Podcasts about naimark

Absolutely no one doubts that Stalin murdered millions of people in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. His ruthless campaign of “dekulakization,” his pitiless deportation of “unreliable” ethnic groups, his senseless starvation of Ukrainian peasants, his cruel attempt to “cleanse” the Communist Party of supposed “enemies of the people”–all of these actions resulted in mass death. In total, Stalin is responsible for the murder of roughly 10 million Soviet citizens. Again, this is well established. What is not well established is what to call Stalin's crimes. As Norman Naimark points out in his thought-provoking Stalin's Genocides (Princeton UP, 2010), historians and others have been peculiarly conflicted about this issue. Everyone agrees it's mass murder. But is it “genocide,” with all that term entails? Etymologically, it doesn't seem so: gens is Latin for “people who claim common descent,” that is, a clan, tribe, or even nation. The Kulaks were not a gens. Historically, genocide doesn't fit well either: after World War II, the UN decided that it would mean “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial religious group, as such.” Again, the Kulaks are none of these things. Naimark, however, argues Stalin's crimes should be considered genocide on three grounds. First, he demonstrates that some of Stalin's attacks were genocide under the UN definition, for example his exile and starvation of minority ethnic groups. Second, he shows that some of those who sought to define genocide during and after World War II did not intend to restrict it to gens: they included political groups, that is, entities like the Kulaks. The Soviets and others demanded these groups be removed from the definition, and they were. Third, he demonstrates that international law has evolved, and with it the legal meaning of genocide: recent proceedings in the Baltic states, for example, have broadened the definition. Some might ask “What does it matter what we call it?” I think it matters a lot. Words are not only an interpretation of the world, but they are also a reflection of who we are. The words the Nazis used to describe their crimes–“final solution,” “transport to the East,” “special handling”–tell us much about them. The words the Stalinists used to describe their crimes–“purge,” “evacuation,” “re-education”–tell us much about them as well. And so we have to ask: What does our persistent failure to call Stalin's crimes “genocide” say about us? Nothing very good, I think. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven't already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/central-asian-studies

Absolutely no one doubts that Stalin murdered millions of people in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. His ruthless campaign of “dekulakization,” his pitiless deportation of “unreliable” ethnic groups, his senseless starvation of Ukrainian peasants, his cruel attempt to “cleanse” the Communist Party of supposed “enemies of the people”–all of these actions resulted in mass death. In total, Stalin is responsible for the murder of roughly 10 million Soviet citizens. Again, this is well established. What is not well established is what to call Stalin's crimes. As Norman Naimark points out in his thought-provoking Stalin's Genocides (Princeton UP, 2010), historians and others have been peculiarly conflicted about this issue. Everyone agrees it's mass murder. But is it “genocide,” with all that term entails? Etymologically, it doesn't seem so: gens is Latin for “people who claim common descent,” that is, a clan, tribe, or even nation. The Kulaks were not a gens. Historically, genocide doesn't fit well either: after World War II, the UN decided that it would mean “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial religious group, as such.” Again, the Kulaks are none of these things. Naimark, however, argues Stalin's crimes should be considered genocide on three grounds. First, he demonstrates that some of Stalin's attacks were genocide under the UN definition, for example his exile and starvation of minority ethnic groups. Second, he shows that some of those who sought to define genocide during and after World War II did not intend to restrict it to gens: they included political groups, that is, entities like the Kulaks. The Soviets and others demanded these groups be removed from the definition, and they were. Third, he demonstrates that international law has evolved, and with it the legal meaning of genocide: recent proceedings in the Baltic states, for example, have broadened the definition. Some might ask “What does it matter what we call it?” I think it matters a lot. Words are not only an interpretation of the world, but they are also a reflection of who we are. The words the Nazis used to describe their crimes–“final solution,” “transport to the East,” “special handling”–tell us much about them. The words the Stalinists used to describe their crimes–“purge,” “evacuation,” “re-education”–tell us much about them as well. And so we have to ask: What does our persistent failure to call Stalin's crimes “genocide” say about us? Nothing very good, I think. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven't already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/eastern-european-studies

Un episodio muy grato y especial no solo porque nos visita un buen amigo como lo es Benny Naimark, sino que además a través de su experiencia en un modelo de negocio de lo más tradicional hablamos de lo importante que es la digitalización para cualquier negocio hoy en día. ¡Disfrútalo y deja tus comentarios! Si te gustó el episodio por favor déjanos una calificación sincera aquí o tus comentarios para seguir mejorando: https://ratethispodcast.com/ecommercesimplificado ¿Quieres explorar la posibilidad de trabajar tu proyecto con nosotros en Simplify? https://simplify.agency/contacto ¿Ya tienes una tienda en Shopify y necesitas ayuda con el Marketing para vender y crecer? https://simplify.agency/contacto ¿Ya tienes una tienda en Shopify y necesitas ayuda con tareas técnicas? Prueba Tasky https://www.somostasky.com ¿Quieres probar Shopify por ti mismo? Empieza aquí: https://cutt.ly/Shopify_ ¿Quieres probar Klaviyo por ti mismo? Empieza aquí: https://cutt.ly/Klaviyo Si te gustaría estar en contacto con Elias, búscalo en linkedin como Elias Manopla o instagram como @eliasmanopla

