765 Izvirni znanstveni članek/Arcle (1.01) Bogoslovni vestnik/Theological Quarterly 79 (2019) 3, 765—785 Besedilo prejeto/Received:12/2019; sprejeto/Accepted:12/2019 UDK/UDC: 321.64:1Osuský S. Š. DOI: hps://doi.org/10.34291/BV2019/03/Valco Michal Valčo, Katarína Valčová, Daniel Slivka, Nina I. Kryuko- va, Dinara G. Vasbieva and Elmira R. Khairullina Samuel Štefan Osusky’s Theological-Prophec Cricism of War and Totalitarianism Osuskýjeva teološko-preroška krika vojne in totalitarizma Abstract: This arcle analyzes the thought legacy of Samuel Štefan Osuský (1888– 1975), a famous Slovak philosopher and theologian, pertaining to his fight aga- inst totalitarianism and war. Having lived during arguably the most difficult peri- od of (Czecho-)Slovak history, which included the two world wars, the emergen- ce of independent Czechoslovakia in 1918, its fateful, forceful split by Nazi Ger- many in 1939, followed by its reestablishment aſter WWII in 1945, only to be afflicted again by a new kind of totalitarianism on the leſt, it is no surprise that Osuský aimed his philosophical and theological cricism especially at the two great human ideologies of the 20 th century – Fascism (including its German, ra- cial version, Nazism, which he preferred to call »Hitlerism«), and Communism (above all in its historical shape of Stalinist Bolshevism). Aſter exploring the hu- man predicament in »boundary situaons,« i.e. situaons of ulmate anxiety, despair but also hope and trust, religious moves seemed to gain the upper hand, according to Osuský. As a »raonal theist,« he aempted to draw from theology, philosophy and science as complementary sources of wisdom combining them in his struggle to find sasfying insights for larger quesons of meaning. Osusky’s ideas in his book War and Religion (1916) and arcle The Philosophy of Bolshe- vism, Fascism, and Hitlerism (1937) manifest the much-needed prophec insight that has the potenal to enlighten our own struggle against the creeping forces of totalitarianism, right and leſt that seek to engulf our sociees today. Keywords: Samuel Štefan Osuský, communism, bolshevism, Nazism/Hitlerism, anthropology, war Povzetek: Članek analizira miselno zapuščino Samuela Štefana Osuskýja (1888– 1975), znanega slovaškega filozofa in teologa, ki se nanaša na njegov boj pro totalitarizmu in vojni. Osuský je živel v najtežjem obdobju (češko-)slovaške zgo- dovine. V njem sta se zgodili dve svetovni vojni in potem, 1918., nastanek ne- odvisne Češkoslovaške, ki pa jo je 1939. silovito in usodno razklala nacisčna Nemčija. Po drugi svetovni vojni, leta 1945, je bila Češkoslovaška ponovno vzpo-
21
Embed
Michal Valčo, Katarína Valčová, Daniel Slivka, Nina I ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Michal Valčo, Katarína Valčová, Daniel Slivka, Nina I. Kryuko-va, Dinara G. Vasbieva and Elmira R. Khairullina Samuel Štefan Osusky’s Theological-Prophetic Criticism of War and TotalitarianismOsuskýjeva teološko-preroška kritika vojne in totalitarizma
Abstract: ThisarticleanalyzesthethoughtlegacyofSamuelŠtefanOsuský(1888–1975),afamousSlovakphilosopherandtheologian,pertainingtohisfightaga-insttotalitarianismandwar.Havinglivedduringarguablythemostdifficultperi-odof(Czecho-)Slovakhistory,whichincludedthetwoworldwars,theemergen-ceofindependentCzechoslovakiain1918,itsfateful,forcefulsplitbyNaziGer-manyin1939,followedbyitsreestablishmentafterWWIIin1945,onlytobeafflictedagainbyanewkindoftotalitarianismontheleft,itisnosurprisethatOsuskýaimedhisphilosophicalandtheologicalcriticismespeciallyatthetwogreat human ideologies of the 20thcentury–Fascism(includingitsGerman,ra-cialversion,Nazism,whichhepreferredtocall»Hitlerism«),andCommunism(aboveallinitshistoricalshapeofStalinistBolshevism).Afterexploringthehu-manpredicamentin»boundarysituations,«i.e.situationsofultimateanxiety,despairbutalsohopeandtrust,religiousmotivesseemedtogaintheupperhand,accordingtoOsuský.Asa»rationaltheist,«heattemptedtodrawfromtheology,philosophyandscienceascomplementarysourcesofwisdomcombiningtheminhisstruggletofindsatisfyinginsightsforlargerquestionsofmeaning.Osusky’sideas in his book War and Religion (1916)andarticleThePhilosophyofBolshe-vism,Fascism,andHitlerism(1937)manifestthemuch-neededpropheticinsightthathasthepotentialtoenlightenourownstruggleagainstthecreepingforcesoftotalitarianism,rightandleftthatseektoengulfoursocietiestoday.
