Suchergebnisse

Predmet doktorske disertacije je problem konstituisanja političkog tela u demokratskim teorijama. Ovaj se problem u savremenoj analitičkoj političkoj teoriji uobičajeno razmatra kao problem ograničenja demosa, odnosno pitanje kako je moguće demokratski ograničiti demos, dok se u kontinentalnoj političkoj teoriji pre razmatra kao pitanje konstituisanja demosa odnosno kao jedan od paradoksa politike i demokratije. Metodološki se rad priklanja drugom načinu razmatranja ovog pitanja. Zastupam stanovište da je demokratsko konstituisanje demosa logički nerešiv problem te da, umesto pokušaja da se on trajno reši, treba razotkriti paradokse utemeljivačkih priča i hronični nedostatak legitimnosti na ma koji način ograničenog političkog tela. Produktivnije je misliti o načinima da se početne nepravde prema isključenima isprave ili ublaže i da se sastav političkog tela (demosa) naknadno legitimiše demokratskim rekonstituisanjem. Tvrdi se da se političko telo može demokratski rekonstituisati putem ne samo izvanrednih već i svakodnevnih političkih momenata tokom kojih se pregovaraju i osporavaju veze između narodnog suvereniteta i ljudskih prava. Takve situacije osporavanja i pregovaranja su one kada se obnavlja članstvo starim članovima ili priznaje članstvo novim članovima, o čemu se obično misli kao o kompozicionoj dimenziji demosa koja odgovara na pitanje ko je pasivni član, odnosno gde su spoljašnje granice političkog tela. Postoje takođe i situacije redefinisanja političkog identiteta i pokretanja kolektivne akcije što je način da se razmotri performativna dimenzija demosa odnosno unutrašnje granice političkog tela - ko može biti aktivni član i koliki je jaz između demosa i političkog tela. Performativna dimenzija demosa fokusira se na načine na koje demos zahteva priznanje da je demos i istovremeno proizvodi, otelotvoruje sebe, kao političko telo u nastajanju. ; The topic of this doctoral dissertation is the problem of constitution of the body politic in democratic theories. In contemporary analytic political theory this problem has been most commonly dealt with as the boundary problem that asks how to delimit the demos democratically, but in continental political theory it is rather considered as an issue of constitution of the demos and as one of the political and democratic paradoxes. This study has embraced the second methodological approach in tackling this issue. I contend that the original constitution of the demos by democratic means is logically impossible so instead of a quest for a permanent solution of this problem, the paradoxes of the stories of founding as well as chronic legitimacy deficit of any bounded bodies politic should be exposed. It is more productive to rethink the ways to remedy or mitigate the initial injustices committed toward the excluded from the demos and to legitimize the recomposition of the body politic (demos) via subsequent democratic reconstitution. It is argued that political body can be democratically reconstituted not just during extraordinary but also during ordinary, everyday political moments, when relations between popular sovereignty and human rights are negotiated and contested. The opportunities for these contestations and negotiations are situations of restoration of membership for the old members and recognition of membership to the new members, usually understood as situations addressing the compositional dimension of demos that responds to the question who is the passive member, and where should the external boundaries of the demos be drawn. But there are also situations when political identity can be redefined, especially when collective action is initiated, opportunities when performative dimension of the demos is activated, and which informs us about struggles concerning the internal boundaries of the demos - who can be an active member and how deep is the gap between the demos and the body politic. Performative account of the demos focus on the ways in which the demos demands recognition as the demos and at the same time enacts itself as an emerging body politic.

