Zobrazit minimální záznam

Was Normalisation Normal?
dc.contributor.authorFidelius, Petr
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-09T10:20:35Z
dc.date.available2021-02-09T10:20:35Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn2336-6680
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/124287
dc.language.isocs_CZcs_CZ
dc.publisherUniverzita Karlova, Filozofická fakultacs_CZ
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/
dc.sourceSlovo a smysl, 2020, 35, 19-25cs_CZ
dc.source.urihttps://wordandsense.ff.cuni.cz
dc.subjectSémantická analýzacs_CZ
dc.subjectnormalizacecs_CZ
dc.subjectkonsolidacecs_CZ
dc.subject1948cs_CZ
dc.subject1968cs_CZ
dc.subjectkomunismuscs_CZ
dc.titleByla normalizace normální?cs_CZ
dc.typeVědecký článekcs_CZ
dc.title.translatedWas Normalisation Normal?cs_CZ
uk.abstract.enThe author focuses on the semantics of the terms ‘normalisation’ and ‘consolidation’. He then expands his initial analysis to the broader historical context in order to understand how these terms came to characterize the tactics and strategies of the communists after 1948. The author emphasizes how the pretence of normalcy was a central strategy of the Communist regime from the very beginning, arguing that the revolution it carried out in February 1948 was no more than a rhetorical one – a ‘rev olution’ in scare quotes. In reality, it was a shrewdly calculated coup that combined a constitutional loophole with the threat of armed violence. Under the effective pretence that they were acting to save an endangered ‘national path to socialism’ on which the country had previously set out in 1945, the Communists were able to take power. Outwardly, everything pointed to a ‘normal’ transition of government, to which end they took great care, at least in the first months, to present President Beneš as symbolically supportive of the transition to the new order. This is also why they did not dissolve institutional structures but instead assimilated them into the National Front, including sev eral non communist parties that would subsequently help them play up the appearance of ‘normal’ constitutional democratic procedure in parliament and the government before the domestic and foreign audience. Similarly, rather than forming extraordinary courts, they simply made use of the ‘normal’ judicial machinery for repressive purposes. The question thus arises whether this masterful simulation of normality was not one of the more important factors (along with the precision targeted repression and corruption of key social groups), which, in the broader strata of society, blunted what little remained of the will to resist, in this way contributing to the stability of the regime in both the post-1948 and post-1968 contexts.cs_CZ
dc.publisher.publicationPlacePrahacs_CZ
uk.internal-typeuk_publication
dc.identifier.doi10.14712/23366680.2020.3.1cs_CZ
dc.description.startPage19
dc.description.endPage25
dcterms.isPartOf.nameSlovo a smyslcs_CZ
dcterms.isPartOf.journalYear2020
dcterms.isPartOf.journalVolume2020
dcterms.isPartOf.journalIssue35


Soubory tohoto záznamu

Thumbnail

Tento záznam se objevuje v následujících sbírkách

Zobrazit minimální záznam

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/
Kromě případů, kde je uvedeno jinak, licence tohoto záznamu je http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/

© 2017 Univerzita Karlova, Ústřední knihovna, Ovocný trh 560/5, 116 36 Praha 1; email: admin-repozitar [at] cuni.cz

Za dodržení všech ustanovení autorského zákona jsou zodpovědné jednotlivé složky Univerzity Karlovy. / Each constituent part of Charles University is responsible for adherence to all provisions of the copyright law.

Upozornění / Notice: Získané informace nemohou být použity k výdělečným účelům nebo vydávány za studijní, vědeckou nebo jinou tvůrčí činnost jiné osoby než autora. / Any retrieved information shall not be used for any commercial purposes or claimed as results of studying, scientific or any other creative activities of any person other than the author.

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
Theme by 
@mire NV