stavljena,ajojetakojspetprizadelanovavrstatotalitarizma,tokratlevega.Zatonasnepreseneča,dajeOsuskýsvojofilozofskointeološkokritikousmerilzlastivdvevelikičloveškiideologiji20.stoletja:fašizem(vključnoznjegovonemško,rasnorazličico,nacizmom,okateremjerajegovorilkoto»hitlerizmu«)inkomunizem(predvsemvnjegovizgodovinskioblikistalinističnegaboljševiz-ma).Zdise,dajeOsuský,poraziskovanjučloveškestiskev»mejnihsituacijah«,tj.vrazmerahskrajnetesnobe,obupa,patudiupanjainzaupanja,dalprednostverskimtemam.Kot»racionalniteist«jeposkušalčrpatiizteologije,filozofijeinznanostikotkomplementarnihvirovmodrosti,kijihjepovezovalvsvojemprizadevanju,dabinašelzadovoljiveodgovorenavečjavprašanjasmisla.Osu-skýjeveideje,iznjegoveknjigeVojna in religija(1916)terčlankaFilozofijabolj-ševizma,fašizmainhitlerizma(1937),razodevajoprepotrebenpreroškiuvid,kilahkorazsvetlinašlastenbojprotipotuhnjenimsilamtotalitarizma,desnegainlevega,kidanesposkušajozavladatinašidružbi.
1. IntroductionSamuelŠtefanOsuský(1888–1975)wasabishopoftheLutheranChurchinSlo-vakiaandaprofessoroftheologyattheLutheranTheologicalSchoolinBratislava.OneofthemostversatileintellectualoftheLutheranChurchatthetime,Osuskýwasknownforhisexpertiseinphilosophy(includingphilosophyofreligion),psychology,religioushistory,andsociology.Hegrewupinhumblecircumstancesasasonofatanner.Nevertheless,hegotgoodeducation,firstattheHighSchoolinTrnava(TrnavskeGymnasium)andthenLutheranLyceumandtheTheologicalAcademyinBratislava.Osuskýcontinuedinhistheologicalstudiesabroad,firstinErlangen,theninJenaandLeipzigandlaterinhisphilosophicalstudiesattheFa-cultyofPhilosophyofCharlesUniversityinPrague.HeearnedhisdoctorateinphilosophyinPraguein1922.Hisseconddoctoratewasfromlaw(fromtheLawAcademyinPresov,Slovakia,in1941).Osuský’swholeprofessionallifewascon-nectedwiththeSlovakLutheranTheologicalFacultyinBratislavawherehestartedteachingasassistantprofessorin1919,laterbecomingatenured,fullprofessorofphilosophy.Unfortunately,itwasnothisoldagethatmadehimquithisbelo-ved job but rather the communist totalitarian machinery made him abdicate and acceptanearlyretirementin1950,attheageof62.
