Proposal Free Competition in the Humanities

Proposal Free Competition in the Humanities

1. Project information

The long-lasting legacy of collaboration. The exclusion and integration of former national socialist milieus in Dutch society.

Summary

This research programme will investigate the legacy of collaboration during the Second World War in a new way. For a long time the debate on collaborationist behaviour focused on social judgement in terms of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, and subsequently on ‘shades of grey’. This programme chooses a different and innovative approach. Our hypothesis is that we may gain a better understanding of the social consequences of the war and collaboration by examining the paths and strategies of exclusion from and integration in Dutch society of the former national socialist milieus during the long post-war era. Thus, the main issue is no longer to assign labels such as ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, but instead make these attributions themselves into objects of research. Furthermore, emphasis will no longer be on the individual ‘perpetrators’. Instead, the research will also include the spouses and children who may not have been politically active but whose lives, as a consequence of belonging to the collaborationist camp, were also profoundly affected. Thus, this programme links up with research into other groups of people marked by the experience of war and occupation, societal reconciliation following a period of violence, and the conceptualization of notions of ‘good citizenship’ as a means to advance integration. To date no systematic international comparative research has been carried out on the legacy of Dutch collaboration.

2. Main applicant

Prof. Dr. Peter Romijn Netherlands Institute for War Documentation/Amsterdam University

3. Co-applicants Prof. Dr. M. de Metsenaere, Faculty of Arts and Philosophy and the Faculty of Law and Criminology, Free University Brussels

1

Dr. B. Kruithof, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Amsterdam University

4. Previous and Future Submissions

None

5. Institutional setting

Netherlands Institute for War Documentation (NIOD/KNAW) Amsterdam University, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (UvA/FMG) Free University Brussels, Faculty of Arts and Philosophy and Faculty of Law and Criminology (VUB)

6. Period of Funding

1 September 2008 – 1 September 2012

7. Composition of the research team

a.

Prof. Dr. Peter Romijn

b.

The project as a whole will be managed and coordinated by the NIOD in Amsterdam (where

the main applicant, Prof. Dr. Peter Romijn is the Head of Research), in close cooperation with Prof. Dr. M. de Metsenaere of the Faculty of Arts and Philosophy and the Faculty of Law and Criminology of the Free University of Brussels, and Dr. B. Kruithof of the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences of Amsterdam University. Together they are the Steering Committee for this project.

c.

Dr. Ismee Tames, NIOD; Dr. Bram Enning, NIOD and Helen Grevers, MA, NIOD.

d.

The programme as proposed is conceived as an extension of Dr. Tames’s preliminary research

project on descendants of Dutch Nazi-collaborators (Children of foute parents) at the NIOD, 20062008. This project’s Advisory Board will be continued and expanded for the proposed programme. Members of the Advisory Board for the programme under application will be: Prof. Dr. S. Faber (Faculty of Law, Free University Amsterdam), Prof. Dr. P. de Rooij (Faculty of Humanities,

2

Amsterdam University), Prof. Dr. P. Lagrou (Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres of the Université Libre de Bruxelles), Prof. Dr. C. Kesteloot (Centre for Historical Research and Documentation on War and Contemporary Society, SOMA/CEGES), Brussels, and Dr. J. Withuis (Netherlands Institute for War Documentation).

e. Prof. Dr. P. Romijn

Project leader; NIOD/Amsterdam University

Prof. Dr. M. de Metsenaere

Prof. Dr. S. Faber

Faculty of Arts and Philosophy and the Faculty of Law and Criminology, Free University of Brussels Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Amsterdam University Faculty of Law, Free University Amsterdam

Prof. Dr. P. de Rooij

Faculty of Humanities, Amsterdam University

Prof. Dr. P. Lagrou

Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres of the Université Libre de Bruxelles Centre for Historical Research and Documentation on War and Contemporary Society, Brussels (SOMA/CEGES) Netherlands Institute for War Documentation

Dr. B. Kruithof

Prof. Dr. C. Kesteloot

Dr. J. Withuis Dr. I. Tames Dr. B. Enning

Postdoc researcher NIOD; currently working on the project Children of foute parents, 1945-1960 Postdoc researcher NIOD

H. Grevers, MA

PhD-student NIOD (Supervisors Prof. Dr. P. Romijn/Prof. Dr. M. de Metsenaere)

8. Structure of the Proposed Research

Subproject 1: “Life in the internment camps for political delinquents, 1944-1950. A comparison between the Netherlands and Belgium” PhD-project, NIOD/UvA/VUB Supervisors: Prof. Dr. P. Romijn/Prof. Dr. M. de Metsenaere Researcher: H. Grevers, MA

Subproject 2: “Reintegration of former national socialist milieus and their position in Dutch society, 1950-1970” Postdoc-project, NIOD Supervisors: Prof. Dr. P. Romijn/Dr. B. Kruithof Researcher: Dr. I. Tames

3

Subproject 3: “ ‘Children of foute parents’ as a victim category, 1970s to present” Postdoc-project, NIOD Supervisors: Prof. Dr. P. Romijn/Dr. B. Kruithof Researcher: Dr. B. Enning

9. Description of the proposed research programme

This programme will investigate the legacy of war and collaboration in new ways. The general hypothesis is that examining the processes of integration and exclusion of former national socialist milieus in Dutch post-war society will enhance our understanding of collaboration and the consequences of the Second World War. To test this hypothesis, instead of assigning the terms ‘right’ (‘goed’), ‘wrong’ (‘fout’) or ‘grey’ (‘grijs’), we will turn them into objects of research. A key question is in which ways the preconditions of reintegration and the meanings of ‘wrong’, ‘collaborator’ and ‘political delinquent’ changed over time. Both the ‘out-group’ perspective of the former collaborators and their families, and the ‘in-group’ perspectives of government and society, are relevant (Elias 1965). By analyzing and explaining this dynamic our programme will be more than a supplement to existing research into the special criminal proceedings against collaborators (‘bijzondere rechtspleging’) and into other groups marked by the war (i.a. Romijn 1991, De Haan 1997). Addition of the perspective of the out-group will deepen our understanding of how society dealt with the war experience. During the occupation approximately 100,000 people were members of the Dutch Nazi-movement (Nationaal-Socialistische Beweging, NSB), 23,000 men served in the WaffenSS. After the liberation the public prosecutors produced at least 540,000 files investigating collaboration; about 100,000 persons were conditionally released, 65,000 actually convicted. This research, however, includes all who were regarded as having been in one way or another on the ‘wrong side’. Besides members of the NSB or SS this includes their spouses and children, and also, for instance, people who were never formally convicted but who were widely known as having a ‘tainted’ past. Thus one of the integrating and innovative elements in the programme is the emphasis on social integration of national socialist milieus, instead of on individual perpetratorhood. Since this diffuse group cannot be isolated in statistics we need to define how we will explore this phenomenon in practice. Integration and citizenship are central in all three subprojects. Integration is understood in a broad sense: as political, social, economic, and cultural participation in society. Cultural integration then means (the sense) of being part of the memory culture and value systems society is built on. People who recognize themselves and are recognized by their environment as ‘good citizens’ may be considered integrated. However, what a ‘good citizen’ is exactly remains subject of discussion and research.

