Suchergebnisse

Glavni je cilj ovoga rada ideološka analiza političkih govora G. W. Busha vezanih za rat u Iraku. Govori su analizirani kao oblik političkoga diskursa da bi se izdvojile leksičke, semantičke, retoričke i gramatičke strukture uporabljene u strategiji polarizacije pri predstavljanju postupaka dviju sukobljenih strana, iračkoga režima i američke vojske. Strategija polarizacije jedno je od osnovnih načela kritičke analize diskursa T. van Dijka, koja se u diskursu očituje u obliku ideološkoga četverokuta. To znači da u obliku diskursa kao što su ovi politički govori, u kojima su zastupljeni interesi dviju sukobljenih država, ideologija, nacija itd. možemo očekivati da će dobri postupci strane kojoj pripada govornik (naše strane) – biti naglašeni, a loši ublaženi, dok će dobri postupci druge strane (njihove) biti ublaženi, a loši naglašeni. Kritička analiza diskursa omogućuje osnovne načine prepoznavanja ovakvih struktura u različitim diskursima, a ovdje konkretno istražuje funkciju i utjecaj što ga te strukture imaju na Bushev politički plan, ali i na društvo u cjelini. ; The paper deals with the ideological analysis of G.W. Bush's political speeches delivered during the war in Iraq. The speeches were analyzed as a sort of political discourse with the purpose of recognizing lexical, semantic, rhetorical and grammatical structures used in the strategy of polarization when representing the actions of two confronted parties – Iraqi regime and American military. Polarization strategy is one of the basic principles of the T.van Dijk's Critical discourse analysis, which is expressed through ideological square. This means that in a kind of political discourse, as these speeches are, in which the interests of two confronted states, ideologies, nations etc. are presented, we can expect good actions of in-group to be emphasized and bad ones to be mitigated, whereas the good actions of out-group will be mitigated and bad ones will be emphasized. Critical discourse analysis offers the basic tools for recognizing such structures in different discourses, but in these political speeches it questions the function and influence which these structures have on Bush's political plan and on society as a whole.

U suvremenom zapadnom društvu terorizam je postao kulturalni simbol straha te je samim time postao referentni okvir za evaluaciju bilo kakvih drugih oblika ugroze ljudskoj sigurnosti. Pokušaji donošenja univerzalne definicije terorizma nikada nisu rezultirali uspjehom, a razlog tomu je njegova situacijska i pejorativna priroda te preklapanje s drugim formama političkog nasilja (gerilsko ratovanje, pobune i slično). Na tom tragu, prikazivanje određenih fenomena i događaja kao terorističkih može biti stvar subjektivne konstrukcije značenja tog pojma. Stoga je u ovom radu, uz metodu kritičke analize diskursa protuterorističkih strategija Europske unije i Sjedinjenih Američkih Država, prikazano kako se konstruira strah od terorizma u kolektivnoj svijesti zapadnog društva, te su komparativnom analizom utvrđene sličnosti i razlike u provođenju politike straha od strane zapadnih političkih elita. Rezultati analiza ukazuju kako se prikaz prijetnje koju terorizam predstavlja zapadnom svijetu ne temelji na činjenicama, nego na zamišljanju najgorih mogućih ishodišnih scenarija terorističkih napada. ; Terrorism has become a cultural symbol of fear in contemporary Western society and therefore a frame of reference for evaluation of any other type of threat to human security. Attempts to universally define terrorism have never been succesful because of its situational and pejorative nature and overlap with other forms of political violence (guerilla warfare, insurgency etc.). Consequently, representation of certain phenomena and events as terrorist can be a matter of subjective construction. Therefore, by applying method of critical discourse analysis to counterterrorism strategies of the European Union and the United States of America, it is shown how the fear of terrorism in collective consciousness of Western society is constructed. In addition, comparative analysis method shows similarities and differences in conduction of politics of fear by western political elites. Results of analysis indicate that the representation of terrorist threat to Western society is based not on facts but on imagining worst-case scenarios of terrorist attack.

