iswar beitshould overwhelming, perceivedas integral whereas of an Polishpart the experience. interview, Grossmatter. the exhaust not did one that but books, claimssuch for demand social is a that the ignorance of society about Polish-Jewish relations during the 199 book written, and why is the discussion important for the reshaping of Polish historical memory? memory is stigmatized with mixture of nationalism and Communist propaganda. Why was the of Communistideology in Poland. 197 196 case. Polish the of enemies bythe created memory is shaped today, sawanti-Semitism amarginal andas ”exaggerated biased problem” µĩ aboutGross theshy condition not historiography,which Polish of away from the does using it necessary? 5.1 Was the discussion. 5. Thesignificanceof out the inconvenient and inconvenient the out rarely mentioned counter-’ Michlic, Gross, “Strach polski, Strach Michlic, Szostkiewicz, “Egzorcysta Gross.” ydokomuna’ myth. In fact authors, among them Krystyna Kersten and Joanna Michlic, point Michlic, Joanna and Kersten Krystyna them among authors, fact In myth. ydokomuna’ Jan T. Gross, asked why he had written the book, says that says book, the written had he why asked Gross, T. Jan The discussion around the book reflects what was written by historians like Michlic or Michlic like by historians whatwas written reflects thebook around The discussion Poland’s Poland’s , 135. and Krystyna Kersten, Krystyna and actions” inactions” it? how one can fit Kielecki anti-Jewish Jedwabne, pogrom and “railroad The vision of Poland asa country of heroes and victims is edifying, but Ī ydowski.” 197 196 Polacy, Postwar Polish Postwar historiography influencedwhich the way 198 ĩ Therefore Polish historiography, which challenges ydzi, Komunizm. Anatomia pó 59 ĩ ydokomuna’ fact of ydokomuna’ factof ethno-nationalization Neighbors á prawd 1939-1968 showed that there that showed 199 In the same (Niezale Ī na CEU eTD Collection still present in a social and psychological circulation.” Archipelago” of Polish anti-Semitism, unspoken now arewidely discussed. thingshithertothe because the latter is because would hehopesthat wouldmakepeople thebook that better, such a discussion invoke “a strong toxic substance, a “callby to attempt name.” their things poison, book to be a basis for any type of pecuniary compensation, nor a reason for apology, but an 205 204 203 202 201 200 will not be the final voice in it, soul.” collective freedom-oriented romantic, “Polish the and state the to destructive absolutely is which Endecja, and anti-Semitism of resistingfighting for acommon evil, freedom and helpingvictims, a to tradition opposite one the is faithful to, and his will to have the Polish society5.2 What is the message? to be sharing it as well. It is a tradition of isschool, thebook in important a message.certain conveying pass away. has to Holocaust the witnessed that change generation the and years things, it to because requires die months, in three however,making the difference? MarekEdelman argues thethat will discussion thearound book Gebert, “Kto si inKielce. debate Gross, Gross, “ Ibid. Jan T. Gross, “Strach polski, Strach Edelman, debate in Kraków. Konstanty Gebert suggests that “Fear” will move the Polish-Jewish debate forward but forward debate Polish-Jewish the move will “Fear” that suggests Gebert Konstanty The messagefrom the author has a lotto dowith the romantic tradition, that he claims he ĩDá oba ze Strachu.” Ċ boi Strachu.” 205 200 Ī ydowski,” while according to Zbigniew while “does according to not book Nosowski, this Therefore, in the perception of the historian from critical from the historian the of in perception the Therefore, 202 In an interview for the weekly 201 60 Gross overtly states that he does not expect his 204 203 He wants “Fear” to become a “Gulag become a “Fear” to Hewants Przekrój , Gross states , Gross CEU eTD Collection 208 207 206 strange mixture of andCommunist family propaganda distorted history. Moreover, unlike preconceptions,in that havebeen schools taught whichyielded and byparents, repeatedly a told is basedon subjecta number of the on Polishknowledge society’s several reasons. for author Theisskeptical the of easily position paper assumes that. this hardthat assess to is it of discussion of the recentness in because itthe Admittedly, evokes. society resonance the century. twentieth the of legacy ethno-nationalist exclusivist the is historiography “patriotic” the of eradication the in obstacle primary the JoannaMichlic, to according for example, And past. the of interpretations reasonable the which distort tendencies, andcultural-nationalist ethno- strong bearing in is inare influencedAnd bythetrends historiography. the latter understood paperas this Pole today. There arethence twoopposinghistorical memories, whichareinfluencing, butalso negative images of the past. Therefore debate centers around the definition internalize what to by eagerness the measured it society, the of means openness the and creation identity to be a now? significant discussion the is 5.2 Why modified? inhow is words in publication and other narrativethe popularthe debate the perceptions; it. with deal to able be finally will Poles and memory, Polish Polishintohistoriography has tobe thatthe Jewish performed, so existencein will appear the relations.” Polish-Jewish forward move Michlic, Jedlicki, “Tylko tyle i a Nosowski, “Bez okoliczno “Bez Nosowski, Given that the discussion is aimed at shaping society’s identity,it is important to see what The opposing is today important reflectsdiscussion because itin two then forces Polish The Soviet . 208 Ī tyle.” Ğ ci á agodz ą cych,” 206 In any case, as Jedlicki states, internalization of Jews of internalization states, Jedlicki as case, Inany 61 207 What does remain after the CEU eTD Collection with high numbers. 