著者

河本 和子

出版者

ロシア史研究会

雑誌

ロシア史研究 (ISSN:03869229)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.89, pp.23-39, 2012-01-31 (Released:2017-07-25)

---

В конце 1950-х - начале 1960-х гг. в СССР много говорилосв о том, что в процссе дальнейшего развития социалистической демократии должно произойти постепенное превращение органов государственной власти в органы коммунистического общественного самоуправления. Именно в это время не только на предприятиях, в различных учреждениях и организациях, но и при городских домах, обслуживаемых ЖЭКами, домоуправлениями или объединяеых уличными комитетами, а также в сельских населенных пунктах по всему Совесскому Союзу было создано огромное количество товарищеских судов с целью того, чтобы общественноть самостоятельно разбирала некоторые проступки и мелкие правонарушения граждан, частично выполняя при этом функции государственных судов. Одновременно с этом товарищеский суд был призван содействовать воспитанию граждан в духе коммунистической идеологии путем общественного воздействия на нарушителей правил социалистического общежития. Вследствие этого, возникала возможность прямого вмешательства в личную жизнь граждан со стороны общества и власти. Дела, рассматриваемые товарищескими судами, в общем, могут быть разделены на три категории: 1) дела по нарушению трудовой дисциплины; 2) дела по нарушению общественного порадка, в том числе дела по спорам, возникающими между гражданами; 3) дела по семейным спорам. Таким образом, с точки зрения повседевной жизни, компетенция товарищеского суда была крайие шинока, однако это не означало, чло общественность всегда имела право вторгаться в личную жизнь граждан. Как правило, считалось, что товарищеский суд не может вмешиваться в обдасть любовного чувства между мужчиной и женщиной, хотя вмешательство в такие отношения также не было полностью исключено. Таким образом, можносказать, что личная жизнь постоянно подвергалась угрозе вмешательства со стороны общества в лице товарищеского суда. С другой стороны, такой интерес общества к частной жизни мог оказать иной эффект. Например, когда прогулы совершались по причине семейного конфликта, товарищеский суд нередко принимал во внимание обстоятельства жизни в семье нарушителей и выносил более мягкие решения. Иными словами, плоисходящее в личной жизни могло оказывать свое влияние на общественную и публичную жизнь челогека.

著者

河本 和子

出版者

一般財団法人 日本国際政治学会

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2020, no.201, pp.201_82-201_97, 2020-09-15 (Released:2022-03-31)

参考文献数

79

---

This essay reveals how the newborn Soviet government as the first socialist government in history treated the properties and property rights of foreigners, including concessioners, who were entitled to invest their properties in Soviet Russia. The private property system was the most important issue in the antagonism between socialist and capitalist regimes; therefore, by tracing Soviet policies on foreigners’ properties, we can ascertain how the Soviet government compromised, however insufficiently, its socialist mission to coexist with the capitalist West and then ended those compromises to build socialism in one country.The Soviet government, created by the Bolsheviks upon the October Revolution in 1917, embarked on the abolition of the private property system through policies such as the socialization of land, the nationalization of banks and enterprises, and removing the inheritance system. The government also cancelled all foreign debt for the sake of the revolution. Further, the Bolsheviks dropped out of World War I in March 1918 to make a separate peace treaty with Germany, leaving its former Entente allies behind. These actions were met with anger and distrust by the Entente, and the U.K., France, and other former allies even militarily intervened in Russia’s revolution, further intensifying its civil war. Though its government survived this war, it left Soviet Russia economically exhausted and diplomatically isolated.Despite mutual distrust between Soviet Russia and the West, economic and diplomatic relations were soon restored after the civil war. The Soviet government wanted foreign capital for economic recovery and further development, while the West sought stability in international relations and investment destinations. Particularly, Western countries demanded that Soviet Russia secure conditions for normal capitalist economic activities under its socialist government. In response, the Soviet government guaranteed property rights under certain restrictions and restored the inheritance system by enacting the Civil Code in 1922. The Bolsheviks understood this partially rebuilt Soviet market economy as a compromise with the socialist revolution.The Soviet government further called for concession projects from foreign countries and in turn granted concessions to foreigners for their economic activities. However, Soviet authorities, loyal to their socialist cause, often obstructed the concessioners to confront the concessions administrations. Furthermore, by the mid-1920s, Soviet leadership felt the country’s relations with the West were beginning to strain, which only increased the hostility to concessioners and fueled intra-party struggles. This led to Soviet Russia’s radical industrialization and construction of socialism under the first five-year plan. Accompanying this plan, most of the concessions were liquidated in the course of nationalization. The Soviet Union thus became increasingly isolated because of its soured economic and political relations with the West.

