<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

The paper aims to describe and analyze the changes in public sites of memory in the multi-ethnic border region of Czechoslovak Silesia during the period of restoration of Czechoslovak sovereignty, between the fall of Nazism in May 1945 and the communist putsch in Czechoslovakia in February 1948. This research focuses on transformations and (dis)continuity of cults and symbols during that period, and on specifics and differences within the examined region with regard to ethnic and social structure of local population. Research is based primarily on the recorded agendas of state and district administrations, but preserved memorials and photographs or descriptions of vanished sites of memory also serve as important sources.
After the expulsion of German population, the western part of the region was repopulated by settlers from various regions of East-Central Europe. Most of local German sites of memory vanished, with the partial exception of religious symbols and a few “apolitical” memorials. New monuments and memorials were dedicated mainly to personalities of Czech history in an effort to inculcate the “official” identity amongst the new-settlers.
In the Ostrava coal basin, the new regime invoked the pre-war tradition of working-class identity and showed tolerance towards the sites of memory of the local Polish minority, except memorials related to the former Czech-Polish border conflicts. In the Hlučín region specifically, a strong pro-German narrative survived despite the “Czechization” efforts of state authorities.
In general, the state-supported memory policy aimed to create the narrative of a “Slavic” and “socialist” Silesia, suppress the German past of the region, and weaken frictions between Czechs and Poles.
</abstract>

Sites of Memory in Czechoslovak Silesia 1945–1948

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

The war in Ukraine has had enormous media coverage in the West, generating a wide-ranging debate concerning its origins, responsibilities, and consequences. The debate in the media raises an interesting question seldom explored in the study of nations and nationalism, specifically, the scarce incidence or penetration by expert knowledge into the theories of common sense and profane knowledge. In fact, despite the current consolidation in the scientific literature of the constructionist and modernist paradigm – of a sociological nature – other visions and interpretations of the past continue to be widely accepted and popularized beyond academia. This article analyzes the weight and influence of psychology, psychiatry, and psychoanalysis in the social representation of nationalism. The persistence of psychopathological language in the profane interpretation of the conflict is explored using the discourse of the press and, in particular, the opinion columns published in various Western countries during the first weeks of the war. The article shows that the criticism and denunciation of nationalism are still being formulated nowadays with the voices of psychology and psychiatry, the psychodynamic vision of the authoritarian, and the vulgarized portrayal of Adolf Hitler.
</abstract>

The <italic>War of Vladimir</italic>. Nationalism, Narcissism, and Childhood Battles

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

The discipline of folklore studies was introduced to China in the early twentieth century while the country faced a grave national crisis resulting from intense foreign pressure and a rigid political system that was incapable of adapting to the challenges of the modern world. Nationalism contributed to the rising interest in folklore from the late 1910s to early 1920s, then became the dominant theme of folklore studies thereafter. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, folklore studies spread all over the country and developed vigorously within China. However, the eruption of the War of Resistance in 1937 interrupted this revitalization process and most folklore activities came to a standstill. In wartime China, leading scholars looked to the past in part as a reaction to Japanese imperialism, but also to strengthen cultural cohesion for the nation. In Japanese-occupied areas, some scholars persisted in independent folklore investigations and writing even though most upper tier Chinese universities and leading figures in the folklore movement gradually relocated to non-occupied territory. Scholars who remained in the occupation zone often had contact with foreign-backed institutions and were able to continue working during the war years. Their research activities served the purpose of rallying the nation and fed a growing popular demand for more and deeper investigations into China’s folk traditions. This work examines the influence of nationalism on folk studies in Beiping and Shanghai, shining a light on folklorists’ activities, folklore organizations, and primary publications during China’s War of Resistance against Japan.
</abstract>

Department of History, 6B-10 Faculty Hall

In the Shadow of War: Nationalism and Folk Studies in Wartime Beiping and Shanghai

