Suchergebnisse

The article addresses issues related to the growing importance of non-governmental organizations & social movements in world politics. The key question that the article deals with is whether there are structures of global political activism in the making? In other words, is a "global civil society" being constituted? If yes, how does this "global civil society" relate to local actors? Are global actors partners in the building of local activism? In addition, how do the actors of the "global civil society" relate to states? Do they transcend the confines of the state? In order to answer these questions, the article first describes the evolving debate around the issue of transnational relations. During the last decade this issue has become an important research problem in at least two social scientific disciplines -the theory of international relations & the theory of collective action. Moreover, the attention paid to transnational social movements & net-works of non-governmental organizations has influenced debates in certain fields of political theory where actors described as "global civil society" came to be perceived as the manifestation of reformist hopes associated with globally organized civic activism. This activism is believed to hold the promise of future global democratization. In sum, the issue of transnational relations & transnational political action is an interdisciplinary problem. The aim of this article is to answer the specified questions above. It reflects the most important aspects of the debate on transnational political action. The ambition of the article is to critically assess both empirically oriented approaches & normatively motivated explorations of the possibilities for global democratization through political involvement of transnational movements & non-governmental organizations. The paper maintains that the concept of "global civil society" is applicable for the description of political action "beyond borders" only under the condition that it is not understood as an alternative to the institutions of the modern state & that it is not used in an ideological way. References. Adapted from the source document.

The theme is crucial to the concrete question, whether moravian identity really exists. It´s about phenomena which is natural and important for some parts of population or on the other hand we can see this identity as the artificial problem. The main goal is connecting with results from the field work. I would like to explain something about moravian political elites according to the non-political activism. It´s also necessary to mark historical processes which are important for present time. The polemic should have done some reflexive view on regionalism, activation of moravian elites and civic movements. ; The theme is crucial to the concrete question, whether moravian identity really exists. It´s about phenomena which is natural and important for some parts of population or on the other hand we can see this identity as the artificial problem. The main goal is connecting with results from the field work. I would like to explain something about moravian political elites according to the non-political activism. It´s also necessary to mark historical processes which are important for present time. The polemic should have done some reflexive view on regionalism, activation of moravian elites and civic movements.

Regardless of the role religion plays in the world today, ie despite the significant deprivatization of faith in the sociocultural space & in politics, contemporary Czech sociology of religion is in rather poor shape. The author presents a number of factors to explain this, including the legacy of the communist regime, & low levels of church attendance in the Czech Republic, the latter having been erroneously interpreted as non-religiosity. But the author focuses mainly one other reason: the discordant legacy of Czech pre-communist sociology of religion & the neighboring field of social studies. Two different traditions of the subject are identified - the 'profane' sociology of religion, founded by T. G. Masaryk, & Catholic religious sociology. Although the former legacy declared itself non-religious & even anti-clerical, in the case of many of its followers this claim was only partially true. In the 1930s & 1940s, when they (especially Prague's sociological school, which formed a certain opposition to Masaryk) turned more toward Durkheimian attitudes, they emphasized, for example, their own religious experience as a necessary tool for understanding piety. On the other hand, Catholic religious sociology was closely related to church activism, policy, & contemporary social work, ie, strictly conservative & anti-modern. Its way of understanding modern society was discounted by the former group of scholars, though to at least some degree, the two legacies shared similar methodological approaches. Both certainly seem outdated today, but their theoretical & methodological discussions & their findings remain of importance. Consequently, a re-thinking of these legacies & their theoretical backgrounds is still significant for the sociology of religion today.