4

Upon release former collaborators were explicitly obliged to behave like ‘good Dutchmen’. Contemporary ideas on what this actually meant, will be compared with the sociological classification into liberal, (neo-)republican, and communitarian notions of citizenship: was ‘good citizenship’ defined on the basis of political rights and freedoms (liberal), or was political participation (republican), or even visible devotion (communitarian) expected? These three notions of citizenship differ in the degree to which individuals must prove their citizenship, and in the tasks of (government) institutions and living environment. The linking question is how the various concepts of citizenship expanded or limited integration opportunities, and in that way determined the integration parameters. Formulated differently: the limits of the constitutional state and welfare state that was realized after the war are examined through the foute milieus. The way in which these milieus were either integrated or excluded and their subsequent responses demonstrated which behaviours and attitudes were defined as either acceptable or unacceptable. This is a theme that did not just emerge in our multicultural society, but is in line with an older tradition of, for example, the ‘elevation’ of the working classes and the ‘re-education’ of ‘antisocials’ and ‘criminals’. The treatment of former collaborators also implied a dynamic civilizing offensive aimed at groups that were considered deviant and a threat to social cohesion and societal order. The three subprojects combined demonstrate how society’s handling of this serious problem developed from confinement to integration, and subsequently reflection. The first subproject – the study into the internment camps for ‘political delinquents’ in the Netherlands and Belgium – covers the years 1944 to 1950: a key period when exclusion was the dominant perspective, and integration seemed very distant. In this phase ‘good citizenship’ provided an instrument to discriminate rather than a goal that former collaborators could also attain. The central question in this subproject is what influence the (experience of) internment had on the subsequent integration in free society. On the one hand its analytical nature distinguishes this new study from the generally anecdotal, personal, and emotional publications on camp life, as they exist in the Netherlands and Belgium, and on the other hand it is different from many scientific publications because we start with the phase of exclusion: gaining insight into the long-term legacy of the collaboration requires knowledge of the period of the occupation, as well as immediately following it. Among former collaborators the internment phase has produced a specific narrative about their own position. In this narrative they do not see their wartime past as the cause of their confinement, but they place themselves as ‘political prisoners’ opposite the reconstructing constitutional state’s message of democracy and freedom. For many the internment and conviction still symbolize their relationship to the nation. This subproject researches the scope and boundaries of physical exclusion. We want to examine the expectations of the detainees and their families regarding to their return to society based on their interaction with, among others, chaplains and probation officers. Conditional release is a

5

delicate theme, because both prisoners and social and spiritual caregivers had to articulate in their arguments and decisions which was the deciding factor: the political one (f.i. believing in democracy) or the social one (f.i. the preservation of a stable family life). Analysis of these sometimes conflicting interpretations of good citizenship provides new insight into the nature of society during the postwar reconstruction. A comparison with Belgium can furthermore answer the question whether a different handling of the problem of collaboration has also resulted in differences in integration and exclusion after the occupation. However, this period does not explain everything. Whereas in the second half of the 1940s the future still seemed to offer opportunities, on their return to family and labour market, many people experienced which problems a fout past sometimes continued to have. In subproject 2. – about the concrete social reintegration of former national socialist families – we will investigate the effects of punishment and internment: many former political delinquents had not only lost their jobs, they also lost part of their political rights, such as the right to vote and to stand for election, and their nationality. Married women automatically lost their nationality when their husbands lost theirs. It took until the late 1950s before most of them had their rights restored; in Belgium some people were deprived of certain rights for the rest of their lives. We want to systematically examine the effect of these measures on integration. People who had lost the Dutch nationality were formally regarded as aliens. The employment office and therefore also potential employers knew that someone was a ‘former political delinquent’, and so finding work was not easy. The formal requirements for regaining these rights were obscure, and then there were also the silent barriers. How did not having the right to vote or a passport impede the pursuit of integration? How important were these attributes of citizenship to this group? Were they prepared to meet society halfway in order to ‘belong’, or did they fall back on likeminded networks? In the public domain of the 1950s and ‘60s ‘the war’ came up mainly as a result of incidents, including several public scandals regarding the foute wartime past of well-known persons and ‘the revival of fascism’. The fact that collaboration remained an open wound often compelled the people involved to a strategy of secrecy, silence, and evasion. From about 1965 the public definition of the essence of the evil of collaboration started changing. Parallel to the increasing emphasis on the persecution of the Jews, the focus on treason diminished and shifted to (potential) perpetratorhood in the execution of the Holocaust. Subproject 2. investigates the significance and the repercussions of this new dimension of guilt and guiltiness (in their own eyes as well as in those of their adolescent children and society around them). Again, a comparison with Flanders is interesting. Unlike the situation in the Netherlands, former Flemish collaborators were excluded from the Belgian state, but frequently not from the Flemish community. Their immediate environment did not associate them with treason, nor with perpetratorhood, but rather with Flemish idealism. In subproject 3. – about children of foute parents as a victim category – integration and citizenship also play an important role. In the Netherlands children of collaborators started organizing

