A paper entitled Cooperation between Moskow and Minsk in the energy sector describes the most important problems of gas and petrol market at the European part of former USSR. It is an attempt to answer questions aroused by the situation at the post-soviet petrol market. Its analytical part is based on statistical data, analytical papers of the most important think-tanks in that matter, books and papers together with internet resources. All above mentioned contribute to an author`s proper arguments which are focused on abilities and limitations of petrol and gas sector of Russian Federation and Republic of Belarus. The paper provides an information about bilateral relations of these countries, describes Russian energy strategy towards pos-soviet area, especially towards the Belarus` role. It also describes Russian-Belarusian relations in broad international context and also Belarusian dilemmas while Minsk does refuse Russians to obtain strategic importance in the country`s energy sector on the one hand, but also must strictly cooperate with Moscow while Belarusian economy is unable to function without cheap petrol and gas supplies from Russia. An author focuses also on Yamal pipeline and the eventual threat from the Nord-Stream project and also describes the meaning of BTS1 and BTS2 installations which virtually are the pressure tools on Belarus. He characterizes the background of past and current energy conflicts in bilateral relations and indicates the role of petrol and gas as political tools at Russian disposal, towards Belarus. He also formulate prognosis, based on his past analyzes. According to an author Belarus must solve the problem of its own dependency on Moscow in the energy area. Without it she won`t be a clearly independent state. In the same time Russia is using all possible tools and strengths it monopoly on the Belarusian petrol market. This kind of policy is a step in Russian Federation`s policies aimed at regaining imperial role again in the post-soviet area. ; A paper entitled Cooperation between Moskow and Minsk in the energy sector describes the most important problems of gas and petrol market at the European part of former USSR. It is an attempt to answer questions aroused by the situation at the post-soviet petrol market. Its analytical part is based on statistical data, analytical papers of the most important think-tanks in that matter, books and papers together with internet resources. All above mentioned contribute to an author`s proper arguments which are focused on abilities and limitations of petrol and gas sector of Russian Federation and Republic of Belarus. The paper provides an information about bilateral relations of these countries, describes Russian energy strategy towards pos-soviet area, especially towards the Belarus` role. It also describes Russian-Belarusian relations in broad international context and also Belarusian dilemmas while Minsk does refuse Russians to obtain strategic importance in the country`s energy sector on the one hand, but also must strictly cooperate with Moscow while Belarusian economy is unable to function without cheap petrol and gas supplies from Russia. An author focuses also on Yamal pipeline and the eventual threat from the Nord-Stream project and also describes the meaning of BTS1 and BTS2 installations which virtually are the pressure tools on Belarus. He characterizes the background of past and current energy conflicts in bilateral relations and indicates the role of petrol and gas as political tools at Russian disposal, towards Belarus. He also formulate prognosis, based on his past analyzes. According to an author Belarus must solve the problem of its own dependency on Moscow in the energy area. Without it she won`t be a clearly independent state. In the same time Russia is using all possible tools and strengths it monopoly on the Belarusian petrol market. This kind of policy is a step in Russian Federation`s policies aimed at regaining imperial role again in the post-soviet area.
Цели работы проследить, как изменялись подходы к гуманитарному знанию, и определить возможные пути его развития на современном этапе. Методология и методики. Методология, изложенного в статье исследования, основывается на контент-анализе вербальных и визуальных текстов, а также на индуктивных методиках, позволяющих обобщить гетерогенные подходы. Результаты и научная новизна. Рассмотрен концепт homo duplex начиная с периода проторенессанса, когда произошло вычленение гуманитаристики из общего знания о человеке и компонент значения «земной, небожественный» закрепился за науками, которые обозначались словом humanitatis. Эти науки были противопоставлены теологическим, трактующим божественное начало человека. С опорой на схематичную трактовку человека, представленную Леонардо да Винчи, сделан вывод: именно этот образ сформировал ядро антропоцентрической картины мира, а впоследствии ведущий исследовательский метод гуманитарных наук. Анализ развития концепта от homo duplex до homo triplex показывает, что динамика его переосмысления во многом зависела от возможности экстраполяции методов научно-естественного познания мира на гуманитарные знания. В качестве причины кризиса современного гуманитарного знания указывается «доктринальное» мышление, вызванное, с одной стороны, факторами политического характера, а с другой стороны, «высоким искусством» превращать постулаты гуманитаристики в догму. Для доказательства данного положения привлекаются художественные и визуальные тексты, а также исторические факты. Современная структура гуманитарного знания основана, по мнению автора, на интеграции гуманитаристики и нейронаук, где ядром исследования являются такие концепты, как сознание, подсознание и язык. Выстроена модель гетерогенных сфер, включающая биосферу, ноосферу, техносферу, семиосферу, социосферу, этносферу. Сформулирована новая парадигма научного знания, объединяющая в себе следующие черты антропоцентрического подхода: человек осознающий (обрабатывающий информацию); человек, творящий себя и мир; человек, взаимодействующий с природой и машиной. Практическая значимость. Предлагаемая модель гетерогенных сфер позволяет вычленить варианты взаимодействия естественных, точных и гуманитарных наук, что определяет новое концептуальное содержание понятия homo triplex. ; The aims of the article: to track the change of approaches to humanitarian knowledge; to define possible ways of its development at the present stage. Methods. The methodology of the research is based on the content analysis of verbal and visual texts, and inductive techniques allowing us to generalize heterogeneous approaches. Results and scientific novelty. The author, having postulated a double objective to trace, on the one hand, how the attitude to humanities changed during centuries, and, on the other, to draft possible routes of further development, scrutinizes the concept homo duplex starting from the early renaissance period, when humanities were singled out of the common knowledge about the human being, when the component of meaning «down to earth, not divine» shaped the kernel of the field of knowledge, later named as humanities. This type of knowledge was opposed to the theology with its concept of the divine origin of man. The author attracts Leonardo da Vinci drawing to define the major research methodology of humanities. Further tackling the evolution of the concept from the homo duplex to homo triplex, the author proves that the dynamics of reconceptualization owed to a great extend to the possibility to extrapolate methods of sciences onto humanities research. Touching upon the reason of vicissitudes and recent crisis in humanities the author points to the «doctrinal way of thinking» caused on the one hand by political situation and on the other hand by the «fine art» of turning humanities postulates into a dogma. To prove the point, the author attracts verbal and visual texts, as well as historical facts. Upon this basis the contemporary structure of the humanitarian knowledge is being scrutinized that rests upon the integration of humanities and neurosciences, the research kernel including brain, mind, language and subconsciousness. The author constructs the model of heterogeneous spheres, including biosphere, noosphere, technosphere, semiosphere, socisphere, and ethnosphere. Hence, a new paradigm of research approaches that rests upon «the anthropocentric trinity»: thinking (processing) individual+ self and world creating individual + an individual who communicates both with nature and computer. Practical significance. The proposed model of heterogeneous spheres enables to outline intersections variants of sciences and humanities thus defining new conceptual meaning of homo triplex.
Рассматриваются проблемы понимания правовой герменевтики и доктринального толкования. Автор делается вывод, что проблема толкования норм права уже переросла тематические рамки общей теории права и государства и является предметом отдельной науки прикладного характера правовой герменевтики, имеющей в своем арсенале целую палитру разнообразных методов толкования норм права. Особое внимание уделяется проблемам определения объекта доктринального толкования и его видов. На основе проведенного анализа автор статьи делает вывод, что объекты доктринального толкования весьма разнообразны и не ограничиваются интерпретацией только норм права. Практически все элементы правовой системы могут быть подвержены научному анализу и прогнозированию. В противовес утвердившемуся в литературе по теории права и государства мнению о том, что доктринальное толкование это вид неофициального толкования права, автор делает вывод, согласно которому доктринальное толкование может быть официальным, неофициальным и официозным, то есть иметь полуофициальный характер, как например, заключения на законопроекты. Автор статьи утверждает следующее: несмотря на то, что в современной России доктрина не признается в качестве официального источника права, она оказывает сильнейшее воздействие на законодателя, прежде всего, на его правовое сознание, на его психологию, устои. Лучшие образчики научных доктрин закреплены в первой главе Конституции Российской Федерации. Это и теория Ш. Монтескье о разделении властей, также идея федеративного устройства российского государства, идеи светского и демократического государства, которые прошли серьезную проверку временем. Это и идея Лоренца фон Штейн о социальном характере государства. Рассмотрев различные подходы к пониманию источников права, автор приходит к выводу, что если результат толкования подготовлен известным ученым юристом, изложен в лоне общепризнанной теории, определенного концепта, правовой парадигмы, то он должен быть признан источником (формой) права и на него необходимо ссылаться при разрешении правовых проблем в административных, а также в судебных инстанциях различного уровня. ; The article observes the problems of understanding of legal hermeneutics and doctrinal interpretation. The author concludes that the issue of interpretation of the law has already developed into the thematic framework of the general theory of law and state, and now is a subject of a specific applied science legal hermeneutics, which has different ways of interpreting the law. The author focuses of the definition of the object of doctrinal interpretation and its types. After carrying out the analysis the author concludes that the doctrinal interpretation of the objects is very diverse and does not mean only interpretation of the law. Almost all the elements of the legal system can be subjects to scientific analysis and forecasting. In contrary to the opinion affirmed in the literature on the theory of law and state that the doctrinal interpretation is a kind of informal interpretation of the law, the author makes a conclusion that the doctrinal interpretation can be official, unofficial and officious i.e. it can have the semi-official character, such as the conclusion to bills. The author considers that despite the fact that in modern Russia the doctrine is not recognized as an official source of law it has a tremendous impact on the legislator, in particular, his legal mind, his psychology foundations. The best samples of scientific doctrines presented in the first chapter of the Constitution. E.g. it is Montesquieu's theory on the separation of powers, idea of the federal structure of the Russian state, ideas of a secular and democratic state, which withstood a major test of time. This is idea of Lorenz von Stein of the social character of the state, too. After considering the various approaches to understanding the sources of law the author comes to the conclusion that if the interpretation of the results is prepared by a famous legal scholar, is set out in the field of a recognized theory, a certain concept, the legal paradigm, it must be recognized as the legal source and one needs to refer to it in resolution of legal problems in the administration and courts of various levels.
