During a debate in London in 1987 to consider the Historikerstreit, Fest and Jäckel again clashed over the question of the " singularity " of the Holocaust with Fest accusing Jäckel of presenting a " caricature " of his and Nolte's views.

Some historians have characterized its reception as an extension of the Historikerstreit, the German historiographical debate of the 1980s that sought to explain Nazi history.

Debates similar to those of the Historikerstreit in West Germany have been carried out in other countries independent of the German debate, especially after the Fall of Communism.

In the western world, the debate revolving around issues similar to those of the Historikerstreit was renewed following the publication of The Black Book of Communism in 1997.

The British historian Norman Davies argued in 2006 that revealations made after the Fall of Communism in Eastern Europe after 1989-91 about Soviet crimes had discredited the left-wing position in the Historikerstreit debate.

The British historian Norman Davies argued in 2006 that revealations made after the Fall of Communism in Eastern Europe after 1989-91 about Soviet crimes had discredited the left-wing position taken in the 1980s during the Historikerstreit debate.

Speaking of the political importance of the Historikerstreit, Wehler described the debate as " The Historikerstreit is, in sum, more than a strictly scholarly controversy within scholarly limits ".

During a debate in London in 1987 to consider the Historikerstreit, Fest and Jäckel again clashed over the question of the " singularity " of the Holocaust with Fest accusing Jäckel of presenting a " caricature " of his and Nolte's views.

In the Historikerstreit ( historians ' dispute ), Mommsen took the position that the Holocaust was a uniquely evil event that should not be compared to Stalinist terror in the Soviet Union.

In an article entitled " Neither Denial nor Forgetfulness Will Free Us " first published in the Frankfurter Rundschau on December 1, 1986, Mommsen argued that Historikerstreit was a result of the failures of modern society Mommsen argued that in the prosperous 1950s-60s, most Germans were happy to forget about their recent past, and looked forward to a brighter future Starting with the oil shock of the early 1970s and the rise of fundamentalist Islam in the late 1970s, Mommsen argued that the idea of a progressively better future was discredited, leading to a pessimistic public mood, and the a renewed interest in history This had occurred in tandem in a period when German historians had started to make a more critical examination of their recent past As a result at the precise mood when public demanded a past that could make them feel good about being Germans, German historians came under attack for not writing the sort of history the public wanted Mommsen argued that the work of those like Ernst Nolte was intended to provide the sort of history that would allow Germans feel good about being Germans by engaging in “… an explanatory strategy that … will be seen as a justification of National Socialist crimes by all those who are still under the influence of the extreme anti-Soviet propaganda of National Socialism " Mommsen charged that Ernst Nolte was attempting to egregiously whitewash the German past.

In an essay entitled " The Search for the ‘ Lost History ” Observations on the Historical Self-Evidence of the Federal Republic ” first published in the September / October 1986 edition of Merkur magazine, Mommsen began his article by arguing that the Historikerstreit was the result of the desire of the German Right to have a history that they could approve of.

Mommsen argued that the Historikerstreit was caused because German rightists could no longer “ bracket out ” National Socialism and the Holocaust from German history, thus leading to attempts by Ernst Nolte to “ relativize ” Nazi crimes.

Mommsen argued that the growth in pacifist feeling in the Federal Republic as reflected in widespread public opposition to the American raid on Libya in April 1986 made it imperative for the Americans and the West German government to promote a more nationalistic version of German history, and that was what was behind the Historikerstreit.

Mommsen described the Historikerstreit as :“ What is happening now is much like freeing lines of thought that until then had been repressed because they seemed politically questionable.

" As part of his attack on Habermas and his supporters, Hildebrand assailed the functionalist interpretations of the Holocaust advanced by Hans Mommsen and Martin Broszat as little better than Holocaust denial, and commented sarcastically that in the Historikerstreit that the “ revisionists ” Mommsen and Broszat were supporting Habermas in his attacks on the “ revisionists ” Nolte and Hillgruber Hildebrand wrote as part of his attack on the “ singularity ” of the Holocaust that:

In a 1989 essay, the American historian Jerry Muller criticized Wehler as a " leading Left-Liberal historian " who used the Historikerstreit to unjustly smear neo-conservatives with the Nazi tag Muller went on to write of the " interesting peculiarity of the political culture of German Left-liberal intellectuals " such as Wehler, in that Wehler referred to repression in the Stalin-era Soviet Union as " the excesses of the Russian Civil War ", and argued that there was no comparison between Soviet and German history.

In another feuilleton, Hildebrand argued in defense of Nolte that the Holocaust was one of out a long sequence of genocides in the 20th century, and asserted that Nolte was only attempting the " historicization " of National Socialism that Martin Broszat had called for During the Historikerstreit, Hildebrand often used the press as way of attacking Jürgen Habermas over what Hildebrand regarded as Habermas ’ s unfair criticism of Nolte and Hillgruber.

