|
View the H-German Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in H-German's July 2006 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in H-German's July 2006 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the H-German home page.
[Two posts from this thread follow. Coming next week: a report we've commissioned from Moshe Zimmermann, a longtime observer of German soccer and German nationalism. Further discussion is, of course, welcome, but please note that we are not able to publish brief, anecdotal responses. Some degree of historical context is essential. - Ed.] From: Bergerson, Andrew S. <BergersonA@umkc.edu> Subject: Boettcher on the World Cup in Wolfenbüttel Date: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 I have to confess that, prior to this soccer season, I have never watched a single soccer match. But I have been in Hildesheim (with visits to Hannover and Berlin) for the last six months and given the high drama surrounding the games, I watched and enjoyed the Weltmeisterschaft on many levels. Some of the games were really great, but apart from the very exciting matches, the larger political and cultural issues did not just start with the flag-waving, but began weeks before with the fear of anti-foreigner violence, public debate about the legitimacy of posting 'no-go' zones in East Germany for foreign visitors (particularly of darker complexions), and the need among Germans to prove to the world that they can be gastfreundlich: i. e. tolerant and open to what we in the US call 'diversity'. The latter is a particularly poignant mix of questions as they are expressed in everyday life: dealing with the Nazi past, the neo-Nazi present, Ossie-Wessie tensions, and Welfare Reform. None of these are particularly new issues to the German public sphere or in everyday practice, however. What seems to me to be new is the pride (and relief) with which the Germans are slapping themselves on the back for having succeeded in avoiding any major incidents (with the exception of, I believe, some English hooligans after one match) as well as achieving place #3 in the ranks of teams (with hopes for even better accomplishments in four years). The point is not that foreigners (like me) might congratulate them for their accomplishment of a safe (and also exciting and fun) Weltmeisterschaft (or being #3), but that they are congratulating themselves about these accomplishments, and that they are expressing this feeling as Stolz, indeed, as Stolz for being German. This is no small change in the country where you can still hear people say, or read on posters, the exact opposite: that one is ashamed to be German. The political repercussions of this kind of collecitve shame are not insignificant. So I wonder whether the very recent change associated with the World Cup is taking place not on the right, where there has been a consistent and growing threat of neonazis in the Bundesrepublik for some time, together with resentment against this shame and lots of nationalist flagwaving, but on the center-left, where it may have become acceptable to be proud to be German again. I have had some conversations with progressive Germans, actively involved in dealing with the Nazi past in the public sphere (and not just academics), who have expressed lots of misgivings about the proliferation of Schwarz- Rot-Gold in the public sphere (complaining that they have never seen so many flags on cars; joking with their kids about getting one if only the German team gets into the semi-finals; etc.) and yet some are cautiously suggesting that, since Fussball is 'only a game', it is ok, but that they would worry if it was for 'real.' When confronting this problem, one news program quoted Hans-Ulrich Wehler as saying (and I am paraphrasing from memory) that it should not be seen as a troubling change precisely for this reason: flag-waving is only an expression of a carnevalesque atmosphere (i. e. serves only to release social tensions and will pass as soon as carneval is over). Whether or not Wehler said this, I believe that this interpretation is wrong--to dismiss the shift in behavior as a temporary circumstance created by an abnormal situation (anthropologists call it: communitas) that can be ignored now that we have returned to daily life (societas). It is precisely in such extraordinary moments that political cultures, and everyday practice, can be changed readily, especially because these experiments with new behaviors can be dismissed as exceptional. I suspect that this is precisely what the Germans, particularly in the center-left, are exploring anxiously: what new practices they can take back with them from the Weltmeisterschaft into their daily lives without losing their committment to dealing with the Nazi past, the neonazi present, being good hosts (i. e. open to foreigners), etc., or being seen by the rest of the world as having done so. Meanwhile, I agree with the earlier commentator: in abandoning flags and flag waving entirely, the German Left has left open the field of German political symbols to the Right (perhaps to reject totalitarian abuses of such symbols). This is a strategic mistake. In an ideal world, there would be no flags; but in the real world there are. Of all the German flags, Schwarz-Rot-Gold is one of the best: one which could be associated not with just with the early nationalist movements of the 19th century but with the progressive achievements of German democracy in the 20th century. I would hope that the Weltmeisterschaft has provided progressives in Germany with an unexpected opportunity to recolonize this political symbol and reinvest it with those meanings in everyday life: of tolerance and fair play precisely because of the Nazi past. Andrew Stuart Bergerson University of Missouri-Kansas City From: Dieter K. Buse <DBuse@laurentian.ca> Subject: Boettcher on the World Cup in Wolfenbüttel Date: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 Dear colleagues, In Canada, with very few exception, we have received journalists' accounts from Berlin and other German cities which almost unanimously proclaim the games as a wonderful gathering: fun in the streets and pubs, well organized but not over organized, great exchanges among people from across the globe and a fine cosmopolitan festival. Many comments pointed out that Neo-Nazism and British hooliganism were kept under control. From my own perspective I would like to add that I thought that the games were an illustration of the long-term other aspects or sides of the German past which include cosmopolitanism, civility and, at the local and personal level, earthy Gemuetlichkeit that have received insufficient attention. Further, the games represented federalism and regionalism at work (perhaps as author of a descriptive work on the present-day regions I am biased). I also noted how few flags seemed in evidence at the game in Dortmund. Finally, I wondered if H-Italy was having a discussion about the incredible outpouring of pro- Italian sentiments (even here in our many little Italies) and whether it was combined with hints at the possible reemergence of fascism or about Italian gassing and massacres in Ethiopia (for which no apologies or compensation have ever been offered). I doubt it, just as I doubt that the most flag-waving country of the present would combine a discussion of a sporting event to include the lack of recognition for illegal bombing of Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia or Iraq. The surprise about Germany and these games is surely that the past has been acknowledged but not forgotten by the display of moderation. As historians of Germany we should all worry about that country's past and the implications for the present, but as citizens of the contemporary world we might want to worry more about the present breakers of international law and rules. Hope everyone is having a fine summer Dieter K. Buse, Laurentian University
 Humanities & Social Sciences Online 
|