Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2008. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes bibliographical references (p. 218-227).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1998. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. [494]-517).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 1996. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 83-92).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1963. / Typescript. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 96-101).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 1996. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 83-92). Also available in print.

Este estudo teve por objetivo analisar como, no contexto da Guerra Fria, o comunismo de extração marxista-leninista foi sendo identificado às formas políticas totalitárias por representações circulantes em nível internacional e nacional e como a questão democrática ganhou proeminência no interior do movimento comunista no Brasil, com destaque para o Partido Comunista Brasileiro (PCB). Na década de 1960, movimentos de contra cultura e lutas sociais das esquerdas se contrapuseram ao golpe civil-militar acirrando ainda mais os conflitos entre as classes no Brasil. Tendo como fontes primárias documentos produzidos pelo Departamento de Ordem Política e Social (DOPS), acrescidos de processos-crime, jornais do período e de entrevistas realizadas, relativas à atuação dos comunistas e dos movimentos cultural e estudantil que tomou corpo na região de Londrina, Paraná, procedemos à análise das representações sobre o comunismo e o PCB ali consignadas, considerando os sujeitos e as condições na quais foram produzidas. Verificamos então como o partido foi paulatinamente assumindo a questão democrática pelas experiências históricas e crises que se instauraram em seu interior, situação explicitada na Declaração de Março de 1958. Finalmente, a experiência de integrantes do Comitê Central do Partido no exílio, em meados da década de 1970, introduziu a polêmica no interior do PCB, o qual incorporou as discussões do marxista Antonio Gramsci levadas a cabo principalmente pelos partidos comunistas italiano, francês e espanhol, de um lado, na vertente denominada eurocomunismo e, de outro, nas frações do partido que buscavam interpelar a questão da democracia valendo-se do pensamento gramsciano mas, preservando contudo, a tradição marxista-leninista. As duas vertentes nascidas do debate tinham como principais divergências as interpretações da relação entre democracia e socialismo. O ponto de convergência foi a necessidade de superação da regulação social pelo mercado como sendo um elemento incompatível com a ampliação e aprofundamento da democracia. / The present study aimed at analyzing how, in a Cold War context, communism of a Marxist-Leninist extraction was gradually identified to the political-totalitarian forms by ongoing representations at national and international levels, and how the democratic issue gained prominence within the Communist Party in Brazil, with focus at the Brazilian Communist Party (Partido Comunista do Brasil PCB). During the 1960s, counterculture and social conflicts of the leftist entities opposed the civil-military putsch, enflaming even more the conflict of classes in Brazil. Having its primary sources from documents produced by Social and Political Order Department (Departamento de Ordem Política e Social - DOPS), increased with Criminal Proceedings, newspapers and interviews produced in such period, related to the activity of the communists and the arising students and cultural movements that took place at the region of the city of Londrina, State of Parana, Brazil, one proceeded to the analysis of the communist and PCB representations there established, considering the agents and the conditions in which they were produced. One has then verified how the party was gradually taking up the democratic issue by the historical experiences and crisis that arose within its interior, such situation which was made explicit by the Declaration of March 1958. Finally the experience of the members to the Partys Central Committee in exile, around the mid 1970s, introduced the polemics in the interior of PCB, which assumed the discussions of Marxist Antonio Gramsci, performed mainly by, on one side, the Italian, French and Spanish communist parties, in its side named Eurocommunism; and, on the other side, in the fractions of the party which attempted to apostrophize the democratic issue, betaking the Gramscian thought, yet preserving the Marxist-Leninist tradition Both sides originated from the debate diverged mainly about the relation between democracy and socialism. The converging point was the necessity to overcome the social regulation by the market as being an element incompatible with the broadening and deepening of democracy.