1 or»re-education«laborcamps?Osuský’sideasinhisbookWar and Religion (1916)andhisarticleonThePhilosophyofBolshevism,Fascism,andHitlerism(1937)manifestthemuch-neededpropheticinsightthathasthepotentialtoenlightenourownstruggleagainstthecreepingforcesoftotalitarianism,rightandleft.
2. Osuský’s views on the war and its relationship to religionThequestionconcerningtherelationshipbetween»WarandReligion«isafoun-dationalquestion,inOsuský’sview,whereotherimportantconcernsmeetand/orgettheirrelentlessurgency.Whetheritisthequestionofthesufferingoftheinnocent,ortherelationshipofGod’sKingdomtotheearthlykingdom(s),theyallseemtopointtotheultimatequestionthatwasaskedduringtheGreatWar(WWI):»HowcouldajustGodallowsuchbloodshed?«(Osuský1916,3)ThewayOsuskýarticulatesthisquestionmakesitevenmorepoignant:»Howcouldsuchhighlypraisedcultureandhumanenesshavelaidsuchutmostterroronthesho-uldersofman?HowcouldthemostChristianandmostenlightenedofnationshaveburnedwithsuchterrifyingangeragainsteachother,forgettingeverythingthatisChristian,honorable,conscientious?Howisitthatthemorenoblearemorepronetofallthanthelesser!?«(3)WhileOsuskýadmitsthatbeinginthemidstofthewarfrenzyrendersanyandallinterpretersunobjective(toaconsiderabledegree),hefeelstheburdentoaddressthisquestionandasksGodforhelpinghimwiththistask.Hedoessodespiteexpectingtoaddonly»afewburningchar-coalsintothefire«(4)ofliterarytreasureofthenation.
2 ThenextsectioninOsuský’sbookonWar and Religionisdevotedtowhatthe
SlovakLutherantheologiansthinkaboutthewar.HenoticesthatmostLutheranpastorstendtobecautiousaboutpronouncingjudgments,letaloneinstigatingpeopletoembracetheseeminglyomnipresentwarfrenzy.Theirstatementsarepastoral,promptingforalleviationofthesufferingofthewoundedsoldiersandprayingforpeace.Theroleofthechurchisseenprimarilyinpreparingforandworkingtowardspeace.Sometheologiansreflectonthepossiblereasonsbehindthewar,arguingthatGodispunishingtheevilofhumanhearts,lettinghumanna-tionswagewaragainsteachother.Yet,thisisnotGod’soriginalplan,perhapsnotevenanactivedoingbutratherapassivedivinejustice,allowingthesethingstohappenasaself-inducedpunishment.Osuský’sliftsup(aboveallothers)MartinRazus’stancetowardthewar,remindinghisreadersofGod’spassivitywithregardtoongoinghumanwareffortsandtheutmostillegitimacyofcallinguponGod’snamewhenfightingforvictory.(Osuský1916,24‒28)CriticalremarksareofferedpertainingthemagazineStraz na Sione [TheZionWatchtower]whosearticlesten-dedtoeuphemizethedisastrousconsequencesofwar,liftingupinsteadthepo-tential»benefitsofwar.«96F
5 and variousstrandsofFascismwereright.Nothumanlyinvented,totalitarian(andpseudo-religious)ideologieswillusheranageofpeaceandprosperity.TheonlyworldviewthatOsuskýhopeshasthispotential–atleastontheEuropeanconti-nentandonlywhenappliedcompetentlyintherealmofhumancivicresponsibi-lities–is»internationalizedChristianity.«(Osuský1916,50) 9 9F
3. Osuský’s Struggle Against Fascism and »Hitlerism«AmongOsuský’smanypronouncementsagainstFascism,especiallyintheformofGerman»Hitlerism,«orNazism,onestandsoutasuniquelysystematicand
