Suchergebnisse

The article presents a critical overview of underlying ideas, social context, and original teachings of two "mediating ideologies" (social democracy and conservatism) and two mass "political phenomena" (nationalism and populism). Each of them constitutes a form of more or less effective political compromise, which ought to neutralize constant tensions and clashes between the leading modern ideologies of freedom and equality, i.e. liberalism and communism. However, the clash of ideologies which were prominent in the 19th and 20th centuries has lost much of its intensity today, although the social causes that gave rise to them have remained unchanged: social inequalities, abuse of freedom, and uneven distribution of social power. At the same time, the main social forces and political organizations that had been the symbols and striking forces of freedom and equality in the preceding decades - the political parties of the "left " and "right", including the never clearly defined "political center" - also lost their identity and power. Th e then political mortal enemies look and behave today almost exactly as they did then: in the ideological sense, "everyone wants everything" (allegedly representing/ defending the interests of "all citizens"); in the organizational sense, there is almost no difference between them; whereas the difference in the manner they behave when in power is almost negligible.

The essay describes the evolution of the concept of political culture, from th concepts such as Comte's 'consensus', Durkheim's 'collective awareness', Weber's 'significance of individual actions', to Parson's 'action frame of reference', and Mead's 'national character'. The development began with Comte's search for differentia specifica of social sciences in relation to oth positive sciences and finished in 1963 with the introduction of the concept of political culture into political science by G. Mmond and S. Verba. Our analysis has shown that many definitions of political culture point out that i essence lies in people's beliefs since political culture is a set of beliefs regarding politics. As much as it may seem a paradox, it cannot be reduced to mere individual beliefs, but represents a system of inter-subjective opinions on various political objects. This explains the possible discrepancies between the political events and the political beliefs of the people, between their behaviour and political culture, and so on. Contrary to the belief of some authors, it has been shown how political culture may and should be taken as a common denominator for a variety of opinions on politics. Political attitudes, values, norms, public opinion and political ideologies are nothing but different manifestations of political culture. Thus, the concept of political culture includes diverse facets of the subjective attitude of people towards politics. This is the asset and not the downside of this concept, as some authors would have it. It is pointed out that the manifold manifestations of political culture do not carry the same 'weight' in explaining the political activism of people and the functioning of political systems. The relationship between these manifestations is extremely complex and a challenge for research. It is this very relationship that could explain the stable and less stable (i.e. stable and vacillating) reactions of people in their political activity. (SOI : PM: S. 128)

The author suggests that Dayton peace accord is primarily an expression of the West's (particularly American) strategic interests, both regional and global. Numerous political constellations which have surrounded the conflict in the former Yugoslavia can be explained if this proposition is accepted. The lamentations that the recognition of Slovenia and Croatia was premature is an expression of the disgruntlement over the failure to incorporate the entire Yugoslav territory within the western interest sphere and the consequent relinquishment of Serbia to Russia. In Southeastern Europe, Russia has proved the sole American strategic ally. Americans, realizing that their strategic interests became vulnerable due to the European rivalries, decided to strike o its own. The Dayton constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a multicultural state is built on current political principles in line with the requirements of the moment which include antifascism, anticommunism, antiterrorism, human rights and multiculturalism. author concludes that Croatian politics should fall in line with the strategic preferences of the West which would enable it to accomplish ist national interests. (SOI : PM: S. 156)

The author poses the question about the fate of neoconservatism, in the 1980s the official political orientation in the USA. Twenty years later, one can see how anti-communism and anti-modernism, neoconservatism's fundamental ideological premises, have changed the political practice and awareness, both (and equally) in American foreign and national policy. Though conceptually incoherent, neoconservatism has proved to possess exceptional clout. This has led the author to conclude that neoconservatism, despite the claims by neoconservatives themselves that it is dead, still has much leeway, since voters' awareness has been changed: they have got used to the new political context, they vote for well-balanced "mixtures" of rightist and leftist ideologies. (SOI : PM: S. 164)

