Suchergebnisse

The authors in the article reveal the positioning of extreme right political parties in the Western world and Central and Eastern Europe by following such ideological basis as nationalism and welfare chauvinism, practically rejecting immigrants and their willingness to use the benefits and services of the mentioned welfare systems in the presented Western as well as Central and Eastern European countries. The authors maintain their position, applying the secondary data from European Social Survey, International Monetary Fund and OECD data as well as interpretations of the authors from different foreign countries. In the end of the article the authors pose the one of the most interesting scientific and practical questions – why the place of the electorate of the "socially excluded" and having low income voters is moving from the left political parties to the side of the extreme right political parties? The further research is necessary in the following direction. This article is the first article of the theme on social chauvinism in Lithuania.

The authors in the article reveal the positioning of extreme right political parties in the Western world and Central and Eastern Europe by following such ideological basis as nationalism and welfare chauvinism, practically rejecting immigrants and their willingness to use the benefits and services of the mentioned welfare systems in the presented Western as well as Central and Eastern European countries. The authors maintain their position, applying the secondary data from European Social Survey, International Monetary Fund and OECD data as well as interpretations of the authors from different foreign countries. In the end of the article the authors pose the one of the most interesting scientific and practical questions – why the place of the electorate of the "socially excluded" and having low income voters is moving from the left political parties to the side of the extreme right political parties? The further research is necessary in the following direction. This article is the first article of the theme on social chauvinism in Lithuania.

According to the historiographical tradition, Pilėnai Castle was besieged by the army of the Teutonic Knights in 1336. When the defenders of the Castle, led by Duke Margins, realized that it was impossible to defend themselves any longer against the much larger enemy force, they made a decision to commit mass suicide. They did this in preference to being subjugated and enslaved by the Teutonic Order. The author of the article surveys symbolical meanings that the name of Duke Margins acquired in the cultural memory of Lithuania since the beginning of national revival in the 19th century until the end of the 20th century as well as the influence of the discourse of Lithuanian nationalism and alternation of political regimes upon notional transformations of the name of Duke Margins. It is argued that the gravitation of the image of Duke Margiris and Pilėnai Castle which has been persisting in the cultural memory of Lithuania for more than one century testifies that this image has become an example of a sampler Lithuanian heroism and is constantly brought up-to-date in the context of Lithuanian identity first and foremost. The usage of the relevant image of Duke Margins aims at making a response to the challenges made to the Lithuanian identity while the name of the Duke of Pilėnai acquires new symbolic meanings in the cultural memory of Lithuania.

According to the historiographical tradition, Pilėnai Castle was besieged by the army of the Teutonic Knights in 1336. When the defenders of the Castle, led by Duke Margins, realized that it was impossible to defend themselves any longer against the much larger enemy force, they made a decision to commit mass suicide. They did this in preference to being subjugated and enslaved by the Teutonic Order. The author of the article surveys symbolical meanings that the name of Duke Margins acquired in the cultural memory of Lithuania since the beginning of national revival in the 19th century until the end of the 20th century as well as the influence of the discourse of Lithuanian nationalism and alternation of political regimes upon notional transformations of the name of Duke Margins. It is argued that the gravitation of the image of Duke Margiris and Pilėnai Castle which has been persisting in the cultural memory of Lithuania for more than one century testifies that this image has become an example of a sampler Lithuanian heroism and is constantly brought up-to-date in the context of Lithuanian identity first and foremost. The usage of the relevant image of Duke Margins aims at making a response to the challenges made to the Lithuanian identity while the name of the Duke of Pilėnai acquires new symbolic meanings in the cultural memory of Lithuania.

According to the historiographical tradition, Pilėnai Castle was besieged by the army of the Teutonic Knights in 1336. When the defenders of the Castle, led by Duke Margins, realized that it was impossible to defend themselves any longer against the much larger enemy force, they made a decision to commit mass suicide. They did this in preference to being subjugated and enslaved by the Teutonic Order. The author of the article surveys symbolical meanings that the name of Duke Margins acquired in the cultural memory of Lithuania since the beginning of national revival in the 19th century until the end of the 20th century as well as the influence of the discourse of Lithuanian nationalism and alternation of political regimes upon notional transformations of the name of Duke Margins. It is argued that the gravitation of the image of Duke Margiris and Pilėnai Castle which has been persisting in the cultural memory of Lithuania for more than one century testifies that this image has become an example of a sampler Lithuanian heroism and is constantly brought up-to-date in the context of Lithuanian identity first and foremost. The usage of the relevant image of Duke Margins aims at making a response to the challenges made to the Lithuanian identity while the name of the Duke of Pilėnai acquires new symbolic meanings in the cultural memory of Lithuania.