 In this Conversations With Healers episode, my guest is Ann Naimark, Licensed Spiritual Psychotherapist with over 32 years of experience, Author of 'A Touch Of Light, Opening To the Love That Is You & All Creation.', Energy Healer, Teacher of Spiritual Classes and Group Meditation Leader. We talked about: What Spiritual Psychotherapy and EMDR are (hint: we'll teach you a butterfly tapping technique to balance both sides of your brain), Being friends with Light Beings and accessing your intuition, What do to if it feels really hard to connect with the love that you are and the love that surrounds you, How to make space for the awesome, And much more. You can find out more about Anna and her work at her website https://annnaimark.com/ and her Instagram https://www.instagram.com/annnaimark/. You can get her book on Amazon https://amzn.to/3XXZDaH (affiliate link) You can email her at annnaimark5@gmail.com to be considered for a free healing until August 15, 2023. You can also email her to be included in her free Saturday meditations. With love and light, Damla

Ann Naimark – integrating “Woo Woo” and “Science” Don't forget to like subscribe and comment we always love to hear from you on the Awesome Life Podcast! And watch us on YouTube: https://youtu.be/5lQ8_uT_Ghw http://www.annnaimark.com/ Ann has been a psychotherapist for 32 years. She began incorporating spirituality into her counseling work when clients said no one was talking about this subject in their lives. She has felt for many years that attending to and integrating body, mind, emotion, and spirit are all important, and all spiritual. That is how she approaches her therapy work. Honoring our human diversity, Ann adheres strongly to the idea that there are many ways to our spiritual evolution. She honors everyone's experience and inclination, and supports each person in their unique style. Ann has written articles and blogs, for YourTango and Health and Fitness Magazine. Her book chronicling her spiritual journey, “A Touch of Light, Opening to the Love that is You and All Creation” is on Amazon. Ann has led many meditations over the years. She can hear, see, feel the energy coming from the family of Source and communicate that during the meditations. She has made friends with many amazing Light Beings who are here to help us uncover our True Love Selves. When she invites them to show up, they do, if that is the best move in the moment. #Spirit #Psychotherpy, #Podcast #AwesoemLife #Books #AnnNaimark #KarenStultz www.awesomelifepodcast --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/awesomelife/message

War is raging in Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has made veiled—and not-so-veiled—threats about the use of nuclear weapons. And with President Joe Biden warning of the potential for "armageddon," many have begun asking a troubling question: Is this the beginning of a new Cold War?In this interview, Lindsay talks with historian Norman Naimark, author of the book "Stalin and the Fate of Europe." Naimark explains how we got to this moment in Ukraine—and the lessons we can draw from the Cold War.Listen to new episodes 1 week early and to all episodes ad free with Wondery+. Join Wondery+ for exclusives, binges, early access, and ad free listening. Available in the Wondery App https://wondery.app.link/americanscandal.Support us by supporting our sponsors!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Norm Naimark is a nosographer who specializes in medieval manuscripts. Jeannette is a woman who seems to have everything going for her, but she's not content with her life. Norm and Jeannette chat about life, love, and Thucydides.

Norm took us on a history lesson of sorts discussing the evolution of the rag-doll chicken. He also told us about a new type of taper that is being used onoultry today.

Ann Naimark is a spiritual psychotherapist for 30 years. Her spiritual autobiography will be coming out in October, 2022. “TAPPING INTO SOURCE, How to Meet the Light of All Things, Connect to Your Unique Spiritual World and Adventure into the Mystical Unknown”

Alaura Lovelight & Ann Naimark

American historian Norman M. Naimark is the Robert and Florence McDonnell Professor of Eastern European Studies at Stanford University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. Norman writes on modern Eastern European history, genocide, and ethnic cleansing in the region. He is one of our most respected experts on the Soviet era. He is a member of the editorial boards of a number of professional journals, including The American Historical Review and The Journal of Contemporary History. One of Norman's most famous studies is “The Russians In Germany”. He wrote in a 2017 essay that genocide is often tied to war, dehumanization, and/or economic resentment. KSE Public lectures with top world intellectuals serve to demonstrate solidarity with Ukraine and enhance Ukrainian intellectual sovereignty. More information about project: https://kse.ua/lektsi-na-pidtrimku-ukrayini/ The KSE launched a humanitarian aid campaign for Ukraine. The campaign's objective is to purchase necessary supplies, first aid, and protective kits for the State Emergency Service of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Paramedic Association, and the Ukrainian Territorial Defense Forces. No matter how small, every donation can help deliver essential aid and supplies. DONATE: https://kse.ua/support/donation Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/KyivSchool https://twitter.com/brik_t Follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KyivSchoolOfEconomics

