 |
|||||||||
     |
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
| You are here: 2000 / Workshops, Panels and Seminars / Workshops on Education / Workshop 3 on Education, "Facing Denial in Society and Education" / Presentation by Mr. Stéphane Bruchfeld | |||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Participants Countries and organizations Conference documentation Conference programme 
|
|
|
|
Report from Workshop 3 on Education: "Facing denial in society and education" Presentation by Mr. Per Ahlmark Presentation by Mr. Stéphane Bruchfeld Presentation by Professor Irwin Cotler Presentation by Dr. Shimon Samuels Presentation by Professor Robert Jan van Pelt Presentation by Mr. Stéphane Bruchfeld Bruchfeld, Stéphane Presentation by Stéphane Bruchfeld So-called Holocaust revisionism, including outright denial, was propagated from very early on in Sweden by Swedish antisemitic activists as well as small groups within the Swedish elite driven by nostalgia for the Third Reich, coupled with a strong commitment to the anti-Communism of the Cold War. At the same time, the Holocaust was only very rarely a topic in the classrooms in the schools or universities. The discourse about the Holocaust was developed to a large degree in books, articles and popular culture. Thus, when Holocaust denial in the 1980’s and early 1990’s became more visible, very much through the activities of the Stockholm community radio station Radio Islam and its “chief editor” Ahmed Rami, one might have expected a potential susceptibility to the blandishments of the “revisionist” message. Not least, schools and teachers appeared by and large ill-equipped to deal with this “revisionist” campaign. In late 1996 and early 1997 a survey of 8,000 school students in the age range 12-18 years was conducted by the Centre for Research in International Migration and Ethnic Relations (CEIFO) at Stockholm University. The report was published in June 1997. When made public the media at once fastened especially upon a question concerning certainty about the Holocaust, although this particular problematic was not the main focus of the survey. The result was interpreted by many journalists as saying that one third of the Swedish students denied or doubted the Holocaust. The researchers however had stated that lack of certainty was “likely to be due more to insufficient knowledge than to an adherence to ‘revisionist’ beliefs and active doubts.” In fact, certainty that the Holocaust took place clearly grew both with age and level of education. Further, in the group of students with the consistently most positive set of attitudes certainty was very high, in stark contrast to the opposite group. At the same time that the Living History project was launched in mid-1997, a major teacher survey was in its finishing stages. The survey examined teachers ideas and attitudes with regard to the multicultural school of today, and included questions about the Holocaust and attitudes toward Jews (A. Lange, E. Hedlund, CEIFO 1998). Close to 8,000 teachers were asked to respond to the survey, which was much more comprehensive than the student survey. The teachers’ certainty that the Holocaust took place was practically total. However, the responses to a question concerning the proportion of Jewish children in Europe killed during World War II indicated a marked lack of awareness regarding the relative dimensions of the Holocaust. Can we draw any conclusions from the results of these two surveys? First of all, it is important to keep in mind that they were not about the knowledge and certainty about the Holocaust. These aspects formed only a minor element of the surveys. Secondly, the number of relevant questions was minimal and many more and deeper studies will have to be conducted to form a clearer picture. It is also difficult to say to what extent the Swedish experience can be generalized. Tentatively though, despite the insufficiencies of the Swedish educational system with regard to Holocaust education, Holocaust denial appears not to have created or reinforced doubts in Sweden about the Holocaust in any major way. On the whole, few seem prepared to entertain the idea that nothing, or almost nothing, occurred. This does not mean that “revisionist” propaganda is totally ineffective. Maybe its effect can best be described as a process of osmosis. There is no single solution to the problem of Holocaust denial, but it is probably safe to say that one of the best is to fight it by increasing knowledge about the Holocaust. The Swedish surveys suggest a correlation between the general level of education and certainty about the Holocaust’s historical reality, as well as between a general adherence to democratic and humanistic values and certainty about the Holocaust. Therefore, it will be both interesting and necessary to monitor closely the outcome of campaigns such as the Swedish Living History project. >> Back to top |
|
|
|
Introduction Opening Session: Messages and speeches Plenary Sessions: Messages and speeches Workshops, Panels and Seminars
Other Activities |
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
| For information about this production and the Stockholm International Forum Conference Series please go to www.humanrights.gov.se or contact Information Rosenbad, SE-103 33 Stockholm, Sweden | |||||||||