The way we talk about complex and abstract ideas is abundant in metaphors. Many research studies have shown that even the most subtle metaphor can have a significant influence on the way people try to tackle various social problems. Thus, the assumption is that metaphors are not just a simple rhetorical tool, but also have a profound effect on how we conceptualize reality and respond to important social issues. In the last two decades, scientists have studied the impact of metaphorical framing on political discourse from different research perspectives. Metaphors are often used for framing political topics, and these metaphorical frames are considered to affect the way people regard these issues, perceive the world, and act, on both the individual and collective level. In accordance with these research studies, in this paper, we will regard the metaphor as a cognitive tool that classifies our conceptual system and enables the understanding of our experiences. The objective of this paper is to examine the use of conceptual metaphors in media discourse on the corona crisis and the earthquake crisis caused by the quake in Petrinja. The research was conducted in three steps, following the methodology of critical metaphor analysis (Charteris-Black, 2004). In the first step, the identification of metaphorical expressions was performed by using a big data corpus of articles published by Croatian web-portals from the beginning of the pandemic (from January 2020 to April 2021) and after the Petrinja earthquake (from 29 December 2020). In the second step, the dominant conceptual metaphors employed in communicating the two crises were interpreted. The results of this interpretation are that war metaphors are ubiquitous in reporting on the COVID-19 disease pandemic, and the apocalypse metaphor is used in reporting on the earthquake. In the third step of the analysis, the reasons and implications of the occurrence of these metaphors are explained. ; Način na koji razgovaramo o složenim i apstraktnim idejama prožet je metaforama. Mnoga istraživanja pokazuju da čak i najsuptilnija metafora može imati snažan utjecaj na to kako ljudi pokušavaju riješiti razne društvene probleme. Dakle, pretpostavka je da metafore nisu puki retorički alati, već da one duboko utječu na to kako konceptualiziramo zbilju i postupamo s obzirom na važna društvena pitanja. Tijekom posljednjih dvaju desetljeća znanstvenici iz različitih istraživačkih perspektiva proučavaju učinke metaforičnog uokvirivanja na politički diskurs. Metafore se često koriste za uokvirivanje političkih tema, a za te se metaforične okvire tvrdi da utječu na to kako ljudi razmišljaju o tim pitanjima, opažaju svijet i ponašaju se, na razini individualnog i kolektivnog. Na tragu tih istraživanja, metaforu u ovom radu shvaćamo kao kognitivno sredstvo koje ustrojava naš pojmovni sustav i omogućuje razumijevanje iskustva. Cilj je ovog rada istražiti upotrebu konceptualnih metafora u javnom diskursu vezanom uz koronakrizu i krizu izazvanu potresom u Petrinji. Istraživanje je provedeno u tri koraka, slijedeći metodologiju kritičke analize metafora (Charteris-Black, 2004). U prvom koraku, identifikacija metaforičnih izraza provedena je korištenjem velike baze podataka (big data corpus) objava s hrvatskih mrežnih portala nastalih u periodu pandemije (od siječnja 2020. do travnja 2021. godine) te za i nakon petrinjskog potresa 29. 12. 2020. U drugom koraku, interpretirane su dominantne konceptualne metafore korištene u medijskom komuniciranju tih dviju kriza. Rezultati te interpretacije pokazuju da su u slučaju epidemije bolesti COVID-19 sveprisutne metafore rata, dok se u izvještavanju o potresu koristila metafora apokalipse. U trećem koraku analize, nastojali su se objasniti razlozi i implikacije pojavljivanja tih konceptualnih metafora u medijskom diskursu.

