Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

65 results

Page 1 of 4

  • 8 - The Russian and Soviet Empire

  • from Part I - Imperial and Postcolonial Settings
  • Edited by Cathie Carmichael, University of East Anglia, Matthew D'Auria, University of East Anglia, Aviel Roshwald, Georgetown University, Washington DC
  • Book:
    The Cambridge History of Nationhood and Nationalism
    Published online:
    08 November 2023
    Print publication:
    09 November 2023, pp 158-178

  • Summary

    Empires and nations pull in different directions. Empires are founded on principles of institutionalized differences and distinctions, both laterally between peoples or geographies and vertically between those on top whose superiority grants them the right to rule over others and those below whose inferiority condemns them to be ruled by others. Nations, in contrast, are imagined and affective communities that promote, at least rhetorically if not always in practice, the commonality, horizontal equivalency, and homogeneity of the population that constitutes the nation. A nation at its inception is a political claim that a shared culture, ethnic, political, or religious, gives a people the right to self-rule, and possibly to sovereignty and statehood. At one end of the political spectrum, empires operate through hierarchy and difference between subjects and rulers, while at the other end, nations function on the basis of equality and shared nature, whether ethnic, religious, or political, of their citizens.

  • 5 - Social Democracy in Georgia

  • from Social Democratic Routes in Europe
  • Edited by Marcel van der Linden, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam
  • Book:
    The Cambridge History of Socialism
    Published online:
    03 November 2022
    Print publication:
    24 November 2022, pp 132-151

  • Summary

    In the first years after the First World War, social democrats in Europe celebrated the beleaguered socialist government in the briefly independent Republic of Georgia (1918–21). The senior statesman of the Second International, Karl Kautsky, travelled to the South Caucasus and wrote a laudatory book – Georgien, Eine Sozialdemokratische Bauernrepublik (translated into English as Georgia: A Social Democratic Peasant Republic – Impressions and Observations) (1921) – that contrasted what the Georgian social democrats (formerly the Georgian Mensheviks) were doing while maintaining a democratic government in contrast to the one-party dictatorship then operating in Soviet Russia.1 Almost simultaneously with the appearance of the small book, the communists invaded Georgia, and the social democrats were forced to flee to western Europe. Their flight ended an extraordinary three decades in which Marxist socialists dominated the national liberation movement in a largely peasant country, repeatedly won elections to the Russian imperial Duma (1906–12), successfully forged a cross-class alliance in Georgia that brought democratic socialists to power when the tsarist regime was overthrown in February/March 1917, and even provided major leaders (Nikoloz Chkheidze and Irakli Tsereteli) to the Petrograd Soviet through 1917.

  • In Memoriam

  • G. M. Hamburg, Randall A. Poole, Ronald Grigor Suny, Maria Todorova, Dmitry Tartakovsky, Anna Shternshis, William Nickell
  • Journal:
    Slavic Review / Volume 79 / Issue 4 / Winter 2020
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    04 March 2021, pp. 921-932
    Print publication:
    Winter 2020
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • Intent to Destroy

  • Ronald Grigor Suny
  • Journal:
    Nationalities Papers / Volume 47 / Issue 1 / January 2019
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    28 January 2019, pp. 162-164
    Print publication:
    January 2019
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • Debating Famine and Genocide

  • RONALD GRIGOR SUNY
  • Journal:
    Contemporary European History / Volume 27 / Issue 3 / August 2018
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    23 July 2018, pp. 476-481
    Print publication:
    August 2018
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • Between academic writing of history – what professional historians, usually employed by universities, do – and popular history – what journalists, celebrities and independent writers usually with some claim on fame do – there is a growing intermediate genre, which I will call ‘history light’. While popular history is produced rather quickly and often with armies of researchers working for the celebrity author, history light is artisanal. It takes more time and bears the mark of the scholar/journalist author. Such writers, smart people with a flair for fluid prose, have turned out bestsellers and prizewinners that have found a broad reading public. They can be read with enjoyment and profit by the general public and scholars alike. History light may not be as sensationalist or prurient as many popular histories, but neither is it as thickly evidenced or balanced as the best academic histories. Such books usually have a strong point of view, often supportive of the liberal/conservative status quo in the United States, and in the case of those that deal with Russia or the Soviet Union, usually condemnatory of the Soviet Union, communism and extremes of left and right. They often tend to be indictments rather than historically empathetic; that is, they shape evidence to a particular conviction instead of allowing a more complex, perhaps even ambiguous, reading.

  • Making states and breaking states: Kosovo and the Caucasus in 2008: Introduction

  • Ronald Grigor Suny, Vicken Cheterian
  • Journal:
    Nationalities Papers / Volume 40 / Issue 5 / September 2012
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    20 November 2018, pp. 657-660
    Print publication:
    September 2012

  • Two events in 2008 shaped the political map of the Caucasus: the West's decision on the independence of Kosovo and the Russo-Georgian War. First, on 17 February, Kosovo authorities unilaterally declared the independence of what was at the time a UN protectorate. This declaration enjoyed much support in the West, including near-immediate recognition by key states such as the US, Germany, France, the UK, and a dozen others. But it also faced strong opposition from Serbia and Russia and strong skepticism from prowestern countries such as Georgia. Russia opposed not only the Kosovo declaration itself but more importantly the western adoption of it. From the Russian perspective, by supporting Kosovo's accession to sovereignty western states were violating the rules set at the moment of collapse of the federal states of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union: to invite the former union republics to join the international clubs of sovereign states, but not extend such invitation to any other sub-units. In other words, Azerbaijan, Croatia, Kazakhstan, and Russia became members of the United Nations, but sub-entities like Chechnya, Kosovo, or Tatarstan did not receive the same recognition.

  • Moshe Lewin, 1921-2010

  • Ronald Grigor Suny
  • Journal:
    Slavic Review / Volume 70 / Issue 1 / Spring 2011
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    27 January 2017, pp. 240-242
    Print publication:
    Spring 2011
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Page 1 of 4