Search results

The article explores the way political participation, representation and governance
are conceptualized and rationalized by the Romanian legislation on parties. The
plurality of parties was initially set up as a way to discipline and organize the
political pluralism manifest in society in order to contain it within the boundaries
imposed by the Constitution. This disciplinary vocation of parties was confirmed
and reinforced by the laws enacted in 1996 and 2003 that embedded parties into
a functional vision of democracy where they were explicitly endowed with
the public mission of ensuring the political integration of Romanian citizens.
The detailed rationalization of parties' mission to organize citizens' political
participation and to contain the expression of their political will contrasted
sharply with both the ambiguity of their governmental role within the "eclectic"
institutional design of the Constitution, and with their organizational friability.

The paper presents the theories of 195 great specialists in the field of organizations, the selection being made according to several criteria: originality of ideas and style, academic recognition and applicability. They are sociologists, psychologists, economists, management experts, engineers, philosophers, political scientists, historians, journalists, lawyers, but all have enjoyed a professional fame that has crossed the borders of their country. Their multiple specializations have enriched the field of organizations, and the dynamic, high, engaging style has made them enter global university circuits. Managers understood thanks to them that for the development of their institutions they have to work closely with specialists to increase their visibility, to impose a good strategy and for the well-being of themselves, employees and society.

This study aims to answer the question whether Christian Orthodoxy can inspire political movements. In so doing we start from the political theories of modernity where the link between Christianity and democracy is central. Our result sounds unexpected: interaction between Orthodoxy and democracy seems to not have a perspective. It is too late for it since most political movements in post-communism do not have the religious identity of their members as criterion. The situation was not different before. As an example the effort of the orthodox theologians and laymen in Romania before the outbreak of the Second World War is quoted here. Almost without an exception all focused and restricted their interest on the question of the nation. Therein we see the principal reason for the above postulated perspective of an orthodox political doctrine until now. On the European level the situation looks also no better. Even the parties, which attribute themselves the Christian values, have at present large difficulties to convey their message. It remains only to hope that the political actors rediscover the social and actively support the Christian ethics in the public area. Only so can democracy be regarded as one of the most important binding forces also under the Christians.

The international academic community is currently exploring the development of the intelligence studies domain as a social science project. The current position paper argues for a project to connect, in content terms, the Romanian political science with the domain of intelligence studies. It takes into account the international and local context, and presents some of the benefits to be generated by the intersection of these two domains.