lack of freedom, by the consequences of war destruction and socialist collectiviza- tion, the Soviet political domination and economic exploitation. Hungary ruled by the Stalinists (Rákosi, Farkas, Gerö) became a repressive police state reminiscent of the pre-war fascist dictatorship. Th e resistance to communism revealed, howev- er, the nationalist conservative attitudes. Th e nationalist utopianism opposed the offi cial social utopianism. From the margins of the Hungarian Uprising also ap- peared the anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism was a crawling global trending within the context of decolonization and the Middle East Crisis. Th e offi cial Yugoslav policy was becoming anti-Israel orientated. In the later period Yugoslavia has provided systematic support to Palestinian separatists and terrorists. Th e totalitarian reali- ties of Hungary and Yugoslavia contributed to the relativization of antifascism. Th e Janos Kadar restoration of the “real communism” retained the anti-fascist rhetoric, considering the 1956 Uprising as counterrevolutionary. Initially opposed, fascism and communism eventually gained the similarities: totalitarian dictatorship and alien (Soviet) occupation. Th e nationalist resistances to communism warned that anti-fascism is limited by complex realities. Antifascism was an important political conviction in Hungary, after the Horti era, the coalition with Nazi Germany and the “Arrow Cross” regime.11 But already since the end of the 1940-s the anti-fas-
cist sentiments started to fade while facing the horrors and despair under the communism. Th e break-up of Tito with Stalin in 1948, and the concentration of the Soviet troops on the Hungarian border with Yugoslavia were suffi ciently over- whelming. Th e Red Army was no longer considered as liberating, but rather as the occupation force. Th e renunciation of anti-fascism remained the basis of Hungar- ian resistance to the Soviet domination both before and after 1956. Conservative nationalism became a dominant alternative to the Stalinist state and Soviet impe- rialism. Th e political conservatives and the radical right enabled Janos Kadar to characterize the Uprising as an attempt by fascists to confront the communist rule (Mark 2006, 2013).
Th e Hungarian Uprising was a serious temptation for the Yugoslav govern- ment. However, Tito managed to seize the opportunity and redefi ne the status
11 “Hungarian communists conferred legitimacy on their regime by referring to (and in most cases, exaggerating) their role in the antifascist struggle – as partisans and in alliance with the Red Army – and bolstered their authority by claiming to be the best protectors of Hungary from the return of Fascism” (Mark 2006, 2012).
120
of Yugoslavia and his personal role in international relations. He already had a certain experience in that. In the depths of the Yugoslav regime, there was enough understanding of the new approach to the Soviets, and the concrete cooperation in the suppression of the Hungarian Uprising. In one year, Tito met four times with Khrushchev. Apart from helping refugees and formal reactions, the West had no power to help Hungary to leave the Soviet orbit. Th e West remained inactive, and Yugoslavia silent, also during the suppression of the Prague Spring in 1968.
REFERENCES:
Balázs, Eszter and Phil Casoar. 2006. “An Emblematic Picture of the Hungarian 1956 Rev- olution: Photojournalism during the Hungarian Revolution”. Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 58, 8: 1241–1260.
Benziger, Karl P. 2000. “Th e Funeral of Imre Nagy: Contested History and the Power of Memory Culture”. History and Memory, Vol. 12, 2: 142–164.
Cox, Terry. “1956: Discoveries, Legacies and Memory”. Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 58, 8, 1956 and Its Legacy: III–XVI.
Granville, Johanna. 1998. “Hungary, 1956: Th e Yugoslav Connection”. Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 50, 3: 493–517.
Granville, Johanna. 1998. “Josip Broz Tito’s Role in the 1956 ‘Nagy Aff air’”. Th e Slavonic and East European Review, Vol. 76, 4: 672–702.
Granville, Johanna. 2001. “Hungarian and Polish Reactions to the Events of 1956: New Archival Evidence”. Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 53, 7: 1051–1076.
Granville, Johanna. 2002. “1956 Reconsidered: Why Hungary and Not Poland?” Th e Slavon- ic and East European Review, Vol. 80, 4: 656–687.
Granville, Johanna. “Reactions to the Events of 1956: New Findings from the Budapest and Warsaw Archives”. Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 38, 2: 261–290.
Gripp, Richard C. “Eastern Europe’s Ten Years of National Communism: 1948–1958”. Th e Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 13, 4: 934–949.
Hellema, Duco. 1995. “Th e Relevance and Irrelevance of Dutch Anti-Communism: Th e Netherlands and the Hungarian Revolution, 1956–57”. Journal of Contemporary His- tory, Vol. 30, 1: 169–186.
