Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "Soviet historiography" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-7 z 7
    Tytuł:
    Stalin and the Pamphlet “Falsifiers Of History”: “Interpretations”, Guidelines and Their Implementation.
    Autorzy:
    Szumski, Jan
    Musiał, Bogdan
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2116034.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2022
    Wydawca:
    Instytut Pamięci Narodowej, Komisja Ścigania Zbrodni przeciwko Narodowi Polskiemu
    Tematy:
    Hitler-Stalin Pact
    Nazi–Soviet Relations
    Soviet historiography
    Russia’s Politics of History
    Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact
    Opis:
    The article focuses on the background of the pamphlet ‘Falsifiers of History. An Historical Note’ issued by the Soviet Information Bureau in 1948. The book was personally edited and largely hand-written by Joseph Stalin. His involvement was not fully known until now. In this paper, the authors deciphered, translated and compared the text of the published pamphlet. It shows Stalin’s guidelines in the official interpretation of the causes of World War II and the reasons for the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Throughout the post-war period the official Soviet narrative regarding the origins of the of World War II were largely based on a set of guidelines contained in a pamphlet ‘Falsifiers of History’. Currently, the neo-Stalinist historical narrative concerning the origins of World War II is promoted by the Russian officials. Nevertheless, not all Russian historians share these views, and many assess the Hitler-Stalin Pact in a much more critical way.
    Źródło:
    Institute of National Remembrance Review; 2021-2022, 4; 243-287
    2658-1566
    Pojawia się w:
    Institute of National Remembrance Review
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Рижский мирный договор в советской и современной белорусской историографии
    The Treaty of Riga in Soviet and modern Belarusian historiography
    Autorzy:
    Огородников, Александр
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/27311760.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2022
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w Krakowie
    Tematy:
    Riga Peace Treaty
    historiography
    Soviet historiography
    modern Belarusian historiography
    Soviet-Polish war
    Traktat Pokojowy w Rydze
    wojna radziecko-polska
    historiografia
    historiografia radziecka
    współczesna historiografia białoruska
    Opis:
    The Riga Peace Treaty was a very important political fact for the whole of Eastern Europe and for this reason it began to figure in Soviet historiography almost immediately after its signing. This interest on the part of the Soviet government in the treaty was justified by the desire to ‘soften’ the results and ‘explain’ the reasons for the defeat in the Soviet-Polish war. The war, which was very important from an ideological point of view for Soviet Russia and was initially presented as ‘the victorious march of bolshevism to the West’. At the same time, despite the ideologization of Soviet historiography on the issue of the Riga Peace Treaty, these works contain factual material and also deserve critical analysis. In modern Belarusian historiography, despite the enormous importance of issues related to the Riga Peace Treaty, there are still no elaborated and generalizing research works of an encyclopedic and dissertation nature that consider this issue from a critical and non-ideologized point of view. Such works should be based on the achievements of global scholarship, take into account different points of view and reveal the true reasons, conditions and consequences of the conclusion of the Riga Peace Treaty between Poland and Soviet Russia for Belarusians and Belarusian lands. At the same time, modern Belarusian historiography is in continuous development and, of course, in the near future, it will be replenished with new scientific works, including those revealing the problems of the Riga Peace Treaty.
    Źródło:
    Res Gestae. Czasopismo Historyczne; 2022, 14; 232-242
    2450-4475
    Pojawia się w:
    Res Gestae. Czasopismo Historyczne
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    The Year of Africa Remembered: Horizons of Change in African Studies 50 years after the Year of Africa
    Autorzy:
    Tolmacheva, Marina
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/969735.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2013-12-10
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydział Orientalistyczny. Katedra Języków i Kultur Afryki
    Tematy:
    African studies
    Year of Africa
    Cold War historiography
    intellectual history
    Soviet Union - intellectual life
    Opis:
    The year 2010 marked the passage of 50 years since the Year of Africa in 1960. For the world, and especially for Africans, 2010 became the year of soccer, the year of the Cup. Africanists taking a look back at the 50 years of African Studies can take heart in the healthy dynamics of African Studies in the United States, but in the year when African Studies Association discusses the theme of African Diaspora, in the year of massive budget cuts resulting in elimination of whole departments of foreign languages in the United States, they cannot be altogether happy with the state of academic African studies. The retrospective may be pleasantly nostalgic, but the vibrancy of today’s African studies has come from unanticipated sources and the movement has not been linear or carefully programmed. The wave of independence that rose across Africa since the late 1950s created a worldwide anticipation of great things to follow the wonderful start. The closely related development of African studies as an academic field ensued. Among the factors unanticipated by the experts of the day was the impact of the Cold War on the postcolonial development of African studies in the United States, in Europe, and in the Soviet Union. The author is a participant in the field of African historical studies both in the United States and in Russia. These two perspectives and selected stops along the way will guide a personalized discussion of the crucial events and significant trends in African studies as observed from the Soviet and American academic circles.
