The Republic of Belarus is the most authoritarian state in Central and Central-Eastern Europe. The international security community identifies the threats of Aleksandr Lukashenko's regime at global and regional levels. The article analyses the problem: what are the concrete threats posed to Lithuania by the Belarusian authoritarianism? The profiles of the problem presented here - the origins of authoritarianism in Belarus, the pattern of the dependence in the relations between Belarus and Russia, the international security community and Belarus, the development of the Lithuania-Belarus relationship - make it possible to identify eventual threats to Lithuania arising within political, social, economic and ecological sectors.
The Republic of Belarus is the most authoritarian state in Central and Central-Eastern Europe. The international security community identifies the threats of Aleksandr Lukashenko's regime at global and regional levels. The article analyses the problem: what are the concrete threats posed to Lithuania by the Belarusian authoritarianism? The profiles of the problem presented here - the origins of authoritarianism in Belarus, the pattern of the dependence in the relations between Belarus and Russia, the international security community and Belarus, the development of the Lithuania-Belarus relationship - make it possible to identify eventual threats to Lithuania arising within political, social, economic and ecological sectors.
The Republic of Belarus is the most authoritarian state in Central and Central-Eastern Europe. The international security community identifies the threats of Aleksandr Lukashenko's regime at global and regional levels. The article analyses the problem: what are the concrete threats posed to Lithuania by the Belarusian authoritarianism? The profiles of the problem presented here - the origins of authoritarianism in Belarus, the pattern of the dependence in the relations between Belarus and Russia, the international security community and Belarus, the development of the Lithuania-Belarus relationship - make it possible to identify eventual threats to Lithuania arising within political, social, economic and ecological sectors.
The Republic of Belarus is the most authoritarian state in Central and Central-Eastern Europe. The international security community identifies the threats of Aleksandr Lukashenko's regime at global and regional levels. The article analyses the problem: what are the concrete threats posed to Lithuania by the Belarusian authoritarianism? The profiles of the problem presented here - the origins of authoritarianism in Belarus, the pattern of the dependence in the relations between Belarus and Russia, the international security community and Belarus, the development of the Lithuania-Belarus relationship - make it possible to identify eventual threats to Lithuania arising within political, social, economic and ecological sectors.
Political systems doesn't limit government enforcement mode. Adoption of political regime implies its implementation into legitimacy. Definition of political regime and its enforcement is a very important issue for every single state. The analysis of regime implied into legitimacy of particular state helps us understand political process and political ruling. The actuality of this theme mostly relies on the analysis of states' political regime and its development through historical, political and national changes. Object of this work is political regimes, and its aim - to analyse political regimes that exists in world. Main tasks given – to analyse and systematically present main state governing forms, fully analyse concept of political regimes, to present its' differentiations and forms, also – to provide two empirical research: to analyse the impact of development of political regime in Lithuania, analysing its Constitutions in XX century and to analyse three various political regimes – ones existing in USA, Belarus and North Korea. States might be divided into republics and monarchies. Republics – presidential (representative) or direct democracy. Analysing republics by constitutional approach it may be also divided into parliamentary or presidential governing forms. Though mixed forms also exists. States, relying on theoretical approach and governing form may be also distinguished: unitary, federation and confederation. The governing regime depends on constitutional background that sets state's government. Political regime – methods of governing. They may be distinguished: normative, economical political, cultural, social or mixed. But mostly these regimes are distinguished into democratic or nondemocratic. Nondemocratic are also distinguished into authoritarian and totalitarian. Development of political regime mostly depends on the states' historical development, traditions, values, geopolitics or political leader. After analysing Lithuanian XX c. Constitutions, we conclude, that political regime developed from democratic to authoritarian, and nowadays – it's again democracy, that was established in the 1922 years' Constitution (with exceptions also in 1928), changed to authoritarian governing in 1938 and restored after Independency (1992). Three different foreign political regimes let us to conclude, that USA is a presenter of fundamental constitutionalism, Belarus is a state, that though has constitution but its' regime is authoritarian, and North Korea has totalitarian political regime. Master thesis consists of introduction, four parts, conclusions, list of used literature and summaries, in Lithuanian and English.
