Suchergebnisse

The paper will analyse political strategies deployed for promoting European culture in America. It will compare 'theoretical' goals with 'actual' actions, that is, cultural activities undertaken by the cultural operators in Washington DC, focusing on spreading the achievements of European art in the US. Finally, it will evaluate the activities undertaken within of cultural diplomacy conducted by the EU and its partners. The paper focuses on how policy/policies is/are performed, discursively negotiated and constructed in different political and cultural environment abroad. Effectiveness of various type of actions such as European Month of Culture, European Days, or European Houses, in propagating knowledge about European history of the nations, its culture. The paper investigates strong/weak points of the current state of affairs in implementing the external cultural relations between the EU in the USA, as well as the issue of implementation of the EU's soft power in America. The paper aims to verify the following research hypothesis: The European Union interacts with the US audiences through culture. In line with the EU's capacity and institutional limitations within the sphere of external relations, the EU's cultural diplomacy in the USA is formal, hierarchical and proper, which in effect builds a stable but not deepened intercultural bond. Additionally, a research question was formulated: What kind of intercultural dialogue is being formally conducted between the European Union and the USA through the cultural actions of the EU Delegation?

The EU is promoting cultural relations with Asian countries. While building interpersonal and institutional connections, the EU pays special attention to Japan. The image of the EU and its mutual relations with Japan are generally recognised as predominantly good and trustworthy. This paper will examine the process of building creative/progressive cultural relations between the EU and Japan based on two hypotheses; first: despite the fact that the EU tried to develop cultural relations within Japan, the embassies of the EU Member States are far more active in cultural programs than the EU Delegation; and secondly: the reception of the EU as a historic
and cultural project is rather fragmented (as opposed to being holistic) in Japan. The aim of this research is to analyse, compare, and evaluate both the effort and achievements made by the EU and Japan in the process of building creative cultural relations. The research will demonstrate an analytical approach in the political sciences discipline.

Polityka zagraniczna UE w dziedzinie kultury jest stosunkowo nowym i mało zbadanym obszarem działalności UE. Jej funkcjonowanie określił traktat z Lizbony, nakładając nań kompetencje programująco-inicjatywne oraz reprezentacyjne Wysokiego Przedstawiciela Unii do spraw zagranicznych i bezpieczeństwa (WP), ESDZ oraz delegatur UE. Dyplomację kulturalną UE prowadzą również – na zasadzie partnerstwa z Unią – instytuty kultury państw członkowskich, zarejestrowane w Stowarzyszeniu Narodowych Instytutów Kultury Unii Europejskiej (EUNIC) oraz ich klastry regionalne. Artykuł ma za zadanie prześledzić w trybie analiz ewolucji priorytetów zawartych w relacjach zewnętrznych UE w dziedzinie kultury (a także analiz instytucjonalnych) oraz zweryfikować, czy instrumenty polityczne zastosowane wobec soft power UE są wystarczające dla efektywnego kształtowania wizerunku kulturowego Europy w świecie. Tezą niniejszego artykułu jest twierdzenie, że relacje zewnętrzne UE w sektorze kultury odznaczają się słabą polityką, dlatego nie mają szans osiągnąć fazy dojrzałości, tym samym tworzyć trwałych podstaw do cywilizacyjnego oddziaływania kultury europejskiej, rozumianej w sposób integracyjny, czyli jako realizacja paradygmatu "jedności w różnorodności".

Polityka zagraniczna UE w dziedzinie kultury jest stosunkowo nowym i mało zbadanym obszarem działalności UE. Jej funkcjonowanie określił traktat z Lizbony, nakładając nań kompetencje programująco-inicjatywne oraz reprezentacyjne Wysokiego Przedstawiciela Unii do spraw zagranicznych i bezpieczeństwa (WP), ESDZ oraz delegatur UE. Dyplomację kulturalną UE prowadzą również – na zasadzie partnerstwa z Unią – instytuty kultury państw członkowskich, zarejestrowane w Stowarzyszeniu Narodowych Instytutów Kultury Unii Europejskiej (EUNIC) oraz ich klastry regionalne. Artykuł ma za zadanie prześledzić w trybie analiz ewolucji priorytetów zawartych w relacjach zewnętrznych UE w dziedzinie kultury (a także analiz instytucjonalnych) oraz zweryfikować, czy instrumenty polityczne zastosowane wobec soft power UE są wystarczające dla efektywnego kształtowania wizerunku kulturowego Europy w świecie. Tezą niniejszego artykułu jest twierdzenie, że relacje zewnętrzne UE w sektorze kultury odznaczają się słabą polityką, dlatego nie mają szans osiągnąć fazy dojrzałości, tym samym tworzyć trwałych podstaw do cywilizacyjnego oddziaływania kultury europejskiej, rozumianej w sposób integracyjny, czyli jako realizacja paradygmatu "jedności w różnorodności". ; The EU's foreign policy in the field of culture is a relatively new and under-explored area of the EU activity. Its operation was defined by the Treaty of Lisbon, imposing on it programming and initiative and representation powers of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security (HR), the EEAS and EU Delegations. The EU cultural diplomacy is also conducted – on a partnership basis with the European Union – by the institutes of culture of the member states registered in the Association of National Institutes of European Union (EUNIC) and their regional Clusters. The article aims to follow in the evolution analysis mode the priorities contained in the EU's external relations in the field of culture (as well as institutional analysis) and verify whether the political instruments applied to the EU 'soft power' are sufficient to effectively shape Europe's cultural image in the world. The thesis of this article is that EU external relations in the cultural sector are characterized by poor politics, and therefore have no chance of reaching the maturity phase, thus creating a solid basis for the civilizational impact of European culture, understood in an integrative way, i.e. as the implementation of the "unity in diversity" paradigm.

