Rainer M, János (2012) Az államszocializmus, mint történelmi tapasztalat – Magyarországon In: Összhang: Tudomány a gazdaságban és a társadalomban. Eger, Eszterházy Károly Főiskola Líceum Kiadó. pp. 25-38.
![[img]](http://publikacio.uni-eszterhazy.hu/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
pdf
25_35_Rainer.pdf Download (300kB) |
Absztrakt (kivonat)
Soviet-type socialism as historical experience in Hungary This paper provides rather hypothetical answers for four questions concerning the memory of the epoche of Soviet-type socialism. Firstly, the collective (communicative) memory of the communist period can be characterised with a certain duality. As a recent representative sociological survey has testified, the memory of the first decade (1947–56, or Rákosi-era) is negative, almost traumatic. On the contrary, the three decades of Kádár-era is evaluated rather positively by the Hungarian public; interestingly enough much better than the period of the Hungarian democracy after 1989–90. Secondly, historical memory (i. e. professional-analytical discourses) was created only outside Hungary up to the late 80ies. Representatives of the dissent (Lukács, Konrád, Szelényi, Bence, Kis etc.) contributed relevant aspects of understanding of Stalinism however. During and after the transition the totalitarian paradigm has become the ruling approach of the Soviet-type system. Only after 2000 a new generation influenced by social history, new cultural history and German Alltagsgeschichte posed new questions and proposed new perspectives in this field. The third part of the paper argues that in spite of dual collective memory, there is no reason to make a difference between the two periods at least from the structural point of view. Main structures and institutions of the Kádárist Hungary did not differed neither from those of the earlier epoche nor those in the other Soviet satellite countries at the same time. Decreasing of the terror, stabilization within the ruling elite as well as in coordinating mechanisms, growing standard of living, importance of the mass consumption etc. were quite common phenomena in all post-Stalinist countries. It seems that Hungarian peculiarity was perhaps not more than a relaxed common feeling, a kind of easiness after the severe and brutal experiences of the midcentury. Fourth point of the paper raises the problem of legacy and tradition. On one hand, the Kádárism was a special point of view, a frame of the understanding the whole world creating a special language and behavior for the purpose. If so, the legacy is quite hard and undoubtedly has negative effects for a democratic public discourse. The memory of the dissent and opposition, however, is going to fall into oblivion and/or generating discontent, thus has quite less chance to become a real tradition.
| Mű típusa: | Könyvrészlet | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Szerző: |
|
||||||||
| Kapcsolódó URL-ek: | |||||||||
| Nyelv: | magyar | ||||||||
| ISBN: | 978-615-5250-17-0 | ||||||||
| Felhasználó: | Tibor Gál | ||||||||
| Dátum: | 28 Júl 2020 11:31 | ||||||||
| Utolsó módosítás: | 28 Júl 2020 11:31 | ||||||||
| URI: | http://publikacio.uni-eszterhazy.hu/id/eprint/6374 |
 |
Tétel nézet |
