Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 9

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  1956
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
In 1956 Poland underwent significant political, cultural and social transformations. These are connected to the events that upset the PCUS and international communism after the denunciation of the crimes committed by Stalin during the 20th Congress of the Party held in Moscow. Very important were: the emergence of a reformist current within the PZPR, the Poznan workers' revolt and its severe repression, the return to the party secretariat of Władysław Gomułka and the opening of a new political phase that will inspire the revolt in Budapest. These events received a great deal of attention in international public opinion. In the following essay we critically analyse how the Italian press reconstructed these facts, what interpretations were given on Poland and on the evolution of the political situation.
IT
Nel 1956 la Polonia è stata attraversata da significative trasformazioni politiche, culturali e sociali. Queste sono connesse agli eventi che hanno stravolto il Pcus e il comunismo internazionale dopo la denuncia dei crimini commessi da Stalin durante il XX congresso del partito tenutosi a Mosca. Particolarmente significative sono state l'emergere di una corrente riformista all'interno del PZPR, la rivolta operaia di Poznan e la sua severa repressione, il ritorno alla segreteria del partito di Władysław Gomułka e l'apertura di una nuova fase politica che ispirerà la rivolta di Budapest. Queste vicende hanno goduto di una grande attenzione presso l'opinione pubblica internazionale. Nel seguente saggio si analizza in modo critico come la stampa italiana ha ricostruito questi fatti, quali interpretazioni sono state fornite a seconda delle fasi sulla Polonia e sulle e voluzioni della situazione politica.
EN
The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate three possible methods of reading and interpreting three consequent literary works on the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 that describe the events from a perspective of an adolescent boy. The mentioned works are the following: The Radiance of Childhood  (Gyermekkor tündoklete) by Istvan Kovacs, Hungarian Revolution 1956: Diary  (Magyar Forradalom 1956. Naplo) by Gyula Csics and Kalef by Zsolt Berta. The first demonstrated approach provides a documentary-like look on the October 1956 that is given by dint of (auto)biographical elements or diaristic form. The second method ensures much closer analysis of the Hungarian history across time (before, during and after the Revolution) and space (Hungarian country and Budapest). The third approach targets the aspects of initiation into adulthood, masculinity and Hungarian history of the 20th century that allows to read the three stories as a novels of initiation.
EN
In 1956, the Czechoslovak authorities successfully suppressed all traces of a potential uprising. It can be stated that peace was not seriously disturbed in both the Czech and the Slovak territories, and no significant movement took place. The Czechoslovak society was not yet prepared for a political turn-over in the 50’s. The cautious change of direction in 1953 and the economic reforms had borne their fruits by 1956, which prevented the spread of the revolution to Czechoslovakia. The pull and let go tactic of the authorities worked. Czechoslovakia pulled through the critical year of 1956 and she got stronger. Slovak Hungarians could choose between their survival as a minority and an uprising in autumn 1956. A sober deliberation excluded all steps leading to a Hungarian revolution. The Slovak Hungarians still had vivid memories of suffering, which they experienced after 1945. Worries of being accused of irredentism were strong and any support of Hungarian revolution was unthinkable.
EN
Nikita Khrushchev's secret speech at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956 marked the beginning of the process of liberalization in the USSR and the Soviet bloc, known as the "Khrushchev thaw". In Polish reality, this phenomenon known as "Gomułka’s thaw" or the Polish “October” initiated the destalinization of the political system. This included many political prisoners were released following an amnesty. The changes taking place in the country at that time met with considerable interest from the Polish political groups in exile. In the article, the author presents the establishment and functioning of the "Polski Narodowy Komitet Demokratyczny" (PNKD) [Polish National Democratic Committee] and the position of this political platform with regards the changes taking place in Poland, including the Poznań protests in June 1956. The controversies related to the visit to Poland of Seweryn Eustachiewicz, a member of the Christian Democrats, critically assessed by partners from PNKD, is also described. Another factor that the author has paid attention to is the contrasting opinions of the situation and transformations taking place in Poland between the main PNKD groups – Polskie Stronnictwo Ludowe [the Polish People's Party] and Partia Pracy [the Labor Party]. It is also pointed out that different assessments of the Polish “October” had a significant impact on the functioning of the PNKD and became a catalyst for its disintegration. The PNKD partners also differed in other matters, which is also highlighted in the article. Among other things, they had divergent views on the West's economic aid for Poland, as well as the election campaign and the election to the Parliament of the Polish People's Republic on January 20, 1957.