Queere Geschichte hilft dabei, saubere und oft gewaltsame Kategorien in eine fruchtbare Unordnung zu bringen. So beschreibt Dr Anna Hájková unter anderem die Funktion von queerer Geschichte. Wir haben uns mit ihr unterhalten. Darüber was queer history ist, wie sie dazu kam und was sie daran begeistert. Ihr neues Buch "The Last Ghetto: An Everyday History of Theresienstadt" betrachtet Theresienstadt nicht als einen Ausnahmezustand, sondern untersucht die Gesellschaft dort als eine solche. Wie wurden Freundschaften geschlossen? Wie wurde bestehende Grenzen überwunden? Wie wurde der Alltag in Theresienstadt organisiert? Wir haben auch über ihr kurzes Buch "Menschen ohne Geschichte sind Staub. Homophobie und Holocaust" gesprochen. Darüber wie es in der Forschung aussieht: Ist queer history ein Thema? Und im speziellen Fall des Holocausts? Hájková beschäftigt sich mit einer sehr gewaltvollen und auch grausamen Geschichte. Wie sie mit Trauma in den Quellen und den damit verbunden Emotionen umgeht erfahrt ihr in der heutigen Folge. Wer Gast sein möchte, Fragen oder Feedback hat, kann dieses gerne an houseofmodernhistory@gmail.com oder auf Twitter an @houseofModHist richten. Quellen und Literaturhinweise: Butler, Judith: Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge, New York, 1990. E.P. Thompson: The Making of the English Working Class, Harmondsworth 1970. Douglas, Mary: Purity and Danger. An Analysis of Conceptions of Pollution and Taboo, New York 1966. (Dt: Reinheit und Gefährdung. Eine Studie zu Vorstellungen von Verunreinigung und Tabu, Berlin 1985. Evans, Jennifer: Why Queer German History? In: German History Volume 34, Issue 3, Special Issue: ‘Queering German History', September 2016. Hájková, Anna: Menschen ohne Geschichte sind Staub. Homophobie und Holocaust. Hirschfeld-Lectures Band 14. Göttingen, 2021. Hájková, Anna: The Last Ghetto. An Everyday History of Theresienstadt, New York 2020. Hájková, Anna; Heydt, Maria von der (2019). Die letzten Berliner Veit Simons: Holocaust, Geschlecht und das Ende des deutsch-jüdischen Bürgertums [The Last Veit Simons from Berlin. Holocaust, Gender, and the End of the German-Jewish Bourgeoisie] (in German). Hentrich und Hentrich Verlag Berlin. Hanhardt, Christina B.: Queer Histoty. Organization of American Historians: https://www.oah.org/tah/issues/2019/may/queer-history/ International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: https://www.sciencedirect.com/referencework/9780080430768/international-encyclopedia-of-the-social-and-behavioral-sciences Lücke, Martin: Männlichkeit in Unordnung. Homosexualität und männliche Prostitution in Kaiserreich und Weimarer Republik, Frankfurt/Main 2008. Marhoefers, Laurie Vortrag: Transgender Identity and the Police in Nazi Germany: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NhJVtMGONk Mauss, Marcel: Die Gabe. Die Form und Funktion des Austauschs in archaischen Gesellschaften, Frankfurt/Main 1968. Naimark, Norman M.: The Russians in Germany. A History of the Soviet Zone of Occupation, 1945-1949, Harvard 1995. Rieder, Ines & Voigt, Diana: The Story of Sidonie C.: Freud's Famous ‘Case of Female Homosexuality'. Helena History Press, 2019. Robinson, Paul: Opera, Sex and Other Vital Matters, Chicago, 2002.

On this episode of Finding Your Bliss, we have Monica Parker, an Award-Winning Actress, Writer/Author, and Producer. She has always known she was destined for big things. Having worked in Hollywood and Canada with many of the greats?including Sir Anthony Hopkins, Michael Douglas, Dan Ayckroyd, Gwyneth Paltrow, Viggo Mortensen, John Cusack, John Candy and Kim Catrall

I interview my good friend and we get real...---To get 4 drops of Sessions per week instead of 2 in season 4 + access to seasons 1-3 of Sessions (528 drops) + membership to DGAF Community, sign up to become a PATRON for $4.22 a month (or more) at https://www.patreon.com/DGAFPokerPlayer.*This public drop of Sessions is sponsored by Hustler Casino, home of the #1 poker stream in the world, Hustler Casino Live! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

I interview my good friend and we get real...---To get 4 drops of Sessions per week instead of 2 in season 4 + access to seasons 1-3 of Sessions (528 drops) + membership to DGAF Community, sign up to become a PATRON for $4.22 a month (or more) at https://www.patreon.com/DGAFPokerPlayer.*This public drop of Sessions is sponsored by Hustler Casino, home of the #1 poker stream in the world, Hustler Casino Live! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Part 5: Why certain cultures are more opposed to vaccines than others, the Pfizer CEO's stock debacle, a PR blunder at the FDA, and how to navigate discussions with those who have opposing views.To get access to all 34 drops of season 1, all 192 drops of season 2, all 302 drops of season 3, all drops of season 4 and beyond+ access to the 2-season catalog of Solicited Advice Podcast+ membership to DGAF Community sign up to become a PATRON for $4.22 a month (or more) at https://www.patreon.com/DGAFPokerPlayer. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Emprendedora Social fundadora de ImpACTa, Bold Beauty Project Panama y Creadora del patacón mas grande del mundo con un Guiness World Record. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

