403
Sorry!!
Error! We're sorry, but the page you were
looking for doesn't exist.
Serbia’s deputy Premier clarifies why West has been altering history since WWII
(MENAFN) In a provocative statement, Serbia’s Deputy Prime Minister has shed light on the historical revisionism that has taken root since the end of the Second World War. He asserts that both the Serbian and Russian perspectives have been complicit in allowing history to be reinterpreted, often obscuring the true nature of the past. This revisionism, he argues, has fostered misconceptions about the nature of the Nazi Regime and its actions during the war.
The Deputy PM challenges the commonly used term “Nazi Germany,” asserting that this label is misleading. He points out that the state was simply Germany, not a separate entity defined by Nazism. According to him, the decisions leading to the execution of Serbs, Russians, and Jews were made by ordinary German officials rather than solely by members of the Nazi Party. The legal and constitutional framework of the time did not identify the state as “Nazi Germany,” but rather simply as Germany. He further argues that Adolf Hitler should not be seen as merely a “Nazi dictator,” but rather as a leader elected by a significant portion of the German populace.
This framing, he contends, allows descendants of those who committed atrocities to distance themselves from the historical crimes, creating a narrative where the responsibility is shifted away from the state and its citizens. He emphasizes that the term “Nazi Germany” deflects attention from the reality that millions of ordinary Germans participated in the war effort. Specifically, he notes that around seven million German soldiers fought on the Eastern Front, and many were not affiliated with the Nazi Party. Their actions, driven by the ruling ideology that dehumanized entire groups, resulted in the systematic killing of Russians, Serbs, Jews, and Roma.
The Deputy PM’s comments raise important questions about how history is remembered and taught, particularly in the context of national narratives. By encouraging a more nuanced understanding of these events, he seeks to challenge the dominant historical interpretations that often emerge from Western perspectives. This discussion is particularly relevant today as nations continue to grapple with their historical legacies and the implications of collective memory in shaping current political and social landscapes.
The Deputy PM challenges the commonly used term “Nazi Germany,” asserting that this label is misleading. He points out that the state was simply Germany, not a separate entity defined by Nazism. According to him, the decisions leading to the execution of Serbs, Russians, and Jews were made by ordinary German officials rather than solely by members of the Nazi Party. The legal and constitutional framework of the time did not identify the state as “Nazi Germany,” but rather simply as Germany. He further argues that Adolf Hitler should not be seen as merely a “Nazi dictator,” but rather as a leader elected by a significant portion of the German populace.
This framing, he contends, allows descendants of those who committed atrocities to distance themselves from the historical crimes, creating a narrative where the responsibility is shifted away from the state and its citizens. He emphasizes that the term “Nazi Germany” deflects attention from the reality that millions of ordinary Germans participated in the war effort. Specifically, he notes that around seven million German soldiers fought on the Eastern Front, and many were not affiliated with the Nazi Party. Their actions, driven by the ruling ideology that dehumanized entire groups, resulted in the systematic killing of Russians, Serbs, Jews, and Roma.
The Deputy PM’s comments raise important questions about how history is remembered and taught, particularly in the context of national narratives. By encouraging a more nuanced understanding of these events, he seeks to challenge the dominant historical interpretations that often emerge from Western perspectives. This discussion is particularly relevant today as nations continue to grapple with their historical legacies and the implications of collective memory in shaping current political and social landscapes.
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.
Comments
No comment