Search results

Drawing upon earlier work by the author, the text seeks to help answering the question of the sources of fear regarding the future integration of Slovakia. By looking at the roots & substance of this fear, the author aims to evaluate whether it has become unsubstantiated since the 2002 general election. Even though Dzurinda's 1998 government has fallen short of the voters' expectations, this has never been true in the foreign & security policy where the government delivered on its promises. The first chapter aims to identify the key factors, having the greatest effect on the policy- & decision-making of Slovakia's political elite between 1998 & 2002. These factors have been crucial in extending the country's image as being the most problematic out of the Visegrad group. The second chapter deals with Slovakia's internal political watershed: the 1998 general election. The problems weakening & ultimately threatening the ruling coalition from within are analyzed as well. The third chapter discusses economic & social aspects of Slovakia's post-1998 domestic development. The rather unbalanced performance & the lack of achievements are examined as the causes of doubts about the translation of Slovakia's integration ambitions into practical outcomes. Finally, the last chapter describes the societal perceptions in Slovakia as reflected in public opinion polls prior to the 2002 general election, summing up the election results. In answer to the question posed at the beginning, the author closes his analysis claiming that the current level of preparations for Slovakia's integration into both the European & Trans-Atlantic structures guarantees that the country will successfully join both. Despite the lack of any bulletproof guarantee of the stability of the country's post-2002 political scene, & in spite of potential change of the government or early elections, Slovakia's full integration into the European & Euro-Atlantic institutional structures in mid-2004 cannot be prevented. Slovakia will join along with its Visegrad partners. References. Adapted from the source document.

The article addresses issues related to the growing importance of non-governmental organizations & social movements in world politics. The key question that the article deals with is whether there are structures of global political activism in the making? In other words, is a "global civil society" being constituted? If yes, how does this "global civil society" relate to local actors? Are global actors partners in the building of local activism? In addition, how do the actors of the "global civil society" relate to states? Do they transcend the confines of the state? In order to answer these questions, the article first describes the evolving debate around the issue of transnational relations. During the last decade this issue has become an important research problem in at least two social scientific disciplines -the theory of international relations & the theory of collective action. Moreover, the attention paid to transnational social movements & net-works of non-governmental organizations has influenced debates in certain fields of political theory where actors described as "global civil society" came to be perceived as the manifestation of reformist hopes associated with globally organized civic activism. This activism is believed to hold the promise of future global democratization. In sum, the issue of transnational relations & transnational political action is an interdisciplinary problem. The aim of this article is to answer the specified questions above. It reflects the most important aspects of the debate on transnational political action. The ambition of the article is to critically assess both empirically oriented approaches & normatively motivated explorations of the possibilities for global democratization through political involvement of transnational movements & non-governmental organizations. The paper maintains that the concept of "global civil society" is applicable for the description of political action "beyond borders" only under the condition that it is not understood as an alternative to the institutions of the modern state & that it is not used in an ideological way. References. Adapted from the source document.

The evolution of Czech sociology, from its outset up until the present time, has had four lasting features: a tendency to put too much emphasis on personal grudges, a deep interest in the serious problems of the time, an ability for forming well-grounded statements on contemporary issues, & a natural plurality of opinions. These features are evident still in contemporary Czech sociology. In the postcommunist period, Czech sociology managed to come to terms with some of the more shadowy aspects of its past (cooperation with the regime) without any personal conflicts & was able to relatively quickly fill in the information gap in relationship to Western sociology. Several alternative interpretations of the transformation processes were formulated, & some neglected subject areas were cultivated. Impulses stemming from globalization are accepted in a critical & relatively reasonable manner, but there is a tangible lack of study devoted to cultural processes & the influence of mass media on society. Czech sociology has thus come to terms with the trauma that accompanies every fundamental social change, & has done so in a rational & practical manner.