The aims of the article: – to track the change of approaches to humanitarian knowledge; – to define possible ways of its development at the present stage.Methods. The methodology of the research is based on the content analysis of verbal and visual texts, and inductive techniques allowing us to generalize heterogeneousapproaches.Results and scientific novelty. The author, having postulated a double objective to trace, on the one hand, how the attitude to humanities changed during centuries, and, on the other, to draft possible routes of further development, scrutinizes the concept homo duplex starting from the early renaissance period, when humanities were singled out of the common knowledge about the human being, when the component of meaning «down to earth, not divine» shaped the kernel of the field of knowledge, later named as humanities. This type of knowledge was opposed to the theology with its concept of the divine origin of man. The author attracts Leonardo da Vinci drawing to define the major research methodology of humanities. Further tackling the evolution of the concept from the homo duplex to homo triplex, the author proves that the dynamics of econceptualization owed to a great extend to the possibility to extrapolate methods of sciences onto humanities research. Touching upon the reason of vicissitudes and recent crisis in humanities the author points to the «doctrinal way of thinking» caused on the one hand by political situation and on the other hand by the «fine art» of turning humanities postulates into a dogma. To prove the point, the author attracts verbal and visual texts, as well as historical facts. Upon this basis the contemporary structure ofthe humanitarian knowledge is being scrutinized that rests upon the integrationof humanities and neurosciences, the research kernel including brain, mind, languageand subconsciousness. The author constructs the model of heterogeneous spheres, including biosphere, noosphere, technosphere, semiosphere, socisphere, and ethnosphere. Hence, a new paradigm of research approaches that rests upon «the anthropocentric trinity»: thinking (processing) individual+ self and world creating individual + an individual who communicates both with nature and computer. Practical significance. The proposed model of heterogeneous spheres enables to outline intersections variants of sciences and humanities thus defining new conceptual meaning of homo triplex. ; Цели работы – проследить, как изменялись подходы к гуманитарному знанию, и определить возможные пути его развития на современном этапе.Методология и методики. Методология, изложенного в статье исследования, основывается на контент-анализе вербальных и визуальных текстов, а также на индуктивных методиках, позволяющих обобщить гетерогенные подходы.Результаты и научная новизна. Рассмотрен концепт homo duplex начиная с периода проторенессанса, когда произошло вычленение гуманитаристики из общего знания о человеке и компонент значения «земной, небожественный» закрепился за науками, которые обозначались словом humanitatis. Эти науки были противопоставлены теологическим, трактующим божественное начало человека. С опорой на схематичную трактовку человека, представленную Леонардо да Винчи, сделан вывод: именно этот образ сформировал ядро антропоцентрической картины мира, а впоследствии – ведущий исследовательский метод гуманитарных наук. Анализ развития концепта от homo duplex до homo triplex показывает, что динамика его переосмысления во многом зависела от возможности экстраполяции методов научно-естественного познания мира на гуманитарные знания. В качестве причины кризиса современного гуманитарного знания указывается «доктринальное» мышление, вызванное, с одной стороны, факторами политического характера, а с другой стороны, «высоким искусством» превращать постулаты гуманитаристики в догму. Для доказательства данного положения привлекаются художественные и визуальные тексты, а также исторические факты. Современная структура гуманитарного знания основана, по мнению автора, на интеграции гуманитаристики и нейронаук, где ядром исследования являются такие концепты, как сознание, подсознание и язык. Выстроена модель гетерогенных сфер, включающая биосферу, ноосферу, техносферу, семиосферу, социосферу, этносферу. Сформулирована новая парадигма научного знания, объединяющая в себе следующие черты антропоцентрического подхода: человек осознающий (обрабатывающий информацию); человек, творящий себя и мир; человек, взаимодействующий с природой и машиной.Практическая значимость. Предлагаемая модель гетерогенных сфер позволяет вычленить варианты взаимодействия естественных, точных и гуманитарных наук, что определяет новое концептуальное содержание понятия homo triplex.
The author of the article continues analyses heritage of Jonathan Swift with the philosophical point of view. It is the third article of series what is presented for reader. Two previous articles were sanctified to the analysis of suchknowns works as "A Tale of a Tub" and, certainly, "Travels into Several Remote Nations of the World In Four Parts. By Lemuel Gulliver, First a Surgeon, and then a Captain of Several Ships, commonly known as Gulliver's Travels". In this work the author examines philosophical and publicism property sanctified to the study of labours of the great Irish and English thinker. The special attention is spared to some pamphlets and essay that are relatively not popular to wide mass of readers. For example, there are analysed such works: - The Battle of the Books; -A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland Being a Burden on Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick; - A Journal to Stella; - A Proposal for Correcting, Improving and Ascertaining the English Tongue; - Drapier's Letters; - A short view of the state of Ireland. These publicistic works of Jonathan Swift is analysed with the purpose of selection and demonstration to the reader of bright socially-philosophical theses that can be actual and today. Different literary styles of thinker are also watched in the article – both ironical and delivered to emotional expression. The author makes conclusion that estimation of the English philosopher only as an author of entertaining books for children and teenagers, master of satire is too narrow and incomplete. Some of pamphlets, essay, verses are not contained satire, irony and cynicism. However they are also sanctified the traditional themes that interested Swift. There are three thematic aspects of literature work of philosopher in this article: - theme of necessity of moral and intellectual progress of society; - theme of constructive and effective state administration, management and politics; - romantic theme. The author of the article makes conclusion also, that socio-political conditions modern to Swift (XVIII century), when Ireland was led to by Great Britain to the economic decline and full political submission, quite enslavements of Ukraine, that were actual in the nearest past. That why conclusions of the Irish philosopher about reasons aggressive wars, bribery the aggressive country of provocative politicians, journalists, writers for suppression of nearby country it is been absolutely actual -especially in the context of modern mutual relations between the free countries of Europe and post-soviet imperial Russia. Also important are Swift's opinions about of necessity of a arranging in any country of the system of state pedagogics what is reviving the moral and intellectual level of nation. It is absolute reason of this thesis is explained by it is difficult to deceive patriotic, moral and intellectual peoples, it is difficult to manipulate and subordinate to the external management. At the end of the article the author makes conclusion also, that a person and labours of Jonathan Swift must be include into teaching course of Philosophy and History of philosophy in institutions of higher learning of Ukraine, because he is the bright and original representative of ideas of Renaissance and Enlightenment age. ; В статье автор продолжает исследовать философское и публицистическое достояние великого англо-ирландского мыслителя. При этом внимание уделяется памфлетам, которые относительно малоизвестны широкой массе читателей. Эти произведения Дж.Свифта анализируются с целью выделения, а также иллюстрации ярких социально-философских тезисов, которые являются актуальными и сегодня. В статье также отслеживаются различные литературные стили мыслителя. ; У статті автор продовжує досліджувати філософське і публіцистичне надбання великого англо-ірландського мислителя. При цьому приділяється увага відносно маловідомим широкому загалові памфлетам. Ці твори Дж.Свіфта аналізуються з метою виокремлення та ілюстрації яскравих і актуальних для сьогодення соціально-філософських тез, а також відстеження різних літературних стилів мислителя.