InhislectureonthephilosophyofBolshevism,Fascism,andHitlerism,OsuskýsetouttoanalyzethesourcesunderlyingFascism,includingtheracial-biologicalconceptionofFascismofAdolfHitler–OsuskýcalledthisversionofFascism,»Hi-tlerism,«commonlyknownasNazism.Osuskýdidnothaveenoughtimetopro-videacomprehensiveaccount.Giventhehistoricsituatednessanditsimmediateneeds,heexploredtheLutheran»flirting«withtheideasofFascismasheobser-veditinhistoryandthepresent.OsuskýidentifiesfourelementsthesynergyofwhichhelpedFascismemergeasapotentideologicalmovement.(1)ThefirstoneistheRenaissancemovementwithitspreferencefornationinsteadofthechurch.(2)ThesecondoneisMachiavelli’sThe Prince (1532).Thisis,accordingtoOsuský,»thefirstteacherofMussoliniandhisfascism.Itisonlynecessarytoinsertthe
Inadditiontoidealizingthesovereign self,Osuskýcriticizedtheidealization of the state and the aristocratswhoallegedlyhadthenaturalrighttoruleand»gu-ide«thestate.QuotingtheFascistwriterJuliusEvola(1898‒1974),Osuskýwrites:»›Thelightofasublimemythshinesinusaristocrats,inbeingswhosevisageisfrightful,whobreathefreelyinaworldfreedfromProvidence,teachersandrea-sonsforthings,butnowlookingintotheshadowswherethereisnoGodandwheretheythemselvesarehiscreators.‹«(Osuský2013,210)102F
ThereisyetanotherrootofFascism,accordingtoOsuský:the idealization of war,whichstandonthemetaphysicalpresuppositionthatwaristhedeepestna-tureofallthings.Thisviewpromptsustobelievethatconflictistheprimary(infactevennormative)expressionoflifeanditsvitality.Ifunderstoodwell,liferequiresbothphysicalandmentalvitality.Attimesitevendemandsactsofhero-ismandsacrifice.Conflictsontheindividuallevelarenotdesirableinviewoftheneedsofthetotalized,divinizedstate,however.Inplaceofinternationalsolidari-tyandclasswarfareadvocatedbythecommunists,Mussoliniandotherfascistscallforaclasssolidarityandnationalwarfare.Lifeisfullofviciousdynamics,al-waysinmotion,permeatedbyconflictandwar.Thisdynamicisthemostfunda-mentallawofhistoryandcannotbeavoided(notinthelongterm,inanycase).
9 OsuskýherecitesHerbertSchneider’sbookThe Making of the Fascist State (Schneider1929,346).
12 OsuskýsummarizesthethoughtshereofanotherfamousGermanNaziideologist,AlfredRosenberg,whoinhisbookThe Myth of Blood of the 20th Century assertsthat»toacknowledgefreedomtodayforCzechsandPolesmeanstobewedtoracialchaos«(Osuský2013,219).
4. Osuský’s Struggle Against BolshevismSoonafterthewar(WWII),theatmospherewas»shapedbyareshufflingofthepoliticalforcesintherenewedCzecho-Slovakia.«(Olexák2018,155)Asmentionedbefore,wefindintriguingparallelsandoverlapsbetweentheextremerightideo-logiesofFascismandHitlerism(asracialtypeofFascism)andtheideologiesontheextremeleft–Communism,especiallyinitsappliedversionofStalinistBolshevism.OsuskýwasoneofthefewintellectualsofhistimesinCzechoslovakia(andinEu-rope)whorealizedwithfullsobernesstheevillurkingbehindthesociallyluringfaçadeofBolshevism.Duetoalackofspace,whatfollowsisasuccinctsummaryandevaluationofthisideology,basedonOsuský’sNovemberlecturein1937.