The notions of "right" and "left" are a fundamental semantic pattern within which voters construct their political perceptions and attitudes. Their universal meaning lies in a simple spatial approach to politics as conflict; functionally, "right" and "left" are "shortcuts" for political communication. In the empirically oriented political science, the left- right scale has become a standard variable in public opinion polls. After the initial pessimistic interpretations, in the last twenty years or so, this scale has increasingly demonstrated its validity and reliability. The sources of the right-left identification may be manifold, and not solely ideological. Also, the right-left scheme has demonstrated a remarkable potential to - in time - encompass new political contents and thus create a need for new cross-national and longitudinal studies. Voters - and not scientists - are those who define what is left and what is right. (SOI : PM: S. 168)

The article deals with Mill's theory of liberal democracy as a synthesis of the elements of two different political traditions and doctrines: liberalism and democracy, integration of liberal concepts of freedom, limitations of power, political representation and elite leadership and democratic ideas of equality, social homogeneity, national sovereignty and citizens" participation. The author concludes that the contradictions found in Mill's theory do not stem from the inconsistency of the logic of his argumentation, but from the contradictory demands he tried to reconcile. (SOI : PM: S. 162)

The author analyses the concept of neo-classicism in contemporary political philosophy. The study begins with a description of contemporary neo-classic developments and continues with a precise delineation of Plato's and Aristotle's philosophy of politics. In the end, the author concludes that the antiquity-inspired philosophy of politics today has the corrective function to steer liberal society towards community. (SOI : PM: S. 156)

Violations of human rights have become an almost daily occurrence via various TV and newspaper reports. Massacres, murders, torture, violence, imprisonment of political opponents, are facts of life in a number of contemporary states. While these states blatantly curtail human rights of their citizens, the governments and peoples of other countries have the right but also a kind of duty to demand they be respected. This feeling of global responsibility is increasing every day thanks to the process of globalization itself. (SOI : PM: S. 82)

The author looks into the methodological features of public choice theory. On the example of James Buchanan's contribution, he demonstrates the differences between that kind of approach (often dubbed political economy) versus welfare economics and mainstream economics. Unlike welfare economics, which tries to work out the optimal state of allocation and distribution of economic resources by using certain logical rules based on Pareto's principles, or mainstream economics, which tries to identify the improvements in observable economic categories (such as national income or investment consumption), political economy encompasses the process of collective decision-making i.e. politics. In this, the efficacy criterion is t extent of consent (consensus) in collective decisionmaking. On the example of Buchanan's and Tullock's joint contribution in the book "The Calculus of Consent", the author concludes that this paved the way for introducing a legitimate categorial mechanism for investigating the costs of political decision-making into political science. (SOI : PM: S. 88)

The author describes Buchanan's theory of political constitution and his individualist understanding of political science. On the basis of homo economicus, Buchanan deduced the normative elements of political science, i.e. the proposals for the choice of political institutions. In his opinion, the choice of political institutions always contains the ethical dimension. The positive elements of political science are illustrated by means of the analyses of the behaviour of political actors within the designated framework. The author shows how this type of radical individualism does not satisfy the standards of political science since it de facto does away with the political sphere. (SOI : PM: S. 195)

The revival of the nation has shocked German intellectuals who think that the nation-state is historically obsolete and that new models should be upheld: the united Europe, a world community of responsible states, globalisation of markets, a universe of human rights. The contrary tendencies in today's world are marked by giving up on huge political entities which have been replaced by smaller nationality-based states. It seems that political freedom leads to the formation of nation-states based on democratic constitution. This process requires looking into the relation between the nation-state and democracy. The key for the explanation of their relationship can be found in the notion of nation. Citizenship mediates between the people (in its real manifestation as a social group), and democracy as a constitutional principle. It gives to the state as a personal entity legal structure on which to build a democratic form of the state and guarantees legally applicable taxonomies and limitations. (SOI : SOEU: S. 17)