Suchergebnisse

The article focuses on representatives of the regional (and most recently established) level of government in the Czech Republic. It describes the context behind the emergence of regional governments & how they differ from the local & national political levels. It notes the close personnel connection between local & regional political elites. Experience gained in local politics helps elites to succeed at the regional level. The presence of local politicians in regional government varies with the level of residential fragmentation & the degree of urbanization in the given region. Unlike local politics, which is consistently comprised of a significant proportion of independents, regional representatives are almost exclusively members of political parties & movements. This situation on the one hand serves to increase the politicization of local politics & on the other leads to greater competition within political parties, whose programs & national leadership regional politicians wish to influence.

The aim of the article is to introduce contemporary Russian discussion on the USSR and Russia in broader political and publicist context. Both positive and negative interpretations of the Russian/Soviet history will be presented. The text does not pretend to provide exhaustive list of the particular "schools" and "movements" nor does it offer historical dynamics or institutional background of the discussion. The author rather intends to single out certain basic schemes and arguments that circulate in the discussions, place them in broader frames and anticipate their potential political consequences. Particularly, the text concentrates on various versions of the patriotic thinking that has been receiving broad popularity in today Russia. As the author is convinced, due familiarity with the contemporary Russian debate may help to better understand Russian internal as well as foreign policy nowadays: as it becomes clear, rise of patriotism in academia, society and politics are inseparable phenomena. Secondly, some of the arguments promoted by the contemporary Russian authors may enrich Western (non-Russian) sovietology and debate on socialist experiments as such. Last but not least, both content and form of the Russian academic discussion convincingly point at cultural conditionality of social and historical sciences. To some extent the discussion reminds perpetual Russian debate on national identity; cardinally new context in which it takes place however justifies attention paid to it.

Since the beginning of the second Chechen war, Russia has experienced several shifts in domestic policy. From the very start of his presidency, Vladimir Putin pursued a policy of consolidating power while facing both the external and internal enemy represented by Chechen rebels. As a side effect, this has brought about an outburst of xenophobia and racism that has turned against all Caucasians. The antiterrorist campaign has had broad consequences, even outside the security field. The campaign, which was based on economic arguments, began with attacks on the media tycoons Vladimir Gusinskii and Boris Beresovskii, and was later widened to other selected oligarchs. Another set of changes brought about reforms to almost every aspect of state organization, including everything from the parliamentary electoral system to the local representative elections. Although it had been planned for a long time, the core of the reforms was enacted after the tragedy in Beslan in September 2004.

Why are things different on the other side of national borders; and how can this be explained sociologically? This inaugural lecture tries to answer these questions, starting from the example of the bicycle in the Netherlands. It distinguishes four processes that have contributed to increasing similarity within nations: growing interdependence within nations; increasing density of networks and institutions; vertical diffusion of styles and standards; and the development of national we-feelings. Together, these processes have contributed to the development of national habitus: increasing similarities within nations, and increasing differences between people living in different countries. These processes have reached their apex in the second half of the twentieth century. Since then, they have diminished, leading to increasing variations within countries, and growing similarities between comparable groups in different countries. This analysis poses new questions and challenges for sociologists. First, it leads us to rethink comparative research: what are we comparing when we compare nations, and is this still a viable unit of analysis? Second, it leads us to consider how the transfer of styles and standards occurs in our informalized, globalized, and mediatized age. Third, sociologists should analyse the new forms of inequality resulting from these processes, such as the growing rift between 'locals' and (bike-loving) cosmopolitans.

Article describes the books of two authors, who try to compare Russian and Iranian revolutions and political development generally. Whereas Ghoncheh Tazmini uses Hegelian structuralist approach, that sees these revolutions as an inevitable result of modernization from above, another Iranian political scientist Zhand Shakibi puts stress on the role of human actor – pre-revolutionary monarch and his (miss)management of the situation in explaining the origins of revolution. Shakibi applies the human agency perspective to the analysis of the character of pre-revolutionary monarch and his modus operandi. According to Shakibi the structural variables did not by themselves cause the revolution, they create only potential for revolution. The revolutions must be explained by describing complex interactions between structural variables and modus operandi of the monarchs.

Since the time of its foundation (1990) the Slovak National Party (SNS) has been able to pool approximately 5-10 % of votes. During most of its 15 years existence there was a permanent crisis in the party and one could observe numerous clashes between particular groups in the Slovakian party system. As a result of this in-party fragmentation the SNS disintegrated in 2001. Following the division of supporter's votes between two successor parties, the SNS lost its parliament representation. This was the main impulse for the antagonized leaders to change their relations and start a process of integration which was successfully finished on March 3rd 2005 – the 15th anniversary of the party. From the beginning of 2005, the SNS has been enjoying growing popularity (7%) and has a good chance to succeed in the next parliamentary elections in autumn 2006.