Статья передает содержание доклада, прочитанного на XXXVI научно-практической конференции профессорско-преподавательского состава Челябинской государственной академии культуры и искусств «Культура - искусство - образование: научные и прикладные аспекты». С культурологических позиций детально анализируется современная литературная ситуация. Прослеживается ряд противоречий внешнего характера - в осмыслении роли литературы в обществе и её современных социокультурных задач. Рассматриваются и внутренние противоречия - между активизацией литературного процесса и размыванием литературных критериев, отнесением к литературе как широкого самодеятельного творчества, так и произведений прямой антикультурной направленности. Акцентируется внимание на фрагментарности современных литературных коммуникаций, затрудняющей проведение литературоведческого и культурологического анализа. Освещается спектр мнений относительно литературоцентричности современной российской культуры. Автор формулирует базовое противоречие, заключающееся в том, что, с одной стороны, общество испытывает потребность в литературе как в регулятивно-проективном инструменте, действенность которого подкреплена исторически, а с другой - как в общественном понимании, так и в рамках самого литературного процесса размыты основополагающие понятия, главная социокультурная задача литературы сместилась из области общественного служения в область самовыражения. Стерты сущностные признаки литературы, критерии оценки и разграничение собственно художественной литературы и самодеятельного литературного творчества. Автор отмечает, что анализ и разрешение противоречия существенно затруднены неполнотой картины, политизированной субъективностью критики и объективно слабым знанием о реальном соcтоянии литературного процесса в стране в целом по причине разрушения системы литературных коммуникаций. Решая противоречие с позиций культурологии, мы предлагаем выделить из многообразия функций, выполняемых литературой в обществе, главную - целостное, образное, т. е. наиболее полное и емкое решение нравственных задач и вопросов бытия современного человека. Делается вывод о вторичности и соподчиненности остальных функций литературы главной функции самопознания человека - только при таком иерархическом подходе литература может выполнять задачи социокультурного проектирования. С этих позиций автор предлагает решение ряда как внутренних, так и внешних противоречий современного литературного процесса. В статье использованы документы, определяющие современную культурную политику и политику в области литературы. ; The article contains detailed analysis of modern literature situation from culturology positions. A number of external contradictions in interpretation of literature role in a society and its modern social-cultural tasks are quite obvious. The author also considers internal contradictions between literature process stirring up and literature criteria washing out and treating literature both as a kind of wide amateur creative activity and as well as works of immediate anti-literature direction. The author attracts the readers' attention on fragment character of modern literature communications thus hampering philological and cultorogical analysis. The article also studies different opinions regarding literature centrism of modern Russian culture. The author formulates on the one hand basic contradiction consisting in the literature demand of the society as a regulative-projective tool that has been proved historically, and on the other hand both in public understanding and within literature process itself, fundamental notions of literature have been washed out, main social-cultural task of literature has been shifted from the field of public narrowing to the field of self-expression. The article abolishes essential signs of literature, evaluation criteria and differentiation of fiction in the true sense and amateur literary activities. The author points out that the analysis and disambiguation are very difficult to determine because of incomplete picture, politically loaded by criticism subjectivity and objectively weak knowledge of real state of literary process in the country on the whole by reason of literary communications system destruction. Trying to resolve contraindications from the viewpoint of culturology the author proposes to point out of many functions of literature in the society the main one consisting in integral and picturesque, i. e. mostly full and capacious solution of moral problems and questions of objective reality of modern man. The article draws a conclusion about unoriginality and adherence to other functions of literature,to its main function of self-knowledge of man. Only such hierarchical approach allows literature fulfill the tasks of social-cultural designing. From this point of view the author gives his own way of saluting a number of both internal and external contradictions of modern literary process. The article uses documents determining modern cultural and literature policy.
My motivation to study Dany Laferrière's novels is inspired by the fact that the majority of studies or analyses made on works from francophone former colonies, are focused on cultural aspects and deal with questions of nationality or social problems. Furthermore, these works, favouring a thematic approach, are considered as testimonial works and are relegated to a lower level than works from the metropole. Formal and stylistic understanding of this literature needs further research. From this viewpoint, Haitian francophone literature still has areas that require deeper investigation. This provides justification for the present research, focused on works by Dany Laferrière, the Haitian francophone author. Two of his works: le goût des jeunes filles (Young girls' cravings), and le cri des oiseaux fous (The screech of crazy birds) are analysed. A big part of these novels is autobiographical. This raises the following questions which we will try to elucidate. Is the author the narrator in those novels? Also, is he the main character, Vieux Os? In le goût des jeunes filles, the narrator is now in his new homeland, in Miami. Through is aunt's character, he drew the picture or the reality of the country of exile. He is also presenting three days he passed with a group of young girls, when he was in Haiti. He remembers how he was initiated to make love for the first time in his life. From there, he depicts the revolt of a young girl, against the oppressing middle class into which she is born. She leaves the perverted circle of her class and joins a group of young liberated girls. Dany Laferrière presents a novel of social observation, which castigates chaotic times created by a sordid dictatorship that results in teenagers' immorality and debauchery. The second novel, le cri des oiseaux fous, set in the time of Bébé Doc Duvalier and the militia, the tontons macoutes, deals with the anguish of the Haitian people, who are afflicted, impoverished and tortured by the dictators. Dany Laferrière depicts violence and abuse of power. The torture inflicted on opponents to the regime deprives mothers of their sons and their husbands, who, in order to protect their lives, are obliged to go into exile. Dany Laferrière stirred my interest because he presents a work of the moment. His novels portray adolescence, dictatorial tyranny and the integration of the exile into a new homeland. Laferrière brings up a worthwhile debate: how to become western when one comes from Haiti (Africa, Asia)? In his quest for identity, the author raises the issues of the contemporary struggle of hybrid identity. The two novels relate the personal trajectory of the author, to illustrate what he has become: a writer. My concern was, firstly, to understand, and to explain through the narrator's socio-historical trajectory, his interest to become a writer. I show that in these works the author projected himself as the narrator. For this phase, I relied on Bourdieu's method "la sociocritique" which allowed me to discover the origin of the author's obsession with the question of identity. He refused to be dictated by politics and wanted to work in the field he chose: literature. This refusal to be constrained is a sign of the search for identity. Secondly, my study has investigated the narrative techniques used by Laferrière, through the analysis of narration. Using one of Philippe Lejeune's works, I examined the relationship between the narrator, the author and the hero. Genette's narratology approach led my way in this study. It is impossible to deal with Laferrière's works as simple examples of francophone literature. At the end of my analyses, I found important literary merit in the organisation of related events. I have shown that Dany Laferrière is a talented writer and his works are an inexhaustible source from which one can draw.
Придерживаясь либеральной трактовки верховенства права, автор конструирует возможные модели политических режимов в ситуациях совместимости и несовместимости верховенства права и демократии. Для характеристики возможных моделей политических режимов он использует методику, предложенную Чарльзом Тилли, но применяет не два основных индикатора (потенциал государства и потенциал демократии), а три потенциал верховенства права, потенциал государства, потенциал демократии. На основе предложенного подхода им анализируются два типа демократического режима и четыре типа недемократического режима. Как показано в работе, введение дополнительного индикатора позволяет по-иному (по сравнению с методиками Freedom House и др.) оценить динамику изменения политических режимов в разных странах мира. Автор обращается к проблеме верховенства права и демократии применительно к России и независимым государствам, образовавшимся после распада СССР. Применив три указанных индикатора, он аргументирует тезис о необоснованности высказываемых в современной политологической литературе выводов о происходящем процессе дедемократизации политического режима в России в период после 1995 г. Им доказывается, что политический режим в стране как до 1995 г., так и до настоящего времени не был демократически ориентированным, оставался и остается режимом с низким потенциалом верховенства права. В период после распада СССР сменился лишь тип недемократического политического режима. Автор отмечает, что главным вектором развития для России и постсоветских государств должен стать демократический политический режим, фундированный на идее демократического верховенства права. Однако движение в этом направлении в России и ряде других стран (Азербайджан, Беларусь, государства Центральной Азии) сопряжено с издержками трактовки демократического верховенства права. К таким издержкам автор относит антизападничество и релятивистский подход к ценностям верховенства права и демократии; отождествление верховенства права (Rule of Law) с правлением на основе права (Rule by Law); инструменталистский подход к праву; параконституционные практики. Продвижение по пути к демократическим режимам он связывает с преодолением этих издержек и достижением состояния совместимости высоких потенциалов верховенства права, государства и демократии. ; The author develops possible models of political regimes in situations of compatibility/ incompatibility of rule of law and democracy, while maintaining liberal approach to the rule of law. Не applies the methodology proposed by Tilly Charles, however, he takes into account three indicators for description of possible models of political types (potential of rule of law, potential of state, and potential of democracy), instead of two indicators (potential of state and potential of democracy). Based on the proposed approach the author analyses two types of democratic and four types of undemocratic regimes. As shown in this paper, introduction of an additional indicator allows proper evaluation of the dynamic of political regimes' change in various countries (compared with Freedom House, etc., methods). The author turns to problems of the rule of law and democracy in Russia and in the independent states that emerged after the disintegration of the USSR. The author, using these three above-mentioned indicators, argues that the conclusions made by today's political science about the current process of de-democratization of political regime in Russia after 1995 are not compelling. He also argues that the political regime in Russia was not democratically oriented before, as well as after 1995. It remains the regime with inadequate potential of the rule of law. The only thing that changed after the disintegration of the Soviet Union is the type of non-democratic political regime. The author underlines that the main course for development of Russia and post-Soviet countries should be democratic political regimes based on the idea of democratic rule of law. However, the development of Russia and some other countries (Azerbaijan, Belarus and the countries of Central Asia) in this direction has faced with challenges in proper interpretation of democratic rule of law. Among these challenges the author mentions anti-Western sentiment and relativistic approach to human rights and democracy; identification of rule of law with rule by law; instrumentalist approach to law; para-constitutional practices. He ties the progress toward democratic regimes with overcoming these challenges and achieving the situation of compatibility of high potentials of rule of law, state, and democracy.