Rad pokazuje filozofijski diskurs opasnosti od društva normalnih. Riječ je o razmatranju odnosa ludila i nenormalnosti važnih za društvo i političku zajednicu iz nekadašnje optike Michela Foucaulta i današnje perspektive Manfreda Lütza. Smisao je rada pokazati kako je pojam norme i iz njega proizašloga normiranja i discipliniranja doveo do imperativa zdravog društva utemeljenoga na normi. Takvo društvo isključuje sve one koji na bilo koji način odstupaju od ponašanja predviđenoga normom. U takvu se zahtjevu krije opasnost suvremenoga društva koje ne razlikuje nenormalnost i ludilo, nego ih koristi za diskreditiranje svojih članova koji ne pristaju na postavljeno normiranje. Radi se o tome da biti nenormalan samo znači kritički ne pristajati na postojeću normu koju je nametnula većina bilo da je riječ o pravnoj, političkoj, društvenoj, vjerskoj, obrazovnoj, odgojnoj ili medicinskoj normi. Na temeljima Foucaultovih filozofskih i Lützovih psihologijskih uvida rad pokazuje kako opasnost po društvo ne predstavljaju oni koji po bilo čem odstupaju od norme nego upravo oni »normalni«, koji kao nosioci »normalnoga« društva nekritički pristaju i provode normativni poredak. ; The paper presents a philosophical discourse on the dangers of the society of normal persons. It is about the importance of relation between madness and normality within the society and the political community from the former Michel Foucault's optics and today's Manfred Lütz's perspective. The purpose of this paper is to show how the concept of the norm, and accordingly of the normalisation and discipline, leads to the imperative of the healthy society based on norms. Such society excludes all those who in any way deviate from the behavior predicted by the norm. Such request is the danger of modern society that does not differentiate abnormality from insanity, but use them to discredit its members which refuse to be subordinate. To be abnormal means only to be critical toward the norm that is set by majority, whether is it a legal, political, social, religious, educational or medical norm. On the foundations of Foucault's philosophical and Lütz's psychological insights, the thesis shows that the danger to society are not those who deviate from the norm, but the "normal people" who, as bearers of "normal" society, uncritically accept and implement the normative order.

Članak se bavi karakterom i zastupljenošću etničkoga diskursa u srbijanskim opozicijskim glasilima Demokratija i Srpska reč u periodu 1990./1991. Jedno od pitanja koje razmatra ovaj rad odnosi se na preispitivanje teze o nepostojanju relevantne političke alternative tzv. nacionalnom programu Slobodana Miloševića i njegove političke partije u Srbiji u predvečerje raspada Jugoslavije. ; A statistical analysis of the presence of ethnic discourse (ED) and its subcategory, discourse of ethnic intolerance (DEI), in the party organs Demokratija and Srpska reč shows the indisputably different political character and physiognomy of these two papers. Namely, the average presence of ED in the Srpska reč in the period from June 1990 to June 1991 was four times higher, and the prevalence of DEI ten times higher, than in the Demokratija. In addition to the varying prevalence and character of their ED content, these two organs were fundamentally different as regards the character of their remaining contents. In the Serbian Renewal Movement's organ, the predominant part of the remaining discourse consisted of revisionist serials and essays dedicated to promoting the Chetnik Movement. These texts made up as much as half of the contents of individual issues of the monthly Srpska reč. Putting together all the pro-Chetnik contents and the ED contents of the Srpska reč, we can conclude that, on average, over 60 percent of each issue's contents were exceptionally irrational, conservative, and nationalist. On the other hand, after its first few issues, the Demokratija preserved an ethic of responsibility and a critical stance towards the social reality and political situation in the country. After these first few issues, the ethnic discourse in this organ was present only as a precedent and derailment, and was not a commonplace of political rhetoric, unlike in the case of the Srpska reč. The leadership of the Democratic Party certainly played a role in setting up these standards of civil discourse in this organ but, paradoxically, it often also took responsibility for sharpening the 'national' line of reasoning within the frame of (forced) political pragmatism. Đinđić's or Mićunovićev's ethnic discourse from August 1990 and May 1991 was not supported by a corresponding change in the physiognomy of the paper, which remained predominantly rational, critically oriented, civil, and socially responsible. The analytical verification of facts in this paper certainly supports the thesis of Dubravka Stojanović from 1996 that there was no alternative to this programme in Serbia, at least not within the frame of these two most relevant opposition parties. Furthermore, this paper indicates that, in the summer and autumn of 1990 and in May 1991, the rhetoric of the party leaders of the Serbian Renewal Movement and Democratic Party attempted to be—and often was—more belligerent than Milošević's. As regards almost all questions of the internal order of Yugoslavia, and especially regarding the status of the autonomy of Kosovo and the regulation of the position of Serbian people outside Serbia, the solutions advocated by the opposition were more radical than the ones advocated by Slobodan Milošević's regime.