    Źródło:
    Studies in African Languages and Cultures; 2013, 47; 7-30
    2545-2134
    2657-4187
    Pojawia się w:
    Studies in African Languages and Cultures
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Enn Tarvel’s International Reach Through His Works on the Polish Rule in Livonia
    Autorzy:
    Seppel, Marten
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/32388145.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2023-12-31
    Wydawca:
    Towarzystwo Naukowe w Toruniu
    Tematy:
    Enn Tarvel
    Polish rule in Livonia
    Soviet academic system
    agrarian history
    Marxist-Leninist historiography
    Polish-Estonian scholarly cooperation
    Opis:
    Enn Tarvel (1932–2021) is widely regarded as one of the greatest and most erudite Estonian historians. His expertise encompassed a wide range of historical topics, including medieval and early modern history, with a particular focus on the Polish rule in Livonia. This article provides insights into Tarvel’s educational background, his self-taught approach to research, and the challenges he faced during his career due to his reluctance to join the party. Despite his significant impact on Estonian scholarship, Tarvel’s international reach was somewhat limited due to the constraints of the Soviet academic system. Notably, Poland played a crucial role in his academic career. Tarvel’s first dissertation, later published as a book, focused on the management of Polish state manors and the peasantry in southern Estonia during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. This research earned him recognition in Estonia and abroad, particularly in the Eastern Bloc. Tarvel was one of the first Estonian historians to submit his contributions to Polish historical journals. He published articles and other pieces in, for example, Kwartalnik Historyczny and Zapiski Historyczne. The vital role played by his Polish contacts for his academic development is emphasised not only by those articles but also by his research stays in Poland in 1959 and 1969 and his correspondence with Polish scholars in the 1960s and 1970s. Access to Polish archives and libraries facilitated his meticulous research. Tarvel also participated in numerous international conferences. However, he was not always able to attend them due to the constraints imposed by the Soviet regime.
    Źródło:
    Zapiski Historyczne; 2023, 88, 4; 93-117
    0044-1791
    2449-8637
    Pojawia się w:
    Zapiski Historyczne
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Toward a New Concept of Progressive Art: Art History in the Service of Modernisation in the Late Socialist Period. An Estonian Case
    Autorzy:
    Kodres, Krista
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/909522.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2019-12-20
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
    Tematy:
    Socialist art history and historiography
    Soviet studies
    Thaw era and modernisation
    centre (Moscow) and periphery (Estonian SSR) relations
    art and ideology
    progressiveness in art
    Opis:
    The paper deals with renewal of socialist art history in the Post-Stalinist period in Soviet Union. The modernisation of art history is discussed based on the example of the Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic (Estonian SSR), where art historians were forced to accept the Soviets’ centrally constructed Marxist-Leninist aesthetic and approach to art and art history. In the art context, the idea of progressiveness began to be reconsidered. In previous discourse, progress was linked with the “realist” artistic method that sprang from a progressive social order. Now, however, art historians found new arguments for accepting different cultures of form, both historical and contemporary, and often these arguments were “discovered” in Marxism itself. As a result, from the middle of 1950’s Soviet art historians fell into two camps in interpreting Realism: the dogmatic and revisionist, and the latter was embraced in Estonia. In 1967, a work was published by the accomplished artist Ott Kangilaski and his nephew, the art historian Jaak Kangilaski: the Kunsti kukeaabits – Basic Art Primer – subtitled “Fundamental Knowledge of Art and Art History.” In its 200 pages, Jaak Kangilaski’s Primer laid out the art history of the world. Kangilaski also chimed in, publishing an article in 1965 entitled “Disputes in Marxist Aesthetics” in the leading Estonian SSR literary journal Looming (Creation). In this paper the Art Primer is under scrutiny and the deviations and shifts in Kangilaski’s approach from the existing socialist art history canon are introduced. For Kangilaski the defining element of art was not the economic base but the “Zeitgeist,” the spirit of the era, which, as he wrote, “does not mean anything mysterious or supernatural but is simply the sum of the social views that objectively existed and exist in each phase of the development of humankind.” Thus, he openly united the “hostile classes” of the social formations and laid a foundation for the rise of common art characteristics, denoted by the term “style.” As is evidenced by various passages in the text, art transforms pursuant to the “will-to-art” (Kunstwollen) characteristic of the entire human society. Thus, under conditions of a fragile discursive pluralism in Soviet Union, quite symbolic concepts and values from formalist Western art history were “smuggled in”: concepts and values that the professional reader certainly recognised, although no names of “bourgeois” authors were mentioned. Kangilaski relied on assistance in interpretation from two grand masters of the Vienna school of