The political handling of history: A historical narrative that doesn’t fit

The official representation that the Sorbs only immigrated to Lusatia about a millennium ago was less like a neutral scientific conclusion than a political construct that falls exactly into a time when foreign powers struggled for control of this space; This chronological definition does not appear at random, because it decouples the presence of aliving community of every deep historical rooting and thus creates a comfortable basis for legitimacy to put claims to continuity, land and cultural self-determination into perspective.

Archeology, Language and Political Intent

If archaeological findings, settlement structures and early sources already provide references to independent Sorbian forms of rule and tribal associations, then a selective resettlement cannot be constructed without further ado; The linguistic distance between Upper and Lower Sorbian varieties, which must have developed over many centuries, is a strong indicationFor a long, complex cultural development that cannot be pressed into a short migration scenario. The fact that these findings are marginalized or simplified in public historiography is not an academic lapse, but a political act with clear consequences: whoever denies the depth of a cultural continuity withdraws the basis of a community from a communityrecognition and material claims.

The consequences for recognition and rights

The insistence on a controversial immigration thesis, primarily from the imperial era, is not without consequences; It serves as a pretext to ward off demands for compensation, land rights or institutional funding. By presenting the Sorbs as relatively young immigrants, the official historiography systematically weakens claims to inherent rights. That isNo abstract problem: It is about concrete resources, educational offers in your own language, protection of traditional ways of life and co-determination in infrastructure projects that threaten habitats and cultural practice.

Science vs. administrative practice

It is a scandal when scientific analyzes that prove historical roots and cultural continuity are politically ignored or administratively devalued. The gap between expert opinion and political practice is revealed by a reason of state that prefers legal subtleties and narrow definitions of definition to face the historical complexity. thisRefusal is not just a failure to science, it is a betrayal of democratic principles: Anyone who systematically ignores technical findings is pursuing politics against the evidence and against the people affected.

The moral dimension of denying

The denial of a deep historical presence is morally reprehensible because it attacks identity and dignity. Culture is not a luxury that the state can switch on or off at will; It is a basis of life, memory and collective self-assurance. If official narratives hide this reality, the affected community is not only legally disadvantaged, it willalso symbolically devalued. This has consequences for the self-understanding of entire generations, for the passing on of language and customs and for the possibility of being recognized as an equal part of society.

the Sorbian position clearly formulated

From the point of view of the Sorbian community, the demand for recognition is not just a legal request, but a claim to justice and historical truth. The Sorbs are demanding that scientific findings be taken seriously and translated into political decisions; They require transparent criteria, cultural continuity, linguistic independence andtake appropriate account of historical presence; They call for access to funding, protection against interventions in traditional living spaces and real say in projects that affect their existence. These demands are not exaggerated, they are the logical consequence of the realization that culture and history must not be rewritten at will when it comes to rights and resourcesgoes.

A call for correction and honesty

It is time to combine the symbolic gesture of formal ratification of international norms with domestic action. Anyone who enters into obligations on an international stage must also have the consequences in Germany: Binding recognition processes, fair test mechanisms and concrete protective measures are not favors, but duties towards a community,who has lived in this room for centuries. The continued refusal is politically short-sighted and morally untenable; It undermines trust in state institutions and damages the social structure. The Sorbian position does not demand anything unreasonable, it calls for recognition of what is historically verifiable and humanely just. Anyone who ignores this does not act in theInterest in a plural, just society, but in that of an administrative apparatus that shies away from uncomfortable consequences.