A good number of authors and theorists dealing with heritage and memory claim that organized oblivion is largely present in the society, so one might conclude accordingly that every society consciously forgets. The carriers or executors of this project of oblivion often seek to erase the entire memory of an "enemy" by destroying heritage, thus seeking to force those who have inherited and preserved it to forget it. In this article, I have sought to point out that historical artefacts are part of the process of social oblivion, which also raises the following question or topic: can history be constructed and reconstructed from the history of amnesia, rather than the history of memory? The process of "facing loss, that is destruction" is still in its infancy as a heritage practice and policy, and often limited to acknowledging the problem rather than responding to it. The salvage paradigm that permeates the heritage discourse is fundamentally based on a system that implies, at the same time, the sacrifice and loss of less valuable cultural achievements in order to protect and conserve the more valued ones. These questions and dilemmas are fundamentally political and boil down to the decision which stories/objects to preserve, celebrate and remember, and which to forget. Illustrating the concepts of destruction and oblivion on the examples of devastated Zadar, Split's Peristyle, the Old Bridge in Mostar, and finally the anti-fascist monuments, I have sought to indicate and establish that places of absence can also be places of memory, and that heritage is performative in its nature. Historical buildings are not meaningful and significant inherently, in themselves, but become significant only when they are socially construed through a performative act. ; Dobar dio autora i teoretičara koji se bave baštinom i memorijom tvrdi da je organizirani zaborav u velikoj mjeri prisutan u društvu, pa bismo, shodno tomu, mogli zaključiti da svako društvo svjesno zaboravlja. Nositelji ili izvršitelji projekta zaborava često nastoje izbrisati čitavo sjećanje "neprijatelja" destrukcijom baštine čime se želi prisiliti one koji ih baštine i čuvaju da ih zaborave. U ovom članku nastojat ću uputiti na to da povijesni artefakti sačinjavaju dio procesa društvenog zaborava što ujedno otvara i sljedeće pitanje-temu: može li se povijest konstruirati i rekonstruirati iz povijesti amnezije, a ne povijesti memorije? Proces "suočavanja s gubitkom, tj. destrukcijom" u baštinskoj je praksi i politici još uvijek u povojima i češće se odnosi na priznavanje problema nego na sam odgovor na problem. Paradigma spasitelja koja prožima baštinski diskurs je fundamentalno utemeljena na sustavu koji podjednako implicira žrtvovanje i gubitak manje vrijednih kulturnih ostvarenja nasuprot zaštiti i konzervaciji više vrijednih ostvarenja. Ova pitanja i dileme su fundamentalno politički i svode se na odluku: koje priče/objekte očuvati, slaviti i zapamtiti, a koje zaboraviti? Objašnjavajući pojmove destrukcije i zaborava na primjerima porušenog Zadra, splitskog Peristila, Starog mosta u Mostaru i, naposljetku, antifašističkih spomenika, pokušala sam uputiti i utvrditi da i mjesta odsutnosti mogu biti mjestima memorije, te da je baština po svojoj prirodi performativna. Povijesne građevine, naime, nisu same po sebi inherentno smislene i bitne, već postaju važne samo onda kad su društveno konstruirane kroz performativni čin.

Gender and sexuality in the Croatian educational context occasionally resurface in the public discourse due to political instrumentalization but are largely neglected as a research topic. To address this absence, this paper presents original data on high-school and university experiences of queer persons collected in critically oriented research which examines social inequality of queer individuals in the Croatian educational institutions. Based on these data and drawing parallels with previous studies in an international context, the authors outline a theoretical approach that conceptualises gender and sexuality as interdependent social processes. Through showing how educational institutions actively marginalise persons of non-normative gender and sexual orientation, the authors point to the importance of conceptualising the everyday life of queer persons in education as a source of knowledge about these processes by highlighting the complex relationship between gender and sexuality – which authors do by establishing theoretical and methodological collaborations between sociology, queer theories as well as critical and institutional ethnography. The study's findings suggest that educational institutions have a mediating role in creating inequality based on gender and sexual differences since they function as spaces privileging heterosexuality and heteronormativity. This results in an ambivalent status of queer gender expressions and sexualities as they are simultaneously a subject of public negotiation and stigmatization and hidden in the private sphere of each person. (In)visibility and (non)acceptance of non-normative gender expressions and sexualities in the Croatian educational context imply a continuous process of managing one's identity between institutional and personal spheres of action. ; Teme roda i seksualnosti u obrazovnom kontekstu zbog političke instrumentalizacije povremeno su prisutne u javnom diskursu, ali su istraživački nedovoljno zastupljene. To osobito vrijedi za izvorna i