Heller, Agnes and Ferenc Feher. 1983. Th e Message of a Revolution A Quarter of a Century Later. London & Boston : Allen & Unwin.
Kramer, Mark. 1998. “Th e Soviet Union and the 1956 Crises in Hungary and Poland: Reas- sessments and NewFindings”. Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 33, 2: 163–214. Litván, György. 2001. “1956: Crise de Hongrie, Crise de Suez”. Guerres mondiales et confl its
contemporains, 200, Dossier: La Hongrie dans lesconfl its du XXe siècle: 99–114. Ludanyi, Andrew. 1979. “Titoist Integration of Yugoslavia: Th e Partisan Myth & the Hun-
121
Mark, James. 2005. “Society, Resistance and Revolution: Th e Budapest Middle Class and the Hungarian Communist State 1948–56”. Th e English Historical Review, Vol. 120, 488: 963–986.
Mark, James. 2006. “Antifascism, the 1956 Revolution and the Politics of Communist Au- tobiographies in Hungary 1944–2000”. Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 58, 8, 1956 and Its Legacy: 1209–1240.
McCauley, Brian. 1981. “Hungary and Suez, 1956: Th e Limits of Soviet and American Pow- er”. Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 16, 4: 777–800.
Persak, Krzysztof. 2006. “Th e Polish: Soviet Confrontation in 1956 and the Attempted So- viet Military Intervention in Poland.” Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 58, 8, 1956 and Its Legacy: 1285–1310.
Rádvanyi, János. 1970. “Th e Hungarian Revolution and the Hundred Flowers Campaign”. Th e China Quarterly, No. 43: 121–129.
Rainer, János M. 2006. “1956: Th e Mid-Twentieth Century Seen from the Vantage Point of the Beginning of the Next Century”. Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 58, 8, 1956 and Its Legacy: 1189–1198.
Valenta, Jiri. 1983. “Th e Explosive Soviet Periphery”. Foreign Policy, No. 51: 84–100. Wright, Quincy. 1957. “Intervention, 1956”. Th e American Journal of International Law,
Vol. 51, 2: 257–276.
Nedostaju sažetak i ključne reči
Paper received: . Paper reviewed: Paper accepted:
Limes plus. Časopis za društvene i humanističke nauke pripada oblasti naučne pe- riodike i zasnovan je na sistemu recenziranja u vidu dobijanja dve pozitivne anonimne recenzije kao preduslova za prihvatanje radova za štampu. Limes plus objavljuje izvorne naučne članke, pregledne članke, prethodna saopštenja, stručne radove, kao i prikaze iz svih oblasti društvenih i humanističkih nauka, koji nisu prethodno objavljeni niti su pod- neti za objavljivanje u nekoj drugoj publikaciji. Rukopisi treba da budu pripremljeni prema standardima časopisa Limes plus. Rukopisi se dostavljaju elektronskom poštom na adresu: [email protected]
U pripremi rada treba se držati sledećih uputstava:
Rad mora biti napisan u tekst procesoru Microsoft Word, na stranici formata A4, fontom Times New Roman (12 tačaka), latinicom, sa propredom od 1,5 redova. Sve stran- ice moraju biti numerisane. Rad treba da bude dužine do jednog autorskog tabaka (30.000 slovnih mesta ili 20 strana bez referenci i priloga). Izuzetak su pregledni radovi koji mogu biti dužine do 50.000 znakova i prikazi koji mogu biti dužine do 5.000 znakova. Redakcija zadržava pravo da objavi i radove koji premašuju ovu dužinu u slučajevima kada izlaganje naučnog sadržaja zahteva veću dužinu, odnosno prostor.
Časopis objavljuje radove na srpskom i engleskom jeziku.
Naslov rada treba da bude što koncizniji. Iza naslova rada sledi ime i prezime autora. i naziv institucije u kojoj radi. Iza imena prvog autora treba staviti fusnotu koja sadrži e- mail adresu autora. Zvanje autora se ne navodi.
Apstrakt (sažetak) dužine od 150 do 250 reči treba da bude na početku rada is- pod naslova rada. Sastavni delovi apstrakta treba da su: cilj istraživanja, metod, rezultati i zaključak. Apstrakt po pravilu ne sadrži reference. Uz radove na srpskom jeziku treba priložiti i sažetak i ključne reči na engleskom jeziku koji se navode na samom kraju rada, ispod Literature.
