1 Anna Miller & Anita Shenoi Exploring Human Rights: Memory Laws Podcast Transcript and Bibliography TRANSCRIPT *Background sound of many voices talking to each other.* *Background sound fades away as soundbite begins.* DON LEMON The Q-Anon congressowmen actually compares the mask mandate in the house to the Holocaust. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREEN You know, we can look back in a time in hisotry where people were told to wear a gold star, and they were definitely treated like second class citizens so much so that they were put in trains and taken to gas chambers in Nazi Germany, and this is exactly the type of abuse that Nancy Pelosi is talking about. DON LEMON I mean, uh, I don’t like to call people names, but that’s outrageous. Comparing mask wearing to Jews being sent to the gas chamber… *Sound fades as narration begins* ANITA It’s outrageous, and it’s unacceptable. We just heard CNN’s Don Lemon reacting to a clip of U.S. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene comparing House Speaker Pelosi’s mask-mandate on the chamber floors to the reprehensible and horrific acts carried out by the Nazi regime. Her comments were swiftly condemned by many, and yet she still stands by them, in a vocal and persistent manner. This isn’t the first time that U.S. politicians and lawmakers have falsely compared the COVID-19 crisis to the Holocaust, and we have to wonder how these comments do not always impact the politician’s support in a negative manner. Is this due to a lack of education about this genocide? Worrying statistics show that more than half of 2 American adults don’t know how many people died in the Holocaust, a result perhaps of the 31 U.S. states who do not require public schools to educate students about it. If Americans were widely educated about it, would there be less of these comparisons which trivialize Nazi-era persection? In the United States, there are no formal, legal policies in place to preserve the history of the Holocaust. Unlike Germany, the U.S. does not enforce memory laws that would make things like the Nazi salute or holocaust denial illegal. On our podcast, “Exploring Human Rights,” we will keep these questions in mind as we analyze memory laws in an effort to understand them and their cultural, social, and political impact. *Intro-theme music plays* ANNA Hello everyone and welcome to “Exploring Human Rights,” a podcast where two graduate students discuss the pressing issues related to human rights ideology and discourse. My name is Anna Miller. ANITA And I am Anita Shenoi. We are so excited to bring human rights dialogue to the podcast community. ANNA Absolutely. Human rights is a conversation where we all deserve a space at the table to discuss. ANITA Exactly. And it’s also a space for diverse opinions, nuanced perspectives, and even uncomfortable conversations. ANNA Agreed. So, Anita, what are we talking about today? ANITA Well, today we’re going to dive into an issue that seems straightforward but is actually way more complex than most people think. 3 ANNA That sounds like a typical human rights issue. ANITA Today, we’re talking about memory laws. Memory laws ban certain speech about historical events in favor of state-approved narratives of those historical events. These laws are especially prominent in Europe. For example, in several European countries, including Austria, France, and Germany, a key memory law that prevents holocaust denial. In Germany, if a citizen is caught publicly denying or minimizing the impact of the holocaust, they could actually face time in jail. ANNA Right. And memory laws can look different depending on the country involved. They are not just about the holocaust, but they can also be used to criminalize speech and expression that denies or minimizes crimes against humanity. ANITA So, on the surface, memory laws seem like a slam dunk for human rights. Memory laws preserve history. They protect the experiences of victims. They provide consequences for extremists who think certain genocides and crimes against humanity are not real. And on a macro level, memory laws help ensure peaceful coexistence of different members within a country. They can help tame racism, bigotry, and intolerance, and they can help reduce violence amongst citizens. So all in all, memory laws can encourage a healthy, pluralistic society. ANNA But on the other hand, some wonder if memory laws are actually beneficial for a country or society in general. Because memory laws don’t just ban the crazy speech of extremists, they ban the open, democratic discussion of genocide and crimes against humanity. Historians and scholars in countries with certain memory laws cannot publish any work that is antithetical to the state sponsored narrative of history. So, do we really have pluralism in society if certain voices are banned? 4 ANITA That’s a great point Anna. And it also brings us to that question of why people deny genocides, not only within their private conversations, but through published works, or you know, flyers they hand out, or attempts to change the educational narrative for children to that of denial. I mean - what is their goal? Why are they so staked on this? ANNA In some readings we did about the Srebrenica genocide, the authors discussed how “justifications of atrocities were invented as the result of a societal need to understand and incorporate violent events within culturally acceptable boundaries.” But really, a societal response should not be to deny the events. The intentionality and planning that goes into the decision to actively deny atrocities - I suppose that brings us to the question of whether people should then be criminally prosecuted for denial. ANITA That is a complex question, because it seems that criminally prosecuting them doesn’t always have the desired outcome. We’ve seen many cases in which these deniers become martyrs for the cause, further shifting the narrative to that of deniers being the ones discriminated against. ANNA Right. So are memory laws enforced through the legal system actually effective in what they set out to achieve? ANITA Let’s take a close look at two different countries with two very different stances on memory laws, Germany and the United States. Germany is renowned for the legal framework it put in place after the holocaust to honor the victims and keep this type of tragedy from ever happening again. And the United States is renowned for its protection of free speech, as iterated in the first amendment of the U.S. constitution. ANNA 5 And we should say now, both of these concepts are important for a healthy society. Honoring history and victims is critical. And free speech is critical. ANITA Right. So, Anna, why don’t you explain what’s at stake in the United States in relation to memory laws. ANNA Well, while the United States was involved in World War II - in both positive and negative ways - the holocaust did not take place on U.S. soil. So post WWII, there wasn’t necessarily an onus on the U.S. to establish memory laws in the U.S. However, there were Nazi supporters living in the U.S. in the 1930s and 40s. And there is still a strong neo-Nazi presence in the U.S. today. In 2020, the Southern Poverty Law Center reported 26 active neo-Nazi groups in the U.S. And we know that the antisemitism that precipitated the holocaust has a strong presence in the U.S. now. In 2020, The Anti-Defamation League reported 2,107 antisemitic incidents in the U.S. And a considerable portion of antisemitic incidents reported to the ADL are incidents of holocaust denial. ANITA So even with a neo-Nazi presence and a high rate of antisemitism, the U.S. isn’t interested in enacting memory laws? ANNA So, one of the biggest issues related to memory laws is free speech. And as we know, the United States is famous, or infamous, for protecting free speech at almost any cost. And interestingly, the Anti-Defamation League actually recommends more speech, rather than censored speech. In the U.S., we still have the opportunity to speak truth in a respectful way and counter the opinions of extremists without limiting our basic right to freedom of speech. ANITA Wow. And then Germany, on the other hand, has quite a different approach to memory laws, and how they educate youth on what these laws are and what’s acceptable within society. And to 6 speak more on that, we actually have a German guest, Emma, who generously took time off of her university studies to give us her thoughts. *Clapping noises* ANITA Welcome Emma! And thank you so much for joining us. We were wondering if you could first share with us where and how you learned about these memory laws as a child growing up in Germany? EMMA Hi Anita and Anna, thank you so much for having me. I think almost every German knows that the Holocaustleugnung, so the denial of the Holocaust, is very illegal in Germany and it’s included in our criminal code so if you commit this crime in front of people in a public space, or on TV, or on the radio, or in a writing you publish, you have to pay fine or you can be sentenced up to five years in prison. You’re also not allowed to do the Hitlergruß, so raising your right arm so that your hands are at the same height as your eyes, or say Nationalist Socialist Parole, or use symbols like hakenkreuz or the swastika.