Suchergebnisse

Classical liberalism as opposed to traditional concepts has established a notion of justice that envisages the equality of individual (negative) freedoms & (tutelary) rights. Under the influence of socialist criticism, modern-day liberals have been trying to include within the concept of justice the problem of the distribution of positive freedoms & rights. The already classic attempt of solving this problem is John Rawls's theory that defines justice as fairness, based on the principles of the equality of basic freedoms of individuals compatible with the freedom of other individuals; the distribution of goods that will most benefit the least privileged; & the primacy of freedom over social equality & justice over economic efficiency. In a pluralist society, these principles should facilitate the establishment of the "overlapping consensus" among divergent social groups on the issues of the basic social structure. In his attempt to solve the problems of social equality, which Rawls's theory leaves open-ended, Michael Walzer postulates the principle of complex equality, which requires different ways of distribution for different types of goods. These types cannot be specified in advance; however, their distribution is the most remarkable skill of liberal politics. Finally, the author claims that the problem of a just political organization of multicultural societies can be solved by applying Rawls's principles of fairness to the negotiating processes & to achieving consensus among divergent cultural groups on certain issues. Adapted from the source document.

Razvoj ljudske civilizacije usko je povezan s korištenjem energije i njezinih mnogostrukih izvora. Od doba ranih hominida na planetu, prije sedam milijuna godina, pa do sadašnjeg homo sapiens sapiens, energija je bila osnovni čimbenik opstanka vrste. Crkva općenito, a posebice kroz svoj socijalni nauk pokazuje posebno zanimanje za pitanja cjelovitog ljudskog razvoja, pa je tako predmet njezina razmatranja i pitanje energije, kao iznimnog izazova za pravdu, sigurnost i mir u svijetu. S pitanjem globalne energetike bave se izravno pape Ivan Pavao II., Benedikt XVI. i Franjo, svjesni da ono spada u iznimno bitne znakove vremena, koje treba pretpostavljati, čitati i tumačiti u svjetlu evanđeoske mudrosti. Ipak, problematika energije, odnosno energetskog sustava, još uvijek je jedno zanemareno globalno pitanje današnjice, iako je iznimno bitan čimbenik za cjelovit razvoj i ljudsko dostojanstvo. ; The development of human civilization is closely related to the use of energy and of its multiple sources. From the time of the early hominoids on the planet, seven million years ago, to the present homo sapiens sapiens, energy has been a basic factor affecting the survival of the species. Generally speaking and particularly through her Social Doctrine, the Church demonstrates a special interest in issues concerning integral human development. Thus, the energy issue is also deemed a subject to be dealt with by the Church since it is an exceptional challenge for the purposes of justice, security and peace in the world. Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis all have concerned themselves with the question of global energy, being aware that this is an extremely important sign of the times which must be understood, read and interpreted in the light of evangelical wisdom. Nevertheless, matters concerning energy and the energy system are today still a neglected global issue, though an immensely important factor affecting integral development and human dignity.

The author describes the communitarian critique of John Rawls, mostly that by Michael Walzer in Spheres of Justice (1983). The main communitarian objection to Rawls's theory of justice is that it is objectivistic & thus a modern variant of Platonism. Contrary to this attitude, Walzer insists on the theory of justice which takes as its starting point particular values of a society or culture & tries to formulate a critique of the American society as a community subject to "market imperialism." The response by Rawls & other liberals to the communitarian critique has proved that his theory is neither Platonic, transcendentally Kantian, nor abstractly objectivistic. Rawls & liberals are aware that their principles of justice have come into being within a specific European tradition of democratic constitutionalism, but that those principles aspire toward achieving universality, at least in those communities that are willing to accept a democratic constitutional system. Adapted from the source document.

In this article, the author shows why the student movement for free education ("the blockade") is wrong in asserting that the cause of injustice in higher education is the implementation of an allegedly neo-liberal project -- the Bologna Process. Furthermore, he claims that, in a serious discussion which would include all interested parties, the students' demand of "everything free on all levels in the highest possible numbers" could not be defended as a just demand. A socially just higher education would not be one which would be available free of charge to all interested parties, but one which would ensure access to higher education to the poor. The expose of the article is divided into three sections. First, Kurelic presents some ideological-theoretical formulations used in advocating free education. Then he attempts to show the short-sightedness of such formulations by referring to the example of criticism aimed at the higher education reform in Croatia, the so-called Bologna. In the third and final section, he explains why he is of the opinion that egalitarian liberals such as Scanlon and Barry, developing their line of argument from the position of social justice, would ask for much more than cancellation of school fees on all levels, and why the demand formulated according to Barry's categories is more solid. Adapted from the source document.

