拓展本土共和国命题:共产国际历史的解构

O. Drachewych
{"title":"拓展本土共和国命题:共产国际历史的解构","authors":"O. Drachewych","doi":"10.3898/175864323837280526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After the Sixth Comintern Congress in 1928, the Native Republic Thesis, or Black-Belt Thesis, became a noted platform for the Communist Parties of South Africa and the United States. The platform called for self-determination for Black Africans and Black Americans respectively. Historians\n have often reframed this platform as a call for selfdetermination on racial lines, and the thesis has become a prominent part of histories of these communist parties. Taking a comparative and transnational approach, this article argues that the Native Republic Thesis and its key tenets (including\n calls for a workers' and peasants' republic or for a nation within a nation) may have extended beyond the issue of racial selfdetermination. These tenets can be found, with some variation, in similar contemporaneous communist platforms in Latin America, Australia, Belgium and the Balkans.\n In the process of developing this argument, this article highlights the benefits of taking a fresh look at Comintern platforms from a transnational and comparative perspective; here this approach has suggested new questions about communist or Soviet perspectives on self-determination and nationhood,\n and about Comintern leadership.","PeriodicalId":406143,"journal":{"name":"Twentieth Century Communism","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Broadening the Native Republic Thesis: De-siloing Comintern histories\",\"authors\":\"O. Drachewych\",\"doi\":\"10.3898/175864323837280526\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After the Sixth Comintern Congress in 1928, the Native Republic Thesis, or Black-Belt Thesis, became a noted platform for the Communist Parties of South Africa and the United States. The platform called for self-determination for Black Africans and Black Americans respectively. Historians\\n have often reframed this platform as a call for selfdetermination on racial lines, and the thesis has become a prominent part of histories of these communist parties. Taking a comparative and transnational approach, this article argues that the Native Republic Thesis and its key tenets (including\\n calls for a workers' and peasants' republic or for a nation within a nation) may have extended beyond the issue of racial selfdetermination. These tenets can be found, with some variation, in similar contemporaneous communist platforms in Latin America, Australia, Belgium and the Balkans.\\n In the process of developing this argument, this article highlights the benefits of taking a fresh look at Comintern platforms from a transnational and comparative perspective; here this approach has suggested new questions about communist or Soviet perspectives on self-determination and nationhood,\\n and about Comintern leadership.\",\"PeriodicalId\":406143,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Twentieth Century Communism\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Twentieth Century Communism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3898/175864323837280526\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Twentieth Century Communism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3898/175864323837280526","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1928年第六次共产国际代表大会之后,“本土共和国提纲”或“黑带提纲”成为南非和美国共产党的著名纲领。该纲领分别呼吁非洲黑人和美国黑人自决。历史学家经常将这一纲领重新定义为种族自决的呼吁,这一论点已成为这些共产党历史的重要组成部分。采用比较和跨国的方法,本文认为,本土共和国理论及其关键原则(包括呼吁工农共和国或国中之国)可能已经超出了种族自决的问题。这些信条可以在拉丁美洲、澳大利亚、比利时和巴尔干半岛类似的同时期共产主义纲领中找到,只是有所不同。在发展这一论点的过程中,本文强调了从跨国和比较的角度重新审视共产国际平台的好处;在这里,这种方法提出了关于共产主义或苏联对自决和国家地位的看法以及关于共产国际领导的新问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Broadening the Native Republic Thesis: De-siloing Comintern histories
After the Sixth Comintern Congress in 1928, the Native Republic Thesis, or Black-Belt Thesis, became a noted platform for the Communist Parties of South Africa and the United States. The platform called for self-determination for Black Africans and Black Americans respectively. Historians have often reframed this platform as a call for selfdetermination on racial lines, and the thesis has become a prominent part of histories of these communist parties. Taking a comparative and transnational approach, this article argues that the Native Republic Thesis and its key tenets (including calls for a workers' and peasants' republic or for a nation within a nation) may have extended beyond the issue of racial selfdetermination. These tenets can be found, with some variation, in similar contemporaneous communist platforms in Latin America, Australia, Belgium and the Balkans. In the process of developing this argument, this article highlights the benefits of taking a fresh look at Comintern platforms from a transnational and comparative perspective; here this approach has suggested new questions about communist or Soviet perspectives on self-determination and nationhood, and about Comintern leadership.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
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