6

from the late 1970s because they were looking for ‘recognition’: their story was also part of the national wartime past and their traumatic childhood entitled them to care. In this group we see the legacy of the stories about internment camps and exclusion, and not least: the suppressed wartime past. The abuses during internment and the discrimination afterwards sometimes also evoked anger in the ‘second generation’, because they felt they were not fully accepted citizens. This is expressed in several ways. For example: among the children from former national socialist milieus the notion of being stigmatized as ‘a child of’ is a major theme. Especially during national holidays such as 4 and 5 May they feel excluded from the national community: at first their stories were incompatible with the schematic national discourse of ‘oppression’ and ‘resistance’, later on they did not fit within the discourse of anti-racism and human rights. Convincing society that they were not guilty but merely ‘innocent children’, was the only way their story could be included in the latter, more general meaning of war: children should not be punished for the actions of their parents, and every child suffers under conditions of war and violence. The desire of ‘children of’, as many have started to refer to themselves, to integrate in the memory of the war became manifest in the 1970s and ‘80s. Then Dutch society became aware of the psychological consequences of the Second World War, and the central focus in thinking about the war shifted to (psychological) care and victimhood. Citizenship and victimhood appear to enter into a symbiosis in the Netherlands during this period. The children of collaborators’ desire to integrate in the war memory therefore went hand in hand with the search for integration in care and welfare services. This begs the question how widespread this phenomenon was: children from national socialist milieus in Belgium never identified themselves as a victim category, but those in Norway did. Apart from sharing the element of integration and citizenship, the three subprojects also form one whole because they cover the entire postwar period in chronological order. The questions are designed in such a way that the effects of each previous phase on the next one become clear. For example, the experience in the internment camps (subproject 1.) led to specific notions and expectations about people’s own position in postwar society (subproject 2.), and it played an important role in the reflection of the children of foute parents on the origin of their feeling excluded (subproject 3.). The actual integration in the 1950s and ‘60s (subproject 2.) also influenced this reflection (subproject 3.). Each of the three subprojects furthermore aims to place the Dutch experience in an international context. Due to the volume and nature of the available research material, plus the current state of research in the Netherlands and other countries, direct comparison of two countries based on primary sources is only possible in subproject 1. In the other projects the Dutch situation is placed in an international context on the basis of extensive literature research and the international network of the researchers. Again, we are very interested in Belgium, but also in France, Denmark, and Norway, and we will examine similarities and differences with Germany and Middle European countries.

7

Content and operationalization of the three subprojects are addressed in more detail in the separate descriptions.

Subproject 1: Life in the internment camps for political delinquents, 1944-1950. A comparison between the Netherlands and Belgium

After the liberation suspected collaborators were locked up under severe and often inhumane conditions, both in the Netherlands and Belgium. The main question of this study is how these internment camps functioned and how the time spent there influenced the detainees. The assumption is that uncertainty about a future between the extremes of violent exclusion and preparation for reintegration in society meant that the political delinquents and their families were poorly prepared for the complex reintegration process. Up to now, Dutch historians discussed the controversies about the camp regime at the levels of policymaking and public debate. The different phases in the organization of camp life between 1944 and 1950 were never researched systematically in the Netherlands or in Belgium. Camp life and general conditions were more differentiated than the general term ‘ill-treatment’ suggests. The division between guards and detainees was not in all respects decisive, as previous hierarchical relations within national socialist organizations also played a role within the camp population. For practical reasons and also hoping to teach the detainees ‘responsibility’ and ‘good citizenship’, the camp authorities responded to this hierarchy by partially delegating tasks and authorities. Moreover the camps were not completely closed off: detainees worked outside the camp, had contacts with their families and f.i. suppliers and the local population. A sociology of camp life may offer insight into this formative phase in the life of former national socialists. Studying the perspectives of detainees, camp commanders, chaplains and probation officers, will reveal the dynamics they found themselves in. This approach is in line with current studies of the penitentiary system and the German concentration camps in the Netherlands (monographs on Vught and Westerbork are in progress; also Adler 2002, Kogon 1974). The perspective of release, either following a trial or not, greatly affected morale in the camps. Case study research of arguments in favour of early release will be carried out to determine the conditions under which foute milieus regained access to society. In particular we will examine whether impending divorce was a reason for early release, since on the basis of society’s thinking about divorce the tensions within the citizenship discourse can be analyzed. On the one hand there was moral judgement of foute countrymen, on the other hand social elites were concerned about the ‘moral degeneration’ and the loss of the family. The question arises whether a battle cry such as ‘restore the family, restore the nation’ implied that the wife who had not been ‘wrong’ should be dissuaded from

8

divorcing her detainee husband. Did impending divorce stimulate early release? And if the divorce did become final, who received custody of the children and why? Questions like these will reveal society’s priorities: was a ‘good’ wife loyal to her husband or to the nation? The Dutch-Belgian comparison will highlight the results of this approach. Many collaborators in both countries reflected on the internment period as a time of victimization, thereby neutralizing their own actions during the war. Unlike the Dutch, however, the Belgian elites did not agree on the methods of internment and purposes of punishment. Former collaborators could continue to identify with what was widely considered a basically ‘good’ ambition (like equal rights for Flanders). The dichotomy between collaboration and resistance seems to have enhanced existing dividing lines (between Flemish-Walloon and catholic-anti-clerical). Also unlike the Netherlands, Belgium did not have a flourishing special probation service. These differences in national contexts affected how the internment camps functioned and therefore also how this period is remembered. Archival sources for the project are abundant both for the Netherlands and Belgium. The researcher will gather information f.i. in the archives of the Justice Departments to provide a general overview and choose approx. 8-10 camps for detailed analysis. For a major internment camp like Camp Vught for example, there is a multitude of documents with information on the detainees: daily reports, reports on conduct, attempted escapes and ill-treatment (Militair Gezag Noord-Brabant, Gemeentepolitie Vught, Gemeentebestuur Vught). Brochures drew attention to the bad conditions in Camp Vught. Also interviews with children who visited their parents there or father Jan van Kilsdonk, who worked in Vught as a priest, can shed more light on this specific camp. On the basis of this information we can answer the question of what daily life looked like and under what conditions the return to society was realized. For Belgium, existing local studies of camps can be used as an introduction to the archival and oral sources (Ballegeer 1995, Rzoska 1999), and many memoirs have been published (Brouns 1969, Swerts 1968). Film footage is available as well: especially in 1945 the improvized camps and the detainees were recorded on film (f.e. RVD Filmarchief 8 June 1945).