16Theper-vasivechaosofthegreedyhumanheart(whichChristiantheologycallsthestateof»sinfulness«)engendersinjustice,insecurity,anger(amongotherthings),butalsoadesireforstabilityand/orequality(perceivedas»justice«)atanycost.Attherootoftheunyieldingtendencyofhumansocietiestoascribeblametoexter-nal»enemies«–whetherthesebetheJews,aswehaveseenintheracialvariantofFascism(theGermanNazism),orthekulaksandbourgeoisie,aswehaveseenintheBolshevistrevolutionandsubsequentCommunisttotalitarianregimesinCentralandEasternEuropeafterWWII–isthefrivolousdenialofthecommonhumanpredicamentof»depravity,«aninneralienationandintrinsicself-cente-redness of the human self.
(2)Inourattemptstosaveoursocietiesandthewellbeing,towhichwebelie-vetobeentitled,wethentendtoidealizethestateasthebearerofstabilityandjustice(inwhateverwaywemayperceiveit).Itisrevealingtonoticethatthiskindofidealizationandabsolutizationofthestateisintrinsictoideologiesonbothsi-desofthespectrum,rightandleft.Thechaosofthegreedyhumanheart,unlea-shedwithanewforceinthelaissez-faircapitalismattheturnofthecenturies(19th‒20thcenturies),madeitattractiveforacriticalmassofpeopletohandtheirfates(andmanyoftheirbasicrights)overtotheirnewleaderswhobegantobeseenaspoliticalmessiahs,suchasMussolini,Hitler,Lenin,Stalinandothers.(Oborskyetal.2018)Thechaosofthegreedyheartasexemplifiedhereincludes,naturally,theunjustworldorderofWesternimperialismandcolonialismofthe19th and 20thcenturies.This,alongwiththewoundednationalprideanddignityoftheGermansasanation,constitutedafertilegroundfortheemergenceofaFuehrerwhowouldrideonthewaveofresentmentandanger,makingitsnationcommitcrimesofunimaginableproportions.
Anewconceptionofsovereigntyemergedwiththesenewleaders.Beneathitsnewveil,»sovereigntyontheearthappearsasthepowertoreducehumanlifetobarelife,lifethatcannotberedeemed,lifethatisutterlybanishedinandbysovereignty'sveryassertionofdominioninthenameofProvidence,oflawandorder.«(Adkins-Hinlicky2013,203)Justiceasanobjectivereality,orevenasanobjectivetobepursued,isnolongerrecognizedbecauseitis»completelysubor-dinatedtotheallegedneedsandinterestsoftheVolk.«EncyclopaediaBritannica2019,https://www.britannica.com/event/Nazism)AsAdkinsandHinlicky(2013,203)provokinglyargue,theregimesbuiltuponthisnewconceptionofsovereign-tyareessentiallybiopolitical,havingits»essencerevealedintheextremitiesoftheconcentrationcampsoftheNazisortheGulagoftheSoviets.«Butwhatisevenmoredisturbingisthatwecantracevestigesofthiskindthinkinganditsmalignantmanifestations»intherefugeesoftodaywhoareturnedaway,sincetheyaremerely»human«;just»bare«life,notcitizensofourcityundercontractwithpoliticalsovereignty.«(203)Ourresponsibilitytothehumanracethuscol-lapsesunderourperceivedresponsibilitytothewellbeingandprotectionofournation/country.Howmuchdifferent is this from20th century Fascism and
Michal Valčo idr. - Samuel Štefan Osusky’s Theological-Prophetic Criticism ...
