WORKING THROUGH THE TRAUMA OF POLITICAL OPPRESSION:
FOCUS ON EASTERN EUROPE AND THE USSR
Dr. Michael Macpherson M.R.C.P.(UK)
PSAMRA/Integral Studies, Berlin FRG
1992-3
Traumata which occurred, for instance, during Fascism, as a result of political torture in middle and south America, during the continuing war in Mozambique, have been diagnosed, treated, studied and reported to the scientific and wider publics. The social, cultural and national responses to psychic trauma of political origin, such as that of the Shoah or the Vietnam war, have shown that (at least, some) positive social change can result from overcoming taboos and promoting the "facing of history and ourselves * ". Therefore, it is very important that also those traumata which occurred during socialism, say, from 1917 in what became the USSR and after 1945 in eastern Europe should not be neglected or "forgotten", should be documented, studied in their contexts and made publicly known. People who suffered should receive adequate compensation and, where appropriate, rehabilitatlon, care and therapy.
Victims and surviving family members of brutality and terror are many, presumably millions. Those who have been "touched" or who "know" are many more. In a system of widespread oppression, single persons may sometimes combine or exchange the roles of victim, perpetrator and bystander.
* This phrase is taken from the title of a published educational curriculum
The complex processes of interaction between individuals and society, referred to above, probably vary between cultures; they are certain]y poorly understood. Very simply, in east Europe and the former USSR is a group of peoples with common experience of a certain type of oppression (of course, with major international differences) who since the late 1980s appear to be "working through the past" in quite different ways. To illustrate two extremes; in Poland certain well known figures who are acknowledged to have been consistent over the difficult years in their engagement for human rights, T. Mazowiecki and A. Michnik, are in favour of "putting an end" to the public debate about the oppression and injustice which occurred under communism in order, they say, to allow pressing, mainly economic problems to be tackled unhindered by heated discussions and recriminations. On the other hand, in Germany, led by civil rights activists and pushed by victims from the former German Democratic Republic and by some concerned citizens from the west, there is quite a large movement to reveal and analyse history both at the state and at the "human" (individual and micro) levels, not shying away from naming persons who have been involved in betrayal and persecution. In other countries of the former soviet bloc thlngs appear differerent again. The extent and nature of the socialcultural-national "working through" of the past, for instance as manifested in publications, public discussions, opening of official files, rehabilitation of victims, prosecution of serious offenders against human rights, will have important implications for individuals, families and peer groups as to how they come to terms with their own involvement in the former "system"; as convinced supporters, opportunists, pragmatists, bystanders or victims.
This paper does not present "pure" theory or practice but is a hybrid. There is some pre-theoretical exploration concerning the interaction in trauma of individual and collective processes (processes which may be said to include "facing history and ourselves", a fair translation, I think, of the German "Vergangenheitsbewaeltigung"); there are also some case reports and a very brief and preliminary taxonomy of trauma, with some notes about its circumstances, as it putatively occurred in a particular political system.
An experienced Holocaust researcher, as I recall, was asked during a lecture in l991 how the individual traumata which he had reported in detail could come to have positive social effects. He replied that society was a libidinous organism. I think he meant: Tell the stories well and people will learn, be moved, change their behaviour. Given the chance he would probably go into much more detail; I would like to hear it. In the meantime and to complement this psychoanalytic view of society I suggest it would do no harm to attempt a more detailed analysis of this "libidinous organism", people and society.