The process of intensive deruralization or decline in total rural population of the FR of Yugoslavia in the second half of the 20th century ??m? exclusively as ? result of migration from rural to urban areas. Though constantly positive at the level of the country as ? whole, the downward tendency in rural population growth was observed throughout the period. The author analyzes components and dynamics of natural change in rural population with emphasis on the period from 1981 to 1997, regional specifics up to the republican and provincial levels, and the main differences from the specifics of natural change in urban population. The author highlights that in analyzing natural change b? type of settlement, particular attention should b? paid to the very pronounced interdependency between the components of population dynamics and the age-sex structure, the more so as the latter is becoming the most significant direct determinant of the natural population growth. Namely, crude birth rate of rural population in Yugoslavia has tor several decades now been lower th?n the corresponding measure for urban population, while the crude death rate has, however, been higher. At the same time, in age-specific terms, fertility was higher and mortality lower in rural relative to urban populations. Such discrepancy evolved primarily from the unfavorable age-specific structure of rural population and its notably disturbed sex-specific structure (pronounced surplus in male, particularly younger middle-aged population). The author goes on to analyze the main features of fertility and reproduction in rural population based on demographic statistics. ?? argues that the general and total fertility rates represent more adequate indicators of fertility in rural population, as the impact of age structure has been partially or even fully eliminated. Thus, in 1990-1992, both indicators are higher for rural relative to urban population, and sufficiently high relative to the mortality level to assure integral replacement (net reproduction was 1.0 in rural relative to 0.9 in urban population). In all m???r regions of the country, fertility was higher in rural relative to urb?n population. Such differences were minimal in low fertility regions, while remaining significant in Kosovo and Metohia. The analysis of fertility was supplemented b? the 1991 census data, which, for the first time, included the number of live born children b? age of mother and type of settlement. Despite the fact that such data on female population illustrate the situation at the moment of census taking only, and not at the moment of birth, the author thinks that the cohort analysis based on the census data provide ? much more realistic account of fertility in rural population than the period analysis based on vital statistics, primarily as it resolves the problem of ???ur?t? registration 0f vital events b? type of settlement. Thus, cohort fertility rates show that fertility of rural female population is notably higher than the effective fertility in urban areas. This is true for all five-year age groups without exception, and equally true for all major regions Finally, the author analyzes cohort fertility of the autochthon versus migrant populations, as well as fertility b? ethnic origin. ?? draws ? general conclusion that fertility is higher in migrant relative to autochthon female population, and that th? differences are much more pronounced in rural relative to urban populations. This phenomenon is explained b? the so-called marriage-motivated migration, which the author assumes to b? dominant in migrant female population. As for fertility rates b? ethnic origin, the well-known differences are also evident in rural population. Namely, all ethnic groups can b? classified b? level fertility into three categories. The highest rate is recorded for ethnic Albanian, Roma and Muslim women. Montenegrin women record moderately high fertility rates, while the rate recorded for women of Croatian descent is generally sufficient for generation replacement. The third category is made u? of Serb, Yugoslav, and ethnic Hungarian women as well as the great majority of women of other ethnic origin (?unj?va?, Romanian and Slovak). ?ll these nationalities record very low fertility levels, which have for years been insufficient to enable generation replacement.
Накал национальных страстей в России пока меньше, чем в других республиках бывшего СССР, но тревожные симптомы уже проявились в Татарии и на Северном Кавказе. Татария возглавила сепаратизм бывших российских автономий. Каковы истоки татарского сепаратизма, можно ли рассчитывать на существование этой республики в составе России? Эти вопросы анализируются в статье. ; The author of the article presents statistical data and empirical evidences for the analysis of the origins of ethnic conflict in Tataria.Thcre used original methodology for composing an integral index of socio-cconomical development. The author pays attention to the character and to the extent of influence of most powerful political forces due to the producing change in Tataria in particular and in Russia in general.He underlines that the Government of Tataria maintains a strong orientation towards separation under the pressure of talarian nationalist mowements — TOZ, ITT, Islamic Democratic Party of Tatarstan, Congress of Citizenship of Independent Tatarstan with their separatism and religious orientation mobilizing people by means of nationalist slogans. The author refers to analysis of the character of political and social activity of most mighty political institutions (like President, Supreme Council of Tataria, national parties and movements, Millie Medglis, and Russian democratic movements. Really for some of the republics notably the three Baltian states and the Ukraine seized on the crisis to press their demands for total independence and it seems inevitable that they spitted off much quicker than it was recently supposed, and just now they started to develop their own sense of independence. There is the different sort of situation in Tataria. The author is principally certain in impossibility for Tataria to split off from Russia for following reasons: geopolitical location of the republic inside Russia; lack of external boundaries, ethnic scope of the population with prevailing of non-Tatars; strong diasporization of Tatars among the population of other nations. But the feeling of permanent danger and encirclement appeared among Tatars. Nationalist consolidation and facts of hysteria were only a step away. Conflict can erupt and there arc inner and external casualitics. The author of the article suggests criteria for estimation of the socio-economical development level of Tatarstan and the criteria for studying of rising national self-consciousness. There also suggested a typology of cultural integration of nations into Russian society and examined a problem of economical status of Tatars on the labour market. As a rule the scales have been constructed on the basis of a definition 'socio-cconomical status' — a concept which itself lacks of clarity and direct empirical reference. Recent analysis of data has shown according the criteria chosen by the author very high level of socio-cconomical development for the republic,which naturally tends to separatist national-economical orientation. Very often ethnic differences tend to be reflected in occupational stratification.Abovc all 'Basque' type of cultural integration consolidates and strengthens autonomist and separatist intentions, stimulates vertical social mobility relevant to the 'cultural distribution of labour' maintaining clear cultural-religious distance between the republic's and Russian population. There in the article has been considered a conflict in Tataria as a ' conflict of rising points' without pathological tendency when the establishing of consensus is possible. The point of great importance is to prevent an influence of Tatar nationalist movements upon the Government,Supreme Council and President of Tataria and to construct a new body of nation-state Russian structure based on hew Constitution legalizing the organization and rights of the autonomies. Beyond all the problems there lie 3 fundamental issues concerning future shape of Tataria: 1. Who will be a real national leader? It must be a liquidation of double-powers in the republic. 2. What kind of central government will continue to exist after the republics gain new amount of power and some of them break away? 3. How to open up the economy to market forces?
