This document discusses how German museums underrepresent the "Gastarbeiter" movement from 1961-1973, in which over 14 million immigrant workers, including over 800,000 Turks, came to Germany. While other countries have immigration museums, Germany lacks representation of this important period. The omission reveals that German cultural memory is focused on overcoming World War II and defining national identity against that dark past. As a result, the Gastarbeiter and their descendants are excluded from being considered a true part of German history and culture. This gaps leaves modern Germany unable to fully acknowledge its multicultural present and future.

1. We Were There: a Recognition of the (Missing) Guest Workers in German Museums
English Version
Ned Strasbaugh
March 24, 2014
Prof. Cohen-Pfister

2. The importance of museums to understanding the culture that they portray cannot be
understated. Museums are a collection of exhibits from different periods of time that illustrate
the history and development of a culture. On one hand, museums help members of a culture to
remember and preserve the past of the culture more clearly than the fallibility of individual
memories; on the other hand, the preservation of certain cultural artifacts presents problems in
itself: not all of history can be represented by a museum, and so that requires a choice about what
does get represented by museums.1 This omission of certain events from museums necessarily
requires a choice about what gets represented and what doesn’t, a decision that reveals where the
interests of those in charge lie. Not only that, but the viewer of the exhibits in the museum,
presented with only some of the history, is left to fill in the gaps of what is not represented.2
Museums, therefore, have a power when it comes to representing a culture because of what they
show and what they omit. This has an effect of the viewer of the exhibits, because they are
presented with a one-sided account of a culture, and this affects the cultural mindset of the
viewer: “The relative value attributed to each way of looking at things is really a function of the
respective intensity of influences that each group has separately exerted upon him”.3
Museums in Germany face this conundrum acutely: the importance of portraying German
culture and history well is of vital significance, because “Germany’s identity was joined to the
negative memory of its Nazi past”.4 But in this attempt to reconcile with its turbulent past,
German museums are focused on some aspects while crucially leaving others behind. I am
1 Olick,Jeffrey K., Vered Vinitzky-Seroussi and Daniel Levy, eds. “The CollectiveMemory Reader.” Oxford: Oxford
University Press,2011.Print. P.379
2 Olick 379
3 Olick 140
4 Assmann, Aleida,and Anja Schwarz. "Memory, migration and guilt." Crossings: Journal of Migration & Culture 4,
no. 1 (2013). 54

3. referring to the Gastarbeiter movement of 1961-1973, in which fourteen million immigrants5 and
specifically over 800,000 Turks6 came to Germany to work. There are similar dedications to
immigrants in other countries: the United States has the Immigration Museum at Ellis Island,
established in 1990, and the Pacific Coast Immigration Museum in San Francisco. In an
increasingly-globalized society, the impact that immigration has in the advancement of nations is
apparent, and deserves recognition. But Germany has notably struggled with coming to terms
with itself as a nation with immigrants for years (source). It has had to come to terms with its
past, devoting boundless attention to reconciling with the atrocities of World War II and building
itself up again from the wreckage. The result is that the Gastarbeiter movement is left behind: not
portrayed in museums, it is as if the Gastarbeiter are not a part of German culture and history at
all, so that they are denied a place in cultural memory. This paper will demonstrate how the
Gastarbeiter movement has, conspicuously, been omitted from German museums and
consequently German awareness, cultural memory, and identity.
The implications of this omission are that German cultural memory is being shaped in a
way that is eschewed: German national identity is being biased in favor of the society that
unified and moved on from World War II. This national identity does not take into account the
complexity and multicultural identity of the new German, including the Gastarbeiter and the
German-Turks descended therefrom, which help to make Berlin the second largest Turkish city
in the world.7 This multicultural society is being denied its place in German history because it is
5 Eryilmaz,Aytac. „The Political and Social Significanceof a Museum of Migration in Germany.“ Museum
International 59 no.1/2 (May 2007): 127-136.Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed March 17,2014).
P.128
6 Ataman, Ferda. “Türkische Frauen: Die Opferrollehatausgedient.” Spiegel Online.
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/tuerkische-frauen-die-opferrolle-hat-ausgedient-a-470392.html
(accessed March 23,2014)
7 Sturm, Daniel-Friedrich.“Türken in Berlin.“Die Welt.
http://www.welt.de/welt_print/kultur/literatur/article6276084/Tuerken-in-Berlin.html (accessed March 23,2014)

