CALL FOR PAPERS: The Humanities and Natural Sciences in the Late Stalin Era

 CALL FOR PAPERS: The Humanities and Natural Sciences in the Late Stalin Era

The CUPOLA project (Culture’s Politics Under Authoritarian Rule: Soviet Civilizationism and the Case of the Humanities During the Stalin Era, 2024–2028) invites chapter proposals for the book project The Humanities and Natural Sciences in the Late Stalin Era. The deadline for abstracts is May 15, 2025, with notifications of acceptance sent by May 23, 2025. We invite abstracts for book chapters that offer novel perspectives on the humanities and natural sciences during the late Stalin era. To apply, please submit an abstract (maximum 500 words) and a CV (maximum two pages) to elina.viljanen@helsinki.fi.

Research on Stalin-era humanities and natural sciences has primarily focused on the political and ideological control exerted by the state. However, there is a scarcity of studies exploring the degrees of autonomy and submission within these fields. To address this gap, we propose examining the political strategies employed by scholars in Soviet humanities and natural sciences in their efforts to gain relative autonomy from Soviet political control. This approach is grounded in the understanding that, for political instrumentalization to be effective, it cannot entirely eliminate scholarly autonomy, as scholarship must remain useful for political purposes.

Our project seeks to explore the intersections between the political, cultural, and philosophical aspects of Soviet humanities and natural sciences. Our premise is that the political aspects of humanities and sciences are not reducible only to the active role they assume through their actors and ideas in conventional state driven politics. To address and test this premise, we introduce the methodological concept of culture’s politics, which refers to the struggle for power to define and govern one’s own cultural existence. In the context of the humanities and natural sciences, it is essential to ask: To what extent did scholars under Stalinism experience relative autonomy? What did autonomy entail, and why is this phenomenon significant? How should we conceptualize the late Stalin era in scholarship, particularly from the perspectives of the history of ideas and philosophy of science?

A seminar to discuss preliminary book chapters will be held at the Aleksanteri Institute of the University of Helsinki on October 2–3, 2025. Online participation will be available, and the deadline for submitting draft chapters is September 22nd, 2025.

We kindly ask you to forward this Call for Papers to any individuals or groups who may be interested in contributing to this book project. For more information about the CUPOLA Project, please visit the ARGIH pages: https://www.helsinki.fi/en/researchgroups/russian-east-european-and-eurasian-intellectual-history/news/call-for-papers

 

Call for Articles: "Betrayal Revisited: Historical Perspectives on Treachery in Central Europe" (Střed/Centre 2/2025)

 Call for Articles: "Betrayal Revisited: Historical Perspectives on Treachery in Central Europe" (Střed/Centre 2/2025)

By early 2025, arguments about ‘betrayal’ have made a triumphant return to the domain of global politics, underscoring the emotive underpinnings of a particular US- and NATO-centric global order, particularly from the perspective of the Global North. At the same time, rhetoric from many of the main actors involved has operated with the concept of betrayal since nobody wants to betray the trust of the respective ‘nation’. This situation has evoked memories of historic betrayals, from the Munich Agreement to the Phoney War, from the Yalta Conference to the failure of the Budapest Memorandum, as well as individual betrayals both domestic and foreign. The resurgence of interest in treachery in Central Europe is in line with a number of historiographical trends since the 1990s. On the one hand, it is driven by a new generation of historians seeking to challenge post-socialist narratives with their black-and-white, national typologies. On the other hand, it is a reaction to the resurgence of such dualistic narratives in conservative and right-wing historiography. Concurrently, and not by chance, Julien Benda’s La trahison des clercs (The Treason of the Intellectuals, orig. 1927) experienced a revival in the region, marking the return of yet another discourse on betrayal.

The present issue of the diamond open access journal Střed/Centre will contribute to this growing Central European debate on the histories of treachery and betrayal. Contributions are invited on the period from the onset of the 19th century to the present day, and the space stretching from Bregenz to Luhansk and from Dubrovnik to Tallinn. Comparative and transnational approaches are particularly welcome in this context.

Potential themes or questions to discuss are:

- What terms are used in the languages of Central Europe to discuss concepts of betrayal or treachery in a variety of historic political or personal contexts? Where does this language come from and how has it evolved?

- What criteria are used by governments or in the general public for evaluating treachery or betrayal? Which discourses and which emotional regimes do they relate to (social, cultural, gender, religious, colonial, national etc.)?

- How has the criteria employed in incidents of treachery changed over time? How has this affected the criteria for atonement? How far is atonement for treachery ever possible?

- Where and why have notorious figures of betrayal or treachery appeared or disappeared over the course of the last two centuries? How far have they involved new forms of collective identification in the Central European region (e.g. class, gender, ethnicity) in evolving forms of state or society?

- What happens when discourses about betrayal clash with each other? – e.g. different national perspectives (as in the 1938 ‘Munich betrayal’), or conflicts about betrayal on a more personal level such as adultery or oath-breaking.

- How and why are certain incidents or figures of treachery long-lasting? Who sustains these historic incidents in the public memory, and how are they reconfigured for new purposes in later decades by regimes or society?

- To what extent are there key sites or spaces in Central Europe which evoke memories of betrayal, treachery or treason? 

- How far do incidents or discourses about treachery have regional limits, or are they also transnational with some examples from Central Europe having an international resonance?

Please send a title and an abstract of no more than 250 words to the editors at stred@mua.cas.cz by April 10, 2025. Authors of accepted proposals will be expected to submit their full papers by October 1, 2025.

Information about the journal and the guidelines can be found in the “For Authors” section of the journal’s website: https://asjournals.lib.cas.cz/Stred/home?lang=en 

Languages of publication: English, Czech, Slovak, German

Call for papers: Truth Politics between Science and Society. Political Epistemologies of the 1990s Science Wars. Erfurt

Call for papers: Truth Politics between Science and Society. Political Epistemologies of the 1990s Science Wars. Erfurt, 08.07.2025 - 09.07.2025, Deadline 22.04.2025

In light of a dwindling public trust in science (Oreskes 2019) and ambiguous calls for a ‘return to truth’ (Cain et al. 2019), understanding the relationship between science and a democratic public, the delineation of appropriate scientific practices, and how to reconcile conflicting interpretations of reality seems to be more relevant than ever. In the 1990s, struggles over these issues culminated in the Science Wars that consisted of a series of heated academic-public discussions, among them the infamous ‘Sokal Hoax’. The Science Wars represent a historic peak and intersection of academic, political, and epistemological debates that had been smoldering for decades before, leaving a contested legacy.

A fresh perspective on the Science Wars – one that acknowledges their historical complexity, moves beyond a dualistic framing, and situates them firmly in their historical moment – promises to illuminate the social, political, and cultural ramifications on academia and beyond. The workshop aims to map and historicize the shifting epistemological landscapes of the 1990s from an international perspective informed by methods of Historical and Political Epistemology.

We take the Science Wars and their reception as a vantage point to explore historical debates at the nexus of truth, science, and society. The topics may include, but are not limited to:

- debates about the relationship between religion, especially creationism, and science and education (Perez 2024);

- the “Darwin wars” (Brown 2000) or “Evolution wars” (Aechtner 2020);

- the New Atheist movement and its struggles against religious “irrationalism”;

- sceptics’ networks debunking “pseudo-sciences” since the 1970s;

- more generally, the philosophical efforts to delineate science against “pseudo-science” (Popper, Lakatos, Bunge etc.);

- the “Freud wars” against psychoanalysis;

- the “theory wars” (Bevir et al. 2020) in literary theory;

- debates about science museum exhibitions (e.g. Science in American Life, Enola Gay) etc.

In line with the perspective of Historical and Political Epistemology, the following questions might be worth considering:

- What were the socio-political effects of deploying scientific concepts, rhetorics, and arguments (e.g. truth, objectivity, rationalism, the scientific method, academic freedom) in particular historical contexts?

- What kind of political and social imaginations about the future of science and the (democratic) public informed these different positions?

- What kinds of subjectivities and narratives about science and society were re-/asserted?

In particular, we invite paper proposals with an international and transnational perspective on the reception of the Science Wars and related debates, as well as similar struggles that played out in different academic cultures and national contexts. Moreover, the role of new channels of communication and media, and how they shaped debates in public-academic arenas represent an important topic to explore.

We invite colleagues to send a short CV, and a 300-word abstract of their paper (the presentation should be 25-30 minutes long). The deadline for submission is April 22, 2025. Please send these documents to forschungsstelle.wahrheit@uni-erfurt.de. Applicants will be notified of the acceptance of their proposal by the beginning of May. As a result of the workshop, we are planning a publication. The workshop will take place at the University of Erfurt, Germany. We will cover travel and accommodation costs for the speakers.

Organizing Committee:

Martin Babička, D.Phil., Institute of Contemporary History, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague

Johanna Hügel, History of Science, University of Erfurt

Meike Katzek, M.A., History of Science, University of Erfurt

Prof. Dr. Bernhard Kleeberg, History of Science, University of Erfurt

Dr. Jan Surman, Masaryk Institute and Archives of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague

call for papers: History of Digital History between East and West

 call for papers: History of Digital History between East and West. Centre for Contemporary and Digital History (C²DH), University of Luxemburg, 05.02.2026 - 06.02.2026, Deadline 29.05.2025

In histories of digital history, as in digital humanities in general, much emphasis has been placed on the two commonly recognized centers of the development of historical computing since the 1950s: the United States and Western Europe. As a result, crucial developments elsewhere have been overlooked, including in the Nordic countries as well as the Soviet Union and the various states of the Eastern bloc. The consequence of this omission is not merely a lack of knowledge about specific countries and a skewed understanding of digital history’s manifold early trajectories. It also creates epistemological blind spots regarding the political dimensions of the development of early historical computing and, given the latter’s networked nature within a general context of ‘East-West’ scholarly exchange in the Cold War period, obscures the transnational dimensions of the early history of digital history.

This workshop will address these blind spots by focusing attention on the question of how the local and the transnational intersected in the technology-inflected reshaping of historical research practices and how political backgrounds, contexts and constraints fed into this process. We therefore seek papers that focus on local case studies in a transnational ‘East-West’ context, as well as those that consider comparative perspectives. Papers that ask what resources are available to support research in this area are similarly welcome.

Our workshop also continues and expands upon work done at the conference Tracing the History of Digital History (October 2024, German Historical Institute, Paris).

Main themes

- Local case studies: pioneers, projects, groups, schools within a wider transnational and East-West context. How did individual scholars and pioneering research groups contribute to the emergence of digital history and quantitative methods in different national and institutional contexts? What types of projects and methodological innovations emerged from local research centers? To what extent did the adoption of digital and quantitative methods vary between different historiographical traditions, and how did pioneers navigate resistance or skepticism within their own academic communities? How were networks of scholars instrumental in the spread of quantitative and digital methods in history?

- Development of networks: social, material and semantic (events, conferences, workshops). What kind of knowledge, expertise and practical experiences were exchanged and circulated in the networks? Which topics, methods, technical expertise, code, programs? What did people learn from each other? What points of contestation emerged (for instance, different theoretical approaches to quantification)

- Political and ideological dimensions: What role did politics and varied ideological backgrounds play? How did this help or hinder contacts (both practically and in terms of ideologically-infused ideas about doing history, topics to research, justification, valorisation, etc). How can we move beyond simplistic East versus West, communist versus capitalist, binaries and allow for more insight into what happened inside and between countries, and inside ‘blocs’? Similarly, how to consider actors in their own right and not as mere representatives of the latter?

- Methodological debates. What were the key methodological debates in historical research? How were different theoretical perspectives – such as Marxism, social history, and other critical approaches – negotiated within these debates? To what extent did the use of quantitative methods shape and contribute to broader theoretical and methodological reflections in historical scholarship?

- Materialities: How did differences in material infrastructure (hardware and software) shape the development of historical computing in different geopolitical contexts? How did differing access to technology and computing resources affect the methodological and epistemological directions of digital history in various regions?

- Primary and secondary sources: What resources are already available in digital format for investigating the history of historical computing in the 1960s–70s — which types, where, and in what form? What materials remain accessible only in analogue format, and how does this shape research possibilities? How can we map materials in the institutional archives and repositories and those in private archives and personal collections? How can the analysis of historical sources shape current knowledge, reveal biases and gaps, and deepen our understanding of transnational connections in historical computing?

- Links and acceptance with the wider history profession: How was early digital history perceived by mainstream historians? What were the main points of resistance and acceptance? How did the early digital history community navigate disciplinary boundaries within the historical profession? How did the terminology used to describe digital history evolve in its early decades? What were the implications of changes in naming (e.g., “quantitative history”, “cliometrics”, “historiometrics”, etc.)? What were the methodological debates surrounding the use of computers in historical research, and how did they influence the status of digital history? How did political and ideological contexts shape the adoption and institutionalisation of digital history in different regions?

We plan to publish the papers of the workshop in a dedicated Open Access volume in the C²DH book series Studies in Digital History and Hermeneutics. This volume will have sections dedicated to local as well as thematic studies that engage comparative perspectives.

The conference will be held at the Centre for Contemporary and Digital History (C²DH) at the University of Luxembourg. Accepted participants will be offered hotel accommodation for two nights on campus.

Submissions

Please send your abstract of maximum 400-600 words by 29 May 2025 to Gerben Zaagsma (gerben.zaagsma@uni.lu) or Marek Tamm (marek.tamm@tlu.ee). Please explain in your abstract to which theme(s) your contribution is linked. Notifications of acceptance will be sent in early July.

