Suchergebnisse

Als Einleitung gibt das Buch einen Überblick über die politische Geschichte der Kroaten und von deren Staatlichkeit, beginnend mit dem Jahr ihrer Taufe in die Römisch-Katholische Kirche (641), über die zwei Jugoslavien (1918-1941; 1945-1990), bis zum Jahr der Gründung eines eigenstaatlichen Parlaments am 30.05.1990. Dieser Teil ist mit reichlichem Kartenmaterial ausgestattet. Der Hauptteil behandelt die inneren kulturell-politischen und gesellschaftlichen Probleme der Kroaten im jetzigen Nationalstaat, die zu einem erheblichen Teil als Auswirkungen ehemaliger und derzeitiger geistig-kultureller und politischer Konfliktkonstellationen in Jugoslavien bzw. Kroatien verstanden werden. Hierbei gilt das Augenmerk insbesondere der Ideologie des Serbentums mit der großserbischen Expansions- und Hegemoniepolitik sowie dem jetzigen Krieg, dem für den Bestand des kroatischen Staates entscheidende Auswirkungen zugesprochen werden. Der Hauptteil endet zeitlich mit der Anerkennung der Republik Kroatien durch die europäischen Staaten am 15.01.1992. Der Autor, ein kroatischer Franziskaner-Pater, basiert sein Buch auch auf eine reiche Erfahrung aus der Seelsorge für kroatische Kriegsteilnehmer, Verwundete und Flüchtlinge. (SOI-Abr)

The author analyzes two famous critiques of the bourgeois state: Marx's thesis on the withering away of the state as an instrument of force of the economicall dominant bourgeois class which, by means of the quasi-neutral state as the higher third instance controls the the class antagonisms whose disappearance will make the state as an instrument of repression obsolete; and Carl Schmitt's thesis that the state will become unnecessary in the world in which there are no longer any enemies, only offenders who violate humanistic norms and human rights. (SOI : PM: S. 68)

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)

First, the author analyses Plessner's interpretation of Husserl's phenomenology. He goes on to outline the cognitive limits of the phenomenological-hermeneutical method, successful in text-analysis, but inadequate in illuminating pertinent historical processes. In his conclusion, the author points to Plessner's uncritical mixing of scientistic and phenomenological interpretations of fascism. (SOI : PM: S. 44)

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)

Rezension von: Behschnitt, Wolf D.: Nationalismus bei Serben und Kroaten 1830 - 1914. Analyse und Typologie der nationalen Ideologie. - München : Oldenbourg, 1980. - (Südosteuropäische Arbeiten; 74). - 231 S

The author outlines the modern universalistic theories which assume the natural and historical unity of humankind and, using this as a starting point, predict a cosmopolitan and Eurocentric outcome of world history. Contrary to these universalistic theories, the contemporary globalist theories, the author claims, are pluralistic and multicultural and thus paradigmatically different from the panoptical theories of classic modernism. (SOI : PM: S. 100)