This study aims to explore the concept of authoritarianism, which – presented in terms of the "wicked problem" of the contemporary world – seems to be a severe challenge to present-day International Relations (IR), both in theoretical and practical dimensions. The author of the article defines the concept of authoritarianism as a form of the political system in which the power and material resources of the state have been centralized, appropriated, and put at the disposal of either an individual or an elitist group "in power." In this way, the possibilities of integrating the authoritarian state – both in the political and economic dimension – with the global system of international relations are limited, and the vital administrative institutions of the state have been manipulated and appropriated. The applied research method allows for interpreting the discussed issues in a complex – albeit specific – systemic form, characteristic not only for politically fragile or declining countries and regions but also for politically stable and economically developed ones. The author's analysis allows for the presentation and reinterpretation of the issue of contemporary authoritarian regimes concerning international relations in terms that not only define but often legitimize – and repeatedly even validate – some of the most despotic, autocratic, and hegemonistic forms of the political systems in modern times.
Without doubt, tension between Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Hizmet Movement is of vital importance for both Turkey and international society. This conflict is also important for Turkey's future when considering the concept of democracy. In this context, this tension has been mentioned by both academic and associated political interests worldwide. Therefore the importance of the outcome of this issue is going to be one of the key factors deciding Turkey's political and social future. To clearly understand and make predictions concerning Turkey's future, it is important to understand not only the actors involved and their normative and ideological perspectives; the deeper problematic areas of the Turkish state should also be explored. This paper outlines almost ten years of Turkey's social and political life under these two main opposing actors. This study will try to find a rational answer to the question of "what will be the outcome of this tension surrounding Turkish democracy for the political arena and civil society?" In this respect, the contemporary meaning of civil society, its importance for a healthy democracy and the relation among the state, the government which controls all state apparatus and the civil society organisations is explained. The final part provides further details about the AKP and Hizmet Movement and the subjects of their tension.
Without doubt, tension between Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Hizmet Movement is of vital importance for both Turkey and international society. This conflict is also important for Turkey's future when considering the concept of democracy. In this context, this tension has been mentioned by both academic and associated political interests worldwide. Therefore the importance of the outcome of this issue is going to be one of the key factors deciding Turkey's political and social future. To clearly understand and make predictions concerning Turkey's future, it is important to understand not only the actors involved and their normative and ideological perspectives; the deeper problematic areas of the Turkish state should also be explored. This paper outlines almost ten years of Turkey's social and political life under these two main opposing actors. This study will try to find a rational answer to the question of "what will be the outcome of this tension surrounding Turkish democracy for the political arena and civil society?" In this respect, the contemporary meaning of civil society, its importance for a healthy democracy and the relation among the state, the government which controls all state apparatus and the civil society organisations is explained. The final part provides further details about the AKP and Hizmet Movement and the subjects of their tension.
The Republic of Belarus is an authoritarian country in Europe, which level of the political system's transition is defined as consolidated authoritarianism. Belarus claimed it was a democratic state after 1991, but in 1995 changed its course towards authoritarianism. From the theoretical aspect, as well as political practice, it is important to assess the internal and external political conditions affecting the multifaceted nature of the state. It is also important to establish the conditions allowing the state's transition from consolidated authoritarianism to democracy. The direction and extent of the political system's transition is influenced not only by political elite or society, although they play a dominant role, but also by history, religion, political culture or axiomatic system, which in large is still a continuation of the Soviet system. Therefore in the case of Belarus, there is a need for analysis of the conditions shaping authoritarianism on the normative and functional levels. A lack of conditions conducive to the flourishing of civil society impedes the democratization building process, which in accordance with the third wave of democratization should have been anchored in Belarus after the collapse of the bipolar system ; Republika Białoruś jest ostatnim państwem autorytarnym w Europie, którego poziom przemian ustrojowo-prawnych można określić jako autorytaryzm skonsolidowany. W przypadku Białorusi, która po w 1991 roku pretendowała do grona państw demokratycznych, a po 1995 zmieniła kurs w kierunku autorytaryzmu. Istotne jest zatem z punktu teorii, jak i praktyki politycznej ocena uwarunkowań wewnętrznych i zewnętrznych, które oddziałują na charakter państwa. Ważny aspekt stanowi określenie warunków, które pozwolą na wyjście z autorytaryzmu skonsolidowanego w kierunku demokratyzacji państwa. Na kształt i zakres przemian ustrojowo-prawnych i politycznych wpływają nie tylko elity polityczne czy społeczeństwo, choć one są dominujące, ale także historia, religia, kultura polityczna, system aksjologiczny, będący w znacznym stopniu kontynuacją systemu sowieckiego. Bardzo znaczące w przypadku Białorusi są uwarunkowania kształtowania się autorytaryzmu na poziomie normatywnym i funkcjonalnym. Brak uwarunkowań do powstania aktywnego społeczeństwa obywatelskiego uniemożliwia, na obecnym etapie rozwoju przemian ustrojowo-prawnych, tworzenie i budowanie demokratyzacji, która zgodnie z duchem III fali powinna zakotwiczyć się w Białorusi już po rozpadzie systemu bipolarnego.