DER HERBST-FELDZUG 1914 ; 2. DER ABSCHLUSS DER OPERATIONEN IM WESTEN UND OSTEN Der Weltkrieg 1914 bis 1918 (-) Der Herbst-Feldzug 1914 ; 2. Der Abschluß der Operationen im Westen und Osten (6. 1929) ( - ) Einband ( - ) Titelseite ([IV]) Einführung zum fünften und sechsten Band. ([VII]) Inhaltsverzeichnis. ([IX]) Karten und Skizzen. (XII) Anmerkungen zu den Karten und Skizzen. (XIII) I. Neue Pläne für die Führung des Zweifrontenkrieges. ([1]) II. Der Krieg im Westen vom 4. bis zum 18. November bis zum Abschluß der Ypern-Kämpfe. ([10]) A. Die Kämpfe um Ypern. ([10]) 4. Armee 4. bis 9. November [38. Landwehr-brigade, 4. Ersatz-Division, 43. Reserve-Division, XXII. Reservekorps, XXIII. Reservekorps, III. Reservekorps, XXVI. und XXVII. Reservekorps]. (11) 6. Armee 3. bis 9. November [Menin, Ypern, Comines, XV. Armeekorps, II. bayerisches Armeekorps, Eikhof, St. Eloi, Wytschaete, Generalleutnant Wilhelm Herzog von Urach]. (12) 10. November [4. Armee, Dixmude, 4. Ersatz-Division, 43. Reserve-Division, XXIII. Reservekorps, 45. Reserve-Division]. (16) 11. November [4. Armee, XXII. und XIII. Reservekorps, III. Reservekorps, 9. Reserve-Division, 38. Landwehr-Brigade]. (17) 12. November [4. Armee, Marine-Division, Nieuport, 9. und 44. Reserve-Division, XXIII. Reservekorps, XXVI. und XXVII. Reservekorps, Brodfeinde, Comines]. (18) 13. bis 18. November [4. und 6. Armee, 9. und 44. Reserve-Division]. (21) B. Die Ereignisse an der übrigen Heeresfront. (25) C. Die Vorgänge beim Gegner. (29) III. Der Krieg im Osten bis zum Siege von Kutno. ([34]) A. Der "Oberbefehlshaber Ost" und seine ersten Entschlüsse. ([34]) 1. Die Gesamtlage an der Ostfront Ende Oktober. ([34]) Ende Oktober [Polen, Serbien, Feldzeugmeister Potiorek, Rumänien, Italien]. ([34]) 28. Oktober [Petrikau, General v. Mackensen, Gnesen, Thorn]. (36) 30. Oktober [General v. Falkenhayn, General v. Conrad, General v. Ludendorff]. (36) 1. November [General v. Mackensen]. (37) Anfang November [Generaloberst v. Hindenburg]. (38) 2. Die Ereignisse bis zum 3. November. (39) 27. Oktober [Österreichisch-ungarische 1. Armee, deutsche 9. Armee, San, Kjelzy, Freiherr v. Hauer, Gruppe Mackensen, XVII. Armeekorps, Korps Frommel, XI. Armeekorps, Noworadomsk, Wjelun, Kavalleriekorps Korda, Kalisch]. (39) 28. Oktober [9. Armee, Neu-Sandez, San, Kjelzy]. 30. Oktober [General v. Conrad, Garde-Reservekorps, XX. Armeekorps, Kjelzy, Noworadomsk, Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, Oberstleutnant Hoffmann]. (40) 31. Oktober [General v. Conrad, Oberst v. Sauberzweig, deutsche 9. Armee, 1. Armee, Kjelzy]. (40) 2. November [Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, General v. Mackensen, 9. Armee, Noworadomsk, Wjelun, Piliza]. (42) 3. Die ersten Maßnahmen für den Angriff auf den russischen Nordflügel. Meinungsverschiedenheiten mit General v. Conrad. (45) 3. November [Pschedborsh, russische 2. Armee, General Rennenkampf, Weichsel, Plozk, Gosthynin, 5. Armee, Msurki, Rospschy, Pschedborsy, 2. Armee]. (45) 4. November [Posen, Thorn, 9. Armee, XX. und XVII. Armeekorps, XXV. Reservekorps, 36. Reserve-Division, Thorn]. (48) Ende Oktober und Anfang November [Neu-Sandez, General v. Conrad, Berlin, Generalleutnant Freiherr v. Freytag-Loringhoven, Posen]. (49) 3. November [General v. Conrad]. (50) 5. November [Neu-Sandez, 1. Armee]. (51) 6. November [Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, General v. Conrad, Hauptmann v. Fleischmann, 1. Armee, Skala, Kromolow]. (51) 7. November [9. Armee, österreichische 1. Armee]. (52) 8. November [Oberberg, Ratibor, Oppeln, österreichisch-ungarische 2. Armee]. (53) 9. November [Krakau, österreichische 1. Armee]. (54) 11. November [Oberstleutnant Hentsch, Posen, General v. Falkenhayn, Schlesien]. (55) 12. November [Mézières, General Ludendorff, Galizien, General v. Conrad]. (55) B. Die Kämpfe bei Wlozlawek und Kutno. ([58]) 1. Die Bereitstellung der deutschen 9. Armee. ([58]) 4. November [Warthe, Weichsel, General v. Mackensen]. ([58]) 5. November [General v. Frommel, Kavalleriekorps Nowikow, General Nowikow, Krotoschin, Wreschen]. 7. November [Kosaken-Abteilung]. 9. November [General v. Frommel, Konin, General Nowikow]. (59) 10. November [General Nowikow, Kalisch, Warta, XI. Armeekorps]. (59) 2. Die Schlacht bei Wlozlawek. (65) 10. November [Wlozlawek, V. sibirische Korps, General v. Mackensen, , russische 2. und 1. Armee]. (65) 11. November [V. sibirische Korps, Bshechtj, Lubranjez, 6. Kavallerie-Division, 41. Infanterie-Diivision, Kavalleriekorps Schmettow, Isbiza, Lubranjec, General v. Scholtz, Generalleutnant v. Morgen, General Freiherr v. Scheffer-Boyadel]. (67) 12. November [V. sibirische Korps, 9. Armee, Lubjen, 9. Kavallerie-Division, Generalmajor Graf v. Schmettow (Eberhard), Chodetsch, Chozen]. (67) 13. November [XI. und XVII. Armeekorps, Kowal, Kavalleriekorps Schmettow, Gosthynin, Lubjen, XX. Armeekorps]. (69) 12. bis 13. November [Wlozlawek, Weichsel, V. sibirische Korps, Thorn, Lipno, Rypin, russisches VI. Korps, Generalleutnant v. Wrochen]. (71) 3. Die Schlacht bei Kutno. (71) 13. November [General Tschagin, 2. Armee, Wjelun, Kalisch, Thorn, Domb, Wjelki, Dsiankow, Lanjenta, Pjerowawola, Bsowki, Kosserz, Plozk]. (71) Die Kämpfe am 14. November. (73) Die Kämpfe am 15. November. (79) Die Kämpfe am 16. November. (85) Bewegungen der Russen - Würdigung der Schlacht von Kutno. (88) IV. Die Wandlung in den Entschlüssen des Generals v. Falkenhayn. ([92]) V. Der Krieg im Osten bis zum Jahresschluß. ([98]) A. Die Schlacht bei Lods. ([98]) 1. Die Maßnahmen des Oberbefehlshabers Ost. ([98]) 11. November [9. Armee]. ([98]) 12. November [Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, Thorn, General v. Conrad, Krakau]. ([98]) 13. November [Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, Warthe, Jarotschin, Kattowitz, Schlesien, Posen]. (99) 13. und 14. November [Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, Armee Woyrsch]. (100) 15. November [General v. Conrad, 4. Armee, Krakau]. (101) 16. November [Kutno]. (102) 17. November [9. Armee, Lods, Kalisch, Korps Posen, Korps Breslau]. (103) 2. Der Angriff der 9. Armee vom 17. bis 22. November. (104) a) Der Versuch zur überholenden Verfolgung am 17. und 18. November. (104) 16. November [9. Armee, Kavalleriekorps Nowikow, russische XXIII. Korps, Dombje, Piontek, russische IV. Korps, Warta, Aleksandrow, Sgjersh, Lods, Sdunska-Wola, Schadek]. (104) 17. November [Korps Posen, Schadek, Korps Plüskow, Poddembize, Aleksandrow, Korps Pannewitz]. (105) 18. November [XXV. Reservekorps, General v. Scheffer, Bshesiny, Strykow, Glowno, Wola-Zyrusowa, Njesulkow, Generalleutnant v. Thiesenhausen]. (108) 17 und 18. November [Lods, 9. Armee, I. Reservekorps, Lowitsch]. (112) b) Der umfassende Angriff gegen die Russen bei Lods vom 19. bis 22. November. (114) Die Auffassung des Oberkommandos. (114) Die Kämpfe am 19. November. (117) Das Armee-Oberkommando am 19. November. (122) Die Kämpfe am 20. November. (129) Das Armee-Oberkommando am 20. November. (138) Die Kämpfe am 21. November. (141) Das