scholarly journals At the Origins of Dagestan Philosophy and Islamic Studies (to the 90th anniversary of the birth and 70th anniversary of the scientific, pedagogical and social activities of M.A. Abdullaev)

Islamovedenie ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 95-106
Author(s):  
Kafarov Telman Emiralievich ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Historical Memory ◽  
70Th Anniversary ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Social Activities ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
Islamic Studies ◽  
Religious Issues ◽  
Academic Scientist ◽  
90Th Anniversary ◽  
Scientific Pedagogical

The article highlights some important philosophical and Islamic views and works of the famous Russian, Dagestani scientist Abdullaev Magomed Abdullayevich, in connection with his 90th anniversary of the birth and 70th anniversary of scientific, pedagogical and social activities. The author notes the importance and relevance of the problems raised in numerous monographs and articles, especially the specifics of Islam in the Caucasus and Dagestan, and the uniqueness of regional Sufism. Thanks to the works of Magomed Abdullayevich, the original views of doz-ens of thinkers representing the multinational Republic were preserved in historical memory. It is emphasized that he is not only an academic scientist, but also a publicist whose works on topical religious issues played a constructive role in particularly dramatic periods of the development of our country and our republic. Overcoming the stereotypes in assessing Islam that formed during the Soviet period of the county’s development, he shows that it is an integrating factor for the entire culture and life of Dagestanis.

Professor Vladimir Feoktistovich Bogoyavlensky

2001 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 232-234
Author(s):  
D. M. Zubairov
Keyword(s):  
Family Medicine ◽  
Postgraduate Education ◽  
70Th Anniversary ◽  
Social Activities ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Medical Academy ◽  
The Republic ◽  
State Medical Academy ◽  
Scientific Pedagogical

March 18, 2001 marked the 70th anniversary of the birth and 45 years of medical, scientific, pedagogical and social activities of the Honored Scientist of the Republic of Tatarstan, Academician of the Eurasian Academy of Medical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Therapy and Family Medicine of the Kazan State Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Doctor of Medical Sciences V. F. Bogoyavlensky.

Institutional Historical Memory and History in Post-Soviet Belarus

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-73
Author(s):  
Alena Marková
Keyword(s):  
Historical Memory ◽  
Typical Feature ◽  
Historical Narrative ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
National History ◽  
Nationality Policy ◽  
Second Shift ◽  
Characteristic Features ◽  
The Government ◽  
Clear Shift

Abstract Belarusian institutional historical memory (as defined by Richard Ned Lebow) and the interpretation of Belarusian national history have experienced radical shifts in the past several decades. The first shift (1990–1994) was characterized by radical rejection of the interpretational and methodological patterns of the Soviet period, resulting in the creation of a new concept of Belarusian national history and historical narrative. The second shift in the existing historical narrative and institutional memory followed rapidly. It came with the transformation from a parliamentary republic into a parliamentary-presidential (1994) and then presidential republic (1996). The second wave demonstrated a clear shift towards a methodological, theoretical approach and terminological framework typical of the historiography of the Soviet period. These changes were in response to the growing demands for ideological control of institutionalized historical research supported by the government in the same decade. One of the characteristic features of recent Belarusian state-sponsored historiography (Lyč, Chigrinov, Marcuĺ, Novik and others) is the linking of post-Soviet national initiatives to Nazi occupation and collaboration in World War II. Another typical feature is simplifying historical explanations and often using undisguised pejorative terminology. The last shift in institutional historical memory also resulted in further re-interpretations of many symbolic centres and milestones of Belarusian history (for example, the period of the first years of post-Soviet independence, the introduction of new national symbols (Pahonia coat of arms and white-red-white flag) and the interwar nationality policy of Belarusization of the 1920s.)

THE CORE AND PERIPHERY OF THE CURRENT CULTURE OF ARTISTIC CREATION ABOUT THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR IN THE STUDENTS’ VIEWS

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-149
Author(s):  
Elena N. NARKHOVA ◽  
Dmitry Yu. NARKHOV
Keyword(s):  
Historical Memory ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Russian Society ◽  
Student Culture ◽  
The Core ◽  
Musical Works ◽  
Great Patriotic War ◽  
History Of ◽  
Current Student ◽  
Historical Periods

This article analyzes the degree of demand for works of art (films and television films and series, literary and musical works, works of monumental art) associated with the history of the Great Patriotic War among contemporary students. This research is based on the combination of two theories, which study the dynamics and statics of culture in the society — the theory of the nucleus and periphery by Yu. M. Lotman and the theory of actual culture by L. N. Kogan. The four waves of research (2005, 2010, 2015, 2020) by the Russian Society of Socio¬logists (ROS) have revealed a series of works in various genres on this topic in the core structure and on the periphery of the current student culture; this has also allowed tracing the dynamics of demand and the “movement” of these works in the sociocultural space. The authors introduce the concept of the archetype of the echo of war. The high student recognition of works of all historical periods (from wartime to the present day) is shown. A significant complex of works has been identified, forming two contours of the periphery. Attention is drawn to the artistic work of contemporary students as a way to preserve the historical memory of the Great Patriotic War. This article explains the necessity of preserving the layer of national culture in order to reproduce the national identity in the conditions of informational and ideological pluralism of the post-Soviet period. The authors note the differentiation of youth due to the conditions and specifics of socialization in the polysemantic sociocultural space.

scholarly journals Education, historical memory and civil identity: vectors of influence (on the example of students of Republic of Mordovia)

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-60
Author(s):  
Tatyana M. Dadaeva
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Mutual Influence ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Active Involvement ◽  
Social Events ◽  
Patriotic Education ◽  
The Republic

Introduction. The article presents for the first time the results of the study of the influence of education, historical memory on the formation of civil identity of modern students of the Republic of Mordovia. Clarification and identification of the vectors of historical memory influence in the formation of civic identity through the prism of the education level of young people not only allows to set the existing problems and contradictions, but also to determine the dominant factors and mechanisms (tools) the formation of youth historical memory to effectively use them to reinforce patriotic education, active involvement of the younger generation to meaningful social events of the Russian history through various social institutions such as education, science, art, cinema, media. Materials and Methods. In the course of the study was used a sociological survey of students of universities and colleges of the Republic of Mordovia. Quota sampling by sex, age and level of education was applied. The sample amounted to 586 h. data processing was carried out by using the statistical software package SPSS Base 21.0. Processing techniques made identification of correlation between individual parameters, the Pearson’s Chi-squared. Results. It is based on the identified vectors of mutual influence of education, the historical memory of the civilian identity of student youth set a certain ambivalence and inconsistency in the perception of the historical events of the past among young people, on the one hand is a high assessment of the achievements of the Soviet period, when the collective positive memory of the Soviet past prevails, forming positive attitude to the event the youth is the foundation for sustainable nationwide identity, on the other hand, the events of the modern history of Russia are not significant in the historical consciousness of young people. The author established the importance of the level of education of young people when choosing the main events – “nodes” of memory, events-regret (oblivion), sources of formation. Discussion and Conclusion The question of the influence of individual memory (family memories) on the construction of students’ identity and its comparison with the influence of collective memory remains open, which requires further research. The obtained results expand and supplement knowledge in the field of sociology of youth and memory studies, and can also be used as scientific and methodological recommendations in the development of curricula for teaching historical knowledge in the system of school, secondary vocational and higher education and in priorities determining in the system of youth patriotic education.

scholarly journals CROSS-CULTURAL ANALYSIS OF THE HOLOCAUST THEME BY MATERIALS OF SCHOOL PROGRAMS (IN RUSSIA AND GERMANY)

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 678-681
Author(s):  
Olga Lvovna Panchenko ◽  
Ildar Almazovich Zinnatov ◽  
Alina Andreevna Kadyrova
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Cultural Analysis ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
The Holocaust ◽  
School Programs ◽  
Racial Conflicts ◽  
Teachers And Students ◽  
Cross Cultural Analysis

Purpose: The article deals with the problems associated with the transformation of historical memory in the teaching of the theme of the Holocaust. The relevance of this issue is connected with the growing problems of migration flows, intercultural and racial conflicts in the world. The authors conducted a comparative analysis of approaches to the study of this issue in the context of modern educational reality of Germany and Russia. Methodology: The main method was the discourse analysis of the texts in modern textbooks. It is noted that in recent years the Holocaust has been the subject of attention in school education. Result: Ideological goals pursued by the state are most often realized through the translation of ideas in the school literature. A similar situation was observed in the period of the Soviet state when a number of historical facts were distorted; the same situation is observed in the post-Soviet period. The results of the discourse analysis reveal the main context of the transmitted ideas. It is that the Holocaust is being studied as a tragic page in history. At the same time, this topic is allocated a very small amount of space in textbooks, which leads to the conclusion of its weak accentuation. It is concluded that it is necessary to increase the importance of this page of history in the process of formation of adequate historical memory of schoolchildren and the development of their tolerance. Applications: This research can be used for universities, teachers, and students. Novelty/Originality: In this research, the model of Cross-Cultural Analysis of the Holocaust Theme by Materials of school Programs (In Russia and Germany) is presented in a comprehensive and complete manner.

scholarly journals Historical memory of the Great Patriotic War: reasons for pluralism

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 19-35
Author(s):  
Galina S. Shirokalova
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Young People ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Emotional Reaction ◽  
The State ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Russian Society ◽  
Network Resources ◽  
Sociological Study ◽  
Great Patriotic War

The article analyzes the results of a sociological study of the historical memory of students about the World War II in general (and the Great Patriotic War in particular), conducted by the Russian Society of Sociologists in 2020, as well as materials from surveys of other research teams. The author comes to the conclusion that historical memory is formed, first of all, by the information field, set by state institutions or encouraged by them (school, mass media, network resources). Contradictory assessment of the events of the twentieth century led to the rupture of the historical memory of generations and the formation of a large group of people ready to accept the revision of the geopolitical results of the war from the standpoint of history falsifiers. The attitude of young people to the past, without taking into account the cause-and-effect liaison of the events of that time, is explained not only by the extinction of communicative memory for the departure of war generations, the desacralization of their life, deed, death. The range of factors is much wider. Since there is no integral picture of the history of the USSR, there is no value core for assessing events of the Great Patriotic War either. In the absence of historical hygiene in the Russian Federation, the entire Soviet period turns into historical antiques for new generations. They treat this in different ways: with reverence, condescension, aggressiveness, indifference, but it is excessive for the daily life of the majority. The slogan “If required, we repeat / can repeat”, replicated on May 9, is nothing more than a short-term emotional reaction, including to PR management, but not the readiness / mindset / promise of action in a real war. The opposition of the state to the country, that is reflected in the popular among young people song of the group Lumen, actually testifies to alienation from both the state and the country, since there is no one without the other. Questions are inevitable: how adequate are the methodologies and techniques based on which social scientists choose the range of factors that form the portrait of modern youth and predict the direction of further socialization of its individual groups? How many meaningful collaborators should there be to lose / win a civilizational battle in which historical memory is only one of the components? According to the author, the conditions and opportunities for the realization of the desired worldview values ​​in modern Russia adjust the attitude to the present and the life strategies of young people to a greater extent than historical memory.

scholarly journals “Myths Making”: Western View of Soviet/Russian Historical Memory (Book Review: Davis, V. Myth Making in the Soviet Union and Modern Russia: Remembering World War Two in Brezhnev’s Hero City [Text] / V. Davis. – London : I.B. Taurus, 2018. – 351 p.)

2020 ◽  
pp. 120-125
Author(s):  
Aleksey Popov ◽  
Oleg Romanko
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Subsequent Development ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Great Patriotic War ◽  
Public Consciousness ◽  
Western View

Introduction. The publication is a review of the monograph of British researcher V. Davis, dedicated to the Soviet and Post-Soviet memory of the Great Patriotic War in the hero city of Novorossiysk. Methods and materials. Based on a significant set of published materials and oral interviews, the author characterizes discourse, memorials, and practices related to the genesis and subsequent development of the “myth about Malaya Zemlya”. From the methodological point of view, the peer-reviewed monograph is written from the position of the popular direction of memory studies in the West and is characterized by interdisciplinarity, increased attention to the analysis of memorial discourse, visual representations and social practices, while completely ignoring the complex of archival sources on the research topic. Analysis and Results. The main conclusion of the author is that through its association with L.I. Brezhnev’s biography during his reign, the “malozemelniy myth” became an important part of not only local but also national historical memory. Generally, the reviewed book is a valuable contribution to the study of the collective memory of the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet and Post-Soviet period, and the debatable nature of its individual provisions can serve as an incentive for the emergence of new studies. The main disadvantage of the book in terms of its scientific significance is the author’s desire to impose on the reader non-obvious political conclusions about the total mythology of the Soviet/Post-Soviet memory of the Great Patriotic War, as well as the permanent militarism of public consciousness in the USSR/Russia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document