From my incomplete collection of writing about trauma and post-traumatic stress, my impression is that the societal (including political and legal) processes which are considered in detail are only those which are expected to aid recovery, in a mainly clinical sense, of the individual. However, there are some very useful short, general statements such as, "Each of us who has been victimised or who cares for those who have is part of a growing concern for the welfare of the trauma victim. And each of us in our own way can reinforce this sense of societal responsibility by insuring that the emotional upheaval of victims is neither minimised nor forgotten." (Figley, 1985). Writing on 'some theoretical considerations' Danielli states, "The goals of the Group Project for Holocaust Survivors and their Children ... are predicated on ... 1) that awareness of the meaning of post-Holocaust adaptional style and the integration of Holocaust experience into the totality of the survivors' and their offspringŒs lives will be liberating and self-actualising for both; ..." Further, "... the Group Project ...maintains that the attempt to re-establish the sense of continuity, belongingness and rootedness, and to effect perspective and integration through awareness, are our optimal vehicles in possibly achieving our reparative and preventive goals of liberation from the traumata." That the author cites Robert Jay Lifton here suggests that by 'prevention' she is referring to, or including, prevention of future Holocausts and related evils; but the text seems to refer to prevention of further traumatic stress of the individual or of transgenerational transmission. In the same chapter, a diagram which shows the historical and psychic "place" of victimisation rupture during the lifespan of an individual who is shown as the centre of family, social/communal, religious, national and international circles offers promise as a framework for theoretical considerations concerning individual - sociopolitical interactions of the types discussed in this paper. Danielli hardly attempts to approach this complexity in the chapter cited; its focus is elsewhere (Danielli, 1985).
A model which seems to underly the thinking and practice of workers on traumatic stress is tentatively shown as follows (Model 1):
MODEL 1
INDIVIDUAL TRAUMA (OWING TO ABUSES OF POLITICAL POWER)
is approached clinically, firstly with
ASSESSMENT AND DIAGNOSIS, then
THERAPY (GUIDED BY SHARING CLINICAL EXPERIENCE WITH COLLEAGUES AND BY RESEARCH)
sometimes therapists attempt "outreach" e.g. by
HELPING EXPERIENCES OF VICTIMS AND THERAPISTS TO DIFFUSE (E.G. THROUGH GROUP WORK, PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, CONFERENCES, BOOKS
it is hoped that these efforts will lead to avoidance of social conflict and of traumatic repetition.The hoped for result of the efforts shown in the above model is social change which goes beyond immediate benefits to the victim to include, say "altered (group and societal) consciousness" (see below, Mitscherlichs), empathy, political action for prevention, avoidance of repetition (of brutality, genocide, war). A broader socio-political process process, which suggests that citizens (who may be survivors). politicians as well a therapists may help to promote "working through" of mass trauma, is shown in Model 2;
MODEL 2
Path one: MASS TRAUMA, COLLECTIVE EXPERIENCE OF A REPRESSIVE PERIODleads to ---> NON-ACCEPTANCE OF TRAUMA AND VICTIMS, PSYCHO-POLITICAL STATUS-QUO (with little learning or development)
which in turn leads to REPETITION AND CONFLICT
Path two: MASS TRAUMA, COLLECTIVE EXPERIENCE OF A REPRESSIVE PERIOD
leads to: CHANGE OF CONSCIOUSNESS AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
which allows or promotes: INSTITUTIONAL (E.G. EDUCATIVE), LEGISLATIVE AND INTERNATIONAL REFORM
leading to: PROGRESS IN PEACE-BUILDING AND CONFLICT AVOIDANCE
There are well known tendencies for societies to ignore, use denial-like processes, react in hostility, forget. How can these negative tendencies be avoided or minimised? What are the characteristics of a society which accepts its victims ? Model 1 (above) does not offer us much guidance concerning the conditions in a society around the time and in the few decades after the mass trauma. What are the important requirements for the trauma to be recognised and for victims to be helped ? Therapy for obvious victims is clearly desirable but in many cases will not be achieved, e.g. because trained staff and facilities are lacking. Other processes by which people may come to "work through' the shared trauma of their culture (or that of other peoples) need to be developed.( See "Note (3)", following references.)
I now want to draw on the experience of some German intellectuals who have tried to promote "Vergangenheitsbewaeltigung" (loosely but, I think, well translated as "facing history and ourselves) (Verg-b.) and then describe some events and circumstance of life during really-existing socialism in the former GDR and elsewhere in Europe.
