Suchergebnisse

Discurs de presentació a la signatura del conveni Generalitat-universitats per a víctimes de violència de gènere, pronunciat pel rector de la UOC, Josep A. Planell al Palau de la Generalitat, Barcelona. ; Discurso de presentación en la firma del convenio Generalitat-universidades para víctimas de violencia de género, pronunciado por el rector de la UOC, Josep A. Planell en el Palau de la Generalitat, Barcelona. ; Opening speech of the UOC at the signing of the Government of Catalonia¿Universities agreement for the victims of gender-based violence, held by the president, Josep A. Planell at Palau de la Generalitat, Barcelona.

Following the case of the disappearance of the 43 Ayotzinapa students, the Pandora's Box was opened: pits filled with bodies, corruption, impunity and institutional weakness of a state where politicians, police and authorities at all three government levels have been infiltrated by the organized crime. In Mexico, corruption and drug trafficking are common and the economic reforms are not enough if they do not go together with an effective program of combating corruption and the society is not the main beneficiary of the reforms.This article will explain the background of the Ayotzinapa case, the characteristics of the Mexican political system that allow cases like Ayotzinapa, the consequences of the fight against organized crime launched by ex-President Felipe Calderon, the behavior of a sleeping civil society tired of the reduced economic results and where the state does not have the monopoly of the authority and does not guarantee security.

Following the case of the disappearance of the 43 Ayotzinapa students, the Pandora's Box was opened: pits filled with bodies, corruption, impunity and institutional weakness of a state where politicians, police and authorities at all three government levels have been infiltrated by the organized crime. In Mexico, corruption and drug trafficking are common and the economic reforms are not enough if they do not go together with an effective program of combating corruption and the society is not the main beneficiary of the reforms.This article will explain the background of the Ayotzinapa case, the characteristics of the Mexican political system that allow cases like Ayotzinapa, the consequences of the fight against organized crime launched by ex-President Felipe Calderon, the behavior of a sleeping civil society tired of the reduced economic results and where the state does not have the monopoly of the authority and does not guarantee security.

JOVES, GÈNERE I VIOLÈNCIES: FEM NOSTRA LA PREVENCIÓ GUIA DE SUPORT PER A LA FORMACIÓ DE PROFESSIONALS -- LEGAL -- SUMARI -- AGRAÏMENTS -- PRÓLEG -- 1. INTRODUCCIÓ -- PRIMERA PART -- SEGONA PART -- BIBLIOGRAFIA -- MATERIALS PEDAGÒGICS -- BIOGRAFIES DE LES AUTORES -- CAPÍTULO 2. -- CAPÍTULO 3. -- CAPÍTULO 4. -- CAPÍTULO 5. -- SESSIÓ A: -- SESSIÓ B: -- SESSIÓ C: -- SESSIÓ D

Na poziom uprzedzeń i ksenofobii w społeczeństwach wpływa nie tyle liczba imigrantów, którzy mieszkają w danym kraju, a raczej poczucie zagrożenia, jakie panuje w danym społeczeństwie przed napływem imigrantów. Stąd poziom uprzedzeń jest wyższy w tych społeczeństwach, które są bardziej homogeniczne. Potwierdzają to wyniki badań nad polskimi uprzedzeniami w stosunku do muzułmanów czy ogólnie wobec imigrantów. Badania kryminologiczne pokazują silny związek między ksenofobicznymi postawami rodziny sprawców a popełnianiem przez nich czynów na tle uprzedzeń. Sprawcami tych czynów są przede wszystkim działający w grupie młodzi mężczyźni (poniżej 25 lat), a podstawowymi motywacjami ich czynów jest poszukiwanie wrażeń (połączone ze spożyciem alkoholu) czy też specyficznie rozumiana próba ochrony społeczeństwa przed napływem Obcych. Ważnym motorem działań sprawców jest także przekonanie, że za pokrzywdzonymi nikt się nie ujmie – ani policja, ani społeczeństwo. The level of biases and xenophobic attitudes in a society is influenced mostly by the fear towards immigrants and their influx instead of the real number of immigrants residing in a particular country. That's why the level of bias towards the Others is much higher in homogeneous societies. The results of Polish opinion polls research on bias attitudes of our society towards Muslims or immigrants echo these findings. In the criminological research we find strong relations between xenophobic attitudes of the family of the perpetrator and acts of bias violence committed by the latter. Biased crimes are usually committed by young males (under 25 years old), and the main motivation of their actions is either thrill (usually connected with the consumption of alcohol) or specifically understood defence of their community from the Others and their presence. An important factor of the perpetrators' behaviour is also the conviction that no one will stand up for the victims, neither the police, nor the society.

