Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Contents -- List of Tables -- List of Figures -- Acknowledgments -- Chapter 1. Introduction: Comparing Organized Medicine and Health Policies in France and the United States -- Chapter 2. Unity and Fragmentation of the French State -- Chapter 3. The Fragmentation of the Stateless State: The Effects of Absolute Liberalism on Politics in the United States -- Chapter 4. Cohesion and Fragmentation of Organized Medicine in France and the United States -- Chapter 5. The Continuity of Crisis: Patterns of Making Health Policy in France, 1978-1990 -- Chapter 6. Policy Issues in France: State Reforms and Medical Resistance -- Chapter 7. Public and Private Forces in the American Health Universe -- Chapter 8. Patterns of Making Health Policy in France and the United States -- Chapter 9. Consequences for the Political Activites of Organized Medicine -- Chapter 10. Conclusion -- Appendix A: Glossary of Abbreviations -- Appendix B: Medical Unions and Associations in the French Hospital Sector -- Notes -- References -- Index.

Abstract. The aim of the article is to examine the relationship between the state, democracy and the Carl
Schimitt's concept of the political. That is going to be
done by reconstructing the concepts of Schmitt's political theory and finding out whether they can be used
to explain the ideology of the new right-wing populism
and illiberal democracy. As it turns out, the Schmitt's
reduction of the political to the friend/enemy antagonism makes the core of the illiberal democracies' ruling
narrative. The Schimtt's understanding of the political doesn't defend the state as a political space but by
cancelling of the liberal elements of democracy ruins
the state institutions. The analysis shows that Schmitt's
notion of the political cannot be used to build effective
democratic state institutions. Namely, in his definition
of the political, politics actually exists only on the outwards, towards some other nation, some other political
unity, but not within the state itself.
Keywords: state, the political, Carl Schmitt, illiberal
democracy

Review of the European Institute of the Mediterranean, Barcelona. In early May 2015, Yarmouk's battle was eternised. The Islamic State does not control the entire camp, but remains there. The Aknaf Beit al-Maqdis Brigades, close to Hamas, did not collapse: while some of their activists have in fact initially fled to the regime-owned areas, they remain one of the main forces opposed both to the Syrian regime and to an Islamic State allied to Jabaha an-Nusra. Working with other Syrian opposition forces, including the Islam Army of Zaaran Alloush, the militias close to Hamas are still standing as a political and military force on which to rely in the future. ; International audience ; Review of the European Institute of the Mediterranean, Barcelona. In early May 2015, Yarmouk's battle was eternised. The Islamic State does not control the entire camp, but remains there. The Aknaf Beit al-Maqdis Brigades, close to Hamas, did not collapse: while some of their activists have in fact initially fled to the regime-owned areas, they remain one of the main forces opposed both to the Syrian regime and to an Islamic State allied to Jabaha an-Nusra. Working with other Syrian opposition forces, including the Islam Army of Zaaran Alloush, the militias close to Hamas are still standing as a political and military force on which to rely in the future. ; Revue de l'Institut européen de la Méditerranée, Barcelone. Début mai 2015, la bataille de Yarmouk s'éternise. L'Etat islamique ne contrôle certes pas l'ensemble du camp, mais y demeure encore. Les Brigades Aknaf Beit al-Maqdis, proches du Hamas, ne se sont pas effondrées : si certains de leurs activistes ont effectivement fui, dans un premier temps, vers les zones tenues par le régime, elles n'en demeurent pas moins l'une des principales forces opposées tant au régime syrien qu'à un Etat islamique allié au Jabaha an-Nusra. Collaborant avec d'autres forces armées de l'opposition syrienne, notamment avec l'Armée de l'islam de Zaaran Alloush, les miliciens proches du Hamas s'imposent ...

Iako je demokracija u Izraelu održiva i stabilna, ne odgovara ni jednoj od postojećih zapadnih vrsta demokracije. Izrael je tipično podijeljeno društvo čiji su politički sustav i društvena struktura ostatku svijeta često slabo razumljivi. Ovaj rad predstavlja kratku analizu, utemeljenu na teorijskim okvirima i tipološkome smještaju demokracije koja je u uskoj svezi s društvenim rascjepima izraelskoga društva. U radu se ispituje je li se demokracija u Izraelu razvijala tako da olakša upravljanje društvenim podjelama te jesu li se njome ublažili ili ojačali društveni rascjepi. ; Although democracy in Israel is sustainable and stable, it does not match any of the western types of democracy. Israel is a typical divided society whose political system and social structure do not often make a great deal of sense for the rest of the world. This paper represents a brief analysis, based on theoretical frameworks and typological placement of democracy which is closely connected to social rifts of the Israeli society. The paper investigates if democracy in Israel was being developed in order to facilitates the social divisions management and if it alleviated or strengthened social rifts.

Since a few years the individual has returned to social science debates through their community, societal and national "affiliations". Liberals are opposed to "communitarians" in order to place individuals in the face of power and optimise their rights in modern, complex and multicultural societies. However, the process of political modernisation _ with the formation of the nation state _ had extracted the individual from his or her 'vital' relations in order to place him directly vis-à-vis the State as a citizen, thus replacing loyalty vis_à_vis-à-vis peers with loyalty vis_à_vis the political community and affectivity through rationality as an indicator of progress and empowerment. As for the process of economic modernisation leading to social transformations, it has been accompanied by dichotomic analyses of social relations and modes of solidarity (.). ; Depuis quelques années l'individu reprend sa place dans les débats en sciences sociales à travers ses " appartenances " communautaire, sociétale, nationale. Les libéraux s'opposent aux " communautaristes " pour situer l'individu face au pouvoir et optimiser ses droits dans les sociétés modernes, complexes et multiculturelles. Or le processus de modernisation politique _ avec la formation de l'État_nation _ avait extrait l'individu de ses relations dites primordiales pour le situer directement face à l'État en tant que citoyen, remplaçant ainsi la loyauté vis_à_vis des pairs par la loyauté vis_à_vis de la communauté politique et l'affectivité par la rationalité comme indicateur du progrès et de l'émancipation. Quant au processus de modernisation économique à l'origine de transformations sociales, il s'est accompagné d'analyses dichotomiques des relations sociales et des modes de solidarité (.).