In 1990, the Institute for Historical and Socio-Political Studies of the Central Committee of the Romanian Communist Party was closed, since the Party was dissolved by the Romanian Revolution. Similar institutions had existed in all countries belonging to the Soviet bloc. This Institute was founded in 1951 under the name of the Party History Institute, and modelled on the Marx-Lenin-Engels Institute in Moscow. Since then, it served the Communist Party in producing thousands of books and journals on the history of the Party and of Romania, following Party orders. Previous research has portrayed the Institute as a loyal executioner of the Party’s will, negating the agency of its history-writers in influencing the duties of the Institute. However, the recent opening of the Institute’s archive has shown that a number of internal and previously obscured dynamics impacted on its activities. This book is dedicated to the study of the Party History Institute, of the history-writers employed there, and of the narratives they produced. By studying the history-writers and their host institution, this study re-contextualizes the historiography produced under Communist rule by analysing the actual conditions under which it was written: the interrelation between dynamics of control and the struggle for resources, power and positions play a fundamental role in this history. This is the first scholarly inquiry about a highly controversial institute that struggled in order to follow the constantly shifting Party narrative canon, while competing formaterial resources with rival Party and academic institutions. The main actors in this study are the history-writers: Party veterans, young propagandists and educated historians, in conflicting networks and groups, struggled in order to gain access to the limited resources and positions provided by the Party, and in order to survive the political changes imposed by the leadership. By doing so they succeed, on many occasions, to influence the activities of the Institute.

No description available.

This study examines the explanatory power of the traditional explanations as to what determines public support for EU membership and European integration – the economic explanation and the political values‐based explanation – in the context of the post-communist member states of the EU. Further, an alternative explanation – the communist legacy explanation – is presented and tested. It is hypothesized that a high degree of Soviet influence and suppression during the communist period leads to a low degree of support for EU membership and European integration, because of a willingness to protect oneself from violation of national sovereignty once again. The explanatory power of the traditional explanations does not obtain convincing empirical support, even if many individual predictors are statistically significant as determinants. Communist legacy seems to be important as a determinant of public support for EU membership and European integration. However, the hypothesis can neither be accepted nor rejected, because of the methodological problems associated with the dummy variable approach used in order to test it. Further, the direction of the relationship between communist legacy and public support for EU membership and European integration seems to be two‐fold, rather than one-sided as hypothesized.

This thesis is concerned with main cultural discourses of the second phase of Communism in Romania (1964-1989), period largely identical with that of Ceauşescu’s rule. A secondary aim of the thesis is to look at the post-1989 continuations of these publicly influential discourses with the aim of understanding how the educational system (HE, in particular) is positioned in relation to the cultural domain. With regard to the Communist period, the main assertion of the thesis is that analysis of these discourses reveals an underlying cultural mechanism equivalent with a central mode of governance employed by the Communist party. According to this assertion, the mission of this cultural mechanism, with origins in Lenin’s drastic distinction between the party and the proletariat and in the idea that the party must bestow consciousness on the proletariat, is to create and regulate positive avatars (heroes imbued with the best of humanity) for each social category so as to fulfill and safeguard the aims of the Party. For this reason, this device has been entitled the hero-mirror mechanism. The device has also been linked with religion and theology. This perspective has found that the mirror-mechanism corresponds to the notion of “imago Dei,” and its axes to the notions of “kenosis” and “imitatio Dei.” The assessment of these cultural discourses via the mirror-mechanism results in three dimensions of research, each with its own universes of investigation, and each with its own findings. In the first dimension, the mirror-mechanism deals with discourses as identity, and thus with the deconstruction of Romanian identity. If, as observed, the mirror-mechanism receives its first major blow in the 1980s and begins to crumble after 1989, what has replaced it since and with what implications for Romanian identity? The second dimension views the same discourses as mainly intellectual. Here, the notion of ‘inner utopia’ is highlighted as a dominant and recurring theme, and, therefore, as possibly the dominant feature of the Romanian cultural/political scene during and after Communism. If, because of the notion of ‘inner utopia,’ ‘true education’ is viewed as lying outside the provinces of formal institutions, what then is the educational role ascribed to the public space in relation to the HE system? Finally, the third dimension assesses these discourses in terms of their claims for anti-Communist resistance while providing a typology for elucidating such claims.