18 is, in additiontoanalwayspartialandideologicalrepresentationofrealityitself,partofthesocialconstructionthatisconsolidatedastruthinourlearningprocess.Thestereotypeintheperceptionandconsiderationofmigrantsisoneoftherisksthatcanprovokeandconsolidateinequalityinmanycountriesoftheworld.«(Marfil--Carmona–Ortiz-Cobo2019,192)
(3)Someblameandresponsibilityforthehorrorsofthe20th century ought to be ascribedcriticallytoChristianliberaltheology,especiallytheliberalProtestantthe-ology of the 19th century. This is not to deny the fact that »religious based commu-nitiesandinstitutionsplayedasignificantroleincultivatingboth,thediscontentwiththeregimeaswellasthecourageandresolveofthepopulationtostanduptoit,«(Šturák2016,39);nevertheless,theso-called»Kultur-Protestantismus«112F
21 AsBinettiandPavlíková(2019,192)reminduspertainingtheissueofsociallysituatedfreedom,»thedeepestintentionoffreebecomingispersonalidentitythatdoesnotremainasamereunattainableendbuthasitsconcretefulfilmentinthepresence of the self before God and alongside others, through the unifying force of love.«
Adkins, Brent, and Paul R. Hinlicky. 2013. Rethin-king philosophy and theology with Deleuze: A new cartography.A&CBlack.
Ambrozy, Marian, Roman Kralik and Jose Garcia Martin. 2017. Determinism vs freedom: Some ethics-socialimplications.XLinguae 10, no. 4:48–57.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2017.10.04.05
Ambrozy, Marian, and Peter Sagat.2019.Axiolo-gicalaspectinthecontextofteachingphilo-sophy. XLinguae12,no.3:218–227.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2019.12.03.16
Binetti, Maria, and Martina Pavlíková. 2019. Kierkegaardonthereconciliationofconscien-ce. XLinguae12,no.3:192–200.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2019.12.03.14
Dulebová, Irina, and Radoslav Štefančík. 2017. SecuritizationtheoryoftheCopenhagenschoolfromtheperspectiveofdiscourseanalysisandpoliticallinguistics. XLinguae 10, no.2:51–62.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2017.10.02.05
Encyclopaedia Britannica. 2019. »Nazism.« March 15,2019.https://www.britannica.com/event/Nazism(accessedApril04,2019).
Galushkin, Alexander A., Valeriy I. Prasolov, Anvar N. Khuziakhmetov, Zhanna M. Sizova and Irina V. Vasenina.2018.Aggressivenessand social aggression in the youth enviro-nment:philosophicalandpsychologicalfieldofinterpretation.XLinguae 11, no. 2:106–119. https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2018.11.02.09
Gažík, Peter. 2012. Samuel Štefan Osuský: Moder-ný filozof náboženstva. Žilina:EDIS.
Hinlicky, Paul R. 2016. Between Humanist Philo-sophy and Apocalyptic Theology: The Twentieth Century Sojourn of Samuel Stefan Osuský.
Ibragimov, Ibragim D., Badma V. Sangadzhiev, Sergey N. Kashurnikov, Ivan A. Sharonov and Julia A. Krokhina.2018.Machiavellianismandmanipulation:fromsocialphilosophytosocialpsychology.XLinguae 11, no. 2:404–419. https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2018.11.02.33
Máhrik, Tibor.2018.Truthasthekeymetaethicalcategory in Kierkegaard. XLinguae 11, no. 1:40–48.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2018.11.01.04
Marfil-Carmona, Rafael, and Monica Ortiz-Cobo. 2019.Socialandphilosophicalrepresentationof the immigrant in the media. XLinguae 12, no.1:192–206.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2019.12.01.15
Oborsky, Alexey Yu., Alexey A. Chistyakov, Alex-ey I. Prokopyev, Stanislav V. Nikolyukin, Kirill A. Chistyakov and Larisa I. Tararina.2018.Thenationalmentalityinthehistoryofphilosophy.XLinguae11,no.3:158–165.
Omarova, Leila B., Aydar M. Kalimullin, Ludmila Yu. Grudtsina, Andrey V. Korzhuev and Maria Ye. Zhukova.2018.Philosophicalanthropologyinpostmodernism.XLinguae11,no.3:76–85.
