Confronting Communism with Christian Ethics: The Ethico-Religious Motivation of Eastern European Dissidence


获取原文并翻译 | 示例


The present study aims to argue that concepts like ‘totalitarianism’ and ‘political religions’ are still an important part of the political science vocabulary and should not be abandoned. Although they were adopted by many important scholars, these concepts went under fire starting in the 1960s. They were accused of being too broad, too vague, trying to constrain under an artificial conceptual umbrella a diverse and heterogeneous reality. Most of all, some found irritating the historical comparison between National Socialism and Communism and the use of term ‘totalitarian’ for both of the regimes. Therefore, ‘totalitarianism’ was considered a propaganda tool of the Western world against the Soviet Union and not a scientific concept. Similarly, ‘political religions’ was seen as a weapon invented by conservative thinkers and not a valid instrument of political theory. As a ground for our research, we employed an analysis of the self-understanding of those involved in the resistance against Communist totalitarianism, choosing some important figures of Central and Eastern European dissidence. Dissidents felt they were confronting a political system which aimed to be the sole source of values for the individuals' public and private lives, and the word ‘totalitarian’ was thoroughly adequate to describe it. We also underline that ethics, as a mandatory prerequisite for any political opposition, was a common feature in the intellectual dissent's thought. However, the main contribution of this article is the attempt to reveal the common ground of dissidence ethics and Christian values, although those presented here were lay intellectuals. Describing Communist regimes in religious terms and adopting a strategy of opposition rooted in Christian ethics seemed to be the self-evident solution for the lay dissidence.View full textDownload full textRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2011.564400
机译:本研究旨在论证诸如“极权主义”和“政治宗教”之类的概念仍然是政治学词汇的重要组成部分,不应被抛弃。尽管这些概念被许多重要的学者采用,但从1960年代开始就受到抨击。他们被指控过于宽泛,模糊不清,试图在人为的概念保护下限制多样化和异类的现实。最重要的是,一些发现激怒了国家社会主义与共产主义之间的历史比较,以及在两种制度中都使用“极权主义”一词。因此,“极权主义”被认为是西方世界反对苏联的宣传工具,而不是科学概念。同样,“政治宗教”被认为是保守思想家发明的武器,而不是政治理论的有效手段。作为我们研究的基础,我们对参与抵抗共产主义极权主义的人们的自我理解进行了分析,选择了中东欧持不同政见的一些重要人物。持不同政见者感到他们正在面对一个旨在成为个人公共和私人生活价值的唯一来源的政治制度,“ totalitarian”一词足以描述它。我们还强调,作为任何政治反对派的强制性先决条件,道德是知识分子持异议者思想的共同特征。但是,本文的主要贡献是试图揭示持不同意见的伦理学和基督教价值观的共同基础,尽管此处介绍的是知识分子。用宗教术语描述共产主义政权并采取植根于基督教伦理的对立策略似乎是外行持异议的不言而喻的解决方案。查看全文下载全文citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,美味,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2011.564400


  • 论文查重
  • 论文收录引证报告
  • 文档翻译
  • 文档转换

联系方式:18141920177 (微信同号)


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