Search results

The following comments compare the present orientations of Czech sociology with recent developments in European sociology. The analysis of sociology in Europe shows that the attention of European sociologists has shifted to social theory & social philosophy, sociology of culture, media, gender & feminism, political sociology, nationalism, ethnicity, & racism. Czech sociology, in the opinion of the author, still does not pay sufficient attention to such pressing issues of Czech society as national identity, nationalism, value transformations, the role of traditions, & European integration processes.

The article deals with the idea of Central Europe and aims to identify common developmental tendencies of the region in the medieval period and early modern age. The author emphasizes the advantages of the comparative approach primarily in the case of the medieval and early modern Polish, Czech and Hungarian states. Alongside common developmental tendencies the author emphasizes also important differences which cast doubt on the very idea of Central Europe.

Based on a systematic study of Polish sociological literature produced in the period stretching between the elevation of Wladyslaw Gomulka to the post of the Party's first secretary in October 1956 to the first free elections in Poland in June 1989, the author of this article offers an account of the main dilemmas & the varieties of pluralism in Polish sociology during the state socialist era. The author claims that, with the exception of the Stalinist period, Polish sociologists always occupied diverse positions on 'government' & 'society', but this diversity yielded to change in response to a particular time. Generally, in 1956-1989 Polish sociology was something unique in comparison with sociology in other so-called people's democracies, as it had a considerably high status in the country & in the world, including the West. The author argues that Polish sociology did not have to undergo a revolution in 1989 & make the move from Marxist to bourgeois sociology, as since 1956 (or even earlier, since 1945) it had been undergoing continuous change & constant reform (in theoretical domain & concerning its division into sub-disciplines) & maintained a consistent level of diversity in various respects.

The article offers a brief account of the history of Hungarian sociology during four decades of communist rule in Hungary. Beginning with the brief existence of the first department of sociology in Hungary (the 'Szalai Institute', 1946-1948) the author describes the field in the 1950s, when for political reasons sociology was marginalized to the point of extinction. The revival of sociology in Hungary during the 1960s is devoted considerable attention from an institutional, a personal & a doctrinal point of view. The author analyses the main branches of study in Hungarian sociology at the time, including critical sociology & the study of social stratification, which overcame the rigidity of official Marxist-Leninist doctrine. She characterizes the last two decades of state socialism in Hungary as a period when sociology both suffered from increased political repression (stronger in the early 1970s than later) & at the same time became more & more professional. She argues that a determining feature of the history of Hungarian sociology between 1948 & 1989 was its strong connection to politics. However, sociology & politics had a mutual influence on one another during this period, as sociology also had an impact on the way Communist Party officials approached the structure of Hungarian society. In the process, sociology evolved & was professionalized, enabling its existence as an autonomous discipline today.

The author, a Czech social anthropologist who returned home from exile in order to help in the introduction of his discipline, writes a field report in which he describes in relative detail the vicissitudes of Czech social anthropology during the last thirteen postcommunist years. Even though lecturing on social anthropology became common in Czech universities, the institutionalization of the discipline encounters stiff resistance from the conservative academic establishment. Social anthropology gets support in new provincial universities (Pardubice, Plzen) & only very reluctantly in Prague (Charles U). As a result, Czech protagonists of social anthropology are scattered throughout various institutions. Nevertheless, the author concludes, social anthropology has become known in the Czech Republic as a dynamic part of the social sciences. Grant agencies have given support to fieldwork projects on minorities, political culture, & identity problems during the transformation process. If the momentum gained during the recent years were to be sustained, social anthropology has a bright future on the Czech academic scene.

In a context of geo-political changes, the Arab and Islamic world re-discovers, as usual in moments of crisis, the social and economic thought of Ibn Khaldun and his concept of assabiya to analyse the challenges and the risks of the present times. There is, also, a significant attempt to found an autonomous and autochtonous way of political approach in order to attribute a local philosophical origin and intellectual paternity to the recent revolts in contrast with any "westernized" aspect or interpretation.

This study deals with application of the Norbert Elias's theory of sociogenesis to the case of early Czech state formation. For this purpose we focus on the mechanisms of emergence and establishing of the state monopoly, as well as on the aspects of decentralization and privatization of state power during reign of first Premyslid dukes - from 860 to 1230 AD. In the second place, the article tries to compare the process of sociogenesis in the Western Europe with the dynamics of state formation that was typical for the contemporary Czech lands. In this context we claim that Elias made several mistakes, because he supposed that features and mechanisms of state formation were fairly unitary everywhere Europe. We try to challenge this notion show that the history of state making in the Central European region has many autonomous and unique aspects that differentiate it from social dynamics in other parts of the continent. From this critical pointof view, the article attempts a reformulation of Elias's theory for the Central European area.

