Methodology of the research of the Transcarpathia Sovietization in 1944–1950

IF 0.3 Q2 HISTORY
Rusin Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.17223/18572685/64/11
V. Mishchanyn
{"title":"Methodology of the research of the Transcarpathia Sovietization in 1944–1950","authors":"V. Mishchanyn","doi":"10.17223/18572685/64/11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes the modern methodology of the Transcarpathia Sovietization research in 1944–1950. Though there are individual (N. Makara, V. Mishchanyn) and collective monogrpahs (N. Makara, R. Ofitsinsky), it is too early to speak about a serious methodological base to present the causal links of this process. A better understanding of Sovietization in Transcarpathia requires studying the historical and geographical space. A contemporary researcher should go beyond the narrowed framework of the regional approach in the study of the Sovietization in Transcarpathia and compare its post-war transformations with those in Western Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic Republics, Central and Eastern Europe (A. Applebaum) using the methodology of comparative analysis. The epistemological approach employed by P.R. Magocsi can be used to study the historical specificity of the region with its multi-ethnicity, multiculturalism, multiconfessionality (S. Makarchuk). The Ukrainian emigration was rather critical of the post-war policy of the Soviet regime. In particular, V. Markus defines the entry of Transcarpathia into Soviet Ukraine as annexation. The Encyclopedia of Ukraine published in the 1950s and 1980s in Canada analyzes many aspects of Sovietization in the Ukrainian SSR. A contemporary researcher should clearly understand such concepts as “totalitarianism” (H. Arendt), “Sovietization”, “socialist version of modernization” (S. Gavrov), “transit”, “transformation”, etc. The article also points out some errors of scholars studying the problems of Sovietization in the region. Thus, the problem of Sovietization of Transcarpathia is still under development. Its multifaceted nature requires interdisciplinary approaches using the tools of history, economics, law, statistics, political science, social science, ethnology, and cultural studies.","PeriodicalId":54120,"journal":{"name":"Rusin","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rusin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17223/18572685/64/11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article analyzes the modern methodology of the Transcarpathia Sovietization research in 1944–1950. Though there are individual (N. Makara, V. Mishchanyn) and collective monogrpahs (N. Makara, R. Ofitsinsky), it is too early to speak about a serious methodological base to present the causal links of this process. A better understanding of Sovietization in Transcarpathia requires studying the historical and geographical space. A contemporary researcher should go beyond the narrowed framework of the regional approach in the study of the Sovietization in Transcarpathia and compare its post-war transformations with those in Western Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic Republics, Central and Eastern Europe (A. Applebaum) using the methodology of comparative analysis. The epistemological approach employed by P.R. Magocsi can be used to study the historical specificity of the region with its multi-ethnicity, multiculturalism, multiconfessionality (S. Makarchuk). The Ukrainian emigration was rather critical of the post-war policy of the Soviet regime. In particular, V. Markus defines the entry of Transcarpathia into Soviet Ukraine as annexation. The Encyclopedia of Ukraine published in the 1950s and 1980s in Canada analyzes many aspects of Sovietization in the Ukrainian SSR. A contemporary researcher should clearly understand such concepts as “totalitarianism” (H. Arendt), “Sovietization”, “socialist version of modernization” (S. Gavrov), “transit”, “transformation”, etc. The article also points out some errors of scholars studying the problems of Sovietization in the region. Thus, the problem of Sovietization of Transcarpathia is still under development. Its multifaceted nature requires interdisciplinary approaches using the tools of history, economics, law, statistics, political science, social science, ethnology, and cultural studies.
1944-1950年喀尔巴阡山脉外苏维埃化研究的方法论
本文分析了1944-1950年喀尔巴阡山脉外苏联化研究的现代方法论。虽然有个人专著(N. Makara, V. Mishchanyn)和集体专著(N. Makara, R. Ofitsinsky),但现在谈论一个严肃的方法论基础来呈现这一过程的因果关系还为时过早。要更好地理解外喀尔巴阡的苏维埃化,就需要研究历史和地理空间。当代研究人员在研究外喀尔巴阡的苏维埃化时,应超越区域方法的狭窄框架,使用比较分析的方法将其战后转变与西乌克兰、白俄罗斯、波罗的海共和国、中欧和东欧的转变进行比较(A. Applebaum)。P.R. Magocsi采用的认识论方法可以用来研究该地区的多种族、多文化、多信仰的历史特殊性(S. Makarchuk)。乌克兰移民对苏联政权的战后政策相当不满。特别是,V. Markus将外喀尔巴阡山脉进入苏联乌克兰定义为吞并。20世纪50年代和80年代在加拿大出版的乌克兰百科全书分析了乌克兰苏维埃社会主义共和国的苏维埃化的许多方面。当代研究者应该对“极权主义”(阿伦特)、“苏维埃化”、“社会主义版现代化”(加夫罗夫)、“过渡”、“转型”等概念有清晰的认识。文章还指出了学者们对该地区苏维埃化问题研究的一些错误。因此,喀尔巴阡山脉的苏维埃化问题仍在发展中。它的多面性需要跨学科的方法,使用历史、经济学、法学、统计学、政治学、社会科学、民族学和文化研究的工具。
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
Rusin
Rusin HISTORY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
75.00%
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