Search results

The revival of the nation has shocked German intellectuals who think that the nation-state is historically obsolete & that new models should be upheld: the united Europe, a world community of responsible states, globalization of markets, a universe of human rights. The contrary tendencies in today's world are marked by giving up on huge political entities, which have been replaced by smaller nationality-based states. It seems that political freedom leads to the formation of nation-states based on democratic constitution. This process requires looking into the relation between the nation-state & democracy. The key for the explanation of their relationship can be found in the notion of nation. Citizenship mediates between the people (in its real manifestation as a social group), & democracy as a constitutional principle. It gives to the state as a personal entity legal structure on which to build a democratic form of the state & guarantees legally applicable taxonomies & limitations. Adapted from the source document.

This article critically examines the answers to the following questions: "Why are there nation-states?," ie., "Why isn't there only one nation-state?," asked by Jacques Bidet in his work General Theory of Modernity. In the first part of the article, Bidet's analogy between the emergence of nation-states & more complex states such as the EU is discussed, with particular emphasis on the possibilities of creating a worldwide democratic state, which Bidet innovatively conceives as a guarantee of equality between nations. Still, in view of the normative character of Bidet's theory, the author raises doubts about the possibility of clarifying Bidet's assertion that "the time has not yet come for a universal state-order." In the second part of the article, the author attempts to find an answer to Bidet's questions with the help of Marx's class analysis. On the one hand, such an analysis makes it possible to explain why (worldwide) capitalism benefits from "freezing" the extant order of nation-states. On the other hand, not even Marx's analysis makes it possible to elucidate the conditions for building a worldwide state, particularly the one condition which Bidet cares about most of all: a relation between nations characterized by equality & lack of rivalry. Adapted from the source document.

The world of sports is a reflection of the world of politics. It is becoming increasingly multipolar with the emerging states hosting mega sporting events. Firstly, the article problematizes the concept of multipolarity and, secondly, globalisation by questioning whether the Olympic Games reinforce national identities and promote national interests by using Olympic diplomacy as a soft power tool. In doing so, the article explores the correlation between the changes in international affairs and the hosting of and participation at the Olympic Games by emerging states such as Brazil, China and Russia. The analysis distinguishes globalisation from the role of the nation-state, by highlighting the evident differences between emerging states in terms of hosting the Games, but also takes into consideration geopolitical and geo-economic parameters. ; The world of sports is a reflection of the world of politics. It is becoming increasingly multipolar with the emerging states hosting mega sporting events. Firstly, the article problematizes the concept of multipolarity and, secondly, globalisation by questioning whether the Olympic Games reinforce national identities and promote national interests by using Olympic diplomacy as a soft power tool. In doing so, the article explores the correlation between the changes in international affairs and the hosting of and participation at the Olympic Games by emerging states such as Brazil, China and Russia. The analysis distinguishes globalisation from the role of the nation-state, by highlighting the evident differences between emerging states in terms of hosting the Games, but also takes into consideration geopolitical and geo-economic parameters.

U ovom se radu istražuje odnos između nacije, nacionalizma, građanstva i strategija europskih integracija. Propituje se problem odnosa između 'nacionalnog' i 'građanskog' aspekta u postojećoj nacionalnoj državi i problem odvajanja nacionalnog od građanskog u nekim opravdanjima transnacionalnih političkih integracija. Propituje se i teza nekih autora da su i nacija i država zapreka afirmaciji građanstva kao univerzalnog statusa u slobodi i jednakosti svih. Zapravo, analizira se krucijalno pitanje je li neka transnacionalna politička organizacija moguća kao "zajednica građana" prema konceptu 'konstitucionalnog patriotizma' ili kao internacionalna zajednica "društva narodā" s "pravom narodā" na pretpostavkama političkog liberalizma ili pristojno uređene državne vlasti. Autor analizira i pojam 'nacionalizma' te neopravdanost njegova proskribiranja per se. Na kraju komentira i analizira uočene nacionalne (nacionalističke) strategije integracije u Europsku uniju. ; This paper explores the relationship between the nation, nationalism, citizenship and European integration strategies. It addresses the problem of the relationship between the 'national' and 'civil' aspects of the existing nation state and the problem of separating the national from the civil in some justifications of transnational political integrations. It also examines the thesis of some authors who claim that both the nation and the state are obstacles to asserting citizenship as a universal status in the freedom and equality of all. In fact, it analyses the crucial issue whether a transnational political organisation is possible as a 'community of citizens' in line with the concept of 'constitutional patriotism', or as an international community in the sense of a 'Society of Peoples' with the 'right of nations' under the assumptions of political liberalism or of a properly ordered state government. The author also analyses the concept of 'nationalism' and the unjustifiableness of its proscription per se. In the final section, he comments on and ...