PL
Wystąpienie Chruszczowa na XX zjeździe KPZR w 1956 r. stanowiło początek odwilży w ZSRS, a następnie w krajach Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, w tym w Polsce. W polityce wewnętrznej PRL nastąpiła tzw. odwilż gomułkowska, będąca liberalizacją systemu komunistycznego. Wprowadzono amnestię, w ramach której wypuszczono wielu więźniów politycznych. Zmiany zachodzące w kraju spotkały się z żywym zainteresowaniem polskiej emigracji politycznej. W artykule przedstawiono powstanie i funkcjonowanie Polskiego Narodowego Komitetu Demokratycznego (PNKD) oraz stanowisko tej platformy politycznej wobec zmian w Polsce, w tym także buntu robotników poznańskich z czerwca 1956 r. Opisano kontrowersje związane z wizytą w Polsce członka władz Stronnictwa Pracy Seweryna Eustachiewicza, zupełnie inaczej ocenianej przez partnerów z PNKD. Zwrócono uwagę na rozbieżną ocenę sytuacji i przeobrażeń zachodzących w kraju pomiędzy Polskim Stronnictwem Ludowym i Stronnictwem Pracy będącymi głównymi ugrupowaniami PNKD. Podkreślono, że odmienne oceny odwilży październikowej w znaczący sposób wpłynęły na funkcjonowanie PNKD, były katalizatorem jego rozpadu. W artykule zaznaczono, że partnerzy z PNKD różnili się też w innych sprawach: w kwestii uzyskania przez Polskę pomocy ekonomicznej Zachodu, jak również w ocenie kampanii wyborczej oraz samych wyborów do Sejmu PRL z 20 stycznia 1957 r.
PL
Rok 1956 stanowił przełom w historii powojennej Polski i życiu mieszkańców Płocka. Jednak masowe demonstracje poparcia dla zmian demokratycznych do jakich doszło w dużych miastach, nie miały miejsca w Płocku. Wyszli z więzień i powrócili do normalnego życia więźniowie polityczni, działalność wznowiły inicjatywy społeczne jak np. Towarzystwo Naukowe Płockie, ukazało się wydawane do dziś czasopismo naukowe pn. „Notatki Płockie”. Doszło do rozruchów ulicznych i obrzucania komendy milicji obywatelskiej kamieniami. Miejscowy komitet PZPR nie wykazał żadnej inicjatywy w celu poparcia demokratycznych zmian.
EN
The year 1956 was a turning point in the history of post-war Poland and lives of the inhabitants of Płock. However, the mass demonstrations of support for the democratic changes that occurred in large cities, had no place in Płock. Political prisoners left prisons, social organizations such as Płock Scientific Society resumed their activities, a scientific journal „Notatki Płockie” which is being published till today was issued. Riots and pelting stones at the militia station took place. The local committee of PZPR did not show any initiative in support of democratic changes.
EN
The article presents the social characteristics of the Żerań Passenger Car Factory (PCF) staff in 1956 against the background of the nationwide working class. Their profile was similar to the ‘old’ industrial centres. The staff composition, made up of a relatively large number of workers of the proletarian productive type, cultivating traditional values and capable of collective action in defence of their interests, could have had a significant impact on the attitude of the PCF workers (both those belonging to the party and non-party staff) in 1956. This was reflected in the election, against informal guidelines, of a young worker, Lechosław Goździk, as secretary of the PCF Works Committee, and in the rejection of official trade unions and support for the ‘Żerań’ project to create a workers’ self-government.
PL
Artykuł przedstawia społeczną charakterystykę załogi FSO na Żeraniu w 1956 r. na tle ogólnopolskiego środowiska robotniczego. Jej profil był zbliżony do „starych” ośrodków przemysłowych. Skład załogi, złożonej z relatywnie dużej liczby robotników typu proletariacko-produktywnego, pielęgnujących tradycyjne wartości i zdolnych do działań zbiorowych w obronie swoich interesów, mógł mieć duże znaczenie dla postawy robotników FSO (partyjnych i bezpartyjnych) w 1956 r. Jej przejawem był wybór na sekretarza Komitetu Zakładowego FSO, wbrew nieformalnym wytycznym, młodego robotnika Lechosława Goździka oraz odrzucenie oficjalnych związków zawodowych i poparcie „żerańskiego” projektu utworzenia samorządu robotniczego.
EN
The article is a brief survey and evaluation of historical research on Poznań 1956 protests, the political change in October 1956, and the year in general. An important gap was filled by the publication of Piotr Grzelczak’s book on the long-term consequences of the Poznań protests, and the conflict over its remembrance between government representatives and local inhabitants of the region, since the protests were one of the defining moments in recent history of Poznań. The article also includes a summary of the controversy between historians over the importance of 1956 as a watershed in Polish history, with some historians arguing that a more liberal image of the communist system in Poland was formed in 1956, while others argued that the communist dictatorship was stabilized by winning wider social support. The author has indicated an increasing separation between narratives about the Poznań protests in June and the political transformations in October, which has consequences and threats related to polarized perception of history, leading to meagre and simplified understanding of social realities of the Polish People’s Republic after 1956.
