Suchergebnisse

The question of engendering has emerged as a dominant theme in the development. theory and practice in the past few years, mainly due to partial achievement of. the desired goals of development in terms of attaining gender equality and women`s. empowerment. Most studies in this regard focus largely on engendering the state. institutions. But the context of development has changed in developing countries. with the introduction of recent economic reforms. Taking note of the changed scenario,. this book broadens the framework of analysis of engendering governance institutions. by incorporating th

Episode 4 Guests, Dr. Dale Walton and Dr. Brian Arendt, discuss the challenges facing US and Chinese relations in the coming years. Dr. Brian Arendt is an Assistant Professor of Chinese Studies and International Relations at Lindenwood University. He has earned a Ph.D. in History from Georgetown University in 1993, and also holds a Master's degree from SUNY at Stony Brook and a Bachelor's degree from UM-St. Louis. He has taught courses in South Korea, interned at the World Trade Center in St. Louis, and served as an adjunct instructor with Lindenwood, St. Louis University, Washington University, and Concordia University. He has taught a wide variety of courses, including World History, modern Chinese history, traditional Chinese history, the history of Asia, and international politics. He has presented papers on aspects of Chinese history to the Midwest Association of Asian Studies and the Missouri Conference on History. In 2013 he published an article in Lindenwood University's Confluence journal entitled, "China and the Louisiana Purchase Exposition." He is currently working on a project in modern international relations. Dr. C. Dale Walton is associate professor of International Relations at Lindenwood, as well as a senior research fellow with the John W. Hammond Institute for Free Enterprise. Prior to coming to Lindenwood, he taught at the University of Reading (UK) and Missouri State University. Dr. Walton has published three monographs: Grand Strategy and the Presidency: Foreign Policy, War, and the American Role in the World (2012); Geopolitics and the Great Powers in the Twenty-first Century: Multipolarity and the Revolution in Strategic Perspective (2007); and The Myth of Inevitable U.S. Defeat in Vietnam (2002). He also is one of the co-authors of Understanding Modern Strategy, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2016). His academic interests include strategic theory and history, great power politics, and the future of US domestic governance and foreign policy. ; https://digitalcommons.lindenwood.edu/thinking_aloud/1003/thumbnail.jpg

Polish constitutional law utilizes the notion of "constitutionalism" but does not explain the basic components which would help to classify a given system to such a category. The 20th century utilized this concept for the purposes of confrontation between West and East, but with the democratic wave of the 1990s and the decay of the transition process, it began to lose its widely acknowledged criteria of recognition. The article brings new taxonomy proposed in comparative constitutional law which suggests that there is no longer one fixed notion of constitutionalism. Such an approach seems to be the equivalent of realpolitik in constitutional studies accompanied by the suggestion that Western taxonomy can no longer ignore the protracted existence of constitution- based states which treat it as an object but reject other components e.g. separation of powers, an effective impartial and independent judicial system and legal constraints. Such realism in taxonomy may come at a price, with even further decay of rule of law standards and erosion of liberal democracy.

Since 1999, Muslim-majority northern Nigeria has witnessed a new phase of political struggles over the place of Islamic law (shari'a) in public life. This article traces how Muslim politics played into shari'a administration in Kano, northern Nigeria's most populous state, and argues that governmental bureaucracies created for the purpose of administering shari'a became sites of political contests over the meaning of public morality in Islamic terms. Shari'a bureaucracies featured as prizes in unstable political alliances between Muslim scholars and elected Muslim politicians. Politicians' appointments of Muslim scholars to bureaucratic positions, and their empowerment or disempowerment of certain bureaucracies, posed fundamental questions concerning who would control the shari'a project and what its content would be. The manoeuvres surrounding Kano's shari'a bureaucracies reflect broader trends in northern Nigerian politics. The shari'a project has not been a manifestation of Islamism in a narrow sense, but rather the site of a more complex set of intra-Muslim rivalries and electoral competition within an ostensibly secular political system. Adapted from the source document.