In the major German catalogue of "books in print" there is no entry "Verg-b " but under "Unbewaeltigte Vergangenheit" ?un-worked through history) appear numerous titles. Probably the most frequently cited book is "The incapacity to mourn" (Mitscherlich & Mitscherlich, 1967). Drawing on entries under Verg-b. and related topics, I find: "In our time ideological Totalitarianism celebrates triumphs." There is in the opinion of the authors, a 'Wiederholungszwang', a compulsion towards repetition. History does not exactly reproduce itself, but nevertheless there is a tendency, a pull towards repetition. This pull can only be resisted if historical events elicit a change in consciousness. That has to mean that the dynamics of previously uncontrolled forces become more fully and more accurately understood. For the Germans, such a change in consciousness could perhaps have been possible if a mourning process (Trauerarbeit), based on an admission of guilt, had succeeded. ... here (Federal Republic of (west) Germany) little has happened to counteract the tendency to repetition of massive expressions of aggression./...after the war, in contrast (to facing history), one regressed into a tendency, reinforced by the education (family, school), into passive, child-like dependency and so denied the intensity of destructive potential or rivalry. They refer to ?... loss of the narcissistic object ...? contained in the concept of we as the "master race". (check translation)
... (one needs to) confront oneself with the victims ... and discover our capacity of sympathy (Mitleid; literally 'shared suffering') for other people?. The Mitscherlichs summarise: "If there is a prescription against the persistence of unconsciously effective (destructive social) forces, then it is in a promotion of a new 'Aufklaerung' (Enlightenment) in all situations/places, in which society teaches/informs (vermitteln) the developing generations about itself." (Mitscherlich & Mitscherlich, 1967).
Dudeck, attempting a historical review of Verg-b., concentrates on the process as it occurred in the western part of Germany. He identifies four components of Verg-b. after the second World War, (a) the applications of criminal law, e.g. in the Nuremberg processes and to crimes committed by concentration camp personnel, (b) financial measures, compensation for victims, the "Wiedergutmachung" in which funds were paid to Israel (c) political and constitutional measures (d) psychological -pedagogical process of "working through".
Dudeck presents the controversy concerning the extent and degree of success of Verg-b. in Germany. There are those commentators who conclude that the main characteristics of the interaction with National Socialism have been denial-like processes and forgetting. Their critics claim that in no country other than the Federal Republic of Germany has there been such a radical discourse concerning a past tragedy. He cites Steinbach who refers not only to the decisive national constitutional discontinuity but also to the "antitotalitarian" political legitimacy of the FRG.
Dudeck pleads for further study of German history in order to obtain insights into the roots of Nazism, to consider for instance pre-existing "problematic modernisation trends" and "social pathologies" (Dudeck, 1992).
I now wish to turn the reader's attention towards eastern Europe and the former USSR. To "face history and ourselves" (I assume the reader wants to join in !) then the more we know and understand about the history of these countries, the better. For this paper no more than a few sentences can be offered. The term Totalitarianism is, according to Tucker who cites Arendt, best applied to the periods beginning with the absolute dictatorships of Stalin in 1929 and Hitler in 1934 (Tucker,1986) . After 1945 the sphere of Soviet power included the countries of eastern Europe and the Soviet zone of occupation in Germany. (Konkov, in pleading for the inclusion of people from the USSR in work and discussion about "facing history" remarked that "This evil had its origins in our people." (Konkov 1990a)). Since the apparent "collapse" of Soviet communism the peoples of the Soviet bloc have lived through rapid change in most dimensions of life, uncertainty, financial and environmental problems of an extreme nature, even hunger and wars. It is highly understandable if people and their governments appear to live and work only for the moment and for the future. The recent past, it seems, tends to be ignored, forgotten or suppressed out of consciousness.