art history: Alois Riegl’s term Kunstwollen and the Zeitgeist concept from Max Dvořák (Zeitgeist, Geistesgeschichte). In particular, the declaration of art’s linear, teleological “self-development” can be considered to be inspiration from the two. But Kangilaski’s reading list obviously also included Principles of Art History by Heinrich Wölfflin, who was declared an exemplary formalist art historian in earlier official Soviet historiography. Thaw-era discursive cocktail in art historiography sometimes led Kangilaski to logical contradictions. In spite of it, the Primer was an attempt to modernise the Stalinist approach to art history. In the Primer, the litmus test of the engagement with change was the new narrative of 20th century art history and the illustrative material that depicted “formalist bourgeois” artworks; 150 of the 279 plates are reproductions of Modernist avant-garde works from the early 20th century on. Put into the wider context, one can claim that art history writing in the Estonian SSR was deeply engaged with the ambivalent aims of Late Socialist Soviet politics, politics that was feared and despised but that, beginning in the late 1950s, nevertheless had shown the desire to move on and change.
    Źródło:
    Artium Quaestiones; 2019, 30; 211-223
    0239-202X
    Pojawia się w:
    Artium Quaestiones
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Polskie formacje wojskowe okresu I wojny światowej i Wojsko Polskie z lat 1918–1939 – węzłowe problemy oraz stan badań i postulaty badawcze
    Polish military formations from the period of the First World War and the Polish Army in years 1918-1939 - crucial problems and the stage of research as well as research postulates
    Польские воинские формирования периода Первой мировой войны и Войско Польское 1918-1939 гг. – ключевые проблемы, обзор исследова¬ний и исследовательские принципы
    Autorzy:
    Smoliński, Aleksander
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/482791.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2017
    Wydawca:
    Muzeum Wojska w Białymstoku. Ośrodek Badań Historii Wojskowej
    Tematy:
    Polish military formations in the First World War
    Polish-Soviet War
    Polish Armed Forces
    modernization of Polish Army
    Polish military historiography
    Польские военные формации Первой мировой войны
    советско-польская война
    Вооружённые Силы Речи Посполитой
    модернизация польской армии
    польская военная историография
    Opis:
    The article presents the stage of research concerning Polish professional litera¬ture which was published before the end of September 2014, mainly in the form of extensive footnotes. Apart from what constituted obvious issues, it does not present the complete hitherto work of Polish historiography and the full catalogue of trans¬lations of works by foreign authors concerning mostly the armed forces of our then neighbours. What is more, in the case of selected major topics of this study, the author cited a limited number of foreign-language publication as well which dealt either with the Red Army or with Reichswehr or Wehrmacht. As a result of three partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth the inde¬pendent Polish state disappeared from the map of Europe for 123 years. Till October 1831 the Polish armed forces continue existing, although in an abridged form. Conse¬quently, between the autumn of 1831 and the late autumn of 1918 there were no for¬mation of the Polish Army dependent solely on Polish, national, independent political centres and following Polish national interests exclusively. As a result, the continuity of the development as regards the national armed forces was broken. For that reason the Republic of Poland had to establish armed forces basically from scratch. In this extensive article the author addresses almost all issues corresponding to reconstruction, warfare, training, equipment and outlining as well as expansion of the Polish Army during the time of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The extensive pro¬fessional literature devoted to this subject suggests that a significant part of the issues described in the work have already been the subjects of more or less reliable analysis. Naturally, this does not mean that there are no problems requiring further exploration and source research. In many cases even a large number of bibliographic items are not sufficient to answer a complete range of questions. This is the case, for example, as regards Polish military formation in the East operating in years 1914-1918 which have been so far studied exclusively based on source materials located in the country and using Polish professional literature devoted to the subject. Despite recent literature increasing rapidly in numbers the situation is similar as regards other issues connected to the Polish Army. Consequently, Polish historiog¬raphy faces significant problems in determining the scale of Polish military effort in the period 1918-1921 and the size of the victory in the Polish-Soviet war of 1919- 1921. The situation is comparable with the one concerning the relationship between the status of the Polish armed forces at the peace rate and their development and modernization from 1921 to 1936-1939 as well as the level of armaments of Ger¬many and USSR. And it is indisputable that there was connection between these phenomena. In the meantime, in hitherto Polish historical professional literature, researchers often seem to abstain from these dependencies. This results in a very unilateral and little objectified description of reality which practically lacks knowl¬edge on real or potential opponents of the Polish Army.