Unia Europejska dopiero w 2007 r. zaproponowała wobec regionu Azji Centralnej strategię, w której odniesiono się do różnych problemów, w tym deficytu demokracji i łamania praw człowieka. Istotnym ograniczeniem działań UE jest występowanie w cieniu USA oraz brak ambicji by także rozwijać współpracę w innych obszarach jak bezpieczeństwo czy zwiększenie europejskich inwestycji. Kolejnym problemem jest po zakończeniu jedynej strategii brak nakreślenia priorytetów, które umożliwiłoby UE na odgrywanie większej roli w Azji Centralnej. ; European Union after years of relatively small activity, in 2007 offered a strategy to Central Asia. In that strategy were addressed many issues, including democratic deficit or human rights violations. EU in its activity is overshadowed by the US and has small capacity for pursuing its own policy to the Central Asia. Another problem is a fact that after accomplishing EU strategy to Central Asia there are no new initiatives which will contribute for more visible European activity in that region.
My article is a succinct overview of macro-Polish governments' evolution over 25 years of political transformation. It is presented from the perspective of education for democracy, in a democracy and not about democracy. I explain how Poles, after they got rid of the monistic doctrine of the totalitarian state, have become subjected to a covert process of democratization of education and the school system. I analyze public education, mechanisms and structures for its management in a way that counteracts democratic change. The school is subjected to political game-makers. It becomes an institution which is painfully ineffective and without a face. This institution destroys tradition and causes intellectual regression. There are threats to educational reforms which lie not only in the sociopolitical mechanisms, but also and perhaps primarily within the education system, which has not created procedures to eliminate Pharisees of innovation from it. After 25 years of transformation, the Polish educational system is not only partially reprivatized but highly bureaucratic and fully involved in political parties. ; 38 ; 21 ; 42 ; 2 ; Studia Edukacyjne
This paper debates abusive constitutionalism and constitutionalism abused as ways to introduce a fundamental change of political system. Abusive constitutionalism consists in a change of a democratic regime in a less democratic one with the help of democratic means, i.e. democratically legitimized change of the existing constitution, or proclamation of a new constitution, as it recently happened in Hungary. An example of abused constitutionalism presents contemporary Poland. There the fundamental change of democratic regime happens notwithstanding the still binding constitution, as in an oblivion of it, by the means of ordinary laws proclaimed in a rush process by the ruling parliamentary majority. The whole process is steered in an informal way by the chairman of the ruling party. The important context of abusive constitutionalism, and of constitutionalism abused, as I am going to argue, presentst he crisis of liberal constitutionalism, the loss of its motivational force as a moral sign-post in the public sphere. Instead, one observes a retreat to some primordial and emotionally laden conceptualizations of a politically organized community (a Gemeinschaft) where emotions, primary bonds, foundational myths are more important than law and liberal constitution. Such a retreat results from the past but also presents a reaction to the growing complexity of the contemporary world, and involved risks.
This paper debates abusive constitutionalism and constitutionalism abused as ways to introduce a fundamental change of political system. Abusive constitutionalism consists in a change of a democratic regime in a less democratic one with the help of democratic means, i.e. democratically legitimized change of the existing constitution, or proclamation of a new constitution, as it recently happened in Hungary. An example of abused constitutionalism presents contemporary Poland. There the fundamental change of democratic regime happens notwithstanding the still binding constitution, as in an oblivion of it, by the means of ordinary laws proclaimed in a rush process by the ruling parliamentary majority. The whole process is steered in an informal way by the chairman of the ruling party. The important context of abusive constitutionalism, and of constitutionalism abused, as I am going to argue, presentst he crisis of liberal constitutionalism, the loss of its motivational force as a moral sign-post in the public sphere. Instead, one observes a retreat to some primordial and emotionally laden conceptualizations of a politically organized community (a Gemeinschaft) where emotions, primary bonds, foundational myths are more important than law and liberal constitution. Such a retreat results from the past but also presents a reaction to the growing complexity of the contemporary world, and involved risks.
The author shows the contemporary political regime in Serbia, focusing on the role of the president and the party system. He traces Serbia's evolution in the last decade from non-consolidated democracy to hybrid regime or even non-consolidated authoritarianism from the historical experiences that shaped her political culture. He identifies the sources of autocratism and monism in her state, church and intellectual history. He compares Serbia with Croatia, which for twenty years is a non-consolidated democracy. The article shows that Serbian and Croatian historical pre-1991 cultural and political traditions influenced the perceptions of democracy and "strong leaders" rules of their contemporary inhabitants no less than experience from the transformation period.