The author starts the article with a discussion of the ideas of deliberation & deliberative democracy in general & then presents some impressions & findings of the ongoing comparative research project on global justice movements. The research tries to answer two main questions: "How do (attempts to) deliberation, participation & decision-making look like in different kinds of groups, different countries (and probably at different levels -- from the local to the international)?" & "What factors influence & restrict deliberate/participatory practices?". The presented empirical investigation is mainly based on a semi-structured & full-structured participant observation, complemented by informal interviews in the local & regional groups in six countries & a number of transnational meetings of networks & political campaigns for global justice. The author concludes that global justice groups, though generally putting much emphasis reducing what they perceive as illegitimate forms of power within their own ranks & to deliberate as much as possible, do exhibit quite a number of aberrations from this ideal. Still, the author points out that deliberation, at least at the level of small-scale groups, is not just a dream but actually occurs, & that the majority of these groups are more successful in reducing in their internal communication "hard" power & enabling deliberation than most trade unions, political parties, & big NGOs. Adapted from the source document.

Kao rezultat izbora 2005. Pravo i pravda (PIS) postaje dominantna stranka u poljskom parlamentu s dominantnom braćom Kaczyński na čelu. Od 2007. do 2015. je oporbena politička sila, a onda 2015. uvjerljivom većinom i u donjem i u gornjem domu parlamenta opet dolazi na vlast. PiS je radikalna stranka desne orijentacije ili desnog centra. Zbog svojih je radikalnih stavova često spominjan kao uzrok slabijeg razvoja Poljske i njenog slabog međunarodnog položaja. U radu se konzervativna vlast te stranke prikazuje s obzirom na neovisnost rada sudova, slobodu medija i zaštitu ljudskih prava i sloboda. Status zaštite ljudskih prava i stupanj demokracije utjecao je na odnos EU prema Poljskoj, a nacionalizam PiS-a na odnos Poljske prema EU, Rusiji, Njemačkoj i ukupnoj međunarodnoj zajednici. ; As a result of the 2005 election, the Law and Justice party (abbreviated as PiS in Polish for Prawo i Sprawiedliwość) became the dominant party in the Polish parliament under the leadership of the Kaczyński brothers, Lech and Jaroslaw. From 2007 to 2015, PiS was a force in its role as the political opposition. It came to power again in 2015 after winning persuasive majorities in the Lower and Upper Houses. PiS is a radical party of right or center-right orientation. Because of its radical positions, it often is mentioned as a cause of Poland's weaker national development and international status. This work discusses the party's conservative government with regard to the relationship between legislative and judicial authorities, freedom of the media, and the protection of human rights. Poland's state of human rights protection and its degree of democracy has influenced its relationship with the EU. PiS's nationalism also has had an impact on Poland's relations with the EU, Russia, Germany, and the larger international community.

U radu se analizira veza između dohodovnih nejednakosti i redistributivnih preferencija. Glavni su ciljevi rada: utvrditi u kojoj su mjeri stvarne dohodovne nejednakosti povezane s redistributivnim preferencijama, koji su korelati redistributivnih preferencija na makrorazini te koje mehanizme redistribucije preferiraju građani u zemljama EU-a. Kao izvori podataka o redistributivnim preferencijama korišteni su agregirani podaci iz dvaju specijalnih istraživanja Eurobarometra (2010. i 2018.), dok su makrostatistički pokazatelji uzeti iz Eurostatove baze podataka. U radu su korištene bivarijatne korelacijske analize, linearna regresija i klaster analiza. Opći je nalaz da su visoke redistributivne preferencije prisutne u gotovo svim zemljama EU-a. Izgleda da rast dohodovnih nejednakosti nije ključni čimbenik visoke razine redistributivnih preferencija, već je to percepcija dohodovnih nejednakosti i osjetljivost građana na ekonomske nejednakosti. Građani u zemljama EU-a često pogrešno percipiraju razinu nejednakosti u društvu i svoje mjesto na dohodovnoj ljestvici. Ispitanici iz postsocijalističkih zemalja imaju veću »averziju« prema dohodovnim nejednakostima i žele veću ulogu države u redistribuciji i društvenom životu. Stanovnici EU-a podržavaju sve ključne mehanizme dohodovne redistribucije (porezi, obrazovanje, socijalna zaštita i minimalna plaća), ali najveću potporu daju poreznom sustavu i progresivnom oporezivanju bogatijih, dok je najviše dilema vezano za potpuno besplatno obrazovanje. ; The paper analyses the relationship between income inequalities and redistributive preferences. The objectives have been: determine to which degree income inequalities are associated with redistributive preferences, which are the correlates of redistributive preferences on the macro level and which mechanisms of redistribution have been preferred by citizens in the EU countries. Aggregated data from two special Eurobarometer surveys (2010 and 2018) were used as the data source on redistributive preferences, while macro-statistical indicators were taken from the Eurostat database. Bivariate correlational analyses, linear regression and the cluster analysis were used for data processing. A general finding is that redistributive preferences are high in almost all EU countries. It seems that an increase of income inequalities is not the key factor of high redistributive preferences, but it is the perception of income inequalities and the sensitivity of citizens towards income inequalities. Citizens in the EU countries often incorrectly perceive the level of inequalities in society and their place on the income scale. The respondents from post-socialist countries have a larger "aversion" towards income inequalities and want a stronger role of the government in the redistribution and social life. Inhabitants of the EU countries support all key mechanisms of income redistribution (taxes, education, social protection and minimum wage), but they give the largest support to the tax system and the progressive taxation of the wealthy, while there are a lot of suspicions regarding fully free education.