Suchergebnisse

The article explores how solidarity and political emancipation progressed and impacted resistance against colonial imperialism movements in Bolivia. All throughout five hundred years of colonialism in South America local people sought to defend their communal way of life. Recent history of Bolivia, when Evo Morales, the leader of indigenous peoples, took the power is a result of long history of social struggle. Why is it important to analyze the history of social movements in Bolivia, what can it say about the development of democracy to democratic theory? Solidarity as one of the main elements of democracy was the only way for the indigenous Bolivians to achieve freedom and equality. While during the neoliberal political-economic reforms in Europe and the USA workers' solidarity has been marginalised, in Bolivia the resistance against neoliberal model played a vital role to build new forms of political solidarity. Thus the analysis of the history of how colonial and later system of liberal republicanism divided the strong indigenous communities and weakened their ability to resist them leading to political and economic alienation is important for theoretical reflections on a new forms of democracy. The history of indigenous in Bolivia shows that the main source of communal protection for these people was the communal ownership of land. The article demonstrates how first Spanish colonialists, then liberal republicans and later oligarchs together with transnational corporations pushed indigenous people from their lands thus threatening not just their livelihood but also their entire way of life. Since Inca Empire times indigenous people lived in very close communities, where they shared land and decision making. Communal assemblies were and remain today the most respected way of decision making. [.]

The article explores how solidarity and political emancipation progressed and impacted resistance against colonial imperialism movements in Bolivia. All throughout five hundred years of colonialism in South America local people sought to defend their communal way of life. Recent history of Bolivia, when Evo Morales, the leader of indigenous peoples, took the power is a result of long history of social struggle. Why is it important to analyze the history of social movements in Bolivia, what can it say about the development of democracy to democratic theory? Solidarity as one of the main elements of democracy was the only way for the indigenous Bolivians to achieve freedom and equality. While during the neoliberal political-economic reforms in Europe and the USA workers' solidarity has been marginalised, in Bolivia the resistance against neoliberal model played a vital role to build new forms of political solidarity. Thus the analysis of the history of how colonial and later system of liberal republicanism divided the strong indigenous communities and weakened their ability to resist them leading to political and economic alienation is important for theoretical reflections on a new forms of democracy. The history of indigenous in Bolivia shows that the main source of communal protection for these people was the communal ownership of land. The article demonstrates how first Spanish colonialists, then liberal republicans and later oligarchs together with transnational corporations pushed indigenous people from their lands thus threatening not just their livelihood but also their entire way of life. Since Inca Empire times indigenous people lived in very close communities, where they shared land and decision making. Communal assemblies were and remain today the most respected way of decision making. [.]

The article explores how solidarity and political emancipation progressed and impacted resistance against colonial imperialism movements in Bolivia. All throughout five hundred years of colonialism in South America local people sought to defend their communal way of life. Recent history of Bolivia, when Evo Morales, the leader of indigenous peoples, took the power is a result of long history of social struggle. Why is it important to analyze the history of social movements in Bolivia, what can it say about the development of democracy to democratic theory? Solidarity as one of the main elements of democracy was the only way for the indigenous Bolivians to achieve freedom and equality. While during the neoliberal political-economic reforms in Europe and the USA workers' solidarity has been marginalised, in Bolivia the resistance against neoliberal model played a vital role to build new forms of political solidarity. Thus the analysis of the history of how colonial and later system of liberal republicanism divided the strong indigenous communities and weakened their ability to resist them leading to political and economic alienation is important for theoretical reflections on a new forms of democracy. The history of indigenous in Bolivia shows that the main source of communal protection for these people was the communal ownership of land. The article demonstrates how first Spanish colonialists, then liberal republicans and later oligarchs together with transnational corporations pushed indigenous people from their lands thus threatening not just their livelihood but also their entire way of life. Since Inca Empire times indigenous people lived in very close communities, where they shared land and decision making. Communal assemblies were and remain today the most respected way of decision making. [.]

The article explores how solidarity and political emancipation progressed and impacted resistance against colonial imperialism movements in Bolivia. All throughout five hundred years of colonialism in South America local people sought to defend their communal way of life. Recent history of Bolivia, when Evo Morales, the leader of indigenous peoples, took the power is a result of long history of social struggle. Why is it important to analyze the history of social movements in Bolivia, what can it say about the development of democracy to democratic theory? Solidarity as one of the main elements of democracy was the only way for the indigenous Bolivians to achieve freedom and equality. While during the neoliberal political-economic reforms in Europe and the USA workers' solidarity has been marginalised, in Bolivia the resistance against neoliberal model played a vital role to build new forms of political solidarity. Thus the analysis of the history of how colonial and later system of liberal republicanism divided the strong indigenous communities and weakened their ability to resist them leading to political and economic alienation is important for theoretical reflections on a new forms of democracy. The history of indigenous in Bolivia shows that the main source of communal protection for these people was the communal ownership of land. The article demonstrates how first Spanish colonialists, then liberal republicans and later oligarchs together with transnational corporations pushed indigenous people from their lands thus threatening not just their livelihood but also their entire way of life. Since Inca Empire times indigenous people lived in very close communities, where they shared land and decision making. Communal assemblies were and remain today the most respected way of decision making. [.]

