AROUND 1968 – DANISH HISTORIOGRAPHY

This article is divided into three parts. The first part outlines the cultural and political leftist revolt of the 1960s and 1970s in Denmark by presenting the different periodizations linked to various aspects of the revolt and by introducing a variety of perceptions of its causes, course and impact. In the next section, apart from pointing out some of the important lacunae, I provide an overview of the genres and topics that characterise the historiography. Studies of social movements and political parties, for example, are heavily overrepresented. In the third and concluding part, I propose that the thematic and methodological distinction in the historiography between the cultural and political aspects of the revolt should be blurred and deconstructed.     

FROM MEMORY TO HISTORY: YEAR 1968 IN FINLAND

As in other Scandinavian countries, in Finland the year 1968 has become a significant memory place, still influencing the current political debate. The first part of the article discusses how the 1960s started in Finland already during the 1950s when matters like internationalism and the Third World, pacifism, party‐political activities, women's issues, critical attitudes towards the church and the army etc. had already begun to affect the general opinion. The student movement in Finland was an essential part of the modernisation process with clear aims and cultural and political consequences. The students became main bearers of radically different vision of society, crucial years being 1964–68. The movement culminated in the occupation of Old Student's House in Helsinki in November 1968. The second part of the article discusses the development of Finnish historiography, as seen in the context of 1968.     

A Matter of Courtesy: The Role of Soviet Diplomacy and Soviet “System Safeguards” in Maintaining Soviet Influence on Czechoslovak Science before and after 1968

In 1969, a few short months after the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia, Sergei I. Prasolov, advisor to the Soviet Ambassador in Prague, informed František Šorm, President of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, at a formal meeting that he welcomed Šorm's suggestion to intensify scientific exchange between Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union. Šorm politely declined this offer. Behind the veneer of diplomatic courtesy on the part of both actors, a real drama was taking place. Šorm and the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences had actually never formulated such a request. To the contrary, since the late 1950s the academy had repeatedly pointed out that the Soviets were incapable of coordinating scientific activities in the Eastern Bloc. The Soviet system of academic cooperation within the Eastern Bloc had already begun to collapse after the Geneva Summit of 1955, where the Soviets opened the door to international collaboration across the Iron Curtain. Yet it was only in the late 1960s that the Soviets realized that while they dominated large-scale international collaboration, they had lost control of internal developments within the Eastern Bloc.     

‘Angelic Spirits of ‘68’: Memories of 60s’ Radicalism in Responses to the 2010–11 UK Student Protests

The winter of 2010–11 saw a significant upsurge of student protest in Britain. This paper analyses the numerous references to 60s’ radicalism which circulated in responses to the protests, with a focus on left-wing media. Drawing on performativity theory, the paper traces the highly polarised divisions between affirmations and repudiations of ‘1968’ in responses to the protests. This polarisation, I argue, reflects an absence of a clear-cut collective memory of the British radical 60s. More broadly, the paper sheds light on the hitherto under-explored mechanisms through which memories of ‘1968’ shape the discursive and affective landscape of contemporary radical politics.     

‘1968’ IN NORWAY: PIECEMEAL,PEACEFUL AND POSTMODERN

The first part of this essay presents an outline of ‘1968’ in Norway focusing on national particularities, especially the lack of violence. Three elements are highlighted: the political left turn with the opposition to the Vietnam War and the strong Marxist‐Leninist faction as main aspects; the student revolt; and the multifarious countercultural movement. The theme of the second part is the state of Norwegian 1968 historiography. Here a distinction is drawn between actors‐cum‐historians and historians proper, or rather between writers with a desire to commemorate – predominantly but not exclusively former communists – and writers whose interest in the events is more professionally historiographic.     

Words,songs and books. Oral history in Italy. A review and discussion

Abstract

This short article aims to do three things. First, tell the ‘history of Italian oral history’ — a history which begins on the Left and in the south, and then slowly moves towards the city and the big questions of conemporary Italian history: Fascism, the Resistance, 1968, gender studies. Second, the article examines some of the most important methodological debates concerning the collection, use and interpretation of oral historical material, and the links which have been made with other disciplines. Third, there is a discussion of the possible didactic uses of oral history in schools and universities. The piece also highlights some of the main ‘schools’ which have emerged within the discipline over the last fifty years and the possible trends for the future of oral history. In addition, the bibliography and notes bring together the most important (and sometimes obscure) works of oral history produced since the war.     

