Suchergebnisse

An article on how the Flemish government has used the new legislation to found its own international cultural policy and if its aims were solely cultural, or mixed with political and/or economic gains. Up till now cultural policies have been mainly policies of subvention and not enough autonomous, since political and economical aims were found too important. Regarding autonomy, the results have not been brilliant; international subventions, regulated by external factors, have been mainly of a political and economical nature, which diminishes the structural practices, leaving a tight budget for an autonomous, authentic policy. However, compared with Holland and the Walloon provinces, the results seem better. The functionality in Walloon remains highly influenced by international merchandising goals, and Holland has accepted the existing and hard to avoid co-relation with other domains, but their idea of an autonomous policy seems rather individualistic. As regards the EU: its nature is too economical to make for a successful autonomy. Future aims seem worthwhile however in a cooperation of a Dutch language union, an international cooperation thus, between the Netherlands and Flemish cultural strategies. It is a costly business, but promoting Dutch language contributions to the international scene provide some good basics for an internationalized policy, to which the Flemish-Dutch Cultural Policy Committee (Commissie Cultureel Verdrag Vlaanderen-Nederland) has given its approval. References. O. van Zijl

Thucydides is considered to be the founder of political realism. Even in those times he determined the basic premises of realism - security and survival. He made an impact on subsequent development of realism embodied in the works of Machiavelli, Hobbes, Morgenthau, Car, Niebuhr, Aaron, Waltz etc. They will call the system of international relations as anarchical one since there is no supreme arbitrator which will force states to adequate behaviour. His views of realism were given in the volume 'The Peloponnesian War' where he had determined the anarchy of the relationships among states. Such system did not rely on justice and morale, but force and power were the predominant facts. He also introduces the category of just wars by claiming that Sparta led a just war against the increased power of Athens, and observed morale principles. Nevertheless, Thucydides faces contradictory, since Sparta itself as the largest land force of that time had to use force in order to beat Athens. He went ahead since he considered force and power as a necessary condition to achieve other objectives, which was later on adopted by Raymond Aaron. Following the example of the war between Athens and Sparta, he successfully analysed bipolar system of balance of power in which the conflict between the leading members of the two opposite blocks was possible in the end, while beforehand there should have been conflicts among weaker members of both blocks. Thucydides explained the manifestation of force and power using example of the Melian dialogue between the envoys of Athens and Melos. It was about the pure politics of force of Athens regardless of the fact that Melos had its independence.