Armee-Oberkommando am 21. November. (149) Der 22. November. Das Ende der Umfassungsoperation. (152) 3. Die Wiederherstellung der Front vom 22. bis 25. November. (158) a) Die Gefahr im Rücken des XX. Armeekorps bis zum 24. November mittags. (158) 22. November [General v. Mackensen, Lods, Gruppe Scheffer, Kavalleriekorps Nowikow, XXV. Reservekorps]. (158) 23. November [Korps Breslau, Schtscherzow, Widawa, Warthe, Sdunska-Wola, Landwehr-brigade Schmiedecke, Kavalleriekorps Frommel, Korps Posen]. (161) 24. November [Warschau, Skjernewize, General v. Scheffer]. (166) b) Die Ereignisse bei der Gruppe Scheffer. (169) Der 22. November. (169) Der 23. November. (176) Der 24. November. (182) c) Das Ende der Krise. (185) 24. November [Bshesiny, XVII. Armeekorps, Biala, Strykow, Lods]. (186) 25. November [General v. Mackensen, russische 1. Armee, Lods, Lowitsch, XX. Armeekorps, 3. Garde-Division, Njesulkow, XXV. Reservekorps, Glowno]. (187) 4. Der Oberbefehlshaber Ost und die Schlacht von Lods. (188) 17. November [Kutno, Armee Woyrsch, Lods, 9. Armee, Hauptmann v. Fleischmann]. (188) 18. November [General Ludendorff]. (189) 19. November [Ostpreußen, Lötzen, Tschenstochau, Lods, 8. Armee]. (189) 20. November [Lods, 38. Infanterie-Division, Lowitsch, Gruppe Plozk, 9. Armee]. (190) 21. November [Generaloberst v. Hindennburg, , Lods, Woyrsch]. (191) 22. November [Mézières, Korps Breslau]. (192) 23. November [XXV. Reservekorps, Miasga, XX. Armeekorps, Krakua, Korps Thorn]. (192) 24. November [General v. Scheffer, 9. Armee, XX. Armeekorps, Lowitsch, I. Reservekorps, Posen, XXV. Reservekorps]. (193) 25. November [Generaloberst v. Hindenburg]. (193) 5. Die Operationen der Russen. (194) a) Die russischen Operationen von Anfang bis Mitte November. (194) Anfang November [General Rußki, 10. Armee, Lods, General Iwanow]. (194) 2. November [Großfürst Nikolaus, Thorn, Kalisch, Kjelzy, Weichsel, Kolo, Tschenstochau, Aufschwitz]. (196) 3. November. [San, General Joffre, Galizien]. (196) 10. November [Weichsel, Kalisch, Wjelun, Jarotschin, Kattowitz, Aufschwitz]. (197) 11. November [Thorn, Ostpreußen, Tschenstochau]. (198) 12. November [Großfürst Nikolaus]. (198) 13. November [Wlozlawek, Weichsel, V. sibirisches Korps, Gostynin, VI. sibirisches Korps, General Rußki]. (200) 14. November [Kutno, Weichsel, Warthe, Dombje, General Rennenkampf]. (201) 15. November [General Rußki, Warschau, Weichsel, Warthe, Klodawa, Kalisch]. (202) 16. November [Bsura-Ner-Abschnitt, Kavalleriekorps Nowikow, Sgiersy, General Rußki]. (203) 17. November [V. und VI. sibirisches Korps, Plozk, Weichsel, Sychlin, Pschysowa]. (204) 18. November [General Rußki, IV. Korps, Lowitsch, Wyschogrod, General Scheidemann]. (206) b) Die Abwehr der deutschen Umfassung bei Lods. (207) 18. November. (208) 19. November [6. Kavallerie-Division, General Rußki, General Plehwe, General Rennenkampf, 1. Armee, Bsura, Lods, Sanniki, Abteilung Schmid]. (208) 20. November [Korps Breslau, Sjerads, Gruppe Scheffer, Pabianize, General Rußki, Lods] (209) 21. November [1. Armee, Bsura, sibirische Korps, Lowitsch, General Plehwe]. (211) 22. November [Kavalleriekorps Nowikow, 10. Infanterie-Division, 1. sibirische Division, 6. Kavallerie-Division, XXV. Reservekorps, XX. Armeekorps]. (212) 23. November [1. Armee, Bsura, General von Rennenkampf, Wola-Rakowa]. (214) 24. November [XXV. Reservekorps, Bshesiny, russisches I. Korps, Galkowek, General Plehwe, General Scheidemann, 1. sibirische und 10. Division]. (216) 6. Betrachtungen. (218) B. Die österreichisch-ungarische Front bis zum 22. November. - Der Anteil der unterstellten deutschen Verbände. ([227]) 1. Der Rückzug vom San. ([227]) Anfang November [Weichsel]. ([227]) 2. November [1. Armee, Opatow, General v. Conrad, San, Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, Pschemysl]. 5. und 6. November [General Böhm-Ermolli, Pschemysl]. (231) 7. und 8. November [General v. Conrad, Karpaten, General Dankl, Neu-Sandez, Krakau]. (231) 9. November [Teschen, Oberstleutnant Hentsch, General v. Falkenhayn, Thorn, Schlesien, General v. Conrad]. (232) 13. November [Wlozlawek, Thorn, Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, General v. Conrad, General v. Woyrsch]. (233) 2. Die Schlacht nördlich Krakau. (233) 13. November [Karpaten, Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, 9. Armee]. (234) 15. November [General Freiherr v. Pflanzer-Baltin, Lysa-Paß, General Boroevic, Ushoker-Paß, Neu-Sandez, Pschemysl, Erzherzog Josef Ferdinand, Krakau]. (235) 16. November [4. Armee, Armee Woyrsch] (239) 17. bis 19. November [General v. Conrad, Armee Woyrsch]. (239) 20. bis 22. November [General v. Conrad, Krakau, Armee Woyrsch, 9. Armee, Slomniki, Proschowize]. (240) 3. Die Kämpfe der Armee Woyrsch. (241) 6. bis 13. November [Armee-Abteilung Woyrsch, 9. Armee, Oberleutnant Heye, Thorn, Sarki, Wjelun]. (241) 14. November [General v. Woyrsch, Lublinitz, Erzherzog Friedrich]. (241) 15. November [Österreichisch-ungarische 4. und 1. Armee, Krakau, Armee Woyrsch, General v. Gallwitz, Garde-Reservekorps Bredow, Tschenstochau]. (242) 16. November [Tschenstochau, Armee Woyrsch]. 17. November [General v. Woyrsch, 35. Reserve-Division, Warthe, Dsjaloschyn]. 18. November [35. Reserve-Division, österreichisch-ungarische 16. Infanterie-Division, Noworadomsk] (243) 19. und 20. November [General v. Conrad, österreichisch-ungarische 2. Armee, Noworadomsk, Korps Breslau, Schtscherzow, Widawa]. (244) 21. November [Österreichisch-ungarische 35. Infanterie-Division]. (245) 22. November [Warthe, österreichisch-ungarische 32. und 35. Infanterie-Division, Armee Woyrsch, General v. Conrad, Tschenstochau]. (245) 4. Hoffnungen und Entäuschungen bei der österreichisch-ungarischen Heeresleitung. (246) 16. und 17. November [4. Armee, General v. Conrad, General v. Falkenhayn]. (246) 19. November [General v. Falkenhayn, General v. Conrad, Galzien, Lods, Feldzeugmeister Potiorek, General v. Bolfras]. (247) 21. bis 23. November [Lods, Krakau, Weichsel, Dunajez]. (248) C. Der Einsazu der Verstärkungen aus dem Westen und der Fortgang der Kämpfe in Polen und Galizien. ([249]) 1. Wie sollten die Operationen weitergeführt werden? ([249]) 15. November [Generaloberst v. Hndenburg]. ([249]) 20. November [General v. Falkenhayn]. ([249]) 22. November [9. Armee, Lods, Thorn, Kutno, Lowitsch, Strykow, Kreuzburg, Ostrowo, Njeschawa]. (250) 23. November [Hauptmann v. Fleischmann, Krakau, General Ludendorff, Oberst Tappen, Lods]. (251) 24. November [9. Armee, XXIV. Reservekorps, XIII. Armeekorps]. (252) 25. November [Hauptmann v. Fleischmann, Teschen, General v. Falkenhayn]. (252) 26. November [General v. Falkenhayn, Spirding-See]. (254) 27. November [Generaloberst v. Hindenburg]. (256) 2. Die Einnahme von Lods. (257) a) Die Abwehr der 9. Armee bis zum 29. November. (257) 23. November [General v. Mackensen, II. Armeekorps]. (257) 25. November [General v. Scheffer, Sdunka-Wola]. (257) 26. November [Lentschyza, XXV. Reservekorps, Bshesiny, General v. Scheffer, Mroga, Glowno, Bsura]. (258) 27. November [Bjelawy, russisches VI. Korps, General