著者

河本 和子

出版者

日本国際政治学会 ; 1957-

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

no.201, pp.82-97, 2020-09

著者

河本 和子

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2008, no.152, pp.19-35,L6, 2008-03-15 (Released:2010-09-01)

参考文献数

57

---

This study illustrates the gender norms embedded in the socio-political orders in the Soviet Union in the past and in the Russian Federation in the present days, and also sketches how they differ each other and why. For this purpose the author examines following two aspects: the basic principles on women's role and the actual circumstances of women in the society.In the Soviet ideological principles, all the people, including women as well as men had to work. They thought that wage work would make women economically independent so that they would eventually be emancipated. The Soviet government actually encouraged women to find employment and in later period the number of female workers even slightly exceeded that of male, though female wages in general remained lower.This line of thought appears to exclude the existence of the gender notion. There was, however, another line. The Soviet government not only encouraged women to work but also expected them to bear children and take care of families as mothers. Women then had to do most of housework other than their daily jobs. This so-called “double burden” was mitigated to some extent by the state support in order that female workers could meet their responsibility at work and at home. In other words, family life was not simply a private matter but a matter of the state's concern.In spite of the heavy burden, women seemed to generally accept their gendered role with lower-wage work and housework duties, particularly if their husbands earned more. However, some soviet writers insisted especially in the period of Perestroika that women would prefer to stay home if possible economically.After the collapse of the Soviet Union, there have been no definite governmental principles on women's role as in the Soviet period. However, political and economic liberalism, which the new Russian government has adopted at least theoretically, has a certain influence on the women's position. Political liberalism draws a line between public and private affairs and this newly introduced ideology, combined with the severe economic crisis, has led to the cut-off of the state support to family. Economic liberalism justifies the dismissal of female workers for they are more expensive than male.Under these circumstances the number of female workers was drastically reduced. However, many women are still working and they represent almost half of the entire number of workers. Several researches show that women in Russia want to work rather than stay home even if possible economically. Same researches also demonstrate that women think that they should take the responsibility of doing housework and indeed they do so. Women's “double burden” and their attitude toward it survived the regime change at the present moment.

著者

河本 和子

出版者

ロシア史研究会

雑誌

ロシア史研究 (ISSN:03869229)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.71, pp.27-44, 2002-10-18 (Released:2017-07-25)

著者

竹中 千春 網谷 龍介 磯崎 典世 戸田 真紀子 田村 慶子 小川 有美 中田 瑞穂 津田 由美子 合場 敬子 森本 泉 小嶋 華津子 柄谷 利恵子 勝間 靖 浪岡 新太郎 中村 文子 河本 和子 木村 真希子 中村 唯 小倉 清子 サンギータ ラマ アニー ダンダヴァティ ウルバシ ブタリア パメラ フィリポーズ

出版者

立教大学

雑誌

基盤研究(A)

巻号頁・発行日

2008

---

ジェンダー研究の提起した概念や理論を導入し、国際政治学・国際関係論の再構築をめざすプロジェクトである。グローバリゼーションの波を被る国家や社会、および「国際体制(International Regime)」の変動について、成熟社会・成長社会・危機社会における政治過程と政治現象の事例分析をもとに、現代世界における「ジェンダー・ダイナミクス(gender dynamics)」を分析した。

著者

河本 和子

出版者

岩波書店

雑誌

思想 (ISSN:03862755)

巻号頁・発行日

no.1025, pp.72-95, 2009-09