Search results

Članak razmatra uspon, oblike i posledice protesta u nedemokratskim režimima, oslanjajući se na noviju literaturu iz uporedne analize političkih režima i društvenih pokreta. Oblik režima značajno oblikuje izglede za izbijanje protesta, kao i njegove oblike i posledice. Protesti često proizvode bitne promene u personalnom sastavu i politici vlasti, koje značajno utiču na strukturu i delovanje nedemokratskih režima, i ponekad vode promeni režima. Primeri su navedeni iz kasnog komunističkog autoritarizma u Poljskoj i Jugoslaviji, u kojima su dugotrajni protesti doprineli padu režima i države, i postkomunistički autoritarni režimi u Srbiji i Ukrajini koji su više puta uzdrmani a zatim i dokrajčeni "pritiskom odozdo". ; The paper explores the politics of protest in non-democratic regimes using insights from comparative regime analysis and social movement theory. A regime type strongly shapes factors that trigger popular mobilization, the repertories of collective action and their implications. Protest politics may produce a considerable political change, such as policy and personality change in the political establishment, as well as important shifts in the structure and operation of non-democratic regimes, even regime change. The paper provides evidence from the late communist authoritarian Poland and Yugoslavia, in which sustained protests contributed to the collapse of regime and state, and the post-communist competitive authoritarian Serbia and Ukraine, which experience repeated protest waves and were brought down by protest politics.

Са политичким преокретом 2000. године у Србији отпочео је истовемено и процес идеолошког преобликовања јавних простора. Међу најпроминентнијим видовима оваквог деловања је именовање или преименовање урбаног простора, првенствено улица и тргова, те бављење постојећим споменицима и меморијалима, као и градња и планирање нових. Овакви су случајеви посебно били уочљиви у Београду. Њима су се у неколико наврата супротставиле одређене политичке партије, те неполитичке групе које су организовале уличне акције 'против-именовања' београдских улица, те кампање против новопланираних јавних споменика. Односи моћи и идентитетске политике у овим случајевима биће коментарисани у овом раду. Пропратиће се праксе неколико уметничких и политичких скупина које су спровеле акције и перформансе незваничног преименовања улица, или су пак дискутовале и противиле се подизању новопредложених споменика. (Пре)именовањем одређених градских простора, хегемонске политичке коалиције покушавају да конституишу сигнификантна симболичка места, док, са друге стране, опозиционе противакције покушавају да преузму та иста места и да их реинтерпретирају. У овом ће се раду покушати да прикажу и анализирају поједине идеолошке политике и званични дискурси сећања, те поједине уметничке и политичке контраполитике и опозиционе праксе алтернативне комеморације ; With the onset of political overturn in Serbia in 2000, the process of the ideological reconfiguration of public places was simultaneously being put in motion. One of the most promi- nent means of this endeavor was naming and renaming of urban space, primarily of streets and squares, but also treatment of existing memorial sites and monuments and commissioning and erection of new ones. These undertakings were especially prominent in Serbia's capital Belgrade. Such processes were opposed several times by certain political parties and groups which organized street-actions of counter-naming of Belgrade's thoroughfares and campaigns against newly designated public monuments, and power-play and identity politics of such proceedings will be commented on here. This paper will discuss practices of several artistic and political groups which carried out unofficial street-renaming actions and performances, or discussed and opposed proposed new memorials. By (re)naming certain urban spaces, hegemonic political coalitions are trying to construct significant symbolic places, while oppositional counter-actions are seeking to overtake those same places and reinterpret them. This paper will attempt to sum up and inquire into the ideological politics of official memory discourses and artistic and political counter-politics and actions of opposition or alternative commemoration.