The topic of this doctoral dissertation is the problem of constitution of the body politic in democratic theories. In contemporary analytic political theory this problem has been most commonly dealt with as the boundary problem that asks how to delimit the demos democratically, but in continental political theory it is rather considered as an issue of constitution of the demos and as one of the political and democratic paradoxes. This study has embraced the second methodological approach in tackling this issue. I contend that the original constitution of the demos by democratic means is logically impossible so instead of a quest for a permanent solution of this problem, the paradoxes of the stories of founding as well as chronic legitimacy deficit of any bounded bodies politic should be exposed. It is more productive to rethink the ways to remedy or mitigate the initial injustices committed toward the excluded from the demos and to legitimize the recomposition of the body politic (demos) via subsequent democratic reconstitution. It is argued that political body can be democratically reconstituted not just during extraordinary but also during ordinary, everyday political moments, when relations between popular sovereignty and human rights are negotiated and contested. The opportunities for these contestations and negotiations are situations of restoration of membership for the old members and recognition of membership to the new members, usually understood as situations addressing the compositional dimension of demos that responds to the question who is the passive member, and where should the external boundaries of the demos be drawn. But there are also situations when political identity can be redefined, especially when collective action is initiated, opportunities when performative dimension of the demos is activated, and which informs us about struggles concerning the internal boundaries of the demos - who can be an active member and how deep is the gap between the demos and the body politic. Performative account of the demos focus on the ways in which the demos demands recognition as the demos and at the same time enacts itself as an emerging body politic. ; Predmet doktorske disertacije je problem konstituisanja političkog tela u demokratskim teorijama. Ovaj se problem u savremenoj analitičkoj političkoj teoriji uobičajeno razmatra kao problem ograničenja demosa, odnosno pitanje kako je moguće demokratski ograničiti demos, dok se u kontinentalnoj političkoj teoriji pre razmatra kao pitanje konstituisanja demosa odnosno kao jedan od paradoksa politike i demokratije. Metodološki se rad priklanja drugom načinu razmatranja ovog pitanja. Zastupam stanovište da je demokratsko konstituisanje demosa logički nerešiv problem te da, umesto pokušaja da se on trajno reši, treba razotkriti paradokse utemeljivačkih priča i hronični nedostatak legitimnosti na ma koji način ograničenog političkog tela. Produktivnije je misliti o načinima da se početne nepravde prema isključenima isprave ili ublaže i da se sastav političkog tela (demosa) naknadno legitimiše demokratskim rekonstituisanjem. Tvrdi se da se političko telo može demokratski rekonstituisati putem ne samo izvanrednih već i svakodnevnih političkih momenata tokom kojih se pregovaraju i osporavaju veze između narodnog suvereniteta i ljudskih prava. Takve situacije osporavanja i pregovaranja su one kada se obnavlja članstvo starim članovima ili priznaje članstvo novim članovima, o čemu se obično misli kao o kompozicionoj dimenziji demosa koja odgovara na pitanje ko je pasivni član, odnosno gde su spoljašnje granice političkog tela. Postoje takođe i situacije redefinisanja političkog identiteta i pokretanja kolektivne akcije što je način da se razmotri performativna dimenzija demosa odnosno unutrašnje granice političkog tela - ko može biti aktivni član i koliki je jaz između demosa i političkog tela. Performativna dimenzija demosa fokusira se na načine na koje demos zahteva priznanje da je demos i istovremeno proizvodi, otelotvoruje sebe, kao političko telo u nastajanju.

Autor se bavi odnosima Sjedinjenih Država i Venezuele zaključno sa aktuelnom‎ predsedničkom krizom ne bi li odgovorio na pitanje kako i zašto je Venezuela‎ postala problem za spoljnu politiku SAD koji zahteva pojačanu pažnju‎ i radikalne mere. Analiza ovih odnosa u toku 20. veka pokazuje da su oni zasnovani‎ na naftnoj međuzavisnosti dveju država. Kada je krajem veka višedecenijsko‎ loše upravljanje naftnim bogatstvom u Venezueli izazvalo društvenu‎ i ekonomsku krizu koja je dovela na vlast Huga Cháveza, spremnog da koristi‎ prihode od nafte protiv interesa regionalne hegemonije SAD, ove su Venezuelu‎ označile kao problem. Američki establišment je prema tom problemu nastupio‎ oportunistički – naftna međuzavisnost je sprečavala da sukob eskalira‎ sve dok aktuelna ekonomsko-politička kriza u Venezueli nakon Chávezove‎ smrti nije dala Washingtonu priliku za konačni obračun sa režimom, po cenu‎ privremenog prekida u trgovini naftom. Godinu i po dana od izbijanja predsednička‎ kriza u Venezueli još nije razrešena, jer se čavistički režim održao, a‎ SAD odustale od vojne intervencije, pa autor nastoji da ukaže na perspektive‎ problema i mogućnosti njegovog prevazilaženja nakon što tekuća pandemija‎ korona virusa bude obuzdana.‎ ; The author deals with the United States and Venezuela relations up to the‎ current presidential crisis, in order to answer how and why Venezuela became‎ a problem for U.S. foreign policy which requires increased attention‎ and radical measures. The analysis of these relations during the 20th century‎ shows that they were based on oil interdependence of the two states.‎ When a decades-long mismanagement of oil riches in Venezuela at the end‎ of the century caused a social and economic crisis that brought to power‎ Hugo Chávez, who was ready to use oil revenues against U.S. regional hegemonic‎ interests, it marked Venezuela as a problem. American establishment‎ treated the problem with opportunism – oil interdependence prevented‎ the conflict from escalating until the current economic and political crisis in‎ Venezuela after the death of Chávez gave Washington an opportunity for the‎ final clash with the regime at the price of a temporary break in the oil trade.‎ A year and a half after the presidential crisis in Venezuela erupted, it has not‎ been resolved yet, for the chavista regime remained in place, while the U.S. gave up on military intervention. The author points to the perspectives of the‎ problem and the possibilities of its overcoming once the current coronavirus‎ pandemic gets contained.‎