Subproject 2: Reintegration of former national socialist milieus and their position in Dutch society, 1950-1970

To gain insight into the complex process of social integration and the role of contemporary ideas on integration and ‘good citizenship’, this project focuses on strategies of former collaborators’ families, policies of government, churches, trade-unions and other societal organizations in the 1950s and 1960s. Social integration is a multi-faceted topic on the cutting edge of history and social sciences. The process is non-linear, has no specific goal, and is a sum of the attitudes of all involved. The project will establish the conditions on which former collaborators and their families were accepted,

9

the degree to which they wanted to be part of society, and the attitudes of the social environment. Some former collaborators persevered in old convictions or resentment; others resumed their lives more easily. Some ‘good’ Dutchmen extended a helping hand; others did not or acted ambiguously. The ‘civilizing process’ was not directed towards the former detainees alone, but also towards their fellow-citizens. It included religious notions of guilt and forgiveness, comparisons to re-education and integration of other ‘anti-social’ milieus, and, moreover, a shift in the political discourse: instead of Germany, the Cold War defined Soviet Russia and therefore the domestic communists as the principal enemy. These issues fit in with current research into societal reconciliation following periods of violence, and into the broad field of social work, community building and mental healthcare (Bossenbroek 2001, De Goei 2001). A starting point for analyzing these inclusion and exclusion processes is the taking away and restoring of citizenship rights and the right to vote. Similar to divorce in subproject 1. the gender aspect will receive special attention. Regardless of their own actions during the occupation, wives automatically lost the Dutch nationality when their foute husbands lost theirs. Rules like these and the debates about them reveal the boundaries and border disputes of the postwar constitutional state under construction, which explicitly included values regarding the ‘right’ family. Concrete data (including figures) on who were excluded from particular rights can be found in the archives of courts of law, ministries and municipalities. ‘Moral decline’ was feared for a long time in the strongly emerging fields of care and welfare. Continuing the path of subproject 1. into the 1950s, we will examine the changing categories and interpretations of what was first referred to as ‘political delinquency’, but was later named, f.e., ‘antisocial behaviour’. For the current NIOD-study suggests a depoliticization: churches and social/welfare services focused on general or personal problems, separating them from the wartime past. Comparison with criminological research among family members of convicted criminals may provide insight into which stigma is dominant in a particular societal context (Condry 2007). In the 1960s the collective memory of war and occupation made a new turn. As a result of the growing attention for the persecution of the Jews, ‘wrong’ became increasingly associated with war crimes and perpetratorhood rather than treason. At the same time doubt was cast on the myth that presented the Dutch nation as heroic and united in its resistance against Nazi-tyranny. Many collaborators thus came to see themselves as scapegoats for societal failure at large. This project will study these shifts with regard to ‘good’, ‘wrong’ and ‘grey’ (Van der Heijden 2001) and its effects on the position of former national socialist milieus in Dutch memory of the war. Archival and oral sources that enable us to analyse how the collaboration past was discussed in the 1950s and ‘60s in private, the institutional world, and public debate, are readily available. Special attention will be paid to the broadcasting media as an emerging forum of public debate and reflection. When, for example, did former collaborators first appear on television, and in what role?

10

Already in the early 1950s self-help groups like the Stichting Ondersteuning Politieke Delinquenten were fiercely discussed in newspapers and parliament, who feared its activities heralded political action. Various publications by former national socialists can shed a light on their perspective (De Noodhoorn, publications of Hinag and Archief der Conservatieve Revolutie). These initiatives, all closely watched by the Dutch state and the Communist Party, included social and financial support, action to regain political rights for ex-political delinquents, but also a search service to find still missing SS-men. Oral history research conducted for the current project ‘children of foute parents’ indicates a gap between official and informal help and led the researcher to otherwise difficult to trace networks of informal help within families, neighbourhoods or among former comrades. The researcher will expand the corpus of interviews to a minimum of 20 in depth interviews, especially tracing professionals engaged with former national socialists. Besides building on the results of current NIOD-research, the project will explicitly include international insights (Bryld 2007, Gotovitch and Kesteloot 2002, Rousso 1991).

Subproject 3: ‘Children of foute parents’ as a victim category, 1970s to present

In project 3. the children from the ‘former NSB-families’ (project 2.) have grown up, frequently into adults who struggle with and reflect on their origins. This study aims to provide insight into the discourse of their exclusion and integration. In the course of the 1970s and 1980s psychologists and psychiatrists, encouraged by an increasing demand for help from this group and supported by engaged journalists, introduced the ‘children of foute parents’ as a category of ‘second generation’ psychological war victims (Withuis 2002), but not without a struggle: such claims evoked resistance, and descendants of NSB and SSmembers also had to overcome hesitation: many felt they were ‘not allowed’ to suffer from the consequences of the war. Moreover, they had to come to an understanding with their parents about their families’ problematic past. We will investigate when public opinion shifted, who contributed to this shift, and the extent to which these processes deviated from the emancipation of other victim groups. In this dynamic of professionals, society and former national socialist milieus, new notions of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ were developed. The memory of the actual collaborators faded; instead more abstract ideas about the collective failure of society and government during the occupation and in support of ‘damaged groups’ like ‘war children’ gained importance. From the 1980s, as the older generations and the political interpretations of the Cold War disappeared, younger groups took the opportunity to tell their stories. Defining themselves as victims

11

helped. The political aspect of collaboration faded into the background, and the demand for care came first. Linking up with the international comparative NIOD-study of the changing conceptualization of trauma (Trauma in Historical Context, dr. J. Withuis), the project will give ample attention to the fact that victimhood also became an important category in some comparable countries, but not in others. One concrete issue in the investigation of the integration of the children of foute parents is the debate about therapy for this group. Many ‘children of’ wanted ‘recognition’ as ‘second generation war victims’ and access to group therapies just like children of members of the resistance and Holocaust victims. The arguments used to exclude or include them in existing welfare services can be found in various archives (f.e. of Werkgroep Herkenning a self-help group established in 1982; Centrum’45, Sinaï Centrum, Icodo). Again former resistance women spoke up for these children, just like immediately following the liberation. Examination of the period in which the now adult children again became a policy category links this project to project 2. and the study into ‘children of foute parents’. The political and public debate on their victimhood can be studied through the realization of the state-initiated study into the support of descendants of foute families by the Netherlands Institute for Care and Welfare (NIZW; Vorst-Thijssen 1993). The political decisions, the influence of pressure groups, and the responses to the report reveal why a past as a child of foute parents was seen as sufficient reason for psychological help, or why it was not. In line with the current NIOD-study into the laws for victims of war (De geschiedenis en toepassing van de wetten voor oorlogsslachtoffers, dr. H. Piersma and dr. E. Touwen), we will investigate how after the NIZW-report appeared the decision that these ‘war children’ were also entitled to compensation of the costs of psychological help was reached. The researcher will analyse published and unpublished autobiographies, interview a minimum of 15 children of foute parents and an equal number of people who were involved in mental healthcare. In addition audiovisual sources will be used. Media attention started in 1975 with a special edition of Hier en Nu about the psychological problems of children of collaborators. Next to a religious worker and a former member of parliament, various descendants appeared on television (NCRV 15 Oct. 1975). Public attention remained relatively scarce, however, until the mid 1980s when more and more descendants appeared on television, radio and in the papers. In 1985 various groups of ‘second generation war victims’, including descendants of collaborators, were brought together in an emotional confrontation (KRO 4 May 1985). 1988 and 1989 saw a peak in media appearances. Ever since the NIZW-project was presented in 1993 the children of collaborators have remained in the public eye. These sources also show how members of this group were portrayed and presented themselves: as second generation war victims in need of psychological care, or as eye witnesses of the war and liberation period. These various roles indicate the different ways the story of children of collaborators integrated into the mainstream memory of the Second World War. This contributes to an

12

answer to the central question of this programme regarding the integration and exclusion of former national socialist milieus.

Supplement (2 pages) Primary sources Berg, J.D. van den, Herstel in rechten van politieke delinquenten, Zwolle 1949 De Noodhoorn: mededelingenblad der Stichting Oud-Politieke Delinquenten, 1953 Gasthigny, Camp de Fourcault - Damprémy-Charleroi: témoignage (mostly 1945), 1949 (Collectie Cegesoma) Geschriften van de Vereniging van Reclasseringsinstellingen, 1940-50 Groen, K., Landverraders: wat deden we met ze? een dokumentaire over de bestraffing en berechting van NSB-ers en kollaborateurs en de zuivering van pers, radio, kunst, bedrijfsleven na de tweede wereldoorlog, Baarn 1974 Hinag-koerier: Hulp aan Invalide Oud-Oostfrontstrijders, nabestaanden, politieke gevangenen en anderen, 195x Hofman, J., De collaborateur: een sociaal-psychologisch onderzoek naar misdadig gedrag in dienst van de Duitse bezetter, Meppel 1981 Hofman, J., ‘Het lot van de NSB-kinderen. Een oud maar actueel probleem’, in: MGv, Maandblad voor Geestelijke volksgezondheid, 1984, vol. 39, no. 3, p.243-255 Kamphuis, M., Wat is social casework? Een eerste inleiding, Alphen aan den Rijn 1950 Maeter, P.P., Epuration de la collaboration et internements: monographie, 1943-1946 (Collectie Cegesoma) Mantel, P. [et al.], Werkgroep Herkenning twintig jaar: 1982-2002, Utrecht 2002 Lindt, M.W.J., Als je wortels taboe zijn: verwerking van levensproblemen bij kinderen van Nederlandse nationaalsocialisten, Kampen 1993 Oorlogskinderen: toen en nu, Stichting ICODO Utrecht 1995 Palies, A.L.C., De politieke delinquent: enige sociale en psychiatrische aspecten bij de berechting en reclassering van politieke delinquenten, Assen 1948 Pauwels, W., L'internement administratif à la libération: article (overwegend 1944) (Collectie Cegesoma) Stichting Toezicht Politieke Delinquenten, Gids bij de behandeling der meest voorkomende moeilijkheden van politieke delinquenten, 's-Gravenhage [1951] Tienen, P. van, De strijd tegen de geschiedvervalsing, Nederlands Archief der Conservatieve Revolutie, 1957-1963 Tijdschrift voor maatschappelijk werk: orgaan van de Nationale Federatie voor Maatschappelijk Werk en de Nationale Federatie voor Kinderbescherming, 1947-1971 Toezicht. Tijdschrift voor en door medewerkers van de Stichting Toezicht Politieke Delinquenten, 1948-1949 Uitzicht. Weekblad voor de bewarings- en interneeringskampen, 1946 Vaart Smit, H.W. van der, Kamptoestanden 1944/'45-'48: rapport; met een voorw. van G.M.G.H. Russel, Haarlem 1949 Verslag der Handelingen der Eerste Kamer der Staten Generaal, ‘s-Gravenhage 1814-… Verslag der Handelingen der Tweede Kamer der Staten Generaal, ‘s-Gravenhage 1814-… Verslag der werkzaamheden van de Stichting Toezicht Politieke Delinquenten, ’s-Gravenhage [1948] Vorst-Thijssen, T. en N. de Boer, Daar praat je niet over! Kinderen van foute ouders en de hulpverlening, Utrecht 1993 Willemse, Th. R.M., ‘Kinderen van NSB-ers, 1944-1949’, in: MGv, Maandblad voor Geestelijke volksgezondheid, 1986, vol. 41, no. 4, p.367-381 Secondary sources Adler, N., The Gulag survivor: beyond the Soviet system, New Brunswick/NJ 2002 Assmann, J., Das kulturelle Gedächtnis. Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität in frühen Hochkulturen, München 1992 Ballegeer, J., Repressie en interneringskampen in Kortrijk (1944-1947), Kortrijk 1995 Belinfante, A.D., In plaats van bijltjesdag: de geschiedenis van de bijzondere rechtspleging na de Tweede Wereldoorlog, Assen 1978 Bessel, R. and D. Schumann (eds.), Life after Death. Approaches to a Cultural and Social History of Europe during the 1940s and 1950s, Washington DC/Cambridge 2003 Blom, J.C.H., In de ban van goed en fout. Geschiedschrijving over de bezettingstijd in Nederland, Amsterdam 2007 Bossenbroek, M., De Meelstreep, Uitgave van de Stichting Onderzoek Terugkeer en Opvang (SOTO), Amsterdam 2001 Bryld, C.,‘‘The Five Accursed Years’, Danish perception and usage of the period of the German Occupation, with a wider view to Norway and Sweden’, in: Scandinavian Journal of History, 2007, vol. 32, no. 1, p.86-115 Condry, R., Families shamed. The consequences of crime for the relatives of serious offenders, Devon 2007 Deák, I., et al. (eds.), The politics of retribution in Europe: World War II and its aftermath, Princeton NJ 2000 Diederichs, M., Wie geschoren wordt moet stil zitten. De omgang van Nederlandse meisjes met Duitse militairen, Amsterdam 2006 Donselaar, J. van, Fout na de oorlog. Fascistische en racistische organisaties in Nederland 1950-1990, Amsterdam 1991 Elias, N., The established and the outsiders: a sociological enquiry into community problems, London 1965 Elster, J., Closing the books : transitional justice in historical perspective, Cambridge 2004 Fühner, H., Nachspiel: die niederländische Politik und die Verfolgung von Kollaborateuren und NS-Verbrechern, 1945-1989, Münster 2005 Gastelaars, M., Een geregeld leven: sociologie en sociale politiek in Nederland 1925-1968, Amsterdam 1985 Goei, L.M.L.K. de, De psychohygiënisten: psychiatrie, cultuurkritiek en de beweging voor geestelijke volksgezondheid in Nederland, 1924-1970, Nijmegen 2001

