Selective Perceptions: The Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust

Abstract

Adamson's conference report focuses on those speeches delivered at the Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust that evinced a nationalistic tendency, particularly those given by delegates from Bulgaria, Latvia, Hungary and Turkey. He addresses the relationship between social conditions and solidarity with local Jewish communities, and shows, for instance, that whereas the representatives from Latvia and Turkey suggested that hardship was likely to threaten solidarity, the representative from Bulgaria argued rather that hardship was likely to enhance it. Another issue taken up concerns how moments from the historical past are put to use as constituents of national myths: whereas the speakers extolled resistance against the Nazis as the heroic acts of individuals, any collaboration was drained of intelligibility and a sense of responsibility, and reduced to being merely an episode of the national tragedy. Adamson also observes that the representatives from Latvia and Hungary put considerable emphasis upon their respective domestic legal statutes and their prohibition of racial hatred; this, he argues, is a very weak source of moral justification. Adamson then goes on to analyse and criticize the speeches delivered by the Bulgarian and Latvian delegates. On this subject he concludes that, in terms of, for instance, self-sacrifice or resistance against the Nazis, the former's speech considerably exaggerated the benevolent character of the Bulgarian people as a whole; it also, falsely, suggested that deportations of Jews in particular areas outside Bulgarian borders were not carried out by ‘Bulgarians’, and described, contrary to the evidence, the Bulgarian parliament as unanimously opposed to antisemitism. The Latvian delegate, in her turn, offered a rather subjective theory of the origins of ‘barbarity’ that was historically dubious.