    Представленный в статье, преимущественно в виде обширных коммента¬риев, обзор исследований касается исключительно польскоязычной литера¬туры, изданной до конца сентября 2014 г. Кроме того (и это очевидно), она не представляет всей польской историографии и не приводит полного перечня переводов работ иностранных авторов, касающихся, прежде всего, воору¬женных сил наших соседей того времени. Кроме того, по некоторым важным вопросам данной работы автор приводит ограниченное количество иностран¬ных исследований, посвященных, напр., Красной армии, Рейхсверу и Вермахту. В результате трех разделов Речи Посполитой Обоих Народов на 123 года с карты Европы исчезло независимое польское государство. До октября 1831 г. сохранились польские вооруженные силы, хотя и в ограниченном формате. Таким образом, с осени 1831 г. до поздней осени 1918 г. не было ни одного формирования Войска Польского, зависящего только от польских, националь¬ных и независимых политических центров и защищающих исключительно польские национальные интересы. Таким образом, была прервана непрерыв¬ность развития национальных вооруженных сил, что привело к тому, что, как и Республику Польша, их необходимо было возрождать почти с нуля. В статье автор затрагивает почти все вопросы, связанные с возрождением, военными действиями, обучением, оснащением и обмундированием, а также с реорганизацией Войска Польского в период Второй Речи Посполитой. При¬веденная обширная библиография по данной теме позволяет утверждать, что преимущественное большинство обозначенных вопросов уже было предме¬том в большей или меньшей степени объективного анализа. Однако это не означает, что уже не осталось проблем, требующих дальнейших поисков и исследования источников. Зачастую даже обширная библиография не в состо¬янии ответить на целый ряд вопросов. Так складывается ситуация с польскими воинскими формированиями на Востоке 1914-1918 гг., которые до настоящего времени исследовались исключительно по источникам, имеющимся в Польше, а также по польскоязычным источникам по данной теме. Подобным образом, несмотря на огромный рост в последнее время числа работ, выглядит ситуация с оценкой вопросов, связанных с Войском Поль¬ским. В результате в польской историографии возникают серьезные про¬блемы с определением масштабов усилий польской армии в 1918-1921 гг. и значимости победы в советско-польской войне 1919-1921 гг. Подобным оба¬зом выглядит оценка соотношения состояния польских вооруженных сил в мирное время, а также их развитием и модернизацией в 1921-1936-1939 гг., и уровнем вооружения Германии и СССР. Очевидно, что между данными явле-ниями существовала причинно-следственная связь. Тем не менее, в польской исторической литературе исследователи зачастую, кажется, абстрагируются от данной зависимости, что приводит к весьма одностороннему и мало объ¬ективному описанию действительности, в которой практически нет объектив¬ного знания о реальных и потенциальных противниках Войска Польского.