Timeline

Call for papers: early March 2025

Deadline for abstracts: 29 May 2025

Notification of acceptance: 4 July 2025

Workshop: 5-6 February 2026

Programme Committee

Gerben Zaagsma (University of Luxembourg)

Marek Tamm (Tallinn University)

Julianne Nyhan (Technische Universität Darmstadt)

Petri Paju (University of Turku)

Sune Bechmann Pedersen (Stockholm University)

Nadezhda Povroznik (Technische Universität Darmstadt)

Muriel Blaive: Pandemic Power. The Covid Response and the Erosion of Democracy—A Liberal Critique

 Muriel Blaive: Pandemic Power. The Covid Response and the Erosion of Democracy—A Liberal Critique. Budapest: CEU Press 2025. ISBN: 978-963-386-933-8

Open access: https://ceupress.com/sites/ceupress.ceu.edu/files/pandemicpower.pdf

Pandemic Power offers a bold and thought-provoking exploration of how the global response to the Covid pandemic has reshaped our understanding of science, freedom, and democracy. This meticulously researched book examines the political, social, and intellectual shifts that have accompanied lockdowns, censorship, and the instrumentalization of fear, delivering a searing critique of the policies and narratives that defined the Covid era.

From past public health scandals to the rise of “digital authoritarianism,” Blaive investigates the dangers of unchecked authority, the troubling role of the media, and the ethical failures of policymakers and public health leaders. Through her in-depth analysis, the author explores critical issues such as surveillance and censorship, the disproportionate impact of lockdowns on the poor and disadvantaged, the capture of public health by the pharmaceutical industry, and the erosion of the rule of law under the guise of public safety. Lastly, this book questions the liberal left’s troubling support for authoritarian practices and its apparent indifference to the aggravation of socio-economic inequalities resulting from the pandemic response it championed.

Provocative, insightful, and deeply relevant, Pandemic Power is essential reading for anyone seeking to gain insight into not only how the Covid response has eroded democracy but also how it has contributed to the rise of the extreme right in many countries.

Marie Škarpová et al. (eds.) Příhodnější spojení není možné - Vzájemná korespondence Antonína Škárky a Dmytra Čyževského (1939–1972) [There is no more convenient connection - Mutual correspondence of Antonín Škárka and Dmytro Čyževský (1939-1972)].

 Marie Škarpová et al. (eds.) Příhodnější spojení není možné - Vzájemná korespondence Antonína Škárky a Dmytra Čyževského (1939–1972) [There is no more convenient connection - Mutual correspondence of Antonín Škárka and Dmytro Čyževský (1939-1972)]. Praha: Filosofia 2025. ISBN: 978-80-7007-779-5

Svazek je kritickou edicí veškeré vzájemné odborné korespondence českého filologa a literárního historika Antonína Škarky (1906-1972) a filozofa a komparatisty ukrajinsko-ruského původu Dmytra Čyževského (1894-1977), která se dochovala z let 1939-1972 a čítá přes 80 korespondenčních jednotek.

Vedle standardního edičního aparátu kniha obsahuje úvodní studii, jež poukazuje na jedinečnost editované korespondence, svědčící mj. o tom, že oba bohemisté, žijící po většinu svého života v rozdílných částech politicky rozdělené Evropy, dokázali navzdory nemožnosti osobního setkávání právě v korespondenci navázat a dlouhodobě rozvíjet intenzivní a plodnou spolupráci, která nakonec ve druhé polovině 60. let 20. století vyústila až v konstituování unikátního vědecko-vydavatelského týmu napříč železnou oponou. Korespondence tak podává jedinečné informace o principech fungování odborné komunikace přes železnou oponu i o dobových problémech a limitech provozu humanitních věd na obou jejích stranách.Anotace

EUI Summer School in: Environmental History: European and Global Perspectives

 EUI Summer School in: Environmental History: European and Global Perspectives

Programme Description

The Summer School will take place online from  17th of September  to the 19th of September 2025

For a long time environmental history was a relatively small and specialized field of historical research. Most historians interested in political, social, economic, or cultural issues did not incorporate the natural world into their accounts, nor did they consider environmental histories relevant to their own work. Growing concern about climate change and discussions about the notion of the Anthropocene have changed this situation dramatically. In recent years, environmental history has become a very popular field, with many historians from other backgrounds drawing on its findings and adapting their research agendas to include environmental questions.

In this summer school, we intend to provide participants with ideas on how environmental history can be brought into conversation with research on European and global history in the early modern and modern periods. Given the History Department’s expertise in these fields, we aim to highlight the opportunities to be gained from engaging with environmental history as a transversal approach. For example, we will investigate the ways in which European encounters with the early modern world can benefit from studying how notions of ‘exotic’ nature informed (or misinformed) colonial policies and approaches. We will study the role and perception of natural resources in mid-twentieth century international discussions about global trade and economic policies. Furthermore, we will analyze the history of transregional and transnational environmental protection efforts and their contributions to the emergence of a sense of planetary responsibility and international climate governance efforts.

Contributions by leading environmental historians will be combined with hands-on research opportunities. Participants will have the chance to work with digital visual sources related to environmental themes housed in the Historical Archives of the European Union. They will also be able to present their own research projects and receive feedback from their peers.Programme Description

More: https://www.eui.eu/apply?id=summer-school-in-global-and-transnational-history