农业主义作为20世纪欧洲的现代性:农民的黄金时代亚历克斯·托什科夫,布卢姆斯伯里学院,伦敦,纽约,牛津,2019,256页,9781350090576

IF 0.3 2区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY
I. Marin
{"title":"农业主义作为20世纪欧洲的现代性:农民的黄金时代亚历克斯·托什科夫,布卢姆斯伯里学院,伦敦,纽约,牛津,2019,256页,9781350090576","authors":"I. Marin","doi":"10.1017/S0956793320000151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Alex Toshkov’s book is an impressive tour de force in the national archives of four Eastern European countries and the Russian State Archives in an attempt to place agrarianism at the heart of political history in Central and Eastern Europe in the interwar period. The aim of the book is that of taking the agrarian project seriously as the road not taken and exploring the agrarians’ bid to elaborate ‘a more ethical modernity, a third way between capitalism and communism’ (p. 7). The author concentrates on the socio-political factors that ‘allowed peasant parties to stake out a space for themselves’ (p. 8) in national politics and internationally. The book follows a thematic rather than chronological structure and relies on a composite theoretical framework bringing together insights from nationalism, subaltern, corruption and transnational studies. The focus of analysis is placed on Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia while the choice of agrarian movements aims to showcase different faces of modernity: radical agrarianism in Bulgaria, national agrarianism in Yugoslavia and parliamentary agrarianism in Czechoslovakia. The first chapter focuses on the impact of the war and consequent political radicalisation in Bulgaria as a defeated country. Chapter Two pieces together the fate of the International Agrarian Bureau starting from a fragmentary archive and trying to sidestep communist mystification. The third chapter explores a double-case study, Bulgarian and Croatian nationalism and its relationship to the respective agrarian movements, and draws on insights from subordinate studies. Chapter Four highlights vital characteristics of agrarianism as both context specific but also following three guiding principles: parliamentarism, land reform and the cooperative movement. The fifth chapter provides an analysis of the delegitimation campaigns against Bulgarian and Croatian agrarians and uses theories of corruption as an explanatory framework. The conclusion shows how the Second World War changed societies dramatically; both the political elites and the masses they claimed to represent, and thus rendered agrarian politics irrelevant before the actual onslaught of communism. Toshkov’s method of zooming in and out, alternating between case study and broad synoptic analysis, is well suited to the concept of the book and helps overcome national parochialism. As the author himself puts it, the book is a stimulating ‘experiment in how national historiographies can be stitched together to provide a whole that is greater than the individual parts’ (p. 9). The important achievements of this monograph are thus several: revaluating interwar agrarianism from a fresh perspective untainted by the negative teleology of the movements’ wartime decline; basing this revaluation on a wealth of new primary sources; and placing the analysis in a broader European context, rather than remaining anchored in narrow national contexts. Given that well","PeriodicalId":44300,"journal":{"name":"Rural History-Economy Society Culture","volume":"32 1","pages":"121 - 122"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0956793320000151","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agrarianism as Modernity in 20th-Century Europe: The Golden Age of the Peasantry Alex Toshkov, Bloomsbury Academic, London, New York, Oxford, 2019, 256 pp., 9781350090576\",\"authors\":\"I. Marin\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0956793320000151\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Alex Toshkov’s book is an impressive tour de force in the national archives of four Eastern European countries and the Russian State Archives in an attempt to place agrarianism at the heart of political history in Central and Eastern Europe in the interwar period. The aim of the book is that of taking the agrarian project seriously as the road not taken and exploring the agrarians’ bid to elaborate ‘a more ethical modernity, a third way between capitalism and communism’ (p. 7). The author concentrates on the socio-political factors that ‘allowed peasant parties to stake out a space for themselves’ (p. 8) in national politics and internationally. The book follows a thematic rather than chronological structure and relies on a composite theoretical framework bringing together insights from nationalism, subaltern, corruption and transnational studies. The focus of analysis is placed on Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia while the choice of agrarian movements aims to showcase different faces of modernity: radical agrarianism in Bulgaria, national agrarianism in Yugoslavia and parliamentary agrarianism in Czechoslovakia. The first chapter focuses on the impact of the war and consequent political radicalisation in Bulgaria as a defeated country. Chapter Two pieces together the fate of the International Agrarian Bureau starting from a fragmentary archive and trying to sidestep communist mystification. The third chapter explores a double-case study, Bulgarian and Croatian nationalism and its relationship to the respective agrarian movements, and draws on insights from subordinate studies. Chapter Four highlights vital characteristics of agrarianism as both context specific but also following three guiding principles: parliamentarism, land reform and the cooperative movement. The fifth chapter provides an analysis of the delegitimation campaigns against Bulgarian and Croatian agrarians and uses theories of corruption as an explanatory framework. The conclusion shows how the Second World War changed societies dramatically; both the political elites and the masses they claimed to represent, and thus rendered agrarian politics irrelevant before the actual onslaught of communism. Toshkov’s method of zooming in and out, alternating between case study and broad synoptic analysis, is