Suchergebnisse

Opens a window on the ways in which Russian thinkers have historically considered the political. Political philosophy in Russia has always sought, and sometimes found, a middle way between embracing anarchy and searching for authority. Political philosophy in Russia has never before been the subject of a scholarly monograph. While historical factors make this understandable, the topic deserves our attention more than ever, now that Russia, after a short Soviet century, has regained self-assurance as a world power. Its unique historical trajectory, and the specific role of philosophy in it, are of interest to many fields of research and, beyond that, broader audiences. A focus on political philosophy as it existed and exists in Russia despite periods of marginalisation and suppression, allows us to understand its specific character, importance and relevance, and to realise that, in trying to think philosophically, critically, and reflectively about the political reality that shapes them, Russian thinkers are not essentially different from philosophers elsewhere. Hence, many lessons that can be learned from this subject.

In this paper, an argument is developed in favour of further integration of "Europe" and, most importantly, its increased "politicization". It is not based on any romantic or idealistic vision of a positive European cultural identity, but on an assessment of Europe's reality as already integrated economically, socially and ecologically, however lagging behind politically in terms of democratic government and citizenship. The seemingly endless discussions about Europe's identity, limit, unity, civilization, etc. are not a problem that is yet to be solved, but are, precisely, the core of what makes Europe what it is: a plurality in unity instead of a "unity in plurality", as one of the official slogans of the European Union (EU) has it. Current social, economic and environmental problems require European solutions as well as a more active European citizenship. However, European civil identity that is to match European societal reality, will not be a unitary and homogeneous identity, but heterogeneous and diverse, covering a plurality of perceptions, preferences and ideals ‐ it will be plural, not as a first step towards unity, but in its core; and it will be divided, but not along national lines.

In this paper, an argument is developed in favour of further integration of "Europe" and, most importantly, its increased "politicization". It is not based on any romantic or idealistic vision of a positive European cultural identity, but on an assessment of Europe's reality as already integrated economically, socially and ecologically, however lagging behind politically in terms of democratic government and citizenship. The seemingly endless discussions about Europe's identity, limit, unity, civilization, etc. are not a problem that is yet to be solved, but are, precisely, the core of what makes Europe what it is: a plurality in unity instead of a "unity in plurality", as one of the official slogans of the European Union (EU) has it. Current social, economic and environmental problems require European solutions as well as a moreactiveEuropean citizenship. However, European civil identity that is to match European societal reality, will not be a unitary and homogeneous identity, but heterogeneous and diverse, covering a plurality of perceptions, preferences and ideals ‐ it will beplural, not as a first step towards unity, but in its core; and it will bedivided, but not along national lines. Vieningumo pliuralumas: europietiškasis tapatumas ir europietiškasis pilietiškumas Santrauka.Tolesnė "Europos" integracija ir svarbiausia – vis dažnesnės "politinės diskusijos" šia tema yra remiamos ir skatinamos. Vadovaujamasi ne romantine ar idealistine pozityvaus europietiškojo tapatumo vizija, bet Europos ekonominės, socialinės ir ekologinės integracijos vertinimu bei požiūriu, esą ji politiškai atsilieka demokratinio valdymo ir pilietiškumo atžvilgiais. Tariamai nesibaigiančios diskusijos Europos tapatumo, ribų, vieningumo, civilizacijos ir panašiais klausimais nėra ta problema, kuri jau turi būti išspręsta, bet iš esmės sudaro tokios Europos, kokia ji yra, pagrindą: vieningumo pliuralumas vietoj "pliuralumo vieningumo", kaip skelbia vienas iš oficialių Europos Sąjungos (ES) lozungų. Nūdienės socialinės, ekonominės ir ...

In this paper, an argument is developed in favour of further integration of "Europe" and, most importantly, its increased "politicization". It is not based on any romantic or idealistic vision of a positive European cultural identity, but on an assessment of Europe's reality as already integrated economically, socially and ecologically, however lagging behind politically in terms of democratic government and citizenship. The seemingly endless discussions about Europe's identity, limit, unity, civilization, etc. are not a problem that is yet to be solved, but are, precisely, the core of what makes Europe what it is: a plurality in unity instead of a "unity in plurality", as one of the official slogans of the European Union (EU) has it. Current social, economic and environmental problems require European solutions as well as a moreactiveEuropean citizenship. However, European civil identity that is to match European societal reality, will not be a unitary and homogeneous identity, but heterogeneous and diverse, covering a plurality of perceptions, preferences and ideals ‐ it will beplural, not as a first step towards unity, but in its core; and it will bedivided, but not along national lines. Vieningumo pliuralumas: europietiškasis tapatumas ir europietiškasis pilietiškumas Santrauka Tolesnė "Europos" integracija ir svarbiausia – vis dažnesnės "politinės diskusijos" šia tema yra remiamos ir skatinamos. Vadovaujamasi ne romantine ar idealistine pozityvaus europietiškojo tapatumo vizija, bet Europos ekonominės, socialinės ir ekologinės integracijos vertinimu bei požiūriu, esą ji politiškai atsilieka demokratinio valdymo ir pilietiškumo atžvilgiais. Tariamai nesibaigiančios diskusijos Europos tapatumo, ribų, vieningumo, civilizacijos ir panašiais klausimais nėra ta problema, kuri jau turi būti išspręsta, bet iš esmės sudaro tokios Europos, kokia ji yra, pagrindą: vieningumo pliuralumas vietoj "pliuralumo vieningumo", kaip skelbia vienas iš oficialių Europos Sąjungos (ES) lozungų. Nūdienės socialinės, ekonominės ir aplinkosaugos problemos reikalauja europietiškų sprendimų ir kur kas aktyvesnio europietiškojo pilietiškumo. Tačiau norint, kad europietiškasis pilietinis tapatumas atitiktų europietiškąją socialinę tikrovę, jis neturi būti bendras ir homogeniškas, bet, atvirkščiai, heterogeniškas ir įvairialypis, apimantis daugelį suvokimo perspektyvų, privilegijų ir idealų. Jis turi būti pliuralus, bet ne kaip pirmas žingsnis vieningumo link; jis turi būti iš esmės dalus, tačiau ne pagal valstybių sienas. Reikšminiai žodžiai: pilietiškumas, "civilizacionalizmas", diskursyvi erdvė, europietiškoji integracija, tapatumas, pliuralumas. First Published Online: 14 Oct 2010

"Nach einer säkularen Periode im 20. Jahrhundert spielt Religion in der Politik wieder eine wichtige Rolle. Das Verhältnis von Politik und Religion und von Staat und Kirche ist komplex und asymmetrisch. Die Spannung zwischen beiden Dimensionen und Institutionen lässt sich immer nur vorläufig lösen. Ein Sonderfall dieses Spannungsverhältnisses kommt in Grundprinzipien der ostkirchlichen politischen Theologie wie Cäsaropapismus und symphonia zum Ausdruck. Aus orthodoxer Sicht sind diese Prinzipien Gegensätze, beide aber schließen Gesellschaft als unabhängigen dritten Bereich zwischen Staat und Kirche aus und stehen damit im Gegensatz zur westlichen Tradition." (Autorenreferat)