13

Gotovitch, J. en Chantal Kesteloot (eds.), Het gewicht van het oorlogsverleden, Gent 2003 Haan, I. de, Na de ondergang. De herinnering aan de Jodenvervolging in Nederland 1945-1995, Den Haag 1997 Haan, I. de en J. W. Duyvendak (red.), In het hart van de verzorgingsstaat: het ministerie van Maatschappelijk Werk en zijn opvolgers (CRM, WVC, VWS), 1952-2002, Zutphen 2002 Havenaar, R., De NSB tussen nationalisme en volkse solidariteit: de vooroorlogse ideologie van de Nationaal-Socialistische Beweging in Nederland, ’s-Gravenhage 1983 Henkes, B., ‘De tweede schuld, of over de last familie te zijn: nationaal-socialisme en de overdracht van historische ervaringen binnen familieverband’, in: Oorlogsdocumentatie '40-'45, 1999, p.89-112 Heijden, Chr. van der, Grijs verleden: Nederland en de Tweede Wereldoorlog, Amsterdam 2001 Huyse, L. en S. Dhondt [et al.], Onverwerkt verleden: collaboratie en repressie in België, 1942-1952, Leuven 1991 Huyse, L. en K. Hoflack, ‘Het leven na de straf. De reïntegratie van de collaborateurs uit de Tweede Wereldoorlog in België, Nederland en Frankrijk’, in: Panopticum, 1992, vol.13, no.5, p.429-440 Jong, L. de, Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog, 14 dln., ‘s-Gravenhage 1969-1988 Kennedy, J.C., De deugden van een gidsland: burgerschap en democratie in Nederland, Amsterdam 2005 Kogon, E., Der SS-Staat: das System der deutschen Konzentrationslager, Reinbek bei Hamburg 2000 (1974) Kooy, G.A., Het echec van een "volkse" beweging: nazificatie en denazificatie in Nederland 1931-1945, Assen 1964 Kromhout, B., Fout geboren. Het verhaal van kinderen van foute ouders, Amsterdam/Antwerpen 2004 Kruithof, B., P. Noordman en P. de Rooy, Geschiedenis van opvoeding en onderwijs: inleiding, bronnen, onderzoek, Nijmegen 1994 [1984] Lagrou, P., The legacy of the Nazi past. Patriotic memory and national recovery in Western-Europe, 1945-1965, Cambridge 2000 Matthée, Z., Voor Volk en Vaderland. Vrouwen in de NSB, 1931-1948, Amsterdam 2007 Meyers, J., Mussert, een politiek leven, Soesterberg 2005 [Amsterdam 1984] Ponteville, I. en C. Kesteloot, Kinderen van verzetslui of collaborateurs: opgroeien zonder vader of moeder, Brussel Dossier SOMA berichtenblad nr. 37-lente 2002 Romijn, P., Snel, streng en rechtvaardig. De afrekening met de 'foute' Nederlanders, [z.p.] 2002 [1991] Rondas, J. en K. Ravyts, Het interneringskamp Sint-Kruis I.C.S.K., Het Brugse 1940-1945, Deel 4 a + b, Kortrijk 2003-2004 Rzoska, B., Zij komen allen aan de beurt, de zwarten. Het kamp van Lokeren, Leuven 1999 Rousso, H., The Vichy syndrome: the history and memory in France since 1944, Cambridge Mass. 1991 [1987] Sichrovsky, P., Born guilty: children of Nazi families, London 1988 Taylor, J. Vanderwal, A Family Occupation. Children of the War and the Memory of World War II in Dutch Literature of the 1980s, Amsterdam 1997 Vree, F. van, ‘Televisie en de geschiedschrijving van de Tweede Wereldoorlog’, in: Theoretische Geschiedenis, 1994, vol.22, no.1, p.1-26 Withuis, J., Erkenning. Van oorlogstrauma naar klaagcultuur, Amsterdam 2002 Personal documents Over 30 examples of personal documents have already been collected. To give an impression of the variety of actors who reflected on the legacy of collaboration 5 are listed here: Harterink, F.J., Verslag van mijn internering: Bergum, Wolvega, Leeuwarden, Ameland, Farmsum, 15 april 1945- 17 januari 1947, Leeuwarden 1997 Rijke, R., Niet de schuld, wel de straf: herinneringen van een NSB-kind, Weesp 1982 Stouten, H., Naar verkeerd spoor. Achtergronden van Nederlandse politieke delinquenten, 1940-1945, Hoogezand 1986 Swerts, L., Dagboek van een zware tijd: repressiejaren 1944/1950, Antwerpen 1968 Zee, S. van der, Potgieterlaan 7 : een herinnering, Amsterdam 2005 (1997) Archival sources Archives of the various churches in the Netherlands, Utrechts Archief Archives of the various Gemeentebesturen and Gemeentepolitie Militair Gezag, Nationaal Archief and Militair Gezag in the various provincial archives Various archives of Dutch and Belgian Ministries, i.a. Ministerie van Justitie, Ministerie van Algemene Zaken, Nationaal Archief (Den Haag), Algemeen Rijksarchief (Brussel) Various archives of institutions, i.a. Stichting Toezicht Politieke Delinquenten, Nationaal Archief Various archives of internmentcamps and prisons, i.a. Archief van de gevangenissen te Groningen, fungerend als interneringskamp voor politieke gedetineerden, 1945-1950 (1955), Groninger Archieven, Archief van het kamp "Arendstuin" voor mannelijke en vrouwelijke politieke gevangenen, 1945-1947, Tresoar Leeuwarden, Interneringskamp, later gevangenis Nieuw-Vosseveld in Vught, 1945-1957, Brabants Historisch Informatie Centrum (BHIC) Various personal archives, i.a. Brieven August Borms uit de gevangenis aan zijn kinderen, 1945-1946, Cegesoma, Marie Kamphuis, Internationaal Informatiecentrum en Archief voor de Vrouwenbeweging, J. le Poole, Nationaal Archief, Hugo Sinclair de Rochemont, o.a. huisorganen voor politieke delinquenten, 1949-1950, BHIC Media sources Since the late-1960s former collaborators appeared on television, several years later followed by their descendants. Earlier material stems from the liberation period. To give an example of the material 6 broadcasts are presented here: AVRO Televisie, Karel van de Graaf. Tweede generatie oorlogsslachtoffers, 11.4.1986 NCRV Televisie, Hier en Nu: Omdat mijn vader fout was. Kinderen van NSB'ers, 15.10.1975 RVD Filmarchief, Opnamen BS en geïnterneerde NSB’ers, Haarlem; Halfweg, 8.6.1945