Now to a description of some aspects of life in the former socialist countries which have been or are associated with psychic trauma and extreme stress. First, a brief, tentative taxonomy of trauma and the circumstances in which it occurred in the USSR and eastern Europe: "Purges" and "Terror" of Stalin"s rule; Forced collectivisation; Plantation of populations and ethnic groups; Exile, external and internal; Imprisonment of political, psychiatric or arbitrary nature, work camps, the "Gulag"; Spying (inland ) and betrayal; Industrial and environmental negligence which was often accompanied by absence of recognition or caring facilities for victims e.g. Chernobyl, pollution of White Sea, of Lake Baikal, of much of Poland's water supply, radioactive contamination of a vast area around the nuclear weapons testing ground in Kasachstan; Restricted freedom of thought, self expression and human communication e.g. in speech, writing, publishing, education, in work whether in science, culture and many other fields, prohibition of meetings, interception of correspondence and telephone calls, restricted access to communication of general and professional kinds; enforced conformity e.g. militarisation of everyday life from kindergarten onwards; forced child bearing.
A psychotherapist from Leningrad, speaking in the Netherlands in 1990, stated that traumata resulting from recent tragedies became superimposed on those of sociopolitical origin, namely, those attributable to the repressive aspects of communism. He had worked as a volunteer with survivors of the earthquake in Armenia. He said "In the west there is relatively little trauma and many helpers. In our country there are masses of trauma and far too few helpers." (Yerish, 1990).
The brief taxonomy of traumatic events and circumstances and the above quote may help to emphasise that there is a need for systematic study of trauma in its sociopolitical context. An interdisciplinary process involving, for example, epidemiologists, clinicians, historians (they will hopefully begin to obtain many new sources with the "opening" of the countries of the former soviet bloc), sociologists, anthropologists, political analysts, educational and developmental psychologists and others would be desirable. The World Health Organisation in cooperation with UNO human rights specialists might be called upon to help initiate such a process. They should preferably liaise with "Non-governmental" groups such as Memorial of the USSR, who have made a start.
Now, a case history of Mrs. and Mr. Bauer (she aged 28, he 30 years) who consulted two family counsellors working under the wing of the Protestant church in September 1989, before the opening of the Berlin wall (9 November 1989). First impression of the therapists: Here is a hippopotamous married to a preying manti (a graceful insect). How could the marriage possibly work ? Mrs. B. was in despair because her husband never showed his feelings and seemed not to perceive his feelings for her or for their children. She felt very lonely and had begun to refuse sexual intercourse. That made him withdraw even more. Mr. B. was, also in the counselling sessions, mainly silent. "I want to live with my wife." was all he could say about himself. Progress in counselling was deadly slow. Then came November 9th and within a few weeks there was a pre-arranged session with the therapists. Mr. B. was unrecognisable. He immediately began to talk. He expressed great satisfaction, "dass die Schweine abdanken muessen!" (that the pigs (he referred to the communist party and government) had to clear off). Happiness and joy lit up his previously stonily unexpressive face. The therapists asked Mr. B. to explain what had happened to him. He said that before his marriage, although the charge had been false, he had been in jail for two years, a "political" prisoner. A "Stasimann" (collaborator of the Ministry for State Security) had denounced him, reported that Bauer had made statements which showed him to be an enemy of the state. He was promptly arrested on the Alexanderplatz (the central square of the eastern part of divided Berlin). The time in jail was incredibly hard. Worst, the prisoners were very brutal one to another. He had only survived by making himself "invisible" (no detail given). On his release from jail he swore to himself that he would never again think over or speak about his jail trauma. His wife knew he had been in jail but could get no more out of him. Both went along with making a taboo of those events. With the opening of the border between east and west (the couple spent the whole night of the 9th and 10th of November in west Berlin) the past broke through. The "inner wall" was washed away as in a "flash flood" and Mr. B. felt a strong anger.