The article explores how solidarity and political emancipation progressed and impacted resistance against colonial imperialism movements in Bolivia. All throughout five hundred years of colonialism in South America local people sought to defend their communal way of life. Recent history of Bolivia, when Evo Morales, the leader of indigenous peoples, took the power is a result of long history of social struggle. Why is it important to analyze the history of social movements in Bolivia, what can it say about the development of democracy to democratic theory? Solidarity as one of the main elements of democracy was the only way for the indigenous Bolivians to achieve freedom and equality. While during the neoliberal political-economic reforms in Europe and the USA workers' solidarity has been marginalised, in Bolivia the resistance against neoliberal model played a vital role to build new forms of political solidarity. Thus the analysis of the history of how colonial and later system of liberal republicanism divided the strong indigenous communities and weakened their ability to resist them leading to political and economic alienation is important for theoretical reflections on a new forms of democracy. The history of indigenous in Bolivia shows that the main source of communal protection for these people was the communal ownership of land. The article demonstrates how first Spanish colonialists, then liberal republicans and later oligarchs together with transnational corporations pushed indigenous people from their lands thus threatening not just their livelihood but also their entire way of life. Since Inca Empire times indigenous people lived in very close communities, where they shared land and decision making. Communal assemblies were and remain today the most respected way of decision making. [.]

The thesis explores the postcolonial failures in the Middle East through a case study of Syria. Syria like the whole Middle East as we know it nowadays is a state and region of imagination drafted by the colonial Europe after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Author defines the concept of postcolonial state of Syria and argues that after the Arab upheaval, Syria as a postcolonial state does not exist anymore. Since the "Arab Spring" Syria got dragged into an ongoing civil war and the Assad regime has refused to go down peacefully. The conflict broke out in 2011 hence the developments in Syria through 2011-2015 are the key interest for the study, however in their analysis author has to take into account the historical context and certain vital developments in Syrian history. Currently, Syrian government is unable to deliver the basic services to its population and thus has been regarded as a failed state. Author analyzes the concept of the failed state, its application in Syrian case and attempts to understand what factors led to the failure of the postcolonial state of Syria. The study builds on an argument that postcolonial state of Syria has failed due to the foundational problems and the failure of the national identity, accompanied with the involvement of external actors, which are further prolonging the conflict. Author tries to examine to what extent have those actors promoted or undermined the failure of the postcolonial state of Syria and further sectarianization of the country. Theories of National identity failure and Constructivism are used as a theoretical framework to guide the whole research; with the former providing the explanation of the failure of the Syrian state and the latter addressing the logic behind the involvement of external actors and assists in generalizing the pattern detected in Syria over the whole Middle East, examining whether postcolonial Middle East has ended in light of Syrian case and given way to the emergence of New Middle East.

The thesis explores the postcolonial failures in the Middle East through a case study of Syria. Syria like the whole Middle East as we know it nowadays is a state and region of imagination drafted by the colonial Europe after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Author defines the concept of postcolonial state of Syria and argues that after the Arab upheaval, Syria as a postcolonial state does not exist anymore. Since the "Arab Spring" Syria got dragged into an ongoing civil war and the Assad regime has refused to go down peacefully. The conflict broke out in 2011 hence the developments in Syria through 2011-2015 are the key interest for the study, however in their analysis author has to take into account the historical context and certain vital developments in Syrian history. Currently, Syrian government is unable to deliver the basic services to its population and thus has been regarded as a failed state. Author analyzes the concept of the failed state, its application in Syrian case and attempts to understand what factors led to the failure of the postcolonial state of Syria. The study builds on an argument that postcolonial state of Syria has failed due to the foundational problems and the failure of the national identity, accompanied with the involvement of external actors, which are further prolonging the conflict. Author tries to examine to what extent have those actors promoted or undermined the failure of the postcolonial state of Syria and further sectarianization of the country. Theories of National identity failure and Constructivism are used as a theoretical framework to guide the whole research; with the former providing the explanation of the failure of the Syrian state and the latter addressing the logic behind the involvement of external actors and assists in generalizing the pattern detected in Syria over the whole Middle East, examining whether postcolonial Middle East has ended in light of Syrian case and given way to the emergence of New Middle East.

The thesis explores the postcolonial failures in the Middle East through a case study of Syria. Syria like the whole Middle East as we know it nowadays is a state and region of imagination drafted by the colonial Europe after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Author defines the concept of postcolonial state of Syria and argues that after the Arab upheaval, Syria as a postcolonial state does not exist anymore. Since the "Arab Spring" Syria got dragged into an ongoing civil war and the Assad regime has refused to go down peacefully. The conflict broke out in 2011 hence the developments in Syria through 2011-2015 are the key interest for the study, however in their analysis author has to take into account the historical context and certain vital developments in Syrian history. Currently, Syrian government is unable to deliver the basic services to its population and thus has been regarded as a failed state. Author analyzes the concept of the failed state, its application in Syrian case and attempts to understand what factors led to the failure of the postcolonial state of Syria. The study builds on an argument that postcolonial state of Syria has failed due to the foundational problems and the failure of the national identity, accompanied with the involvement of external actors, which are further prolonging the conflict. Author tries to examine to what extent have those actors promoted or undermined the failure of the postcolonial state of Syria and further sectarianization of the country. Theories of National identity failure and Constructivism are used as a theoretical framework to guide the whole research; with the former providing the explanation of the failure of the Syrian state and the latter addressing the logic behind the involvement of external actors and assists in generalizing the pattern detected in Syria over the whole Middle East, examining whether postcolonial Middle East has ended in light of Syrian case and given way to the emergence of New Middle East.