Video summary
The episode "European Identity on the Test" delves into the complex question of what truly defines a shared European identity beyond mere political borders or legal treaties. The discussion highlights that while criteria for joining the European Union are well-delineated, the cultural and historical boundaries remain fluid and subject to debate, as seen in recent aspirations by nations like Canada and new members such as Albania and Montenegro. A central theme is whether "liberty" serves as the unifying glue holding diverse societies together; however, experts note that while freedom of movement and speech are foundational values often taken for granted, these freedoms vary significantly across different countries. The conversation also touches upon integration as a core value, referencing Germany's historical reliance on Turkish immigrants to rebuild after World War II, suggesting that integrating non-European societies has been an intrinsic part of the European project driven by political, economic, and cultural interests rather than just shared heritage.
A critical tension arises between legitimate updates in historical knowledge and ideological revisionism used for present-day goals, particularly as seen in Hungary's recent election results where national identity is being reshaped to portray Brussels as a threat akin to Soviet regimes. This distortion of shared narratives regarding World War II and the Holocaust weakens the moral foundations of Europe by introducing contradictions into the European project itself. The dialogue illustrates how rewriting history at the national level, such as Spain's unresolved issues with Francoism or Ukraine's struggle against Imperial and Soviet historical manipulations, does not remain isolated but erodes the collective memory that binds the continent together. In these contexts, far-right movements exploit these fractured memories to strengthen narrow national identities while simultaneously dismantling the broader European identity built on common values like democracy and human rights.
The participants emphasize that simply stating "never again" is insufficient because hatreds are persistent viruses that require active transformation rather than symbolic politics alone. There is a clear shift needed from transitional justice, which focuses on legal accountability for past crimes, to transformative justice aimed at changing societal attitudes and preventing the recurrence of violence. The discussion underscores that collective memory shapes current national identities, but when this memory is distorted by political agendas—whether through denying colonial wounds in Spain or suppressing Ukrainian language rights—it creates a dangerous pattern of normalization that threatens European values. Consequently, fostering democratic resilience requires moving beyond wishful thinking to address the root causes of historical denialism and ensuring that all voices are included in constructing an accurate understanding of the past.
To combat these threats, the episode concludes with a call for resistance through active engagement from civil society, particularly among young people who can utilize available funding projects to promote critical dialogue about history. The speakers advocate for being alert, maintaining a critical stance toward historical narratives that obstruct true vision, and refusing complicity when incorrect stories are told. Using the analogy of the butterfly effect, they suggest that small actions in one country, like Norway or Spain, can have profound impacts across Europe and beyond, reaching places as distant as Ukraine. Ultimately, the path forward involves raising voices against revisionism to foster a proud yet honest collective memory that strengthens rather than fractures European unity, ensuring that the continent remains interconnected despite its diverse histories and ongoing challenges.
Read the full video transcript
Welcome to Talking Memories, the podcast
of the School of European Memories.
This season, we explore historical
revisionism and ask a [music] bold
question. Who owns the past?
Join us as we listen, question, [music]
and rethink the stories we thought we
knew. Let's get into it.
Episode two, European identity on
[music] the test.
>> My name is Giorgi.
>> Victoria.
>> Francesco.
>> Laura.
>> And Shadi.
>> And our guest speaker, Anna Miloshevich,
who her research covers European
integration, Europeanization, collective
memories, and identities. So, uh Miss
Anna, we had a little question to you.
So, what is it that really makes us all
European?
>> Well, the definition of what uh European
actually is, it's quite different from a
political point of view, cultural point
of view, historical point of view, and
basically, I think everyone of us has a
different kind of answer. So, where does
the Europe actually begin and where does
it end? So, it's ultimately a question
where are the the borders of Europe and
uh what keeps us together.
>> Yes, this is a very complex question as
well, since as we know, Canada is also
making moves and a lot of Canadians also
have some plans to join the EU. There's
a this has become a very public opinion,
to say the least, and uh so now it's
even a bigger question of when and where
does the Europe begin and where does it
end?
>> Well, the criteria for joining the
European Union well-delineated, and some
countries have opted also in the past,
like Iceland, to change their idea,
which is totally legitimate. Other
countries are wanting to join the
European Union, and soon we'll have two
new members, uh Albania and Montenegro,
which is a welcome addition to the
family of European nations.
>> So, uh we were also talking about our
shared values that Europeans that
as kind of unites us all. We tried to
use the word freedom, but we changed
that into the word liberty, because uh
as we know, freedom is like a more
broader term, and liberty is more of a
you know, it kind of narrows things down
to us. So, uh could liberty be the one
that keeps all of the European societies
like a glue?
>> Well, in the European treaties, if we
are like to look the the documents, the
founding documents of the European
units, the word of freedom that actually
was uh embedded in the fundamentals of
European Union. When we speak about
European values, which is a term I do
not uh use uh quite quite often. We
often spoke about this kind of freedoms,
uh freedoms of movement, freedoms of
speech, um and these are the freedoms
that we probably take often for for
granted in Europe. Well, depending on
the country.