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

The increased arrival of immigrant/refugee populations often leads to public debates. These debates about immigrant/refugee policies are often raised in parliament. Inside parliament, speakers use specific arguments to persuade their audience, aiming to construct specific national identities, and to promote the national homogenizing discourse. To accomplish this, the politicians often exploit narratives and more specifically, national narratives, reframing aspects of history in order to shape the national conscience. The aim of this research is to analyze how two political leaders of opposite Greek parties, Kyriakos Mitsotakis and Yanis Varoufakis, use narratives on the Greek immigration/refugee movement to the USA in the 1920s to argue about the contemporary Greek policy toward immigrant/refugee issues. To analyze their narratives, we utilize the model of <italic>positioning</italic> suggested by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="j_jnmlp-2024-0003_ref_010">Bamberg (1997)</xref>, drawing a distinction between three levels: the <italic>narrative world</italic>, where we focus on how the characters are positioned in relation to one another within the reported events; the <italic>narrative interaction</italic>, where we examine how the narrator positions him/herself in relation to the audience through specific <italic>argumentative strategies</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="j_jnmlp-2024-0003_ref_046">Reisigl and Wodak 2001</xref>); and the <italic>broader socio-ideological framework</italic>, which concerns the positioning of the narrator toward the Discourses, namely, toward the ideologically defined ways of representing reality. According to our findings, at the level of the narrative world the two politicians construct differently the USA immigrant/refugee policy. These constructions result to different arguments at the level of the narrative interaction, where Mitsotakis promotes as a norm the exclusion of the Others, while Varoufakis promotes their assimilation. Given that both the exclusion and the assimilation of the Others comprise homogenizing practices, we realize that, at the level of the broader socio-ideological framework, both political leaders, each from a different perspective, reinforce the national discourse.
</abstract>

Division of Linguistics, Department of Philology

“When the immigrants faced the Statue of Liberty”: Critical Discourse Analysis of National Narratives in Greek Parliament

Vartan Matiossian, <italic>The Politics of Naming the Armenian Genocide: Language, History and “Medz Yeghern”</italic>, London &amp; New York, I.B. Tauris 2022, 279 p., $26,95 (paperback)

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 18 (2024): Issue 1 (June 2024)

Volume 17 (2023): Issue 3 (December 2023) Special Issue: Reconsidering “Post-Socialist Cities” in East Central and South East Europe

Volume 17 (2023): Issue 2 (December 2023)

Volume 17 (2023): Issue 1 (July 2023)

Volume 16 (2022): Issue 2 (December 2022)

Volume 16 (2022): Issue 1 (July 2022)

Volume 15 (2021): Issue 2 (December 2021)

Volume 15 (2021): Issue 1 (July 2021)

Volume 14 (2020): Issue 2 (December 2020)

Volume 14 (2020): Issue 1 (July 2020)

Volume 13 (2019): Issue 2 (December 2019)

Volume 13 (2019): Issue 1 (July 2019)

Volume 12 (2018): Issue 2 (December 2018)

Volume 12 (2018): Issue 1 (July 2018)

Volume 11 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)

Volume 11 (2017): Issue 1 (July 2017)

Journal of Nationalism, Memory & Language Politics

 Journal of Nationalism, Memory &amp; Language Politics is a peer-reviewed journal published by De Gruyter on behalf of the Charles University.  It is committed to exploring divergent scholarly opinions, research and theories of current international academic experts, and is a forum for discussion and hopes to encourage free-thinking and debate among academics, young researchers and professionals over issues of importance to the politics of identity and memory as well as the political dimensions of language policy in the 20th and 21st centuries. The journal is indexed with and included in Google Scholar, EBSCO, CEEOL and SCOPUS.  We encourage research articles that employ qualitative or quantitative methodologies as well as empirical historical analyses regarding, but not limited to, the following issues:    Trends in nationalist development, whether historical or contemporary  Policies regarding national and international institutions of memory as well as investigations into the creation and/or dissemination of cultural memory  The implementation and political repercussions of language policies in various regional and global contexts  The formation, cohesion and perseverance of national or regional identity along with the relationships between minority and majority populations  The role ethnicity plays in nationalism and national identity  How the issue of victimhood contributes to national or regional self-perception  Priority is given to issues pertaining to the 20th and 21st century political developments   While our focus is on empirical articles, our scope remains open to exceptional theoretical works (especially if they incorporate empirical research), book reviews and translations.  Rejection Rate:   70%   Articles must adhere to the journal’s editorial policy and formal guidelines (including author-date Chicago Style). All manuscripts must undergo a double-blind peer review in line with the journal standards. Typically, decisions will be made and applicants will be notified within four months of submission. Accepted articles are not subject to any article processing charges (APC) and are published free of charge for the authors.  Archiving  Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process. 

Journal of Nationalism, Memory & Language Politics

Volume 18 (2024): Issue 1 (June 2024)

Sites of Memory in Czechoslovak Silesia 1945–1948

The War of Vladimir. Nationalism, Narcissism, and Childhood Battles

In the Shadow of War: Nationalism and Folk Studies in Wartime Beiping and Shanghai

“When the immigrants faced the Statue of Liberty”: Critical Discourse Analysis of National Narratives in Greek Parliament

Vartan Matiossian, The Politics of Naming the Armenian Genocide: Language, History and “Medz Yeghern”, London & New York, I.B. Tauris 2022, 279 p., $26,95 (paperback)

Search

All Volumes and Issues in this Journal