If you think anti-vaxxers are stupid or evil after listening to this, well, you might be... --- To reciprocate my spew and become a member of the DGAF Community, click here: https://www.patreon.com/DGAFPokerPlayer To get to the DGAF Community, click here: https://dgafcommunity.com To listen to previous seasons, click here: http://dgaf-sessions.libsyn.com  To get your Sessions apparel, click here: https://pokerrags.us

In this very special second bonus episode of Raising The Nuts, Trevor and Jody continue the conversation with DGAF and Dr. David Naimark.Find Sessions here: https://dgaf-sessions.libsyn.comFind Jody and Trevor on social media!Instagram:RTN - @raisingthenutsJody - @asvglifeTrevor - @tremomeyTwitter:RTN - @raisingthenutsJody - @asvglifeTrevor - @tremomeyFacebook:RTN - @raisingthenutsJody - @asvglifeemail: info@raisingthenuts.comWeb: raisingthenuts.comMerchandise: pokerrags.us

In this very special episode of Raising The Nuts, Trevor and Jody have a thoughtful discussion with DGAF of the Sessions podcast and Dr. David Naimark who is a psychiatrist in San Diego, CA. Together, they discuss mental health during the pandemic lockdowns and what to do if another happens. Additionally, they have a long conversation about vaccines and what to think about the new coronavirus vaccine.Find Sessions here: https://dgaf-sessions.libsyn.comFind Jody and Trevor on social media!Instagram:RTN - @raisingthenutsJody - @asvglifeTrevor - @tremomeyTwitter:RTN - @raisingthenutsJody - @asvglifeTrevor - @tremomeyFacebook:RTN - @raisingthenutsJody - @asvglifeemail: info@raisingthenuts.comWeb: raisingthenuts.comMerchandise: pokerrags.us

Die Sammlung des ZKM | Werkdokumentation

As part of the BIO International Conference taking place this week – as a virtual set of webinars and video meetings – The Commons interviewed several members of the Phoenix bio ecosystem to learn more about the research, resources, and opportunities taking place in this rapidly emerging life science and biotechnology ecosystem.Here is the full interview with Arizona State University's Rick Naimark, Associate Vice President for Program Development Planning.Additional Resources:Arizona State UniversityASU Biodesign Institute

Has America hit rock bottom? --- To reciprocate my spew and become a member of the DGAF Community, click here: https://www.patreon.com/DGAFPokerPlayer To get to the DGAF Community, click here: https://dgafcommunity.com To listen to previous seasons, click here: http://dgaf-sessions.libsyn.com  To get your Sessions apparel, click here: https://pokerrags.us

J! Home Judisk kultur i Sverige online Absolut Beethoven - En podkonsert med Naimark & Friends I den här konserten - inspelad under en eftermiddag hemma hos Lizzie och Staffan Scheja - undersöker Naimark & Friends Beethovens musik ur ett filosofiskt perspektiv. I fokus står förhållandena mellan handling, ord och ordlös musik. Musik av Ludvig v Beethoven: Pianotrio op. 1 nr. 3 Pastoralsonat Stråkkvartett op. 18 nr. 1 Medverkande: Alva Press, violin; Antonio Hallongren, cello; Riikka Repo, viola; Thomas Rudberg, piano och Henrik Naimark Meyers, violin. Inspelningstekniker Leonardo Wehlander Tack till Kulturrådet, Stockholms Stad & Region Stockholm J! Home – Jewish Culture in Sweden online Absolute Beethoven – a Podcast Concert with Naimark & Friends In this concert – recorded one afternoon in the home of Lizzie and Staffan Scheja – Naimark & Friends examine Beethoven’s music from a philosophic perspective with focus on the relations between action, words and music. Music of Ludvig v Beethoven: Piano trio op. 1 nr. 3 Pastoral sonata String quartet op. 18 nr. 1 Participants: Alva Press, violin; Antonio Hallongren, cello; Riikka Repo, viola; Thomas Rudberg, piano and Henrik Naimark Meyers, violin. Supported by The Swedish Arts Council, The City of Stockholm and Stockholm Region.

I have a couple beers via satellite and catch up with "The Dark Angel", Dr. David Naimark... --- To reciprocate my spew and become a member of the DGAF Community, click here: https://www.patreon.com/DGAFPokerPlayer To get to the DGAF Community, click here: https://dgafcommunity.com To listen to previous seasons, click here: http://dgaf-sessions.libsyn.com 

Steven Naimark started out his professional career as a clarinet performer. Through his passion for performing, he grew not only as a musician, but as a person, finding joy in the discipline required for his craft. After not enjoying the teaching aspect of music, he began looking for something different, to help separate him from music... to provide clarity. Along the way, he fell in love with web development and made a universe change to do it full time. Eventually, he started building a solution to totally modernize the water utility space, called Ziptility - a platform providing asset, task and inventory management for water utilities.

