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

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  symbolic politics
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The purpose of this article is to analyse the conflicts over the memorials (sites of memory) in the space of the binational Polish-Lithuanian community of Sejny. The community of Sejny is the second largest concentration of the Lithuanian minority in Poland. In the second half of the 19th century the city was one of the most important centers of Lithuanian culture and the national revival. During the Interwar Period and the People’s Republic of Poland the region was subjected to the polonization policy, which attempted to remove the traces of Lithuanian culture and strengthen the symbolic dominance of the Polish majority. The systemic transformation in Poland provided Lithuanians with formal guarantees to protect group’s memory. In the article I would like to present the most important activities of the Lithuanian community after 1989 aimed at symbolic commemoration of its national and cultural heritage in the public sphere, Polish reactions to it and the conflicts resulting thereof. Referring to the concepts of social memory and the dispute about symbolic domain, I explore the importance attached by both sides to both already created or just planned sites of memory. In the summary, I consider the role of memorials in the transformation of the identity of the place and its inhabitants.
EN
This study is dedicated to analysis of the role of the history of the ancient Rus’ nation in historical memory and the symbolic politics of modern Russia. In recent years, Russian elites have been attempting to create a stable and unified “model” view of national history, which should create a reliable ideological foundation for consolidation of the nation around the current political regime, ensure its historical legitimacy, and represent it as an integral part and logical continuation of a glorious historical past full of victories. The semantic center of Russia’s symbolic politics today is the cult of the Great Patriotic War (1941–1945). Interest in older historical eras is noticeably weaker, and tends to follow current political events. However, by contrast, the Time of Troubles (Smuta in Russian) at the beginning of the 17th century represents a clear exception, as it is the only historical event in prerevolutionary history that is regularly celebrated at the state level. The goal of this study is to analyze the dynamic of how the mythology of the Time of Troubles has developed, particularly about the events associated with driving the Polish-Lithuanian troops out of Moscow in 1612, and investigating how this mythology functions in the political and social conditions of modern Russia.
PL
Research objective: The aim of the article is to examine the circumstances of introduction and subsequent functioning of the minority language from the perspective of local authorities. The hypothesis that bilingualism is a part of the creation of a multicultural image of communes, as well as an element of their promotion and strategic development has been verified. The research problem and methods: The main problem of the publication is the non-symbolic daily practice of language policy in 33 communes that introduced an auxiliary minority language. In the research process, the analysis of evoked sources, critical analysis of content posted on the Internet and the case study method were applied. The process of argumentation: The argument consists of four main parts. The first part discusses the symbolic use of the minority language. The second part presents basic information on the Polish context of policy towards minority languages. The third part presents the main assumptions and results of empirical research. The last part of the paper is devoted to theoretical remarks on the limitations of the analysis of public policy in relation to social phenomena heavily loaded with symbolism. Research results: Research shows that non-symbolic language policy practices are rarely used. Local authorities do not promote the possibility of communicating in a minority language and do not use it themselves. Communes that have introduced a minority language as an auxiliary language rarely use bilingualism in the creation of a local brand or as an element of tourism promotion or in the context of cross-border cooperation in the development of business.Conclusions, innovations, and recommendations: Identity-oriented preferences differ from preferences public policy typically deals with because they do not fulfill the instrumental rationality expectation assumed by the public policy analysis.
XX
In this article, I analyze how the relationship between national identity and religion was reconfigured by social actors during the Quebec’s so-called Quiet Revolution, and discuss how the secularization of society that took place in the 1960s and 1970s shapes contemporary politics in Quebec. With the building of its welfare state in the 1960s, national identity and religion in Quebec have become divorced institutionally, ideologically, and symbolically. Quebec has also undergone one of the most rapid processes of secularization in the Western world during that decade. In this text I trace the evolution and transformation of the relationship between national and religious identities in Quebec through an analysis of symbolic politics, and discuss how some of the ambiguities and unintended consequences of the Quiet Revolution are at the root of current debates about the place of religion in the public sphere.