80% percentages Andservicesecretso, of wasJewish, andGrosshimself providing access to those findings. those to access providing 39,whileand 66% of hadsecondarythem education.orhigher My to personal thanks 210 theare mostlyaround focusing ‘ several fora avisible consulted, tendency isof Theargumentsrejection prevalent. used byusers There it is visible what of kind of arguments people select to allow to enter their memory. On levelis memory, popular one. the of that different show where discussions fora, on utterances by user Internet iswellillustrated areinternalized by public Whichelements popular perception. in stay the debate the form notions certain only is selective, memory resonance. Since that measuring try to interesting is it memory, their into history of part inconvenient the internalize scale. an on European –aphenomenon Poles traits of negative alot ascribe cities 209 psychologist Micha knowledge of a common letcitizen, alone hisinterestin delving issues. into complicated A influential on Polishthe large; population simplyitsat specificity and sophistication supersede bevery considered as cannot discussions intellectuals’ and the historians’ large.Therefore at voiced, which altogether gives a rather grim perspective on the influence of the debate on society be by would Gross were dismantled that stereotypes exactly those Frequently before. discussed been and included, ashad presented Gross samepeople questions the askparticipants, would inKielce, debate the from audience itself. During the discouragingcame signal Another period. of interpretation that a different accept audience the once can be that details understood, on “Neighbors,” the new book is much more complicated, and the discussion accordingly focuses According to a research conducted by OBOP in February 2007, 64.3% of Internet users were between the age 15 Micha If the mentioned audience is more than any other, to understand and potentially and understand to other, any than more is audience mentioned the If á Bilewicz, debate in Kielce. in debate Bilewicz, á Bilewicz, suggests Bilewicz, thatyoung, Poles, welleducated cominglarge from ĩ ydokomuna’ notion, which is presented as is notion, which backed ydokomuna’ a factand presented 62 à ukasz K 209 ą kolecki for 210 CEU eTD Collection exists is considered to be publication. exists toprofitingis book the from considered heldnot Poles, for killing responsible no whohadarmy Jews, the war. during informers, who helpedwhat real the issuebe should upon; touched Gross Jewishshould about write gendarmes and the Germans to kill their own nation, 217 216 215 214 213 212 211 the Polish society. That narrative consists of narratives. a set5.4 Deconstructing of undisputed events, such as that of Poland outlook. memory and storiesinherited through those same viewsexpressedhelp are Jews. Therefore, would often time the reiteratedexperiences of one’s in own the to reference aclear bearing utterances in frequent is reflected War the of memory family,one’s most likelyfamily grandfather of the transmission personal the of Thesignificance heretoo. are reflected that discussion public and who foughtthe againstemotional visible in is there arethreads anonymity. influenceof the complete debate the visible,since The Nazis and at the affinity whichin isare much more the thandebate, radical openpublic understandable given their withprinted about e.g. Kielecki pogrom, and those a should be discussed. particular were books that Gross’s, the unlike aremanyreliable, there suggesting that Finally, trope the extreme groundfor Hitler’s inthe otherdirection final prepared solution.saying Endecja was informer until1968, their http://www.prawica.net/node/9877 http://www.tvn24.pl/1,251,8,40087424,108975861,4438597,0,forum.html http://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=902&w=74288360&a=74288678 http://forum.o2.pl/temat.php?id_p=5387635 http://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=410&w=74025226&a=74493876 http://www.gry-online.pl/s043.asp?ID=7268383&N=1 http://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=410&w=74025226&a=74097529 There is a paramount memory of wartime history that constitutes a common narrative a for common constitutes that history memory wartime of is There a paramount 211 a ‘fact’ confirmed by other users. 63 214 213 or the Allied forces should be Manysuggestions appearasto 217 212 In any case, those opinions ‘ ĩ ydokomuna’, still which 215 Some are also Some 216 CEU eTD Collection sovereignty, on the other support from a body from slanderingPolishness occupier, Jews forof the a body support sovereignty, the other on Communism indefender of national Polish identity, “Themeasurable writes: consequence of installationthe [of Poland] was on one side a mass support of Poles for the nation’s right to only enslaved Poland, but also had Jews to help them. Jan Jan them. help to Jews had also but Poland, enslaved only Germans,killed who and Poles Jews and their plundered property. Then Communists, whonot the were those First victims. are Poles thus role; main the plays always sufferings only) not nation. the of identity the fight of shape uponthe decides that for the fight undecided the division andthe center, the of nature the however, show, They exist. narratives two than more therefore dichotomic, is it nor clear neither is division that distinctions, presented hereto in previous As camps. two the separates past for the bemoral a responsibility should there of whether and question the appears with past relationship the about distinction central the With there this, justice. historical Jewish hands in Poland or challenges the myth of innocence, in accordance with the principles of of help the with Communism of installation the about inquires either and history modern with inflicted uponPoles. Thosetwo oppositein stances also are reflected historiography,deals which ones only the were not witnessed andthose cruel many deeds, that period of time, the about history,any hostile to of attempts changing it,they or justare abackground, basic knowledge of heroic vision of in a onPoland the context and projected internalized ideologically are either Holocaust was performed mostly there. Those tropes are, however, only basicthe notions, which never seriously collaborated with Hitler, and the one about lack of Polish fault as to the fact that being a victim of the Nazi In the right wing discourse the conviction about the magnitude of Polish 20 Drang nachOstenDrang plan, that Poles fought against their enemy and enemy their against fought Poles that plan, 64 ĩ aryn, who assumes the role of the of role the assumes who aryn, th century century (but CEU eTD Collection Poland where theHolocaustprimarily Poland, happened. goes reasoning,was the only the Poland is used in almost all publications and discussions. No one, however, points out that it is in jeopardizes common the Poland.good, history type of evokeswriting the that demons andanti-Polonism, of anti-Semitism