    Źródło:
    Studia z Dziejów Wojskowości; 2017, 6; 179-295
    2299-3916
    Pojawia się w:
    Studia z Dziejów Wojskowości
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Второй Всебелорусский конгресс (июнь 1944): забытая страница истории наших восточных соседей
    The Second All-Byelorussian Congress (June 1944): a forgotten page of our eastern neighbors’ history
    Autorzy:
    Червонная (Czerwonnaja), Светлана (Swietłana)
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2189177.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2014-12-31
    Wydawca:
    Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
    Tematy:
    rezultaty II wojny światowej
    ruchy narodowe ludów Związku Radzieckiego w nadzwyczajnych warunkach wojny i okupacji
    kontrasty interpretacji historiograficznej wydarzeń lat 40. XX wieku
    Results of the II World War
    national movements of the Soviet Union peoples in the war’s and occupation’s extraordinary circumstances
    historiography’s contrasts in the events’ interpretation of the 1940s years
    Opis:
    The second All-Belarusian Congress (after the First Congress in 1917, which laid the foundations of the Belarusian national statehood) was held in Minsk on June 27, 1944 on the eve of Soviet Army invasion in the capital of Belarus (‘liberation’ of Minsk from Nazi occupation). In Soviet historiography, this Congress was treated unambiguously negative as a criminal ‘gathering’ of Hitler’s henchmen. Official historiography of Soviet Belarus ignored this event. Several generations of citizens grew up in the post-war decades who had no idea about the Second Congress, its decisions and speeches that were voiced from the tribune. The task of overcoming this ignorance is still relevant which, of course, does not exclude the development of modern critical thinking about political and ideological positions of the national movement leaders of that dramatic era. This problem is connected with concurrent need to revise the view at the Second All-Belarusian Congress, which was dominant in science and political journalism of Eastern European countries, particularly in Polish historical literature – until 1989 in Polish emigre circles and in the last decades in Polen itself. Here this Congress was well know (down to the smallest detail in the memory of eyewitnesses of what happened in June 1944) and discussed openly. Irreconcilable contradictions between Poland and Belarus and anti-Polish sentiment of the Congress were often emphasized. Allegedly, Congrees participants were more concerned about the imaginary ‘Polish threat’ rather than salvation of their country from the Nazi and Soviet occupation in those tragic days (the last days of their stay in the native land). Based on the sources found in archives and examined by the author, primarily the full transcript of the Congress, we can imagine that the content and emotional speeches of Congress delegates (chairman Yauhim Kipel, head of the Belarusian Central Rada Radoslav Austroysky / Ostrovsky, Archbishop of Mogilev and Minsk – Filafey, General Constance Ezavitov, Master M. Shkelionk and culture referent – Nadzeiya Mizkevich) were aimed at protecting the Belarusian national statehood and culture against the threat of degeneration in the USSR. Great moral value in the perspective of revival of the Belarusian state and political activities in the strategy of the Belarusian emigration in the postwar world had Declaration ‘On breakup with the Bolshevik Moscow’ passed by the Congress. The myth engrafted by communist propaganda that the Second All-Belarusian Congress was initiated by the Nazi occupants of Belarus should be dispelled in today’s public consciousness. In fact, the leaders of the Belarusian national movement managed to convene Congress in spite of resistance, prohibitions and unwillingness of the occupation authorities (which is why it only became possible in the last days before the entrance of the Soviet Army in Minsk). Belarussians were the only peoples of the former Soviet Union (who found themselves ‘between a rock and a hard place’ of rivaling forces during the Second World War – Nazi Germany and the Kremlin), who managed to articulate their national objectives and claims primarily related to public integrity and independence of Belarus at the level of the national congress. The very date of the Second All-Belarusian Congress (June 27th) signifies an important additional perspective, which should be considered in the history of the peoples of Eastern Europe of 1944. It turns out that you can do a lot in the last minute. The trail of All-Belarusian Congress, conducted in emergency circumstances, should not be erased from the memory of the Belarusian people and the international community. Comparative analysis of the Congress delegates’ speeches and those of leaders of Belarusian Popular Front ‘Adrazhenne / Renaissance’ that were made in Minsk at the turn of 1980–1990s (for example, at a rally in memory of victims of Stalin’s repression in Minsk on November 1, 1987) shows that there is a political relay race passing from the First to the Second All-Belarusian Congress, to the Belarusian emigration of 1940–1950s (especially to international ‘Promethean League of Atlantic Charta’, speaking also on behalf of the Belarusian people), to democratic forces of the country, entered the historical arena in the era of perestroika.
