What do you think?
Rate this book
سرزمینها� شبحزد�
Rosenberg's previous book, Children of Cain, dealt with the change from dictatorship to democracy in South America. Here, she approaches a similar theme in Eastern Europe after the fall of Communism, telling a series of riveting human stories to illuminate the paradox that rabid anti-Communism at times resembles Communism. In the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland and the former East Germany, she talks to erstwhile dissidents now victimized because they are named in old police registers; to low-level agents accused of crimes that were not crimes when committed; and to high officials who now run things just like before. She convincingly suggests that the best antidote to Communism may be, not revenge, but "tolerance and the rule of law."
564 pages, Paperback
First published April 25, 1995
46 people are currently reading
2,477 people want to read
About the author
Tina Rosenberg
10books30followersTina Rosenberg, the winner of a MacArthur grant, is a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine and a former member of the Times editorial board. Her book The Haunted Land won the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews
February 27, 2022
The Haunted Land: Facing Europe's Ghosts After Communism, Tina Rosenberg
The Haunted Land: Facing Europe's Ghosts After Communism written by American journalist Tina Rosenberg and published by Random House in 1995, won the 1996 Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction and the 1995 National Book Award for Nonfiction. On the efforts of peoples and government of Germany, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia to confront their pasts.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز پانزدهم ماه آگوست سال2005میلادی
عنوان: سرزمینها� شبح� زده؛ نویسنده: تینا روزنبرگ؛ مترجم: فروغ پوریاوری؛ تهران، علم، سال1383؛ در687 ص؛ شابک9644053869؛ چاپ دیگر: تهران، ثالث، سال1387؛ در564ص؛ شابک9789643803438؛ موضوع: تاریخ اروپای شرقی از نویسندگان ایالات متحده آمریکا - سده20م
درباره ی تلا‌ش‌ها� مردمان و دولت‌ها�: «آلمان»، «لهستان»، «چک» و «اسلواکی»، برای رویارو شدن با گذشته� های کمونیستی� آنهاست؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 16/02/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ 07/12/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
The Haunted Land: Facing Europe's Ghosts After Communism written by American journalist Tina Rosenberg and published by Random House in 1995, won the 1996 Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction and the 1995 National Book Award for Nonfiction. On the efforts of peoples and government of Germany, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia to confront their pasts.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز پانزدهم ماه آگوست سال2005میلادی
عنوان: سرزمینها� شبح� زده؛ نویسنده: تینا روزنبرگ؛ مترجم: فروغ پوریاوری؛ تهران، علم، سال1383؛ در687 ص؛ شابک9644053869؛ چاپ دیگر: تهران، ثالث، سال1387؛ در564ص؛ شابک9789643803438؛ موضوع: تاریخ اروپای شرقی از نویسندگان ایالات متحده آمریکا - سده20م
درباره ی تلا‌ش‌ها� مردمان و دولت‌ها�: «آلمان»، «لهستان»، «چک» و «اسلواکی»، برای رویارو شدن با گذشته� های کمونیستی� آنهاست؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 16/02/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ 07/12/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
December 8, 2016
Author Tina Rosenberg never simplifies the immense complexity of the issues which inform her story. If anything, she dives right in, fully immersing her reader in the formidable challenges the three states� Czechoslovakia, Poland, and East Germany—faced in their rocky transition from communism to democracy just after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. The question the book raises is who is to blame for the crimes of the communist era and who should be punished? Scenes of great political or legal or social complexity are described until the reader begins to feel the earth shifting underfoot, the tale is so dense, but then comes a gradually dawning clarity. In this sense the book reminds me—not in its diction or style so much as in its relentless intellectual rigor—of at his best. This is the highest praise I can offer any writer. I particularly want to cite Naipaul's two Islam books and the three books on India. The Haunted Land is solid throughout but the penultimate chapter, "The Conversation," in which Stasi personnel and collaborators try to justify their spying on friends and associates, will set your hair on fire. These are absolutely astounding flights of Trumpian thinking. Good grief. Winner of the National Book Award for Nonfiction in 1995 and the Pulitzer Prize in 1996.
July 21, 2021
تینا روزنبرگ نویسنده کتاب سرزمین های شبح زده یک دهه پس از فروپاشی کمونیسم به کشورهای اروپای شرقی ، چک اسلاواکی ، لهستان و آلمان شرقی سفر کرده تا مردمانی را بیابد که در آن دوران خوف و وحشت تردید و سوظن نقش قربانی را بازی می کردند اما غافل از آنکه خود سهمی در این سیستم وحشت و ترور داشته اند .
روزنبرگ در این کتاب به تلاش های مردم و دولت ها در جهت روبرو شدن با گذشته و رفتار متفاوت آنها در کشورهای مختلف پرداخته ، سفر پر ماجرای او از چک اسلاواکی شروع شده ، رودلف زوکال یکی از فعالان برجسته حقوق بشر که عمر خود را در راه مبارزه با رژیم کمونیستی گذرانده موضوع کتاب خانم روزنبرگ است . این استاد اقتصاد که از تدریس در دانشگاه محروم شده بود و همسر او حق کارنداشته و فرزندانش هم از ورود به دانشگاه منع شده بودند در فردای پس از آزادی چک اسلاواکی خود قربانی قانونی به نام لوس تراسه می شود ، قانوی که هدف آن یافتن افرادی بوده که با مشارکت هر چند کوچک یا سکوت خود به ادامه استبداد دامن زده بودند .
او سپس به لهستان سفر می کند ، ملتی که به گفته روزنبرگ سابقه ای طولانی در مقاومت هر چند با ناامیدی در برابر کشورهای همسایه خود ( آلمان و شوروی ) دارد ، ویچخ یاروزلسکی آخرین رئیس جمهور لهستان کمونیست ، فردی که نقشی دوگانه در سرکوب و سپس هدایت لهستان به سوی انتخابات آزاد داشته ، کسی که در دادگاه خود تبرئه شده و فردی که استدلال او یعنی شری کوچک برای دفع شر بزرگ در تاریخ ماندگار شده ، همانند معمایی توجه خانم روزنبرگ را به خود جلب کرده است .
نویسنده یاروزلسکی را قضاوت نمی کند ، لحن او سرشار از تعجب و شگفتی ایست که چگونه اعمال یک فرد در مقام رییس جمهوری کشور اگرچه منجر به کشته شدن 100 نفر و بازداشت هزاران نفر می شود اما در عین حال کشور را هم از حمله شوروی نجات می دهد ، حمله ای که کشته شدگان بیشتری و ویرانه های فراوان به جای می گذاشت و اثری قطعی و ویران کننده هم بر آینده لهستان می داشت .
به راستی او را چگونه باید قضاوت کرد ؟ شاید تعریف عدالت از دیدگاه امانوئل کانت بتواند اندکی در روشن کردن جایگاه یاروزلسکی و اعمال او مفید) باشد .)
اما روسای جمهور و استادان دانشگاه موضوع کتاب خانم روزنبرگ نیستند ، او در آلمان شرقی به طور مفصل به نقش تک تک افراد در یک جامعه کمونیستی یا استبدادی پرداخته ، چهار سربازی که از دیوار برلین پاسداری می کردند و با شلیک خود باعث مرگ فردی غیرنظامی شده بودند بهانه ای برای خانم نویسنده شده تا نقش افراد یک جامعه را در تقویت استبداد بررسی کند .
نتیجه ای که خانم روزنبرگ بدست آورده حیرت انگیز است ، هر فردی اگر چه تنها به واسطه زیستن در جامعه کمونیستی یک قربانی بود ، اما با کار کردن در همین سیستم متملق و چاپلوس پرور و البته بی لیاقت ، با شرکت در راه پیمایی حکومتی روز جهانی کارگر ، هر فردی عملا یک شریک جرم و
یکی ازچرخ دنده های ماشین سرکوب هم بوده است .
در پایان خانم روزنبرگ برای کشوری که از حکومت دیکتاتوری بیرون آمده و به سوی دموکراسی حرکت کرده است دو مجموعه تعهد را بر شمرده است ، نخستین مسئولیت آن در قبال قربانیان آن است ، در قبال خانواده های آنهایی که به قتل رسیده اند ، یا شکنجه شدند ، آسیب جسمی دیدند ، به زندان افتادند و یا مفقود شده و هرگز پیدا نشده اند . عذرخواهی رسمی ، پرداخت غرامت ، محاکمه جنایتکاران و پاکسازی آنان بخشی از ابزارهای یک حکومت آزاد برای جبران این گونه از خسارت هاست .
