Suchergebnisse

The author pleads for a renewal of political philosophy by asking what it means to think politically again. He also reexamines characteristics in the concept of democracy that renew its weight in relationship to totalitarianism & cannot be reduced to an institutional system. After looking critically at the works of Tocqueville, who -- contrary to most of his contemporaries -- saw democracy as a form of government, the author comes to the conclusion that democracy appears to be a historical social category, par excellence, of a society that, in its form, accepts & maintains undefinability. This is in significant contrast to totalitarianism, which, establishing itself with the slogan of building the new man, in fact acts against this undefinability & tries to conserve the rules of its own organization. Thus, in the contemporary world, totalitarianism manifests itself secretly as a society without history. Adapted from the source document.

If anyone can be considered the creator of American democracy & its most influential promoter, it is Thomas Jefferson. American democracy is deemed Jeffersonian -- rightly & doubly so: Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence (1776), the basic political & constitutional act, but he also inspired, created, & proselytized American democracy all over the world. Tocqueville considered him to be the sturdiest apostle of democracy ever. Jefferson is one of the few scholars & politicians whose belief in the value & the possibilities of democracy never wavered. His political credo

Pojam "centralizacije" počeo se koristiti u Francuskoj krajem 18. stoljeća kada je nakon revolucije stvorena nova struktura vlade. Pojam "decentralizacije" u upotrebu je ušao početkom 19. stoljeća. Ideje slobode i decentralizacije provodili su tijekom 19. i 20. stoljeća protudrţavni politički aktivisti koji su sebe nazivali "anarhistima", "libertarijancima", pa čak i decentralistima. Tocqueville, jedan od zagovornika decentralizacije je istaknuo da decentralizacija ima ne samo administrativnu vrijednost već i graĎansku dimenziju, jer povećava mogućnosti za graĎane da se zainteresiraju za javne poslove. I od akumulacije tih lokalnih, aktivnih, pronicljivih sloboda, raĎa se najučinkovitija protuteţa središnjoj vladi, čak i ako bi bila podrţavana od neosobne, kolektivne volje. Veliki broj zemalja u razvoju i tranzicijskih zemalja započeo je neki oblik programa decentralizacije. Taj je trend povezan sa sve većim zanimanjem za ulogu civilnog društva i privatnog sektora kao partnera vladama u traţenju novih načina pruţanja usluga. Decentralizacija upravljanja i jačanje kapaciteta lokalne uprave dijelom je i funkcija širih društvenih trendova, što uključuje, na primjer, općenito rastuće nepovjerenje u vladu, propast nekih od najcentraliziranijih reţima na svijetu (npr. Sovjetskog Saveza) i novonastale separatističke zahtjeve koji se rutinski pojavljuju u pojedinim dijelovima svijeta. Pokret prema lokalnoj odgovornosti i većoj kontroli nad nečijom sudbinom nije, meĎutim, rezultat samo negativnog stava prema središnjoj vladi. Umjesto toga, ovaj razvoj dogaĎaja uglavnom je potaknut snaţnom ţeljom za većim sudjelovanjem graĎana i organizacije privatnog sektora u funkciji upravljanja. ; The term "centralization" began to be used in France in the late 18th century when, after the revolution, a new government structure was created. The term "decentralization" came into use in the early 19th century. The ideas of freedom and decentralization were implemented during the 19th and 20th centuries by anti-state political activists who called themselves "anarchists," "libertarians," and even decentralizers. Tocqueville, one of the proponents of decentralization, pointed out that decentralization has not only an administrative value but also a civic dimension, as it increases opportunities for citizens to take interest in public affairs. And from the accumulation of these local, active, insightful freedoms, the most effective counterbalance to central government is born, even if it were supported by an impersonal, collective will. A large number of developing and transition countries have embarked on some form of decentralization program. This trend is linked to the growing interest in the role of civil society and the private sector as partners to governments in seeking new ways of providing services. Decentralization of governance and strengthening the capacity of local government is partly a function of broader social trends, which include, for example, growing distrust of government, the collapse of some of the world's most centralized regimes (eg the Soviet Union) and emerging separatist demands that routinely emerge in some parts of the world. The movement towards local responsibility and greater control over one's destiny is not, however, the result of only a negative attitude towards the central government. Instead, this development is largely driven by a strong desire for greater citizen participation and private sector organization in the governance function.

