東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Who secedes and who succeeds? Disput...

Varuolo, Joseph L.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Who secedes and who succeeds? Disputing the uniqueness of 20th century Russian secessionism.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Who secedes and who succeeds? Disputing the uniqueness of 20th century Russian secessionism./
Author:	Varuolo, Joseph L.
Description:	390 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-03(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International76-03A(E).
Subject:	Political science. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3645554
ISBN:	9781321348033

Who secedes and who succeeds? Disputing the uniqueness of 20th century Russian secessionism.
Varuolo, Joseph L.

Who secedes and who succeeds? Disputing the uniqueness of 20th century Russian secessionism. - 390 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-03(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--State University of New York at Albany, 2014.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

During the twentieth century, the Russian sphere has seen no less than 60 attempts of ethnic secession. The diversity of ethnic groups along with the oppression of successive authoritarian governments have produced two distinct waves of secession. The First Wave (1917-1925) followed the fall of the Russian Empire, while the Second Wave (1989-1995) occurred after the Soviet Union disintegrated. The strength and distinctiveness of the region's secession attracted numerous scholars and investigations. Yet, key elements of general secession theory appear to have little in common with the region's secession. Even more astonishing, the exact opposite of several cornerstones of secession theory appear to influence the decision to secede. A perceived disagreement with general secession theory has produced a concept of regional uniqueness that does not resemble a unified proclamation but rather a cacophony of individual assessments. Why is there disagreement between the general literature and analysis of secessionist movements in/around the Russian Derivative States? The numerous cases of secession in this region is clearly too high to be relegated as unique, and if general secession theory cannot account for the motivations of secession in the region, its generalizability requires reassessment.

ISBN: 9781321348033Subjects--Topical Terms:

528916
Political science.

Who secedes and who succeeds? Disputing the uniqueness of 20th century Russian secessionism.
LDR:02299nmm a2200301 4500 001 2062977
005 20151024095834.5
008 170521s2014 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321348033
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3645554
035 $a AAI3645554
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Varuolo, Joseph L. $3 3177435
245 1 0 $a Who secedes and who succeeds? Disputing the uniqueness of 20th century Russian secessionism.
300 $a 390 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-03(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Victor Asal.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--State University of New York at Albany, 2014.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a During the twentieth century, the Russian sphere has seen no less than 60 attempts of ethnic secession. The diversity of ethnic groups along with the oppression of successive authoritarian governments have produced two distinct waves of secession. The First Wave (1917-1925) followed the fall of the Russian Empire, while the Second Wave (1989-1995) occurred after the Soviet Union disintegrated. The strength and distinctiveness of the region's secession attracted numerous scholars and investigations. Yet, key elements of general secession theory appear to have little in common with the region's secession. Even more astonishing, the exact opposite of several cornerstones of secession theory appear to influence the decision to secede. A perceived disagreement with general secession theory has produced a concept of regional uniqueness that does not resemble a unified proclamation but rather a cacophony of individual assessments. Why is there disagreement between the general literature and analysis of secessionist movements in/around the Russian Derivative States? The numerous cases of secession in this region is clearly too high to be relegated as unique, and if general secession theory cannot account for the motivations of secession in the region, its generalizability requires reassessment.
590 $a School code: 0668.
650 4 $a Political science. $3 528916
650 4 $a Russian history. $3 3173845
650 4 $a Slavic studies. $3 3171903
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0724
690 $a 0614
710 2 $a State University of New York at Albany. $b Political Science. $3 1673163
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 76-03A(E).
790 $a 0668
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2014
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3645554