4.18. Entrepreneurs of memory and other social actors in the construction of memories

In Germany, public practices of remembrance and commemoration are often ritualised and appear to be self-evident. However, depending on their focus and local context, civil society initiatives who engage in remembrance work also encounter defensive reactions. The role of current civil society initiatives that commemorate racist and antisemitic violence in shaping Germany's memory politics and policies has not yet been thoroughly researched. The project 'EZRA – Remembering Racism and Antisemitism' aims to address this gap. It empirically examines such initiatives and the conflicting debates surrounding them. Twenty such initiatives were examined through group discussions. These initiatives are active in three different fields: (1) National Socialist crimes, (2) colonialism, and (3) racist and antisemitic violence after 1945. The research focuses on the following questions: What challenges and conflicts do the initiatives face? How do they address antisemitism and racism? How do they contribute to democratisation? The paper will present empirical findings. There is little to no competition between groups that commemorate Nationalsocialist crimes and those that commemorate colonialism. Many initiatives aim to transform society through their commemorative work. Other initiatives defend themselves against attempts by the state or municipalities to appropriate their work, while they also emphasise their vital role in democratisation. As one initiative put it, 'remembrance work must always be a thorn in the side'. Civil society initiatives encourage the concept of an inclusive and diverse democracy, and some dismiss ritualised commemoration and the instrumentalisation of memory culture. However, some initiatives simply aim to commemorate the deceased publicly, rather than seeking to change society as a whole. Some groups still fight official resistance and they campaign for wider political support. They ask for recognition of their work.

Journalism maintains a special and privileged relationship with society’s collective memory: it both draws upon it for input and context, and contributes to its continual expansion and reinforcement. This relationship becomes particularly intricate in societies marked by internal tensions and conflicts—latent or overt—has been the case in Rwanda for decades. In such contexts, multiple grand narratives of memory coexist, often in contradiction with one another, largely shaped by the power dynamics inherent in each society’s political system. This paper examines the complex intersections between genocide memory and news reporting in Rwanda, addressing the research question: How do Rwandan journalists navigate and represent genocide memories in today’s media landscape? Drawing on a qualitative content analysis of 400 articles published by leading Kinyarwanda-language news outlets between 2012 and 2025, the study identifies key trends and patterns across three dimensions. First, it explores how journalists provide—or fail to provide—context in genocide-memory-sensitive reporting, revealing three recurring patterns: fabricated context, partial context (where opposing perspectives are intentionally omitted), and insufficient contextualization. Second, it investigates the use of metaphors and their implications for framing genocide-related stories. Preliminary findings indicate that metaphors referring to genocide victims and perpetrators often replace the ethnic designations of Tutsi and Hutu. Finally, the paper analyzes processes of heroization and vilification, examining how these align with or diverge from the dominant official narrative. The findings reveal a strong alignment with the government’s discourse on official heroes while also showing that journalists extend these categories beyond state-defined figures.

At a match between Serbia and Switzerland at the 2018 men’s World Championship in football, Serbia’s striker, Aleksandar Mitrović, was brought down in the Swiss penalty area. When no penalty was given, Serbia’s coach, Mladen Krstajić, made a comment on Instagram criticizing the referee’s decision and comparing it to “selective justice” directed against Serbs at the international Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in the Hague.” Asked by a journalist which card he would give the referee, Krstajić responded: “I would just send him to the Hague!” By connecting the referee system in international football with the ICTY, Krstajić contributed to banalizing and ridiculing the international judicial efforts at prosecuting perpetrators of horrendous crimes committed during the wars in Yugoslavia in the 1990s. While the match was already politically charged, due to comments from Serbia’s president and from a Swiss player with Kosovar background, Krstajić’s comments caused massive international reactions, testifying to the impact and visibility of international top football. Since the match was discussed in relation to Serbia’s and Kosovo’s recent history, Krstajić and the Swiss players became highly profiled memory agents, and their presence in media, as well as wider media discussions about them, became parts of transnational and trans-medial negotiation of Southeast European history and Serbia’s role and responsibility in that. Taking the disputes surrounding the Serbia-Switzerland match as point of departure, this paper explores the arena of international football as a certain type of stage for promoting and challenging difficult memory. Following media coverage, I study how claims and debates by footballers are distributed and reacted to by media audiences. Based on these investigations, I propose that memory studies need to pay more attention to mass popular culture when exploring transmissions and negotiations of difficult transnational memory narratives

Conflict defined Europe’s twentieth century and its legacies continue to dominate society today. Historical memories of Europe’s twentieth-century conflicts have been foundational parts of the Brexit campaign (and Euroskepticism more broadly), the recent surge in nationalism across the continent, and how Russia has “justified” their invasion of Ukraine, revealing its centrality to European politics. These problems are particularly intense in areas recovering from ethnic conflict like the former Yugoslavia, Northern Ireland, and the Basque Country. Violence in these regions may be over, but the tensions that helped create and were exacerbated by conflict remain thanks to exclusivist memory cultures about the inter-ethnic conflicts. This paper examines an under-studied way in which polarized memories of conflict are transmitted – soccer. With the return and expansion of the World Cup in 2026, understanding the nexus between soccer, nationalism, and memory is extremely important. Historians have long written about the importance of sports to national identity in the modern era. Eric Hobsbawm said of soccer that “the imagined community of millions seems more real as a team of eleven named people.” But the ways that sports – especially soccer – explicitly enshrine conflict memory has been less studied. Fans have embraced their roles as memory entrepreneurs in post-conflict societies through their presence at commemorative events and the murals they paint. Additionally, some club teams have even embraced this function by highlighting their roles as reservoirs of ethnic identity during conflicts through their museums and cultural programming. This paper analyzes the ways soccer – as a sport that is played across ethnic divides – has become part of the larger post-conflict polarization of the former Yugoslavia, Northern Ireland, and the Basque Country, demonstrating the central role that sports play in maintaining conflict memory and undermining pluralistic democracy across Europe.

The Armenian Genocide of 1915 shattered a centuries-old community and forced the survivors to reinvent their collective life across multiple continents. This paper examines how the Armenian Apostolic Church became a central agent in memorializing the genocide and preserving Armenian identity, both within the Republic of Armenia and throughout the global diaspora. Drawing on archival material, fieldwork in Armenian parishes across Europe and North America, and recent scholarship in memory studies, the analysis highlights the Church’s dual role as a religious institution and a national custodian of historical trauma. In Armenia, the Church frames the genocide within a sacred narrative of martyrdom, embedding remembrance in liturgical calendars, monuments, and pilgrimages that bind religious devotion to civic identity. In the diaspora, where political and cultural contexts vary widely, local parishes adapt these practices to sustain a transnational sense of belonging. Commemorative rituals, theological discourse, and the canonization of the genocide’s victims converge to create what might be called a “sacralized civic memory,” enabling Armenians to negotiate the tension between integration in host societies and loyalty to a shared past. By situating these practices within broader debates on memory and democracy, the paper argues that the Church’s memory work operates as both a counter to denial and a platform for civic engagement. The Armenian case illuminates how religious institutions can shape democratic cultures of remembrance: preserving the moral urgency of historical truth while fostering communal resilience across borders. This study contributes to ongoing conversations about the political and ethical stakes of post-genocide memory and the ways in which faith traditions sustain democratic commitments to justice and recognition.