David and I talk coping (thriving?) during COVID-19... --- To reciprocate my spew and become a member of the DGAF Community, click here: https://www.patreon.com/DGAFPokerPlayer To get to the DGAF Community, click here: https://dgafcommunity.com To listen to previous seasons, click here: http://dgaf-sessions.libsyn.com 

I interview David after one of his poker sessions to try something new. We have some good laughs and he does a great job providing the recreational player's perspective. Spoiler: David loves 42o in the SB! --- Dear Listener, If you get something significant from my content, please reciprocate in whatever way is right for you. Because if you don't, unfortunately, that makes you a nit! Ewwwwww... Visit the "Reciprocation Station" page on my blog site, DGAFblog.com to see the different ways (most free, all easy) you can be communal and help keep my content flowing. Thanks for the support! -DGAF

Recorded on February 14, 2017 Norman Naimark, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and an expert on Eastern Europe and genocides throughout history, brings his considerable expertise to Uncommon Knowledge to discuss the history of genocides from ancient to modern times. Peter Robinson sits down with Naimark to discuss his latest book, Genocide: A World History. Naimark argues that genocides occur throughout history, from biblical to modern times across the world. He considers genocides to be “the crime of crimes, worse than war crimes or crimes against humanity,” Naimark defines genocide as “intentional killing of a group of people as such,” meaning that the intention is to eliminate that group completely. He stresses the difference of this definition from warfare, as in war two sides are killing each other with the intention of subjugation rather than extermination. He goes into detail about a few incidents that he considers genocides, including but not limited to Nazi Germany, Stalin’s genocide of the kulaks, the Armenian genocide in the early 1900s, the Carthage genocide in 146 BC, the Rwandan genocide in the 1990s, and the Yuki genocide in California in the 1850s. Naimark argues that as genocides occur in contemporary society, sovereign states have a responsibility to protect their citizens; if they fail to do so the international community has a moral and civic obligation to step in to stop those genocides from occurring. Granted, he argues, that the cost of intervention needs to be assessed before stepping in but that overall each country has a national obligation to prevent the systematic extermination of people. Interested in buying Norman Naimark’s latest book, Genocide: A World History? You can buy it here. About the guest Norman M. Naimark is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is also the Robert and Florence McDonnell Professor of East European Studies and a senior fellow of Stanford's Freeman-Spogli Institute. He currently serves as the Sakurako and William Fisher Family Director of the Stanford Global Studies Division. Naimark is an expert in modern East European and Russian history. His current research focuses on Soviet policies and actions in Europe after World War II and on genocide and ethnic cleansing in the twentieth century. Naimark is author of the critically acclaimed volumes The Russians in Germany: The History of the Soviet Zone of Occupation, 1945–1949 (Harvard, 1995), Fires of Hatred: Ethnic Cleansing in 20th Century Europe (Harvard, 2001), and Stalin's Genocides (Princeton, 2010). He is also author of the volumes Terrorists and Social Democrats: The Russian Revolutionary Movement under Alexander III (Harvard, 1983) and The History of the "Proletariat": The Emergence of Marxism in the Kingdom of Poland, 1870–1887 (Columbia, 1979). Naimark earned a BA (1966), MA (1968), and PhD (1972) in history from Stanford University. Before returning to Stanford in 1988 Naimark was a professor of history at Boston University and a fellow at the Russian Research Center at Harvard. He also held the visiting Kathryn Wasserman Davis Chair of Slavic Studies at Wellesley College. (Playing time: 49:08)