    Drugi Wszechbiałoruski Kongres (podczas Pierwszego Kongresu z 1917 r. ustalono podstawy białoruskiego państwowości narodowej) odbył się w Mińsku 27 czerwca 1944 r., dosłownie w przeddzień inwazji Armii Radzieckiej na stolicę Białorusi (jej „wyzwolenia” spod okupacji niemiecko-faszystowskiej). Radziecka historiografia oceniała go jednoznacznie negatywnie jako przestępcze zbiegowisko hitlerowskich wspólników a oficjalna białoruska nauka historyczna ignorowała to wydarzenie. W ciągu powojennych dziesięcioleci narodziło się już kilka generacji obywateli tego kraju, którzy nigdy nie słyszeli o tym kongresie i o treści przyjętych przez niego uchwał, deklaracji i wygłoszonych z jego trybuny mów. Przezwyciężenie tej „niewiedzy” pozostaje do dziś aktualnym zadaniem, co – rzecz jasna – nie wyklucza wypracowania w naszych czasach krytycznego stosunku do politycznej i ideologicznej pozycji liderów narodowego ruchu tej dramatycznej epoki. Jest ono związane z koniecznością ponownego rozpatrzenia punktu widzenia na Drugi Wszechbiałoruski Kongres, który ustalił się w nauce i publicystyce Europy Wschodniej, w tym w polskiej literaturze historycznej – do 1989 r. przede wszystkim na uchodźstwie, w środowisku emigracji politycznej, natomiast w ostatnich dekadach w samej Polsce. Tutaj ten kongres był znany (nawet w drobnych szczegółach, które pozostały w pamięci świadków tego, co zdarzyło się w czerwcu 1944 r.), pisano o nim często, ale zazwyczaj akcentowano jedynie trudne do pogodzenia białorusko-polskie animozje, antypolskie nastroje delegatów kongresu, w tych tragicznych czasach (ostatnie dni ich obecności w ojczyźnie) rzekomo bardziej zaniepokojonych „polskim zagrożeniem” niż zainteresowanych uratowaniem ojczyzny przed nazistowską i bolszewicką okupacją. Na podstawie zbadanych przez autorkę źródeł archiwalnych, przede wszystkim autentycznego stenogramu posiedzeń kongresu, udowodniono, że treść i patos emocjonalny wystąpień delegatów (przewodniczącego Jauchima Kapela, prezydenta Białoruskiej Centralnej Rady Radosława Ostrowskiego, arcybiskupa mohylewskiego i mińskiego Fiłafeja, generała Konstancyja Jezawitowa, magistra M. Szkielonka, referentki do spraw kultury Nadziei Mickiewicz) wynikały z konieczności obrony białoruskiej narodowej państwowości i kultury przed zagrożeniem ich zniszczenia przez ZSRR. Wielkie znaczenie moralne – w perspektywie przyszłości, odrodzenia państwa białoruskiego i w strategii działalności politycznej białoruskiej emigracji w powojennym świecie – miała jednogłośnie uchwalona przez kongres deklaracja „O zerwaniu stosunków z bolszewicką Moskwą”. Współcześnie należy obalić stworzony przez komunistyczną propagandę mit, jakoby inicjatorami Drugiego Wszechbiałoruskiego Kongresu byli nazistowscy okupanci Białorusi. W rzeczywistości liderzy białoruskiego ruchu narodowego zorganizowali ten kongres wbrew oporowi, zakazom i niechęci władz okupacyjnych (i właśnie dlatego udało się zwołać go dosłownie kilka dni przed wejściem Armii Radzieckiej do Mińska). Przy tym Białorusini są jedynym narodem dawnego ZSRR, które znalazł się „między młotem a kowadłem” rywalizujących ze sobą sił hitlerowskich Niemiec i Kremla, narodem, któremu udało się sformułować narodowe zadania i cele, przede wszystkim dotyczące państwowej integralności i niezależności Białorusi, na poziomie uchwał ogólnonarodowego zjazdu. Już sama data przeprowadzenia Drugiego Wszechbiałoruskiego Kongresu wskazuje na ważny aspekt, w którym musimy rozpatrywać 1944 r. w historii narodów Europy Wschodniej: nawet w ostatniej chwili można zrobić bardzo dużo, a ślad Drugiego Wszechbiałoruskiego Kongresu, który odbył się w nadzwyczajnych i dramatycznych okolicznościach, nie powinien być zatarty w pamięci narodu białoruskiego i świata. Analiza porównawcza wystąpień delegatów tego kongresu z mowami liderów Białoruskiego Frontu Ludowego „Адражэньне” („Odrodzenie”), wygłoszonymi w Mińsku pod koniec lat 80. (na przykład na wiecu poświęconym pamięci ofiar represji stalinowskich w Mińsku 1 listopada 1987 r.), wskazuje, że w wielu kwestiach można dostrzec sztafetę polityczną od Pierwszego do Drugiego Wszechbiałoruskiego Kongresu oraz do białoruskiej emigracji lat 40. i 50. (przede wszystkim do Prometejskiej Ligi Karty Atlantyckiej, która działała również w imieniu narodu białoruskiego), a także do tych demokratycznych sił Białorusi, które pojawiły się w czasach „pierestrojki”.
    Źródło:
    Studia Orientalne; 2014, 2(6); 215-240
    2299-1999
    Pojawia się w:
    Studia Orientalne
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-7 z 7

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies