Suchergebnisse

The relation between the working of democratic systems today and the exploitation of "modern" forms of politically motivated extreme violence, especially the different types of subversive terrorism, has been an object of thorough study and discussion at most varied levels in the course of recent decades, often with contradictory results. This is not a surprise bearing in mind the diversity of bases for such study and discussion, as well as the complexity and changing nature of the subject matter itself, and last but not least, also the deforming impact of different political factors which in many a case predetermined both the horizon of discussions and the character of "politically correct" or at least acceptable conclusions. This does not apply just to decayed political and propagandist writings displaying a remarkable dose of cynicism and lack of shame in serving the interests of power which decided who would be labelled "terrorist" or "freedom fighter", or else. There is a number of scientific works defending the principles and values of democracy which also display apparent effort to a priori exclude raising a particular problem in full in order to prevent any doubt being cast on the purposefulness and justifiability of traditional approaches to and standpoints regarding the assessment of political violence and extremism. At the same time, polemics regarding terrorism had a large impact. Discussions about terrorism changed the way the public felt about both terrorism as a particular category of extremist violence, and politically motivated violence and extremism as such, propagating and reinforcing the view of political violence (acceptance of violent methods of political fight including terrorism) as an utterly undemocratic and anti-democratic behaviour and as a key characteristic of extremism. There is a growing tendency in substantial part of the public in democratic countries today to a priori associate manifestations of extremist orientation with acts of politically motivated violence, and to identify ...

The paper concentrates on attitudes to the enlargement and the future of EU held by relevant political parties in the Czech Republic and in Slovakia in 2002. With respect to the Czech Republic, three basic approaches to the issue of EU enlargement are identified, thus classifying the Czech political parties as "consistently" pro-European, pro-European "with reservations" and anti-European. It will be argued that in Slovakia the relevant political parties acted as "consistently" pro-European with the exception of the anti-European Slovak National Party (SNS) and the Communist Party of Slovakia (KSS). The dividing line was however rather between the parties whose representatives could be viewed by international partners as an obstacle to Slovakia's admission to EU and the parties that were "acceptable" for foreign countries, which played an important role in rallying voters to opt for "acceptable" political subjects. ; The paper concentrates on attitudes to the enlargement and the future of EU held by relevant political parties in the Czech Republic and in Slovakia in 2002. With respect to the Czech Republic, three basic approaches to the issue of EU enlargement are identified, thus classifying the Czech political parties as "consistently" pro-European, pro-European "with reservations" and anti-European. It will be argued that in Slovakia the relevant political parties acted as "consistently" pro-European with the exception of the anti-European Slovak National Party (SNS) and the Communist Party of Slovakia (KSS). The dividing line was however rather between the parties whose representatives could be viewed by international partners as an obstacle to Slovakia's admission to EU and the parties that were "acceptable" for foreign countries, which played an important role in rallying voters to opt for "acceptable" political subjects.

"Bringing space back" into comparative politics is a difficult task, perhaps inevitably accompanied by various substantive and methodological problems. This paper introduces the concepts of "territorial homogeneity" (of D. Caramani) and "party nationalization" (of M. Jones and S. Mainwaring), both of them dealing with political parties as actors and territorial space as an environment in which they operate. Our aim is to identify some of the typical issues/ matters (selection of cases, elaboration of relationships among variables) any researcher who would try to conceptualize the relationships between political parties and territorial units has to cope with. In respect of issues in question the solutions offered by Caramani and Jones&Mainwaring often seem neither intercompatible nor fully satisfactory. This may raise the question about inevitably ethnocentristic nature of the "homogeneity concepts". We further extend our methodological note, limiting -rather than delineating- the areas of possible use of the homogeneity concept for the post-communist countries, arguing that sensible comparisons would require much better control for intervening institutional variables- a task which is almost impossible to achieve with such a heterogeneous sample. ; "Bringing space back" into comparative politics is a difficult task, perhaps inevitably accompanied by various substantive and methodological problems. This paper introduces the concepts of "territorial homogeneity" (of D. Caramani) and "party nationalization" (of M. Jones and S. Mainwaring), both of them dealing with political parties as actors and territorial space as an environment in which they operate. Our aim is to identify some of the typical issues/ matters (selection of cases, elaboration of relationships among variables) any researcher who would try to conceptualize the relationships between political parties and territorial units has to cope with. In respect of issues in question the solutions offered by Caramani and Jones&Mainwaring often seem ...

The paper presents a wide spectrum of the existing theories of sociology, law & political science dealing with the discretion of officials in public & social policy. Concretely, the paper focuses on three different ways of how to understand the existence of discretion (definition perspective), its functions (role perspective), & its use by officials at the state & local levels (structural perspective). These perspectives are presented in order to identify factors that determine officials' discretion & to grasp the concept of discretion as a tool that reveals the limits of officials' behavior. In the end the paper summarizes the constituent factors determining public officials' discretion. 42 References. Adapted from the source document.