According to the historiographical tradition, Pilėnai Castle was besieged by the army of the Teutonic Knights in 1336. When the defenders of the Castle, led by Duke Margins, realized that it was impossible to defend themselves any longer against the much larger enemy force, they made a decision to commit mass suicide. They did this in preference to being subjugated and enslaved by the Teutonic Order. The author of the article surveys symbolical meanings that the name of Duke Margins acquired in the cultural memory of Lithuania since the beginning of national revival in the 19th century until the end of the 20th century as well as the influence of the discourse of Lithuanian nationalism and alternation of political regimes upon notional transformations of the name of Duke Margins. It is argued that the gravitation of the image of Duke Margiris and Pilėnai Castle which has been persisting in the cultural memory of Lithuania for more than one century testifies that this image has become an example of a sampler Lithuanian heroism and is constantly brought up-to-date in the context of Lithuanian identity first and foremost. The usage of the relevant image of Duke Margins aims at making a response to the challenges made to the Lithuanian identity while the name of the Duke of Pilėnai acquires new symbolic meanings in the cultural memory of Lithuania.

Personality and Philosophy Controversy of M. K. Gandhi in 21st century Modern India Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was one of the most popular 20th century spiritual and political leaders of India. He is widely known for his nonviolent philosophy. He also believed that through satyagraha philosophy he can transform Indian society and ensure long-lasting peace in it. The main problem is that in the Modern India times Gandhi's image is full of controversy - he is widely criticized in public discourses by famous personalities, like Arundhati Roy, Sujatha Gidla and Dalit Diva. This situation is getting worse, because the main political party in current Republic of India is Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is based on hindutva ideology – hindu nationalism, which includes violence, anti-muslim ideology and seeks to make India exclusively only hindu country. Moreover, M. K. Gandhi was killed by Nathuram Godse, which was a member of Hindu Mahasabha organization, which is close to BJP. Through the period of 2014 – 2018, many statues which represented M. K. Gandhi image were eliminated or damaged around the world – from India, Ghana and even in Canada. Popular personalities, like Indian writers and social activists started to criticize M. K. Gandhi personality, moreover, the critique towards M. K. Gandhi transforms into antiGandhi cult. The main object of this paper to analyze, how M. K. Gandhi nonviolent philosophy became controversial in current India context and why his public image has changed. Using hermeneutical and nationalist discourses analysis leads to the conclusion, that BJP do not accept M. K. Gandhi nonviolent and civic nationalism-based ideology, because M. K. Gandhi wanted to unify hindus and muslims, but BJP declared hindu nationalism do not accept any other religions except hinduism. BJP emphasizes, that M. Gandhi can be anti-national because of this muslim-friendly view.

Personality and Philosophy Controversy of M. K. Gandhi in 21st century Modern India Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was one of the most popular 20th century spiritual and political leaders of India. He is widely known for his nonviolent philosophy. He also believed that through satyagraha philosophy he can transform Indian society and ensure long-lasting peace in it. The main problem is that in the Modern India times Gandhi's image is full of controversy - he is widely criticized in public discourses by famous personalities, like Arundhati Roy, Sujatha Gidla and Dalit Diva. This situation is getting worse, because the main political party in current Republic of India is Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is based on hindutva ideology – hindu nationalism, which includes violence, anti-muslim ideology and seeks to make India exclusively only hindu country. Moreover, M. K. Gandhi was killed by Nathuram Godse, which was a member of Hindu Mahasabha organization, which is close to BJP. Through the period of 2014 – 2018, many statues which represented M. K. Gandhi image were eliminated or damaged around the world – from India, Ghana and even in Canada. Popular personalities, like Indian writers and social activists started to criticize M. K. Gandhi personality, moreover, the critique towards M. K. Gandhi transforms into antiGandhi cult. The main object of this paper to analyze, how M. K. Gandhi nonviolent philosophy became controversial in current India context and why his public image has changed. Using hermeneutical and nationalist discourses analysis leads to the conclusion, that BJP do not accept M. K. Gandhi nonviolent and civic nationalism-based ideology, because M. K. Gandhi wanted to unify hindus and muslims, but BJP declared hindu nationalism do not accept any other religions except hinduism. BJP emphasizes, that M. Gandhi can be anti-national because of this muslim-friendly view.

Personality and Philosophy Controversy of M. K. Gandhi in 21st century Modern India Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was one of the most popular 20th century spiritual and political leaders of India. He is widely known for his nonviolent philosophy. He also believed that through satyagraha philosophy he can transform Indian society and ensure long-lasting peace in it. The main problem is that in the Modern India times Gandhi's image is full of controversy - he is widely criticized in public discourses by famous personalities, like Arundhati Roy, Sujatha Gidla and Dalit Diva. This situation is getting worse, because the main political party in current Republic of India is Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is based on hindutva ideology – hindu nationalism, which includes violence, anti-muslim ideology and seeks to make India exclusively only hindu country. Moreover, M. K. Gandhi was killed by Nathuram Godse, which was a member of Hindu Mahasabha organization, which is close to BJP. Through the period of 2014 – 2018, many statues which represented M. K. Gandhi image were eliminated or damaged around the world – from India, Ghana and even in Canada. Popular personalities, like Indian writers and social activists started to criticize M. K. Gandhi personality, moreover, the critique towards M. K. Gandhi transforms into antiGandhi cult. The main object of this paper to analyze, how M. K. Gandhi nonviolent philosophy became controversial in current India context and why his public image has changed. Using hermeneutical and nationalist discourses analysis leads to the conclusion, that BJP do not accept M. K. Gandhi nonviolent and civic nationalism-based ideology, because M. K. Gandhi wanted to unify hindus and muslims, but BJP declared hindu nationalism do not accept any other religions except hinduism. BJP emphasizes, that M. Gandhi can be anti-national because of this muslim-friendly view.