and mass support a been never has is and there that for assures Cardinal the anti-Semitism,Moreover, power. foreign a by victimized especiallyatheistic, in the Church, allowing anti-Polish him to argue that it isand this anti-independence system was imposed on Poland, so Poles were 219 with the findings of with an ethno-nationalist historian, of findings the Jan by Catholicthe on Church are refuted Cardinal Stanis Chodakiewicz, religion is the of theiridentity dwells inmost the innation.pride In narrative by historical the promoted e.g. salient foundation of essence –the nation remembered soisthePolish because the enemy, with the cooperation or crimes identity. Therefore Gross’sfor isno Polish placehistory, there to uncritical approach anegligiblemargin.that In constituted attacks away from them. hadany In case, therebeen in any dark characters history,Polish they forcibly for freedom, the taken continuefighting opposingthread, and were, to that oppression ones the constituted who overwhelmingthe majority Poland.Communistsof in post-1944 Poles with that Polesthey Germans, notacknowledgehavewere that could collaborated does narrative influence. This Jewish againstexcessive means fordefense as a natural treated or either denied Information Agency, prove that the language of Gross’s opposition is in fact anti-Semitic. 218 also in the propaganda of the day.” Stanis Jan ĩ aryn, “Polacy w The arguments about the majority of the Righteous Among the Nations coming from coming Nations the Among Righteous the of majority the about arguments The Only the interwar period did not have its occupier; however anti-Semitism of the time is time the of anti-Semitism however occupier; its have not did period interwar the Only á aw Dziwisz, “List otwarty Kardyna Strachu ,” Biuletyn KAI á a Stanis 218 , no. 825, January 2008.27, Such views, presented in a bulletin of the Catholic á awa Dziwisza,” open letter, January 12, 2008. 65 á aw Dziwisz, who supports his who Dziwisz, arguments aw ĩ aryn. 219 After the war, he argues, an CEU eTD Collection 222 historiography does not have not historiography indoes aplace Poland. from any appeals to andPolish that admiting is history also of that bearPolish Finally,crimes. themselvesdistance they responsibilityfindings historical the to memory the adjusting narrative, above in the events those of memory for the deeds of their ancestors. prices anddisappear.” In their view such rightful heirs They favorable anymore. obtain false pretenceswould and then them a under sell at no were there that meant which families, their with along murder were which of proprietors houses, landsor of plots of heirs rightful are they that claimed survivors Holocaust Some place. would sellthemandleave.” they often Most estate. real their retained have “could they property, prewar collecttheir to came when so figuresin Jews that government), Hilary prominent Berman the Minc andJakub were power. According to Bogdan Musia According to power. Jews seem haveto been occupying Poland along with Soviets, and Poles were subjugated to their 221 ‘ radical most the probably presenting theside occupier, the were on of war Jews afterthe that –claims Remembrance of National Communists. Jan helped wholesuggests thatthe Jews Church this concept inof clergy. persecution manifested the Naturally, and andthus priests all to JewsJews, whichshould some appreciateof them failed to bethat acknowledged, help and which avoid after cooperatingthe war with 220 Jan family. whole occupied country in which helping Jews was punished with death, not only of that person, but the Musia Musia Jan ĩ aryn, “Pogarda dlakontekstu,” “Pogarda aryn, Finally, what bothers those historians and their audience is the call for accepting the á á , “Kto si , “Kto si Ċ Ċ wzbogaci wzbogaci ĩ ĩ aryn – who is also the director of the Public Education Office of the Institute aryn, a virulent opponent of Gross, writes about the help brought by nuns by brought help the about writes Gross, of opponent virulent a aryn, 222 á á na maj na maj 221 Moreover, continues Musia ą ą tku tku Rzeczpospolita ĩ ĩ á ydów.” ydów.” , the Communist state protected Jews (after all, ethnic Jews all, Jews protected (after ethnic state Communist , the ĩ ydokomuna’-myth tainted statement. In this narrative, this In statement. tainted ydokomuna’-myth , January 19-20, 2008. 66 á , “not infrequently, frauds would take 220 CEU eTD Collection 226 225 224 223 shortcomings donotmake anythose less the matter valid, Jerzy writer argues that everso voicedPilch often popular inthediscussion, flaws in book, the formal the of accusation the on commenting so, And important. most is message the because matter, not do inaccuracies various made“Fear,” writing Gross mistakesthat For them, technical of the burning Warsaw Ghetto. In this narrative, Poland was a victim, but Jews suffered the most. Mi late whileCzes the events, anti-Semitic repeatedly recalls events, those who remembers of 20 inthe course the from Poles ethnic the theyreceived sufferings identity.” is bases of a“shockreaching the regardless shortcomings, of book, the the suggest that their distorted historical memory, independence andinternal movedinturmoil people to radical positions. order to create Inan thatopen view, and there self-conscious is a parallelthe country that had to be betweensaved by Marshallxenophobia, and Pi nationalism society. that strengthening of uncertainty, of period turbulence, of time a as perceived Theyand the post-1989 one, Semitism.where interwar period, The has that been invoked as for currentidentity,defining is the fear for states that it“conditional reflex at theis word Jew is the best reagent of who we are dealing with.”enough to specialistlook before scrutiny they begin even discussion. the into Krzemi Jedlicki, “Tylko tyle i a Pilch, “Czarna robota.” Halina Bortnowska, “Patrze Bortnowska, Halina Jerzy Pilch, “Czarna robota,” “Czarna Pilch, Jerzy á osz’s famous poem The opposing stance is characterized by eagerness to introduce Jewish history history introduceand the Jewish to byeagerness ischaracterized stance The opposing Most importantly, this part of the society is able to accept the responsibility and correct accept the responsibility isto able of society the part importantly,Most this 224 Jerzy Pilch again asks whether normal people, not historians, have to wait for a Ī tyle.” Campo Fiori ü na ekshumacj na Dziennik Polska Europa shows how Polish how shows children by undisturbed played walls the Ċ ,” Gazeta Wyborcza Gazeta Ĕ 67 á ski’s survey to stop denying the scale of anti- ĝ sudski less than a decade after WW I had ended. wiat , January 18, 2008. , February 5, 2008. 