For the couple the release of Mr. B's emotions was of great benefit. But, the authors write, it was clear that his wounds could only be healed if he could be cleared at law of the unjust charges. They ask, "How many people in our country were, in similar ways, prisoners within themselves ? Which traumatic experiences have they allowed to become disconnected from feeling and life ? Maybe it was only Angst which prevented a deeper communal life and mutual understanding. And how many people in our country (GDR) have lived under "psychic defence"? There was not much curiosity about what happened during the Nazi time. In 1945 we were "liberated". We were all "resistance fighters against fascism". And the Stalin time? Isn't there plenty of defence and avoidance on that topic? Wasn't there an abundance of collective defence? The "new" freedom will also break down "inner walls" here. If not, it would not be genuine freedom. For our country it would be good if many people tell the stories of their traumatic experiences. It would be a therapy for our society (Kraetschell & Wahl, l991).
Another example of extreme stress in the GDR follows. The psychologist W was a victim of the Ministry for State Security (Stasi) in their O.V. (operativer Vorgang, operative task) (registration number in the official secret files X 39/74) from 1974 to 1989. W's "crime" was to be a supporter of the political reforms expressed in the Prague Spring of 1968, a sympathiser of Robert Havemenn (communist, humanist and dissident) and of Mitscherlich. He was accused of "Trotskyism" and of being acquainted with a fellow citizen who allegedly had contact to people in the west. W was hounded in countless interrogations, by withdrawal of his passport, in his professional life in which promotion was blocked, by attempts to coerce him to collaborate as an informant, and by being spied upon himself. His superior in the child psychiatry hospital department, Dr. L.W. (also known as IMB, special collaborator, Bert, reg. no. 745/62) forced him by threat of problems at work to attend Stasi interrogations. Acquaintances began to insinuate that W was having a "Stasi persecution paranoia". In 1977 (from a report found 1990 in Ministry for State Security* files) a complex plot against W was hatched in which IMs (informelle Mitarbeiter, Stasi spies in the community) in cooperation with the "Espionage Abroad" department of Markus Wolf, created a fictitious conspirative group around W in order to incriminate him. IMs "Rose". "Barth","Coja", "Andre" (all pseudonyms of Stasi colllaborators who were found to have written reports about the victim) and others were involved. Specialists in philosophy and law from the MfS University, Potsdam, were consulted to refine the plot.(Fuchs l991).
A note from the MfS Handbook for Political Operations, entry "Zersetzung" (descriptive translation: operative, destructive harrassment). This was the method for "effectively combatting subversive activity ". "...purpose is to splinter, paralyse, disorganise and isolate enemy/negative elements. The main agent to carry out the "Zersetzung" is the IM (see above). Hard discipline in leadership is called for. Because of the political sensitivity high standards to protect the conspiracy are demanded.
It seems that there are Stasi reports on six million GDR citizens (Maaz 1991). By May 1992, five hundred thousand citizens had placed an application to read their own file. (Statement of Joachim Gauck, director of the administration of Stasi documents.)
Freya Klier, who grew up in the GDR, writes, "Although the key to understand the western part of Germany may possibly be found in its universally dominating economic system, the key to understand the eastern part (former GDR) lies in the education." (Klier, 1990). A child psychotherapist (also GDR) writes, "Repressive child-rearing practices in kindergarten and day-home (latter up to age 10 years) as well as 'parent fluctuation' (accompanying a divorce of 70%) led to disturbances of socialisation with symptoms such as hyperactivity, aggressiveness, enuresis and vegetative disorders (Israel, 1990). Referring to 'Totalitarian' societies, Konkov writes about the consequences of "aversive control as a predominant population behaviour control tool. Emotional deficits in family relationships, bad functioning and poor productivity of organisations" result. Some consequences for individuals are "self-identity, privacy and intimacy problems." The only way to escape sufferring from psychological and social troubles, so Konkov, is to sacrifice one's uniqueness and freedom (Konkov, 1990 b).
