Search results

Classical liberalism as opposed to traditional concepts has established a notion of justice which envisages the equality of individual (negative) freedoms and (tutelary) rights. Under the influence of socialist criticism modern-day liberals have been trying to include within the concept of justice the problem of the distribution of positive freedoms and rights. The already classic attempt of solving this problem is the theory of justice by John Rawls. Rawls defines justice as fairness whose basic principles are: the equality of basic freedoms of individuals compatible with the freedom of other individuals; the distribution of goods which will most benefit the least privileged; the primacy of freedom over social equality and justice over economic efficiency. In a pluralist society principles should facilitate the establishment of the "overlapping consensus" among divergent social groups on the issues of the basic social structure. In his attempt to solve the problems of social equality which Rawls' theory leaves open-ended Michael Walzer postulates the principle of complex equality which requires different ways of distribution for different ways of distribution for different types of goods. These types cannot he specified in advance; however, their distribution is the most remarkable skill of liberal politics. Finally, the author claims that the problem of a just political organization of multicultural societies can be solved by applying Rawls' principle of fairness on the negotiating processes and on achieving consensus among divergent cultural groups on certain issues. (SOI : PM: S. 147)

On the present-day Balkans conflicting desires for self-determination and for recognition of legitimate rights of the new states are confronted which might lead to new regional frictions. The conflict on the territory of former Yugoslavia has affected a specific attitude-profiling of the Balkan states and reconfirmed the existence of Balkan security community which makes it impossible to view national security outside the regional Balkan framework. Using various means, each of the Balkan states strives to overcome the afflictions brought about by the latest Balkan crisis and create conditions for strengthening its national security . (SOI : PM: S. 69)

If regular criteria were applied, Croatia and Bosnia and Hercegovina could count on joining "Partnership for Peace" only after they have resolved internal conflicts and frictions with their neighbours by political means. (SOI : PM: S. 103)

In his essay the author deals with two topics: disadvantageous effects of the common Yugoslav state on the Croatian economy and misappropriation of the Yugoslav federal state property by Serbia. In the first Yugoslavia (between the two World Wars) Croatia was economically handicapped through different political practices: the monetary reform, taxing imparities, Serbian colonization in Eastern Slavonia and disadvantageous treatment in infrastructure construction. In the socialist Yugoslavia this handicap was continued primarily through a policy of industrial disinvestment. The economic reforms by Prime Minister Ante Markovic in the late 1980s could not save the Yugoslav federation, they even attempted to increase centralization, which was inacceptable for Croatia. In the second part of the article the author offers a calculation of federal state property (mainly foreign currency reserves and military property) misappropriated by Serbia. On the basis of IMF methodology in calculating Croatian share in the Yugoslav GNP the author estimates that the net value of the Croatian part of federal property amounts to 17 billion USD. (SOI : PM: S. 161)

Slovakian political development following the collapse of communism is analysed in the text. The instigator of the democratic change in Slovakia was the organization "Public against violence" /VPN/ (the equivalent to the Czech "Citizens' Forum"), in which Vladimir Meciar came to prominence very early. Following his clash with the leadership of VPN in spring of 1991, he emerged as a charismatic political leader. Relying on his populist party called "Movement for Democratic Slovakia" /HZDS/, Meciar in 1992 won the Slovakian parliamentary elections and became Prime Minister. HZDS' radicalization of the nationalist discourse and its striving for a total institutional transformation of the Czechoslovakian federation led to the so called "velvet divorce" and Slovakian independence early in 1993. Meciar and HZDS briefly lost power in 1994 due to the party rift, but made a triumphant comeback after the elections in autumn of the same year. The authors' thesis is that this is responsible for the fact that in Slovakia national populism and client-patrimonial type of government have prevailed over democratic constitutionalism. The authors claim that the causes for such a development can be found in the social repercussions of the forced postwar industrialization and in the powerful tradition of cultural and political nationalism. (SOI : PM: S. 151)