225 Jerzy Jedlicki answers to this that the that this to answers Jedlicki Jerzy 223 and accordingly Bortnowska th century. Marek century. Edelman, 226 Hefurther á aw CEU eTD Collection placing them on the same side. However, anti-Semitism was still present during the war, the during present still was anti-Semitism However, side. same the on them placing concerning WW II is that Poles fought against Germans, who also, at the time, persecuted Jews, instability general of government, mess mostly,and, anti-Semitism. prevailing The concept suchas spots, dark of period all that madeatwhitewashing there are attempts Therefore, 1989. after is statehood independent the of interwarperiod the for continuation how important indicate are particularly salientdiscussed during the debates bypublicand commented fora, onInternet show which elements for Polish topics The narrative. mainstream in Polish place no historicalhas years, of hundreds for door next memory lived they although who Jew, is a anoutsider ofSuch outsider. an theas Polish, ethnically not is 20 who everyone see to tends sufferings, Polish on only focuses which history, of vision The is difficult. victimized invictimized 20 the martyrologies, both with uniqueness,claims hindergroups to dialogue the between two Katy of by Thesymbolism authorities. executed Soviet were officers 8,000 them among andcitizens, martyrology martyrology Katy is Polish for symbol ultimate the suffering, of memory Jewish contemporary for symbol ultimate is whilethe Auschwitz Jews).Therefore, American (especially inits very with center Holocaust Naturally, Jews have their own martyrology reconsidered? 5.5 Narratives as expressed in their memory of the 20 into looks largerpart of society, which reinforcethe past the identities. their already to defined inclusive look forward,Gross’s accept traditionalist, unlike the therapy and and,admittedly, Ĕ is to an extent parallel to the symbolism of Auschwitz for Jews. Two competing Two Jews. for Auschwitz of symbolism the to parallel an extent is to Polish memory is strongly stigmatized with a sense of victimhood and martyrology. and victimhood of asense with stigmatized isstrongly memory Polish th Ĕ century. The need to incorporate incorporate into century.Jewish suffering needto The Polishthe narrative , a forest not far , aforest not from Smolensk, Polish wherein 1940about 22,000 68 th century. Those unquestionably century.Those th century, CEU eTD Collection 229 228 227 isbook his, unlike “scientific, Chodakiewicz’sin of historiography, the IPN’s conception wasemployed, of historians group whereapoliticized IPN, of radicalization nation. of the glorification the for allows of Poles, superiority moral perceived the because mentioned, neverlatest are inhis works, by Of the two actionsdescribedGross central course, point. inthe Polishsufferings whichplaces narrative, in that marginal place occupies only a therefore, by most preferably by help tothem clergy.the Catholic Poles, the Holocaust, ethnic delivered of context in the mentioned are Jews school, heroic dominating the of that historiography, Polish In homogenous. very ethnically both Army, Anders and underground Polish the in especially Chodakiewicz. Gross, in an afterword to a compilation of articles “Wokó whocalls Gross a vampire,is praised for publishing the ‘unbiased and nuanced’ book from whenParliament, he the presented Institute’sfindings. the Now, newJanusz president Kurtyka, lynched he inthe wasalmost the crime, a unbiased research regarding thorough conducted Leon Kieres, theirpresident, then debate, Jedwabne While the during Forces. ArmedNational Jews.” to help brought fordealing with the can be responsible unequivocally identify themselves with national democracy nationalor other camp formations, voiceshissayingunderstand doubtsconcerning thehard project, is thathow “it people, to who purpose of record all iswhich Jews to help duringto broughtcases of war.Dariusz the Libionka aproject“Index,” IPNintroduced a fighting Gross. focuses on now Jedwabnethe discussion, in daily trend asimilar with project is Jan Jan is project G Libionka, “Oni nie s Stanis ą dek, Last yearsLast in andled in witnessed changes government, thus institutions.public It tothe á aw Obirek, “Ko Wokó á ĩ . aryn, who – along with Chodakiewicz – is an open admirer of Endecja-oriented of admirer open an is – Chodakiewicz with – along who aryn, ą z ojczyzny mojej.” Ğ ció á potrzebuje Grossa,” Rzeczpospolita Gazeta Wyborcza Gazeta , anewspaper which a very took standimportant in 69 , February 7, 2008. 228 The person responsible for the á Strachu,” 227 which coincided which 229 writes that writes CEU eTD Collection closer. rolein important todealwith inredefining past order darkstains onit,the andbringchange that like play an lapse “Fear” Books wellas the needed, istime. of as goal, education along toachieve that order In historical assertions. bythecritical andcanbeinfluenced discussion although closer to the right than to the left part of the ideological spectrum, is more open to is that teachings tothecountry. inschools,andstrongly agroup religious group, connected That Communist from stemming notions the cherishes which middle, inthe society the of part whichinternalizing wouldwrongs future. allowisfor for past Finally, sakeof the the the there establishing conducta discussion, aconsensus, in whichaimsat its or book accept the entirety, in “Fear.” Theyeither presented propositions accept the is to ready Poles, left-oriented, mostly liberal, of of that audience, group other anti-Semitism. The Polish raging of alone perception the let Jedwabne, for is noplace there narrative their In nation. unified religiously and ethnically are ideologically foreign to the those, who uses history as a foundation of the culturally, stereotypes.” ideological of full “clerks, of in hands now is institution public important an that fact the on rests 230 impeccable.” pioneercraft-wise and historical, Gross’s afterword to: G The propositions of the book do not fit the narrative of right wing audience, because they because audience, wing right of narrative the fit not do book the of propositions The ą dek, Wokó á . 