Mary - Guida turistica a Berlino

The review was reported for moderation, as it hugely misrepresents the content of my tour. Thank you for your contribution Or. I am genuinely disappointed and deeply concerned by your review, which not only mischaracterises my work but does so in a way that feels both serious and, regrettably, malicious. Throughout every walking tour, my primary aim is to present Berlin’s rich and complex history based on the most authoritative scholarly sources rather than on my personal opinions. At the very start of each tour, I make it a central point that I draw from leading historical research and encourage multiple perspectives and open discussion among participants. The review’s description of my approach represents a serious distortion of what actually occurs during the tour. Regarding the key accusations, I would like to address them directly. When referencing twentieth-century history, totalitarianism, and the consequences of ideology, I rely on the works of renowned historians and political theorists such as Timothy Snyder and Hannah Arendt. My intent is NOT to promote my own political beliefs but rather to present critical insights from their research about the risks and challenges that societies can face. Throughout the tour, I clearly explain when a viewpoint reflects the academic consensus, when there is legitimate debate, and when new evidence requires re-examination of certain historical interpretations. Unfortunately, some guests confronted with the fact that their personal opinions diverse from mainstream academic analysis, become severely distressed. Sometimes, like in this case, instead of engaging in follow up reaserch or asking questions, they try to comfort themselves by pretending that tours content were my personal ideas and the context was not provided. With respect to the controversial topic of soap production during the Nazi era, I have never stated that the Nazis systematically produced soap from human remains. Instead, I reference the ongoing scholarly debate and make it explicit that major historians consider the evidence for large-scale production unsubstantiated by current documentation. I carefully clarify that repurposing of materials such as teeth, hair, or crematory ashes is mentioned in historical research, but this is not presented to sensationalize or to criticize any contemporary political or economic system. When discussing the soap topic, I ensure that the contested nature of this historical claim is fully explained to avoid any misunderstanding. Any comparisons made between German, Soviet, or American historical developments, including political or immigration policies, are intended solely to illustrate how historians like Snyder and Arendt analyze mechanisms and warning signs of authoritarianism, mass violence, and state-driven exclusion. In your review you very conveniently completely skip the fact that I many times underlined these are not my ideas, but some of them I find convincing or intellectually valuable. The history of academic analysis of possible raise of fascism in the United States go as far as the first half of 20th century and thinkers like Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer. These references are never personal attacks on other views but rather educational attempts to highlight relevant historical patterns. Visual materials shown during the tour, such as satellite Google Maps images of a concentration camp and fully valid sources that were also explained. The guest’s portrayal of my comments about immigrant communities is egregiously inaccurate. I did not dismiss personal accounts of discomfort or harassment. On the contrary, I emphasized that such experiences are deeply regrettable and highlight the importance of cultural understanding and integration. I clearly communicated that research points to challenges faced by newcomers from any background, especially in relation to social and dating dynamics. I affirmed that feelings of discomfort are valid, and my intent was never to minimize anyone’s lived experience. When discussing contemporary left-wing political parties, I referred to evidence found in party platforms and mainstream policy proposals. My remark about “public housing” was made in the context of the broader European political spectrum and was never intended to minimize the very real historical dangers associated with authoritarian regimes, including those that have identified as leftist. In fact, the Nazi regime, as I explained on the tour, was a far-right nationalist and totalitarian movement. Therefore, the review’s suggestion that I minimize its far-right roots is inaccurate. The majority of the tour focuses on exploring Berlin's multi-layered history, including its architecture, key historical events, and the lived experiences of its people. Contemporary issues arise naturally from participants’ questions or when they serve as relevant background for understanding present-day Berlin. These topics are never allowed to overshadow the primary historical content. The serious misrepresentations in the guest’s review undermine the integrity of my work and the educational value the tour provides. I categorically reject the claim that my tours serve as platforms for personal political agendas or that they dismiss any participant’s perspectives. Every effort is made to facilitate informed, respectful conversations grounded in verifiable historical research. While I welcome genuine feedback aimed at improving my tours, I urge all guests to represent their experiences truthfully and fairly. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify these points and to defend both my professional reputation and the integrity of historical education. Mary