Criticism of monument protection: Lenin statue in Schwerin causes an uproar!

Criticism of monument protection: Lenin statue in Schwerin causes an uproar!

In Schwerin, the decision to place the 3.50 meter high bronze Lenin statue from 1985 under monument protection is causing controversial discussions. Historians, victims' associations and representatives of memorial sites have made it clear in an open letter that they are critical of this measure. They argue that Lenin should not be viewed in a positive light as the founder of a totalitarian system based on violence and oppression. Monuments of this kind could serve to obscure the suffering and displacement that his policies caused.

The signatories of the letter, which include the historian Ilko-Sascha Kowalczuk and the author Grit Poppe, are calling for a different approach to the statue. “We don’t want to throw away history,” they emphasize. Instead, they suggest allowing the statue to be overgrown with plants or placing it in the courtyard of the former KGB prison, supplemented by signs highlighting the negative effects of Lenin's rule. Above all, reference is made to the Red Terror and the disenfranchisement of entire peoples, which underlines Lenin's historically problematic role.

Criticism of the monument assessment

The discussion about the statue occurs in a sensitive context. Between 1950 and 1953, over 100 death sentences were handed down by a Soviet military tribunal in Schwerin. This fact highlights the perspective of the victims, which is considered to be insufficiently taken into account in the decision to place them under protection. Critics fear that this will deliberately ignore the serious crimes and suffering of those who suffered under Lenin's regime.

The State Office for Culture and Monument Preservation defends the decision by emphasizing the high historical value of the statue. Mayor Rico Badenschier is positive about the protection and sees the monument as an important opportunity to deal with the history of the GDR. However, opinions are divided over what to do with the statue, and the lively debate is likely to continue for some time.

While the monuments of our history are often seen as symbols of certain ideologies and their effects, the tension between the culture of remembrance and the perspective of the victims remains a sensitive topic in local and national discussions. A good knack for dealing with remembrance and warning seems to be in demand more than ever.

For many, including those who signed the open letter, it is clear: history must be kept alive without trivializing the dark chapters. Historical monuments serve not only as a look back, but also as a reminder for the future.

You can find out more about the background to the discussion here Deutschlandfunk culture and n-tv.