70 230 The problem in having a serious discussion CEU eTD Collection the late 19 the is in that nationalism, Polish yearsfor during formative is the thatthey reason were present the livinginnow of inargue discontent Poland, apoint Thisthat a public to discussion? papertries 234 233 talk. to iswhich it very about uncomfortably aretopics, anti-Semitic activities Jews and postwar the murders of inthe Poles of participation the that observation Klugman’s Aleksander It reflects truth. the with misses knowingly and often Gross that states he openly when Gontarczyk, Piotr at all.beenhave published not itshould which reasonsfor the is muchabout there and book, the about less much author, the about lot is a there discussion the In means. “Polish” adjective the (re)defining what itpertains to matters, Polish concerns “Fear,” of publication the with opened discussion, Since that incharacter. Polish makes the discussion of society, Polish correlates with the challenging of identity. Gross’s book, written from the position of a member influences the characteridentities, Poland alwayslooks identity back. Polish is historicized, strongly and then so of the nation. The“Western”look intosee how countrieswhich tendto shape thefuture to to their current challenging of the historical narrative, then, highly 232 231 Conclusion. AleksanderKlugman, “Kogo przera Gontarczyk, “Daleko od prawdy.” Obirek, “Ko Obirek, 4. Porter, 234 Why is the historical memory of Why ishistorical memory Jews,in non-existent the an of of spite of almost group Jews Historical is memory important formationfor element anidentity in Poland. Unlike th and early and early 20 Ğ ció á potrzebuje Grossa.” potrzebuje specify what political consequences should flow from flowfrom should distinctions. these political consequences specify what identity, to designate that to identity, collective reinforce and establish to means a is today nationalism Clearly th centuries. Jews were also the ‘significant other’ during the interwar the during other’ ‘significant the also were Jews centuries. Ī a Strach, ” Midrasz 71 we nr.8February,2008. are like and how wedifferfrom arelike how and 232 them So argues So and to 231 233 CEU eTD Collection Affairs in Kraków by Prince by Charles. inKraków Prince Affairs Jewish for new of center a opening and otherabout the Whore), Jewish the to (Death Kurwie” Semitism is a problem in contemporary Semitism in isa problem contemporary Poland. anti- that concede more often andalso istrue, they asanti-Semites of Poles perception the One treated about a football player from one of from the a of one about football player One treated to eachother. next appeared which Jewish affairs concerning articles two Wyborcza daily Gazeta foundation of the identity.inanti-Semitic triggers dormant the used a defensive prejudices, infringedto the reaction The Polish attitude anti-Semitism.The debate to lackof aboutthe Poles, convictions reinforcethe toward biased Jews today is illustrated usually accounts, Personal code. cultural in Polish the arestillpresent anti-Semitic tropes that in two articles from anti-Semitism asa cliché. anti-Semitism 237 237 236 235 of ‘ stereotypical character acknowledge to in the Failing used of arguments the this discussion. understanding character the resentments.” noperhaps historical issue other inPoland plays that hiddenso powerfully on sensitivities and in historical debates.interested history,becomepreoccupied Jewish are not explains with whypeople which who too Similarlymemory, Polish from Jedlickidisappeared not has problem” “Jewish the negligible, is in Poland Jews writesof number the thatalthough Therefore, “despiteexperience. war the in suffering their of centrality the for the time that has elapsed,period, fundamental for the formation of Polish identity today. They, finally, compete with Polesthere is Krzemi Michlic, Jedlicki, “How to Deal with This.” Gazeta Wyborcza The question whether anti-Semitism is a part of the Polish cultural code, is crucial for Ĕ ski, 117. The Soviet 235 , April 30,2008. , 157. 236 ĩ The arguments in the discussion, and myths they are based on, show on, based are they myths and discussion, in the arguments The ydokomuna’, writers such as Marek Wierzbicki, describe Polish suchasWierzbicki, describe writers Marek ydokomuna’, 237 Fortunately, younglikely aremoreadmit people to that 72 238 In a survey presented in Gazeta Wyborcza on Wyborcza in Gazeta presented Inasurvey à ód Ĩ teams, which said “ said which teams, ĝ mier üĩ ydzewskiej CEU eTD Collection teach us conformism, like thehistrionics, Polish Catholic Church will be. If it continues sweepto those things under the carpet and be, will “Poland says: intelligentsia, Polish falseness, the of members prominent most the of one and origin hypocrisy Jewish of a Pole Michnik, Adam identity. Polish so transforming and in creating we role a crucial plays will be…. If the catholic canchangethesecularized Europe.” Poles, Polish “those and attributes Church of values important most the are patriotism and tradition religion, that claims Chodakiewicz culture. everyday of element is an practice, not do simply or believers themselves consider not themselves.” should “bothpatriotisms, visionsare two two which ofPoland represent Szostkiewicz thatparallel shows to haveAdam historiography seemsaltogether, reject “ethno-nationalist” Michlic,the to who their place, but need to be tolerant of each other and do not harm 243 242 241 240 239 code. cultural Polish the into Jews assimilate to failure isa model nationalist civic failure nationbuilding. the that the of when of Michlic analyzing suggests Polish process the consideration intobe taken to have significance their and representations anti-Jewish Polish of longevity and continuity nature, the undoubtedly, However, identity. Polish thus, and nation of shape the to the contribute that factors many more are there where reality, the this simplifies stream of politics and substitutingit with inclusivethe andcivic tolerant model. condition sinequa non that Poles are anti-Semites. claimed11.02.2008, 31percentof thatis month thebook, publicationa the after of respondents Chodakiewicz, “Historia jako wycinanka.” Szostkiewicz, “Egzorcysta Gross.” Ibid., 16. Michlic, Gazeta Wyborcza Polish identity is strongly entwined with Catholicism, which even among those, who do who those, among even which