Political systems doesn't limit government enforcement mode. Adoption of political regime implies its implementation into legitimacy. Definition of political regime and its enforcement is a very important issue for every single state. The analysis of regime implied into legitimacy of particular state helps us understand political process and political ruling. The actuality of this theme mostly relies on the analysis of states' political regime and its development through historical, political and national changes. Object of this work is political regimes, and its aim - to analyse political regimes that exists in world. Main tasks given – to analyse and systematically present main state governing forms, fully analyse concept of political regimes, to present its' differentiations and forms, also – to provide two empirical research: to analyse the impact of development of political regime in Lithuania, analysing its Constitutions in XX century and to analyse three various political regimes – ones existing in USA, Belarus and North Korea. States might be divided into republics and monarchies. Republics – presidential (representative) or direct democracy. Analysing republics by constitutional approach it may be also divided into parliamentary or presidential governing forms. Though mixed forms also exists. States, relying on theoretical approach and governing form may be also distinguished: unitary, federation and confederation. The governing regime depends on constitutional background that sets state's government. Political regime – methods of governing. They may be distinguished: normative, economical political, cultural, social or mixed. But mostly these regimes are distinguished into democratic or nondemocratic. Nondemocratic are also distinguished into authoritarian and totalitarian. Development of political regime mostly depends on the states' historical development, traditions, values, geopolitics or political leader. After analysing Lithuanian XX c. Constitutions, we conclude, that political regime developed from democratic to authoritarian, and nowadays – it's again democracy, that was established in the 1922 years' Constitution (with exceptions also in 1928), changed to authoritarian governing in 1938 and restored after Independency (1992). Three different foreign political regimes let us to conclude, that USA is a presenter of fundamental constitutionalism, Belarus is a state, that though has constitution but its' regime is authoritarian, and North Korea has totalitarian political regime. Master thesis consists of introduction, four parts, conclusions, list of used literature and summaries, in Lithuanian and English.
Today in Lithuania, the day of the establishment of the modern nation-state is celebrated on 16 February. It is well known that the origins of this celebration go back to the period before the Second World War. However, historians have stated for some time now that in the 1920s, in addition to 16 February, there was another day that was also known as the National Day: 15 May. An attempt is made here for the first time to look at the two celebrations as alternatives set by political competition. The author seeks to find explanations why some politicians wanted to see 15 May as a counterbalance to 16 February, and examines whether this was influenced by their different experiences and different views as to what constituted the starting point of the independent Lithuanian state.
Today in Lithuania, the day of the establishment of the modern nation-state is celebrated on 16 February. It is well known that the origins of this celebration go back to the period before the Second World War. However, historians have stated for some time now that in the 1920s, in addition to 16 February, there was another day that was also known as the National Day: 15 May. An attempt is made here for the first time to look at the two celebrations as alternatives set by political competition. The author seeks to find explanations why some politicians wanted to see 15 May as a counterbalance to 16 February, and examines whether this was influenced by their different experiences and different views as to what constituted the starting point of the independent Lithuanian state.
Today in Lithuania, the day of the establishment of the modern nation-state is celebrated on 16 February. It is well known that the origins of this celebration go back to the period before the Second World War. However, historians have stated for some time now that in the 1920s, in addition to 16 February, there was another day that was also known as the National Day: 15 May. An attempt is made here for the first time to look at the two celebrations as alternatives set by political competition. The author seeks to find explanations why some politicians wanted to see 15 May as a counterbalance to 16 February, and examines whether this was influenced by their different experiences and different views as to what constituted the starting point of the independent Lithuanian state.
Today in Lithuania, the day of the establishment of the modern nation-state is celebrated on 16 February. It is well known that the origins of this celebration go back to the period before the Second World War. However, historians have stated for some time now that in the 1920s, in addition to 16 February, there was another day that was also known as the National Day: 15 May. An attempt is made here for the first time to look at the two celebrations as alternatives set by political competition. The author seeks to find explanations why some politicians wanted to see 15 May as a counterbalance to 16 February, and examines whether this was influenced by their different experiences and different views as to what constituted the starting point of the independent Lithuanian state.
The object of this study is the state and civil society dialogue on entrepreneurship development in Belarus (2010–2019). The subject of the research – development of private entrepreneurship in the center of interests of the state, business and NGOs dialogue. The main objectives of the research are to analyze the dialogue field, to define the main sources of the conflicts of interests and the main practices in the dialogue field, and to define successful platforms of the dialogue in authoritarian Belarus. Using such methods as theoretical analysis of the state and civil society dialogue concepts, documents analysis, semi-structured interviews with experts, discourse analysis of mass media articles and researches on the dialog issues and the analysis of political structure, it was concluded, that fusion of the authoritarian state with business causes conflicts in the dialog field and restrain the development of private entrepreneurship and market economy. This study contributes to the public policy analysis of the state and civil society dialogue.