Polityka zagraniczna UE w dziedzinie kultury jest stosunkowo nowym i mało zbadanym obszarem działalności UE. Jej funkcjonowanie określił traktat z Lizbony, nakładając nań kompetencje programująco-inicjatywne oraz reprezentacyjne Wysokiego Przedstawiciela Unii do spraw zagranicznych i bezpieczeństwa (WP), ESDZ oraz delegatur UE. Dyplomację kulturalną UE prowadzą również – na zasadzie partnerstwa z Unią – instytuty kultury państw członkowskich, zarejestrowane w Stowarzyszeniu Narodowych Instytutów Kultury Unii Europejskiej (EUNIC) oraz ich klastry regionalne. Artykuł ma za zadanie prześledzić w trybie analiz ewolucji priorytetów zawartych w relacjach zewnętrznych UE w dziedzinie kultury (a także analiz instytucjonalnych) oraz zweryfikować, czy instrumenty polityczne zastosowane wobec soft power UE są wystarczające dla efektywnego kształtowania wizerunku kulturowego Europy w świecie. Tezą niniejszego artykułu jest twierdzenie, że relacje zewnętrzne UE w sektorze kultury odznaczają się słabą polityką, dlatego nie mają szans osiągnąć fazy dojrzałości, tym samym tworzyć trwałych podstaw do cywilizacyjnego oddziaływania kultury europejskiej, rozumianej w sposób integracyjny, czyli jako realizacja paradygmatu "jedności w różnorodności". ; The EU's foreign policy in the field of culture is a relatively new and under-explored area of the EU activity. Its operation was defined by the Treaty of Lisbon, imposing on it programming and initiative and representation powers of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security (HR), the EEAS and EU Delegations. The EU cultural diplomacy is also conducted – on a partnership basis with the European Union – by the institutes of culture of the member states registered in the Association of National Institutes of European Union (EUNIC) and their regional Clusters. The article aims to follow in the evolution analysis mode the priorities contained in the EU's external relations in the field of culture (as well as institutional analysis) and verify whether the political instruments applied to the EU 'soft power' are sufficient to effectively shape Europe's cultural image in the world. The thesis of this article is that EU external relations in the cultural sector are characterized by poor politics, and therefore have no chance of reaching the maturity phase, thus creating a solid basis for the civilizational impact of European culture, understood in an integrative way, i.e. as the implementation of the "unity in diversity" paradigm.

The article attempts to answer the question on the role of social and cultural networks of international cooperation in contemporary Europe. The processes of European integration facilitated the creation of networking relations between cultural organs in various member states. The four freedoms of a single market (the free movement of people, goods, services and capital) supported the internationalization and Europeization of public sectors, shaped the cultural exchange and built a European civil society. At least since the 1970s, the European Economic Community/European Union led the policy of encouraging cultural operators to network and assigned European funds to support this goal. At this moment, we deal with nurtured and lasting forms of international cooperation between public entities in Europe. The civil society is also gaining more power. Because of the noticed re-nationalization or the trendy concept of returning to the "Europe of homelands" and countries closing themselves because of economic and political particularities, several research questions are bound to arise. The most crucial one regards the depletion of the apolitical paradigm of civil activities and its possible – unintentional yet inescapable – politicization of the so-called third sector.

The article attempts to answer the question on the role of social and cultural networks of international cooperation in contemporary Europe. The processes of European integration facilitated the creation of networking relations between cultural organs in various member states. The four freedoms of a single market (the free movement of people, goods, services and capital) supported the internationalization and Europeization of public sectors, shaped the cultural exchange and built a European civil society. At least since the 1970s, the European Economic Community/European Union led the policy of encouraging cultural operators to network and assigned European funds to support this goal. At this moment, we deal with nurtured and lasting forms of international cooperation between public entities in Europe. The civil society is also gaining more power. Because of the noticed re-nationalization or the trendy concept of returning to the "Europe of homelands" and countries closing themselves because of economic and political particularities, several research questions are bound to arise. The most crucial one regards the depletion of the apolitical paradigm of civil activities and its possible – unintentional yet inescapable – politicization of the so-called third sector.

