Suchergebnisse

Nikos Potamianos, The Radical Right and the Agrarian Question in the Early 20th Century. The Case of Christovassilis and the "Hellenism Asosociation"The subject of this article is an aspect of the history of the radical right in Greece, namely its intellectual and political response to the agrarian question which emerged in Greece at the end of the 19th century after the incorporation of new provinces where large landownership was predominant. In particular, the arguments and theses of a cadre of the biggest nationalist league of Athens in 1907 are examined, in contrast to its earlier views on the agrarian question and in contrast to the discourse of the radical supporters of the sharecroppers as well as the landowners. Christovassilis adopts a pro-peasant stand, attacking capitalist landowners and indirectly proposing the purchase of the land by its cultivators with the assistance of the state. However, his main aim was to prove that parliamentary democracy was incapable of improving the sharecroppers' situation, a task which only an authoritarian state could accomplish. Crucial in Christovassilis' arguments was the use of nationalist discourse in order to legalize sharecroppers' demands: he linked the peasants' struggle for land in the past with the national conflict with the Ottoman conquerors, equating land with fatherland and, therefore, the ownership of land of Thessaly with the peasants' participation in the nation. Christovassilis' earlier views which put emphasis on the social aspects of the agrarian question gave way to the pre-ponderance of the nationalist argument, which was in turn related to other aspects of the ideology of the radical right. "Hellenism" followed a strategy of appealing to the mobilized subordinate classes — but without totally adopting their point of view. It was always clear that the viewpoint of the association was that of paternalism, not of emancipation. One of the points of its criticism against the democratic state was that the latter was not powerful enough torepress the impending peasant revolt. The restoration of law and orderwas for the radical right more important than the improvement of the living conditions of the lower strata. And the adoption of popular demands, in general, proved to be merely rhetoric: when the class struggle became more intense, especially in the case of the agrarian movementof 1910, "Hellenism" remained aloof. ; Nikos Potamianos, The Radical Right and the Agrarian Question in the Early 20th Century. The Case of Christovassilis and the "Hellenism Asosociation"The subject of this article is an aspect of the history of the radical right in Greece, namely its intellectual and political response to the agrarian question which emerged in Greece at the end of the 19th century after the incorporation of new provinces where large landownership was predominant. In particular, the arguments and theses of a cadre of the biggest nationalist league of Athens in 1907 are examined, in contrast to its earlier views on the agrarian question and in contrast to the discourse of the radical supporters of the sharecroppers as well as the landowners. Christovassilis adopts a pro-peasant stand, attacking capitalist landowners and indirectly proposing the purchase of the land by its cultivators with the assistance of the state. However, his main aim was to prove that parliamentary democracy was incapable of improving the sharecroppers' situation, a task which only an authoritarian state could accomplish. Crucial in Christovassilis' arguments was the use of nationalist discourse in order to legalize sharecroppers' demands: he linked the peasants' struggle for land in the past with the national conflict with the Ottoman conquerors, equating land with fatherland and, therefore, the ownership of land of Thessaly with the peasants' participation in the nation. Christovassilis' earlier views which put emphasis on the social aspects of the agrarian question gave way to the pre-ponderance of the nationalist argument, which was in turn related to other aspects of the ideology of the radical right. "Hellenism" followed a strategy of appealing to the mobilized subordinate classes — but without totally adopting their point of view. It was always clear that the viewpoint of the association was that of paternalism, not of emancipation. One of the points of its criticism against the democratic state was that the latter was not powerful enough torepress the impending peasant revolt. The restoration of law and orderwas for the radical right more important than the improvement of the living conditions of the lower strata. And the adoption of popular demands, in general, proved to be merely rhetoric: when the class struggle became more intense, especially in the case of the agrarian movementof 1910, "Hellenism" remained aloof.

Δεν παρατίθεται περίληψη στα ελληνικά. ; Eleni Fournaraki, «Wherefore deprive her of the vote?». Universal male suffrage and the exclusion of women from politics in 19th century Greece Through study of the Greek case, this article tries to explore the exclusion of women from political rights in the context of liberal democracy as a historiographical problem. In contrast to the vast majority of representative states at the time, political circumstances prevailing in Greece led to the constitutional establishment of universal male suffrage in 1864, though not without provoking the discontent of a sizeable portion of the political scene for several years thereafter. According to «conventional» historical accounts, there can be no doubt that women's exclusion from «universal suffrage» in 1864, while not explicity articulated in the Constitution or any pertinent legislation, was regarded as self-evident. Furthermore, prior to 1910-20 the possibility of attributing the vote to women did not preoccupy party politics, while a suffragist movement did not appear before the Inter-war period. Our own approach can be summarized as follows: exploration of the meaning of women's exclusion from political rights in a democratic conjuncture that assured those rights to all adult men may reveal the full dimensions of the conflict dynamic that democratic conquests presuppose. In the first place, this dynamic applies to men themselves, or more precisely to the less privileged among them. As empirical data reveal, the question of women's political rights, even if acquiring those rights was not an existing possibility, could appear as a constructive element of the political discourse: women's exclusion could have been put forward as one of the issues in the argument against universal male suffrage. It is precisely the self-evident and trivial nature of this exclusion together with that of children which could offer a more convincing argument against the conception of suffrage as a natural right. A lack of internal coherence and consistency in the argument of the advocates of «universal suffrage», could be pointed out through the emphasis, conversely, on the irrationality of a regime that guaranteed political participation down to the very last «illiterate» or «vagrant» man, while depriving all women of the vote, especially those who had the ability to possess and administrate property. Support for suffrage for those women was not totally absent from such argumentation, which served to reveal the contradictions that women's exclusion from political rights brought to the heart of the modern system for the legitimization of sovereignty. Through examination of the arguments employed by the science of constitutional law to justify exclusion, we observe a broader process of redefinition and rationalization of the existing gender hierarchy, in modern terms. Crystallized in the last quarter of 19th century, this process appealed to the notion of the biological and psychological «specificity» of «female nature)) in order to legitimize the incompatibility of women as a whole with politics.