It was always a very scenic area of forests and ravines. A very pleasant green zone on the edge of the city. Picturesque. It was once known as the “Switzerland of Kyiv.” Innocent and bucolic.All that changed over the course of a couple of days at the end of September 1941. Babyn Yar, on the outskirts of Kyiv, became a global symbol of the Holocaust, and entered the language as shorthand for unfathomable cruelty and unprecedented loss of life.Babyn Yar was the site of the murder of nearly 34,000 Kyivan Jews that dark September.  The killings continued over the next couple of years during the German occupation of Kyiv. With continued shootings of tens of thousands more Jews. As well as the Roma people, the patients of psychiatric hospitals, Soviet prisoners of war, Ukrainian national activists, Communist Party members, and ordinary residents of Kyiv taken as hostages.We are still coming to grips with this legacy. Now a new book, entitled Babyn Yar: History and Memory, is dedicated to the commemoration of the seventy-fifth anniversary of Babyn Yar, This book, in both English and Ukrainian-language editions and sponsored by the Ukrainian Jewish Encounter, is the result of the collaborative effort of scholars working with the editors Vladyslav Hrynevych and Paul Robert Magocsi. The scholars are from various disciplines in Canada, France, Israel, the Netherlands, Ukraine, and the United States,All the contributors were united by a desire to inform the international community about the history of one of the twentieth century’s most terrible human tragedies. They also wanted to underline the importance of preserving its memory.At the center of the book of course is the history of a Nazi crime.  But this history is a departure point for a deeper discussion. The book also covers the politics of memory and forgetting from the Stalinist period to the present day, and the cultural memory of Babyn Yar. The contributions to this volume are based on documentary sources and academic research.The essays provoke questions for further discussion, especially since the various authors may raise the same questions but do not always arrive at the same answers.As the editors in the introduction to the book point out, this most recent anniversary of the Babyn Yar tragedy allows us to understand that the past is not some construct set in stone, forever fixed in place. It is instead a dynamic phenomenon open to new discoveries. Every era and every generation contributes its own vision and interpretation of the Babyn Yar tragedy. These are expressed in a variety of dimensions.Finally, it is important to point out there is a generational aspect to the reinterpretation of this tragedy, as every generation does this in its own way.The book also poses questions, especially to those who were born in an independent Ukraine. What is Babyn Yar in our memory? And how does this memory fit into our understanding of the past? And into the philosophical and ideological picture of the present and the future?As the editors remind us, to know and remember the Babyn Yar tragedy means not allowing such a crime to be repeated. And in the Ukrainian experience, Babyn Yar is also a symbolic farewell to empire and its mythological legacy. A return to the work of sadness and the formation of a culture of mourning.As Norman Naimark of Stanford University points out in his preface to the book, Babyn Yar is in many ways still unfinished business. There is no consensus on how to memorialize the Kyivan Jews killed there. There is also considerable confusion about how to deal with the multiple interests of victim groups, in addition to the Jews, who lost substantial numbers of their people at Babyn Yar.But as Naimark writes, See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

GLOBALE: Tribunal – A Trial Against the Transgressions of the 20th Century | Symposium Fri, June 19 - Sun, June 21, 2015 The GLOBALE begins with a tribunal at which the 20th century will be tried for its transgressions and crimes against humanity, animals, and nature. Indictments will be sought for genocide such as the Holocaust, the exploitation of the Earth, and the extermination of the animal world by humans. With a conference, a panorama-screen installation, and a film program, the tribunal will present a critical review of the 20th century, a “century of extremes” (Eric Hobsbawm, 1994) and declining inhibition. The three-day event takes its cue from Franz Kafka’s novel »The Trial« (1914/1915) and prominent trials of the 20th century. The historical trials that serve as a model for this tribunal are the dadaist trial against Maurice Barrès (1921), the Nuremberg Trials, and the Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal. As the first international tribunals prosecuting war crimes, the Nuremberg Trials are exemplary of legal proceedings to ascertain individual guilt in crimes against humanity. The Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal, also known as the Russell Tribunal, was initiated by Lord Bertrand Russell in 1966, as a private body for investigating and evaluating American war crimes in Vietnam. It later served as the model for investigating violations of international law; for example, for the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal. Our tribunal also reminds us of the legal importance of Karlsruhe – the seat of both the Federal Constitutional Court and the Federal Attorney General of Germany. The presentations will deal with the history of violence and genocide, expulsion and persecution in the 20th century. The speakers are distinguished scholars and artists exploring these themes from historical, legal, philosophical, and artistic perspectives, who will present their latest research findings. Conference languages are English and German. /// Die GLOBALE beginnt mit einem Prolog am 19. Juni 2015 im ZKM: mit einem Prozess gegen die Verfehlungen des 20. Jahrhunderts und seine Verbrechen gegen Mensch, Tier und Natur. Angeklagt werden Völkermorde wie der Holocaust, die Ausbeutung der Erde und die Ausrottung der Tierwelt durch den Menschen. In Form einer Konferenz, einer Panorama-Screen-Installation und eines Filmprogramms liefert das Tribunal eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme des 20. Jahrhunderts. Das Tribunal findet im ZKM an einem geschichtlich belasteten Ort statt. 1915, vor genau 100 Jahren, war Baubeginn des sog. Hallenbaus als architektonisch avancierte Waffen- und Munitionsfabrik. Während des Dritten Reiches mussten Tausende von Zwangsarbeitern hier unmenschlichen Dienst tun. Insofern ist der Hallenbau auch ein Mahnmal der im Tribunal verhandelten Verbrechen. Die dreitägige Veranstaltung wird vom ZKM in Auseinandersetzung mit dem Roman »Der Prozess« (1914/1915) von Franz Kafka sowie historischen Prozessen wie etwa André Bretons dadaistischem Schauprozess gegen Maurice Barrès (1921), den Nürnberger Prozessen oder dem »Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal« inszeniert. Die Nürnberger Prozesse stehen als erster internationaler Prozess gegen die Kriegsverbrechen beispielhaft für die juristische Verhandlung der individuellen Schuld an Vergehen gegen die Menschlichkeit. Das »Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal«, auch unter dem Namen »Russell-Tribunal« bekannt, wurde 1966 von dem Mathematiker, Philosophen und Literaturnobelpreisträger Lord Bertrand Russel als private Nichtregierungsorganisation ins Leben gerufen, um die US-amerikanischen Kriegsverbrechen im Vietnamkrieg zu untersuchen. Später diente es als Modell für die Untersuchung von Völkerrechtsverletzungen, z. B. das UN-Kriegsverbrechertribunal. Das Tribunal erinnert auch an die Bedeutung Karlsruhes als »Residenzstadt des Rechts«, in der sowohl das Bundesverfassungsgericht, der Bundesgerichtshof als auch die Bundesanwaltschaft ihren Sitz haben.

