并非所有的过去都需要利用:青民盟的记忆政治特征

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Simone Benazzo
{"title":"并非所有的过去都需要利用:青民盟的记忆政治特征","authors":"Simone Benazzo","doi":"10.1515/jnmlp-2017-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Since the 2010 elections, the current Hungarian government has proven to be a very active and restless “memory warrior” (Bernard and Kubik 2014). The ruling party, Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz, shows both a neat understanding of national history and the ability to transmit it by the adoption of different tools. This politics of memory is instrumental in granting the government political legitimacy. By ruling out oppositional actors and their historical narratives from the public sphere, Fidesz presents itself as the primary champion of Hungarian national sovereignty. Hungarians is, then, portrayed as a nation that has long suffered from the yoke of external oppression in which the Ottomans, the Habsburgs, the Soviets and eventually the Europeans figure as the enemies of the Hungarians. Specific collective memories, including the Treaty of Trianon (1920), Nazi occupation (1944–5) and socialist period (1948–90), are targeted so as to enact a sense of national belonging and pride, as well as resentment against foreigners. Moreover, in its rejection of the pluralism of memories and yearn for the homogenization of national history by marginalizing unfitting elements, this politics of memory is consistent with the System of National Cooperation (Batory 2016) that Fidesz’s administration has tried to establish in Hungary. This paper carries out an in-depth analysis of Fidesz’s multilayered politics of memory by investigating both its internal and external dimensions separately. In the final section, conclusions are drawn up to summarize its key tenets. Official speeches, legislative acts, and four interviews with key historians of Hungary have been used as sources.","PeriodicalId":37559,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nationalism Memory and Language Politics","volume":"1 1","pages":"198 - 221"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Not All the Past Needs To Be Used: Features of Fidesz’s Politics of Memory\",\"authors\":\"Simone Benazzo\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/jnmlp-2017-0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Since the 2010 elections, the current Hungarian government has proven to be a very active and restless “memory warrior” (Bernard and Kubik 2014). The ruling party, Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz, shows both a neat understanding of national history and the ability to transmit it by the adoption of different tools. This politics of memory is instrumental in granting the government political legitimacy. By ruling out oppositional actors and their historical narratives from the public sphere, Fidesz presents itself as the primary champion of Hungarian national sovereignty. Hungarians is, then, portrayed as a nation that has long suffered from the yoke of external oppression in which the Ottomans, the Habsburgs, the Soviets and eventually the Europeans figure as the enemies of the Hungarians. Specific collective memories, including the Treaty of Trianon (1920), Nazi occupation (1944–5) and socialist period (1948–90), are targeted so as to enact a sense of national belonging and pride, as well as resentment against foreigners. Moreover, in its rejection of the pluralism of memories and yearn for the homogenization of national history by marginalizing unfitting elements, this politics of memory is consistent with the System of National Cooperation (Batory 2016) that Fidesz’s administration has tried to establish in Hungary. This paper carries out an in-depth analysis of Fidesz’s multilayered politics of memory by investigating both its internal and external dimensions separately. In the final section, conclusions are drawn up to summarize its key tenets. Official speeches, legislative acts, and four interviews with key historians of Hungary have been used as sources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37559,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Nationalism Memory and Language Politics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"198 - 221\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Nationalism Memory and Language Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/jnmlp-2017-0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nationalism Memory and Language Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jnmlp-2017-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

自2010年大选以来,现任匈牙利政府已被证明是一个非常活跃和不安的“记忆战士”(Bernard and Kubik 2014)。执政党,维克多Orbán的青民盟(Fidesz),既对国家历史有清晰的理解,又有能力通过采用不同的工具来传播它。这种记忆政治有助于赋予政府政治合法性。通过在公共领域排除反对派演员和他们的历史叙述,青民盟将自己呈现为匈牙利国家主权的主要捍卫者。因此,匈牙利人被描绘成一个长期遭受外部压迫的民族,奥斯曼帝国、哈布斯堡王朝、苏联,最后是欧洲人,都是匈牙利人的敌人。具体的集体记忆,包括特里亚农条约(1920),纳粹占领(1944-5)和社会主义时期(1948-90),是为了制定一种民族归属感和自豪感,以及对外国人的怨恨。此外,这种记忆政治拒绝记忆的多元化,渴望通过边缘化不合适的元素来实现民族历史的同质化,这与青民盟政府试图在匈牙利建立的民族合作体系(bory 2016)是一致的。本文分别从内部和外部两个维度对青民盟的多层次记忆政治进行了深入分析。在最后一节,得出结论,总结其主要原则。官方讲话、立法法案和对匈牙利主要历史学家的四次采访被用作资料来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Not All the Past Needs To Be Used: Features of Fidesz’s Politics of Memory
Abstract Since the 2010 elections, the current Hungarian government has proven to be a very active and restless “memory warrior” (Bernard and Kubik 2014). The ruling party, Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz, shows both a neat understanding of national history and the ability to transmit it by the adoption of different tools. This politics of memory is instrumental in granting the government political legitimacy. By ruling out oppositional actors and their historical narratives from the public sphere, Fidesz presents itself as the primary champion of Hungarian national sovereignty. Hungarians is, then, portrayed as a nation that has long suffered from the yoke of external oppression in which the Ottomans, the Habsburgs, the Soviets and eventually the Europeans figure as the enemies of the Hungarians. Specific collective memories, including the Treaty of Trianon (1920), Nazi occupation (1944–5) and socialist period (1948–90), are targeted so as to enact a sense of national belonging and pride, as well as resentment against foreigners. Moreover, in its rejection of the pluralism of memories and yearn for the homogenization of national history by marginalizing unfitting elements, this politics of memory is consistent with the System of National Cooperation (Batory 2016) that Fidesz’s administration has tried to establish in Hungary. This paper carries out an in-depth analysis of Fidesz’s multilayered politics of memory by investigating both its internal and external dimensions separately. In the final section, conclusions are drawn up to summarize its key tenets. Official speeches, legislative acts, and four interviews with key historians of Hungary have been used as sources.
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
9
期刊介绍: Journal of Nationalism, Memory & Language Politics is a peer-reviewed journal published by De Gruyter on behalf of the Charles University. It is committed to exploring divergent scholarly opinions, research and theories of current international academic experts, and is a forum for discussion and hopes to encourage free-thinking and debate among academics, young researchers and professionals over issues of importance to the politics of identity and memory as well as the political dimensions of language policy in the 20th and 21st centuries. The journal is indexed with and included in Google Scholar, EBSCO, CEEOL and SCOPUS. We encourage research articles that employ qualitative or quantitative methodologies as well as empirical historical analyses regarding, but not limited to, the following issues: -Trends in nationalist development, whether historical or contemporary -Policies regarding national and international institutions of memory as well as investigations into the creation and/or dissemination of cultural memory -The implementation and political repercussions of language policies in various regional and global contexts -The formation, cohesion and perseverance of national or regional identity along with the relationships between minority and majority populations -The role ethnicity plays in nationalism and national identity -How the issue of victimhood contributes to national or regional self-perception -Priority is given to issues pertaining to the 20th and 21st century political developments While our focus is on empirical articles, our scope remains open to exceptional theoretical works (especially if they incorporate empirical research), book reviews and translations.
×
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