اما وظیفه دوم و البته مهمتر مسئولیت حکومت در قبال آینده کشور است ، تضمین اینکه حکومت دیکتاتوری هرگز باز نمی گردد ، ایجاد یک فرهنگ سیاسی جدید و دموکراتیک و البته نبش قبر تاریخ یا به قول خانم روزنبرگ چنگ انداختن در تاریخ .
روزنبرگ کتاب خود را با اهمیت دادن به نقش مردم و نه چهره ها و با این نقل قول از یان اوربان روزنامه نگار سرشناس و مخالف حکومت کمونیستی چک به پایان برده است :
موضوع این نیست که بعضی از آنها چه کردند ، موضوع این است که ما چه کردیم
روزنبرگ در این کتاب به تلاش های مردم و دولت ها در جهت روبرو شدن با گذشته و رفتار متفاوت آنها در کشورهای مختلف پرداخته ، سفر پر ماجرای او از چک اسلاواکی شروع شده ، رودلف زوکال یکی از فعالان برجسته حقوق بشر که عمر خود را در راه مبارزه با رژیم کمونیستی گذرانده موضوع کتاب خانم روزنبرگ است . این استاد اقتصاد که از تدریس در دانشگاه محروم شده بود و همسر او حق کارنداشته و فرزندانش هم از ورود به دانشگاه منع شده بودند در فردای پس از آزادی چک اسلاواکی خود قربانی قانونی به نام لوس تراسه می شود ، قانوی که هدف آن یافتن افرادی بوده که با مشارکت هر چند کوچک یا سکوت خود به ادامه استبداد دامن زده بودند .
او سپس به لهستان سفر می کند ، ملتی که به گفته روزنبرگ سابقه ای طولانی در مقاومت هر چند با ناامیدی در برابر کشورهای همسایه خود ( آلمان و شوروی ) دارد ، ویچخ یاروزلسکی آخرین رئیس جمهور لهستان کمونیست ، فردی که نقشی دوگانه در سرکوب و سپس هدایت لهستان به سوی انتخابات آزاد داشته ، کسی که در دادگاه خود تبرئه شده و فردی که استدلال او یعنی شری کوچک برای دفع شر بزرگ در تاریخ ماندگار شده ، همانند معمایی توجه خانم روزنبرگ را به خود جلب کرده است .
نویسنده یاروزلسکی را قضاوت نمی کند ، لحن او سرشار از تعجب و شگفتی ایست که چگونه اعمال یک فرد در مقام رییس جمهوری کشور اگرچه منجر به کشته شدن 100 نفر و بازداشت هزاران نفر می شود اما در عین حال کشور را هم از حمله شوروی نجات می دهد ، حمله ای که کشته شدگان بیشتری و ویرانه های فراوان به جای می گذاشت و اثری قطعی و ویران کننده هم بر آینده لهستان می داشت .
به راستی او را چگونه باید قضاوت کرد ؟ شاید تعریف عدالت از دیدگاه امانوئل کانت بتواند اندکی در روشن کردن جایگاه یاروزلسکی و اعمال او مفید) باشد .)
اما روسای جمهور و استادان دانشگاه موضوع کتاب خانم روزنبرگ نیستند ، او در آلمان شرقی به طور مفصل به نقش تک تک افراد در یک جامعه کمونیستی یا استبدادی پرداخته ، چهار سربازی که از دیوار برلین پاسداری می کردند و با شلیک خود باعث مرگ فردی غیرنظامی شده بودند بهانه ای برای خانم نویسنده شده تا نقش افراد یک جامعه را در تقویت استبداد بررسی کند .
نتیجه ای که خانم روزنبرگ بدست آورده حیرت انگیز است ، هر فردی اگر چه تنها به واسطه زیستن در جامعه کمونیستی یک قربانی بود ، اما با کار کردن در همین سیستم متملق و چاپلوس پرور و البته بی لیاقت ، با شرکت در راه پیمایی حکومتی روز جهانی کارگر ، هر فردی عملا یک شریک جرم و
یکی ازچرخ دنده های ماشین سرکوب هم بوده است .
در پایان خانم روزنبرگ برای کشوری که از حکومت دیکتاتوری بیرون آمده و به سوی دموکراسی حرکت کرده است دو مجموعه تعهد را بر شمرده است ، نخستین مسئولیت آن در قبال قربانیان آن است ، در قبال خانواده های آنهایی که به قتل رسیده اند ، یا شکنجه شدند ، آسیب جسمی دیدند ، به زندان افتادند و یا مفقود شده و هرگز پیدا نشده اند . عذرخواهی رسمی ، پرداخت غرامت ، محاکمه جنایتکاران و پاکسازی آنان بخشی از ابزارهای یک حکومت آزاد برای جبران این گونه از خسارت هاست .
اما وظیفه دوم و البته مهمتر مسئولیت حکومت در قبال آینده کشور است ، تضمین اینکه حکومت دیکتاتوری هرگز باز نمی گردد ، ایجاد یک فرهنگ سیاسی جدید و دموکراتیک و البته نبش قبر تاریخ یا به قول خانم روزنبرگ چنگ انداختن در تاریخ .
روزنبرگ کتاب خود را با اهمیت دادن به نقش مردم و نه چهره ها و با این نقل قول از یان اوربان روزنامه نگار سرشناس و مخالف حکومت کمونیستی چک به پایان برده است :
موضوع این نیست که بعضی از آنها چه کردند ، موضوع این است که ما چه کردیم
May 14, 2007
So. Here's the problem. This is a very excellent book about the effects of Communism on people, even a dozen years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall. It's exhaustively researched, the author's biases and personal feelings on the subjects are expressed in a way that you can fully take them into account, and the human stories that this book relates are moving and important to wrestle with in this modern time.
However, it is 400 pages of bad news. Humans are weak, bureaucracy is strong and destructive, and people turn on each other all the time. Even the processes that people put into place to heal old wounds wind up creating new ones.
On the plus side, this book is gripping, a quick and engaging read, and, oddly, entertaining. It can be very dispiriting, however. I found myself repeatedly telling people around me that I'm very happy not to live in a Communist Country, because, in all likelihood, I'd betray them. That's just what people do, after all.
Not a very inspiring message, but it's good, at times, to be reminded that people who do horrible things are often just ordinary people, nonetheless.
However, it is 400 pages of bad news. Humans are weak, bureaucracy is strong and destructive, and people turn on each other all the time. Even the processes that people put into place to heal old wounds wind up creating new ones.
On the plus side, this book is gripping, a quick and engaging read, and, oddly, entertaining. It can be very dispiriting, however. I found myself repeatedly telling people around me that I'm very happy not to live in a Communist Country, because, in all likelihood, I'd betray them. That's just what people do, after all.
Not a very inspiring message, but it's good, at times, to be reminded that people who do horrible things are often just ordinary people, nonetheless.
September 15, 2022
در مورد سقوط کمونیسم تو سه کشور چکسلواکی، لهستان و آلمان صحبت می‌کن�. بخش لهستان قسمت مورد علاقه� تو کتاب بود. نمی‌تون� یاروزلسکی لهستانو دوست داشته باشم، در عین حال نمی‌تونم� ازش متنفر باشم چون اگه قرار به تنفر باشه گزینه‌ها� به مراتب شایسته‌تر� جلو روم هستن.
February 15, 2019
با وجودی که در سال ۹۷ تا الان کتاب‌ها� خوبی خوندم، به جرئت می‌تون� بگم که «سرزمینها� شبح‌زده� بهترین‌شو� بوده.
کتاب بررسی کلی کشورهای اروپای شرقی یا اون‌طو� که نویسنده می‌گ� «اردوگاه شرق»، به‌طو� ویژه چکسلواکی، لهستان و آلمان شرقی پس از سقوط کمونیسم و مواجه جامعه و قانون مابعد کمونیسم با جنایت‌ه� و جرم‌ها� توتالیتاریسم کمونیستی است.
تینا روزنبرگ، روزنامه‌نگا� و نویسنده یهودی آمریکایی پیش از سقوط کمونیسم سال‌ه� در کشورهای آمریکای لاتین مانند شیلی زندگی کرده بود و کتابی هم درباره استبداد راست‌گرا� کشورهای آمریکای لاتین و چگونگی مواجه قربانیان با فاشیست‌ها� نظامی پس از سقوط نوشته بود. روزنبرگ که از نویسندگان نیویورک تایمز است پس از سقوط کمونیسم چندین بار به اروپای شرقی سفر می‌کن� و با قربانیان، روزنامه‌نگارا� و نویسندگان، پلیس‌ها� مخفی سابق مفصل صحبت و در طول سالها� اولیه پس از سقوط سرگذشت و زندگی‌شو� رو دنبال می‌کن�.