kritički usmjerena istraživanja koja bi utvrdila kako obrazovne institucije u Hrvatskoj pridonose društvenoj nejednakosti queer osoba. Ovim se člankom pokušava nadomjestiti ta podzastupljenost teorijskom raspravom o konceptualizaciji roda i seksualnosti kao međuovisnih osobnih i društvenih procesa te prikazom rezultata istraživanja u kojem je taj pristup korišten. Kako dosadašnje spoznaje u međunarodnom kontekstu pokazuju, obrazovne institucije imaju aktivnu ulogu u procesima marginalizacije osoba nenormativne queer rodne i seksualne orijentacije, zato je nužno razumijevanje obrazovne svakodnevice kao izvora znanja o tim procesima kroz promišljanje isprepletenosti roda i seksualnosti. Ta isprepletenost u svrhu istraživanja društvene nejednakosti nastale na temelju rodne i seksualne različitosti mora teorijski i istraživački povezati sociologiju, queer teorije te kritičku i institucionalnu etnografiju. Na taj se način uspostavlja cjeloviti teorijski i metodološki pristup koji je korišten u istraživanju srednjoškolskog i visokoškolskog obrazovnog iskustva queer osoba u Hrvatskoj. Rezultati istraživanja pokazuju da obrazovne institucije imaju posredničku ulogu u stvaranju nejednakosti na temelju rodnih i seksualnih različitosti. Obrazovne su institucije ponajprije prostor koji privilegira heteroseksualnost i heteronormativnost, dok su queer izričaji roda i seksualnosti s jedne strane predmetom javnog označavanja i stigmatiziranja, a s druge strane predmetom prisiljavanja na privatnu i skrivenu sferu. Ne/vidljivost i ne/prihvaćanje nenormativnih rodnih izričaja i seksualnosti za queer osobe u hrvatskom obrazovnom kontekstu predstavlja trajan proces pregovaranja između institucionalnih i osobnih domena djelovanja.

Cilj rada je razjasniti pojam transcendentalno-aktivističke kreativnosti kao i razmotriti mogućnosti i preduvjete njezine realizacije u odgojno-obrazovnom procesu. Rad započinje opisom 'slike' prirode učenika koja se smatra potrebnom za praktičnu realizaciju ovog oblika kreativnosti. Pritom se naglašava činjenica ljudske nesvršenost i mogućnost kontinuiranoga razvoja. Kao metoda ostvarenja transcendentalno-aktivističke kreativnosti preuzima se dijalog shvaćen kao otvoreno iskazivanje i dijeljenja vlastitih misli, ideja i težnji s drugim ljudima bez skrivanja i straha od mogućih neuspjeha ili neugodnih iskustava. Budući da se institucionalizirani odgojno-obrazovni proces odvija u učionicama, opisuje se učionica kao zajednički prostor nade koji omogućava demokratsko angažiranje i borbu za promjene situiran u kontekstu širih zajedničkih prostora demokratskoga i aktivističkoga djelovanja. Demokratizacija učionica omogućava postavljanje socijalnih pitanja, prelaženje granica te kritičko propitivanje dominantnoga neoliberalnog diskursa te je stoga neophodan element aktivistički shvaćene kreativnosti. Dijalog kao sredstvo, i dijaloški pristup kao metoda kreativnog djelovanja, usmjereni su poništavanju efekata prevladavajućega elitističkog shvaćanja koje kreativnost prikazuje izoliranu od društva i namijenjenu posebno imaginativnim pojedincima. U radu se iskazuje stav kako nije vjerojatno da će u skoroj budućnosti doći do promjene dominantnoga shvaćanja kreativnosti u odgojno-obrazovnom procesu koje kreativnost promatra kao transformaciju postojećega. Razloge za ovakvo stanje nalazimo u dominantnom ekonomsko-političkom uređenju društva u cjelini, te odgojno-obrazovnoga sustava kao jednoga od društvenih podsustava. ; The aim of this paper is to clarify the notion of a transcendental-activist creativity as well as to consider the possibilities and preconditions for its realization in the educational process. The paper begins with the description of the 'image' of pupil's nature that is considered necessary for the practical realization of this form of creativity. The experience of human non-completion and the possibility of continuous development is emphasized. Dialogue, as a method of practical realization of transcendental-activist creativity, is understood as an open expression and sharing of one's own thoughts, ideas and aspirations with other people without hiding and fear of possible failures or unpleasant experiences. Since the institutionalized educational process takes place in the classrooms, the classroom is described as a shared space of hope which enables democratic engagement and struggle for changes in the context of the wider shared spaces of democratic and activist action. Democratization of classrooms, which is a necessary element of transcendental-activist creativity, creates a climate that sets the necessary conditions for discussion of social issues, crossing of preconceived boundaries and critical questioning of dominant neoliberal discourse. Dialogue as a medium and a dialogic approach as a method of creative agency is directed to the reversal of the effects of a traditional elitist concept of creativity that is treated isolated from a wider society and addressed exclusively to particularly talented individuals. The author feels that it is unlikely that in the near future a change in the dominant conception of creativity in the educational process will occur and therefor creativity will continue to be predominately defined a transformation of the existing. Reasons for this state of affair are situated in the dominant economic and political mode of organization of the society as a whole, and the educational system as a one of social subsystems.