>> [laughter]
>> Uh we were also mentioning um
integration as a part of European
identity as well since uh as we know in
Germany, uh there there were a lot of
Turkish immigrants imported in order to
rebuild Germany and many countries
followed suit as well. So, uh could we
say that integration of the quote
unquote non-European societies could be
a core European value as well?
>> Well, the the policy of uh European
enlargement is policy that uh developed
quite gradually, I would say. So, we
went from the six founding members, as
we know well from from from the history,
to having uh an ever uh expanding family
of European nations that as I said is
going to now include also Albania and
the Montenegro. Uh quite important. And
but the policy of the European
enlargement, it's
a policy that is based on the political
and geopolitical and economic interest
in addition for you know, of uh being
culturally and historically uh close to
different uh different kind of nations
in in Europe. What does it then mean
like from the The who are already
members of the European Union, what does
it mean actually to successfully deal
with the past?
>> I mean, in
Italy never truly
dealt with fascism with the the amnesty
of Togliatti. We practically liquidated
the
situation unlike what Germany did.
So,
we
>> Did Did Germany Can I interrupt you,
please? Because in the '70s, we all know
during the the Kohl When Kohl was a
chancellor,
I mean, there were very violent and very
racist attacks against migrants. The
whole factories burned with the
Philippine workers inside. So, the Kohl
Kohl kind of diminished the importance
of this saying, "Well, you know, you
just have bad opinion about Germans."
So, did we underestimated, you know, the
the danger of this racist, anti-Semitic,
violent kind of virus that
probably is still kind of like slowly
burns after the Second World War. While
we were saying, "Never again, never
again. Wishful thinking, wishful
thinking." And now we say, "Oh,
magically, it all reappeared." Was it
still there somehow?
>> Well, we talk a lot about collective
memories, but we also can talk about
collective responsibility or something
like that. Because
I'm from Ukraine, and that's why it
triggers me.
>> Yeah, well, Ukraine is a currently in
conflict, so that kind of complicates
things to still think about, you know,
the
future plans in the long term
developments in in that sense, you know,
what is going to be collective memory,
who is going to provide apologies and
responsibilities, but
I believe that like we in Europe now,
especially after '45, like we are
reaching almost, you know, adult age of
European Union project. We should move
beyond the symbolic politics, and I
think this was the core problem, the
wishful thinking, the symbolic acts
instead of focusing on transformative
potential of the past. So, the European
Union now, I think, have made this kind
of shift from transitional justice to
transformative justice,
focusing exactly on what we need right
now, but maybe a bit too late, on
fostering this kind of democratic
resilience, and focusing more on how it
can transform the attitudes of people,
because we are realizing that some, you
know, like viruses of hatred are never
going to stop. They are not going to
disappear just because we say never
never again. Because it is always again
and again and again until we do
something about it.
>> Thank you very much for these insightful
and productive talks. I would like to
end this with a question to you. What is
it that we can do to kind of ignite the
the possible collective responsibility
within the peoples? Is there a mechanism
or something that the youth could use to
kind of ignite the the collective
responsibility as a whole?
>> Well, I cannot speak in the name of the
youth because my youth [laughter] days
are I'm way over, but I can speak in the
in in the name of, you know, what is the
European politics, European policy right
now doing, actually focusing on this
kind of diffusing of this explosive
potential that the past has. So, there
are numerous projects, there are
numerous fundings made available for
civil society that is it it it's a it's
a very
um
a life civil society in Europe that is
also one of the the important heritages
that we have in Europe, this kind of
civil society of freedoms of expression.
So, there are a number of different kind
of projects that can finance this kind
of activities that are specially
targeting young people. Young people in
Europe, but also young people outside of
Europe because, you know, also in
Ukraine, in Georgia, in other countries
that are on the European continent
because, as you said at the beginning,
we are still interconnected. And I like
this analogy of the butterfly effect. A
butterfly flaps its wings in Norway and
it lands somewhere in Ukraine or in
Spain or in Hungary.
>> So, thank you very much for this
productive dialogue and we will see you
in the part two.
Now, let's get to reflections, shall we?
>> Yes, let's do this. So, as you can see
when talking about European identity, we
a lot of times approach debates,
discussions and sometimes even some
fights because European identity is
something that we cannot perhaps agree
on, but what we can agree on is that
it's something very fragile. It's
something intangible. We cannot quite
put our hands on them and it's quite
fragile. And I think this fragility of
European identity makes it an easy
target for the far right. In the past
years in Europe, we have seen a rise of
far-right leaders and parties using
historical revisionism to build
narratives that try to strengthen the
national identity and at the same time
break down and destruct the European
identity that we find so valuable and we
try to build and foster so much. So,
reflecting on this connection between
European identity and the historical
revisionism, I would like to talk a
little bit about Hungary and then hear
about your perspectives about where you
come from because very recently on April
12th in Hungary, we had a I would call
it a historical moment with our
elections, which
we could call
a new change of regime. In Hungary,
historical revisionism in the past 16,
but I would even say in the last 24
years has been used to create a a
narrative of the EU and particularly
Brussels being the enemy. Brussels was
compared with the Soviet regime, which
Um, I think we can all agree that this
kind of comparison is very harmful
because these two things are not
comparable. But once you put these uh
two ideas on the same table, in the same
discussion, memory start to maybe fade,
become more obscure, and it becomes more
difficult to talk about these uh topics.