Catholicism, with entwined strongly is identity Polish Poland’s. 242 , February 11, 2008. of the process of eradicating the ethno-nationalist vision from the major 239 Some suggest that the issue of anti-Semitism becomes almost becomes anti-Semitism of issue the that suggest Some 73 243 Therefore, the Church the Therefore, 240 It seems that 241 Unlike CEU eTD Collection complicated historical facts, proves that the message does not reach the majority of society, the majority of reach not the message does the that proves facts, historical complicated anti-Jewish actions is low. Moreover, the response of the audience, unable tograsp some of the the right-wing parties’ political programs, which take advantage of such social conditions. intolerant, authoritarian stances areradicalizing. stances authoritarian intolerant, part of notPolish society does open, butquite otherwise,itcloses. Conservative, restrictive and more country modernizes the relationsliberated, alargemoreandbecoming the more social are especially true, it when pertains tosuch inas described “Fear.”catastrophes identity on remembering and on reflection history, therefore –says Gross–this history has tobe 247 246 245 244 a different country.” clearly states that one should confess all the guilt connectedanti-Semitism to then we will live in very well shows well very movements and init Europe, prove howeverfailsis inthat to factaspecific he phenomenon, anti-Semitic other different it made that logic unique a anti-Semitism Polish gave Poles Jewsand between existing national conflict, a of perception thatthe suggests war.He the about memory of Jews in e.g. schoolbooks and the subsequent removal from the mainstream discussion Michael According of 60sthrough mid the to 70swereby the expelling Steinlauf, characterized them? mention to fail authors such why – helped who those of hundreds were there war, the topics, but is more restrictive otherwise. Therefore, when there were Poles killing Jews during ĝ Gross, “ Steinlauf. Michnik, debate in Kraków. piewak,“Lekcja Strachu.” The analysis conducted herein, shows that the willingness to take responsibility for the for responsibility take to willingness the that shows herein, conducted analysis The All research seems to show that, although we cannot speak of a nationalist Poland, the Polish nationalist historiography seems to be tolerant of its own selectiveness of the ĩDá oba ze Strachu.” la longueduree 244 of the Poles-Jews perceived conflict. perceived Poles-Jews the of 74 247 These attitudes in the society are reflected in are reflected in society Thesethe attitudes 245 Poles are building their building are Poles 246 CEU eTD Collection paramount historical memory. alter the to want not large does society at proves thatthe It measure. it as apurifying accept to it “Fear,” failed for thepublication althoughof society Polish was prepared prevails. Therefore, still option latter the in which (re)definition, identity Polish of dynamic specific a create to today, clash zealous, religiously and intolerant exclusivist, of that and Poland, pluralistic and inclusive serving formodel tolerant, the and aassymbol Obojga Narodów), (Rzeczpospolita Nations Both- of Republic Jagiellonian the of that nation, the of visions two The tolerant. and open be mature calledfully is enough thatthesociety proves to not incode present cultural Polish the hindering the possibility of molding people’s perception. Thefact anti-Semitism that is still 75 CEU eTD Collection Semka, Piotr. “ Semka, Piotr. “ Radzilowski, John. “ Pilch, Jerzy. “Czarna robota.” “Czarna Jerzy. Pilch, Pa Obirek, Stanis 1Ċ Musia Mancewicz, Stanis Maliszewski, Norbert. “Uprzedzenia:Maliszewski, wolni Norbert. jawnych, sp od Machcewicz, Pawe Machcewicz, Lisicki, Pawe Koz Jedlicki, Jerzy.„How to Deal with This.” Jedlicki, Jerzy.“Tylko tyle i a Klugman, Aleksander. “Kogo przera Klugman, Aleksander. Jastrun, Tomasz. “Znowu Strach.” Gross, Jan T. “ Gross, prawdy.” “Dalekood Piotr. Gontarczyk, przypinanie Gross: “Chodakiewicz kontra Gontarczyk, Piotr. Gazeta Wyborcza Gazeta Wyborcza Dziwisz, Stanis Cichy, Micha MarekJan.“Historia jakoChodakiewicz, wycinanka.” Bortnowska, Halina.“Patrze Bortnowska, Boguska, Teresa. “Strach, gniew, debata.” Blumsztajn, Seweryn. “Polski g %áRĔ Bikont, Anna. “Moi ch Beylin, Marek. “ Bauman, Zygmunt. “Wyt Zygmunt. Bauman, Articles: SOURCES PRIMARY Bibliography. á cek, Robert. “ osz, Jerzy. “Ró osz, á owski, Maciej. “Fakty i szansa“Fakty czyli na stracona owski, Maciej. dialog.” uprzedzenia, ski, Jan. “Biedni Polacy patrz á , Bogdan.“Ktosi Inteligenta supplement to supplement 2008. Format no. 7,September, 2006. á á . “ . “Polacy- á ĩDá aw. “Ko Strach Strach á no. 5, supplementno. to aw. “List otwarty Kardyna ĩ ĩ Strach , February , February 11, 2008. , April 30, 2008. oba zeStrachu.” oba ydzi, Polacy i przesz ydzi, Polacy, strach.” Ī , supplement, to á á ne oblicza strachu.” ne oblicza aw. “Od apelu do apelu.” . “Odcienie czerni.” . “Odcienie Strach cofn cofn Rzeczpospolita Ğ jestjak fa á ció ĩ Ċ opi wymordowali moich wzbogaci á ydzi. Czarne karty powstania.” umaczy ąá ąá i rewizja polskiej historii.” polskiej i rewizja á potrzebuje Grossa.” dialog oca dialog oca ü na ekshumacj Ī Dziennik Polska Europa tyle.” á os Grossa.”os á ü szywa moneta.” szywa Polityka ą niewyt Newsweek Przekrój na getto.” á Gazeta Wyborcza namaj Ī , July , July 2006. 15-16, a Tygodnik Powszechny áRĞü Strach Przegl Gazeta Wyborcza áą áą Tygodnik Powszechny Rzeczpospolita, Polityka, epok epok á , .” á Gazeta Wyborcza umaczalne.” a Stanis ą March 8, 2008. , February , February 7, 2008. Ċ Gazeta Wyborcza tku tku .” Rzeczpospolita , no. 4,2008. , Gazeta Wyborcza Kraków, January25,2008. .” ą Tygodnik Powszechny Gazeta Wyborcza Gazeta 76 Ċ Ċ d Midrasz .” .” ĩ , 24.02.2008. Gazeta Wyborcza ydów,” ĩ Rzeczpospolita, Rzeczpospolita Rzeczpospolita á February 10, 2001. awa Dziwisz.” open letter, January 12, 2008. ydów. Portret Jana Tomasza Grossa.” , February , February 4, 2008. Rzeczpospolita November 18, 2006. Rzeczpospolita, March 01-02,2008.Rzeczpospolita, ĝ Le MondeDiplomatique nr.8February, 2008. January 12, 2008. wiat Gazeta Wyborcza Gazeta , January , January 2008. 12-13, Rzeczpospolita , February , February 2008. 23-24, no. 4,2008. January 11, 2008. , January 18, 2008. á , January , January 2008. 