Publishing in the USSR and Yugoslavia

1975 ◽  
Vol 421 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-129
Author(s):  
Edward E. Booher
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Publishing House ◽  
Market Price ◽  
Book Publishing ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Ruling Party

Book publishing in Eastern Europe is a large enterprise dominated by the USSR in style and organization. While the Soviet influence is generally thought to be one of censorship principally, this influence resulted in other changes in most Eastern European nations following their communization shortly after World War II. Censorship exists wherever there is communist rule—or, for that matter, wherever there exists a single ruling party. The influence of the Soviet Union on publishing, however, also extended into the areas of author payments, publishing house organization, and the distribution of books. Yugoslavia was under this influence until her break with Russia in 1948. However, starting in the early 1950s, book publishing followed the pattern of general change in Yugoslavia's economic and political systems. Mass decentralization occurred, and the market-price system was gradually introduced. Moral censorship slowly disappeared, and political control of what was published was minimized. It is impossible to judge at this point the full impact of these two essentially different publishing systems operating under governments controlled by Communist parties. In this publisher's opinion, however, the Soviet system assists in perpetuating a closed, monolithic society, while Yugoslavia's apparently assists in developing an open society that could lead to economic and political democracy.

Lithuania

2019 ◽  
pp. 225-240
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Private Property ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Communal Property ◽  
Almost All

During World War II, the independent Republic of Lithuania was attacked and formally annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940. It was subsequently invaded by Germany in 1941 until Soviet troops re-entered the country in 1944. Between 1939 and 1943, approximately 90–95 percent of Lithuania’s vibrant prewar Jewish community of 160,000 was murdered. Lithuania is one of the few European countries to enact restitution legislation since the Terezin Declaration was drafted in 2009. Despite passage of its communal property law in 2011, restitution of private and heirless property in the country is still an unsettled issue. Unlike its Baltic neighbors, Estonia and Latvia, Lithuania limits private property restitution to citizens of Lithuania. Lithuania, like its Baltic neighbors and almost all Eastern European states, has no effective heirless property legislation. Lithuania endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

scholarly journals Kto wygrał II wojnę światową, a kto przegrał pokój? Refleksje na kanwie 70. rocznicy zakończenia II wojny światowej

2016 ◽  
pp. 11-34
Author(s):  
Józef M. Fiszer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Eastern European Countries

This article is an attempt to answer the questions that have long been bothering historians, political scientists, sociologists and lawyers, as well as ordinary people, nationals of the former anti-Hitler coalition and members of the fascist Berlin-Rome-Tokyo coalition: namely, who really won World War II and who lost the peace that put an end to the war in Europe and the world? Who had reasons to celebrate victory, and who suffered a bitter defeat and enslavement?The main thesis of this article is the observation that, in military terms, World War II was won by the states belonging to the anti-fascist coalition, and lost by Germany, Italy, Japan and their allies. However, in political and economic terms, World War II was won by Western countries led by the United States, and lost by Central and Eastern European countries, with the Soviet Union at the forefront. In international terms, the war and peace were won primarily by the United States and the Soviet Union. These countries have become global superpowers that created a new international order, called the Yalta-Potsdam governance.

The Anti-Aryan Moment: Decolonization, Diplomacy, and Race in Late Pahlavi Iran

2021 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 691-702
Author(s):  
Firoozeh Kashani-Sabet
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Us ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
The Cold War

In 1946, the entertainer and activist Paul Robeson pondered America's intentions in Iran. In what was to become one of the first major crises of the Cold War, Iran was fighting a Soviet aggressor that did not want to leave. Robeson posed the question, “Is our State Department concerned with protecting the rights of Iran and the welfare of the Iranian people, or is it concerned with protecting Anglo-American oil in that country and the Middle East in general?” This was a loaded question. The US was pressuring the Soviet Union to withdraw its troops after its occupation of the country during World War II. Robeson wondered why America cared so much about Soviet forces in Iranian territory, when it made no mention of Anglo-American troops “in countries far removed from the United States or Great Britain.” An editorial writer for a Black journal in St. Louis posed a different variant of the question: Why did the American secretary of state, James F. Byrnes, concern himself with elections in Iran, Arabia or Azerbaijan and yet not “interfere in his home state, South Carolina, which has not had a free election since Reconstruction?”

Atskaņotājmākslas attīstība Liepājā un Otrā pasaules kara ietekme uz mūziķu likteņiem

2021 ◽  
pp. 338-351
Author(s):  
Vēsma Lēvalde
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Performing Arts ◽  
Symphony Orchestra ◽  
Historical Study ◽  
World War ◽  
National Socialist ◽  
Performing Artists ◽  
Cultural Life ◽  
The Soviet Union

The article is a cultural-historical study and a part of the project Uniting History, which aims to discover the multicultural aspect of performing art in pre-war Liepaja and summarize key facts about the history of the Liepāja Symphony Orchestra. The study also seeks to identify the performing artists whose life was associated with Liepāja and who were repressed between 1941 and 1945, because of aggression by both the Soviet Union and National Socialist Germany. Until now, the cultural life of this period in Liepāja has been studied in a fragmentary way, and materials are scattered in various archives. There are inaccurate and even contradictory testimonies of events of that time. The study marks both the cultural and historical situation of the 1920s and the 1930s in Liepāja and tracks the fates of several artists in the period between 1939 and 1945. On the eve of World War II, Liepāja has an active cultural life, especially in theatre and music. Liepāja City Drama and Opera is in operation staging both dramatic performances, operas, and ballet, employing an orchestra. The symphony orchestra also operated at the Liepāja Philharmonic, where musicians were recruited every season according to the principles of contemporary festival orchestras. Liepāja Folk Conservatory (music school) had also formed an orchestra of students and teachers. Guest concerts were held regularly. A characteristic feature of performing arts in Liepaja was its multicultural character – musicians of different nationalities with experience from different schools of the world were encountered there. World War II not only disrupted the balance in society, but it also had a very concrete and tragic impact on the fates of the people, including the performing artists. Many were killed, many repressed and placed in prisons and camps, and many went to exile to the West. Others were forced to either co-operate with the occupation forces or give up their identity and, consequently, their career as an artist. Nevertheless, some artists risked their lives to save others.

Military Industry Evacuation at the Beginning of World War II and the NKVD

2020 ◽  
Vol 152 ◽  
pp. 142-151
Author(s):  
Uta G. Lagvilava ◽  
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Technical Equipment ◽  
World War ◽  
Military Industry ◽  
Emergency Situations ◽  
Military Equipment ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Red Army ◽  
Internal Affairs

A few months after the fascist Germany’s attack on the USSR, under harsh wartime conditions, at the end of 1941 military industry of the Soviet Union began to produce such a quantity of military equipment that subsequently was providing not only replenishment of losses, but also improvement of technical equipment of the Red Army forces . Successful production of military equipment during World War II became one of the main factors in the victory over fascism. One of the unlit pages in affairs of the People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs (NKVD) is displacement and evacuation of a huge number of enterprises and people to the east, beyond the Urals, which were occupied by German troops at the beginning of the war in the summer of 1941. All this was done according to the plans developed with direct participation of NKVD, which united before the beginning and during the war departments now called the Ministry of Internal Affairs, FSB, SVR, the Russian Guard, Ministry of Emergency Situations, FAPSI and several smaller ones. And all these NKVD structures during the war were headed by Lavrenty Pavlovich Beria.

Choice in the West

1953 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-167
Author(s):  
S. Bernard
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
World War ◽  
The West ◽  
Political Situation ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Working Out

The advent of a new administration in the United States and the passage of seven years since the end of World War II make it appropriate to review the political situation which has developed in Europe during that period and to ask what choices now are open to the West in its relations with the Soviet Union.The end of World War II found Europe torn between conflicting conceptions of international politics and of the goals that its members should seek. The democratic powers, led by the United States, viewed the world in traditional, Western, terms. The major problem, as they saw it, was one of working out a moral and legal order to which all powers could subscribe, and in which they would live. Quite independently of the environment, they assumed that one political order was both more practicable and more desirable than some other, and that their policies should be directed toward its attainment.

scholarly journals EXPLORING AND EXPLAINING THE ECONOMIC POLITICAL RELATIONS BETWEEN IRAN AND THE SOVIET UNION IN THE SECOND PAHLAVI ERA EMPHASIZING THE SYSTEM THEORY

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimia Zare ◽  
Habibollah Saeeidinia
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
International System ◽  
World War ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Political Relations ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Cold War

Iran and Russia have common interests, especially in political terms, because of the common borders and territorial neighborhood. This has led to a specific sensitivity to how the two countries are approaching each other. Despite the importance of the two countries' relations, it is observed that in the history of the relations between Iran and Russia, various issues and issues have always been hindered by the close relations between the two countries. The beginning of Iran-Soviet relations during the Second Pahlavi era was accompanied by issues such as World War II and subsequent events. The relations between the two countries were influenced by the factors and system variables of the international system, such as the Cold War, the US-Soviet rivalry, the Second World War and the entry of the Allies into Iran, the deconstruction of the relations between the two post-Cold War superpowers, and so on.The main question of the current research is that the political relations between Iran and Russia influenced by the second Pahlavi period?To answer this question, the hypothesis was that Iran's political economic relations were fluctuating in the second Pahlavi era and influenced by the changing system theory of the international system with the Soviet Union. The findings suggest that various variables such as the structure of the international system and international events, including World War II, the arrival of controversial forces in Iran, the Cold War, the post-Cold War, the US and Soviet policies, and the variables such as the issue of oil Azerbaijan's autonomy, Tudeh's actions in Iran, the issue of fisheries and borders. Also, the policies adopted by Iranian politicians, including negative balance policy, positive nationalism and independent national policy, have affected Iran-Soviet relations. In a general conclusion, from 1320 (1942) to 1357 (1979), the relationship between Iran and Russia has been an upward trend towards peaceful coexistence. But expansion of further relations in the economic, technical and cultural fields has been political rather than political.

scholarly journals Niemiecka droga do demokracji i gospodarki rynkowej jako przykład dla państw Europy Wschodniej

2017 ◽  
pp. 123-135
Author(s):  
Martin Dahl
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Market Economy ◽  
Political System ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Soviet Bloc ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
World War ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
Democratic Political System

The German experience with democracy and the market economy can be particularly valuable for other European countries for at least two reasons. Firstly, after World War II, the Germans effectively and permanently managed to enter the democratic political system based on the market economy. Initially, the economy was implemented only in the western part of the country and since 1990 all over the country. Secondly, after the collapse of the former Soviet bloc, Central European countries greatly benefited from German political solutions. This means that in favourable conditions, these experiences can be a valuable source of inspiration for other countries, especially those in Eastern Europe.This study is a result of research conducted in 2016 as part of the project ‘Germany and Russia in a multipolar international order. Strategic vision and potential alliances’ with the support of the Foundation for Polish-German Cooperation. It consists of four parts. Part I is an introduction to the issues analysed. Part II shows the genesis and characteristics of the democratic political system of Germany. Part III contains an analysis of the German experience with the implementation of the market economy. In Part IV, the author presents his conclusions of how and to what extent Eastern European countries can use the German experience in reforming their political systems and what conditions they would have to meet.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document