My question is, is uh historical
revisionism a threat or a gift to our
European identity? And uh I would be
very curious to hear your opinions about
this. Do you think that uh European
identity is uh threatened or
strengthened by historical revisionism?
Do you see a connection between the two?
What do you think?
>> Well, I think that that historical
revisionism, in its political form, it
becomes the deliberate reinterpretation
of past events to serve present-day
ideological goals, as you said. And I
think that in Europe there is like this
tension between legitimate uh
revisionisms, like the natural updating
of historical knowledge as new sources
emerge or new voices are included. And
this uh this kind of ideological
revisionism is especially loaded because
European identity itself is largely
constructed on a shared narrative, like
the two World Wars and the Holocaust.
But when national revisionism dis-
distorts those shared anchors, it does
not just affect a country. I think that
it also affects like the foundations of
what is known to be European. So, uh
when a state rewrites rewrites its past,
it introduces a contradiction into the
European project itself. Because, as you
said, the far-right wing is like
rewriting the past. For example, I'm
from Spain, and I think that Spain
offers a rich and complex example
because it's a fertile ground for this
debate, given the complexity of its 20th
century and the way in which the
transition left like a lot of issues
unresolved because Franco died, and then
transition was built on what is called
the pact of forgetting, like nothing
happened here. And the result is there
are two competing narratives about
Franco and Francoism. Uh firstly, the
that he was like a brutal dictator, and
the other side is like he was a
modernizer who saved Spain from
communism. Uh also, there is the
colonial wound in Spain, like it's an
open wound experiencing a lot of
revisionism nowadays. And it also the
Galician and Basque and Catalan
dimension and all these regionalism.
This matter
beyond Spain's border as as if we
normalize this kind of denialist
revisionist kind of, we are taking part
in like an normalization effect and
forming a a pattern that kind of erases
the moral structure of European values.
Yeah, that's all for me.
>> Well,
as for me, what I realized is that
obviously collective memory, again, what
we were talking about is
the way society remembers the past, and
that's how we shape our national
identities in the present. And speaking
on behalf of Ukraine, or just as a
Ukrainian citizen, uh I know that uh
historical revisionism is a sensitive
issue because uh history, well, let's
say, has often been distorted for
political purposes. And uh as for
Ukraine, we can say a lot of examples,
including man-made famines, different
wars, like a lot of them, the threats
for speaking Ukrainian, uh even not
publicly. Uh Ukrainian language was
banned a lot of times, uh most of them
during uh the Russian Empire period. And
then also during the USSR, now official
bans were uh implied, but still you kind
of could feel that you do not belong if
you don't speak Russian publicly. You
kind of could feel that Ukrainian
culture, Ukrainian language, and if you
identify as a Ukrainian, you kind of
could feel that you are not enough, that
you are maybe not in something we call
a high society, let's say.
>> I would say that obviously, as I said,
Ukrainian history was influenced by
Soviet and Imperial narratives.
>> Not only that, Ukrainian history was
influenced by Soviet and Imperial
narratives, but when you were talking
>> Sorry about Hungary, what I realized is
that that is actually fascinating that
even though because of what was
happening with Ukraine, we still had
pro-Russian people in power even during
the independent period of Ukraine. And
before 2013, we also heard those
narratives all the time. Even though
this was happening, we also people were
actually in need and always wanted to be
a part of European community, to share
European values, and have a path to to
go to European Union. And that's
fascinating because all of our stories
are really different. We're from
different countries. But we can again
say that this is historical revisionism
with the manipulations is a very
powerful tool, and it can be a really
big threat.
>> Well,
maybe
listening to all of your opinions, we
could say and also kind of rethinking
what we've been talking about over the
past days when it comes to who owns the
past and how to fight historical
revisionism in today's age.
One of our answers is resistance. And
this resistance can be
fostering that very collective memory
that
makes us also proud to be coming where
we are coming from. Also, raising your
voice and not being complicit
when something
is incorrect, when something is
obstruct a vision
that we see. So, maybe what we can take
away from today's discussion is uh
be alert, to be critical,
and speak up when history is threatened.
>> So, thank you very much for listening,
and we will see you in the next one.
>> Talking Memories is a production of the
School of European Memories, produced by
Fernanda Zanussi, Moritz Hercel, and
Natalia Papayorgi. Original idea by
Fernanda Zanussi and Cesc Mainzler.
[music] Recording and post-production,
Benjamin Samama. All episodes were
recorded at the Jean Monnet House from
May 4th to 6th, 2016, [music] during the
4th School of European Memories.
This podcast was made possible [music]
with the support of the European
Commission and the European Parliament.
However, the views expressed are those
of the authors, and do not necessarily
reflect those of the institutions.