The author argues that German society has largely accepted responsibility for and learned from actions done by the country in the past, particularly in World War II, while the United States had not done the same, particularly for Jim Crow violations.

[2] She spent at least three years conducting research for the book; that involved reading works about the post-Nazi Germany period,[1] which describe how Germans initially did not feel guilt about the events.

[2] Deborah E. Lipstadt wrote in The New York Times that the work "is an important and welcome weapon in" cultural battles about historical events, and that while "Optimally, a reviewer’s evaluation should not be influenced by where she read a book", her understanding was enhanced by what she calls attempts from the government of Poland to minimize Polish culpability in the Holocaust.

[1] Alex Clark of The Guardian wrote that the author "is fascinating and potent on how the Holocaust has functioned on multiple planes, and primarily as an example of pure evil that, by consequence, allows other societies to divert attention from their own misdeeds.

McElvoy writes that "where the account goes awfully wrong is in the musings on East Germany, where Neiman is prone to accepting the GDR’s self-serving use of its “anti-fascist” badging at a face value it never merited, despite the good faith of many cultural figures in the idea.

Reviewer Heather Souvaine Horn writes "does the monument to fallen Soviet soldiers in East Berlin really represent a society coming to terms with history?

"[7] Historian Thomas Laqueur makes similar comments in his review, writing that "it’s worth considering the amnesia that monuments like the one in Treptower Park induce", noting that the rapes were not discussed publicly for decades.