well suited to the concept of the book and helps overcome national parochialism. As the author himself puts it, the book is a stimulating ‘experiment in how national historiographies can be stitched together to provide a whole that is greater than the individual parts’ (p. 9). The important achievements of this monograph are thus several: revaluating interwar agrarianism from a fresh perspective untainted by the negative teleology of the movements’ wartime decline; basing this revaluation on a wealth of new primary sources; and placing the analysis in a broader European context, rather than remaining anchored in narrow national contexts. Given that well\",\"PeriodicalId\":44300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rural History-Economy Society Culture\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"121 - 122\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0956793320000151\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rural History-Economy Society Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0956793320000151\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rural History-Economy Society Culture","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0956793320000151","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

亚历克斯·托什科夫(Alex Toshkov)的书是一本令人印象深刻的杰作,收录了四个东欧国家的国家档案馆和俄罗斯国家档案馆,试图将农业主义置于两次世界大战期间中欧和东欧政治史的核心位置。这本书的目的是认真对待农业项目,把它当作一条没有走的道路,并探索农民们试图阐述“一种更合乎伦理的现代性,资本主义和共产主义之间的第三条道路”(第7页)。作者集中在社会政治因素上,这些因素“允许农民政党在国家政治和国际政治中为自己留出空间”(第8页)。这本书遵循一个主题而不是时间结构,并依赖于一个综合的理论框架,汇集了民族主义、下层社会、腐败和跨国研究的见解。分析的重点放在保加利亚、南斯拉夫和捷克斯洛伐克,而土地运动的选择旨在展示现代性的不同面貌:保加利亚的激进农业主义,南斯拉夫的民族农业主义和捷克斯洛伐克的议会农业主义。第一章着重于战争对战败国保加利亚的影响和随之而来的政治激进化。第二章将国际农业局的命运拼凑在一起,从一个支离破碎的档案开始,试图避开共产主义的神秘化。第三章探讨了双重案例研究,保加利亚和克罗地亚民族主义及其与各自土地运动的关系,并借鉴了从属研究的见解。第四章强调了农业主义的重要特征,既具有特定的背景,又遵循三个指导原则:议会制、土地改革和合作社运动。第五章分析了针对保加利亚和克罗地亚农民的非法运动,并使用腐败理论作为解释框架。结论显示了第二次世界大战如何戏剧性地改变了社会;政治精英和他们声称代表的群众,因此在共产主义的实际冲击之前,农业政治变得无关紧要。托什科夫放大和缩小的方法,在案例研究和广泛的概要分析之间交替进行,非常适合这本书的概念,并有助于克服民族狭隘主义。正如作者自己所说,这本书是一个令人兴奋的“关于如何将国家史学整合在一起,以提供一个比个别部分更伟大的整体的实验”(第9页)。因此,这本专著的重要成就有以下几点:从一个全新的角度重新评估两次世界大战之间的农业,而不受这些运动战时衰落的消极目的论的影响;这种重估是基于大量新的原始资源;并将分析置于更广泛的欧洲背景下,而不是局限于狭隘的国家背景。既然如此
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Agrarianism as Modernity in 20th-Century Europe: The Golden Age of the Peasantry Alex Toshkov, Bloomsbury Academic, London, New York, Oxford, 2019, 256 pp., 9781350090576
Alex Toshkov’s book is an impressive tour de force in the national archives of four Eastern European countries and the Russian State Archives in an attempt to place agrarianism at the heart of political history in Central and Eastern Europe in the interwar period. The aim of the book is that of taking the agrarian project seriously as the road not taken and exploring the agrarians’ bid to elaborate ‘a more ethical modernity, a third way between capitalism and communism’ (p. 7). The author concentrates on the socio-political factors that ‘allowed peasant parties to stake out a space for themselves’ (p. 8) in national politics and internationally. The book follows a thematic rather than chronological structure and relies on a composite theoretical framework bringing together insights from nationalism, subaltern, corruption and transnational studies. The focus of analysis is placed on Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia while the choice of agrarian movements aims to showcase different faces of modernity: radical agrarianism in Bulgaria, national agrarianism in Yugoslavia and parliamentary agrarianism in Czechoslovakia. The first chapter focuses on the impact of the war and consequent political radicalisation in Bulgaria as a defeated country. Chapter Two pieces together the fate of the International Agrarian Bureau starting from a fragmentary archive and trying to sidestep communist mystification. The third chapter explores a double-case study, Bulgarian and Croatian nationalism and its relationship to the respective agrarian movements, and draws on insights from subordinate studies. Chapter Four highlights vital characteristics of agrarianism as both context specific but also following three guiding principles: parliamentarism, land reform and the cooperative movement. The fifth chapter provides an analysis of the delegitimation campaigns against Bulgarian and Croatian agrarians and uses theories of corruption as an explanatory framework. The conclusion shows how the Second World War changed societies dramatically; both the political elites and the masses they claimed to represent, and thus rendered agrarian politics irrelevant before the actual onslaught of communism. Toshkov’s method of zooming in and out, alternating between case study and broad synoptic analysis, is well suited to the concept of the book and helps overcome national parochialism. As the author himself puts it, the book is a stimulating ‘experiment in how national historiographies can be stitched together to provide a whole that is greater than the individual parts’ (p. 9). The important achievements of this monograph are thus several: revaluating interwar agrarianism from a fresh perspective untainted by the negative teleology of the movements’ wartime decline; basing this revaluation on a wealth of new primary sources; and placing the analysis in a broader European context, rather than remaining anchored in narrow national contexts. Given that well
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Rural History is well known as a stimulating forum for interdisciplinary exchange. Its definition of rural history ignores traditional subject boundaries to encourage the cross-fertilisation that is essential for an understanding of rural society. It stimulates original scholarship and provides access to the best of recent research. While concentrating on the English-speaking world and Europe, the journal is not limited in geographical coverage. Subject areas include: agricultural history; historical ecology; folklore; popular culture and religion; rural literature; landscape history, archaeology and material culture; vernacular architecture; ethnography, anthropology and rural sociology; the study of women in rural societies.
×
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