The aim of this article is to analyze the attitudes of the main political parties in the Czech Republic towards the European Union. A special emphasis is put on the presentation of these attitudes in the pre-referendum period & on the levels of support for membership achieved among the parties' supporters. This topic is analysed through the theoretical lens of "europeanization," an approach which examines the impact on domestic (national) policies & political systems of EU policies & processes. This theoretical perspective is usually applied to current member states but has been increasingly extended to candidate countries in the pre-accession period as well. In the period after the first democratic elections of 1990, the "European" debate among Czech political parties has intensified & shifted from the clear initial "yes" to membership to more complex & qualitative questions. By the time of the national EU referendum, (June 2003) the impact of" europeanization" was manifested by the presence of a significant number of EU-related topics in the political parties' agenda. The authors have utilized a range of political geography, sociology, & political science methods to demonstrate a high correlation between the EU referendum results & the levels of the partisan support for the parties favoring membership in the EU. According to the available empirical data from various public opinion surveys, the support for membership among the voters of the Social Democratic Party (CSSD), Civic Democratic Party (ODS), Christian Democratic Party (KDU-CSL) & Freedom Union (US-DEU) ranged from 82 to 92 %. On the contrary, the position of the Communist Party (KSCM) was clearly the opposite. In addition to the political orientation of the voters, other factors which have influenced the voting results were examined. These included such factors as regional unemployment rate, education, wage levels as well as other political-geographical aspects. References. Adapted from the source document.

Samoobrona (Self-Defense) and League of Polish Families (LPR) won the seats in the Sejm in the parliamentary elections in September 2001. Both parties represent radical opposition in the Polish parliament. They critisize Poland´s accession to the EU and the situation in the country after 1989 in general. The following text describes the history of both parties and the cardinal points of their policies. ; Samoobrona (Self-Defense) and League of Polish Families (LPR) won the seats in the Sejm in the parliamentary elections in September 2001. Both parties represent radical opposition in the Polish parliament. They critisize Poland´s accession to the EU and the situation in the country after 1989 in general. The following text describes the history of both parties and the cardinal points of their policies.

This article analyzes the history, development, & continuity of the sociology of law within the context of Czech social & legal science since 1989. The sociology of law is depicted as a branch of both social & legal science that has suffered greatly from different political discontinuities & ideological repression during the communist era. After the 1989 political changes, the weak tradition of the Czech sociology of law had to be reconstituted. This development is mainly typical of the law faculties of different Czech universities, while academics trained in general sociology & social theory rather continue to ignore the importance & social functions of the legal system in the process of the postcommunist transformation of Czech society.

This article deals with the complicated & multifaceted topic of Polish politics between the two world wars. This time period was characterized not only by a "classical" political instability but, much more importantly, also by the instability of the whole political system. The democratic regime created in 1919 was weak & was abolished by force in 1926. The subsequent political system was authoritarian (but not totalitarian) & survived until the end of the Polish state in October 1939, when Poland was attacked & occupied by the German & Soviet armies. The questions posed by the article are manifold. Why did Poland introduce democracy in the hardship years of 1918-1919, but did so for only a few years? Why was not democracy successful? Why did Poland accept authoritarianism & what were the political & constitutional consequences of that step? 31 References. Adapted from the source document.

Denmark is considered to be one of the most Euroskeptical member states of the European Union (e.g. it rejected the Treaty of the European Union in 1992 & refused to adopt the euro in 2000). This article analyzes the attitudes of relevant Danish political parties towards European integration. The author of this article utilizes Nicolo Conti's typology of political parties' attitudes towards the European Union based on their spatial position on the political spectrum. Conti supposes that the Euroskeptical attitude (the so-called hard Euroskepticism) is mostly represented by the right- & left-wing parties, while a pro-European attitude is typical of the center & governing political parties. First, the author of this article categorizes the relevant Danish political parties on the basis of Conti's typology. Second, the author compares their real attitudes to European integration to the assumed ones. 2 Tables, 1 Diagram, 36 References. Adapted from the source document.

The paper explains the theory of bureaucracy developed by William A. Niskanen. While sociologist Max Weber's analysis treats bureaucrats as "eunuchs" or automatic machines responsible for public well-being, Niskanen tries to apply standard neoclassical economic models to explain the behavior of bureaucracy as a whole. With this background, he concludes that the bureaucracy will concentrate on bargaining processes with the sponsor & not on improving the quality of its services to the public. This is a simple explanation of why the bureaucratic organization provides systematically worse products & services to its customers than does the standard private firm operating on the market. 19 References. Adapted from the source document.