Suchergebnisse

В статье анализируется один из важнейших источников по истории пангерманизма (непереведенный на русский язык) политический памфлет лидера Пангерманского союза Генриха Класса. Автором рассматривается структура, логика изложения, а также принципиально важные концептуальные подходы Класса на предмет переустройства германского государства и общества накануне Первой мировой войны. Концепция Класса представляет исследовательский интерес, во-первых, так как отражает взгляды консервативного, националистического блока немецкой элиты, во-вторых, как источник, свидетельствующий об изменении сознания части немецкого общества, что предопределило ее лояльность национал-социалистическому режиму. О популярности памфлета Класса свидетельствует факт его многочисленных переизданий, в том числе после войны (более десяти раз). Автор критически рассматривает намерение Класса сохранить название памфлета, даже после революции и крушения монархии в Германии. В статье рассматриваются точки зрения современных авторов на проблему пангерманизма и пангерманской публицистики (Й. Ляйхт, Р. Херинг, Х. Хагенлюке). Статья написана с привлечением документов, собранных автором в немецких архивах и библиотеках. ; The paper analyzes one of the major sources on Pan-Germanism history (not translated in Russian) a political lampoon by Heinrich Class, the leader of the Pan-German Union. The author considers the structure, logics of statement, and also Class's essentially important conceptual approaches regarding the reorganization of the German state and society on the eve of World War I. Class's conception attracts research interest, first, as it reflects the views of the conservative nationalist block of the German elite, secondly, as it is the source testifying to a change of consciousness in a part of the German society that predetermined its loyalty to the national socialist regime. The fact of its numerous reprinting, including post-War (more than ten times) testifies to the popularity of Class's lampoon. The author critically considers Class's intention to keep the name of the lampoon even after the revolution and the crash of monarchy in Germany. The paper considers the researchers' points of view on the problem of Pan-Germanism and Pan-German published works (J. Leicht, R. Hering, H. Hagenlücke). The paper bases on the documents collected by the author in German archives and libraries.

Introduction: pain and prosperity in twentieth-century Germany / Greg Eghigian and Paul Betts -- Pain, entitlement, and social citizenship in modern Germany / Greg Eghigian -- Cities forget, nations remember: Berlin and Germany and the shock of modernity / Peter Fritzsche -- Purchasing comfort: patent remedies and the alleviation of labor pain in Germany between 1914 and 1933 / Patricia R. Stokes -- Modern pain and Nazi panic / Geoffrey Cocks -- The transformation of sacrifice: German identity between heroic narrative and economic success / Sabine Behrenbeck -- The myth of a suspended present: prosperity's painful shadow in 1950s East Germany / Katherine Pence -- Scarcity and success: the East according to the West during the 1950s / Ingrid M. Schenk -- Remembrance of things past: nostalgia in West and East Germany, 1980s-2000 / Paul Betts.

In one of the darker aspects of Nazi Germany, churches and universities - generally respected institutions - grew to accept and support Nazi ideology. Robert P. Ericksen explains how an advanced, highly educated, Christian nation could commit the crimes of the Holocaust. This book describes how Germany's intellectual and spiritual leaders enthusiastically partnered with Hitler's regime, thus becoming active participants in the persecution of Jews, and ultimately, in the Holocaust. Ericksen also examines Germany's deeply flawed yet successful postwar policy of denazification in these institutions. Complicity in the Holocaust argues that enthusiasm for Hitler within churches and universities effectively gave Germans permission to participate in the Nazi regime