PL
Po odzyskaniu przez Polskę niepodległości w ramach oczyszczenia przestrzeni publicznej Warszawy z pozostałości zaborczej polityki symbolicznej podjęto decyzję o rozbiórce soboru prawosławnego pw. św. Aleksandra Newskiego. Sprawa ta była szeroko komentowana zarówno pośród elit politycznych II RP, jak i mieszkańców Warszawy, a informowani o niej byli mieszkańcy całej Polski. Pierwsze kwestię zburzenia soboru podjęły organizacje społeczne oraz magistrat Warszawy. Informacje na ten temat pojawiły się w prasie, a także dotarły do rządu RP. Stanowisko w tej sprawie zajęło Prezydium Rady Ministrów na wniosek swego prezesa Ignacego Jana Paderewskiego. Było ono jednoznaczne – sobór należało zburzyć, a dokonać tego miało Ministerstwo Robót Publicznych. Ze względu na interwencje Ministerstwa Wyznań Religijnych i Oświecenia Publicznego oraz Ministerstwa Spraw Wojskowych rozbiórkę wstrzymano. Jej temat został ponownie podjęty przez Sejm Ustawodawczy, który, po przeprowadzeniu konsultacji społecznych i żywej dyskusji na posiedzeniu plenarnym, przesunął rozbiórkę na okres późniejszy (co ciekawe, wnioski o zburzenie i o zachowanie soboru przedstawiali sejmowi przedstawiciele jednej partii). Następnie sprawę rozbiórki podjął rząd gen. Władysława Sikorskiego (co spotkało się z nieudaną kontrakcją posłów mniejszości narodowych) i zlecił ją Ministerstwu Robót Publicznych. Podwykonawca wybrany przez ministerstwo zawiódł i dopiero magistrat Warszawy zakończył prace rozbiórkowe, a następnie oddał plac Saski na potrzeby reprezentacyjne władz RP w lipcu 1926 r. Pracami tymi kierował przyszły prezydent Warszawy Zygmunt Słomiński. Artykuł jest case study rozbiórki byłego soboru prawosławnego pw. św. Aleksandra Newskiego jako działania wymagającego współpracy wielu instytucji rządowych i samorządowych odrodzonego państwa polskiego, działania, które spowodowało polaryzację poglądów, często niepokrywających się z sympatiami politycznymi.
EN
When Poland regained its independence, a decision was made to pull down the Orthodox St. Alexander Nevsky Cathedral as part of clearing Warsaw’s public space from the remains of the symbolic politics of partition. This matter was widely commented on both among the political elites of the Second Polish Republic and the residents of Warsaw, and the inhabitants of whole Poland were informed about it. Social organisations and the Town Hall of Warsaw were the first to take the issue of demolition of the Cathedral. Information on this subject appeared in the press and reached the Government of the Polish Republic. The Presidium of the Council of Ministers took a stand on this matter at the request of its Chairman, Ignacy Jan Paderewski. It was unambiguous – the Cathedral had to be demolished, and the Ministry of Public Works was to do it. Due to the interventions of the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Public Enlightenment and the Ministry of Military Affairs, demolition was ceased. This subject was again taken up by the Legislative Sejm which, after conducting public consultations and lively discussions at the plenary session, postponed the demolition for a later period (interestingly, requests for demolition and maintaining the Cathedral were presented to the Sejm by representatives of one party). Then, the issue of demolition was taken up by the government of Gen. Władysław Sikorski (which met with a failed counteraction of members of national minorities) and commissioned to the Ministry of Public Works. The subcontractor chosen by the Ministry failed and only the City Hall of Warsaw completed the demolition works, and then gave the Saski Square for the representative needs of the Polish authorities in July 1926. These works were managed by the future Mayor of Warsaw, Zygmunt Słomiński. The article is a case study of demolition of the former Alexander Nevsky Cathedral as an action requiring the cooperation of many state and local government institutions of the reborn Polish State, an action which resulted in the polarisation of views, often not coinciding with the political affinity.
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.