The EU is promoting cultural relations with Asian countries. While building interpersonal and institutional connections, the EU pays special attention to Japan. The image of the EU and its mutual relations with Japan are generally recognised as predominantly good and trustworthy. This paper will examine the process of building creative/progressive cultural relations between the EU and Japan based on two hypotheses; fi rst: despite the fact that the EU tried to develop cultural relations within Japan, the embassies of the EU Member States are far more active in cultural programs than the EU Delegation; and secondly: the reception of the EU as a historic and cultural project is rather fragmented (as opposed to being holistic) in Japan. The aim of this research is to analyse, compare, and evaluate both the effort and achievements made by the EU and Japan in the process of building creative cultural relations. The research will demonstrate an analytical approach in the political sciences discipline.

Visions and Revisions of Europe offers a multidisciplinary debate on the various political, social, and cultural issues that are at the heart of contemporary European discourse, with a focus on the relations between the so-called "New" and "Old" Europe. A range of possible scenarios for the future of the EU, as well as a discussion of the factors affecting current crises are at the forefront of the debate, which lead the reader to reflect upon often overlooked aspects of European integration, such as Germany's hegemonic role in the Union, or historical narratives and myths that need to be deconstructed and critically analysed. Contemporary populist movements also play a key role, as do the often difficult processes of migration and EU mobility, which reveal the tensions, fears, and lines of exclusion in contemporary European societies. Finally, the role of values – namely an adherence to human rights and responsibility over the global social order – which in the 1970s was a cornerstone of EU discursive action and identity building, serves as a lasting point of reflection on the uncertain future of the EU's axio-normative direction(s).

This article contains an analysis of the "ECC effect," that is, the long-term change produced in Polish cities by participation in the competition for European Capital of Culture 2016, which lasted in Poland from 2007 to 2011. The authors concentrate on four basic subjects: (1) city identities; (2) city images; (3) the influence of new cultural institutions on the socio-cultural fabric of cities; and (4) the development of cultural policies and the Europeanization of Polish cities. Their findings are based on the research project "The ECC Effect: In Search of New Urban Narratives," which was commissioned by the IMPART Festival Office and conducted in 2016 in 7 of the 11 candidate cities: Gdańsk, Katowice, Lublin, Łódź, Poznań, Szczecin, and Wrocław. The authors claim that the competition for European Capital of Culture indubitably initiated extensive transformation processes in Polish cities. It led to an improvement in their images more openness and internationalization, and to a redefinition of the role of culture in innovative development policies.

Visions and Revisions of Europe offers a multidisciplinary debate on the various political, social, and cultural issues that are at the heart of contemporary European discourse, with a focus on the relations between the so-called "New" and "Old" Europe. A range of possible scenarios for the future of the EU, as well as a discussion of the factors affecting current crises are at the forefront of the debate, which lead the reader to reflect upon often overlooked aspects of European integration, such as Germany's hegemonic role in the Union, or historical narratives and myths that need to be deconstructed and critically analysed. Contemporary populist movements also play a key role, as do the often difficult processes of migration and EU mobility, which reveal the tensions, fears, and lines of exclusion in contemporary European societies. Finally, the role of values – namely an adherence to human rights and responsibility over the global social order – which in the 1970s was a cornerstone of EU discursive action and identity building, serves as a lasting point of reflection on the uncertain future of the EU's axio-normative direction(s).

Europa und die Europäer besteht aus zwei Teilen: Der erste ist einer Analyse des politischen Denkens von Bronislaw Geremek und seines Beitrags zur Neuausrichtung der polnischen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik nach 1989 gewidmet. Gegenstand des zweiten Teils ist dagegen die aktuelle Debatte über die Zukunft der Europäischen Union, die unter anderem das EU-System, seine Werte, die kulturelle Identität, das kollektive Gedächtnis und die grüne Transformation umfasst. Dieser doppelte Ansatz ermöglicht es, die Bedeutung der Figur Geremeks als polnischer Staatsmann, Europäer und Visionär umfassend zu verstehen. Denn Geremek war ein eifriger Befürworter und Förderer des europäischen Einigungsprozesses nach 1989. In seinem Streben nach einem vereinten Europa stützte sich Geremek auf die Ideen französischer Väter der europäischen Integration wie Jean Monnet, Robert Schuman und Jacques Delors. Mit diesem Ansatz reihte er sich in den Kreis der europäischen Föderalisten und Europäer ein. Für ihn bestand die Gründungsaufgabe der Europäischen Union darin, die Grundlagen für eine dauerhafte Friedensordnung in Europa zu schaffen, damit sich der Schrecken des Zweiten Weltkriegs nie wiederholen würde. Als erklärter Europäer betonte er stets den gegenseitigen Nutzen der EU-Erweiterung auf Mitteleuropa - nicht nur für die EU, sondern auch für die Kandidatenländer. Er vertrat die Auffassung, dass der Beitritt Polens und anderer mitteleuropäischer Länder zur EU sowohl auf einem wirtschaftlichen als auch auf einem demokratischen Wandel beruhen sollte, der die Versuchung, ein autoritäres System aufzubauen, ein für alle Mal beseitigen würde