کتاب برخلاف «کمونیسم رفت، ما ماندیم و حتی خندیدیم» تنها به روایت زندگی افراد عادی جامعه و قربانیان تحت لوای حکومت‌ها� کمونیستی و پس از سقوطش نمی‌پردازه� بلکه تحلیل جامعی با در نظر گرفتن زوایای گوناگون مانند نقش شوروی، عملکرد غرب به‌ویژ� آمریکا به‌دس� می‌د�. تحلیلی که ذهن مخاطب رو متوجه تفاوت‌ها� دیکتاتوری‌ها� آمریکای لاتین و اروپای شرقی و همین‌طو� اهمیتِ نگاه به گذشته در مسیر رسیدن به جامعه دموکراتیک و مدنی می‌کن�.
علاوه بر این‌ه� نقبی هم می‌زن� به روند نازی‌زدای� و پاکسازی‌ها� پس از جنگ جهانی دوم.
شیوه بازگویی و گزارش نویسی نویسنده رو هم بسیار دوست داشتم، کتاب شروع درخشان و غافلگیرکننده‌ا� با روایت زندگی ورا و کنود ولنبرگر دارد.
بسیار از کتاب آموختم و از خوندنش لذت بردم اون‌قد� که دلم می‌خوا� یک‌با� دیگه هم بخونمش.
کتاب بررسی کلی کشورهای اروپای شرقی یا اون‌طو� که نویسنده می‌گ� «اردوگاه شرق»، به‌طو� ویژه چکسلواکی، لهستان و آلمان شرقی پس از سقوط کمونیسم و مواجه جامعه و قانون مابعد کمونیسم با جنایت‌ه� و جرم‌ها� توتالیتاریسم کمونیستی است.
تینا روزنبرگ، روزنامه‌نگا� و نویسنده یهودی آمریکایی پیش از سقوط کمونیسم سال‌ه� در کشورهای آمریکای لاتین مانند شیلی زندگی کرده بود و کتابی هم درباره استبداد راست‌گرا� کشورهای آمریکای لاتین و چگونگی مواجه قربانیان با فاشیست‌ها� نظامی پس از سقوط نوشته بود. روزنبرگ که از نویسندگان نیویورک تایمز است پس از سقوط کمونیسم چندین بار به اروپای شرقی سفر می‌کن� و با قربانیان، روزنامه‌نگارا� و نویسندگان، پلیس‌ها� مخفی سابق مفصل صحبت و در طول سالها� اولیه پس از سقوط سرگذشت و زندگی‌شو� رو دنبال می‌کن�.
کتاب برخلاف «کمونیسم رفت، ما ماندیم و حتی خندیدیم» تنها به روایت زندگی افراد عادی جامعه و قربانیان تحت لوای حکومت‌ها� کمونیستی و پس از سقوطش نمی‌پردازه� بلکه تحلیل جامعی با در نظر گرفتن زوایای گوناگون مانند نقش شوروی، عملکرد غرب به‌ویژ� آمریکا به‌دس� می‌د�. تحلیلی که ذهن مخاطب رو متوجه تفاوت‌ها� دیکتاتوری‌ها� آمریکای لاتین و اروپای شرقی و همین‌طو� اهمیتِ نگاه به گذشته در مسیر رسیدن به جامعه دموکراتیک و مدنی می‌کن�.
علاوه بر این‌ه� نقبی هم می‌زن� به روند نازی‌زدای� و پاکسازی‌ها� پس از جنگ جهانی دوم.
شیوه بازگویی و گزارش نویسی نویسنده رو هم بسیار دوست داشتم، کتاب شروع درخشان و غافلگیرکننده‌ا� با روایت زندگی ورا و کنود ولنبرگر دارد.
بسیار از کتاب آموختم و از خوندنش لذت بردم اون‌قد� که دلم می‌خوا� یک‌با� دیگه هم بخونمش.
January 19, 2021
Rosenberg's interviews form a mosaic of snapshots as Eastern Europe emerged from its age of ideology. Her informers recall the excitement of popular democracy movements "... live as if we had democracy in Poland. Don't burn down party headquarters, build your own. Don't worry about the Party or the state. Forget about the government labor unions, found your own ...." Others offer thoughtful consideration of the future, or describe the tragedy of people divided when the past's state secrets are revealed.
February 27, 2021
این کتاب و حدود دو یا سه ماه پیش خوندم ولی الان لازم دیدم که معرفیش کنم.
سرزمین های شبح زده درباره کشورهایی است که چنگال کمونیست تا قلبِ هویت و شخصیت و زندگی مردمان آن کشور فرو رفته و زمانی هم که این چنگال از وجود مردم بیرون کشیده شد جای جراحت و زخمش ماندگار شد. کتاب به اوضاع کشورهای چکسلواکی، لهستان و آلمان شرقی بعد از مرگ استالین می پردازد که مردمش نسبت به کشورهای دیگر تحت لوای کمونیست خواهان تحول و آزادی بودند.
نویسنده به سراغ قربانیان می رود اما این قربانیان مردم عادی کوچه و بازار نبودند بلکه کسانی بودند که آن سیستم را قبول داشتند و دارای منصبی بودند. انسان های تحصیل کرده ، استاد دانشگاه، حقوقدان، اقتصاددان و پزشکانی که از امضا کنندگان منشور حقوق بشر هفتاد و هفت و خواهان اصلاحات و سوسیالیسمی با چهره انسانی بودند. خواهان اصلاحات و چهره انسانی تر سوسیالیسم بیانگر این بود که تا آن زمان این چهره انسانی نبوده و حتما برای ادامه و بقا نیاز به اصلاح دارد که جرم نابخشودنی است چرا که کمونیست هیچ اصلاحی را بر نمی تابد چون خود را بری از هر عیب و ایرادی می بیند و قبول آن یعنی انکار گذشته طلایی خود و لگدمال کردن آرمان هایی که آنقدر برایش هزینه داده بودند.
گرچه پراگ بهاری را تجربه کرد اما با ورود نیروهای شوروی برای سرکوب، این بهار به پایان رسید و از دگراندیشان خواستند که از تهاجم شوروی حمایت کنند و هر کس که از امضای آن سر باز زد از شغل خود اخراج و اجازه کار در هیچ شغلی مگر به کارهای مانند، مأمور سوخت و نگهبان و لای روب و این قبیل نداشتند.
امضا کردن آن منشور و حمایت نکردن از سرکوب شوروی کافی بود تا آنها در زمره دشمن مردم قرار گیرند و خود و خانواده شان از اجتماع کنار انداخته شوند.
سالها بعد که در این کشورها قانون لوس تراسه اعمال شد که به سبب آن گذشته افراد مورد بررسی قرار می گرفت و کسانی که در سیستم قبلی به هر نحوی همکاری و یا جاسوسی می کردند چه آگاهانه چه ناآگاهانه چه از روی اجبار یا اختیار، برچسب می‌خوردن� و از مشاغل حساس و دولتی کنار گذاشته می شدند. از طرفی این قانون مفید بود چرا که سیستم جدید از افراد گذشته پاک می شد اما دگراندیشانی که در گذشته و در سیستم قبل پاکسازی شده و برچسب دشمن مردم بر آنها زده شده بود در سیستم جدید و طبق قانون لوس تراسه نیز هنوز عنصر نامطلوب خوانده می شدند و این نگرانی جدیدی را برای حقوق بشر ایجاد کرد.
مارکس درباره خیلی چیزها اشتباه می‌کر� و این کتاب نتیجه تاثیر اشتباهات فاجعه بار اوست. کشوری که از حکومت دیکتاتوری آزاد می شود مسئولیت های زیادی دارد. اولین مسؤلیتش این است که دیگر از دیکتاتوری به دیکتاتوری بعدی نیفتد. باید پاسخگوی جنایاتی که رخ داد باشد. به خانواده آنهایی که به قتل رساندند، پاسخ دهند و به کسانی که به ناحق به و بی گناه به زندان افتادند و از شغل و تحصیل محروم شدند. و ملت باید فرهنگ سیاسی خود را غنا بخشند تا ایدئولوژی دیگری چنگالش را بر کالبد نیمه جان اندیشه شان فرو نکند.
سرزمین های شبح زده درباره کشورهایی است که چنگال کمونیست تا قلبِ هویت و شخصیت و زندگی مردمان آن کشور فرو رفته و زمانی هم که این چنگال از وجود مردم بیرون کشیده شد جای جراحت و زخمش ماندگار شد. کتاب به اوضاع کشورهای چکسلواکی، لهستان و آلمان شرقی بعد از مرگ استالین می پردازد که مردمش نسبت به کشورهای دیگر تحت لوای کمونیست خواهان تحول و آزادی بودند.
نویسنده به سراغ قربانیان می رود اما این قربانیان مردم عادی کوچه و بازار نبودند بلکه کسانی بودند که آن سیستم را قبول داشتند و دارای منصبی بودند. انسان های تحصیل کرده ، استاد دانشگاه، حقوقدان، اقتصاددان و پزشکانی که از امضا کنندگان منشور حقوق بشر هفتاد و هفت و خواهان اصلاحات و سوسیالیسمی با چهره انسانی بودند. خواهان اصلاحات و چهره انسانی تر سوسیالیسم بیانگر این بود که تا آن زمان این چهره انسانی نبوده و حتما برای ادامه و بقا نیاز به اصلاح دارد که جرم نابخشودنی است چرا که کمونیست هیچ اصلاحی را بر نمی تابد چون خود را بری از هر عیب و ایرادی می بیند و قبول آن یعنی انکار گذشته طلایی خود و لگدمال کردن آرمان هایی که آنقدر برایش هزینه داده بودند.
گرچه پراگ بهاری را تجربه کرد اما با ورود نیروهای شوروی برای سرکوب، این بهار به پایان رسید و از دگراندیشان خواستند که از تهاجم شوروی حمایت کنند و هر کس که از امضای آن سر باز زد از شغل خود اخراج و اجازه کار در هیچ شغلی مگر به کارهای مانند، مأمور سوخت و نگهبان و لای روب و این قبیل نداشتند.
امضا کردن آن منشور و حمایت نکردن از سرکوب شوروی کافی بود تا آنها در زمره دشمن مردم قرار گیرند و خود و خانواده شان از اجتماع کنار انداخته شوند.
سالها بعد که در این کشورها قانون لوس تراسه اعمال شد که به سبب آن گذشته افراد مورد بررسی قرار می گرفت و کسانی که در سیستم قبلی به هر نحوی همکاری و یا جاسوسی می کردند چه آگاهانه چه ناآگاهانه چه از روی اجبار یا اختیار، برچسب می‌خوردن� و از مشاغل حساس و دولتی کنار گذاشته می شدند. از طرفی این قانون مفید بود چرا که سیستم جدید از افراد گذشته پاک می شد اما دگراندیشانی که در گذشته و در سیستم قبل پاکسازی شده و برچسب دشمن مردم بر آنها زده شده بود در سیستم جدید و طبق قانون لوس تراسه نیز هنوز عنصر نامطلوب خوانده می شدند و این نگرانی جدیدی را برای حقوق بشر ایجاد کرد.
مارکس درباره خیلی چیزها اشتباه می‌کر� و این کتاب نتیجه تاثیر اشتباهات فاجعه بار اوست. کشوری که از حکومت دیکتاتوری آزاد می شود مسئولیت های زیادی دارد. اولین مسؤلیتش این است که دیگر از دیکتاتوری به دیکتاتوری بعدی نیفتد. باید پاسخگوی جنایاتی که رخ داد باشد. به خانواده آنهایی که به قتل رساندند، پاسخ دهند و به کسانی که به ناحق به و بی گناه به زندان افتادند و از شغل و تحصیل محروم شدند. و ملت باید فرهنگ سیاسی خود را غنا بخشند تا ایدئولوژی دیگری چنگالش را بر کالبد نیمه جان اندیشه شان فرو نکند.
May 8, 2021
As with many historical books penned just after the fall of Communism this book, written in 1995, has not aged well.
The focus of this book is inherently looking forward for three nations: Czechoslovakia, Poland and Germany. In effect trying to read the tea leaves about what the future holds for these former totalitarian regimes.
The only nation that the author seemed to have any optimism for was unified Germany. In this view she was, as of 2021, correct. She had a very pessimistic view of Czechoslovakia and Poland and missed the mark there.
This book won the Pulitzer Prize in 1996. I found David Remnick’s book on Russia - Lenin’s Tomb - from this same time period to be a much better read on authoritarian transitions. Different countries yes but the same type of study. In Remnick’s case he had too much optimism for Russia.
3.5 stars
The focus of this book is inherently looking forward for three nations: Czechoslovakia, Poland and Germany. In effect trying to read the tea leaves about what the future holds for these former totalitarian regimes.
The only nation that the author seemed to have any optimism for was unified Germany. In this view she was, as of 2021, correct. She had a very pessimistic view of Czechoslovakia and Poland and missed the mark there.
This book won the Pulitzer Prize in 1996. I found David Remnick’s book on Russia - Lenin’s Tomb - from this same time period to be a much better read on authoritarian transitions. Different countries yes but the same type of study. In Remnick’s case he had too much optimism for Russia.
3.5 stars
June 9, 2015
یکی از بهترین کتاب هایی که در مورد اروپای شرقی و آلمان شرقی سابق نوشته شده.کتابی که بی هیچ جانب داری و پیش داوری نشان می دهد که چطور کمونیسم بهترین ، فداکار ترین و هوشمند ترین انسانها را به خود جذب کرده و در مدت کوتاهی آنها را به یک مشت هیولا تبدیل می کند
August 28, 2021
It took me asecond try at this book to get into it. The read turns out to be excellent and very interesting. Worth the time spent reading.
June 2, 2022
یکی از بهترین کارها در حوزه بلوک شرق و انقلاب‌ها� ۱۹۸۹.
روزنبرگ با تعداد زیادی از افراد صنف‌ها� مختلف در لهستان، آلمان شرقی و چکسلواکی رودررو صحبت کرده و سوالاتی رو مطرح می‌کن� که آدم رو شدیدا تحت تاثیر قرار می‌د� و به فکر فرو‌می‌بر�.
فکر کنم برای آشنایی بهتر با شخصیت‌ها� با توجه به حجم کتاب بهتر باشه ابتدا
۱. روایت‌ها� عینی / ترجمه خشایار دیهیمی نشر آگه
۲. انقلاب‌ها� ۱۹۸۹ / ترجمه اشتری نشر ثالث
۳. کمونیسم رفت، ما ماندیم و حتی خندیدیم
رو بخونید و بعد سراغ این کتاب بیاید.
از متن کتاب:
دوستان لاتینی‌ا� می‌گوین� کمونیسم حقیقی هرگز امتحان نشده‌است� اما اگر بعد از ۵۰ سال تلاش هنوز کسی به آن دسترسی نیافته، آدم شروع به پرسیدن این سوال می کند که آیا یک جای این طرح نمی‌لنگد�
روزنبرگ با تعداد زیادی از افراد صنف‌ها� مختلف در لهستان، آلمان شرقی و چکسلواکی رودررو صحبت کرده و سوالاتی رو مطرح می‌کن� که آدم رو شدیدا تحت تاثیر قرار می‌د� و به فکر فرو‌می‌بر�.
فکر کنم برای آشنایی بهتر با شخصیت‌ها� با توجه به حجم کتاب بهتر باشه ابتدا
۱. روایت‌ها� عینی / ترجمه خشایار دیهیمی نشر آگه
۲. انقلاب‌ها� ۱۹۸۹ / ترجمه اشتری نشر ثالث
۳. کمونیسم رفت، ما ماندیم و حتی خندیدیم
رو بخونید و بعد سراغ این کتاب بیاید.
از متن کتاب:
دوستان لاتینی‌ا� می‌گوین� کمونیسم حقیقی هرگز امتحان نشده‌است� اما اگر بعد از ۵۰ سال تلاش هنوز کسی به آن دسترسی نیافته، آدم شروع به پرسیدن این سوال می کند که آیا یک جای این طرح نمی‌لنگد�
May 30, 2009
When Communism came crashing down alongside the Iron Curtain at the turn of the 1990s, it left a changed Eastern Europe to sift through the debris. Former Soviet Bloc countries found themselves struggling to come to terms with the events of the last fifty years, and to establish new systems in the shadow of the old.
This is the conflict Tina Rosenberg portrays in "The Haunted Land." A journalistic veteran of the South American dictatorships, Rosenberg travels to Czechoslovakia, Poland, and the former East Germany, and tries to uncover and analyze the questions and problems they face after Communism. Czechoslovakia is attempting to cleanse itself of those who “collaborated� with the Communists, a task that proves difficult in a society in which complicity can mean being--not evil, but merely unwilling to risk one’s life speaking out. In East Germany, Rosenberg covers the trial of the last Berlin Wall guards to shoot someone attempting to cross the border between East and West Germany, an act that was legal--even demanded--at the time. And in Poland, she follows the course of the man who instituted martial law in that country: did he condemn Poland, or save it?
Rosenberg’s approach is to seek out issues at the personal level, whether that person be a former high official, an ex-resistance fighter, or an everyday citizen who may or may not have been co-opted as a secret police informant. She tells their stories, and through them, the stories of their countries. Though Rosenberg no doubt spent countless hours interviewing her subjects, the book rarely reads like an interview; Rosenberg’s storytelling has more character, plot, suspense, and sheer narrative panache than many novels.
If the focus on the personal provides a unique perspective, it may also give rise to one of the book’s shortcomings; viz., the “big picture� is sometimes ignored in the heady rush of the particular. Readers with no background in the convulsive politics of the Cold War era may occasionally find themselves wanting for context. This deficiency never really impedes the force of the reporting, but some information from another source might be ideal. (I read the book along with sections of Robert Paxton’s "Europe in the Twentieth Century," a textbook that neatly covers the broader political sweep.)
My other qualm with the book is that by now it begs a sequel. Published in 1995, I wonder how these countries have changed thirteen years on; there might at least be another edition with an afterword to update us.
That being said, the broad questions that Rosenberg raises are the important ones, and they have not changed. In the orbit of a totalitarian system (both during and after it), we find challenged our ideas of personal responsibility, freedom, and legality. What is the difference, Rosenberg asks, between trying Nazi soldiers for crimes that didn’t exist at the time, and trying East German border guards for crimes that didn’t exist at the time? What do we do when we are asking who we can blame, and the answer may be “no one in particular�--may even be “ourselves�?
Rosenberg is singularly eloquent in discussing such questions. She has her own opinions, and is not afraid to voice them, but at the same time she leaves plenty of room for the reader to make his own judgments. The comments she does offer are articulate and insightful. Her answers may or may not satisfy every reader, but they will provoke thought, and they should. What Rosenberg has found in the problems of post-Communist Europe is a microcosm of problems everywhere, stunningly incisive particular examples of the most pressing universal dilemmas. She describes the former East Bloc as a “haunted land,� and we discover--perhaps to our discomfort--that the ghosts of this place are the ghosts of us all.
~
This is the conflict Tina Rosenberg portrays in "The Haunted Land." A journalistic veteran of the South American dictatorships, Rosenberg travels to Czechoslovakia, Poland, and the former East Germany, and tries to uncover and analyze the questions and problems they face after Communism. Czechoslovakia is attempting to cleanse itself of those who “collaborated� with the Communists, a task that proves difficult in a society in which complicity can mean being--not evil, but merely unwilling to risk one’s life speaking out. In East Germany, Rosenberg covers the trial of the last Berlin Wall guards to shoot someone attempting to cross the border between East and West Germany, an act that was legal--even demanded--at the time. And in Poland, she follows the course of the man who instituted martial law in that country: did he condemn Poland, or save it?
Rosenberg’s approach is to seek out issues at the personal level, whether that person be a former high official, an ex-resistance fighter, or an everyday citizen who may or may not have been co-opted as a secret police informant. She tells their stories, and through them, the stories of their countries. Though Rosenberg no doubt spent countless hours interviewing her subjects, the book rarely reads like an interview; Rosenberg’s storytelling has more character, plot, suspense, and sheer narrative panache than many novels.
If the focus on the personal provides a unique perspective, it may also give rise to one of the book’s shortcomings; viz., the “big picture� is sometimes ignored in the heady rush of the particular. Readers with no background in the convulsive politics of the Cold War era may occasionally find themselves wanting for context. This deficiency never really impedes the force of the reporting, but some information from another source might be ideal. (I read the book along with sections of Robert Paxton’s "Europe in the Twentieth Century," a textbook that neatly covers the broader political sweep.)
My other qualm with the book is that by now it begs a sequel. Published in 1995, I wonder how these countries have changed thirteen years on; there might at least be another edition with an afterword to update us.
That being said, the broad questions that Rosenberg raises are the important ones, and they have not changed. In the orbit of a totalitarian system (both during and after it), we find challenged our ideas of personal responsibility, freedom, and legality. What is the difference, Rosenberg asks, between trying Nazi soldiers for crimes that didn’t exist at the time, and trying East German border guards for crimes that didn’t exist at the time? What do we do when we are asking who we can blame, and the answer may be “no one in particular�--may even be “ourselves�?
Rosenberg is singularly eloquent in discussing such questions. She has her own opinions, and is not afraid to voice them, but at the same time she leaves plenty of room for the reader to make his own judgments. The comments she does offer are articulate and insightful. Her answers may or may not satisfy every reader, but they will provoke thought, and they should. What Rosenberg has found in the problems of post-Communist Europe is a microcosm of problems everywhere, stunningly incisive particular examples of the most pressing universal dilemmas. She describes the former East Bloc as a “haunted land,� and we discover--perhaps to our discomfort--that the ghosts of this place are the ghosts of us all.
~
April 2, 2021
Book: The Haunted Land: Facing Europe's Ghosts After Communism
Author: Tina Rosenberg
Publisher: Vintage; Reprint edition (19 March 1996)
Language: English
Paperback: 464 pages
Item Weight: 340 g
Dimensions: 13.21 x 2.54 x 20.32 cm
Country of Origin: USA
Price: 1276/-
Since 1991, historians have been to the highest degree challenged to elucidate the cave in of the Soviet Union and Communist rule in Russia. But a deeper predicament, less often addressed, is the existent nature of the Soviet system that was to finish swept away.
Understanding the paroxysms of the recent past in Russia is impractical without an answer to this question, which in turn demands reassessment of a century of turbulent history.
The astonishing events of 1991 implanted an almost universal typecast about the fallen regime.
It is considered, in Russia as well as abroad, to have been a seventy-four-year experiment that failed, or some variation on that theme. This verdict flows from a literal, one-dimensional reading of Communist ideology as the main determinant of the Soviet experience.
It differs from official Stalinist and neo-Stalinist propaganda only in putting a negative sign on that record.
The entire Soviet era is thus presumed to have had a straightforward historical unity as the direct, everlasting pursuit of a catastrophic revolutionary “utopia.�
Today’s common but intensely unhistorical comprehension of the Soviet experience orbits around three basic problems:
1) The character of the Russian Revolution as a long-term process and its implication as the framework for the general development of Russian society.
2) The dare of modernization that Russia faced all during its revolutionary experience along with the indistinct relationship between Russia and the West in this respect.
3) The character of postrevolutionary society in Russia and its association to modern social trends around the globe. The difficulty of reconstruction and social change leads in turn to the third focus of misconstruction, the relation between ideology and reality and the confusion that Communist doctrine has created about the nature of the Soviet system.
Out of an investigation of these foundations of Soviet reality some conclusions can perhaps be derived about the alleged successes and failures of the revolution and about the assumptions that have shaped understanding of the post-Soviet regime.
In 1989 the Communist dictatorships of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union began to fall and popularly elected governments took their place.
This book is about the endeavours of the people and governments of Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia to face their Communist pasts.
The author of this book began her visits in 1991 and, during dozens of trips over the next two and a half years, watched as these nations debated the fates of their Communist Party leaders, border guards who shot fleeing citizens, secret police informers, and spies.
Some countries put their former repressors on trial.
Some passed laws prohibiting them from holding government posts.
Some sponsored truth commissions to write the official story of the dictatorship.
One opened its secret police archive and invited its victims to penetrate the mysteries of the invisible hydra that had been deployed against them.
Individual citizens carried out investigations, wrote novels and made films, and sat down to cry with their own prison interrogators and secret police informers.
These debates took place in chorus at the level of government policy and in the most private chambers of the soul, as people struggled to find their own definitions for connivance and culpability.
The author shows that there is absolutely nothing unique about distorting history to serve political ends. No one did this more methodically than the Communists. History was rewritten as a parade with the workers and peasants and their vanguard, the Communist Party, as protagonist.
All progress was the result of the effort of the valiant proletariat against subjugation by the dominant classes. Twenty-nine centuries of Russian history became twenty-nine centuries of the unalterable and splendid march toward socialism.
Communist orthodoxy remolded the history of the Second World War, erasing the Hitler-Stalin Pact and the contributions of the Western Allies. The war’s laudable uprisings were recast to star Communists. Communism rewrote communism as well. As each new party secretary ascended, his adversaries were airbrushed from photos, their posters removed from rallies and their names from history books.
With a new leader these imperceptible men were rehabilitated, their pictures and names reappeared, and a new set of class enemies vanished.
This was accomplished not by deliberation and reinterpretation but by the official replacement of new instructions for old on how to remember the past. The new guidelines were pronounced accurate and enduring, just as the old ones had been.
And since the very continuation of previous instructions undermined the new ones� correctness and permanence, the most important new guideline was to forget that there had ever been an old one. Under communism, writes Jacques Rupnik, the future was certain; it was the past no one could be sure of.
Communist totalitarianism cast its citizens in the great moral dramas of our time, and it is now up to democratic political and legal systems to write the endings: A soldier follows his orders and kills a man trying to cross the Berlin Wall. A man agrees to inform for the secret police so his dying father will be released from prison. A master spy runs agents who penetrated the most sensitive posts of then-enemy Western governments. A leader cracks down on dissent, claiming his act of repression is preventing a Soviet invasion. A lifelong secret police official assigned to arrest political activists begins to feed these dissidents information.
Which of these people is guilty?
How should they be punished?
Who may sit in judgment?
In her book, Tina Rosenberg has chosen to focus on three of the more opportune countries, Germany, Poland, and Czechoslovakia.
Along with Hungary, these are the places where former dissidents (in the case of Germany, Westerners) took power early, albeit briefly. Here change has been the most dramatic and expectations the highest.
During her research Slovakia gained its independence, and she has written about it in the Czech section, where it provides a useful contrast.
The three-part book has been divided into the following nine chapters:
Part One: Czechoslovakia
1. Enemy of the People
2. Bureaucracy of Spies
3. We are not like them
Part Two: Poland
4. The Dark Glasses
5. The Lesser Evil
6. The Prisoner
Part Three: Germany
7. Watchful and Decisive in the Struggle
8. Official Exorcism
9. The Conversarion
Each section is droopily constructed around a different type of person: a Czech dissident, a Polish Communist leader, and the ordinary Berlin Wall border guards and secret police informers who made the German system hum. Opponents, leaders, and cogs in the system—each life a different rejoinder to communism.
Their stories explore two main issues:
1) The response of human beings to a totalitarian system, and
2) The moral, political, practical, and legal dilemmas of now-democratic societies� attempts to deal with that response.
The pages of the book pose an assortment of serious questions to the reader:
a) Who is guilty in societies where almost everyone collaborated with the system in some way?
b) Who is qualified to judge?
c) Should democratic freedoms also apply to those bent on subverting democracy?
d) How can a society cleanse the guilty from power without falling into repression itself?
e) What does building a democratic culture really mean?
Hundreds of different people have lived these ambiguities. Several appear in this book.
“Men make their own history,� Karl Marx wrote in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, “but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living.�
Marx was incorrect about a great many things, and a number of books have been written, both before 1989 and after, analyzing the disastrous collision of his errors. But he was overwhelmingly correct about the weight of tradition.
The gifts of memory and tradition are among humankind’s greatest blessings.
Many oppressed peoples can thank the weight of tradition for their very survival. But they can also thank it for their continued oppression.
For too many governments, dealing with past injustice has been not a way to break free of it, but the first step in its recurrence.
This book is about breaking that link, which promises most of those who survived communism’s heartrending past a tragic future as well.
You can grab a copy if you choose.
Author: Tina Rosenberg
Publisher: Vintage; Reprint edition (19 March 1996)
Language: English
Paperback: 464 pages
Item Weight: 340 g
Dimensions: 13.21 x 2.54 x 20.32 cm
Country of Origin: USA
Price: 1276/-
Since 1991, historians have been to the highest degree challenged to elucidate the cave in of the Soviet Union and Communist rule in Russia. But a deeper predicament, less often addressed, is the existent nature of the Soviet system that was to finish swept away.
Understanding the paroxysms of the recent past in Russia is impractical without an answer to this question, which in turn demands reassessment of a century of turbulent history.
The astonishing events of 1991 implanted an almost universal typecast about the fallen regime.
It is considered, in Russia as well as abroad, to have been a seventy-four-year experiment that failed, or some variation on that theme. This verdict flows from a literal, one-dimensional reading of Communist ideology as the main determinant of the Soviet experience.
It differs from official Stalinist and neo-Stalinist propaganda only in putting a negative sign on that record.
The entire Soviet era is thus presumed to have had a straightforward historical unity as the direct, everlasting pursuit of a catastrophic revolutionary “utopia.�
Today’s common but intensely unhistorical comprehension of the Soviet experience orbits around three basic problems:
1) The character of the Russian Revolution as a long-term process and its implication as the framework for the general development of Russian society.
2) The dare of modernization that Russia faced all during its revolutionary experience along with the indistinct relationship between Russia and the West in this respect.
3) The character of postrevolutionary society in Russia and its association to modern social trends around the globe. The difficulty of reconstruction and social change leads in turn to the third focus of misconstruction, the relation between ideology and reality and the confusion that Communist doctrine has created about the nature of the Soviet system.
Out of an investigation of these foundations of Soviet reality some conclusions can perhaps be derived about the alleged successes and failures of the revolution and about the assumptions that have shaped understanding of the post-Soviet regime.
In 1989 the Communist dictatorships of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union began to fall and popularly elected governments took their place.
This book is about the endeavours of the people and governments of Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia to face their Communist pasts.
The author of this book began her visits in 1991 and, during dozens of trips over the next two and a half years, watched as these nations debated the fates of their Communist Party leaders, border guards who shot fleeing citizens, secret police informers, and spies.
Some countries put their former repressors on trial.
Some passed laws prohibiting them from holding government posts.
Some sponsored truth commissions to write the official story of the dictatorship.
One opened its secret police archive and invited its victims to penetrate the mysteries of the invisible hydra that had been deployed against them.
Individual citizens carried out investigations, wrote novels and made films, and sat down to cry with their own prison interrogators and secret police informers.
These debates took place in chorus at the level of government policy and in the most private chambers of the soul, as people struggled to find their own definitions for connivance and culpability.
The author shows that there is absolutely nothing unique about distorting history to serve political ends. No one did this more methodically than the Communists. History was rewritten as a parade with the workers and peasants and their vanguard, the Communist Party, as protagonist.
All progress was the result of the effort of the valiant proletariat against subjugation by the dominant classes. Twenty-nine centuries of Russian history became twenty-nine centuries of the unalterable and splendid march toward socialism.
Communist orthodoxy remolded the history of the Second World War, erasing the Hitler-Stalin Pact and the contributions of the Western Allies. The war’s laudable uprisings were recast to star Communists. Communism rewrote communism as well. As each new party secretary ascended, his adversaries were airbrushed from photos, their posters removed from rallies and their names from history books.
With a new leader these imperceptible men were rehabilitated, their pictures and names reappeared, and a new set of class enemies vanished.
This was accomplished not by deliberation and reinterpretation but by the official replacement of new instructions for old on how to remember the past. The new guidelines were pronounced accurate and enduring, just as the old ones had been.
And since the very continuation of previous instructions undermined the new ones� correctness and permanence, the most important new guideline was to forget that there had ever been an old one. Under communism, writes Jacques Rupnik, the future was certain; it was the past no one could be sure of.
Communist totalitarianism cast its citizens in the great moral dramas of our time, and it is now up to democratic political and legal systems to write the endings: A soldier follows his orders and kills a man trying to cross the Berlin Wall. A man agrees to inform for the secret police so his dying father will be released from prison. A master spy runs agents who penetrated the most sensitive posts of then-enemy Western governments. A leader cracks down on dissent, claiming his act of repression is preventing a Soviet invasion. A lifelong secret police official assigned to arrest political activists begins to feed these dissidents information.
Which of these people is guilty?
How should they be punished?
Who may sit in judgment?
In her book, Tina Rosenberg has chosen to focus on three of the more opportune countries, Germany, Poland, and Czechoslovakia.
Along with Hungary, these are the places where former dissidents (in the case of Germany, Westerners) took power early, albeit briefly. Here change has been the most dramatic and expectations the highest.
During her research Slovakia gained its independence, and she has written about it in the Czech section, where it provides a useful contrast.
The three-part book has been divided into the following nine chapters:
Part One: Czechoslovakia
1. Enemy of the People
2. Bureaucracy of Spies
3. We are not like them
Part Two: Poland
4. The Dark Glasses
5. The Lesser Evil
6. The Prisoner
Part Three: Germany
7. Watchful and Decisive in the Struggle
8. Official Exorcism
9. The Conversarion
Each section is droopily constructed around a different type of person: a Czech dissident, a Polish Communist leader, and the ordinary Berlin Wall border guards and secret police informers who made the German system hum. Opponents, leaders, and cogs in the system—each life a different rejoinder to communism.
Their stories explore two main issues:
1) The response of human beings to a totalitarian system, and
2) The moral, political, practical, and legal dilemmas of now-democratic societies� attempts to deal with that response.
The pages of the book pose an assortment of serious questions to the reader:
a) Who is guilty in societies where almost everyone collaborated with the system in some way?
b) Who is qualified to judge?
c) Should democratic freedoms also apply to those bent on subverting democracy?
d) How can a society cleanse the guilty from power without falling into repression itself?
e) What does building a democratic culture really mean?
Hundreds of different people have lived these ambiguities. Several appear in this book.
“Men make their own history,� Karl Marx wrote in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, “but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living.�
Marx was incorrect about a great many things, and a number of books have been written, both before 1989 and after, analyzing the disastrous collision of his errors. But he was overwhelmingly correct about the weight of tradition.
The gifts of memory and tradition are among humankind’s greatest blessings.
Many oppressed peoples can thank the weight of tradition for their very survival. But they can also thank it for their continued oppression.
For too many governments, dealing with past injustice has been not a way to break free of it, but the first step in its recurrence.
This book is about breaking that link, which promises most of those who survived communism’s heartrending past a tragic future as well.
You can grab a copy if you choose.
October 10, 2020
I struggled to read the first part of the book on Czechoslovakia, thoroughly enjoyed the second part on Poland, and again struggled with the last part on East Germany. I think the differences between the parts for me was familiarity with key players. For Czechoslovakia, much was kept from the Western media. For East Germany, it seemed clear Gorbachov's USSR was crumbling, like the wall and as much attention was paid to Gorbachov's fall, if not more. For Poland, the efforts of Solidarity played out on the nightly news and Lech Wałęsa was portrayed as a mythic hero. Even those of us in little Idaho were enchanted with this modern patriot fighting for God, Liberty, Democracy, Mom and Apple Pie. Well, maybe not apple pie, Jabłecznik.
Rosenberg did an excellent job examining ordinary individuals and their perceived roles in their countries before and after communism. She did make the individuals come alive as people, looking at their whole backgrounds. And they played out against the backdrop of the history they were living through. Had either been left out, the book would have been far less illuminating.
For me, the best part of the book was the final chapter analyzing the moves away from Communism toward a democracy or at least mostly democratic philosophy. She also identified the differences between the totalitarianism of Eastern Europe and Asia vs the dictatorships of Latin America - the first being based on liberalist left-extremists and the other on conservative right-extremists. For the US today, we are facing these battling perspectives play out in real time. For the first time in my life, I truly fear for the liberties our country has espoused and fear that the election in less than a month will either save us for a time or doom us for who knows how long.
Rosenberg did an excellent job examining ordinary individuals and their perceived roles in their countries before and after communism. She did make the individuals come alive as people, looking at their whole backgrounds. And they played out against the backdrop of the history they were living through. Had either been left out, the book would have been far less illuminating.
For me, the best part of the book was the final chapter analyzing the moves away from Communism toward a democracy or at least mostly democratic philosophy. She also identified the differences between the totalitarianism of Eastern Europe and Asia vs the dictatorships of Latin America - the first being based on liberalist left-extremists and the other on conservative right-extremists. For the US today, we are facing these battling perspectives play out in real time. For the first time in my life, I truly fear for the liberties our country has espoused and fear that the election in less than a month will either save us for a time or doom us for who knows how long.
January 18, 2016
This analysis of 3 post-communist European countries (Czech Republic, Poland, and Germany) focuses heavily on the difficulties in rebuilding countries long dominated by communist ideals and ethics. Some of the more interesting sections of Rosenberg's work deal with the decision to include into the new governments and societies those who were once spies and collaborators. Rosenberg explores the reasons for why informers would inform on their fellow citizens. One secret police minister, Lorenc, notes that "people jumped at the chance to become informers." He also noted that "some agreed out of fear, but the big reason people joined us was that we made them feel appreciated. The personal relationship was always more important than ideology." However many informers did so simply to maintain jobs and to protect themselves and their families. Another official, Pavel Bratinka noted, "Staying on the side of power doesn't require any particular personal malice or enduring evil, all it calls for is disinclination toward martyrdom, a very common human attribute indeed." Lastly, Polish Jaruzelski prophetically notes, "great empires don't always act according to moral principles." All very true! However I think that Alexandr Solzhenitsyn has already written much regarding this in "The Gulag Archipelago."
June 27, 2012
A strong and off the fence opinionated view of 3 countries coming to terms with their communist past. For our menu I would recommend reading the Joke by Kundera for starter then a staunch and no quarter Orwell's 1984 for main dish followed by this book as a dish before dessert...
Then The Little Prince for dessert. To give you back hope after this heavy meal! This books deals with the past of 3 countries Poland, the Czech Republic and East Germany (part of Germany now; as info for the younger generation). Not so much a political book or a treatise on politics but more about moral responsbilities ... moral responsabilities of those who governed, those who were governed and those who dared to be neither. It gets more interesting when the oppressed became oppressors and the accused became accusers. And this on the scale of a whole nation!
Tina Rosenberg writes well and isn't afraid to be subjective. That is to avoid being objective and emit judgements and raises questions. A fantastic book!
Then The Little Prince for dessert. To give you back hope after this heavy meal! This books deals with the past of 3 countries Poland, the Czech Republic and East Germany (part of Germany now; as info for the younger generation). Not so much a political book or a treatise on politics but more about moral responsbilities ... moral responsabilities of those who governed, those who were governed and those who dared to be neither. It gets more interesting when the oppressed became oppressors and the accused became accusers. And this on the scale of a whole nation!
Tina Rosenberg writes well and isn't afraid to be subjective. That is to avoid being objective and emit judgements and raises questions. A fantastic book!
June 10, 2018
I loved this book.
This is a book light on the references - mostly because all the sources seem to be the author's interviews with various people involved in communism in Eastern Europe. The theme is how to deal with communism - and the various forms that have been taken.
I loved the author's insights. In Czechslovakia, the problem is dealt with by lustrace - preventing those who co-operated with communism from being part of the government. In Poland, something similar takes place. In Germany, the problem appears to be the complicity of everyone in the system.
It's easy to read the book and think of parallels to the modern world. For example, in the East German experience, the author observes that the problem was too much data, which prevented the spying apparatus from catching everything. With big data and technological advances, would that still be an issue today?
The only (minor) quibble I had was that I wondered how much the author's personal experiences or POV might have shaped the interviews and how much she pushed back on her interviewees. I wish that was clearer.
This is a book light on the references - mostly because all the sources seem to be the author's interviews with various people involved in communism in Eastern Europe. The theme is how to deal with communism - and the various forms that have been taken.
I loved the author's insights. In Czechslovakia, the problem is dealt with by lustrace - preventing those who co-operated with communism from being part of the government. In Poland, something similar takes place. In Germany, the problem appears to be the complicity of everyone in the system.
It's easy to read the book and think of parallels to the modern world. For example, in the East German experience, the author observes that the problem was too much data, which prevented the spying apparatus from catching everything. With big data and technological advances, would that still be an issue today?
The only (minor) quibble I had was that I wondered how much the author's personal experiences or POV might have shaped the interviews and how much she pushed back on her interviewees. I wish that was clearer.
September 19, 2013
"Communism has left behind a poisonous residue. The people ... had forty-five years to accustom themselves to governments endowed with arbitrary and absolute power... No institutions existed that could check power of the Party. It has left citizens unaccustomed to searching for their own values and morals, more comfortable with simply accepting those supplied ready-made by the state... Unchecked power is the evil in communism, what transforms it from Pegasus to Gorgon. The opposite of communism is not anti-communism, which at times resembles it greatly. The opposite is tolerance and the rule of law."
January 12, 2019
An extensively researched, concrete account of the difficulties in the transition from communism in Czechoslavakia, Poland, and the post-Berlin Wall East and West Germany, in terms of moral terms, specifically how difficult it is to hold those accountable when the mark of a totalitarian regime relies on mass complicity, and how this difficulty for justice and democracy and accountability can be counterproductive, even to the point of allowing the original sins to return.
April 2, 2010
I really enjoyed the personal stories embedded in this book, from generals to ordinary people. Rosenberg also did a great job of using individual stories to elucidate larger issues. The insights into how Communism/totalitarianism affected society and culture as well as politics, and how it shaped an individual's sense of self, emotional life, etc.
May 6, 2010
A fantastic look at 3 Eastern European countries after the fall.
