Why Minorities Own History, which is the Dispute over the Versions of Events (for Example Kashubians)

Abstract

In this article I’d like to compare the relationship between the methods in which majority and minority groups create memories (using Kashubians as an example), as well as showcase the array of collective memories and the censorship of the past perpetrated by the dominant group. Thus memory is a basic mechanism of storing experiences, events from the past. Past events or rather the belief in something that happened are essential parts of a community’s values. The omission of the history of a minority group is a belittlement of its importance in the public space, the minority is not “important,” it “does not deserve” a memory, its own distinct memory. The memory of events concerning a minority is also often depreciated and ignored, individuals that play important parts in stories of the past that contribute to the history of the group are overlook or their roles are belittled. Sometimes it is the minority affiliation that is omitted, especially when a person played an important role in history from the point of view of the dominant majority.