外高加索民主联邦共和国作为“格鲁吉亚”的责任

IF 0.5 Q3 AREA STUDIES Caucasus Survey Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI:10.1080/23761199.2020.1712902
Adrian Brisku
{"title":"外高加索民主联邦共和国作为“格鲁吉亚”的责任","authors":"Adrian Brisku","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1712902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article looks at the historical perspectives and positions of key Georgian political figures – mostly leading Social Democrats such as Noe Zhordania and Akaki Chkhenkeli, as well as National Democrats such as Niko Nikoladze – on the making and unmaking of the Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic (TDFR) by analyzing their reflections on the most heated political concepts of the first two decades of the twentieth century: nationality, nationalism, the nation-state, federation, economic development, and socialism in the Georgian, Transcaucasian and imperial contexts, given the rapidly shifting geopolitics of the region triggered by the onset of the Great War and aggravated by the Bolshevik Revolution of November 1917. The article demonstrates that already having conceptualized the socio-economic and cultural needs of the nation as developing outside of the framework of the nation-state, Zhordania and Chkhenkeli viewed these instead within a regional federative context under a revolutionarily transformed imperial centre, while assuming that the Social Democrats would hold the commanding political position in Georgia. This prepared them to take responsibility for establishing de facto federative political institutions for Transcaucasia. That responsibility facilitated the making and unmaking of the short-lived, independent TDFR.","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1712902","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic (TDFR) as a “Georgian” responsibility\",\"authors\":\"Adrian Brisku\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23761199.2020.1712902\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article looks at the historical perspectives and positions of key Georgian political figures – mostly leading Social Democrats such as Noe Zhordania and Akaki Chkhenkeli, as well as National Democrats such as Niko Nikoladze – on the making and unmaking of the Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic (TDFR) by analyzing their reflections on the most heated political concepts of the first two decades of the twentieth century: nationality, nationalism, the nation-state, federation, economic development, and socialism in the Georgian, Transcaucasian and imperial contexts, given the rapidly shifting geopolitics of the region triggered by the onset of the Great War and aggravated by the Bolshevik Revolution of November 1917. The article demonstrates that already having conceptualized the socio-economic and cultural needs of the nation as developing outside of the framework of the nation-state, Zhordania and Chkhenkeli viewed these instead within a regional federative context under a revolutionarily transformed imperial centre, while assuming that the Social Democrats would hold the commanding political position in Georgia. This prepared them to take responsibility for establishing de facto federative political institutions for Transcaucasia. That responsibility facilitated the making and unmaking of the short-lived, independent TDFR.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37506,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Caucasus Survey\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1712902\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Caucasus Survey\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1712902\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Caucasus Survey","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1712902","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文着眼于格鲁吉亚主要政治人物的历史观点和立场——主要是领导社会民主党人,如诺埃·卓达尼亚和阿卡基·奇肯凯利,以及民族民主党人,如尼科·尼古拉泽——通过分析他们对二十世纪头二十年最激烈的政治概念的反思,建立和废除外高加索民主联邦共和国(TDFR)。民族、民族主义、民族国家、联邦、经济发展和格鲁吉亚、外高加索和帝国背景下的社会主义,考虑到第一次世界大战的爆发引发了该地区迅速变化的地缘政治,并因1917年11月布尔什维克革命而加剧。这篇文章表明,已经将国家的社会经济和文化需求概念化为在民族国家框架之外发展,Zhordania和Chkhenkeli在一个革命性转变的帝国中心的区域联邦制背景下看待这些需求,同时假设社会民主党将在格鲁吉亚占据主导地位。这使他们有能力承担在外高加索建立事实上的联邦政治机构的责任。这种责任促进了短命的、独立的TDFR的建立和解体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic (TDFR) as a “Georgian” responsibility
ABSTRACT This article looks at the historical perspectives and positions of key Georgian political figures – mostly leading Social Democrats such as Noe Zhordania and Akaki Chkhenkeli, as well as National Democrats such as Niko Nikoladze – on the making and unmaking of the Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic (TDFR) by analyzing their reflections on the most heated political concepts of the first two decades of the twentieth century: nationality, nationalism, the nation-state, federation, economic development, and socialism in the Georgian, Transcaucasian and imperial contexts, given the rapidly shifting geopolitics of the region triggered by the onset of the Great War and aggravated by the Bolshevik Revolution of November 1917. The article demonstrates that already having conceptualized the socio-economic and cultural needs of the nation as developing outside of the framework of the nation-state, Zhordania and Chkhenkeli viewed these instead within a regional federative context under a revolutionarily transformed imperial centre, while assuming that the Social Democrats would hold the commanding political position in Georgia. This prepared them to take responsibility for establishing de facto federative political institutions for Transcaucasia. That responsibility facilitated the making and unmaking of the short-lived, independent TDFR.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Caucasus Survey
Caucasus Survey Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
4
期刊介绍: Caucasus Survey is a new peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary and independent journal, concerned with the study of the Caucasus – the independent republics of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, de facto entities in the area and the North Caucasian republics and regions of the Russian Federation. Also covered are issues relating to the Republic of Kalmykia, Crimea, the Cossacks, Nogays, and Caucasian diasporas. Caucasus Survey aims to advance an area studies tradition in the humanities and social sciences about and from the Caucasus, connecting this tradition with core disciplinary concerns in the fields of history, political science, sociology, anthropology, cultural and religious studies, economics, political geography and demography, security, war and peace studies, and social psychology. Research enhancing understanding of the region’s conflicts and relations between the Russian Federation and the Caucasus, internationally and domestically with regard to the North Caucasus, features high in our concerns.
期刊最新文献
Revolution, Covid-19, and War in Armenia: Impacts on Various Forms of Trust Unamuso of Tiflis: Urban Women in Pre-Revolutionary Georgia Capricious States and Betwixt Citizens across the Caucasus Parliamentary Opposition Parties in Georgia’s Foreign Policy under a Hybrid Regime in 2012–2020 Challenges to Building a Viable Alternative to Ethnonationalism in the Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict Setting
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1