19-20, no. 2, 2008. atek.” , February , February 5, 2008. , January , January 16, 2008. January January 21, 2008. January January 16, 2008. , February , February 7, 2008. Ċ tani tani ukrytymi.” , January , January 11, 1987. Rzeczpospolita , January 19, 2008. , January , January 29, 1994. (Polish edition), , January , January 25, Plus Minus Niezb Ċ Du dnik Ī y , CEU eTD Collection ĩ Szaynok, Bo Stola, Dariusz, Wojciechowski, Marcin. “Nieudana próba Grossa.” interview for interview Grossa.” próba “Nieudana Marcin. Wojciechowski, Dariusz, Stola, ĝ Libionka, Anna. Dariusz, Bikont, “Oni nie s Kurtyka, Janusz, interview for Radio RMF, January 10, 2008. Gross, Jan Szostkiewicz,Gross, T., Adam.“Strach polski, Strach Gross, Jan T. “Gross: pisa Jan T.“Gross: Gross, Gebert, Konstanty, Wojciechowski, Marcin, Machcewicz, Pawe Machcewicz, Marcin, Wojciechowski, Konstanty, Gebert, for interview “Powszechna rzecz zabijanie.” Marek, Edelman, Chodakiewicz, Marek Jan, Zychowicz, Piotr. “Ludzi nale Piotr. Zychowicz, MarekJan, Chodakiewicz, Aptowicz, Adam. NiemcyAptowicz,“Skoro spo unicestwili Interviews: “Z antysemityzmu trzeba “Z antysemityzmusi trzeba “Strach w Kielcach,” debate in Kielce, January 21, 2008. “Gross, historyk zmisj “Bez okoliczno Debates: ĩ Zaremba, Marcin. “S Zaremba, Wo Wi Tokarska-Bakir, Joanna. “ Joanna. Tokarska-Bakir, Terlikowski, Gross.” Adam.“Egzorcysta Szostkiewicz, Tomasz P. “ piewak, Pawe aryn, Jan. “Polacy w aryn, Jan. “Pogarda dla kontekstu.” Ğ Ĩ nicki, Tomasz. “Katolickim wydawnictwom nie mo wydawnictwom “Katolickim nicki, Tomasz. niakowski, Henryk. “OdpowiedHenryk.niakowski, Wyborcza Wyborcza February February 2008. 2-3, no.28, 2006. January January 16, 2008. interview for interview 2008. for upami Stanis January January 23, 2008. (Kraków,2008). Znak: Rzeczpospolita Rzeczpospolita Ī á Ċ awa Dziwisz.” openletter, January 15, 2008. ena, Klich,Aleksandra. “Gross – moralista, niehistoryk.”interview for tnienia,” interview for interview tnienia,” á Ğ , Maziarski, Wojciech, “Lekcja Strachu.” interview for ci ci , January , January 15, 2008. , January , January 2008. 19-20, á agodz ą Gazeta Wyborcza d Nieostateczny.” , January , January 11,2008. Strachu ą ,” Television debate, ą , January , January 18, 2008. cych,” debate in cych,” January Warsaw, debate 22, 2008. Strach Ċ á em spowiada Strach ,” Strach Biuletyn KAI wPolsce,” inHenryk Wo , czyli propagandowy oskar akt , czyli propagandowy Rzeczpospolita Gazeta Wyborcza Ĩ ü , January , January 18, 2008. jako Polak.” interview for Polish Press Agency (PAP), Agency Press Polish for interview Polak.” jako Henryka Wo ,” debate in Kraków, January in January Kraków, ,” debate 24, 2008. Polityka Polityka ą z mojej.”ojczyzny interview for TVN , no.825,January 27, 2008. 77 no.3,2008. January January 19, 2008. , no. 5, 2008. á eczno , January 2008. 19-20, Ĩ niakowskiego na list otwarty Kardyna nalistniakowskiego otwarty March 3, 2008. Ī e by ü Ī Ğü Ī y rozlicza ü ydowsk Ī wszystko jedno.” wszystko Ĩ ydowski.” interview for Gazeta Wyborcza niakowski (ed.), ü á ą . “Kto si “Kto . indywidualnie.” Interview indywidualnie.” , niech zap Newsweek Ī enia historii.” zamiast Gazeta Wyborcza Ċ Wokó , January , January 19-20, boi Strachu.” boi no. 4,2008. Rzeczpospolita á ac ą koszty jej koszty á Strachu Polityka Gazeta Gazeta á a , , CEU eTD Collection Megill, Allan. “History, Memory, Identity.” the during Clergy Catholic Polish the and Anti-Judaism, “Anti-Semitism, Dariusz. Libionka, Holc, Janine P. “Memory Contested: Jewish and Catholic Views of inPresent-Day Auschwitz of Views Jewish andCatholic Contested: “Memory P. Holc, Janine Hobsbawm, Eric J. “Ethnicity and Nationalism in Europe Today.” Hobsbawm, inEurope Gopal and Nationalism J.“Ethnicity In:Balakrishnan, Eric (ed.), in Relations.” Polish-Jewish Contemporary and Memory “Collective Zvi. Gitelman, Gillis, John R. “Memory and Identity: the History of a Relationship.” Introduction to Gillis, Chodakiewicz, Marek Jan. “Poland’s Fragebogen.” In: Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, John Jan Chodakiewicz, Marek “Poland’s In: Fragebogen.” Jan. Marek Chodakiewicz, NewDirections.” NewIssues, “Identity A.Construction: Karen Cerulo, Ca Blobaum, Robert. “The Politics of Anti-Semitism in Fin-de-Siecle Warsaw.” in “TheFin-de-Siecle ofAnti-Semitism Robert. Politics Blobaum, Bauer, Yehuda.“In Search of the Definition of Antisemitism.” In: Brown, Michael (ed.): Identity.” Cultural and Memory “Collective John. Czaplicka, and Jan Assmann, Articles: SECONDARY SOURCES http://www.tvn24.pl/1,251,8,40087424,108975861,4438597,0,forum.html http://www.prawica.net/node/9877 http://www.gry-online.pl/s043.asp?ID=7268383&N=1 http://forum.o2.pl/temat.php?id_p=5387635 http://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=902&w=74288360&a=74288678 http://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=410&w=74025226&a=74493876 http://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=410&w=74025226&a=74097529 (all on May consulted 25, 2008) Internet fora: á a, Alina. “The Question Assimilationthe of Jewsof in An PolishKingdom the (1864-1897): 37-62. Opponents inModern Poland inRobert (ed.) War,1939-1945.” WorldSecond Blobaum, CornellIthaca: University 2005. Press, Poland.” in Blobaum, Robert (ed.) in Robert Blobaum, Poland.” Mapping thenation. and itsAftermath (ed.), Joshua Zimmerman, Jersey:University Princeton 1994. Press, John R. (ed.), Press,2003). Leopolis (Charlottesville: Radzi Sociology Interpretive Essay.” Interpretive History Approaches to Antisemitism. Critique á owski, Dariusz To Dariusz owski, 73, no.2 73,no.2 (2001), pp. 291-305. , No. 65, , No. Cultural History/Cultural (Spring Studies, -Summer, 125-133. 1995), Vol.pp. 23,(1997), 385-409. Commemorations.National Identity ThePoliticsof . New Brunswick: University Rutgers Press, 2002. Polin I London: Verso, 1996. á czyk (ed.), czyk (1986):130-150. Contested Memories: Poles duringand Jews theHolocaust New York, Jerusalem: American Jewish Committee, 1994. . Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005. Anti-Semitism anditsOpponents inModernPoland History of the Human Sciences ofthe History Poland’s Transformation. A Work inProgress. AWork Poland’s Transformation. 