Personality and Philosophy Controversy of M. K. Gandhi in 21st century Modern India Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was one of the most popular 20th century spiritual and political leaders of India. He is widely known for his nonviolent philosophy. He also believed that through satyagraha philosophy he can transform Indian society and ensure long-lasting peace in it. The main problem is that in the Modern India times Gandhi's image is full of controversy - he is widely criticized in public discourses by famous personalities, like Arundhati Roy, Sujatha Gidla and Dalit Diva. This situation is getting worse, because the main political party in current Republic of India is Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is based on hindutva ideology – hindu nationalism, which includes violence, anti-muslim ideology and seeks to make India exclusively only hindu country. Moreover, M. K. Gandhi was killed by Nathuram Godse, which was a member of Hindu Mahasabha organization, which is close to BJP. Through the period of 2014 – 2018, many statues which represented M. K. Gandhi image were eliminated or damaged around the world – from India, Ghana and even in Canada. Popular personalities, like Indian writers and social activists started to criticize M. K. Gandhi personality, moreover, the critique towards M. K. Gandhi transforms into antiGandhi cult. The main object of this paper to analyze, how M. K. Gandhi nonviolent philosophy became controversial in current India context and why his public image has changed. Using hermeneutical and nationalist discourses analysis leads to the conclusion, that BJP do not accept M. K. Gandhi nonviolent and civic nationalism-based ideology, because M. K. Gandhi wanted to unify hindus and muslims, but BJP declared hindu nationalism do not accept any other religions except hinduism. BJP emphasizes, that M. Gandhi can be anti-national because of this muslim-friendly view.

The article deals with political ideology of the Theosophical Society founded by H elena Petrovna Blavatsky and Henry Steel Olcott in 1875, and its contribution to Indian nationalism and Hindu and Buddhist religious revivalism at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries. The article aims to reveal how modern theosophy in India became an integral part of a wider movement of neo-Hinduism fighting against Christian missionaries and British colonialism, which helped to provide Indian nationalists with legitimating ideology, new-found confidence, experience of organization, contacts and network, all of which they used for political purposes. Since theosophy both eulogized the ancient faith of India and also interpreted it integrating modern scientific doctrines, such as evolution, it had an obvious appeal to western-educated Indians by helping them to solve an intense problem of cultural dislocation – tension between the religious tradition in which they had been raised and the apparent scientific and ethical rationalism of the West.

The article deals with political ideology of the Theosophical Society founded by H elena Petrovna Blavatsky and Henry Steel Olcott in 1875, and its contribution to Indian nationalism and Hindu and Buddhist religious revivalism at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries. The article aims to reveal how modern theosophy in India became an integral part of a wider movement of neo-Hinduism fighting against Christian missionaries and British colonialism, which helped to provide Indian nationalists with legitimating ideology, new-found confidence, experience of organization, contacts and network, all of which they used for political purposes. Since theosophy both eulogized the ancient faith of India and also interpreted it integrating modern scientific doctrines, such as evolution, it had an obvious appeal to western-educated Indians by helping them to solve an intense problem of cultural dislocation – tension between the religious tradition in which they had been raised and the apparent scientific and ethical rationalism of the West.

The article deals with political ideology of the Theosophical Society founded by H elena Petrovna Blavatsky and Henry Steel Olcott in 1875, and its contribution to Indian nationalism and Hindu and Buddhist religious revivalism at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries. The article aims to reveal how modern theosophy in India became an integral part of a wider movement of neo-Hinduism fighting against Christian missionaries and British colonialism, which helped to provide Indian nationalists with legitimating ideology, new-found confidence, experience of organization, contacts and network, all of which they used for political purposes. Since theosophy both eulogized the ancient faith of India and also interpreted it integrating modern scientific doctrines, such as evolution, it had an obvious appeal to western-educated Indians by helping them to solve an intense problem of cultural dislocation – tension between the religious tradition in which they had been raised and the apparent scientific and ethical rationalism of the West.

The article deals with political ideology of the Theosophical Society founded by H elena Petrovna Blavatsky and Henry Steel Olcott in 1875, and its contribution to Indian nationalism and Hindu and Buddhist religious revivalism at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries. The article aims to reveal how modern theosophy in India became an integral part of a wider movement of neo-Hinduism fighting against Christian missionaries and British colonialism, which helped to provide Indian nationalists with legitimating ideology, new-found confidence, experience of organization, contacts and network, all of which they used for political purposes. Since theosophy both eulogized the ancient faith of India and also interpreted it integrating modern scientific doctrines, such as evolution, it had an obvious appeal to western-educated Indians by helping them to solve an intense problem of cultural dislocation – tension between the religious tradition in which they had been raised and the apparent scientific and ethical rationalism of the West.