Today, there is no doubt that the large-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russian troops in February 2022 represents just another phase of the Russo-Ukrainian War that has lasted for nine years. There are many aspects to this confrontation. The consequences of the war will affect the future of the world order. It will include such aspects as security, formation of new political blocs, force interaction of political regimes, the choice of state-building models by the countries, the art of war, the role of civil society, and strengthening of the informational component in the confrontation between states and their alliances. Russia-Iran has already emerged as one such aggressive alliance. In the article, the authors explain the phenomenon of the infodemic and one of its structural elements, the "vaccinodemic". The COVID-19 pandemic became a vivid example of the global clash of actors in international relations that implement conflicting ideologies – democratic or authoritarian rule in the social and political life of their states – and realize such aspects in foreign policy. The authors assert that the current situation in Ukraine, namely, the open military Russian invasion and the further aggravation of the security crisis, primarily in the European region, are only the next phase of an ideological confrontation that could be observed during the response to the COVID-19 pandemic by humanity. Now, this confrontation continues in a more aggressive, conventional format. Manifestations of the infodemic and its unique form, the "vaccinodemic", captured the essence of the global confrontation, which will determine international processes for decades. Namely, Russia's fight between democracy and authoritarianism has acquired neo-totalitarian characteristics. This fight will determine, in addition to other social phenomena, the structure and content of the global information space. It is noted that authoritarian regimes have shown some success in addressing the pandemic, which may aggravate the rivalry between democracy and authoritarianism, as the former will have to prove its effectiveness and long-term advantages.
This work is a synthetic presentation of authoritarian and pro-fascist tendencies appearing in the Polish political thought between 1921 and 1935, tendencies resulting from the crisis of a liberal parliamentary democracy getting stronger (not only in Poland) in the interwar period. After regaining independence, the realities of parliamentarism did not overlap with hopes and expectations harboured so far that is why disappointment with democracy started to germinate in different environments. In the first half of the 1920s the slogans of a withdrawal from democracy remained rare and tentative, and, in general, constrained to postulates of a temporary facilitation of the institution and democratic mechanisms. The 1926 was the breakthrough. The awareness of the democracy crisis has become common. Despite this, authoritarianism initially seemed a temporary phenomenon. In the 1930s, Great Economic Crisis deepened disappointment with democracy making what was initially an exception to the rule a rule. The harbinger of the new epoch was the birth of the National Radicalism. The first chapter is devoted to terminological issues, and explains the notions of demoliberalism, authoritarianism and totalitarianism used in this work. The second chapter describes the bases from which authoritarian tendencies were born in the interwar period, namely criticism of democracy to be found in the Polish political thought of the 19. century. Next chapters present antidemoliberal conceptions of fascists in the 1920s, conservatives, national democrats, Christian democrats, Piłsudski's camp, national-workers movement, agrarian movement and Marxist groups, as well as esoteric circles, Pan-Slavists, eugenic activists, technocrats, war veterans, and, finally, National Radicals from the beginning of the 1930s. Both system solutions proposed in their political thought and their ideological justification were examined. An alternative to a parliamentary democracy took on different forms. One can see here a variety of propositions: from insignificant corrections of the democratic system to its total negation. "Old" national democrats, some conservatives, Christian democrats, agrarian populists, and initially Piłsudskites were limited to the reform of parliamentarism with maintaining its fundaments. Authoritarianism was represented by "young" national democrats of the Obóz Wielkiej Polski (the Greater Poland Camp), and a majority of conservatives. After 1926 it was a direction in which the reform moved. Totalitarianism did not have many followers. Reform proposals showed far-reaching similarity: reinforcement and independence of the executive, reorganization and restriction of the role of the Parliament, and, finally, corporatist system based on organized social groups were postulated. What was different, on the other hand, was the justification of these projects. The national democrats wanted to protect the interest of the ethnic Polish nation. Piłsudskites and conservatives accentuated the necessity to provide the Polish state with power (and, thus, the possibility of expansion). The latter, with Christian democrats, motivated their postulates with a defense of a traditional social and moral order. According to the left-wing activists, strong authority was also to be a tool of nation modernization and conducting social reforms. The most peculiar explanation was given by esoteric groups, according to whom the change of the political system was to serve the fulfillment of moral and metaphysical aims.
The paradigm of the political identity of Central and Eastern Europe was being formed on the sidelines of the paradigm of modernization of the region's states, getting beyond control of the East (authoritarianism) and heading towards Western democracies. In the process of democratization of the countries of the region, the transformation paradigm developed by Western political scientists had to be adapted to the Eastern European reality. The countries of the region underwent a complex process of systemic changes in the political and economic dimension, and some also in the state-building and nation-building dimensions. Three decades of transformation point to a significant group of countries in which democratization has been successful or is heading in the right direction. The second group of states balances between hybrid regimes and non-consolidated democracy, while the third group of countries has failed the experiment of democratization.