首页> 外文学位 >The apathetic democrat and other non-activists: University students in post-Soviet transition.
【24h】

The apathetic democrat and other non-activists: University students in post-Soviet transition.

机译:冷漠的民主人士和其他非积极分子:后苏联过渡时期的大学生。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

During critical moments of political uncertainty, university students are traditionally a dynamic force in society. Why, then, have university students been politically inactive during the period of sweeping political and economic transformation across the former Soviet republics? Two factors account for student passivity: the behavior of the state and the political attitudes of students. In Russia, the state acted first with extreme coercion and then with extreme permissiveness and did not provoke students by alternately liberalizing and cracking down. The students, for their part, generally supported the leadership-initiated transition to a democratic political system and market economy. Most large-scale student protests of the magnitude of the Tiananmen Square, Czechoslovak, or other protests were preempted by swift and extensive reform that corresponded with student preferences. In Central Asia, states balanced liberalism and repression more precariously, but like in Russia, their reform policies generally corresponded with student preferences. Student protests were uncommon because both the students and governments of Central Asia shared a reluctance to reform.;These findings do not support theories of protest which focus on psychological motivations, resources, and economic opportunities. Instead, the findings suggest that attitudes play a critical role in determining political behavior, specifically, in their link with the macro-political situation. Pro-reform attitudes in Russia nurture political apathy. Pro-reform attitudes in Central Asia nurture quite the opposite. I provide evidence from an original survey of over 2,000 students chosen at random from the physics, economics, history, and philology departments of state universities in Russia (Novosibirsk, Kazan, Moscow), Ukraine (Kiev, Kharkiv, Lviv), and Central Asia (Bishkek, Almaty, Dushanbe).
机译:传统上,在政治不确定性的关键时刻,大学生是社会中的生力军。那么,为什么在前苏联共和国全面的政治和经济转型时期,大学生们在政治上不活跃?学生消极情绪有两个因素:国家行为和学生的政治态度。在俄罗斯,国家首先采取极端胁迫的行动,然后采取极端宽松的态度​​,并没有通过交替开放和镇压来挑衅学生。就学生而言,他们总体上支持领导层向民主政治体系和市场经济的过渡。大多数针对天安门广场,捷克斯洛伐克或其他抗议活动的大规模学生抗议活动都因与学生喜好相对应的迅速而广泛的改革而被取代。在中亚,国家平衡自由主义和镇压更加不稳定,但是像俄罗斯一样,其改革政策通常与学生的偏好相对应。学生抗议活动很少见,因为中亚的学生和政府都不愿进行改革。这些发现并不支持针对心理动机,资源和经济机会的抗议理论。取而代之的是,这些发现表明态度在决定政治行为中,特别是在与宏观政治局势的联系中起着至关重要的作用。俄罗斯的改革派态度引起了政治冷漠。中亚赞成改革的态度正好相反。我提供的原始调查证据来自对俄罗斯(新西伯利亚,喀山,莫斯科,莫斯科),乌克兰(基辅,哈尔科夫,利沃夫)和中亚的国立大学的物理学,经济学,历史学和语言学系随机选择的2000多名学生的调查(比什凯克,阿拉木图,杜尚别)。

著录项

  • 作者

    Javeline, Debra Lynn.;

  • 作者单位

    Harvard University.;

  • 授予单位 Harvard University.;
  • 学科 Political science.;Higher education.;Social structure.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1997
  • 页码 297 p.
  • 总页数 297
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号