Die Europäische Union soll um einige weitere Mittelmeerländer - vermutlich um Slovenien, Malta, später auch Zypern und Kroatien - erweitert werden. Das ehemalige Mare nostrum der Römer wird allerdings nie in seiner Gesamtheit in die EU integrierbar sein. Daher die auf der EU-Konferenz in Barcelona getroffene Entscheidung, eine größere Gemeinschaft der Mittelmeerländer ins Leben zu rufen. Folgerichtig befaßte sich die Konferenz mit den Mittelmeerstaaten, mit deren Aufnahme in die EU nicht gerechnet wird. Einige davon (so insb. die Türkei, Ägypten und Marokko) schaffen jedoch schon jetzt Voraussetzungen für eine den gesamten Mittelmeerraum umfaßende Freihandelszone, die vor 2010 gegründet werden könnte. Die wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit soll dann schrittweise durch partnerschaftliche Beziehungen im kulturellen, wissenschaftlichen, politischen und teilweise auch militärischen Bereich ergänzt werden, was zum Frieden in dem gesamten Mittelmeerraum führen dürfte. (BIOst-Hrs)

"This article deals with the relationship between public opinion and rumour from ancient times, through the Middle Ages and right up to today. It will examine the terms which were used and which often depended not just on a particular author but usually an entire social class. The most often used terms to describe opinion, fama and existimatio, occurred in the speeches of politicians which were presented as the valuable opinions of the elite whereas the concepts opinio, rumor or sermo were considered as low value and unreliable opinions of plebeians to whom the ruling classes attributed the spreading and creation of rumours. The concept of fama, more often fama publica, indicated in the Middle Ages a local network of knowledge, a mechanism for the collective evaluation of an individual. In this sense it played an important role in the courts of law. The issue of rumours is common to all subsequent historical periods because public opinion usually both generated, and was supported, by rumour. The article also puts forward a hypothesis why the all-powerful fama dissapeared from the courtrooms, why it lost its significance and became purely a rumour." (author's abstract)

After the First World War an anti-alcohol movement requiring the prohibition intensified both in Europe and the USA and it also resonated strongly in the Czechoslovakia. The main representative of this movement was the Czechoslovak Teetotal Union. It struggled for eradication of alcoholism as a serious social and health problem. The activities of the movement were in conflict with the interests of groups of alcoholic drinks producers and distributors, which represented a strong lobby connected to political circles, especially the most powerful political party, the Agrarian Party. Financially strong alcohol lobby with one exception (Holitscher Act of 1922 restricting access to alcohol for the youth) quite successfully neutralized the attempts of the anti-alcohol movement to gain a bigger state support in the fight against alcoholism. Only after the methyl-alcohol scandal in 1935 the government did establish a permanent advisory board for the fight against alcoholism in the Ministry of Public Health and Physical Education. It elaborated a many recommendations (such as blood tests for drivers after car accidents), which, however, were not implemented until the end of the First Republic. An important benefit of the Czechoslovak Teetotal Union was the founding of alcohol treatment counselling.

This article focuses on Czech pre-Marxist sociological journals - Sociologicka revue (established in 1930, published until 1940, and again in 1946-49) and Socialni problemy (established 1931, published 1931-1938/39 and 1947/48) - and compares how they functioned with the work of the contemporary Sociologicky casopis/ Czech Sociological Review (analyzed volumes 32 (1996) to 41 (2005)). Although the internal situation of the branch & its public evaluation were rather different during each of the two periods, the author believes that looking back at the well-established earlier period of Czech sociology can provide some comparative data for a better understanding of the current situation and its imperfections. First, the author quantitatively analyses the 'genre' composition of the old and new journals and concludes that in the earlier publications reviews and scientific polemics were more strongly represented, whilst the papers - especially those in Sociologicka revue - were less likely to be connected with any empirical research. Conversely, the old sociologists were highly involved in the public sphere, which included student education and active participation in policy making. Nowadays, Czech sociologists tend to be wrapped up in themselves; they produce better theoretical and empirical papers, but the number produced per person has decreased, and their reception is probably weaker. In the article the author also analyses the means of recruitment of the journals' editorial boards, relations within the Czech sociological community itself and its relations abroad, and other issues of the sociology of Czech sociology, past and present.

The article deals with the 1938 treatise History of the All- Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), abbreviated AUCP(b) - an official treatise from the Stalin era of the USSR which was published on a mass scale. The author puts his reflections in two contexts: 1. the internal Marxist dispute over "orthodoxy", which Stalin resolved by publishing (and co-authoring) this "canonical book", and 2. the myth-forming context, which shows how totalitarian regimes present themselves with their "canonical books". He considers publications preceding the analyzed book, which after Lenin's death included texts by Grigory Zinoviev, Nikolai Bukharin and Leon Trotsky. Then he considers the actual book, focusing in more detail on the absence of two topics and concepts - the state and culture. He pays particular attention to the chapter on dialectic and historical materialism written by Stalin, which completes the simplistic interpretations in the so-called Stalinist Marxism. Like L. Kolakowski, he concludes that the entire Stalinist concept is naturalistic (meaning the naive naturalism of the late 19th century: Marxism guarantees a "scientific world view") and naively nomothetic (all fundamental claims have the form of unquestionable laws).