78 Anti-Semitism andits . Princeton and New . Princeton , vol.11 1998, no.3, Journal ofModern Annual Review of Annual Review New German . CEU eTD Collection *ą Dobroszycki, DellaPergola, Connerton, Paul. Clark,Stuart. Chodakiewicz, Marek Jan. Marek Chodakiewicz, Chodakiewicz, Marek Jan, Radzi MarekJan, Chodakiewicz, Burke, Brown, Michael (ed.): Volkov, Shulamit. “Antisemitism as s Cultural Code.” In: Code.” Cultural s as “Antisemitism Shulamit. Volkov, Thompson, Kenneth. “Religion, Values, and Ideology.” In: Stuart Hall Blobaum, Robert (ed.) Robert Blobaum, Balakrishnan, Gopal (ed.), Zubrzycki, Genevieve. “ Bo Szaynok, Stola, Dariusz. “Fighting against the Shadows: The Shadows: the against “Fighting Stola, Dariusz. and Jews, Priests, Catholic Antisemitism: and Nationalism “Clerical Konrad. Sadkowski, Renan,is Ernest. “What a in: Geoff Nation?” ed.1996. and Suny,RonaldGrigor, Eley, Anthony D. Smith, D. Anthony Books: Michlic, Joanna. “The Soviet Occupation of Poland, 1939-41, and Occupation Stereotype the Anti- of of “TheMichlic, 1939-41, Soviet the Poland, Joanna. dek, Mariusz (ed.) University Press, 1984. York, 2002 York, 1989. A Work in Progress. Work in A Committee, 1994. Committee, Press, 1990. University Press, 2005. Introduction to ModernSocieties Introduction University Press, 2005. Nevada Press,1991. Communist Constitutional Debates.” 1978. Robert (ed.) Cornell University 2005. Press, Semitism anditsOpponents in Modern Poland Orthodox Christians in theLublin in: 1918-1939,” Region, (ed.) Blobaum, Robert pp. 41-55. AReader. Becoming National: (Spring/Summer135-176. 2007), 629-668. Blobaum, Robert (ed.) Robert Blobaum, Polish and Pro-Soviet Jew.” Polish andPro-Soviet Peter. Ī TheAnnalesSchool:Critical Assessments. ena. “The Role of Anti-Semitism Postwar Polish-Jewish Relations.” in Blobaum, Relations.” Polish-Jewish Postwar Anti-Semitism of Role “The ena. Sergio. The French historical revolution: theAnnales School, 1929-89 Lucjan. How societies remember. societies How . National identity Wokó Anti-Semitism and itsOpponentsPoland inModern “World Jewish American Population 2002,” Jewish Year Book,102. The Chronicle of the The Chronicle of Approaches toAntisemitism. We, thePolishNation Anti-Semitism and itsOpponents in ModernPoland Mapping the nation. Po zag á Charlottesville: Leopolis Press,2003. Strachu. Anti-Semitism and itsOpponents in ModernPoland á á owski, John, To John, owski, adzie. Jewish Social Studies:History, Culture, Society . Kraków, Znak: 2008. Published London:PenguinReno: University Books, of NewYork and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996: Warszawa: Instytut Pami (Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell, 1996). Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University University Press, Cambridge [England]:Cambridge Theory and Society Theory and : Ethnic and Civic Visions of Nationhood in Post- 79 London:1996. Verso, à ód á czyk, Dariusz (ed.) czyk, Dariusz Ĩ Ghetto,1941-1944 New York, Jerusalem: American Jewish American Jerusalem: York, New . Ithaca: Cornell University 2005. Press, Anti-Zionist London: Routledge, 1999. Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook Leo BaeckInstitute , Vol. 30, No. 5, (Oct., 2001), 5,(Oct., No. , Vol. 30, Ċ ci Narodowej, 2008. Campaign of 1968.” ,” in Poland’s Transformation. . New Haven : Yale . . Oxford : Polity . Ithaca: Cornell Ithaca: Modernity: an Modernity: Ithaca: Cornell n.s. 13, no.3 . , XXIII, Ithaca: Anti- New CEU eTD Collection Zubrzycki, Geneviève. (ed.), Joshua Zimmerman, Tajfel, Henri and Fraser, Colin (ed.), Steinlauf, Schöpflin, George. Jaff. Schatz, Smith, Emmanuel. Ringelblum, Porter, Nora, Pierre. Nora, Michlic, Joanna. Michlic, Mendelssohn, Ezra. Mendelssohn, InstituteYearbookLeo Baeck Le Goff, Le Krzemi Kovács, András. Kovács, Irwin-Zarecka, Iwona. Jankowski, Robert (ed.) Hall, Stuart. Halbwachs, Maurice. Halbwachs, Jan T. Gross, Gutman, and Yisrael Krakowski, Shmuel. Jan T. Gross, Gillis, John R. (ed.), Gross, Jan T. Gross, Anthony Anthony D. Ĕ Poland. Aftermath 1978). N.Y.: Syracuse University 1997. Syracuse University N.Y.: Press, University of California Press, 1991. 1974. Century Poland Lincoln : University Nebraska Press,of 2006. Lincoln: University Nebraska of Press, 2006. Indiana University 1983. Press, 2004. Budapest:2005. 1996. Brunswick [N.J.] : Brunswick [N.J.] Transaction Publishers, 1994. 2008. Two Interpretation Jersey:University Princeton 1994. Press, Brian. ski, Ireneusz. Jacques. Joanna. Michael C. . New York: New York: HolocaustLibrary, 1986. The Generation: theRiseandFallof theJewishPoland. Communists of Realms ofMemory Realms Modernity: an to Modernity: an Introduction Modern Societies Upiorna Dekada. When NationalismBegantoHate:ImaginingModernPolitics in Nineteenth- Strach. Antysemityzm tu Chicago: University The Chicago Press, 2006. of Poland's Threatening Other: the Image of the Jew from 1880 tothePresentthe Jew from Poland'sThreateningOther:theImageof Fear: Anti-Semitism in Poland after Auschwitz: anEssayinHistorical after inPoland Anti-Semitism Fear: . NewBrunswick: University Rutgers 2002. Press, A kéznél lévõ Idegen. Antiszemita elõítéletek a mai Magyarországon. elõítéletekamai Antiszemita lévõIdegen. A kéznél HistoryandMemory. Poland's Threateningthe Jew Other: theimageof 1880tothepresentfrom Nations,identity,power Myths andmemories ofthenation. The Jews Central ofEast Europe between the Word Wars OnCollectiveMemory . AntysemityzmwPolsceinaUkrainie.Raportz Bada Bondage tothedead:Poland andthememoryof theHolocaust Commemorations. ThePolitics ofNational Identity New York : Random 2006. House, TheCrosses ofAuschwitz:Nationalism and Religioninpost-Communist Frames of Remembrance: the Dynamics of Collective Memory of theDynamics Remembrance: Framesof . Cena Strachu Polish-Jewish Relations During World War II Oxford: Oxford University 2000.Press, Contested Memories: Poles during andits and Jews theHolocaust , XXIII, 1978. , XXIII, Krakow: Austeria, 2007. v.1. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996-1998. . Warszawa: Fronda,2008. Introducing social psychology NewYork: Columbia University Press, 1992. Ī po wojnie. Historia powojnie. moralnej zapa Unequal victims:Poles and Jews during WorldWar . New York : New York University Press, 2000. . Chicago: University Chicago Press, 1992. of 80 Oxford: Oxford University 1999. Press, . Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell, Mass.: Cambridge, (Harmondsworth: Penguin, (Harmondsworth: . Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, . Princeton and New . Princeton Ĕ Ğ . ci. Warsaw:Scholar, . Bloomington: Kraków: Znak, Kraków: . Berkeley: Syracuse, PolgArt, . New . .