'Optimism against all odds': Polish National Identity in War Films of Jerzy PassendorferUsing archival sources, movie reviews, secondary sources and films, this article examines the cinema of Jerzy Passendorfer, the founding father of action movies genre in People's Poland, but also the staunch supporter of Władysław Gomułka's 'Polish road to Socialism' and General Mieczysław Moczar's ultranationalist faction of the Partisans in the Polish United Workers' Party. It demonstrates how Passendorfer's blend of mainstream cinema and propaganda legitimized the party state and contributed to the construction of a new ethos, identity, and politics of history that enforced historical amnesia and syncretized past and present. It also argues that Passendorfer's promotion of nationalist and authoritarian state ideology, militaristic patriotism and Polish-Soviet alliance, commissioned by the regime, sat well with mass audiences, precisely because of the use of popular genres adopted from the West and the quench for optimistic visions of nationhood. Although Passendorfer's patriotic actions flicks faded away with the fall of Gomułka's regime, they constitute a model, which can be still emulated. "Trudny optymizm": polska tożsamość narodowa w filmach wojennych Jerzego PassendorferaOpierając się na źródłach archiwalnych, publikacjach naukowych i analizie filmów, niniejszy artykuł bada twórczość filmową Jerzego Passendorfera, ojca chrzestnego filmu akcji w PRL, zwolennika 'polskiej drogi do socjalizmu' Władysława Gomułki oraz sympatyka nacjonalistycznej frakcji generała Mieczysława Moczara w Polskiej Zjednoczonej Partii Robotniczej. Passendorfer łączył w swoich filmach popularne kino gatunkowe z propagandową legitymizacją władzy partii. Współtworzył nowy etos i świadomość narodową oraz uprawiał politykę historyczną, która zsynchronizowała przeszłość z teraźniejszością, doprowadzając do swoistego rodzaju amnezji. Artykuł stawia tezę, że zaproponowana przez Passendorfera synteza nacjonalizmu, autorytaryzmu i militaryzmu cieszyła się sporą popularnością wśród masowego widza z powodu zapożyczeń z zachodniego kina gatunkowego oraz potrzeby optymistycznej wizji wspólnoty narodowej. Patriotyczne filmy akcji Passendorfera uległy zapomnieniu po upadku Gomułki, jednak w dalszym ciągu stanowią kulturowy model, który może być wykorzystywany na potrzeby polityki historycznej.

The subject of the article are the views of Zygmunt Cybichowski (1879–1946), professor of law at the University of Warsaw, on Italian fascism and German National Socialism. This Polish lawyer made a very interesting analysis of totalitarian systems. He was a supporter of the national method of interpreting law. He defined law as a product of the living conditions in a given country, "exclusive" to the solutions adopted in this field in other countries. He argued that the law cannot be invented, but only discovered through the exploration of specific living conditions. In his opinion, not all the law is to be found in the codes, so one should get to know a nation well to discover its laws. Cybichowski, as a supporter of the national-radical movement, looked at the German social and political transformations in the Third Reich with great sympathy. He was impressed by Adolf Hitler.

Since 1989, social change in Europe has moved between two stories. The first being a politics of memory emphasizing the specificity of culture in national narratives, and the other extolling the virtues of the Enlightenment heritage of reason and humanity. While the Holocaust forms a central part of West European collective memory, national victimhood of former Communist countries tends to occlude the centrality of the Holocaust. Highlighting examples from the Estonian experience, this article asks whether attempts to find one single European memory of trauma ignore the complexity of history and are thus potentially disrespectful to those who suffered under both Communism and National Socialism. Pluralism in the sense of Hannah Arendt and Isaiah Berlin is presented as a way in which to move beyond the settling of scores in the past and towards a respectful recognition and acknowledgement of historical difference.

In 2013, the British right-wing tabloid Daily Mail triggered a fierce controversy, focused on antisemitism and patriotism/nationalism. It was sparked by the publication of an article on the British economist Ralph Miliband with the provocative headline 'The man who hated Britain'. The lead refers to Ed Miliband, then leader of the British Labour Party: 'Ed Miliband's pledge to bring back socialism is homage to his Marxist father. So what did Miliband Snr really believe in? The answer should disturb everyone who loves this country'. In this paper, we analyse how Ralph Miliband is discursively constructed as a dangerous 'Other' and subsequently politically instrumentalised in a campaign against his son, Ed Miliband. We focus on how a particular concept of national unity is constructed with reference to the stereotype of the 'disloyal, intellectual, international Jew'. This figure emerges as the 'Iudeus ex machina' in the scenario of impending doom in order, we assume, to distract attention from structural issues facing British society and economy. In our analysis we tackle the complex interdependencies of – mostly coded – antisemitic and nationalist rhetoric with the help of an interdisciplinary framework that integrates approaches to antisemitism, nationalism, media studies, and critical discourse studies, and related methodologies.