The new security paradigm of the modern world, created in 1990s, led to a security organization of a number of countries of the former Soviet bloc. Also evolving, at varying pace, was the contractual relationship of collective security, which, due to the escalation of activities of extremist groups on the territory of Central Asia, the deterioration of Russia-NATO relations, as well as the emergence of the US military bases in the region, resulted in a decision to form the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) in 2002. The basic declared purpose of the organization is a desire of the signatory countries to increase the effectiveness of their cooperation in the field of security. Established as a typical military alliance with characteristics of multifunctional organization for securing peace, CSTO aspires to the role of a regional leading organization in the field of security cooperation, with many open questions concerning its functioning and future development. Whether the new security organization raises the level of collective security of its associate member countries, and whether the said organization contributes to the security of the region and the world, only time ahead will tell.

International pressure prevented Croatia from ending the occupation of eastern Slavonia by military means. The author claims that the policy of peaceful integration and the UNTAES mandate are rife with risks which might jeopardize the eventual Croatian control of that region. He points out a set of contentious issues related to the occupied territory: the incomplete demilitarization, dual government (parallel UNTAES and Serbian authorities), no return for the non-Serbian refugees, staying on of the Serbs from other parts of Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia. Particularly risky for Croatia are the efforts of the local Serbs to retain absolute ethnic majority as the grounds for establishing territorial autonomy which would enable the militant accolytes of Greater Serbian politics to remain in the region and push for the secession and annexation by Serbia, the efforts which would in all probability be given military support by Serbia, this time under the circumstances which would be much more unfavourable for Croatia than in 1995. The author concludes that for Croatia the only acceptable solution is the total integration of eastern Slavonia and the establishment of full Croatian sovereignty while the creation of a Serbian autonomous province in that region must on no account be permitted. (SOI: PM: S. 188)

The subject matter of research in this paper is theoretical controversy related to the definition of right-wing extremism. Given the fact that extremism is a variable, amorphous and insufficiently researched phenomenon, largely conditioned by time, space, political and cultural differences, there is a great confusion in the field of political science when defining right-wing extremism. The problem of researching right-wing extremism is additionally complicated by various terms that are being used in the contemporary literature as its synonyms, such as right-wing radicalism, neo-Fascism, ultra-radicalism, etc. In order to provide the most valid theoretical determination of right-wing extremism, the author provides a detailed analysis of all the components constituting this phenomenon and examines their causality. In the political praxis, the term extremism is extensively abused, which additionally complicates its determination. Videlicet, politicians often use term 'extremist' in order to discredit their political opponents. While during the French revolution aristocracy saw the bourgeoisie as extremists, the members of the working class later stated that the bourgeoisie were extremists. The problem lies in the fact that, in politics, extremists are not only the ones who use violence as modus operandi; indeed, it is also used by political opponents who do not belong to the extreme political option. Another aggravating factor in defining right-wing extremism is that many administrative and academic definitions do not make a clear distinction between extremism and related phenomena, such as terrorism, radicalism and populism. Extremism is most often equaled with terrorism, which gives rise to another problem in defining this phenomenon. The relation between extremism and terrorism is the relation of general and specific. Namely, every act of terrorism is concurrently considered to be an act of extremism, but not vice versa, given the fact that every act of extremism does not lead towards a higher level of political violence (i.e. towards terrorism). Even in the terms of legal sanctioning, it is much easier to incriminate terrorism in comparison to extremism. The Serbian criminal legislation envisages relevant punishment for committing an act of terrorism, without even mentioning extremism, which implies that there is no penalty prescribed for committing an act of extremism. Despite numerous academic and administrative definitions on the concept of extremism, there is still a lack of a balanced approach to defining right-wing extremism, which is also largely conditioned by political definitions. The most prominent problem in addressing the social phenomena such as right-wing extremism lies in the fact that these social phenomena are dynamic and, in order to be analysed in a scientifically objective manner, they must be examined in the specific temporal, spatial and socio-political context.

This article presents a brief and critical review of current research of political representation of women. Is the number of women in political institutions represents the indicator of development of democratic society and what influences the increase of number of women active participants in the political institutions? Different approaches to the definition and types of political representation are examined, with special emphasis on the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation. The effects of various political factors that determine the presence of women in institutions are considered - the electoral system, the internal organization of parties, selection and recruitment, intra-party rules and lobbying, party magnitude, open/closed electoral lists, voting behavior and the quota system. The results of a large number of studies in this field are compared, with particular reference to the current representation theory - the critical mass, supply and demand, political presence, strategic partnership and critical actors.