In October 2013, Xí Jìnpíng presented not only an ambitious infrastructure project but a strategic initiative that promoted connections in many regards: the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). One in-tended strategic value of this initiative is the improvement of relations between China and its neigh-bours as well as the improvement of dialogue among different civilizations. Emphasis is placed on the importance of the shared historical cultural heritage of the involved ethnic groups, while the idea of a ‘harmonious society’ is promoted at the same time. The aim of this article is to shed light on how China expands its soft power through civilizational connections along the Sino-Mongolian-Russian Economic Corridor by referring to the Silk Road Academic Belt. This article is based on ethnographic field research in Hénán Mongol Autonomous County in the Sino-Tibetan borderlands of Qīnghǎi Province during an international conference titled “Historical and Cultural Links be-tween Mongolia and Tibet,” held in July 2017.1
The role of the diaries and memoirs in the process of the conscious self-reflection and their contribution to the emergence of modern individual personalities are well-known facts of the intellectual history. The present paper intends to analyze a special form of the creation of modern individual character; it is the self-creation of the writer as a conscious personality, often with a clearly formulated opinion about her/his own social role. There will be offered several examples from the 19th-century history of the Hungarian intelligentsia. This period is more or less identical with the modernization of the “cultural industry” in Hungary, dominated by the periodicals with their deadlines, fixed lengths of the articles, and professional editing houses on the one hand and the cultural nation building on the other. Concerning the possible social and cultural role of the intelligentsia, it is the moment of the birth of a new type, so-called public intellectual. I will focus on three written sources, a diary of a Calvinist student of theology, Péter (Litkei) Tóth, the memoirs of an influential public intellectual, Gusztáv Szontagh, and a belletristic printed diary of a young intellectual, János Asbóth.
The paper’s aim is a critical reconstruction concerning the ideas of the most renowned representatives of the Hungarian Popular Movement: László Németh, Ferenc Erdei, and István Bibó. It contextualizes the notion of “populism”, which has semantically become overburdened up to now: it means everything and nothing. The Hungarian Populist Movement must be interpreted in the interwar Central-Eastern European and Hungarian contexts. The notion of dual society was a catchword for the abovementioned thinkers; according to its basic tenet, in Hungarian society, there is a symbiosis of modern and premodern segments. The demand for emancipation of the peasantry as a common denominator was frequently connected with the idea of alternative modernization; it was imagined as an autochthonous development different from the Western European models.
Historical and social historical researches have extensively explored the social role and history of the Hungarian nobility and aristocracy, but the present situation of the descendants of the former traditional élite has been overlooked by contemporary sociological studies. The aim of this paper is to fill this gap by providing a comprehensive picture concerning the young descendants of the Hungarian aristocratic families living in Hungary at the turn of the 21st century. The results confirm that the examined group has a very good chance of reaching a higher status within the society despite all the disadvantages their parents and grandparents suffered during the communist era. In other words, they possess all socio-demographic factors which make a higher position likely. This advantageous socio-demographic position is interacting with the values and goals transmitted in family upbringing, namely acquiring a diploma and the knowledge of foreign languages. The religious, Christian, and family-centric values also played a considerable role in their education. Among the young descendants of the former aristocratic families, we can distinguish a group which creates a strong informal network and has preserved its special aristocratic identity and filled it with a renewed content.
Since 2005, a unique project has been under way, which aims to collect all possible descendants of the parliamentary élite of the 18th-century Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (Rzeczpospolita). The project resulted in creating an online database called The Genealogy of Descendants of the Great Sejm, which provides a unique source of information about the genealogical structure of people descending from the 18th-century noble élite of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Drawing on these data, this paper aims to open up new lines of inquiry on the dynamics of homogamy of the Polish nobility by analyzing longer trends of several (e.g. five, eight, or even more) generations of nobles (or nobles’ descendants) in Poland over the last two centuries.
In our paper, we redefine the category of “family” denoting the relationship of selected members of a post-noble/post-aristocratic milieu in Poland using Alain Badiou’s terminology. Badiou’s ontology based on a mathematical set theory and a generic theory is the most developed, complex, and revolutionary ontology of the 20th and 21st centuries. However, it is rarely adapted to new empirical studies probably because of its novelty and complexity. We do not intend to use the empirical case study made by Smoczynski–Zarycki to inform our argument but instead perform a translation of the Durkheim–Lacanian theoretical standpoint from “Totem…” into the category of “singularity” [singularité] in its relation to “the state of situation” [état de la situation] from “Being and Event” (Badiou 2005). This approach seeks to find a universalizing potential of nobility that will allow it to become a relevant subject for truth procedure analysis.
Eleni Filippidou, Maria Koutsouba, Vassiliki Lalioti and Vassilis Lantzos
The research field of this paper is the area of Thrace, a large geopolitical-cultural unit that was divided – due to political reasons – in three subareas distributed among three different countries: Bulgaria, Turkey and Greece. A dance event that used to take place before the border demarcation but is still performed in the Greek and Turkish Thrace is that of “K’na”, a wedding dance event danced by the people of both border areas, despite of the changes in their magical-religious beliefs and the changes brought by socio-economic and cultural development. In particular, the aim of this paper is the study of the “construction” of the national identity of inhabitants both of Greek and Turkish Thrace, as this is manifested through the dance practice within the wedding event of “K’na”, through the lens of sociocybernetics. Data was gathered through ethnographic method as this is applied to the study of dance, while its interpretation was based on sociocybernetics according to Burke’s identity control theory. From the data analysis, it is showed that the “K’na” dance in Greek and Turkish Thrace constructs and reconstructs the national identity of the people who use them as a response to the messages they receive via the communication with “the national others”. In conclusion, the “construction” of the identity results from a continuous procedure of self-regulation and self-control through a cybernetic sequence of steps.
Even though in many cases the terms of risk and uncertainty are similar, they have to be delimited to understand the meaning of each, individual, as accurately as possible. The two terms are combined in different situations. No matter how well the risk is managed, uncertainty cannot be removed because all possible situations and interdependencies cannot be taken into account. Thus, a source of risk can be considered uncertainty in itself if it is based on poor quality information about the actual internal or external situation of the company. Also, in my conclusion, traditional financial theory distinguishes between systematic risk and particular risk, which reaches the company’s overall risk. Investors can reduce total risk with the two primary risk management instruments, namely diversification and asset allocation.