Na kraju apstrakta treba navesti do 10 ključnih reči. Pri odabiru ključnih reči poželjno je odabrati one pojmove koji se često pominju za pretragu časopisa.
Tabele i grafi koni treba da budu sačinjeni u Word-u ili nekom drugom Word kom- patibilnom formatu. Isti podaci ne mogu se prezentovati i tabelarno i grafi čki. Sve tabele, grafi koni ili slike treba da budu označeni brojem, sa naslovom koji ih jasno objašnjava. U tekstu se treba pozvati na svaku tabelu, grafi kon ili sliku.
Na kraju rada navodi se lista referenci (literatura, bibliografi ja). Reference se navode abecednim redom po Čikaškom referentnom sistemu i ne prevode se na jezik rada.
Kada se prvi put navodi strano ime u tekstu, u zagradi treba staviti ime napisano u originalu.
Napomene (fusnote) daju se pri dnu strane na kojoj se nalazi komentarisani deo teksta, ne bi trebalo da prelaze 100 reči. Numerišu se arapskim brojevima u kontinuitetu u
124
za komentare.
Stil citiranja i navođenja napomena (fusnota) i izrade liste referenci (literature, bibliografi je) na kraju rada je Čikaški stil (Chicago Style – Humanities). Detaljno uputstvo za korišćenje ovog stila može se naći na http://chicagomanualofstyle.org/home.html. Kada se navode stranice, od jedne do druge, ili kada se navode godine između brojeva stoji crta (–), ne crtica (-).
Po završetku procesa recenziranja, odnosno dobijanja dve pozitivne recenzije, redakcija će obavestiti autora o prihvatanju rada za objavljivanje najkasnije u roku od dva meseca od isteka roka za predaju rada. Autor čiji je rad prihvaćen ne može da ga objavi u bilo kom obliku i obimu u nekoj drugoj štampanoj ili elektronskoj publikaciji bez saglas- nosti urednika časopisa. Redakcija zadržava pravo na jezičke, stilske ili formalne izmene u radovima.
Primeri za upotrebu Čikaškog stila
KNJIGE: u spisku literature: prezime, prvo slovo imena, godina izdanja, naslov kn- jige, mesto izdanja, izdavač. U tekstu: u zagradi prezime autora, godina izdanja, stranica. U napomeni: prezime autora, godina izdanja, stranica. U napomenama, knjiga se citira isključivo na skraćeni način. Primeri: u literaturi: Wright, Erik Olin. 2016. Alternatives to Capitalism: proposal for a democratic economy. London and New York: Verso.; u tekstu: (Wright 2016, 33); u fusnoti: Wright 2016, 33.
POGLAVLJA U KNJIGAMA: u spisku literature: prezime i ime(na) autora, godi- na izdanja, naslov poglavlja pod navodnicima, „U“ naslov knjige u italiku, ime i prezime priređivača, broj stranica i tačka, mesto izdanja, izdavač. U tekstu: u zagradi prezime au- tora, godina izdanja, stranica. U napomenama: poglavlje se citira isključivo na skraćeni način. Primeri: u literaturi: Perović, Latinka. 1997. „A lesson from the past: Th e political elite and modernization in the fi rst decade of independence of the Serbian state.“ U Serbia Between the Past and Future, uredio Dušan Janjić, 101−114. Beograd: Institut za društvene nauke. U tekstu: (Perović 1997, 102). U fusnosti: Perović 2006, 102.
ČLANCI U ČASOPISIMA: u spisku literature: prezime, ime, godina izdanja, naslov teksta pod navodnicima, naslov časopisa u italiku, godište časopisa, broj sveske u godištu ukoliko paginacija nije jedinstvena za ceo tom i broj stranice. U tekstu: u zagradi prezime autora, godina izdanja, stranica. U napomeni: prezime autora, godina izdanja, stranica. Ne stavljaju se skraćenice „str.“, „vol.“, „tom“, „br.“ i sl. U napomenama, članci se citiraju isključivo na skraćeni način. Primeri: u literaturi: Ingrao, Charles. 2009. “Confronting the Yugoslav Controversies: Th e Scholars’ Initiative.” Th e American Historical Review 114(4): 947−962.; u tekstu: (Ingrao 1999, 947).; u fusnoti: Ingrao 1999, 947.
WEB DOKUMENT: treba da sadrži prezime i inicijale (svih) autora, godinu, naslov dokumenta (italik) i adresu internet stranice. Foa, Roberto. 2007. Socioeconom- ic development and parenting values. Retrieved from http://www.roberto.foa.name/ Parenting_Attitudes_Foa.