Suchergebnisse

For a long time, Western countries relied on science to conduct diplomatic activities and scientific research. During the Cold War, there was a wide exchange and even confrontation between the East and West camps and the major powers in many scientific fields. After 1949, The People's Republic of China initiated an active stage of learning from the Soviet Union, and the creation of Chinese science was supported by the Soviet scientific community. This influence was particularly noticeable in the field of Chinese biology, especially zoology. A large number of Soviet scientists came to China to impart their knowledge, and many classic Soviet scientific works were translated into Chinese. In the 1950s, Chinese scientists published a large number of translations and descriptions of works by T. D. Lysenko and I. V. Michurin in journals such as Bulletin of Biology and other periodicals, which laid the foundation for Michurin's teachings in Chinese biology and zoology. In 1953, Indian Prime Minister Nehru gifted an elephant to Chinese children, but due to the lack of skills and experience in keeping elephants, Beijing approved the creation of courses for training personnel in animal care and invited the director of the Moscow Zoo I. P. Sosnovskii to give lectures in Beijing and Shanghai to train Chinese specialists. China systematically embraced the Soviet system of knowledge in the areas of animal breeding and cultivation, and shaping of zoo functions. From then on, China and the USSR had developed extremely close cooperation in animal exchanges, academic exchanges, and "animal diplomacy", which has had an impact to this day.

THIS ARTICLE DESCRIBES THE CHANGES IN POLITICAL INFLUENCE OF THE SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTIES IN EUROPE IN RECENT YEARS. IT POINTS OUT THAT THE SOCIAL DEMOCRATS WERE STRONGER IN RECENT YEARS IN THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES, BUT MORE CURRENTLY HAVE LESSENED THEIR DOMINANCE IN THE NORTH AND ARE A SIGNIFICANT FORCE IN GREECE, SPAIN, AND PORTUGAL. ALONG WITH THESE CHANGES IS A TREND TOWARD NEOLIBERALISM IN THE SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS.

An analysis of the history of Marxism-Leninism in the USSR since 1900. V. I. Lenin's rise to power is explored in conjunction with the Russian population & the underlying causes for the Russian revolution. It is argued that Russia was a semiperipheral, agriculturally strong nation, with a majority of rural workers & peasants; but its weak position industrially in comparison to the rest of Europe was the primary cause of the revolution & the rise of Lenin. The later rise of Stalinism is attributed in part to internal economic problems & the devastation of WWII. The Soviet empire was formed after 1945 due to: (1) the fear of US military intervention in both the USSR & East Germany; (2) the need for war reparations, which the USSR obtained by force; & (3) the wish to ensure communist unity, in light of possible independent, indigenous communist movements. De-Stalinization is attributed to political & economic failures & misjudgments by Nikita Khrushchev & Leonid Brezhnev, & the reforms of Mikhail Gorbachev are analyzed as an attempt by the elites to regroup after the international collapse of (Marxism-)Leninism. It is argued that Gorbachev's main problem is his lack of an alternative ideology & strategy to substitute for Marxism-Lenism. It is also proposed, however, that he has single-handedly moved the world past the Cold War era. Implications of the Soviet experience for the future of Marxist insights & values are offered. 6 References. D. Dennis

The problem of socialist parliamentarianism
The idea of socialist parliamentarianism appeared at the apogee of Stalinism, nearly 20 years after the victory of soviet power. The author's aim is to show this idea is without foundation by demonstrating its internal contradiction, particularly at the historical and political levels. He tries to identify the causes for the theoretical and political refutation of bourgeois parliamentarianism, above all those which necessitated the creation of the soviet system in the post-revolutionary State. Why could « parliamentarianism » not be socialist, or why was « parliamentarianism in a socialist country » inevitably doomed to disappear ? These are the kind of questions which the author tries to answer, leaving to its partisans the task of « proving » that socialist parliamentarianism does truly exist, as they maintain.

Let us submit the following proposition for consideration: the essence of socialist construction lies in the bid to appropriate the future and is therefore expressed politically, in the organised manipulation of time. What we ordinarily take to be the sine qua non of socialist relations, namely central planning, totalitarian rule and the abolition of private property are, in fact, epiphenomena. They exist as real influences on people's lives in the presently existing socialist societies, but they derive in esse, from the basic organising principle of socialist relations which is to restructure the popular experience of time.

This essay examines the ways a gender studies perspective has been applied in Chinese academic reflections on China's socialist culture and practice during the so-called Seventeen-Year Period, which spanned from the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949 to the beginning of the Cultural Revolution in 1966 and is usually considered the most important period for the establishment of the socialist regime and political system. The essay builds on the premise that since the 1980s, gendered critiques of the Seventeen-Year Period, by applying imported gender theory, have tended to treat woman as an invisible category whose individual agency and distinct, complex subjectivities are sacrificed to the patriarchal state's priorities and socialist ideology. As a case study for alternative ways to reflect on women's struggles during the Mao era, the essay analyzes several stories by representative Seventeen-Year Period writer Zhao Shuli, paying special attention to the evolution of Zhao's treatment of the relationship between women and state projects throughout the Seventeen-Year Period. Presenting a case study in literary fiction may bring attention to some of the blind spots and limitations of the current gender theory applications widely upheld by the Chinese academic world since the 1980s. This essay argues that only when socialist practice and feminist critique are put in vigorous dialogue with history can there emerge truly productive ways of understanding women's liberation movements during the Seventeen-Year Period.