Contrary to the prevalent criticism of the modern nation-state, the author thinks that it is an institution ethically valid in itself. A nation-state is a political entity in which the boundaries of state & nation coincide. National identity is a source of communitarian solidarity & trust, essential for the formation of a state. The author thinks that the state, as a means of national self-determination can relinquish many of its functions & delegate them to supranational bodies, under the condition that it can regain them. Certain areas, such as social & cultural policy & certain aspects of economic policy, due to their importance for the preservation of the national identity should remain in the hands of the nation-state. In their foreign policy, states ought to respect several basic norms: renouncing the use of force or other forms of pressure, honoring agreements, solidarity in adversity, & reducing the unfair distribution of resources. The author deals with the problem of multinational states & concludes that the separate national groups in principle have a right to secession & the creation of their own state. Adapted from the source document.

Rad se bavi propitivanjem implikacija izbjegličke krize koja je zahvatila Europsku uniju na demokraciju u Europi i funkcioniranje Europske unije na osnovi usporedbe s teorijom Hannah Arendt o izbjeglicama i ljudskim pravima. Rad se kritički odnosi prema djelovanju Europske unije, posebice Europske komisije, naspram njezinih članica po pitanju rješavanja izbjegličke krize čime se dovodi u pitanje održanje same Europske unije i demokracije na razini Europe. Teorija Hannah Arendt pomaže u sagledavanju sadašnje situacije u povijesnom kontekstu i pruža mogući odgovor kako sačuvati nacionalne države i demokraciju u njima propitivanjem načela ljudskih prava koja je iznjedrila Francuska revolucija, a koja su dovedena u pitanje pojavom izbjegličkog vala s Bliskog istoka u Europu. ; The paper explains the implications of the European refugee crisis for the functioning of the EU and democracy within Europe, with reference to Hannah Arendt's theory on refugees and human rights. The paper examines critically the handling of the refugee crisis by the European Commission and its attitude towards EU Member States, which compromises the actual functioning of theEU and democracy in Europe. Arendt's theory helps us understand better the present situation, taking into account the historical context. Her theory on human rights, born of the French Revolution provides a possible answer regarding how to preserve European nation states and democracy in Europe, notions that have been challenged seriously by the waves of refugees from the Middle East, and ultimately by the European Union itself.

U radu se analizira ideja nacije Antuna Gustava Matoša (1873. – 1914.), odnosno konstitutivni elementi koji čine njezine temelje. Polazeći od pretpostavke da nacija nije proizvoljni politički konstrukt jednoga vremena nego proizvod povijesne evolucije niza kohezivnih identifikacijskih čimbenika određene skupine ljudi, nastojimo izdvojiti njezinu formulu u hrvatskim okvirima. Temeljne sastavnice Matoševe ideje nacije sukladne su srednjoeuropskomu načelu razvoja nacija pa analiziramo njegove misli o jeziku, teritoriju, povijesnome iskustvu te mitovima i simbolima svojstvenima za ljude sa zajedničkim etničkim podrijetlom. U skladu s tezom da se nacija politički želi ostvariti u državi, posebna se pozornost pridaje istociljnomu političkom i gospodarskomu djelovanju koji otkrivaju važnost voljnoga elementa u izgradnji i bivanju dijelom nacije. Matoševa ideja nacije otkriva se kao koherentan, dinamičan i interkulturan ideal koji odbacuje isključivost nacionalističkoga diskursa te tako i danas pokazuje aktualnost i korisnost. ; The paper analyzes idea of nation of Antun Gustav Matoš (1873 – 1914), i.e. constitutive elements which form its foundations. Starting from the presupposition that nation is not an arbitrary political construction of one time but a product of historical evolution of a number of cohesive identification factors of a certain group of people, we are trying to sort out its formula in Croatian frameworks. Basic components of Matoš's idea of nation are coherent with Middle-European principle of nations' development, so we analyze his thoughts about language, territory, historical experience, myths and symbols characteristic for people with common ethnic origin. In accordance to the thesis that a nation wants to be politically accomplished in a state, special attention is given to the same political and economic activity which reveals significance of willing element in building and being a part of a nation. Matoš's idea of nation is revealed as a coherent, dynamic and intercultural ideal which rejects exclusiveness of the nationalist discourse and therefore it shows its actuality and usefulness.