Athena Syriatou, Duty and Instinct: History in Schools in Post-war Britain 1945-1995 This article deals with the moral role of history in post-war British education, by examining the relationship between the expectations of educationalists and intellectuals from history teaching at schools, and the actual changes which did occur in the classroom on the subject of history as a result of general changes in society and education. It argues that despite the intentions of the educationalists who saw history teaching as a means of promoting ideas which were considered necessary for the moral upbringing of the nation, these ideas very often never reached the classroom or they were considerably altered, demonstrating different ideological dynamics in British society. It initially focuses on the immediate post-war decade when international is educationalists were arguing for the need of history teaching which leads to a world citizenship. The idea of an internationalist approach on history contradicted the conservative, Britocentric, Whiggish history which was finally taught at schools during that period, since there were very few new books published, while civil servants from the Ministry of Education were concerned with the more urgent problems of schools which were affected by enemy action rather than new views on history teaching. The second period which is examined is the decade of mid sixties until mid seventies. Great changes were initiated then, to cover the disparity between the two tier system of education, with the introduction of comprehensive secondary schools, which at the time were considered to contribute to further démocratisation of the welfare state. The spirit of a more tolerant, affluent and democratic society led some educationalists to propose the expulsion of history from schools and its replacement with other humanities such as sociology and behavioural studies. However, history did remain at schools during that period and in many ways it incorporated the new ideas, creating the so called 'new history' with the efforts of the progressive, non traditionalist, and often leftist historians. Problems of implementation of the new history' appeared during the following years as a result of the difference of academic standards at schools which at this period comprehensive education could not eliminate. The final period which is examined is the decade of mid eighties until mid nineties when the New Right ideology was dominant in the political scene, while a National Curriculum for all schools was deemed necessary. Educational planners of the Conservative Party argued that history should teach again traditional values, which were, according to them, intrinsic to the British nation. However, the National Curriculum for History which was drafted by educationalists coming various convictions,(nevertheless appointed by the Conservative government), was closer to the beliefs of the new history' creators, rather than the beliefs and national values that the Conservatives initially wanted to promote. ; Athena Syriatou, Duty and Instinct: History in Schools in Post-war Britain 1945-1995 This article deals with the moral role of history in post-war British education, by examining the relationship between the expectations of educationalists and intellectuals from history teaching at schools, and the actual changes which did occur in the classroom on the subject of history as a result of general changes in society and education. It argues that despite the intentions of the educationalists who saw history teaching as a means of promoting ideas which were considered necessary for the moral upbringing of the nation, these ideas very often never reached the classroom or they were considerably altered, demonstrating different ideological dynamics in British society. It initially focuses on the immediate post-war decade when international is educationalists were arguing for the need of history teaching which leads to a world citizenship. The idea of an internationalist approach on history contradicted the conservative, Britocentric, Whiggish history which was finally taught at schools during that period, since there were very few new books published, while civil servants from the Ministry of Education were concerned with the more urgent problems of schools which were affected by enemy action rather than new views on history teaching. The second period which is examined is the decade of mid sixties until mid seventies. Great changes were initiated then, to cover the disparity between the two tier system of education, with the introduction of comprehensive secondary schools, which at the time were considered to contribute to further démocratisation of the welfare state. The spirit of a more tolerant, affluent and democratic society led some educationalists to propose the expulsion of history from schools and its replacement with other humanities such as sociology and behavioural studies. However, history did remain at schools during that period and in many ways it incorporated the new ideas, creating the so called 'new history' with the efforts of the progressive, non traditionalist, and often leftist historians. Problems of implementation of the new history' appeared during the following years as a result of the difference of academic standards at schools which at this period comprehensive education could not eliminate. The final period which is examined is the decade of mid eighties until mid nineties when the New Right ideology was dominant in the political scene, while a National Curriculum for all schools was deemed necessary. Educational planners of the Conservative Party argued that history should teach again traditional values, which were, according to them, intrinsic to the British nation. However, the National Curriculum for History which was drafted by educationalists coming various convictions,(nevertheless appointed by the Conservative government), was closer to the beliefs of the new history' creators, rather than the beliefs and national values that the Conservatives initially wanted to promote.