Suchergebnisse

The article describes some common features of Indigenous sea cosmovisions (through examples from Oceania and the Arctic region), from which an understanding of ocean governance rooted in the interconnectedness of all life and the importance of protecting water and people emerges. Hence, the model of ocean (or water) connectivity is characterized by the understanding of ocean-human relationships as a continuum of connections between human and non-human elements. In line with the normative recognition of the sacredness of water, the interconnectedness of all life, and the importance of protecting the sea, Indigenous peoples' law provides insights and implementation solutions for the restoration of marine ecosystems. This study aims to identify blind spots of the current law-of-the-sea regime, where marine ecological connectivity is not fully recognized as a foundational pillar of effective ocean protection. It also suggests approaches towards knowledge integration mechanisms that could minimize critical issues in ocean governance by enabling the enshrinement of Indigenous nature-oriented approaches within the law of the sea regulatory framework (especially focusing on the high seas' regime). The work is structured into three main parts: a comprehensive overview of connectivity conceptualizations drawn from Indigenous cosmovisions; reflections on the model's capability to address law-of-the-sea's systemic challenges; and concluding reflections on possible future trajectories in law-of-the-sea that could encompass elements of the analyzed model.

The article discusses the African state, using Michael Mann's theory of state formation as a starting point. Mann describes state formation as a process through which society is gradually "caged in" by the state, establishing the state as the highest political authority & the final arbiter of conflict within its territory. I argue that African states have been unable to "cage in" their societies. On the one hand, this means that politics does not only consist in struggles about control over the state or the content of state politics. Instead, the state's right to formulate laws & policies that are binding for society as a whole is challenged. On the other hand, since the state is unable to control its borders, interstate relations also take a different form. Conflicts that start as civil wars tend to spread across borders, without any of the affected states being able to prevent it. As a result, the distinction between the internal & the external becomes blurred. 28 References. Adapted from the source document.

Marianne Jelved: Norden og Europa. Jean-François Battail : Nordisk särart och internationellt utbyte - något om kulturmötens villkor. Matti Klinge: Omkring det falska i nordismen. C.G. Bjurström: En översättares syn på språken. Guðrún Pétursdóttir: Nordisk identitet - hva er det og skal det bevares?. Lars-Henrik Schmidt: Den naturlige identitetsfølelse mellem nordisk kultur og europæisk civilisation. Jørn Boisen: Fra universalisme til protektionisme? : fransk sprogpolitik i et historisk perspektiv. Jaakko Lehtonen: "Mera än ord" - nordiska språk och kulturer i den europeiska dialogen. Geirr Wiggen: Det nordiske språkfellesskapet : språksosiologiske vilkår og framtidsutsikter. Ástráður Eysteinsson: Translation and cultural borders. Uffe Andreassen: Nordisk og fransk mentalitet.

"This book addresses political conflicts in Norway through an extended time span, from the late autocracy of the 18th century until the democratic challenges of today. The book holds eight articles focusing on historical phases which have been particularly influenced by social and political mobilization. Thus, the book traces an oppositional tradition across borders in time and space. Although the articles are based on limited studies, the authors write with ambition to include their research into this wider context.

In Norway, the Constitution of 1814 marks the shift from autocratic rule to early democracy. 18th century peasant riots may be interpreted as expressions of impotence of the common people, but also as an opportunity for action with the potential to influence the authorities. The 19th century peasant opposition shows the potential for change through parliamentary representation. Around 1850 the first attempts at worker's organizations were criminalized – around 1950, however, the Labour Party dominated Norwegian politics. These trending lines reflect an increasingly developed democracy. The political system is in principle opening for broad popular participation. However, democracy is still being challenged by opposition in ways and by means that occasionally raise concerns about the stability of our political culture.

The book is divided into three parts. Part I is dedicated to the age of late autocracy, part II provides insights into the 19th century democratization processes, while Part III includes articles dealing with opposition and confrontations in the last century, focusing the interwar period, the 1970s, and today's multicultural society.The book is aimed both at researchers, students and the general audience." - "Denne boka tar opp politiske konflikter i Norge gjennom et langt tidsspenn, fra det seine eneveldet til vår tids demokratiske utfordringer. De åtte kapitlene representerer punktnedslag i historiske faser som i særlig grad har vært preget av sosial og politisk mobilisering. Slik bidrar boka til å belyse en opposisjonell tradisjon.

Historikere er blitt kritisert for å fokusere ensidig på avgrensede perioder og hendelser, og være for lite opptatt av å spore linjer på tvers av grenser i tid og rom. Forfatterne av denne boka skriver med bakgrunn i avgrensede studier, men alltid med ambisjon om å sette sine forskningstema inn i en videre kontekst.

I Norge markerer Grunnloven av 1814 skiftet fra eneveldig styre til begynnende demokrati. 1700-tallets bondeopprør kan tolkes som uttrykk for allmuens avmakt, men også som handlingsrom med potensiale til å påvirke myndighetene. 1800-tallets bondeopposisjon viser mulighetene for å nå fram gjennom parlamentarisk opposisjon. Rundt 1850 ble de første forsøk på organisering av arbeidere kriminalisert – rundt 1950 dominerte Arbeiderpartiet norsk politikk. Dette er linjer som speiler et stadig mer utviklet demokrati. Det politiske systemet åpner i prinsippet for bred folkelig medvirkning. Men fortsatt blir demokratiet utfordret av opposisjon i ytringsformer som til tider vekker bekymring for stabiliteten i vår politiske kultur."