785
https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2018.11.03.07Orekhovskaya, Natalia A., Alexander A. Galush-
kin, Elena V. Maleko, Tatyana A. Bezenkova and Natalya A. Plugina.2018.Globalizationandyouth:philosophicalanalysisofchallengesandwaystoovercomethem. XLinguae 11, no. 2:256–164.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2018.11.02.20
Osuský, Samuel Š. 1916. Vojna a náboženstvo. LiptovskýMikuláš:Tranoscius.
Osuský, Samuel Š.2013.ThePhilosophyofBol-shevism,Fascism,andHitlerism.In:PaulR.Hinlicky.Before Auschwitz: What Christian theology must learn from the rise of Nazism, 193–220.Eugene,OR:WipfandStockPublis-hers.
Paxton, Robert O. 2004. The Anatomy of Fascism. NewYork:AlfredA.Knopf.
Pružinec, Tomáš. 2019. Sondy do hodnotovej platformybyzantskejfilozofieajejodkazpresúčasnúeurópskuhodnotovúorientáciu:náčrtproblematiky.Constantine’s Letters 12, no. 2:135–147.https://doi.org/10.17846/cl.2019.12.2.135-147
Ryabchenko, Oksana N., Alexey I. Prokopyev, Leonid N. Romanchenko, Andrey V. Korzhuev and Julia A. Krokhina.2018.Socialandphilo-sophicalunderstandingofnationalandcivicidentityinthecontextofinterethnicandinterreligiousconflictrisks.XLinguae 11, no. 2:359–369.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2018.11.02.29
Savelyeva, Elena B., Elena A. Lineva and Tatiana G. Yusupova.2017.AndreGide’slifephilo-sophy:»Russiantrace«. XLinguae 10, no. 3:184–201.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2017.10.03.15
Schneider, Herbert. 1929. The Making of the Fascist State. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Seregina, Tatiana N., Alfiya R. Masalimova, Mu-hammet Usak, Evgeniy M. Dorozhkin and Alexander A. Galushkin.2019.Philosophicalviewontheproblemofdegradationandrege-nerationaspotentialtrendsininterethniccommunicationculture.XLinguae 12, no. 2:186–194.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2019.12.02.15
Smetáček, Zdeněk. 1933. Ideology of Italian Fasci-sm. Česká Mysl28:208–215.
Šturák, Peter. 2016. The legacy of the Greek catholicleadingpersonalitiesandmartyrsinSlovakiaandtheircontributionforthebuildingupofafreeSlovaksociety.European Journal of Science and Theology 12,no.4:39–48.
Tagirov, Philipp. 2019. Nature, Cosmos, Absolute andSocietyintheMainAnthropologicalPara-digms. In: 2nd International Conference on Contemporary Education, Social Sciences and Ecological Studies (CESSES 2019),1231–1235.S.l.:AtlantisPress,2019.https://doi.org/10.2991/cesses-19.2019.274
Tavilla, Igor, Roman Kralik, Carson Webb, Xiamg-dong Jiang and Juan Manuel Aguilar. 2019. TheriseoffascismandthereformationofHegel’sdialecticintoItalianneo-idealistphilo-sophy.XLinguae12,no.1:139–150.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2019.12.01.11
Tyurikov, Aleksandr G., Nikolay N. Kosarenko, Tatiana B. Gvozdeva, Marianna V. Voronina, Elena Ye. Grishnova and Natalya A. Solovye-va.2018.Newsocialrealityinthecontextofinformationandcommunicationtechnologies.XLinguae11,no.3:37–75.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2018.11.03.06
Zheltukhina, Marina R., Natalia I. Klushina, Elena B. Ponomarenko, Natalia N. Vasilkova and Anna I. Dzyubenko. 2017. Modern media influence:massculture–massconsciousness–masscommunication.XLinguae 10, no. 4:96‒105.https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2017.10.04.09
Žalec, Bojan. 2013. Genocide as social death: A comparativeconceptualanalysis.Anthropolo-gical Notebooks19,no.2:57‒74.
– – –. 2014. Nazism and Stalinism in the light of Kierkegaard's thought. Filozofia69,no.5:443–450.