By Bartosz Animucki
UCR Class of 2016
On November 11th, many European nations celebrated the end of the First World War. For Poles, this date signifies the resumption of independence after 123 years of foreign rule that ended together with World War II. Traditionally, this occasion is celebrated with re-enactments of historical events, a march and an address by the President. In the most recent years, however, young right-wing groups have increasingly disrupted the celebrations.
This year, a sizeable crowd disrupted the Warsaw parade by setting fire to a guard booth in front of the Russian embassy and to a rainbow monument on Zbawiciela Square. This happened shortly after a mob had rampaged through an abandoned building occupied by a left-wing anarchist group, all the while shouting phrases such as “Let’s gas the fags!” The police detained 26 masked rioters until the skirmish was finally diffused. The country’s leaders, even those affiliated with right-wing parties, expressed disgust at the incident.
This event draws attention to the recent surge in popularity of nationalist groups throughout Eastern Europe. The same can be observed in virtually all of Europe, with the same themes of homophobia, ethnic intolerance and euro-scepticism. However, the rhetoric of these groups is somewhat different from their Western counterparts. While the far right in the West is most frequently seen calling for more aggressive public policies, such as restrictive immigration laws, the Eastern groups seem to shamelessly focus on simply spreading hatred towards Jews, gays, Roma and their historical nemeses, chiefly Russia. The exact mix of the three objects of hate speech varies widely by country. Each country even has specific organizations which are created to focus on whatever is the most controversial topic of public debate in that country.
For example, the Hungarian party Jobbik, which has received support from 16% of Hungarian voters in the most recent parliamentary elections, has gathered most of their supporters from their strict anti-Roma stance. In fact, the party went so far as to use a paramilitary-style organization, the “Hungarian Guard,” to make a point. Unarmed but combative, the Guard were perceived by Jobbik supporters as a sort of “anti-Gypsy defense force,” decked out in a fascist-style uniform.
The Roma are only a 2% minority in Hungary and are perceived to be lazy, opportunistic and criminal by the majority of the population. The political situation is exacerbated by the financial crisis, which pushed the public finances to the edge of insolvency. As the government’s austerity measures started to take effect, even more voters turned to the euro-sceptical Jobbik. It’s a very familiar scheme – the one party that addresses the most pressing concerns with the most radical solutions quickly gains support, even if its leaders have no experience in actually running a country.
Perhaps more troubling is the situation in Lithuania. As one might expect, it is illegal to publicly use Soviet or Nazi imagery or symbols. However, a court ruled that the swastika is not subject to this law as it belongs more to “Lithuania’s historical heritage rather than symbols of Nazi Germany”. In the Baltic States, it is not uncommon to see SS uniforms being displayed in an aura of national pride, or to hear Nazi war criminals praised as “people who lost their lives for [their country’s] future”. With a historical perspective, this is somewhat understandable given the much stronger anti-Russian sentiment that stems from the Soviet occupation of the area.
All in all, many countries in Eastern Europe seem to be developing far right political movements, often promoting homophobia, xenophobia, anti-democratic stances and the celebration of war criminals. It will be interesting to see whether the rise of such parties is a short-lived hype, or whether they will become long-lasting cornerstones of these countries. Ultimately for the time being, the violent methods used by these groups to promote their message make them more on the side of wrong than right and prevent them from being universally accepted in their homeland or abroad.
Bartosz Animucki, Class of 2016, Math and Computer Science major from Brussels, Belgium.
Why look at the east? it is happening here and in belgium and basically everywhere, why again talk about sth you do not know anything about in practice? start with something you know best just start with belgium, before you start with analysing other countries, again you probably have no clue or insight into the reason of why these people vote like this or think like this.
This is a very well written article. However, I would like to point out a few facts regarding the Balitcs that I think are misinterpreted. First, swastika or the Thunder cross is indeed a symbol that was used by the Ancient Balts even before Chiristianity. For many people it still has that meaning and it is not related to Nazism in any way, so while the Lithuanian court ruling seems very odd to an outsider, it is understandable if one is familiar with the culture.
Secondly, there are no Nazi war criminals remembered as national heroes. The Baltics were under Nazi occupation from 1941 till 1945 and in 1943 as a result of losses in the Eastern front, the Nazi formed legions in the occupied Estonia and Latvia. These were units fighting in the front, not committing war crimes. While most of these men were mobilized and had no choice, some indeed chose it voluntarily because they had seen the mass repressions carried out by the soviet occupation which lasted from June 1940 till July 1941 and is known as the “terrible year”. They did not want the soviet occupation to return. In my opinion, the men from the Baltic countries fighting under the Nazi flag were actually victims of the conflict between the two murderous regimes. They were deceived and many believed they were actually fighting for their country. Although I do not think it is appropriate to remember these men as national heroes who fought for freedom, I think it is even less acceptable to call them war criminals.
Although your point about the swastika is legitimate, it is pointless to say that there were not Baltic citizens who were Nazis. Portraying them as exclusively fighting a front is just wrong. One simply wonders how the Nazis managed so much in so little time, but then you remember the rampant antisemitism that colored the region and then you realize they had help—the locals, most especially in EE and the Baltic. But then again, it must be nice to rid the poor occupied of the guilt of what they’ve done, and simply call THEM the victims. This reminds me of the Kielce incident, which is another example of how easy it is to forget when history is purposefully changed to their benefit.
Thank you for the comment! About the Baltic states, I see exactly what you mean – and I’m sorry for any misphrasing or inaccuracy on this rather sensitive topic. After all, not everyone associated with the Nazi regime commited war crimes themselves.