Suchergebnisse

In this article, I will try to open a new discussion on the intersection between Gramsci and Foucault. First of all I will try to identify if these two authors could be used together in order to analyze the power relations in a society, by discussing some of the most important contributions on this subject. I will identify the points of intersection and the points of tension between the two authors, in order to find the best way to combine the theories of hegemony and governmentality. The main goal of the article is to find if the two theories can be compatible and how they could work together in order to obtain a better understanding of the power relations. Gramsci could offer a better tool to analyze the institutional context, the role of the social classes and the way in which the interest of the classes are build. By using the concept of governmentality one can analyze the way in which the techniques of power are working and which rationalities contribute to the change of human behavior.

The author tackles the controversial problem of the relation between theory and ideology in Karl Marx's and Friedrich Engels' political writings. The article is structured into two main parts: the first one is focused on Marx's vision of a revolutionary intellectual as a base for the development of both theory and ideology. The second one deals with Marx's posterity, as it was established by the contribution of Friedrich Engels.

The paper explores the merits of Protagoras' view of politics as a possible intellectual source of the post-communist theory of democracy. Unbeknownst to themselves, Romanian politicians and political scientist tend to understand the function of politics in the footsteps of Plato and Lenin, as an art, or science of leadership. Interested mainly in the effectiveness of government, they give no significant heed to the issue of rights and liberties. The great discourse of Protagoras of Abdera could supply, in a normative way, the conceptual tools for a different approach to politics, as a pedagogical rhetoric of legal and political equality.

This article justifies the role and importance of the separation of powers in modern society and in the state, consisting in the fact that this concept is the instrument of restricting the state power to protect the rights and interests of the person. As a rule, the separation of powers is opposed to the concepts of autocracy, the concentration of power in the hands of one person or one organ. The author recognizes the theory of separation of powers as being ideologically linked to the political legacy of Locke and Montesquieu and notes that the genesis of the theory of separation of powers is associated with the emergence of bourgeois political and legal theories, especially in the 17th century in England, D. Locke being the most authoritative political thinker. However, this theory received a classic formulation in the writings of the remarkable French philosopher, lawyer and illuminator Charles Louis Montesquieu. In this article, the characteristics of the original theories regarding the separation of powers of these prominent thinkers, who completed for the first time the concept of a democratically organized state with the optimal organization of the system of organs of state power, are subject to analysis

The international academic community is currently exploring the development of the intelligence studies domain as a social science project. The current position paper argues for a project to connect, in content terms, the Romanian political science with the domain of intelligence studies. It takes into account the international and local context, and presents some of the benefits to be generated by the intersection of these two domains.

Political behavior research starts from the assumption that democracy cannot function properly without citizens' political involvement. In general, studies of political activism aim to understand democratic processes, focusing on the nature of the relationship between citizens and public authorities. Despite a relatively large number of studies devoted to this research topic, many controversies remain regarding political participation in contemporary democracies. What is the optimal level of political engagement in a democracy and the consequences, how do citizens get involved in political processes, and what factors best explain the differences between participants and non-participants, respectively? These questions guide the study of the relationship between political participation and democracy in the present book.