首页> 外文期刊>Theory and Society >Divergent responses to a common past: Transitional justice in the Czech Republic and Slovakia
【24h】

Divergent responses to a common past: Transitional justice in the Czech Republic and Slovakia

机译:对共同过去的不同回应:捷克共和国和斯洛伐克的过渡时期司法

获取原文
           

摘要

This article addresses the question of why, despite having shared a communist regime and a revolution against it, the Czechs and Slovaks have dealt differently with that regime's former high officials and secret police agents, files, and collaborators. I argue that this divergence challenges theories of transitional justice put forward by such scholars as Samuel Huntington and John P. Moran, who respectively identify transition type and levels of regime repression as the key factors shaping a new regime's response to its predecessor. I propose that a stronger influencing factor is the level of the preceding regime's legitimacy, as indicated during the communist period by levels of societal cooptation, opposition, or internal exile, and during the post-communist period by levels of elite re-legitimization and public interest in decommunization. In drawing this link between past and more recent developments, I also argue that struggles over transitional justice issues should not be considered exclusively as the politics of the present. Finally, I examine the cases of Poland, Hungary, and Romania to assess the broader applicability and limits of my theory.
机译:本文讨论了一个问题,即为什么捷克人和斯洛伐克人尽管拥有共产主义政权和反对它的革命,但在对待该政权的前高官以及秘密警察代理,档案和合作者时却采取了不同的态度。我认为,这种分歧挑战了塞缪尔·亨廷顿和约翰·P·莫兰等学者提出的过渡司法理论,他们分别将过渡类型和政权压制程度确定为决定新政权对其前任作出回应的关键因素。我建议,一个更强大的影响因素是前政权的合法性水平,如在共产主义时期通过社会合作,反对或内部流放的程度来表明,而在后共产主义时期则通过精英重新合法化和公众化的程度来表明。对解散的兴趣。在描绘过去与最近的事态发展之间的联系时,我还认为,关于过渡时期司法问题的斗争不应仅被视为当前的政治。最后,我研究了波兰,匈牙利和罗马尼亚的案例,以评估我的理论的广泛适用性和局限性。

著录项

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