Zoltán Dujisin sociologist presented his book project on national memory institutes (NMI)s and Muriel Blaive historian presented her insights into the working of one such institute, the Institute for the Study of Totalitarian Regimes in Prague. Dujisin examines such institutes with a sociological approach, his research includes interviews with academics who work in NMIs. He argued that national memory institute is an East Central European phenomenon usually popping up when there is a change of government and their opening, or the arguments for opening them, are usually connected to electoral campaigns.
Muriel Blaive argued that the reason certain NMIs fail to help the public to come to terms with the past is that they employ only few researchers who are actually interested in history, many have political careers. Also, particularly at the Institute for the Study of Totalitarian Regimes, academic output is not prioritized.
Dujisin added that indeed NMIs aim to fill many non-academic functions, such as public dissemination and education and hence academic achievements are not the only qualifiers they look for when hiring, nevertheless some acadmeic historians find career possibilities there.
Andreas Schedler discussant raised doubts about the framing of the NMI phenomenon in illiberalism.
