Suchergebnisse

This article attempts to analyze how the bureaucratic principles of organizing public administration evolved from Max Weber to public administration at the beginning of the 21st century. It is mentioned that M. Weber's formulation regarding the ideal type of bureaucracy is a classic approach of public administration. Public administration practice confirms that bureaucracy is not as predictable and clear as described in M. Weber's theory of bureaucracy. Unlike the ideal model of bureaucracy developed by M. Weber, the current system of public administration is an open system and incorporates much more complex features. This fact is conditioned by a series of factors that influence the activity of the public administration including: the level of development of democracy, economic and social development, information technologies, leadership style, administrative culture, professionalization of civil servants, etc.

This study aims to answer the question whether Christian Orthodoxy can inspire political movements. In so doing we start from the political theories of modernity where the link between Christianity and democracy is central. Our result sounds unexpected: interaction between Orthodoxy and democracy seems to not have a perspective. It is too late for it since most political movements in post-communism do not have the religious identity of their members as criterion. The situation was not different before. As an example the effort of the orthodox theologians and laymen in Romania before the outbreak of the Second World War is quoted here. Almost without an exception all focused and restricted their interest on the question of the nation. Therein we see the principal reason for the above postulated perspective of an orthodox political doctrine until now. On the European level the situation looks also no better. Even the parties, which attribute themselves the Christian values, have at present large difficulties to convey their message. It remains only to hope that the political actors rediscover the social and actively support the Christian ethics in the public area. Only so can democracy be regarded as one of the most important binding forces also under the Christians.

This article justifies the role and importance of the separation of powers in modern society and in the state, consisting in the fact that this concept is the instrument of restricting the state power to protect the rights and interests of the person. As a rule, the separation of powers is opposed to the concepts of autocracy, the concentration of power in the hands of one person or one organ. The author recognizes the theory of separation of powers as being ideologically linked to the political legacy of Locke and Montesquieu and notes that the genesis of the theory of separation of powers is associated with the emergence of bourgeois political and legal theories, especially in the 17th century in England, D. Locke being the most authoritative political thinker. However, this theory received a classic formulation in the writings of the remarkable French philosopher, lawyer and illuminator Charles Louis Montesquieu. In this article, the characteristics of the original theories regarding the separation of powers of these prominent thinkers, who completed for the first time the concept of a democratically organized state with the optimal organization of the system of organs of state power, are subject to analysis

The article surveys the various stances taken in interwar Romania towards the contemporary international - particularly French - trends of legal and political theory meant at counteracting the shortcomings manifested by the legislative patterns of Napoleonic provenance when confronted with the exigencies of expanding associational life and the need of growing state intervention in the sphere of the relations between economic factors. The crisscrossing visions of federalist syndicalism and, respectively, juridical socialism - exposed most conspicuously by the legal philosophers Léon Duguit and Emmanuel Lévy - are shown to receive various evaluations in the local milieu, from the part of authors connected with the leading journal of the Romanian Social Institute and otherwise (and always by reference to the predicament of social reform in the national space). It is highlighted that the impact of the ideas involved in the debate was broader and more diffuse than one could assume when taking into consideration only the outspoken - and partly obsolete - objectives and premises of the argumentations in question.