This article analyses the Brexit debate within the UK. It examines the historical roots of the debate from 1973 when the UK joined the European Economic Community, but focuses primarily on the debates that occurred between 2013 when David Cameron pledged to hold a referendum up and the 2019 UK General Election. Section one briefly introduces the topic. Section two examines the rise of social hatred during the referendum campaign. It focuses on the history of British euro-scepticism, the immediate context of the Brexit campaign, concerns over UK sovereignty and immigration, and the increasing use of threats and political violence. Section three examines the decline of trust in politics due to the increasing failure to challenge lies in the Brexit debate. It explores the idea of "Project Fear", the anti-expert narrative, and the anti-elitism narrative. Section four asks what this period tells us about UK democracy. It focuses on weak and disorderly government, the democratic status of the referendum, the erosion of trust in parliamentary institutions and mechanisms, and some reasons for (limited) optimism. The article concludes by considering possible ways forward for the UK government and polity following the decisive Conservative victory in the 2019 UK General Election. ; This article analyses the Brexit debate within the UK. It examines the historical roots of the debate from 1973 when the UK joined the European Economic Community, but focuses primarily on the debates that occurred between 2013 when David Cameron pledged to hold a referendum up and the 2019 UK General Election. Section one briefly introduces the topic. Section two examines the rise of social hatred during the referendum campaign. It focuses on the history of British euro-scepticism, the immediate context of the Brexit campaign, concerns over UK sovereignty and immigration, and the increasing use of threats and political violence. Section three examines the decline of trust in politics due to the increasing failure to challenge lies in the Brexit debate. It explores the idea of "Project Fear", the anti-expert narrative, and the anti-elitism narrative. Section four asks what this period tells us about UK democracy. It focuses on weak and disorderly government, the democratic status of the referendum, the erosion of trust in parliamentary institutions and mechanisms, and some reasons for (limited) optimism. The article concludes by considering possible ways forward for the UK government and polity following the decisive Conservative victory in the 2019 UK General Election.

This article analyses the Brexit debate within the UK. It examines the historical roots of the debate from 1973 when the UK joined the European Economic Community, but focuses primarily on the debates that occurred between 2013 when David Cameron pledged to hold a referendum up and the 2019 UK General Election. Section one briefly introduces the topic. Section two examines the rise of social hatred during the referendum campaign. It focuses on the history of British euro-scepticism, the immediate context of the Brexit campaign, concerns over UK sovereignty and immigration, and the increasing use of threats and political violence. Section three examines the decline of trust in politics due to the increasing failure to challenge lies in the Brexit debate. It explores the idea of "Project Fear", the anti-expert narrative, and the anti-elitism narrative. Section four asks what this period tells us about UK democracy. It focuses on weak and disorderly government, the democratic status of the referendum, the erosion of trust in parliamentary institutions and mechanisms, and some reasons for (limited) optimism. The article concludes by considering possible ways forward for the UK government and polity following the decisive Conservative victory in the 2019 UK General Election. ; This article analyses the Brexit debate within the UK. It examines the historical roots of the debate from 1973 when the UK joined the European Economic Community, but focuses primarily on the debates that occurred between 2013 when David Cameron pledged to hold a referendum up and the 2019 UK General Election. Section one briefly introduces the topic. Section two examines the rise of social hatred during the referendum campaign. It focuses on the history of British euro-scepticism, the immediate context of the Brexit campaign, concerns over UK sovereignty and immigration, and the increasing use of threats and political violence. Section three examines the decline of trust in politics due to the increasing failure to challenge lies in the Brexit debate. It explores the idea of "Project Fear", the anti-expert narrative, and the anti-elitism narrative. Section four asks what this period tells us about UK democracy. It focuses on weak and disorderly government, the democratic status of the referendum, the erosion of trust in parliamentary institutions and mechanisms, and some reasons for (limited) optimism. The article concludes by considering possible ways forward for the UK government and polity following the decisive Conservative victory in the 2019 UK General Election.

The aim of this article is to present the course of the Velvet Revolution in Slovakia in the period from 17 to 29 November 1989 and to show the similarities and differences between the two movements: Civic Forum and Society Against Violence. The study is based on several assumptions. Unlike the Civic Forum in the Czech Republic, the Society Against Violence was a broad movement with a very decentralised structure, led by individuals who had no organisational experience. Secondly, the main goal of the Society Against Violence was to control power and thus it was more of a civic initiative than a political one. Thirdly, a number of differences between the Civic Forum and the Society Against Violence determined the fact that it was not possible to create a single Czechoslovak political elite. In the study, the comparative method was applied in order to indicate similarities and differences between the Civic Forum and the Society Against Violence. To analyse the political reality in Slovakia in November 1989, the decision analysis method was applied. The article uses archival materials, documents and scientific studies.

Terrorism is defined as use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to indulge fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, social or religious. Bioterrorism is terrorism by intentional release or dissemination of biological agents, mainly bacteria or viruses. Use of biological weapons is attractive from the terrorists' point of view because of low production costs, major range and easiness of transmission. The first mention of the use of primitive biological weapons date back to the 6th century. Use of plague-infested corpses as offensive means in the 14th century caused a spread of bubonic plague through the whole Europe. The biggest development of biological weapons took place in the interwar period and in the cold war era. Biological weapon trails and research were conducted by super powers such as USSR, UK, USA and Japan. At the beginning of the 20th century a new form of bioterrorism occurred, which put humanity in the face of a terrifying threat.

Leave the violence is possible by gender perspectives, ie by working with myself and those around us, work based on the legacy of decades and decades of thoughts and practices of women who were sensitive, and at the same time demands, to the individual and collective experiences of social domination and subjugation that women have suffered only by the fact of being. These women whisper to us like sirens and make us question the more unquestionable than ever we have raised in our everyday lives, and so often we have believed and followed blindly, without reason or sense