"This volume seeks to develop new narratives on China's alternative policy and challenges policy makers on gender, regional, income and wage inequalities among rural migrant workers in China. The book also looks at China's social, environmental, economic and governance policies aimed at implementing a sustainable financial and corporate system for a prosperous society. The argument that China follows 'capitalism or socialism with Chinese characteristics' emanates from the Eurocentric ideological narratives based on 'varieties of capitalism' and 'national socialism'. This book attempts to move away from the duality of ideological criticism and dichotomous defence of China based on the ideological prisms of capitalism or socialism. It rejects the flawed analysis of both sides of the ideological divide. For all its limitations within the world capitalist system, China's achievements can't be undermined. The attempt to undermine Chinese achievements is a process and a strategy to delegitimise the Chinese state, the Communist Party of China, the Chinese success story, and to hide the available alternatives from the experience of The Chinese Way. The book will be a great read to students, researchers and scholars of Chinese studies, political economy, development studies and those interested in China's economic and public policies in general"--

The individual camps within the new institutionalist paradigm generally argue that every political actor operates within a specific framework of opportunities and that the physical environment in which bargaining takes place is very important to understanding political outcomes. This article uses three of the new institutionalisms to answer two important questions concerning minority‐protecting institutions in the national constitutions of Denmark (Article 42) and Finland (Section 66). First, why were such institutions developed? Second, why were these institutions ultimately removed in Finland, but not in Denmark? For both countries, it is argued in this article that historical and discursive institutionalism are useful for understanding why such protections were originally considered necessary by particular political groups in society: the rise of socialism during the late twentieth and early twenty‐first centuries compelled non‐reformist parties to push strongly for constitutional change that would legalize powerful procedural tools that could delay and potentially reverse policy decisions passed in parliament. However, the article invokes rational choice institutionalism to explain why the outcomes in terms of the use of such institutions differed over time in the two countries: differences concerning the scope and timing of the relevant procedures compelled opposition parties to utilize them differently. As a result, the legislative process was often stalemated in Finland (and the procedures were subsequently removed in 1992), while in Denmark, the procedures contributed to a parliamentary culture based on consensus and pre‐legislative bargaining and hence, still remain.

"Were Pope Pius XII and the Catholic Church in Germany unduly singled out after 1945 for their conduct during the National Socialist era? Mark Edward Ruff explores the bitter controversies that broke out in the Federal Republic of Germany from 1945 to 1980 over the Catholic Church's relationship to the Nazis. He explores why these cultural wars consumed such energy, dominated headlines, triggered lawsuits and required the intervention of foreign ministries. He argues that the controversies over the church's relationship to National Socialism were frequently surrogates for conflicts over how the church was to position itself in modern society - in politics, international relations and the media. More often than not, these exchanges centered on problems perceived as arising from the postwar political ascendancy of Roman Catholics and the integration of Catholic citizens into the societal mainstream"--Provided by publisher

AbstractFrom its very conception some thirty years ago, Berlin's Humboldt Forum has been one of contemporary Germany's most controversial cultural initiatives. One aspect of this controversy has been the role of the Prussian past in reunified Germany. Housed in a reconstruction of the Prussian Royal Palace destroyed by the East German communist government in 1950, the visual symbolism of the project spurred a long struggle over the appropriate urban aesthetic for the country's capital city. In the view of many critics, the structure symbolizes the triumph of a particular conservative narrative of national memory that excludes the GDR, downplays National Socialism, and uncritically celebrates the Prussian past. This article traces how public debates about the structure of the Humboldt Forum have served as a vehicle for reflection on Prussian history and its relevance (or irrelevance) for reunified Germany.