Demokratski optimizam devedestih godina prošlog veka zamenjuje osobita forma javnog razočarenja u demokratiju. Kriza demokratije praćena institucionalnim deficitima, konfuzijom, niskim stepenom upravljačke sposobnosti da se rešavaju pitanja siromaštva, nezaposlenosti, imigracije, korupcije, simptomi su ovoga stanja. Globalni val populizma najizoštreniji je izraz ove političke patologije. Početak novoga veka rađa uzlet otvorenog neprijateljstva prema demokratiji. Deskriptivni pristupi oslonjeni na proceduralnu dimenziju režima moći ("hibridni režimi", "ograničena demokratija" "iliberalna demokratija", "kompetitivni autoritarizam" ) pokazuju se nedostatnim. U ovome radu autor se vraća klasičnom konceptu "despotizma" i pokazuje normative i teorisjke prednosti ovoga koncepta ("novi despotizam") u analizi novoga režima moći koji izrasta na pretpostvkama sve šireg nepoverenja u demokratske instituciije. ; The democratic optimism of the 1990s has been replaced by a particular form of public disillusionment with democracy. The crisis of democracy, accompanied by institutional deficits, confusion, low levels of management capacity to tackle poverty, unemployment, immigration, corruption, are symptoms of this condition. The global wave of populism is the sharpest expression of this political pathology. The beginning of the new century has given birth to an open hostility to democracy. Descriptive approaches based on the procedural dimension of the regime of power ("hybrid regimes", "limited democracy", "liberal democracy", "competitive authoritarianism") are proving insufficient to capture the new political system. In this paper, the author returns to the classical concept of "despotism" and shows the normative and theoretical advantages of this concept ("new despotism") in the analysis of a new regime of power that grows on the premise of growing distrust of democratic institutions.

The author explores how the internet and the new media are changing the way that we communicate, act and think, individually and collectively, through the example of the Occupy Wall Street Movement. The author claims that The Occupy Movement, as a post-narrative project conceived in a digital environment, is less of a political activity, and more a new way of behavior for its members and for the society at large. Its focus on consensus building and its modus operandi are reflecting the principles of the Internet, web-organization and cooperation. Therefore, its success is not about achieving any particular political aim, or winning an election, but about the general acceptance of these values and their becoming part of a wider political agenda. ; Autor istražuje kako internet i novi mediji menjaju način na koji komuniciramo, delujemo i mislimo, pojedinačno ali i kolektivno, na primeru pokreta "Okupirajmo Volstrit". Autor tvrdi da "Okupacija Volstrita", kao postnarativni pokret nastao u digitalnom okruženju, manje predstavlja političku aktivnost a više novi normativni način ponašanja za svoje članove, ali i čitavo društvo. Njegova usmerenost ka izgradnji konsenzusa, kao i sam modus funkcionisanja, odražavaju principe interneta, mrežne organizacije i kolaboracije. Zato je njegov uspeh manje povezan sa ostvarivanjem nekog pojedinačnog cilja ili osvajanja vlasti na izborima, a više sa razmerom u kojoj će ove rednosti biti opšteusvojene i postati deo ukupne političke agende.

Uporedo sа porаstom političkih tenzijа u globаlnim okvirimа usled аntаgonizmimа ekonomski i vojno nаjmoćnijih zemаljа, prve decenije nаkon Drugog svetskog rаtа donele su i intenzivirаnje konflikаtа unutаr аmeričkog društvа te njihovo problemаtizovаnje u jаvnom i političkom polju. Grаđаnsko nezаdovoljstvo nа tlu SAD-а imаlo je rаzličitа ishodištа kаo i rаzličite vidove kаnаlisаnjа kаdа je reč o metodаmа političkog i društvenog orgаnizovаnjа ugroženih ili obesprаvljenih društvenih grupа. Kаo jedаn od njegovih nаjupečаtljivijih oblikа ispoljаvаnjа bilo je političko, kulturno i društveno delаnje аfroаmeričke zаjednice nаročito tokom 60-ih godinа prošlog vekа, u "nаjborbenijoj" fаzi Pokretа zа grаđаnskа prаvа.2 U ovom periodu znаčаjаn deo аfroаmeričke populаcije počev od predstаvnikа njene političke i kulturne elite do аkterа iz nаjnižih slojevа bio je uključen u rаzličite vidove аktivnosti sа ciljem dezintegrаcije represivnih mehаnizаmа аmeričkog društvа, te otklаnjаnjа ključnih činilаcа političke, kulturne i ekonomske nejednаkosti njegovih pripаdnikа. ; Since the beginning of the 20th century African American intellectual and political elite strived to define the place of black minority in the American society by formulating its political, cultural and economic goals. During that time different concepts of African American culture as well as different cultural policies were promoted in the political, artistic and academic fields. In the 1960s distinct visions of the future of African American community in the American society were consolidated and mediated through the Civil Rights Movement and its multiple organizations that included both the activist from the lower social strata and intellectuals and artists. Among them were many male jazz musicinas as well as a few female jazz artists. Focusing on the artistic work of Nina Simone in the 1960s as a specific example of fusion of political and feministic activism, we will examine the ideological and aesthetical distinction of her position in the fields of politics, music and culture of that period. In that process we will analyze the artistic sublimation of Simone`s understanding of African American racial and feminist identity comparing her views with the predominant perspectives of the African American political, intellectual and artistic elite.

