Abstract
Over the twentieth century, politicians of various ideological beliefs and party denominations have claimed to represent “the peasant” or “the village” in the national capital. At first sight, the variety-from fascist to communist, from Scandinavian farmers to Romanian nationalists and German Christian Democrats-is baffling. The present contribution argues that in essence they championed one out of three generic solutions to the “agrarian question”: a continuation of the status quo with piecemeal improvements, a return to an idealized early-modern society, or a revolutionary breakthrough overcoming the peasantry’s conservative stronghold. Much in these grand narratives and their confrontation with economic and societal realities depended on the representative’s understanding of those he claimed to represent. Either as “farmers” and hence rational economic actors or, alternatively, as “peasants” and hence authentic and/or backward. On closer scrutiny, many grand narratives contain significant strands of both understandings.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.