Absolutely no one doubts that Stalin murdered millions of people in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. His ruthless campaign of “dekulakization,” his pitiless deportation of “unreliable” ethnic groups, his senseless starvation of Ukrainian peasants, his cruel attempt to “cleanse” the Communist Party of supposed “enemies of the people”–all of these actions resulted in mass death. In total, Stalin is responsible for the murder of roughly 10 million Soviet citizens. Again, this is well established. What is not well established is what to call Stalin's crimes. As Norman Naimark points out in his thought-provoking Stalin's Genocides (Princeton UP, 2010), historians and others have been peculiarly conflicted about this issue. Everyone agrees it's mass murder. But is it “genocide,” with all that term entails? Etymologically, it doesn't seem so: gens is Latin for “people who claim common descent,” that is, a clan, tribe, or even nation. The Kulaks were not a gens. Historically, genocide doesn't fit well either: after World War II, the UN decided that it would mean “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial religious group, as such.” Again, the Kulaks are none of these things. Naimark, however, argues Stalin's crimes should be considered genocide on three grounds. First, he demonstrates that some of Stalin's attacks were genocide under the UN definition, for example his exile and starvation of minority ethnic groups. Second, he shows that some of those who sought to define genocide during and after World War II did not intend to restrict it to gens: they included political groups, that is, entities like the Kulaks. The Soviets and others demanded these groups be removed from the definition, and they were. Third, he demonstrates that international law has evolved, and with it the legal meaning of genocide: recent proceedings in the Baltic states, for example, have broadened the definition. Some might ask “What does it matter what we call it?” I think it matters a lot. Words are not only an interpretation of the world, but they are also a reflection of who we are. The words the Nazis used to describe their crimes–“final solution,” “transport to the East,” “special handling”–tell us much about them. The words the Stalinists used to describe their crimes–“purge,” “evacuation,” “re-education”–tell us much about them as well. And so we have to ask: What does our persistent failure to call Stalin's crimes “genocide” say about us? Nothing very good, I think. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven't already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Absolutely no one doubts that Stalin murdered millions of people in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. His ruthless campaign of “dekulakization,” his pitiless deportation of “unreliable” ethnic groups, his senseless starvation of Ukrainian peasants, his cruel attempt to “cleanse” the Communist Party of supposed “enemies of the people”–all of these actions resulted in mass death. In total, Stalin is responsible for the murder of roughly 10 million Soviet citizens. Again, this is well established. What is not well established is what to call Stalin’s crimes. As Norman Naimark points out in his thought-provoking Stalin’s Genocides (Princeton UP, 2010), historians and others have been peculiarly conflicted about this issue. Everyone agrees it’s mass murder. But is it “genocide,” with all that term entails? Etymologically, it doesn’t seem so: gens is Latin for “people who claim common descent,” that is, a clan, tribe, or even nation. The Kulaks were not a gens. Historically, genocide doesn’t fit well either: after World War II, the UN decided that it would mean “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial religious group, as such.” Again, the Kulaks are none of these things. Naimark, however, argues Stalin’s crimes should be considered genocide on three grounds. First, he demonstrates that some of Stalin’s attacks were genocide under the UN definition, for example his exile and starvation of minority ethnic groups. Second, he shows that some of those who sought to define genocide during and after World War II did not intend to restrict it to gens: they included political groups, that is, entities like the Kulaks. The Soviets and others demanded these groups be removed from the definition, and they were. Third, he demonstrates that international law has evolved, and with it the legal meaning of genocide: recent proceedings in the Baltic states, for example, have broadened the definition. Some might ask “What does it matter what we call it?” I think it matters a lot. Words are not only an interpretation of the world, but they are also a reflection of who we are. The words the Nazis used to describe their crimes–“final solution,” “transport to the East,” “special handling”–tell us much about them. The words the Stalinists used to describe their crimes–“purge,” “evacuation,” “re-education”–tell us much about them as well. And so we have to ask: What does our persistent failure to call Stalin’s crimes “genocide” say about us? Nothing very good, I think. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Absolutely no one doubts that Stalin murdered millions of people in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. His ruthless campaign of “dekulakization,” his pitiless deportation of “unreliable” ethnic groups, his senseless starvation of Ukrainian peasants, his cruel attempt to “cleanse” the Communist Party of supposed “enemies of the people”–all of these actions resulted in mass death. In total, Stalin is responsible for the murder of roughly 10 million Soviet citizens. Again, this is well established. What is not well established is what to call Stalin’s crimes. As Norman Naimark points out in his thought-provoking Stalin’s Genocides (Princeton UP, 2010), historians and others have been peculiarly conflicted about this issue. Everyone agrees it’s mass murder. But is it “genocide,” with all that term entails? Etymologically, it doesn’t seem so: gens is Latin for “people who claim common descent,” that is, a clan, tribe, or even nation. The Kulaks were not a gens. Historically, genocide doesn’t fit well either: after World War II, the UN decided that it would mean “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial religious group, as such.” Again, the Kulaks are none of these things. Naimark, however, argues Stalin’s crimes should be considered genocide on three grounds. First, he demonstrates that some of Stalin’s attacks were genocide under the UN definition, for example his exile and starvation of minority ethnic groups. Second, he shows that some of those who sought to define genocide during and after World War II did not intend to restrict it to gens: they included political groups, that is, entities like the Kulaks. The Soviets and others demanded these groups be removed from the definition, and they were. Third, he demonstrates that international law has evolved, and with it the legal meaning of genocide: recent proceedings in the Baltic states, for example, have broadened the definition. Some might ask “What does it matter what we call it?” I think it matters a lot. Words are not only an interpretation of the world, but they are also a reflection of who we are. The words the Nazis used to describe their crimes–“final solution,” “transport to the East,” “special handling”–tell us much about them. The words the Stalinists used to describe their crimes–“purge,” “evacuation,” “re-education”–tell us much about them as well. And so we have to ask: What does our persistent failure to call Stalin’s crimes “genocide” say about us? Nothing very good, I think. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Absolutely no one doubts that Stalin murdered millions of people in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. His ruthless campaign of “dekulakization,” his pitiless deportation of “unreliable” ethnic groups, his senseless starvation of Ukrainian peasants, his cruel attempt to “cleanse” the Communist Party of supposed “enemies of the people”–all of these actions resulted in mass death. In total, Stalin is responsible for the murder of roughly 10 million Soviet citizens. Again, this is well established. What is not well established is what to call Stalin’s crimes. As Norman Naimark points out in his thought-provoking Stalin’s Genocides (Princeton UP, 2010), historians and others have been peculiarly conflicted about this issue. Everyone agrees it’s mass murder. But is it “genocide,” with all that term entails? Etymologically, it doesn’t seem so: gens is Latin for “people who claim common descent,” that is, a clan, tribe, or even nation. The Kulaks were not a gens. Historically, genocide doesn’t fit well either: after World War II, the UN decided that it would mean “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial religious group, as such.” Again, the Kulaks are none of these things. Naimark, however, argues Stalin’s crimes should be considered genocide on three grounds. First, he demonstrates that some of Stalin’s attacks were genocide under the UN definition, for example his exile and starvation of minority ethnic groups. Second, he shows that some of those who sought to define genocide during and after World War II did not intend to restrict it to gens: they included political groups, that is, entities like the Kulaks. The Soviets and others demanded these groups be removed from the definition, and they were. Third, he demonstrates that international law has evolved, and with it the legal meaning of genocide: recent proceedings in the Baltic states, for example, have broadened the definition. Some might ask “What does it matter what we call it?” I think it matters a lot. Words are not only an interpretation of the world, but they are also a reflection of who we are. The words the Nazis used to describe their crimes–“final solution,” “transport to the East,” “special handling”–tell us much about them. The words the Stalinists used to describe their crimes–“purge,” “evacuation,” “re-education”–tell us much about them as well. And so we have to ask: What does our persistent failure to call Stalin’s crimes “genocide” say about us? Nothing very good, I think. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Host Michael McIlwrath talks trends with Richard Naimark, senior vice president of the American Arbitration Association. Richard oversees the AAA's International Centre for Dispute Resolution. He discusses the ADR market for big providers and regional organizations, as well as the growth of ad hoc arbitration.

Norman Naimark, Professor an der Stanford-Universität sprach über sein Buch "Stalin und der Genozid" (Suhrkamp 2010). In seinem Vortrag rekapitulierte er die Geschichte des Genozid-Konzepts und erläuterte die Zusammenhänge zwischen den Massentötungen in der Sowjetunion der 1930er und der politischen Linie bzw. dem Vorgehen Stalins. Naimark begründete seine Überzeugung, dass die stalinistischen Verbrechen als Genozid anzusehen und im Vergleich mit denen Hitlers und der Nazis zu betrachten seien.

Norman Naimark, Professor an der Stanford-Universität sprach über sein Buch "Stalin und der Genozid" (Suhrkamp 2010). In seinem Vortrag rekapitulierte er die Geschichte des Genozid-Konzepts und erläuterte die Zusammenhänge zwischen den Massentötungen in der Sowjetunion der 1930er und der politischen Linie bzw. dem Vorgehen Stalins. Naimark begründete seine Überzeugung, dass die stalinistischen Verbrechen als Genozid anzusehen und im Vergleich mit denen Hitlers und der Nazis zu betrachten seien.