Is Rousseau unquestionably an enemy of political liberalism, as per the famous irrevocable judgment of I. Berlin? In other words, is he a representative of radical (even "totalitarian") democracy, an apologist of popular sovereignty and a vicious plebeian "friend of the people" (of so-called "positive freedom"), who overlooks the importance of negative freedom of individuums and the separation of powers? Are Rousseau as republican political theorist on the one hand and political liberalism on the other advocates not only of different, but opposite perceptions of political freedom? The first part of the paper recalls the fact that Rousseau's political theory is shaped in a deliberate and complete opposition with regard to the physiocratic economic liberalism, which reduces freedom to its economic and legal aspects, and the modern man to a bourgeois. In this Rousseau is very close to Tocqueville, who questions the physiocratic doctrine from the standpoint of political liberalism. The second part provides a concise presentation and evaluation of the critique of Rousseau's political doctrine (of political freedom and popular sovereignty) from the standpoint of B. Constant's classic political liberalism. In the third, final and most important part, the author shows that an adequate comparison of Rousseau's doctrine with the liberal political doctrine must carefully distinguish between the conceptual clusters reflecting affinity (the people and the separation of powers) and the ones reflecting opposition (the people, the law, the general will and the citoyen). On the basis of this distinction, Rousseau turns out to be both frere and ennemi -- i.e. frere ennemi -- of political liberalism, but not of economic liberism as well. Adapted from the source document.

Pojam "centralizacije" počeo se koristiti u Francuskoj krajem 18. stoljeća kada je nakon revolucije stvorena nova struktura vlade. Pojam "decentralizacije" u upotrebu je ušao početkom 19. stoljeća. Ideje slobode i decentralizacije provodili su tijekom 19. i 20. stoljeća protudrţavni politički aktivisti koji su sebe nazivali "anarhistima", "libertarijancima", pa čak i decentralistima. Tocqueville, jedan od zagovornika decentralizacije je istaknuo da decentralizacija ima ne samo administrativnu vrijednost već i graĎansku dimenziju, jer povećava mogućnosti za graĎane da se zainteresiraju za javne poslove. I od akumulacije tih lokalnih, aktivnih, pronicljivih sloboda, raĎa se najučinkovitija protuteţa središnjoj vladi, čak i ako bi bila podrţavana od neosobne, kolektivne volje. Veliki broj zemalja u razvoju i tranzicijskih zemalja započeo je neki oblik programa decentralizacije. Taj je trend povezan sa sve većim zanimanjem za ulogu civilnog društva i privatnog sektora kao partnera vladama u traţenju novih načina pruţanja usluga. Decentralizacija upravljanja i jačanje kapaciteta lokalne uprave dijelom je i funkcija širih društvenih trendova, što uključuje, na primjer, općenito rastuće nepovjerenje u vladu, propast nekih od najcentraliziranijih reţima na svijetu (npr. Sovjetskog Saveza) i novonastale separatističke zahtjeve koji se rutinski pojavljuju u pojedinim dijelovima svijeta. Pokret prema lokalnoj odgovornosti i većoj kontroli nad nečijom sudbinom nije, meĎutim, rezultat samo negativnog stava prema središnjoj vladi. Umjesto toga, ovaj razvoj dogaĎaja uglavnom je potaknut snaţnom ţeljom za većim sudjelovanjem graĎana i organizacije privatnog sektora u funkciji upravljanja. ; The term "centralization" began to be used in France in the late 18th century when, after the revolution, a new government structure was created. The term "decentralization" came into use in the early 19th century. The ideas of freedom and decentralization were implemented during the 19th and 20th centuries by anti-state political activists ...

Demokracija kao pučka vladavina, od svojega nastanka i praktičke provedbe u antičkoj Grčkoj, pa do suvremenog etabliranja kao sakrosanktnog neupitnog svjetskog poretka, vazda je praćena i osmišljavana filozofijskom raščlambom i promišljanjem u djelima najvećih socijalnih i političkih filozofa, od Platona i Aristotela, preko Lockea, Rousseaua, Montesquieua, Tocquevillea, Kanta, Hegela i Milla, do Deweyja i Rawlsa, što Pavo Barišić u svojoj knjizi Ideal vladavine puka. Uvod u filozofiju demokracije sustavno i pregledno dokumentira i kritički razglaba. Uz osvrt na njegova promišljanja razvoja demokracije od antike do suvremenosti, u ovome se prilogu razmatraju razni njezini aspekti i dimenzije u kritičkom dijalogu s filozofima i ostalim teoreticima demokracije, od Platona i Aristotela, do Deweyja, Lippmanna, Poppera, Wintersa i Scholtea – s posebnim naglaskom na perspektive razvoja demokracije u epohi suvremene globalizacije. ; Since its genesis and practical implementation in the ancient Greece, up to its contemporary confirmation as a sacrosanct unquestionable world order, democracy as the rule of the people has always been conceived by philosophical analysis and reflection in the works of the most significant social and political philosophers, from Plato and Aristotle, through Locke, Rousseau, Montesquieu, Tocqueville, Kant, Hegel and Mill, to Dewey and Rawls. This general content of Pavo Barišić's book The Ideal of the Rule of the People: Introduction to the Philosophy of Democracy is in its pages systematically and comprehensively documented and critically discoursed. Reflecting to his consideration of the development of democracy from antiquity to modernity, this paper discusses its various aspects and dimensions, together with the critical dialogue with philosophers and other theoreticians of democracy, from Plato and Aristotle to Dewey, Lippmann, Popper, Winters and Scholte, particularly focusing on the prospects of the development of democracy in the age of contemporary globalization.