PL
The article is a brief survey and evaluation of historical research on Poznań 1956 protests, the political change in October 1956, and the year in general. An important gap was filled by the publication of Piotr Grzelczak’s book on the long-term consequences of the Poznań protests, and the conflict over its remembrance between government representatives and local inhabitants of the region, since the protests were one of the defining moments in recent history of Poznań. The article also includes a summary of the controversy between historians over the importance of 1956 as a watershed in Polish history, with some historians arguing that a more liberal image of the communist system in Poland was formed in 1956, while others argued that the communist dictatorship was stabilized by winning wider social support. The author has indicated an increasing separation between narratives about the Poznań protests in June and the political transformations in October, which has consequences and threats related to polarized perception of history, leading to meagre and simplified understanding of social realities of the Polish People’s Republic after 1956.
Porównania
|
2020
|
vol. 27
|
issue 2
25-46
PL
Artykuł dotyczy dwóch zagadnień. Pierwsze to problem zbiorowej pamięci przeszłości, w której obrębie autor wyodrębnia pamięć wspólną, pamięć odrębną i nie-pamięć. Pamięć wspólna odgrywa w Europie Środkowej mniejszą rolę niż pamięć odrębna, stanowiąca rdzeń tożsamości narodowej i społecznej. Pamięć wspólna jest raczej nieosiągalnym ideałem zgłaszanym przez niektórych polityków i badaczy kultury. Ważną funkcję pełni nie-pamięć, czyli przestrzeń czasowego unicestwiania trudnych spraw związanych z przeszłością. Historia i zbiorowa pamięć są w Europie Środkowej konkurencyjnymi drogami utrwalania przeszłości. Wynika to z faktu wielowiekowych konfliktów, zmieniających się form ustrojowych, zmiany granic i przede wszystkim odebrania wielu narodom suwerenności. Ta sytuacja spowodowała, że problem dominacji i podległości stał się zasadniczym problemem historii i pamięci zbiorowej. Druga część artykułu jest poświęcona postkolonialnym aspektom zbiorowej pamięci, w jej ramach zwłaszcza podejściu do wydarzeń i dat 1956, 1968, 1981, związanych z militarną reakcją komunistycznego systemu na próby jego zreformowania. Wydarzenia te, przy wszystkich różnicach, są spowodowane przez przemoc zewnętrzną (1956, 1968) lub przemoc wewnętrzną wywołaną naciskiem z zewnątrz (1981). Poprzez stosunek do wybranych elementów przeszłości społeczeństwa Europy Środkowej kształtują też wzajemne relacje. Autor ukazuje problem nieoczywistości wspólnej pamięci wewnętrznej i międzynarodowej przez analizę czterech aspektów: resentymentu, odpamiętywania, polityki historycznej i estetyzacji. Prezentacja wydarzeń lat 1956, 1968, 1981 w perspektywie wskazanych czterech aspektów postkolonialnej pamięci pokazuje słabe istnienie wspólnych obszarów, nad którymi przeważają pamięć odrębna, deformująca realia historyczne, oraz nie-pamięć. Dowodzi to, że wyjście poza hasła i ogólne deklaracje jest dla społeczeństw Europy Środkowej trudne. Prawdziwa wspólna pamięć to zadanie przyszłości.
EN
This article deals with two issues. The first concerns the problem of collective memory of the past, which is divided here into shared memory, separate memory and non-memory. Shared memory plays a lesser role in Central Europe than separate memory, the latter being the core of national and social identity. Shared memory is an unattainable ideal proposed by some politicians and cultural researchers. A significant role is played by non-memory, which temporarily annihilates difficult matters related to the past. History vies with collective memory in Central Europe as a means of preserving the past. This is the result of centuries-old conflicts, changing political systems, shifting borders and, above all, many nations losing their sovereignty. This situation made the problem of domination and subordination a fundamental problem of history and collective memory. For this reason, the second part of the article focuses on the postcolonial aspects of collective memory, and in particular on its relation to the events of 1956, 1968, and 1981 connected with the military reaction of the communist system to attempts at reform. These events, with all their historical differences, are caused by external violence (1956, 1968) or by internal violence caused by external pressure (1981). Central European societies also shape mutual relations through their attitudes to selected elements of the past. The author of the article depicts the inconspicuous aspects of shared internal and international memory by means of an analysis of four aspects: ressentiment, unremembering, historical politics and aesthetisation.An analysis of the events that took place in 1956, 1968, and 1981 in the context of these four aspects of postcolonial memory reveals the fragile (moderately strong) existence of common areas. These areas are dominated by non-memory and separate memory, which deform historical realities. This proves that it is difficult for Central European societies to move beyond slogans and general declarations. True shared memory is the task for the future.  
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.