论文部分内容阅读
在《抗议与忍耐的政治经济分析:东欧与拉美转型之比较》一书开头,贝拉·格雷什科维奇开门见山地写道:“在苏联解体之后,关于东欧会出现大范围政治与经济崩溃的黯淡预言并没有变成现实。”这一失败的预言,促使这位中欧大学国际关系和欧洲研究系主任去追问:为什么长时间、大幅度的经济衰退,没能使转型期的中东欧像许多第三世界国家那样陷入动荡?为什么中东欧人对体制变革所带来的社会问题采取的抗议是零散的、非暴力的,而不像拉美一样具有破坏性,甚至毅然走向威权主义或者民粹主义?
At the beginning of the book Political and Economic Analysis of Protest and Patience: A Comparison of the Transformations between Eastern and Latin American Countries, Bela Greshkevich wrote straightly: “After the collapse of the Soviet Union, a great deal of political and economic development in Eastern Europe The bleak prediction of collapse did not materialize. ”This failed prediction prompted the director of international relations and European studies at Central Europe to ask why the protracted economic recession did not make the transition period Why Eastern Europe, as so many Third World countries, is in turmoil and why the Central and Eastern Europeans protested the social problems posed by institutional change as fragmented and non-violent, not as devastating as that of Latin America, or even resolutely toward authoritarianism or Populism?