July 21, 2023
Rosenberg's look at the complex issues the inhabitants of some of the countries ruled by a Communist regime prior to the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 had to grapple with in the years thereafter is an interesting one, though one must take into account that this book was published almost 30 years ago.
July 20, 2021
Tina Rosenberg writes an excellent in-depth analysis of 3 countries (Czechoslovakia, Poland, East Germany) moving on from oppressive Communist regimes into something that resembles democracy. These countries had a grave task of making sense of the horrors of the past, giving due penalties and repercussions to those who deserve it, and ensuring that totalitarian rule will not happen again.
This book is full of dense information (historical accounts, observations, and testimonies gathered from interviews) that we somehow feel how it is to have lived under repressive governments and the sacrifices some people have to make. We are also treated into the lives of the oppressors as they try to make sense of what they did and to give justification and guilt, if any, to their actions. We know why some people had to betray their countrymen and their country just to enjoy some perks of life. It is not really an issue of either-or as ideologies are not easily categorized into black or white.
My most major takeaway from this book is that no matter what form of government a state has, oppression will remain supreme if unchecked power is permitted and the citizens remain silent. This is a gripping and disheartening book that reminds us of the power of the people, which may or may not be used for better ends.
This book is full of dense information (historical accounts, observations, and testimonies gathered from interviews) that we somehow feel how it is to have lived under repressive governments and the sacrifices some people have to make. We are also treated into the lives of the oppressors as they try to make sense of what they did and to give justification and guilt, if any, to their actions. We know why some people had to betray their countrymen and their country just to enjoy some perks of life. It is not really an issue of either-or as ideologies are not easily categorized into black or white.
My most major takeaway from this book is that no matter what form of government a state has, oppression will remain supreme if unchecked power is permitted and the citizens remain silent. This is a gripping and disheartening book that reminds us of the power of the people, which may or may not be used for better ends.
May 2, 2018
Through a geographical setting Czechoslovakia, Poland, and East Germany, Tina's book walks through human, political, legal aspect of communism; the human aspect being the most important, for it is the person who defines the "ism" they follow and not the other way around. Through the stories of the prisoners and the jailers, the spies and the spied, the communists and the dissidents, the shooters and the shot; Tina paints the beautiful grey spectrum of the right, wrong, and left.
In 2018, as the global liberal is leaning left, with a very good intention to solve the rising global inequality, it is worthwhile to look at the dangers if we tipped a little too left. And for my own, free market social-capitalist self, I hope the book saves me from tipping too much to the right.
Hope the history helps us find the right moderation, the balanced path: the middle road.
Russia's history, revolution, communism has always fascinated me. From my late teen years, I have seen the "coolest" of my friends and classmates incline towards left policies. In our early rebel years in liberal free-market capitalist societies, it is a very conforming thing to be moderate republican, a Miltonian capitalist, and hence the coolest amongst us are Socialist, Leftist, Liberal Left.
The "ism" trajectory of society has been feudalism -> imperialism -> fascism -> communism -> and now I guess is capitalism. We can either change it to solve the critical challenges of our times, or we can see it deteriorate and be replaced by some other "ism". No "ism" is completely right or wrong, it is what we make of it.
In 2018, as the global liberal is leaning left, with a very good intention to solve the rising global inequality, it is worthwhile to look at the dangers if we tipped a little too left. And for my own, free market social-capitalist self, I hope the book saves me from tipping too much to the right.
Hope the history helps us find the right moderation, the balanced path: the middle road.
Russia's history, revolution, communism has always fascinated me. From my late teen years, I have seen the "coolest" of my friends and classmates incline towards left policies. In our early rebel years in liberal free-market capitalist societies, it is a very conforming thing to be moderate republican, a Miltonian capitalist, and hence the coolest amongst us are Socialist, Leftist, Liberal Left.
The "ism" trajectory of society has been feudalism -> imperialism -> fascism -> communism -> and now I guess is capitalism. We can either change it to solve the critical challenges of our times, or we can see it deteriorate and be replaced by some other "ism". No "ism" is completely right or wrong, it is what we make of it.
June 5, 2018
Tina Rosenburg's examines the aftermath of communism in Eastern Europe and Germany and how citizens and political leaders are attempting to reconcile and bring closure to a dark chapter in the history.
Although different countries have utilized different approaches, one of the most difficult problems in every country, is one of accountability. Who should be barred from public service temporarily or permanently? Who should be imprisoned or otherwise legally sanctioned and for what crimes? What restitution, if any, is owed to the victims, and what exactly constitutes being a victim of the regime? There are few easy answers to any of these questions.
The Haunted Land is well-researched, though a bit dry at times, and overall makes for a worthwhile read for anyone interested in history, especially the era of communism in Europe.
Although different countries have utilized different approaches, one of the most difficult problems in every country, is one of accountability. Who should be barred from public service temporarily or permanently? Who should be imprisoned or otherwise legally sanctioned and for what crimes? What restitution, if any, is owed to the victims, and what exactly constitutes being a victim of the regime? There are few easy answers to any of these questions.
The Haunted Land is well-researched, though a bit dry at times, and overall makes for a worthwhile read for anyone interested in history, especially the era of communism in Europe.
May 7, 2011
کتابی درباره آنچه که کمونیسم بر سر کشورها و مردمان بلوک شرق آورد ، مردمانی مطیع همچون اسلواک ها ، روشفکران پراگی ، رومانتیک ها و شجاعان لهستانی و ... . نویسنده خود روزنامه نگاری بوده که تجربه حضور در دیکتاتوری های آمریکای لاتین را داشته است و با دید باز و تجربه خوب به سراغ دیکتاتور های کمونیست و روشنفکرانی که در بند بوده اند می رود و سعی میکند تصویری وافعی از آن چه در سه کشور چکسلواکی ، لهستانی و آلمان شرقی پیش آمده است ارائه دهد .
کتاب ترجمه بسیار خوبی دارد و نویسنده به تصویری ترین شکل ممکن کتاب را نوشته است به طوری که در ذهن خود می توانید آن را مانند مستند های سیاسی تصور کنید .
تجربه خواندن این کتاب را از دست ندهید .
کتاب ترجمه بسیار خوبی دارد و نویسنده به تصویری ترین شکل ممکن کتاب را نوشته است به طوری که در ذهن خود می توانید آن را مانند مستند های سیاسی تصور کنید .
تجربه خواندن این کتاب را از دست ندهید .
March 4, 2017
این کتاب در مورد بعد از فروپاشی نظام کمونیستی در سه کشور آلمان شرقی، لهستان، و چکسلواکی میپردازد.
اساسی ترین نکته ای که این کتاب برای من داشت برخوردی بود که مردم بعد از اینکه حکومت کمونیستی سقوط کرد با سران حزب و نظام داشتند بود. اینکه در نظام اجتماعی نمیشد این افراد را به هیچ عنوان به جرمی متهم کرد. زیرا آنها به درستی قانون را اجرا میکردندو نمیتوان فردی را به خاطر اینکه قانون را اجرا کرده مجازات کرد.
واقعا باید در این شرایط که قانونی غلط است و کسی آن را انجام میدهد، با فرد مزکور چه برخوردی داشت؟
منظور اطاعت کورکورانه نیست، بلکه اطاعت از قانون نوشته شده و مکتوب است
اساسی ترین نکته ای که این کتاب برای من داشت برخوردی بود که مردم بعد از اینکه حکومت کمونیستی سقوط کرد با سران حزب و نظام داشتند بود. اینکه در نظام اجتماعی نمیشد این افراد را به هیچ عنوان به جرمی متهم کرد. زیرا آنها به درستی قانون را اجرا میکردندو نمیتوان فردی را به خاطر اینکه قانون را اجرا کرده مجازات کرد.
واقعا باید در این شرایط که قانونی غلط است و کسی آن را انجام میدهد، با فرد مزکور چه برخوردی داشت؟
منظور اطاعت کورکورانه نیست، بلکه اطاعت از قانون نوشته شده و مکتوب است
February 10, 2016
A really interesting book. I have never really considered how difficult the conversion from socialism to democracy really is. Like many people (I think), I just thought that everyone in these countries would be partying when they people democracies. But that is hardly the case. There are people to blame/punish, and others that have to be made whole (or at least attempted to) by years of oppression. And there seems to be a lot of confusion as well.
Well done.
Well done.
June 15, 2008
This book compares the experiences of four Central European countries coming to terms with their Communist pasts. Interesting, well-written, and well-researched, but I wish she had provided more analysis of the differences and similarities among the countries in question, rather than just including each as an entirely separate narrative.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.