PRIVATE LIFE AND PRIVATE PROPERTY

2012 ◽  
pp. 315-340
Author(s):  
Eileen Power
1995 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 275-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Waters

The Bolsheviks considered the family to be a minor matter. The ABC of Communism, a popular exposition of Bolshevik Marxism published shortly after the October Revolution, detailed the economic and political institutions of Soviet Russia with only a passing reference to the public services that would emancipate women in the future society.1 Its authors, Nikolai Bukharin and Evgenii Preobrazhenskii, understood the revolutionary process chiefly as the by-product of economic development and expected socialism to come through the manipulation of economic mechanisms by central government, and in this they echoed the views of their party. The Bolshevik scenario did not preclude the ‘participation of the masses’ to use the vocabulary of the times. Individuals, women as well as men, were to enjoy unprecedented access to the political process, and as masters of the nation's resources would decide matters of state, each acting as part of the whole, or more exactly as part of a number of collectivities, first and foremost as members of the proletariat, but also as members of other groups including nationality, youth and women. While families in the past had played a crucial role in the creation and transmission of private property, with the overthrow of the exploitative capitalist system they would cease to function as providers of economic and psychological welfare. Instead the individual's social place and action would be determined by class and, to a lesser extent, by ethnicity, age and gender. Families belonged to the superstructure and were symptom rather than cause; they adapted to the needs of society, changing in response to the transformation of economic relations. Families, in other words, could look after themselves, and appropriate forms of private life would evolve without much outside intervention.


Author(s):  
Christine Talbot

This chapter discusses anti-Mormon literature from its beginnings in domestic fiction. Anti-Mormons objected to polygamy not only because they believed it promoted licentiousness and degraded its participants but, perhaps of deeper social consequence, because it also undercut the distinctions between public and private that middle-class white Americans so highly prized. Plural marriage upset the private intimacy of romantic love and introduced outside influence into the home circle. Indeed, Anti-Mormons claimed that under polygamy, public and private merged together, such that neither the home nor the polity could exist in a viable form. Moreover, if monogamous private life created and maintained the good citizen, then the perversions of Mormon polygamy did the opposite; it turned privacy into religious despotism, private property into socialism, and citizens into blind followers incapable of independent thought.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 91-108
Author(s):  
Madhu Giri

Jat Nasodhanu Jogiko is a famous mocking proverb to denote the caste status of Sanyasi because the renouncer has given up traditional caste rituals set by socio-cultural institutions. In other cultural terms, being Sanyasi means having dissociation himself/herself with whatever caste career or caste-based social rank one might imagine. To explore the philosophical foundation of Sanyasi, they sacrificed caste rituals and fire (symbol of power, desire, and creation). By the virtues of sacrifice, Sanyasi set images of universalism, higher than caste order, and otherworldly being. Therefore, one should not ask the renouncer caste identity. Traditionally, Sanyasi lived in Akhada or Matha, and leadership, including ownership of the Matha transformed from Guru to Chela. On the contrary, Dasnami Mahanta started marital and private life, which is paradoxical to the philosophy of Sanyasi. Very few of them are living in Matha, but the ownership of the property of Mathatrans formed from father to son. The land and property of many Mathas transformed from religious Guthi to private property. In terms of cultural practices, Dasnami Sanyasi adopted high caste culture and rituals in their everyday life. Old Muluki Ain 1854 ranked them under Tagadhari, although they did not assert twice-born caste in Nepal. Central Bureau of Statistics, including other government institutions of Nepal, listed Dasnamiunder the line of Chhetri and Thakuri. The main objective of the paper is to explore the transformation of Dasnami institutional characteristics and status from caste renunciation identity to caste rejoinder and from images of monasticism, celibacy, universalism, otherworldly orientation to marital, individualistic lay life. Both philosophical orientation and behaviors are transformed. Who are the Dasnami Sanyasi? Why did the Dasnami Sanyasis campaign for the identity? How has the Dasnami Sanyasi been changing? Based on key informant interviews, observations in different Dasnami Sanyasi communities, their historical institutions, and self-reflection as a member of Dasnami Sanyasiare methods of data collection.  


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Regina Kempen ◽  
Karsten Mueller ◽  
Tammo Straatmann ◽  
Kate Hattrup ◽  
Sven-Oliver Spiess
Keyword(s):  

2000 ◽  
pp. 60-67
Author(s):  
M. M. Nikitenko

The inclusion of Eastern Slavs in the sphere of religious and cultural influences of Byzantium was a tremendous event both in national and in world history. Since then, the main center of the culture of Kievan Rus, incorporating a complex of ideas and functions of the spiritual, public and private life of ancient Russian society, became the Eastern Christian temple in its local version


2007 ◽  
pp. 4-26
Author(s):  
G. Yavlinsky

Results of privatization campaign in 1990’s continue to meet strong opposition from a very considerable part of Russian people and authorities actually refuse to consider the rights of private owners legitimate and not subject to violation. One of the reasons for this, besides historical tradition, is a specific nature of Russian privatization of 1990’s. The article brings to discussion a set of measures aimed at overcoming its negative consequences. While insisting on the need to honor all previous government obligations and commitments, the paper proposes a one-time special tax (windfall tax) to be levied on those who benefited most from privatization deals that were not just and fair, and special rules to be set for the use and sale of economic assets of national importance. The author also considers possible ways to legitimize private property, as well as chances to achieve а broad public consensus on this issue in Russia.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document