4. underrepresented in museums, indicators of the cultural and collective memory. But the
Gastarbeiter movement is important to show because they are also citizens of Germany who have
made this country their home. Therefore, it is important to recognize the repression of
Gastarbeiter from museums, because this indicates the problems that underlie German society in
failing to come to terms with its immigrant history, and informs the work that still needs to be
done for Germany to come to terms with its past.
It is important to realize also that it is not every medium of memory that underrepresents
the German-Turks: the development of German-Turks in Germany has been portrayed acutely in
film, for example, by Tevfik Başer, Fatih Akin, and Özgür Yıldırım, among others;8 the role of
German-Turkish identity has been written about by prominent authors including Zafer Şenocak;9
and photographs of Armando Rodrigues de Sá, the millionth Gastarbeiter to work in Germany,
and his motorcycle are still portrayed in textbooks and newspaper articles.10 It is museums
specifically that underrepresent the Gastarbeiter, and thus not acknowledging the German-Turks
who descended from them. When I say that museums underrepresent the Gastarbeiter, it must be
understood that they are not unrepresented: for instance, de Sá’s motorcycle is housed in das
Haus der Geschichte in Bonn.11 However, the representation that is in Germany is startlingly
limited: there is no museum which commemorates those people who came to work in Germany
fifty years ago, people who numbered over a million and who have left a sizable minority in
8 Tunc Cox, Ayca. “Three Generations of Turkish Filmmakers in Germany: Three Different Narratives.”Turkish
Studies 12, no.1 (March 2011): 115-127.Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed January 22,2014). P.118-
119
9 Littler, Margaret. „Guilt, Victimhood and Identity in Zafer Şenocak’s Gefährliche Verwandtschaft.“ German
Quarterly 78,no.3 (Summer 2005): 357-373.Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed March 23,2014).
10 Stephan, Tobias.“50 Jahre geteilte Erinnerung; Es gibt Auswanderermuseen – aber keine für die Einwanderer.
Erst langsamfinden dieGeschichten von deutschtürkischen Künstlern Eingang ins kollektiveBewusstsein.“ ZEIT-
Online, 30 October 2011. http://www.lexisnexis.com (accessed February 25,2014).
11 Motte, Jan, and Rainer Ohliger. “Menschen ohne Geschichte?; Was weiß die Mehrheit der bundesdeutschen
Gesellschaftüber die Herkunft der Arbeitsmigranten? Und was weiß sieüber ihreeigene Migrationsgeschichte?
Welche Bilder verbinden siedamit? Der Einwanderungsgesellschaftein Gedächtnis geben.“ Die Tageszeitung, 07
October 2002. http://www.lexisnexis.com (accessed February 25, 2014).

5. present society: “Die erste Station in Deutschland für Millionen von Gastarbeitern ist nicht zu
einem deutschen Ellis Island geworden, welches heute ein Einwanderungsmuseum
beherbergt”.12
With such an underrepresentation of the Gastarbeiter and their descendants in modern
German society today, it is important to understand the root of German-Turks in German history.
In other words, there is no reason why museums would not underrepresent the Gastarbeiter if the
Gastarbeiter never came to Germany in the first place. The question becomes: Why did Germany
need the Gastarbeiter in the first place? Following World War II, Germany needed workers to
rebuild the nation, but East Germany cut itself off from West Germany, and consequently any
German laborers in East Germany from moving west. Without this labor force, “the FRG
increasingly began to recruit millions of labour-related immigrants from south-eastern Europe”13,
which was the beginning of the Gastarbeiter movement.
Germany kept accepting new migrant workers from other countries with the belief that
they would one day return home to their countries of origin. However, with the sudden end of the
Gastarbeiter movement in 1973, though most returned home, many stayed.14 This characterizes
the two sides of the issue of immigration to Germany and German identity during the
Gastarbeiter movement. On one hand, the Germans who hired the Gastarbeiter to work in
Germany did so due to the country’s weak economic state, yet at the same time espoused their
economic strength: “The German national myth of cultural purity characterizes foreign workers
for being dependent on German wealth, while the basic facts of migration historically prove the
existence of large-scale labour demand either for agricultural or industrial growth that initiated
12 Stephan
13 Eryilmaz128
14 Horrocks,David and Eva Kolinsky,eds.“Turkish Culture in German Society Today.” Providence: Berghahn Books,
1996.Print. P.82

6. labour migrations at the first place”.15 The Gastarbeiter were needed to revitalize Germany. But
this was, and still is, in contrast to the image that Germany wants to have for itself. This image,
of being strong in the 1960s, is borne of Germany’s dark past, and its need to move on. The irony
of this is that, following the use of foreign labor in the Nazi period, or the negative term
Fremdarbeiter, the term Gastarbeiter was used for this new period to replace it;16 but by the end
of the Gastarbeiter movement, it was apparent that the term Gastarbeiter carried the connotation
that the workers were merely guests, destined one day to leave Germany.17
It is apparent, therefore, that the Gastarbeiter were viewed as a temporary necessity to
help Germany recover from World War II. This is why cultural memory doesn’t allow for the
Gastarbeiter to belong in the German national consciousness, and why they are underrepresented
in museums. The Gastarbeiter were not there either to suffer the destruction that World War II
had on German identity and Germany’s position as a world power, nor at any happier time
before this dark period. “The sacrosanct nature of policies utilized for the accommodation of the
influx of ethnic Germans, and the labelling of these newcomers as ‘returnees’ or ‘re-patriates’ is
suggestive of a form of romantic remembrance of the ‘national’ past at the expense of coming
into terms with the present multi-cultural dictum of the German society”.18 The emphasis on
Germany’s romantic past, here, indicates Germany’s focus on the past in general. German
citizens who willfully forget the Gastarbeiter as part of German society, in the 1960s and
beyond, do so in order to preserve the German past that they may feel nostalgia for. Yet this is
not healthy for German cultural memory, because this intense focus on the past leads such
15 Canefe, Nergis. “Citizens versus Permanent Guests: Cultural Memory and Citizenship Laws in a Reunified
Germany.” Citizenship Studies 2, no.3: 519.Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed January 22,2014).
P.523
16 Smith, Andrea L. “Germany’s Anti-Foreigner Crisis:State Disunity and Collective‘Forgetting’.” Journal of
Historical Sociology 7, no.4: 393. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed January 22,2014). P.409
17 Horrocks xviii
18 Canefe 528

7. citizens to forget the present and the future. In spite of Germany’s emphasis of overcoming the
past, in the 1960s and 1970s, the Gastarbeiter were also part of German society, and their
descendants today cannot be ignored. The focus on the past would lead Germany to stagnate in
the present and future: “The unhistorical and the historical are necessary in equal measure for the
health of an individual, of a people and of a culture”.19
It is not just this emphasis on the past that Germany has focused on which has left the
Gastarbeiter behind; it is also the people involved in the past, those who do the remembering like
those in charge of museums, and those in the past whom we remember. When it comes to
cultural memory, it is always subjective because we experience them personally, and it can only
“be fully understood by… myself. In this sense, it belongs to me and, at the moment of its
occurrence, I am tempted to explain it by reference to myself and myself alone”.20 Even in terms
of cultural memory, felt by a group of people instead of one individual, there is a degree of
subjectivity because of how the individual relates to the culture, a personal connection. The
importance of this personal connection to one’s culture cannot be understated: “The collective
repression of this history is… critical to the reproduction of a key element of German
nationalism: the ideology of German ‘homogeneity’”.21 Quite simply, with the resuscitation of
German identity following the memory of World War II, there was a feeling of who were victims
of the War: we are the people who felt this catastrophe; we are the people who repented and are
better for it. The Gastarbeiter don’t belong with this group because they came to Germany after
World War II. “Germans are those [who] define themselves in terms of belonging by rejection of
a Nazi Past. A German citizen of Turkish background can hardly fully belong to such a
collective. He cannot use the common ‘we’ concerning the contaminated past of Germany. In
19 Olick 75
20 Olick 140
21
Smith412

8. this sense, ius sanguinis is being prolonged by the rituals of memory and remembrance”.22 The
Gastarbeiter are part of a more modern Germany, post-World War II, and have been instrumental
in forming the new German citizen when, in the meantime, German museums are still focused on
overcoming the past.
With these reasons why the Gastarbeiter are not considered to be part of German cultural
memory, it is easier to understand how this plays in the case of museums. Why should museums
submit to this German cultural memory that some of its citizens believe, and why should there be
so little representation of the Gastarbeiter in museums? There are certainly different groups of
people who would believe different things, either that the Gastarbeiter do belong in cultural
memory or they don’t. But it’s because of those who have the power over museums, and make
the choice that the Gastarbeiter don’t belong, that the museums exclude the Gastarbeiter from
cultural memory. “The invention of national traditions or official histories is a highly selective,
politically charged, and ongoing process involving the construction of a unitary national history
from multiple, conflicting, and competing group memories”.23 There are different interests in
what gets remembered in German consciousness and what doesn’t, and those who are in charge
get to decide. It shows the power structure of German society and where the interests of those in
charge are oriented. They have the power to remember certain things in the past and forget
others, shaping the course of the future: “Dieser Zustand der Erinnerungslosigkeit ist Produkt der
Mehrheitsgesellschaft”.24 And these interests of the majority society are concerned with
organizing Germany’s collective Vergangenheitsbewältigung.
22 Diner, Dan. “Nation, Migration and Memory: On Historical Concepts of Citizenship.” Constellations: An
International Journal of Critical & Democratic Theory 4, no.3 (January 1998):293. Academic Search Premier,
EBSCOhost (March 23, 2014). P.303
23 Smith 393
24 Motte

9. I do not imply that this was the wrong thing to do; it was logical for the majority society
to focus on overcoming the past because, following reunification in 1990 and the union of 17
million new Germans as one people, there was a change of German self-definition and patterns
of memory.25 Germany was together, and needed to unite with a common history so that its
citizens could embrace the future that lay before Germany. Naturally, the starkest event that
could unite the majority of its citizens together was its Nazi past,26 events that had profound
effects on those involved as well as the children and grandchildren of those involved. The
problem inherent with focusing specifically on its Nazi past, though, was the conflict at the heart
of it, between the Jews and the Germans, which brought about subsequent questions about the
human condition. It focused on repenting towards one group, while ignoring other minority
groups; the binary nature of Jews and Germans in this historical event implied that immigrants
were excluded from this common history.27 Therefore, while Germany is moving on from its
guilt, the Gastarbeiter and their descendants have been denied their place in cultural memory.
Delving deeper into the role museums have with cultural memory in Germany, it is
interesting to note what takes place in specific museums. There are, as stated, hardly any
museums which are dedicated to immigration. Kreuzberg Museum, located in “Little Istanbul,”
the concentration of German-Turks in Berlin, is one of these few that discuss migration. But
even then, the one special exhibit that it has discusses how the area has been shaped by
immigrants rather than the experience of the immigrants themselves.28 Museum Neukölln, the
museum in another district of Berlin shaped by the immigrants who moved there, has one room
25 Wilhelm,Cornelia. “Diversity in Germany: A Historical Perspective.” German Politics & Society 31, no.2 (Summer
2013): 13-29.Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed January 22,2014). P.24
26 Eryilmaz131
27 Wilhelm24
28 “stadt-migration-geschichte:vom halleschen zumfrankfurter tur.“ Friedrichshain-KreuzbergMuseum.
http://www.fhxb-museum.de/index.php?id=267#c393 (accessed March 24,2014)

10. with a tiny collection of artifacts, no special exhibits, and nothing else. These two districts,
hotspots for immigrants in Germany's capital, have nothing dedicated to immigration to
Germany, hardly an encouraging sign. “Die großen Einrichtungen, die die Geschichte der Nation
abbilden wie das Deutsche Historische Museum, das Germanische Nationalmuseum, die Stiftung
Haus der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, sie alle haben die Geschichte der
Einwanderung stets nur auf Fußnoten reduziert“.29 It is not as if there is no discourse on
immigration to Germany, as seen from these examples. But the topic of immigration to
Germany, and the Gastarbeiter, is hardly done justice by these minimal exhibits.
This underrepresentation of a distinctive minority is inconsistent with Germany’s efforts
to overcome its past and portray itself as changed from the destructive nation it was in World
War II. There is still emphasis elsewhere, away from this major event that helped to stabilize
Germany’s economy and has given rise to Germany’s largest minority, the German-Turks. The
emphasis is, instead, on Germany’s homogenous unification after the horror of World War II,
which has been cultivated in Germany’s museums, the site of Germany’s cultural memory and
politics: “So gerecht der Ruf nach einem zentralen Migrationsmuseum in Deutschland auch
klingen mag, so wenig wurde er bislang von der deutschen Kulturpolitik erhört.... Fest steht: Die
museale Sicht auf gesellschaftliche Phänomene in Zeiten der Globalisierung ist ohne das
Querschnittsthema Migration nicht mehr denkbar“.30 To continue to deny this movement its
place in German culture is counter to Germany’s own history and the increasingly globalized
world we live in: a world of more information, greater transnational movement, and evolving
national identities.
29 Kiyak,Mely. “Das unerzählte Kapitel;Das Problem der Ausstellungen zur Geschichte der Gastarbeiter in
Deutschland.“ Frankfurter Rundschau, 15 January 2011.http://www.lexisnexis.com (accessed February 25, 2014).
30 Gogos, Manuel. “Schaut! Uns! An!; Unsere Städte sind SpielplätzeVereinter Nationen Migrationsausstellungen
boomen: Wie dieGlobalisierungunsereMuseumslandschaftverändert.“ Der Tagesspiegel, 10 January 2011.
http://www.lexisnexis.com (accessed February 25, 2014).

11. It follows from this analysis of the role museums play in society, and how they have
overlooked one of the key events of modern German history, that there is something at fault with
the power structures within German society. After all, the museums have overlooked the
Gastarbeiter because of the majority society that is in charge of them, and this reflects the
mindset that the majority society retains. It is thus important to understand that these problems
are not rooted in the museums themselves, but in the society behind the museums. This is not to
suggest that society is totally oppressive of German-Turks, nor were they of the Gastarbeiter: “It
is true that as of 1 January 1991, the German nationality law was changed to accommodate the
principle of birth right (jus soli) in order to facilitate the acquisition of citizenship for
‘foreigners’ under specific conditions”.31 This was an important change to cause, which changed
conceptions of German nationality from purely blood right to birth right, though this change
came only 18 years after the Gastarbeiter movement had officially ended, and 30 years after it
began.
But the law does not account for the foreigners who came to Germany to work for the
Gastarbeiter movement: generally, upon reaching the age of twenty-three, a resident of Germany
with non-German parents must choose between either German citizenship or citizenship of
another country. In other words, they are still either German citizens or temporary guests to
Germany. This highlights the fact that Germany is slow to accept the fact that its society is in
fact very heterogeneous. German-Turks feel this acutely: “Eine deutsche Istanbulerin: ‘So lange
ich meine deutschsprachige Kultur hier leben kann, fühle ich mich wohl.‘ Eine türkische
Berlinerin: ‚Als Kennedy sagte: „Ich bin ein Berliner“, hat das die ganze Welt gehört. Wir sagen
seit Jahren, dass wir Berliner sind. Aber uns hört niemand“.32 The German-Turks who have lived
31 Canefe 520
32 Kiyak

12. in Germany for three generations now are still, like their ancestors, viewed as guests: neither part
of German history, nor part of German society. This couldn’t be farther from the truth.
The effect that this has cannot be denied: German-Turks, today, are not incorporated into
German society because their ancestors are not remembered as part of Germany. They are
excluded: “In order to unite divided communities and claim national sovereignty through a
politically viable ‘national consciousness’, the field of culture needed to be ordered so that a new
'collective memory' could be created for what was to become a single unified Germany”.33
Germany has sought to unify itself from the horrors of its past, and though the intent is
honorable, the way this is done is not working. They have made themselves appear united into
the same land with common memories with the help of their museums, at the cost of suppressing
the memories of those who don’t belong, namely the Gastarbeiter. This has led to such modern
social unrest as Angela Merkel declaring in 2010 that multiculturalism in Germany has “absolut
gescheitert”.34
Bearing all of this in mind, the situation is not hopeless: there is still much that can be
done, and is being done. There are museums in Germany that have been hosting exhibits that
honor the Gastarbeiter and the immigrants that have moved to Germany, including the
Ruhrlandsmuseum in Essen, the Kölnischer Kunstverein in Cologne, Project Migration, and the
Museum of Migration in Germany.35 The Dokumentationszentrum und Museum über die
Migration in Deutschland (DOMiD) is a project founded by migrant Turkish intellectuals that
has compiled together many documents and memorabilia from the Gastarbeiter movement and
33 Canefe 521
34 Süddeutsche Zeitung. “Merkel: ‘Multikulti istabsolutgescheitert’.” Süddeutsche.de.
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/integration-seehofer-sieben-punkte-plan-gegen-zuwanderung-1.1012736
(accessed March 24,2014)
35 Eryilmaz132-136