Polazište ovog članka je u tvrdnji da doktrina narodnog samoodređenja i dalje ostaje jedna od najparadoksalnijih, najkontroverznijih, ali istodobno i najuspješnijih doktrina, koja i dalje u velikoj mjeri doprinosi oblikovanju postojećeg međunarodnog sustava nacionalnih država. U članku se tvrdi da je ta doktrina, čija je namjera bila da sačuva mir i ljudsko dostojanstvo, uvijek bila u samom srcu mnogih sukoba. Ovaj članak analizira paradokse i kontroverze koji su sadržani u toj doktrini, počevši od napetosti između univerzalnosti doktrine narodnog samoodređenja s jedne, i posebnosti nekog konkretnog zahtjeva za narodno samoodređenje neke nacionalne grupe s druge strane. Ti paradoksi i kontroverze odnose se na širok spektar pitanja: od političkih izazova i pitanja legitimnosti same nacionalne države, koja se na taj način stvara, do činjenice da je doktrina narodnog samoodređenja zapravo stvar međunarodne politike, a ne tek puko unutarnje, tj. nacionalno pitanje. Ne odbacujemo samu doktrinu samoodređenja, nego zaključujemo – u zadnjem (devetom) paradoksu – da se njena uspješnost ili neuspješnost ne smije mjeriti brojem država koje su nastale na taj način, nego u kojoj je mjeri ona uspješna u pretvaranju postojećih država u "sigurne kuće" za sve jasnije definirane nacionalne grupe. ; This article's point of departure is that the national self-determination doctrine remains one of the most paradoxical, contested, but successful doctrines which has largely contributed to the shape of our existing international system of nation-states. It argues that the doctrine which is intended to safeguard peace and human dignity is and always has been at the heart of many conflicts. Starting with the tension between the universality of the national self-determination doctrine and the particularity of the national group whose interests it promotes, the article explores other paradoxes contained within this doctrine. They range from political and legitimacy challenges to the very nation-state it creates, through the violations of human rights contrary to its very meaning, to the fact that national self-determination doctrine, far from being a national issue, is actually an international affair. While not rejecting the doctrine, the paper concludes with the final (ninth) paradox that perhaps the success of this doctrine should not be measured by how many states it can produce, but how it can make the existing states a safe home for more self-differentiating national groups.

Looking at the European Constitution & the legal attainments of the European Union from the perspective of the modern nation-state leads to aporia & Euroskepticism since the European Union has never been, nor will it ever be, a political community modelled after the nation-state. The nation-state as a constitutional institution is not tantamount to political processes; it is one of the historical options of the political. The state & politics cannot be equated: the nation-state is a political institution while politics is a process with various alternatives of institutionalization. These two sides, the constitutional state & the political processes, are in the relationship of soft incommensurability & it is not quite possible to equate them in some higher association. Equating the constitutional state & the political activity in present-day debates on the European Constitution results in Euroskepticism. Conservative theoreticians of the state & politics cannot study the constitutional state separately from political processes. For them Europe is possible solely as a constitutional state with democratic legitimation; otherwise it will never come into being. These theoreticians view the relationship between the constitution & politics as the means-ends or cause-effect category, & not as an open-ended process between two one unequatable media that are semantically mutually irritating. The goal of the European politics is not a European state, nor is the goal of the European constitution to curb the spontaneity of European political processes. The European Union is an open-ended semantic relationship between its legal attainments & its political processes. Consequently, the concept of democracy as a political form will have to be redefined. The European Union as a political community sui generis should be explained from the perspective of contemporary theories evolved along the lines of the linguistic & deconstructivist reversal of the modern substantionalist rationalism, universalism & cosmopolitism. The major contribution of these post-modern theories is that they do not consider political reality as an objective given, but as a construct for which we know how it was produced so that we can change it. This means that the object of study is not the constitutional-legal reality but the knowledge of the constitutional-legal reality that is continuously expanded by means of the new designations of the semantically nonexistent political environment. The European Constitution & the European politics are in the relationship of mutual semantic irritation, but are not identical & will never become identical. References. Adapted from the source document.