14

TROS Televisie, Fout: Documentaire over de NSB adhv gesprekken met oud-NSB'ers, 26.8.1992 VPRO Televisie, Portret van Anton Mussert, 16.4.1970 VPRO Televisie, Vastberaden, maar soepel en met mate. Herinneringen aan Nederland in de jaren 1938 – 1948, 15.10.1974

10. Work programme

Planning Subproject 1 (PhD) Sept.

Year 1 Read literature

Year 2 Prepare field research Belgium

Year 3 Write chapters

Oct. Nov. Dec.

Jan. Feb.

Archival research various camps Belgium

Year 4 Read additional literature Conclude archival research Revise manuscript

Prepare field research Netherlands Archival research various camps the Netherlands

Mrch.

Second version manuscript

Apr. May

Article 2 Finalize first version manuscript

June

Article 1

Planning book

July Aug.

Holiday

Holiday

Manuscript to the doctoral board Holiday and date of PhD Holiday

Note: In planning for the PhD sufficient flexibility is left to provide opportunity to follow courses and participate in conferences and symposiums.

Planning Subproject 2 (Postdoc 1) Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mrch. Apr. May June July Aug.

Year 1 Read literature

Year 2 Interviews

Prepare archival research

Research newly discovered archives

Year 3 Write book

Archival research and prepare oral history Elaborate international context First version manuscript Article 2 Article 1 Holiday

Planning book Holiday

Conclude book and holiday

Year 2 Article 1

Year 3 Write book

Planning Subproject 3 (Postdoc 2) Sept. Oct.

Year 1 Read literature

15

Nov.

Prepare interviews children of foute parents

Dec. Jan. Feb. Mrch. Apr. May June July Aug.

Archival research

Interviews Elaborate international context Prepare interviews journalists, social/welfare workers etc.

First version manuscript Article 2

Interviews Holiday

Planning book Holiday

Conclude book and holiday

11. Word Count General description: 1997

(max. 2000)

Subproject 1: 799

(max. 800)

Subproject 2: 799

(max. 800)

Subproject 3: 799

(max. 800)

12. Planned Deliverables

The described subprojects will result in one dissertation and two monographs. The PhD-student and both postdocs furthermore will report on their interim results through lectures and the publication of a minimum of two articles per project (intended journals: Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis, Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden or Contemporary European History). The project leader will safeguard the progress of the different subprojects and their mutual delineation and interrelation. This will furthermore result in three synthesizing articles. One will be comparative and focus on a historiographical comparison of research into the integration of former collaborators, and how the collaboration past was dealt with in various North- and Western-European countries that were occupied during World War II (intended journal: Contemporary European History). Insights gained in the international networks will be utilized here. A second article will explore the shift from a political to a psychological perspective on the legacy of war in a comparative European context by analyzing the simultaneous shifts in ideas about collaboration: from traitor to the nation to perpetrator of the Holocaust and the emergence of the descendants of national-socialists as a victim category (to be published in: A. Mooij and J. Withuis (eds.), The Politics of War Trauma. A Comparative European Approach (2009)). This article thus links up with the international comparative NIOD-study of the changing conceptualization of trauma. The third article will focus on the Dutch situation and will present the results of the subprojects to a Dutch-language audience (intended journal: Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis or Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden).

16

To enhance embedding of the different projects in the international scientific context, the research programme will start off with an international conference to investigate current research and state of the art research questions abroad. A next international conference will be organized on the synthesizing articles at the end. During the programme period a public meeting will be organized to stimulate a new public debate on the legacy of collaboration. To further this, contact with the media will be sought with the intention of resulting in radio- or television documentaries.

13. Short Curriculum Vitae Principal Applicant, Prof. Dr. Peter Romijn

Professional activities 2002 – present

Professor of 20th Century History, part-time Amsterdam University

1996 – present

Head of Research and Deputy Director NIOD

1985 – 1995

Research Fellow, NIOD

1983 – 1984

PhD-Research Grant of the Dutch Research Council

1981 – 1983

Assistant Professor for Contemporary History, Groningen University

1978 – 1980

Teaching/Research Assistant, Groningen University

Section

Contemporary

History,

Academic Functions 2007 – present 2007 – present 2005 – 2006 2004 – 2006

2004 – present 2004 – present 2003 – 2006 2000 – 2005

1999 – present

Member of the Editorial Board of the Low Countries Historical Review (BMGN) Member of the Advisory Board of the internet-based ‘Open Archives Project’ of histories of children of former collaborators Member of the Advisory Board of the Exhibition ‘Schuldig geboren’ on the topic of being a child in a collaborating family, Museum Markt 12 Aalten Member of the Advisory Board of a project, commissioned by the Belgian Senate, to study the involvement of Belgian state officials and bodies of government, in the persecution of the Jews in Belgium Member of the Scholarly Advisory Board of the Amsterdam Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies President of the Advisory Board of the Dutch Center for the Study of World War I Member of the Advisory Board of CONIH, the Danish Archives for the History of the German Occupation, at Esbjerg, Denmark Teamleader Team 1, Programme ‘The Impact of National-Socialist and Fascist Rule in Europe 1939-1945’, European Science Foundation, Strassbourg Executive Secretary to the Scientific Board to the NIOD

