From Class to Identity. The Politics of Education Reforms in Former Yugoslavia

IF 1 Q1 Arts and Humanities
Águstin Cosovschi
{"title":"From Class to Identity. The Politics of Education Reforms in Former Yugoslavia","authors":"Águstin Cosovschi","doi":"10.1515/soeu-2017-0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"interests as evangelicals during the Yugoslav wars but chose rather to seek ‘biblical responses’ to ‘alleviate the human suff ering of neighbor and enemy alike’ (Politicization of Religion, the Power of State, Nation, and Faith, 111). In their summaries at the ends of the books, the editors are right to underscore once again that the post-Yugoslav situation is a matt er not only of the old and new states in Southeastern Europe but of the whole of Europe which had interfered both actively and passively in the Yugoslav wars. The editors also point out the danger of the self-reproduction of religious symbols by religious institutions which operate as their own judge, jury—and executioner. But according to the editors, that is a ‘constellation [...] always doomed at birth’, especially in the ‘Age of Information’ (Politicization of Religion, the Power of Symbolism, 211-212). At the end of the second book the editors evince deep concern and scepticism concerning solutions they see as ‘too easy’ for a multiethnic environment. In their opinion, the Dayton Agreement especially, signed in 1995 to partition Bosnia into two entities has caused the forces of nationalism to increase. Generally speaking each chapter off ers enough innovative potential and insight into the specifi c and complex social conditions in the Yugoslav ‘successor states’. It is a pity then that some of the articles lack what would have been useful distinctions to give a clearer notion of the actors than does the general use of the term ‘the church’. So it is up to the reader to deduce who is actually in charge of ‘the church’ in question; is it their ‘offi cers,’ the bishops and priests? Or all the believers in a country, its religious institutions and organizations? Or perhaps some combination of all of them? What must however be emphasized is that the authors treat their subjects mostly dispassionately and scholarly. Their ability to stand off from a national viewpoint and their willingness to criticise the failures and short-sightedness of ‘their own’ is a remarkable characteristic of most of the contributions. At the same time, this is real progress in the discussion of the past, present and perhaps even the future of religion in Post-Yugoslavia.","PeriodicalId":51954,"journal":{"name":"Sudosteuropa","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/soeu-2017-0014","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sudosteuropa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

interests as evangelicals during the Yugoslav wars but chose rather to seek ‘biblical responses’ to ‘alleviate the human suff ering of neighbor and enemy alike’ (Politicization of Religion, the Power of State, Nation, and Faith, 111). In their summaries at the ends of the books, the editors are right to underscore once again that the post-Yugoslav situation is a matt er not only of the old and new states in Southeastern Europe but of the whole of Europe which had interfered both actively and passively in the Yugoslav wars. The editors also point out the danger of the self-reproduction of religious symbols by religious institutions which operate as their own judge, jury—and executioner. But according to the editors, that is a ‘constellation [...] always doomed at birth’, especially in the ‘Age of Information’ (Politicization of Religion, the Power of Symbolism, 211-212). At the end of the second book the editors evince deep concern and scepticism concerning solutions they see as ‘too easy’ for a multiethnic environment. In their opinion, the Dayton Agreement especially, signed in 1995 to partition Bosnia into two entities has caused the forces of nationalism to increase. Generally speaking each chapter off ers enough innovative potential and insight into the specifi c and complex social conditions in the Yugoslav ‘successor states’. It is a pity then that some of the articles lack what would have been useful distinctions to give a clearer notion of the actors than does the general use of the term ‘the church’. So it is up to the reader to deduce who is actually in charge of ‘the church’ in question; is it their ‘offi cers,’ the bishops and priests? Or all the believers in a country, its religious institutions and organizations? Or perhaps some combination of all of them? What must however be emphasized is that the authors treat their subjects mostly dispassionately and scholarly. Their ability to stand off from a national viewpoint and their willingness to criticise the failures and short-sightedness of ‘their own’ is a remarkable characteristic of most of the contributions. At the same time, this is real progress in the discussion of the past, present and perhaps even the future of religion in Post-Yugoslavia.
从阶级到身份。前南斯拉夫教育改革的政治
在南斯拉夫战争期间作为福音派教徒的利益,而是选择寻求“圣经的回应”来“减轻邻居和敌人的人类痛苦”(宗教政治化,国家,民族和信仰的力量,111)。在书末的总结中,编辑们再次强调,后南斯拉夫局势不仅是东南欧新旧国家的问题,而且是整个欧洲主动或被动地干涉南斯拉夫战争的问题,这是正确的。编辑们还指出了宗教机构自我复制宗教符号的危险,这些机构就像他们自己的法官、陪审团和刽子手一样运作。但根据编辑们的说法,这是一个“星座”……总是在出生时就注定了”,特别是在“信息时代”(宗教的政治化,象征主义的力量,211-212)。在第二本书的末尾,编辑们对他们认为在多民族环境中“太容易”的解决方案表示了深切的关注和怀疑。他们认为,特别是1995年签署的将波斯尼亚划分为两个实体的《代顿协定》造成了民族主义力量的增加。总的来说,每一章都有足够的创新潜力和对南斯拉夫“继承国”具体而复杂的社会状况的洞察力。遗憾的是,一些条款缺乏有用的区分,而不是一般使用“教会”一词来更清楚地了解行动者。因此,这取决于读者来推断谁是真正负责“教会”的问题;是他们的“官员”,主教和牧师吗?还是一个国家的所有信徒、宗教机构和组织?或者可能是所有这些的结合?然而,必须强调的是,作者们对待他们的主题大多是冷静和学术的。他们能够从国家的角度出发,愿意批评“他们自己”的失败和短视,这是大多数贡献的显著特征。与此同时,这是讨论后南斯拉夫宗教的过去、现在甚至未来的真正进展。
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
Sudosteuropa
Sudosteuropa AREA STUDIES-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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