v. Nowikow, Piontek, XX. Armeekorps]. (259) 28. November [Nowikow, Piontek, Strykow, XX. Armeekorps, XXV. Reservekorps, Bjelawy, Sobota, Mroga, Bsura]. (260) 29. November [Bsura, General Nowikow, Lentschyza, russisches II. Korps, Bjelawy, Glowno]. (261) 30. November [General v. Morgen, Sobota, Bsura, Mroga]. (262) b) Der Angriff der 9. Armee und die Kämpfe auf dem Nordflügel der Armee Woyrsch vom 30. November bis zum 6. Dezember. (263) Bis zum 29. November [9. Armee, II. Armeekorps, Kalisch, Schildberg, XXIV. Reservekorps, Kreuzberg, Armee Woyrsch, Noworadomsk, Warthe, Schtscherzow, Kavalleriekorps Hauer, General Terszthanszky]. (263) 29. November [XXIV. Reservekorps, Warthe, Widawa, General v. Gerok, Korps Breslau, Kavalleriekorps Frommel, Landwehr-Brigade Schmiedecke, Korps Breslau]. (264) 30. November [II. Armeekorps, General v. Linsingen, Landwehr-Brigade Schmiedecke, Sdunska-Wola, Korps Plüskow]. (269) 1. Dezember [General v. Woyrsch, General v. Böhm, Gruppe Linsingen, Kavalleriekorps Frommel, Korps Plüskow]. (271) 2. Dezember [Armee Woyrsch, Gruppe Linsingen, Schtscherzow, Belchatow, 48. Reserve-Division, Korps Gerok, Kavalleriekorps Frommel]. (273) 3. Dezember [Pabianize, Bjelawy, General v. Terszthanszky, 32. Infanterie-Division, Belchatow, Oberst v. Nostitz, Msurky, Kavalleriekorps Hauer]. (274) 4. Dezember [Korps Terszthyanszky, Borowa-Berg, Msurki]. (276) 5. Dezember [Korps Terszthyanszky, Feldmarschalleutnant, General v. Linsingen, Tuschyn, Jutroschew, Pabianize, Armee Woyrsch]. (278) 6. Dezember [9. Armee, Lentschyza, General Nowikow, XIX. Korps]. (279) c) Die Operationen der Russen und Betrachtungen. (280) 3. Der Angriff der 9. Armee gegen die untere Bsura. (285) 2. Dezember [Generalfeldmarschall v. Hindenburg, General Ludendorff, Breslau, General v. Falkenhayn, General v. Conrad, Deutscher Kaiser, Erzherzog Friedrich]. (285) 4. Dezember [9. Armee, Pabianize, Armee Woyrsch, III. kaukasisches Korps, Petrikau, Sjerads]. (286) 5. Dezember [General v. Fabeck] (287) 6. Dezember [General v. Conrad, Krakau, Armee Woyrsch, Sjerads, Weichsel, Polen, Lowitsch]. (287) 7. Dezember [Korps Fabeck, , II. Armeekorps, Weichsel, 21. Landwehr-Brigade, Plozk, Wolborsh, Wolborka, Miasga, Nowosolna, Rawka, Skjernewize, Sochatschew, Shirardow, Blonje, Grodsisk]. (288) 8. Dezember [Ilow, II. kaukasisches Korps, 7. und 8. sibirische Division, Gombin, Bjelawy, Lowitsch, Korps Fabeck]. (290) 9. Dezember [Korps Gerok, II. und XI. Armeekorps, Miasga, Korps Fabeck, Wsheliwy, III. Reservekorps, General Beseler, Slubize, 6. Reserve-Division]. (292) 10. Dezember [II. und XI. Armeekorps, General v. Linsingen, Miasga, XXV. Reservekorps, XVII. Armeekorps, Korps Fabeck, General v. Beseler]. (294) 11. Dezember [Miasga, General v. Linsingen, Wsheliwy, XVII. Armeekorps, 1. Infanterie-Division, 25. Reserve-Divsion, III. Reservekorps, Weichsel, General v. Beseler]. (295) 12. Dezember [XVII. Armeekorps, Korps Fabeck, 36. Infanterie-Division, Generalleutnant v. Heineccius, 5. Reserve-Division, General v. Beseler]. (295) 13. Dezember [XVII. Armeekorps, Korps Fabeck, III. und I. Reservekorps, Wyschogrod, Generalmajor Grünert, Bsura]. (297) 14. Dezember [General v. Mackensen]. (297) 4. Die Schlacht südlich Krakau. (299) Ende November [Österreichisch-ungarische 4. Armee, General v. Conrad, Krakau, 47. Reserve-Division]. (299) 2. Dezember [Breslau, Neu-Sandez, Teschen, Krakau, Dunajez, West-Beskiden, Weichsel]. (299) 3. bis 6. Dezember [XIV. Korps, Tymbark, 47. Reserve-Division, Korps Ljubicic, Bochnia]. (301) 7. bis 11. Dezember [Limanova, Raba-Knie, Bochnia, 47. Reserve-Division, Rschegozina, Rajbrot, VI. und XIV. Korps, Limanowa, Lapanow, Bochnia]. (302) Bis zum 14. Dezember [Weichsel, Gruppe Roth, General v. Conrad, 3. und 4. Armee]. (303) 5. Der Rückzug der Russen und die Verfolgung. (305) 15. Dezember [russische XIV. Korps, Petrikau, Wolborsh, Krakau, österreichisch-ungarische 4. und 1. Armee, Bsura] (305) 16. Dezember [4. und 1. Armee, XVII. Armeekorps, Korps Fabeck, Sochatschew, Bsura, Korps Gallwitz, Armee Woyrsch, Krakau, Tarnow, Rscheschow]. (307) 17. Dezember [9. Armee, Piliza, Utrata, Nowogeorgiewsk, Warschau, Generaloberst v. Mackensen, Bolimow, Grodsisk, III. Reservekorps]. (309) 18. Dezember [General v. Frommel, Wolborsh, Miasga, Piliza, Nowo-mjasto, Grojez, Tartschyn, Mschtschonow]. (311) 19. Dezember [Bsura, Korps Fabeck, Rawka, Weichsel]. (313) 19 und 20. Dezember [Rawka, Bsura, III. Reservekorps, Piliza]. (314) 21. Dezember [General v. Conrad, San, Weichsel]. (315) 6. Die Operationen der Russen und Betrachtungen. (317) Ende November [Galizien, Mlawa]. (317) 30. November [General Iwanow, Krakau, Petrikau]. (318) 4. Dezember [Lods, General Joffre]. (318) Nordwestfront unter General Rußki. (319) Südwestfront unter General Iwanow. (319) Nach dem 6. Dezember [11. Armee, Pschemysl]. (320) 13. und 14. Dezember [Bsura, Krakau, Brest-Litowsk, Piliza]. (320) 15. Dezember [1. Armee, V. und VI. sibirische und II. kaukasische Korps]. (321) 17. Dezember [General Rußki, Bsura, Rawka, Iwangorod, Galizien]. (321) 18. Dezember [IV. sibirische Korps, General Rußki, Bsura, Rawka]. (322) D. Die ostpreußische Front im November und Dezember. ([324]) 1. Die Kämpfe der 8. Armee. ([324]) a) Die Einleitung des Rückzuges in die Lötzen-Angerapp-Stellung unter General v. Francois. ([324]) 2. Dezember [XVII. Armeekorps, Thorn, Danzig, Neidenburg, Graudenz, Generalmajor Grünert, Freiherr Schmidt v. Schmidtseck, General v. Francois]. ([324]) 2. bis 4. Dezember [36. Reserve-Division, Lötzen, Gumbinnen, Insterburg, General v. Francois, XXV. Reservekorps, Bialla, Lyck, Marggrabowa, Pscherosl, Gruppe Jacobi]. (326) 5. November [27. Infanterie-Division, Pillupönen, 1. Reserve-Division, Generalleutnant v. Förster]. (326) 5. und 6. November [Marggrabowa, russisches III. Korps, General v. Below]. (328) 7. November [I. Armeekorps, Generalleutnant Brecht, Korps Below, Mehlkehmen, Stallupönen, General v. Francois, Tollmingkehmen, Soginten]. (328) 8. November [I. Armeekorps, Pillupönen]. (329) b) Die Durchführung des Rückzuges unter General Otto v. Below und die Abwehr bis zum Jahresschluß. (331) 9. bis 12. November [Tollmingkehmen, Stallupönen, Lötzen, Angerapp, 3. Reserve-Division, Darkehmen, Trakehnen]. (332) 13. November [I. Armeekorps, 9. und 70. Landwehr-Brigade, Generalmajor v. Böckmann, Generalleutnant Kosch, Gawaiten, Kleszowen]. (332) 14. November [3. Reserve-Division]. (333) 14. bis 16. November [Gawaiten, 1. Kavallerie-Division, General v. Below, Gumbinnen]. (334) 15. bis 17. November [XXV. Reservekorps, Generalleutnant v. Einem, Löwentin-See, III. sibirisches Korps, Kruglinner-See, russisches XXVI. Korps, Landwehr-Division Jacobi]. (336) 18. bis 20. November [III. sibirisches Korps, General v. Below, Lötzen, General v. Below]. (337) 20. bis 30. November [Generalleutnant Kosch, I. Armeekorps, Neidenburg, Ortelsburg, Nikolaiken, Lötzen, Darkehmen, Gumbinnen]. (338) Dezember [II. kaukasisches Korps, Lötzen, Paprodtker]. (338) 2. Die Kämpfe an der ostpreußischen Südfront. (340) Anfang November [Ostpreußen, Generaloberst v. Hindenburg, Tannenberg, Soldau, Thorn, Neidenburg, Jedwabno, Graudenz]. (340) 7. bis 16. November [I. turkestanische Korps, Division Breugel, Soldau, Neidenburg, Thorn]. (341) 16. und 17. November [Soldau, Generalleutnant v. Zastrow, Neidenburg]. (342) 19. bis 22. November [Korps Graudenz, Mlawa, Zjechanow, Generalleutnant v. Garnier, 4. Kavallerie-Division]. (342) 23. bis 25. November [Generalleutnant v. Hollen, Generalleutnant v. Zastrow, Korps Graudenz, Zjechanow, Division Wernitz, Prasnysch, Opinogora]. (343) 25. und 26. November [Sjerpez, 2. Kavallerie-Division]. (344) 29. November [Mlawa, I. turkestanisches Korps, General v. Zastrow, Prasnysch]. 