17

1995 – 1997 1995 – 1997 1992 – 2005

2003 and 2007

Coordinator of Dutch Graduate Program in 19th and 20th Century History (PONTEG) Program-Director of the Dutch Research School for Political History Treasurer / Member of the Executive Committee of the International Committee for the History of the Second World War, a subsidiary of the International Committee for Historical Sciences Senior Visiting Fellow, Remarque Institute, New York University, New York City, USA

Key publications Principal Applicant, related to the topic

Burgemeesters in Oorlogstijd. Besturen onder de Duitse bezetting [‘Mayors in Wartime. Dutch Administrators under German Occupation’, Amsterdam 2006] ‘Niederlande: Synthese, Säuberung und Integration’, in: U. Herbert und A. Schildt (Hrsg.), Kriegsende in Europa. Vom Beginn des deutschen Machtzerfalls bis zur Stabilisierung der Nachkriegsordnung 1944-1948, Essen 1998, p.207-224 ‘ ‘Pastors and perpetrators’: Dutch Churches and the reintegration of Nazi-collaborators’, in: Journal of European Studies xxvi, 1996, p.373-387 ‘The Image of Collaboration in post-war Dutch society’, in: 1945: Consequences and Sequels of the Second World War, Bulletin of the International Committee for the history of the Second World War, no. 27/28, 1995, p.311-324 Snel, streng en rechtvaardig. Politiek beleid inzake de bestraffing en reclassering van ‘foute’ Nederlanders 1945-1955, s.l. [Houten] 1991 [‘Swift, Severe and Fair Justice. The problem of collaboration and collaborators in Dutch politics, 1945-1955’, PhD-Dissertation, Groningen University, published 1991, re-issued in the Spring of 2002]

14. Summary for Non-specialists (in Dutch)

In de Nederlandse geschiedschrijving over de bezettingstijd is altijd veel geschreven over wie ‘goed’ en wie ‘fout’ waren, en meer recent over welke grijstinten er ook allemaal bestonden. Dit onderzoeksprogramma wil op een andere manier te werk gaan. Het wil op een systematische manier de positie van voormalig ‘fout’ Nederland in de samenleving onderzoeken en zo inzicht geven in de mechanismen van uitsluiting en integratie in het naoorlogse Nederland en de daarmee samenhangende ideeën van ‘goed burgerschap’. Hiertoe zijn drie projecten ontwikkeld. De eerste heeft een zeer duidelijk omgrensd thema en beoogt te resulteren in een dissertatie. De andere twee hebben zowel in tijd als thematiek een bredere en complexere invalshoek en zijn op postdocniveau. Een van de samenbindende elementen in het hele onderzoeksproject is de nadruk op de gezinnen (de voormalig nationaalsocialistische milieus) en niet alleen op de individuele ‘daders’. Zo krijgt ook de positie van bijvoorbeeld vrouwen en kinderen aandacht. Het gaat dus niet meer zozeer

18

om juridische schuld, maar juist om de maatschappelijke omgang met vragen van schuld en verantwoordelijkheid. Boete, verzoening en slachtofferschap komen zo in hun maatschappelijke context te staan. Een ander samenbindend element is het thema van integratie en burgerschap: in alle drie de projecten wordt geanalyseerd hoe de verschillende actoren dachten over wat kenmerkend was voor een ‘goede burger’ en aan welke eisen deze ‘foute’ milieus dus moesten voldoen om weer deel te kunnen uitmaken van de samenleving. De wisselwerking tussen de ideeën binnen bijvoorbeeld reclassering, kerk, media en overheid aan de ene kant en die van personen uit ‘foute’ gezinnen aan de andere kant staat dan centraal. Het laatste gemeenschappelijke element is de aandacht die in elk van de onderzoeksprojecten besteed wordt aan de internationale vergelijking. Het eerste project is een vergelijking tussen Nederland en België; de andere twee plaatsen Nederland in de context van meerdere omringende landen, zoals behalve België ook Frankrijk, Denemarken en Noorwegen. Het eerste deelproject houdt zich bezig met de fysieke uitsluiting van de collaborateurs. Het functioneren van de interneringskampen die direct na de bevrijding in Nederland en België werden opgericht, wordt vergeleken om een gedifferentieerd inzicht te krijgen in het dagelijkse leven en de specifieke ervaring die daar werd opgedaan. Deze ervaring zal later van invloed zijn bij de terugkeer in de samenleving. In de jaren’50 en ’60 zijn de ‘ex-politieke delinquenten’ en hun gezinnen terug in de Nederlandse samenleving. Het tweede project onderzoekt hoe dit complexe en dynamische proces van integratie en uitsluiting verliep, hoe voormalig politieke delinquenten en hun gezinnen een strategie bepaalden en welk beleid de overheid en maatschappelijke organisaties volgden. Het laatste project besteedt aandacht aan de nakomelingen van NSB-ers en SS-ers die zich vanaf de jaren’70 presenteren als één van de oorlogsslachtoffergroepen en hoe deze groep langzamerhand opgenomen werd in het stelsel van psychische hulpverlening en daarmee de herinnering aan de bezetting. Alle drie de projecten zullen gebruik maken van grotendeels nog niet eerder bestudeerd (archief-)materiaal: het eerste project zal de archieven van de interneringskampen als belangrijke basis hebben, het tweede en derde project richten zich behalve op officiële bronnen van maatschappelijke en overheidsinstanties

voor een

aanzienlijk deel ook op

oral

history,

nieuw verzamelde

persoonsarchieven en bovendien de aandacht voor de erfenis van de collaboratie in de media. Tot slot zullen drie synthetiserende artikelen, twee internationale conferenties – een bij de start en een aan het eind – en een publieksbijeenkomst in de loop van de onderzoeksperiode zorgen voor de inbedding van het programma in zowel het wetenschappelijke als het publieke debat.

19