What do you think?
Rate this book
Columbia Studies in International and Global History
Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age
Nationalism today depends on the perception of victimhood. The historical memory of past suffering endows nationalist movements with political legitimacy and a sense of moral superiority. Koreans recall Japanese colonial atrocities, while Japan commemorates the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel sanctifies the Holocaust and Poland trumpets the Nazi and Soviet occupations. Even Germany and Russia, perpetrators of historical crimes, today cast themselves as victims by pointing to national suffering.
In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. He examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity.
In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. He examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity.
- GenresHistory
451 pages, Kindle Edition
Published April 1, 2025
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
April 19, 2026
This is an interesting book. A word to the wise: if you are looking for a relatively straightforward history of the politics of aggrievement, this is not that. The author very ambitiously seeks to create an original framework through which to analyze the commodification of suffering and its use as political capital by nation states and various lobbying organizations. He does this primarily by examining the relationships between Germany, Israel, Poland, South Korea, and Japan, although other battles over memory are referenced throughout.
As for this not being a straightforward history, Lim makes it very clear in the first chapter when he says, “That is why the phenomenology of memory is the critical focus throughout this book, which goes beyond the factuality of memory, a simple fact checking of whether a specific memory is ‘correct’ or ‘wrong.’” Far from being a milquetoast adjudication of whose narrative of suffering is the most worthy or legitimate, Lim seeks to deconstruct the cultural mechanisms that weaponize atrocities. As a result, Victimhood Nationalism often reads more like analytic philosophy than standard political commentary. He strikes a good balance between high in the sky generalism and more down to earth, specific applications of his methods, with plenty of historical examples.
While the attempt to create what is essentially a grand system through which to make sense of these (ostensibly) historical debates is ambitious, this wide net approach is also the book’s primary flaw. At points, it appears that he bites off more than he can chew, and it becomes very easy to get lost in the weeds, with frequent use of terms such as “hegemonic operational mechanism” or “exculpatory relativization.” In fairness, some of the clunkiness likely stems from the translation.
To sum up, this is a supremely interesting, and at times confusing, book that will appeal to anyone curious about the subject matter willing to parse some difficult language.
As for this not being a straightforward history, Lim makes it very clear in the first chapter when he says, “That is why the phenomenology of memory is the critical focus throughout this book, which goes beyond the factuality of memory, a simple fact checking of whether a specific memory is ‘correct’ or ‘wrong.’” Far from being a milquetoast adjudication of whose narrative of suffering is the most worthy or legitimate, Lim seeks to deconstruct the cultural mechanisms that weaponize atrocities. As a result, Victimhood Nationalism often reads more like analytic philosophy than standard political commentary. He strikes a good balance between high in the sky generalism and more down to earth, specific applications of his methods, with plenty of historical examples.
While the attempt to create what is essentially a grand system through which to make sense of these (ostensibly) historical debates is ambitious, this wide net approach is also the book’s primary flaw. At points, it appears that he bites off more than he can chew, and it becomes very easy to get lost in the weeds, with frequent use of terms such as “hegemonic operational mechanism” or “exculpatory relativization.” In fairness, some of the clunkiness likely stems from the translation.
To sum up, this is a supremely interesting, and at times confusing, book that will appeal to anyone curious about the subject matter willing to parse some difficult language.
Displaying 1 of 1 review