Broszat argued during the Historikerstreit that Andreas Hillgruber had come close to being a Nazi apologist and that Nolte was one.

: original documents of the Historikerstreit, the controversy concerning the singularity of the Holocaust.

In the Historikerstreit ( historians ' dispute ) of the 1980s, Hildebrand sided with those who contended that the Holocaust, while a major tragedy of the 20th century was not a uniquely evil event, but just one out of many genocides of the 20th century.

: Original Documents Of The Historikerstreit, The Controversy Concerning The Singularity of the Holocaust, translated by James Knowlton and Truett Cates, Atlantic Highlands, N. J .: Humanities Press, 1993.

: Original Documents Of the Historikerstreit, The Controversy Concerning The Singularity Of The Holocaust, Atlantic Highlands, N. J.: Humanities Press, 1993, ISBN 0-391-03784-6.

During the Historikerstreit of 1986-1987, Augstein was fierce in his criticism of Ernst Nolte and Andreas Hillgruber for creating what Augstein called the “ New Auschwitz Lie ”.

He took a leading role in the Historikerstreit ( historians ' dispute ) of 1986-89, in which he was identified with those rejecting what they saw as the Marxist hegemony in German historiography in this period.

During the Historikerstreit, Winkler was a leading critic of Ernst Nolte.

The Historikerstreit (" historians ' quarrel ") was an intellectual and political controversy in the late 1980s in West Germany about the comparison of the crimes of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, including their origins.

Many of the left-wing participants in the Historikerstreit were to claim that this museum was meant to “ exonerate ” the German past, and asserted that there was a connection between the proposed museum, the government, and the views of such historians as Michael Stürmer, Ernst Nolte and Andreas Hillgruber.

: A Polemical Essay about the ' Historikerstreit ), in which Wehler criticized every aspect of Nolte's views, and in which Wehler called the Historikerstreit a " political struggle " for the historical understanding of the German past between " a cartel devoted to repressing and excusing " the memory of the Nazi years, of which Nolte was the chief member, against " the representatives of a liberal-democratic politics, of an enlightened, self-critical position, of a rationality which is critical of ideology ".

Besides Nolte, Wehler also attacked the work of Michael Stürmer as " a strident declaration of war against a key element of the consensus upon which the socio-political life of this second republic has rested heretofore " During the Historikerstreit, Wehler was one of the few historians who endorsed Jürgen Habermas's method of attacking Andreas Hillgruber by creating a sentence about " tested senior officials in Nazi Party in the East " out of a long sentence in which Hillgruber had said no such thing on the grounds that it was a secondary issue of no real importance.

A project that raised the ire of many on the left, and which became a central issue of the Historikerstreit, were two proposed museums celebrating modern German history, to be built in West Berlin and Bonn.

Along somewhat similar lines to the stance he took during the Historikerstreit, in September 1990 Wehler strongly condemned a newspaper opinion piece by Harold James which suggested national legends and myths were needed to sustain national identity.

* co-written with Ernst Nolte Fascisme et Communisme: échange épistolaire avec l ' historien allemand Ernst Nolte prolongeant la Historikerstreit, translated into English by Katherine Golsan as Fascism and Communism, with a preface by Tzvetan Todorov, Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 2001, ISBN 0-8032-1995-4.

This resulted in a feeling of controversy for many Germans, causing numerous discussions and rows among scholars and politicians in Post-War West Germany ( for example, the " Historikerstreit " argument in the 1980s ) and after Reunification.

In the Historikerstreit ( Historians ' Dispute ) of 1986 to 1989, Kershaw followed Broszat in criticizing the work and views of Ernst Nolte, Andreas Hillgruber, Michael Stürmer, Joachim Fest and Klaus Hildebrand, all of whom Kershaw saw as German apologists attempting to white-wash the German past in various ways.

The most common translation of Historikerstreit in English language academic discourse is " the historians ' dispute ", though the German term is often used.

The Historikerstreit spanned the years 1986-1989, and pitted right-wing against left-wing intellectuals.

The voluminous academic literature on the Historikerstreit includes multiple anthologies of the major interventions, e. g., Augstein 1993, Habermas 1987, and New German Critique 1988.

( English language edition of “ Historikerstreit ”: Die Dokumentation der Kontroverse um die Einzigartigkeit der nationalsozialistschen Judenvernichtung, Munich: Piper.

Nazism, Politics and the Image of the Past: Thoughts on the West German Historikerstreit 1986 – 1987.

Special Issue on the Historikerstreit.

Das Vergehen der Vergangenheit: Antwort an meine Kritiker im sogenannten Historikerstreit, Berlin: Ullstein.

Historikerstreit und die Suche nach einer nationalen Identität der achtziger Jahre, European University Studies, Political Science Vol.

Ein polemischer Essay zum " Historikerstreit " Munich: C. H.