1968 and its other worlds: Global events and (anti-)state dynamics in France,Mozambique and Vanuatu

ABSTRACT

This article de-centres the moment, event and impact of 1968 and expands it temporally and spatially. Taking a longue durée approach charting a trajectory from the 1960s into the 1980s, we analyse statist and anti-statist dynamics through a comparison of the May 1968 Paris riots with the Nagriamel movement in Vanuatu and the phenomenon of Naparama in Mozambique. Such a horizontal triangulation and spatio-temporal expansion is undertaken to contribute to a more global understanding of what we term ‘the 1968 event’ entails. However, this comparative analysis also underlines how its impact should be measured as, first, an experimentation with and attack on political reality, second, how the intricate connections between Euro-American and other worlds were integral to its articulation and, third, how paradoxically 1968 and its response spawned the rise of an authoritarian form of nation-state – eclipsing the openings in the firmament of the political, social and the real afforded by the original event.     

MAOISM IN NORWAY

The Maoist movement was the most visible expression of the 1968 uprising in Norway. But the Maoists soon waved goodbye to the anti‐authoritarian vibes of 1968, and what had started out as a pacifist and slightly anarchistic movement, soon evolved into one of the strongest Marxist–Leninist movements in the Western world in the 1970s. Maoism was first and foremost an imported package, but found fertile soil in the egalitarian and to some extent puritan Norway.     

Strukturwandel der Wissenschaft im Nationalsozialismus

National Socialism brought about profound changes for the German academic system. Forced emigration not just sent outstanding scholars into exile, thus closing down promising research venues. In fact, it changed the entire climate of scientific inquiry by removing intellectual outsiders from the scene, whose absence usually precludes any success of innovative research. In most disciplines this led to a dominance of just a few academic ‘schools’ and paradigms, which severely harmed intra‐discipline accountability and innovation. The academic bureaucracy worked more effectively than has been assumed for a long time: practice‐oriented research enjoyed massive state support, and huge research projects outside the universities flourished. At the same time the National Socialists looked ambivalently at the universities themselves. They savored the legitimizing functions of the arts and sciences, and yet they distrusted the professors as exponents of the bourgeois world of old. Contrary to the blooming sciences such as biology, chemistry, and physics, the arts and humanities had a hard time demonstrating their practical applicability. In order to prove their worth by means of giving advice to the political sphere, they formed interdisciplinary combines, which were massively funded by the ‘Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft’. The ‘Deutsche Wissenschaft’, which has been incorrectly marginalized in numerous accounts, served in part to provide a Weltanschauung justification for these networks. While the German academic community in 1945 tried to pick up the threads of the a‐political self‐ understanding of the 1920s, in fact there were numerous continuities to academic life before and after 1945. Among them were the encompassing loss of international contacts, the strengthening of hierarchical structures, and the importance of feasibility criteria for the culture of innovation. The arts and humanities (Geisteswissenschaften) could not regain the lost territory of significance, which they had suffered during the Third Reich. It is mainly their development which showed an amazing persistence of national socialist patterns of view and of concepts of the enemy, which in turn as late as 1968 inspired in part the anti‐bourgeois thrust of the critique of the academic world.     

SWEDEN AND THE LONG ‘1968’: BREAK OR CONTINUITY?

The first part gives a chronological overview of the Swedish ‘1968’, in this article defined as a phenomenon with its roots in the late 1950s and it's end around 1980. Three phases are identified: a ‘liberal’ until 1965, a ‘red’ in the late 1960s and the ‘diversified’ 1970s. Underlying this time schedule are two characteristics of the Swedish ‘1968’ in its extended form: the role of the social movements and the interaction between old and new movements; and the unique role of the intellectuals. The second part discusses the (late and limited) research so far on this topic in Sweden. The academic works are still few and the critical debate little developed. One of the topics discussed is to what extent ‘1968’ was something fundamentally new and to what extent it was influenced by older social movements.