3. bis 7. Dezember [2. Kavallerie-Division, 8. Kavallerie-Brigade, Prasnysch, Generalmajor Freiherr v. Thumb, Generalleutnant v. Zastrow, Zjechanow]. (345) 9. bis 18. dezember [Generalleutnant v. Zastrow, Mlawa, Soldau, Neidenburg]. (346) 19. bis 31. Dezember [Generalleutnant v. Zastrow, Generalmajor Surén, Grandenz, 2. Kavallerie.Division]. (346) 3. Die Operationen der Russen. (347) Bis 2. November [Ostpreußen, VI. und I. turkestanisches Korps, Grajewo, Lyck, Narew, 1. und 10. Armee, General Siewers]. (347) Bis 15. November [General Rußki, Kowno, Olita, 6. sibirische Division, General Siewers, Lyck, XX., II. kaukasisches, XXII., XXVI. Reservekorps, Kavalleriekorps Gurko, Marggrabowa, Angerapp]. (348) Bis Ende November [10. Armee, 6. sibirische Division, II. kaukasische, 5. Schützen-Brigade, General Siewers]. (349) Dezember [10. Armee, Lods, Lötzen, General Oranowski, General Siewers]. (350) Bis 17. November [Ostpreußen, 1. russische Armee, Weichsel, General v. Rennenkampf, I. turkestanisches Korps, 4. Don-Kosaken-Division, Mlawa, Plonsk, VI sibirische Korps, Sjerpez, Soldau]. (352) Bis Ende Dezember [Mlawa, Lods, Polen, turkestanische Korps, Prasnysch, Zjechanow]. (353) E. Die Lage im Osten bei Jahresschluß und Ergebnisse des Feldzuges im Osten. ([354]) 1. Der Abschluß der Kämpfe in Polen und Galizien. - Auffassungen der Führer im Osten. ([354]) 16. bis 21. Dezember [General v. Conrad, Karpathen, General v. Falkenhayn, General Ludendorff, Oppeln]. ([354]) Bis Ende Dezember [Weichsel, Rida]. (355) Ende Dezember [Generalfeldmarschall v. Hindenburg, Piliza, Rawka, Bsura]. (358) 2. Betrachtungen. (364) VI. Der Krieg im Westen bis zum Jahresschluß. ([371]) A. Stellungskämpfe bis zum 31. Dezember. ([371]) 1. Die Neuordnung des Westheeres bis zum 10. Dezember. ([371]) 2. Die Entlastungsoffensive der Alliierten. (380) 3. Betrachtungen. (385) B. Die Entwicklung des Stellungskrieges. ([394]) Das Werden des Stellungskrieges auf der Westfront. ([394]) Die Anerkennung des Stellungskrieges als Kampfform des Westheeres. (398) Der Stand der Taktik und Technik des Stellungskrieges gegen Ende 1914. (401) VII. Entscheidungslose Kriegführung. ([405]) Rückblick. ([433]) [Anhang] ([449]) Anlage 1. Kriegsgliederung. ([449]) Das deutsche Westheer. ([449]) Das französische Heer. (456) Das britische Heer. Das belgische Heer. (458) Das deutsche Ostheer. (459) Das österreichisch-ungarische Heer. (461) Das russische Heer. (463) Anlage 2. Truppenverschiebungen (468) [Tabelle]: Truppenverschiebungen an der deutschen Westfront und von dort nach dem Osten vom 3. November bis 31. Dezember 1914. (468) [Tabelle]: Truppenverschiebungen an der deutschen Ostfront vom 3. November bis 31. Dezember 1914. (477) Anlage 3. Allgemeine Bemerkungen. (480) Quellennachweis. (483) 1. Deutsche Quellen. 2. Österreichisch-ungarische Quellen. (483) 3. Französische Quellen. (483) 4. Englische Quellen. (484) 5. Belgische Quelle. (485) 6. Russische Quellen. (485) Personenverzeichnis. ([487]) Truppenverzeichnis. ([493]) Deutschland. ([493]) Österreich-Ungarn. (497) Türkei. Belgien. England. (498) Frankreich. (498) Rußland. (499) [Karten] ( - ) [Karte]: Nr. 1. Die Kriegsschauplätze der Mittelmächte im Dezember 1914. ( - ) [Karte]: Nr. 2. Das deutsche Westheer am 18. November 1914. ( - ) [Karte]: Nr. 3. Der Kampf an der Yser und im Ypernbogen vom 10. bis 12. November 1914. ( - ) [2 Karten]: Nr. 4. u. Nr. 5. Der Kampf um den Ypernbogen vom 4. bis 11. November 1914. (1)Nr. 4. Nach deutschen Quellen. (2)Nr. 5. Nach französisch-englischen Quellen. ( - ) [Karte]: Nr. 6. Die Gesamtfront gegen Rußland am 3. November 1914. ( - ) [2 Karten]: Nr. 7. u. Nr. 8. Die Schlacht bei Wlozlawek am 11. und 12. November 1914. (1)Nr. 7. (2)Nr. 8. ( - ) [Karte]: Nr. 9. Die Schlacht bei Kutno vom 14. bis 16. November 1914. ( - ) [Karte]: Nr. 10. Die Gesamtfront gegen Rußland am 16. November 1914 abends. ( - ) [2 Karten]: Nr. 11. u. Nr. 12. Die Schlacht bei Lods (1)Nr. 11. vom 17. bis 19. November 1914. (1)Nr. 12. am 20. und 21. November 1914. ( - ) [2 Karten]: Nr. 13. u. Nr. 14. Die Schlacht bei Lods am 22. und 23. November 1914. (1)Nr. 13. (2)Nr. 14. ( - ) [2 Karten]: Nr. 15. (1)Die Gesamtfront gegen Rußland am 25. November 1914. (2)Die Schlacht nördl. Krakau ( - ) [2 Karten]: Nr. 16. u. Nr. 17. (1)Nr. 16. Der Abschluß der Schlacht bei Lods am 24. und 25. November 1914. (2)Nr. 17. Die Kämpfe auf dem Nordflügel der 9. Armee vom 26. bis 30. November 1914. ( - ) [2 Karten]: Nr. 18. u. Nr. 20. (1)Nr. 18. Die Einnahme von Lods. Die Kämpfe vom 30. November bis 6. Dezember 1914. (2)Nr. 20. Der Angriff gegen Bsura und Rawka vom 6. bis 29. Dezember 1914. ( - ) [Karte]: Nr. 19. Die Gesamtfront gegen Rußland am 6. Dezember 1914 und die Verfolgung bis zum Jahresschluß. ( - ) [4 Karten]: Nr. 21. (1)Die Kämpfe in Ostpreußen im November und Dezember 1914. (2)Die Kämpfe um die Feldstellung Lötzen. (3)Die Kämpfe am 7. und 8. November (4)Die Kämpfe am 12. u. 13. November ( - ) Einband ( - ) Einband ( - )
This book offers a comprehensive exploration of the widespread issue of fake news and misinformation. Using real-life examples and semiotic theory, the author demonstrates how language, images, and symbols are being utilized in media production and distribution with the intention of altering the perception of individuals and shaping their beliefs. The book also addresses how social and cultural factors influence the spread of information and emphasizes the importance of understanding the context in which information is being received and shared. This book is a must-read for anyone seeking to understand the impact of fake news and misinformation on society, especially academics, researchers, journalists, policymakers, and media professionals at all levels. The author provides contemporary theories and practical strategies to navigate the complex and ever-changing media landscape. Tatiana Iskanderova is a media analyst, researcher and sociologist. Working in collaboration with such educational, research and official institutions as Charles University in Prague, Jan Amos Komensky University and the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Czech Republic, she has 10 years' experience as senior lecturer at the Department of Social and Media studies
Verfügbarkeit an Ihrem Standort wird überprüft
Dieses Buch ist auch in Ihrer Bibliothek verfügbar:
