Nesting Orientalisms: Case of Hungary, Its Imaginary Occidentalisation Process, and Inconsistencies

C. Aydoğan
{"title":"Nesting Orientalisms: Case of Hungary, Its Imaginary Occidentalisation Process, and Inconsistencies","authors":"C. Aydoğan","doi":"10.17265/2328-2134/2020.01.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":" What is the border between Central and Eastern Europe? This is an unanswered question in the literature of contemporary European history and politics. In the modern state system, imaginary boundaries are products of the imagined communities, and these boundaries also cause either to occidentalize or to orientalize the lands due to its top-down/elitist imagination procedure. During the Cold War years, anti-USSR voices are important to see the certain demand for Europeanization among people in today’s Central Europe where there especially had the communist legacy. In general, the ultimate goal is to identify themselves as more western among Central and Eastern European states for the sake of civilizational values of the Enlightenment and to reach today’s contested Neoliberal welfare. This desire causes Nesting Orientalisms , Milica Bakic-Hayden’s concept. Nesting Orientalisms are about re-constructing new Orient in the same region to hierarchizeitself as occidental. Through the process of mapping its location and construction of occidental identity, Hungary defines itself as a part of Central Europe. But what are the legitimated reasons of Hungary to define itself as Central European instead of Eastern Europe? Do these reasons perfectly fit in today’s Central European formulation and stereotype? What are the possible reasons to reject Hungary’s Central European self-definition? Moreover, under the shadow of the discussion on Central Europe vs. Eastern Europe, to what extent does the rise of authoritarianism block ongoing occidentalisation process of Hungary? In this research, I will answer these questions by analyzing modern political history of Hungary by the method of interpretivist process","PeriodicalId":70059,"journal":{"name":"国际关系与外交:英文版","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"国际关系与外交:英文版","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17265/2328-2134/2020.01.003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

 What is the border between Central and Eastern Europe? This is an unanswered question in the literature of contemporary European history and politics. In the modern state system, imaginary boundaries are products of the imagined communities, and these boundaries also cause either to occidentalize or to orientalize the lands due to its top-down/elitist imagination procedure. During the Cold War years, anti-USSR voices are important to see the certain demand for Europeanization among people in today’s Central Europe where there especially had the communist legacy. In general, the ultimate goal is to identify themselves as more western among Central and Eastern European states for the sake of civilizational values of the Enlightenment and to reach today’s contested Neoliberal welfare. This desire causes Nesting Orientalisms , Milica Bakic-Hayden’s concept. Nesting Orientalisms are about re-constructing new Orient in the same region to hierarchizeitself as occidental. Through the process of mapping its location and construction of occidental identity, Hungary defines itself as a part of Central Europe. But what are the legitimated reasons of Hungary to define itself as Central European instead of Eastern Europe? Do these reasons perfectly fit in today’s Central European formulation and stereotype? What are the possible reasons to reject Hungary’s Central European self-definition? Moreover, under the shadow of the discussion on Central Europe vs. Eastern Europe, to what extent does the rise of authoritarianism block ongoing occidentalisation process of Hungary? In this research, I will answer these questions by analyzing modern political history of Hungary by the method of interpretivist process
嵌套的东方主义:以匈牙利为例,其想象中的西方化过程和矛盾
中欧和东欧的边界是什么?这是当代欧洲历史和政治文献中一个没有答案的问题。在现代国家体系中,想象边界是想象共同体的产物,这些边界也因其自上而下/精英化的想象过程而导致土地的西方化或东方化。在冷战时期,反苏联的声音对于今天中欧人民对欧洲化的特定需求是很重要的,因为那里有共产主义的遗产。总的来说,最终目标是为了启蒙运动的文明价值,在中欧和东欧国家中把自己定位为更西方化的国家,并达到今天备受争议的新自由主义福利。这种欲望导致了Milica Bakic-Hayden的概念——筑巢东方主义。嵌套东方主义是指在同一地区重新构建新的东方,从而将自身分层为西方。通过绘制其地理位置和构建西方身份的过程,匈牙利将自己定义为中欧的一部分。但是,匈牙利将自己定义为中欧而不是东欧的正当理由是什么?这些理由完全符合今天中欧的表述和刻板印象吗?拒绝匈牙利中欧自我定义的可能理由是什么?此外,在中欧与东欧讨论的阴影下,威权主义的崛起在多大程度上阻碍了匈牙利正在进行的西方化进程?在本研究中,我将通过解释主义过程的方法分析匈牙利的现代政治史来回答这些问题
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
411
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信