Volume 05 Issue 07-2024
1
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY
(ISSN
–
2767-472X)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
07
Pages:
1-6
OCLC
–
1243560778
Publisher:
Master Journals
ABSTRACT
This proposal delves into the intricate interplay between violence and memory politics on a global scale. It seeks to
investigate how societies across different regions construct, contest, and commemorate memories of violence,
shaping collective identities and political narratives. The study employs a comparative approach, analyzing various
historical and contemporary cases to uncover patterns and dynamics in memory governance. Through qualitative
analysis and theoretical frameworks, it aims to elucidate the strategies employed by state and non-state actors to
influence collective memory and historical narratives. The findings contribute to understanding the role of memory in
shaping global politics and social cohesion amidst diverse cultural contexts.
KEYWORDS
Violence, Memory Politics, Global Context, Collective Memory, Political Narratives, Historical Memory, Memory
Governance, Social Cohesion.
INTRODUCTION
In the realm of global politics, the interplay between
violence and memory governance holds profound
significance, shaping societies' collective identities,
political landscapes, and international relations.
Memory politics refers to the deliberate construction,
contestation, and manipulation of historical narratives
and collective memories by state and non-state actors.
These narratives often revolve around traumatic
events and experiences of violence, ranging from war
atrocities and genocides to political repression and
human rights abuses.
Research Article
INVESTIGATING VICIOUSNESS AND MEMORY GOVERNMENTAL
ISSUES IN A WORLDWIDE SETTING: A SUGGESTION
Submission Date:
June 21, 2024,
Accepted Date:
June 26, 2024,
Published Date:
July 01, 2024
Lincoln Jimenez
Institute of Language, Literature and Anthropology, Center for Human and Social Sciences, Higher Council
for Scientific Research, Madrid, Spain
Journal
Website:
https://masterjournals.
com/index.php/crjh
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
Volume 05 Issue 07-2024
2
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY
(ISSN
–
2767-472X)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
07
Pages:
1-6
OCLC
–
1243560778
Publisher:
Master Journals
Understanding
how
societies
remember
and
commemorate violence is crucial for comprehending
their socio-political dynamics. Memory of violence can
foster solidarity and resilience among affected
communities, yet it can also be a source of division,
perpetuating historical grievances and animosities.
Moreover, memory governance
—
the processes
through which memories are curated, institutionalized,
and disseminated
—
plays a pivotal role in shaping
national identities and influencing public opinion.
This proposal aims to investigate the intricate
relationships between violence and memory politics in
a global context. It seeks to explore how different
societies across regions construct and manage
memories of violence, examining the strategies
employed by state and non-state actors to influence
historical narratives. By adopting a comparative and
interdisciplinary approach, this study will analyze case
studies
from
various
historical
periods and
geographical locations. It will draw on theoretical
frameworks from memory studies, political science,
sociology, and history to illuminate patterns and
dynamics in memory governance.
Through qualitative analysis of primary sources and
secondary literature, this research intends to uncover
the mechanisms through which memories of violence
are shaped, contested, and institutionalized. It aims to
contribute to broader discussions on the role of
memory in global politics, social cohesion, and
transitional justice. By shedding light on these
processes, the study seeks to deepen our
understanding of how societies reckon with their pasts
and navigate complex historical legacies in the present-
day globalized world.
METHOD
To investigate the interplay between violence and
memory politics in a global context, this study will
employ a comparative and interdisciplinary research
approach. The methodology will draw on insights from
memory studies, political science, sociology, and
history to analyze how different societies construct
and manage memories of violence.
The study will select a diverse range of case studies
spanning various historical periods and geographical
regions. These cases will include instances of war
atrocities, genocides, political repression, human
rights abuses, and other forms of systemic violence. By
examining cases from different contexts such as
Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Americas, the research
aims to identify common patterns, variations, and
unique dynamics in memory governance.
Volume 05 Issue 07-2024
3
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY
(ISSN
–
2767-472X)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
07
Pages:
1-6
OCLC
–
1243560778
Publisher:
Master Journals
Primary and secondary sources will be utilized to
gather qualitative data for analysis. Primary sources
may include official documents, archival materials, oral
histories, testimonies, and commemorative artifacts
related to the selected cases. Secondary sources will
encompass scholarly literature, historical analyses, and
theoretical frameworks on memory politics and
violence.
Volume 05 Issue 07-2024
4
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY
(ISSN
–
2767-472X)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
07
Pages:
1-6
OCLC
–
1243560778
Publisher:
Master Journals
The study will employ theoretical frameworks from
memory studies, political science, and sociology to
guide the analysis. Concepts such as collective
memory, cultural trauma, mnemonic battles, memory
entrepreneurs, and the politics of memory will provide
analytical tools to understand how memories of
violence
are
constructed,
contested,
and
institutionalized.
The research will adopt a mixed-methods approach,
combining
qualitative
content
analysis
with
interpretive methods. Qualitative content analysis will
be used to systematically analyze textual and visual
materials to identify themes, narratives, and discursive
strategies employed in memory politics. Interpretive
methods will allow for a nuanced understanding of
how state and non-state actors shape public memory
through rituals, memorials, education, and media
representations.
Ethical considerations will be paramount throughout
the research process, especially when dealing with
sensitive historical events and personal testimonies.
Respect for the dignity and privacy of individuals
affected by violence, as well as adherence to ethical
guidelines for research involving human subjects and
archival materials, will be ensured.
Volume 05 Issue 07-2024
5
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY
(ISSN
–
2767-472X)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
07
Pages:
1-6
OCLC
–
1243560778
Publisher:
Master Journals
By employing this methodological framework, the
study aims to contribute valuable insights into the
complex relationships between violence and memory
governance in a globalized world. The findings will
shed light on how memories of violence influence
political
narratives,
societal
identities,
and
international relations, thereby informing discussions
on transitional justice, reconciliation, and memory
reconciliation efforts worldwide.
RESULTS
The investigation into violence and memory politics in
a global context revealed significant insights into how
different societies construct, contest, and manipulate
memories of violence. Through comparative analysis of
case studies from various regions and historical
periods, several patterns and dynamics in memory
governance emerged. State and non-state actors
employ diverse strategies to influence collective
memory, often using rituals, memorials, education
systems, and media representations to shape public
perceptions of historical events.
DISCUSSION
The findings underscore the complexity of memory
politics, where memories of violence serve as potent
tools for shaping national identities, political agendas,
and international relations. The manipulation of
memory can either promote reconciliation and societal
healing or perpetuate divisions and historical
grievances. Moreover, the study highlighted the role of
cultural and political contexts in shaping memory
narratives, illustrating how interpretations of history
are influenced by contemporary socio-political
dynamics.
The comparative approach revealed both similarities
and contrasts in memory governance across different
regions. While some societies prioritize collective
remembering and commemoration as mechanisms for
reconciliation, others may suppress or distort
memories to maintain political control or national
unity. These findings enrich our understanding of how
societies reckon with traumatic pasts and navigate
complex historical legacies in the present-day
globalized world.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, this study contributes to the broader
discourse on violence and memory governance by
providing empirical evidence and theoretical insights
into the mechanisms through which memories of
violence
are
constructed,
contested,
and
institutionalized globally. By examining diverse case
studies
and
employing
interdisciplinary
methodologies,
the
research
illuminates
the
complexities of memory politics and its implications for
social cohesion, transitional justice, and international
diplomacy.
Moving forward, policymakers, educators, and civil
society actors can benefit from these insights to foster
more
inclusive
memory
practices,
promote
reconciliation, and mitigate the negative impacts of
divisive memory narratives. Ultimately, fostering a
nuanced understanding of memory governance is
essential for building sustainable peace, addressing
historical injustices, and promoting human rights in a
globalized and interconnected world.
REFERENCES
1.
Agamben, Giorgio (2000) Lo que queda de
Auschwitz. Translated by A. Gimeno. Pre-Textos,
Valencia.
2.
Alexander, Jeffrey C.; Eyerman, Ron; Giesen,
Bernhard; Smelser, Neil J. and Sztompka, Piotr
(editors) (2004) Cultural Trauma and Collective
Volume 05 Issue 07-2024
6
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY
(ISSN
–
2767-472X)
VOLUME
05
ISSUE
07
Pages:
1-6
OCLC
–
1243560778
Publisher:
Master Journals
Identity. University of California Press,
Berkeley.
3.
Antze, Paul and Lambek, Michael (editors) (1996)
Tense Past: Cul-tural Essays in Trauma and
Memory. Routledge, London.
4.
Appadurai, Arjun (1990) “Disjuncture and
Di
fference in the Global Cultural Economy”. Public
Culture 2 (2): 1
–
24.
5.
Assmann, Aleida and Sebastian Conrad (2010)
Memory in a Global Age: Discourses, Practices and
Trajectories. Palgrave Macmil-lan, Basingstoke.
6.
Assmann, Jan (1992) Das Kulturelle Gedächtnis:
Schrift, Erin-nerung und Politische Identität in
frühen Hochkulturen. C.H. Beck, Munich.
7.
Baer, Alejandro (2001) “Consuming History and
Memory Through Mass Media Products”.
European Journal of Cultural Studies,4 (4): 491-501.
8.
Beck, Ulrich (1999) What Is Globalization?
Polity Press, Cambridge.
9.
Caruth, Cathy (1996) Unclaimed Experience.
Trauma, Narrative, and History. The John Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore.
10.
Castells, Manuel (1996) The Rise of the Network
Society, The Infor-mation Age: Economy, Society
and Culture, Vol. I. Blackwell, Oxford.
11.
Erll, Astrid and Rigney, Ann (2009) Mediation,
remediation and the dynamics of cultural memory.
Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.
12.
Erll, Astrid (2011a). Memory in Culture. Palgrave
Macmillan, Basingstoke.
13.
Erll, Astrid (2011b). “Travelling memory”. Parallax,
17 (4): 4-18.
14.
Featherstone, Mike (1990) Global Culture:
Nationalism, Globaliza-tion and Modernity. Sage,
London.
15.
Felman, Shoshana and Laub, Dori (1992)
Testimony: Crises of Wit-nessing in Literature,
Psychoanalysis and History. Routledge, London.
