Shock and transitions
in Revolution, democratic transition and disillusionment
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

This chapter seeks to answer the question of how transitions came to be understood as generally positive times. It explores different understandings of the concept of shock, arguing that perhaps the transition from a negative to a positive connotation of shock might provide the answer. The concept of shock has perhaps become most popular in the contemporary Central and Eastern European context through what was known as shock therapy. If the normalization process implies a particular kind of adjustment to shock, Carl Cassegard discusses a slightly different response to the shock of modernity through what he calls the process of naturalization. Faced with a brand new economic and political environment and a constantly changing self, Central and Eastern European societies entered into a different kind of shock, something that some sociologists described as a collective culture shock.

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 47 18 0
Full Text Views 23 6 0
PDF Downloads 13 6 0