The object of this study is the state and civil society dialogue on entrepreneurship development in Belarus (2010–2019). The subject of the research – development of private entrepreneurship in the center of interests of the state, business and NGOs dialogue. The main objectives of the research are to analyze the dialogue field, to define the main sources of the conflicts of interests and the main practices in the dialogue field, and to define successful platforms of the dialogue in authoritarian Belarus. Using such methods as theoretical analysis of the state and civil society dialogue concepts, documents analysis, semi-structured interviews with experts, discourse analysis of mass media articles and researches on the dialog issues and the analysis of political structure, it was concluded, that fusion of the authoritarian state with business causes conflicts in the dialog field and restrain the development of private entrepreneurship and market economy. This study contributes to the public policy analysis of the state and civil society dialogue.
The article is devoted to the development of the question of humanism in Gajo Petrović's philosophy. For this purpose the Praxis school is presented as Marxist revisionism, original development of main Western Marxist ideas (alienation, false consciousness, reification, self-government and surplus value), as well as interpretation of Marx's Grudrisse and critique of Engel's Dialectics of Nature. Four different periods of the Praxis school are considered here: the first wave of the Praxis school and the Praxis journal (1964-1975), and the magazine The Praxis International (1981-1994) as the second wave. The third and the most dubious wave is collaboration in the journal (nereikia) Constellations: An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory (after 2002); and the fourth group could be the contemporary Subversive Festival (Subversive Forum) in Zagreb since 2008. The article maintains ("maintains" tiktų tik tuo atveju, jei norėta pasakyti "išlaiko". Jei ne, siūlau "presents" arba "discusses") the original character of the first generation of Praxis, its critique of Soviet Marxism, nomenclature and bureaucracy, authoritarianism as well as absence of creative diversity in the Soviet system. Comparative analysis of Soviet and Yugoslavian Marxist revisionism shows that original revisionism and the Praxis school were important issues in the formation of internal democratic opposition to power in the socialist system. The idea of revolution in the context of the. [to full text]
The article is devoted to the development of the question of humanism in Gajo Petrović's philosophy. For this purpose the Praxis school is presented as Marxist revisionism, original development of main Western Marxist ideas (alienation, false consciousness, reification, self-government and surplus value), as well as interpretation of Marx's Grudrisse and critique of Engel's Dialectics of Nature. Four different periods of the Praxis school are considered here: the first wave of the Praxis school and the Praxis journal (1964-1975), and the magazine The Praxis International (1981-1994) as the second wave. The third and the most dubious wave is collaboration in the journal (nereikia) Constellations: An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory (after 2002); and the fourth group could be the contemporary Subversive Festival (Subversive Forum) in Zagreb since 2008. The article maintains ("maintains" tiktų tik tuo atveju, jei norėta pasakyti "išlaiko". Jei ne, siūlau "presents" arba "discusses") the original character of the first generation of Praxis, its critique of Soviet Marxism, nomenclature and bureaucracy, authoritarianism as well as absence of creative diversity in the Soviet system. Comparative analysis of Soviet and Yugoslavian Marxist revisionism shows that original revisionism and the Praxis school were important issues in the formation of internal democratic opposition to power in the socialist system. The idea of revolution in the context of the. [to full text]
The article is devoted to the development of the question of humanism in Gajo Petrović's philosophy. For this purpose the Praxis school is presented as Marxist revisionism, original development of main Western Marxist ideas (alienation, false consciousness, reification, self-government and surplus value), as well as interpretation of Marx's Grudrisse and critique of Engel's Dialectics of Nature. Four different periods of the Praxis school are considered here: the first wave of the Praxis school and the Praxis journal (1964-1975), and the magazine The Praxis International (1981-1994) as the second wave. The third and the most dubious wave is collaboration in the journal (nereikia) Constellations: An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory (after 2002); and the fourth group could be the contemporary Subversive Festival (Subversive Forum) in Zagreb since 2008. The article maintains ("maintains" tiktų tik tuo atveju, jei norėta pasakyti "išlaiko". Jei ne, siūlau "presents" arba "discusses") the original character of the first generation of Praxis, its critique of Soviet Marxism, nomenclature and bureaucracy, authoritarianism as well as absence of creative diversity in the Soviet system. Comparative analysis of Soviet and Yugoslavian Marxist revisionism shows that original revisionism and the Praxis school were important issues in the formation of internal democratic opposition to power in the socialist system. The idea of revolution in the context of the. [to full text]