Writing ten months after 9th November 1989 (opening of the Berlin Wall) Hans-Joachim Maaz writes, "We are living in a time of general psychosocial crisis, which urgently needs reflexion and working through (of emotions). But a general mourning process is being avoided principally through being over busy and somatising. He makes some challenging claims, e.g. that decisions of the Volkskammer (the last parliament of the GDR which, unusually in that country, was freely elected) were influenced by un-worked out psychic defence mechanisms. The members of parliament, like many of their voters, moved too easily from a dictatorship to another situation of dependency, namely a naive aceeptance of the Deutschmark and of the promises of western politicians. Maaz expresses hopes for the development of a "therapeutic culture" but does not make clear how this might be promoted or initiated. A group of therapists and physicians in east Berlin a few months ago advertised an offer of counsellimg to former GDR citizens who felt they were having problems with the reunification of Germany. There has been a very small response. What else can be done to promote "facing history and ourselves"?
By way of illustration I will describe some of the strategies and achievements of citizens and politicians in the new "united" Germany and briefly compare some other countries of the former soviet bloc. (This will be a way to introduce the suggestion to look again at the models, pre-theories and ideas which have been outlined above, concerning the interactions of individuals and sociopolitical processes in cases of widespread traumata resulting from an oppressive political system, and to reappraise them critically.)
First, the individual level. In the view of the former GDR citizen Maaz (above) there has been little reflexion, questioning or mourning; of course, exceptions exist. One distinguished academic, a biological scientist, has published numerous articles about life in the GDR and about how he and others are experiencing various aspects of the re-unification. In one piece he describes the agony of living in fear of being betrayed (for, say, some "heretical" thought or minor act of deviance) and on the consequent pressure to obey and conform. There are dozens of books published after the "Wende" (1989) by authors who wish to share their own traumata and to offer insights into the way the repressive system worked. By looking at individual cases one senses that, even among the group of IMs (collaborators of the MfS/Stasi), who in many cases betrayed family and friends, things are not always "black and white": Often people with disastrous life histories and weak personalities were coerced or manipulated by their "guiding officers" (Fuehrungsoffiziere: The word has chilling associations for those who know a little German history.) of the Stasi, an organisation which employed many psychologists to help "refine" its techniques. Among prominent members of the old regime, the communist party of east Germany (S.E.D., socialist unity party of Germany) very few have publicly expressed any regret or have admitted to having made any political mistakes.
Much discussion has centred on the activities of the former MfS. Hundreds of thousands of workers were engaged in this absurd, monstrous, unbelievable system of control. Fathers wrote reports for the Stasi about their sons , husbands spied on their wives "for the party". Many who were betrayed went to jail, were forced to emigrate or suffered severe disadvantages at work. Some dissident groups consisted of up to 70% spies (allegedly, in a few cases, 100%!). People who believe they have been harmed by MfS activities can apply to see their files. Hundreds of thousands of "ex" GDR citizens have done so but progress in processing these applications has been very slow. There have been dramatic "leaks" and official revelations about the Stasi connections of people who have gained prominence in public life. The ensuing publicity has both stimulated some people to reflect and led to resistance to hearing more about the issue.
The infiltrating system of the MfS was only part of the larger system which was repressive in most spheres of life; family, education, workplace, professional life, culture (literature, art etc.) and politics were all affected. So, to offer greater promise of successful mourning and learning, a more comprehensive approach or approaches are needed. Indeed, there is a popular, unsurprising reaction to the MfS discussion which contributes to the growing polarisation (most obvious in economic terms) between east and west Germany, expressed in the slogan "We are not a Stasi-Volk!".
There are associations of victims of the S.E.D. State, e.g. people whose careers were destroyed for political reasons, who were political prisoners, relatives of people who were shot while trying to leave the country and others. A human rights group in west Berlin arranges meetings between victims and the spies or officers who betrayed or persecuted them. There are museums to record aspects of repression, for instance, the former headquarters of the MfS contains such a museum. These projects, however, depend heavily on volunteer work and have to depend on public funding, which in the near future will be by no means certain. Their continued existence depends on whether there is enough public interest to promote "remembering" as opposed to "forgetting".
At the institutional level, there is an organisation with several thousand employees which has been established after the Wende to protect, analyse and distribute to victims and public bodies the files which were accumulated by the MfS. Candidates for public office (for positions such as judge, teacher, policeman, member of parliament) are checked for collaboration with MfS. Should this be proved, not all are excluded from public office there is a further evaluation. In addition, a government commission (Enquete Kommission) has been set up to inquire into the history and functioning of the SED state. Laws have been passed to address some of the injustices which occurred in the GDR, e.g. to provide financial compensation for time spent in jail as a political prisoner, to deal with the MfS files and questions of confiscated property. Many people, often employees, have expressed their distress and anger (many have that surely remained silent for fear of disadvantage) that old bosses of the formerly state controlled companies have remained or have reappeared in positions of power. They had been persecuted by these members of the "nomenclatura" in the old system and were dismayed that the "revolution" had produced such injustice. There have been official attempts to solve some of these problems with a sort of Ombudsman system but many such cases remain open.
Some citizens and groups are unsatisfied with the nature and extent of ''facing history and ourselves", despite all the achievements in producing government action mentioned above. Proposals for an independent tribunal to judge the GDR state and its supporters have been modified and have resulted in the launching of a Forum aimed to allow discussion and dialogue, promote historical evaluations and public debate. This initiative came out of the spectrum of former GDR dissidents, protestant church priests and prominent authors.
In other countries of the soviet bloc there are major differences to the GDR. The German socialist state was among the richest few of those countries and now, with many added resources from the west, is certainly economically in the lead. The system of state control seemed more "perfect"; secret police and informers were more numerous and their files much more voluminous and well organised. I have not yet been able to gather much detail about how people in these countries are "facing their history". The aims and activities of the Memorial group founded in the USSR with Sakharov are well known. They aim to document and reveal the history of the USSR, to help avoid that Stalin's terror and the Gulag are forgotten or denied and, it seems, they aim to promote democracy.(Similar groups exist in Poland and some Poles have contacted people with similar interests in the Ukraine.) It is not yet (May 1992) clear exactly how the records of the communist party and the KGB will "looked after"; there are strong pressures to seal the archives.
In many, if not most parts of the collapsed soviet empire, everyday life is simply about survival; working through of the past will have to wait. But, those groups and individuals who attempt it deserve much support.
The question of involvement with the political secret police has recently received public attention in Poland and Czechoslovakia. A government in Poland apparently fell because its minister for internal affairs released some badly researched information which seemed aimed to damage some of his political opponents. As a positive side effect, hot public debate about Poland's recent history was stimulated. In CSFR the so-called transillumination law excludes many of those who held office in the former regime, down to some quite "small fish" (but, controversially, trapping the "father" of the "socialism with a human face", the Prague Spring, Alexander Dubceck) from holding elected public office. Things may change if (or when) the CSFR splits into two republics. In Roumania groups who attempt to raise critical questions about conditions under Ceaucescu still run the risk of being persecuted as much in that country remains effectively unchanged. A group working for the renewal of psychiatry aims to work through abuses of and by psychiatrists and also to study the effects of Ceausescu's repression on the Roumanian people. Members of the group have received threats of physicial violence which aim to force them to abandon their work to renew psychiatry.
It is my intention that the above case studies and brief accounts concerning the "dynamics" of trauma will contribute to a political ecology which covers trauma and extreme stress. And that the "pre-theoretical" steps taken and simple models suggested for discussion in the first part of this paper may possibly assist us to begin improving our understanding of trauma and its meaning for societies and the world. As the psychotherapist from Leningrad said (above), in his country there are many, many cases of trauma and few helpers. Therapy for obvious victims is clearly desirable but will in many cases not be achieved. Other processes through which people may come to work through the shared trauma of their culture need to be developed, which may complement established and proved modes of intervention.
Notes
(1) More detail about the work of this project may be obtained from PSAMRA (see below). A paper is available: German re-unification and personal identity: first experiences of a counselling project in east Berlin, by Heike Bernhardt, presented at a PSAMRA sysmposium during the ISTSS World Conference, The Netherlands, June 1992.
(2) Further information about the work of this group, the Roumanian
Free Psychiatrists' Association, may be obtained from PSAMRA.CONTACT: Psycho-Social and Medical Research (PSAMRA),
Derfflingerstrasse l7, 10785 Berlin, Germany. E-mail: mjm@berlin.snafu.de(3) Questions arise such as: What is generally understood by (a) individua] Vergangenheitsbewaetigung (V-b ) and (b) societal or cultural V-b. ? In trauma cases of sociopolitical origin, what promotes and what inhibits that individual V-b. may occur successfully? What defines success? How does (a) influence (b)? What are the strategies available to encourage (a) and (b) and their positive mutual interactions? Are there classical and/or recent examples of successful (b)? What defines success? How can the degree of success of (b) be judged and monitored? What can be learned from previous successes or failures of V-b., for example, in Europe - colonialism; in Germany - Nazism; in the USA - the Vietnam war ?
REFERENCES
DANIELLI, Y. The treatment & prevention of long-term effects and intergenerational transmission of victimisation: a lesson from Holocaust survivors and their children . In: Figley, C.R. Trauma and its wake. New York, Brunner Mazel, 1985.
DUDECK, P. Vergangenheitsbewaeltigung. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 1992, Band 1-2 (3rd. Jan.), 44-53.
FIGLEY, C.R., (Chapter title ?). In: Figley, C.R. Trauma and its wake. New York, Brunner Mazel, 1985.
FUCHS, J. Zersetzung bis in den Tod (Harrassment with fatal results). Der Spiegel, 1991, 49, 94-108.
KLIER, F. Lueg Vaterland (Translation difficulty - a satirical transformation of "lieb Vaterland" - beloved Fatherland. Lueg = lie.) Munich, Kindler Verlag, 1990.
KONKOV, F. Remarks during the Second European Conference on Traumatic Stress, Netherlands (Noordwijkerhout) 1990 a.
KONKOV, F. Aversive control at the individual, family, organisational and society levels: traumatic stress consequences. Abstract published in the handbook of the Second European Conference on Traumatic Stress, Netherlands, 1990b.
KRAETSCHELL, A-M & WAHL, H. Erfahrungen aus der Beratungsarteit vor und nach der Wende (Experience in counselling work before and after the "Wende" (1989)). Psychosozial, 14 Jahrgang, Heft l (Nr. 45), 102-107, 199l.
ISRAEL, A. Child rearing and early education in the German Democratic Republic. In: Sociopolitical stress, coping and prevention. (A documentation of sessions with a focus on east Europe and the USSR at the 2nd European Conference on Traumatic Stress, Netherlands) l990 (Available from PSAMRA, Derfflingerstrasse 17,10785 Berlin 30).
MAAZ, H-J. Die psychologischen Folgen der "Wende" in der DDR. (Psychic consequences of the "Wende" in the GDR). Psychosozial,14 Jahrgang, Heft l (Nr. 45), 58-63, l99l.
MITSCHERLICH,A. & Mitscherlich M. Die Unfaehigkeit zu trauern. (The incapacity to mourn). Munich, Piper, 1967.
TUCKER, R.C. The dictator and totalitarianism: Hitler and Stalin. In: White, R.K. Psychology and the prevention of nuclear war. NY, New York University, 1986, 307-321.
YERISH, M. Remarks during the 2nd European Conference on Traumatic Stress, Netherlands (Noordwijkerhout) 1990.
contact: Dr. Michael Macpherson via e-mail, mjm@berlin.snafu.de
URL of this document <http//:www.snafu.de/~mjm/verg-b.html>