13. the rest of immigrant history into a library with over 12,000 titles.36 Moreover, greater change
can come about at the societal level: “A broader discourse on the social reality of Germany and
patterns of the construction of diversity, cultural difference, memory, and German identity
would… not only allow those who were or are immigrants to identify with the nation, but also
help Germans to understand their own identity as far more diverse and culturally different as
frequently asserted by their collective memory”.37 Museums are the place where this cultural
memory conflict takes place, but with a change in a societal level, with increased dialogue and a
deeper understanding of Germany’s role as a nation of immigration, museums can change and do
justice to representing the Gastarbeiter.
The Gastarbeiter are underrepresented in museums in Germany, and as a consequence,
they and their descendants are not given their place in German cultural memory, society and
identity. This is due to a number of factors, all of which stem from Germany’s desire to focus its
memory on World War II and overcome this memory: the feeling of community that Germans
experienced World War II, and that the Gastarbeiter didn’t; the desire to restore Germany to the
‘romantic past’ it was thought to have before World War II, also before the Gastarbeiter were
present; and the word “Gastarbeiter” which implies its temporary nature, and the laws of birth
right that are in place and naturally exclude the Gastarbeiter. The museums are the focal point of
this underrepresentation more than other media, because they reflect the mindset of the dominant
majority in society. Though there are cases where museums do represent the Gastarbeiter, this is
few and far between. It is much more prevalent that the Gastarbeiter are briefly touched on
before giving way to other historical topics. This, in turn, omits the Gastarbeiter from cultural
memory, so that it seems even more apparent that they do not belong, and therefore their
36 Eryilmaz133-134
37 Wilhelm26

14. descendants are viewed as not belonging to this society as well. There are projects and museums
that are seeking to change this power structure in Germany, but there is still a long way to go
before the museums begin to reflect the changes that society makes.

15. SOURCES
Canefe, Nergis. “Citizens Versus Permanent Guests: Cultural Memory and Citizenship Laws in a
Reunified Germany.” Citizenship Studies 2.3 (1998): 519. Academic Search Premier.
Web. 22 Jan. 2014.
Eryilmaz, Aytac. "The Political and Social Significance of a Museum of Migration in
Germany." Museum International 59.1 (2007): 127-36. Print.
Gogos, Manuel. “Schaut! Uns! An!; Unsere Städte sind Spielplätze Vereinter Nationen
Migrationsaustellungen boomen: Wie die Globalisierung unsere Museumslandschaft
verändert.“ Der Tagesspiegel. (Montag 10. Januar 2011): Lexisnexis Academic. Web. 9
Feb. 2014.
Horrocks, David, and Eva Kolinsky, eds. Turkish Culture in German Society Today. Berghahn
Books: Providence, 1996. Print.
Kiyak, Mely. "Das unerzählte Kapitel; Das Problem der Ausstellungen zur Geschichte der
Gastarbeiter in Deutschland." Frankfurter Rundschau. (15. Januar 2011): LexisNexis
Academic. Web. 26 Feb. 2014.
Motte, Jan, and Rainer Ohliger. "Menschen ohne Geschichte?; Was weiß die Mehrheit der
bundesdeutschen Gesellschaft über die Herkunft der Arbeitsmigranten? Und was weiß sie
über ihre eigene Migrationsgeschichte? Welche Bilder verbindet sie damit? Der
Einwanderungsgesellschaft ein Gedächtnis geben." taz, die tageszeitung. (07. Oktober
2002). LexisNexis Academic. Web. 26 Feb. 2014.
Smith, Andrea L. „Germany’s Anti-Foreigner Crisis: State Disunity and Collective ‚Forgetting‘.“
Journal of Historical Sociology 7.4 (1994): 393. Academic Search Premier. Web. 22 Jan.
2014.
Stephan, Tobias. "50 Jahre geteilte Erinnerung; Es gibt Auswanderermuseen - aber keine für die
Einwanderer. Erst langsam finden die Geschichten von deutschtürkischen Künstlern
Eingang ins kollektive Bewusstsein." ZEIT-online. (30. Oktober 2011): LexisNexis
Academic. Web. 26 Feb. 2014.
Wilhelm, Cornelia. “Diversity in Germany: A Historical Perspective.” German Politics &
Society 31.2 (2013): 13-29. Academic Search Premier. Web. 22 Jan. 2014.