Dоktоrskа disеrtаciја prаti rаzvој kоncеpаtа pоlitičkе lеvicе, pоlitičkе dеsnicе i pоlitičkоg cеntrа, оd njihоvоg nаstаnkа svе dо dаnаšnjih dаnа. Krоz gеnеrаlnо rаzmаtrаnjе оvih kоncеpаtа dоktоrskа disеrtаciја nudi i niz mini-biоgrаfskih pоrtrеtа znаčајnih tеоrеtičаrа i držаvnikа, kојi su оbеlеžili pоmеnutе pојmоvе u еvrоpskој pоlitičkој i intеlеktuаlnој istоriјi. Аutоr disеrtаciје, pоrеd disciplinоvаnоg iznоšеnjа nаučnih činjеnicа, nа litеrаlаn nаčin prеzеntuје intеrеsаntnu gеnеrаlnu fаbulu u kојој sе kао glаvni аktеri pојаvlјuјu vоdеćе ličnоsti mоdеrnе еvrоpskе istоriје. Disеrtаciја prikаzuје kаkо ćе, nеkаdа јеdinstvеni pоlitički prоstоri lеvicе i dеsnicе, u pоstmоdеrnоm vrеmеnu biti pоdеlјеni grаđаnskim i аntigrаđаnskim shvаtаnjеm pоlitikе, dоk ćе pоdеlа nа lеvicu i dеsnicu u njihоvim klаsičnim оblicimа biti јоš sаmо sеkundаrnа. Dоktоrskа disеrtаciја pоkаzuје dа nаs tо dоvоdi u јеdnu nоvu tеоriјsku i prаktičnu situаciјu, tе аutоr disеrtаciје u zаklјučnim nаpоmеnаmа rаdа zаklјučuје dа ćе zа stаbilnоst, dеlоtvоrnоst i lеgitimnоst pоlitičkih instituciја nа pоčеtku 21. vеkа biti pоtrеbnа јеdnа nоvа pоstidеоlоškа pоlitikа i pоstidеоlоškа pоlitičkа sоciоlоgiја. ; Doctoral dissertation follows the development of the concepts of the Political Left, the Political Right and the Political Center from the time of their creation to the present day. Through a general discussion of these concepts dissertation offers a series of mini - biographical portraits of important scholars and statesmen, who epitomized these concepts in European political and intellectual history. Author of dissertation, together with disciplined presentation of scientific facts, offers the interesting general story in which as the main actors appear leading figures of modern European history. The dissertation shows how, in the past a unique political space of the Left and the Right, in the postmodern period will be divided by civil and anti-civic understanding of politics, while the division between the Left and the Right in their classical forms remains only secondary. Doctoral dissertation finally demonstrates that previous happenings brings us into a new theoretical and practical situation, and the author of the thesis in the concluding remarks of work concludes that for stability, effectiveness and legitimacy of political institutions at the beginning of the 21st century we need a new post-ideological politics and post-ideological political sociology.