标题：From the Guilty City to the Ideas of Alternative Urbanization and Alternative Modernity: Anti-Urbanism as a Border-Zone of City-Philosophy and Cultural Criticism in the Interwar Hungarian Political Thought
期刊名称：Coactivity: Philosophy, Communication / Santalka: Filosofija, Komunikacija
印刷版ISSN：2029-6339
出版年度：2017
卷号：25
期号：1
页码：99-109
DOI：10.3846/cpc.2017.282
语种：English
出版社：Coactivity: Philosophy, Communication / Santalka: Filosofija, Komunikacija
摘要：The phenomenon of anti-urbanism has accompanied the process of modernisation since the emergence of modernity. The city, the modern metropolis played a vital role in this transition from premodern world to modern era. The metamorphosis of archaic structures, including the fields of economy, society and thinking, are inevitably associated with tensions engendering aversion against the city. Anti-urbanism appeared sporadically everywhere, as a continuous tradition, it emerged at two remote corners of the world: in United States and Germany. Hungarian anti-urbanism of the interwar period had been motivated by the shock of the disintegration of the “Historical Greater Hungary”. The motif of guilty city emerged in the atmosphere of scapegoating: Budapest appeared as incompatible with Hungarian national character. These ruminations about the role of city were embedded in a special context mixing city-philosophy, cultural criticism, German-origin crisis philosophy, political philosophy and national characterology. It was a peculiar mixture in the Central European region: Hungarian interwar thought, from this respect, follows the regional patterns.
其他摘要：The phenomenon of anti-urbanism has accompanied the process of modernisation since the emergence of modernity. The city, the modern metropolis played a vital role in this transition from premodern world to modern era. The metamorphosis of archaic structures, including the fields of economy, society and thinking, are inevitably associated with tensions engendering aversion against the city. Anti-urbanism appeared sporadically everywhere, as a continuous tradition, it emerged at two remote corners of the world: in United States and Germany. Hungarian anti-urbanism of the interwar period had been motivated by the shock of the disintegration of the “Historical Greater Hungary”. The motif of guilty city emerged in the atmosphere of scapegoating: Budapest appeared as incompatible with Hungarian national character. These ruminations about the role of city were embedded in a special context mixing city-philosophy, cultural criticism, German-origin crisis philosophy, political philosophy and national characterology. It was a peculiar mixture in the Central European region: Hungarian interwar thought, from this respect, follows the regional patterns.