The geopolitical evolution represents a permanent process. It is mostly influenced by the geopolitical condition, in which the geopolitical relations and processes are evolving. The understanding of geopolitical evolution is impossible without the critical review and even rejection of the dominant geopolitical visions. There are various theoretical perspectives that reject the dominant geopolitical visions and discourses as well as geopolitical practices of the political elites. Those theoretical perspectives are known as: critical geopolitics, anti-geopolitics, subaltern geopolitics, feminist geopolitics, radical geopolitics. There are also various comprehensions of relationship between these theoretical perspectives, although it is clear that each of them is overlapped with others, and all of them are overlapped with critical geopolitics, differing in the focus of study and the identification of new moments, and at the same time being similar by their deflection from the dominant geopolitical vision and practices, to which they react in different ways: by criticizing, by putting resistance or offering alternatives. In this paper, the research focus is mostly on anti-geopolitics, a radical geopolitical vision that puts into question the relations of exploitation and dominance. Anti-geopolitics also represents a theoretical perspective that poses the most serious challenge to the dominant ways of representing the World. The proponents of anti-geopolitics focus their research on the anti-colonial and anti-imperialist struggles, as well as on the social movements and networks that offer a resistance to globalization and geo-economic logic that are advocated and practiced by the political-economic elites of states and multinational corporations and intergovernmental institutions, especially the financial ones. The paper also brings a brief review of the key aspects of other theoretical perspectives that represent a more or less radical deflection from the dominant geopolitical visions. Adapted from the source document.

The cognitive worth of the concept of totalitarianism is constantly refuted. In this text, the author begins by confronting his perception of totalitarianism as a new social formation, which he advocated in many of his works, with four scientific arguments raised by historians against totalitarianism as a political category or in favour of a limited use thereof. The first is that communism and fascism are fundamentally different, that the ideologies which characterize them are radically opposed to one another. This argument overlooks the fact that in such regimes ideology is not merely the prevalent discourse -- it has a new function and efficiency, it establishes a totalitarian "regime" of language and thought in which the power of discourse and the discourse of power are made equal. The second argument is that totalitarianism is evident, in Germany and Russia, only during limited periods. To this the author replies that it is a "realistic" illusion to assume that the totalitarian project was ever fully realized in history. According to the third objection, the concept of totalitarianism is of no cognitive worth to the historian, and totalitarian regimes belong to the order of contingency, and not of historical necessity. On the other hand, the author stresses the historical novelty of totalitarianism, which does spring and can spring only from the modern "democratic revolution" (in Tocqueville's sense) as a radical refutation thereof. The final objection of a methodologically aware historian (F. Furet) is that the concept of totalitarianism can be analytically fruitful only if used as an "ideal type", as a common trait of regimes established in atomized societies through total domination by way of ideology and terror. To this the author replies that we cannot be satisfied with the use of the concept "ideal type", although it is true that it liberates the historian from the naivety of positivistic descriptive historiography. The making of an ideal type thus makes it possible to avoid the choice between philosophy and descriptive history, but only inasmuch as the historian is transformed into a cognizant subject which is external with regard to history. In the second part of the text, the author provides a critical evaluation of the theory of totalitarianism by H. Arendt, particularly her central thesis that totalitarian society comes into being in modern atomized society. Namely, totalitarianism is characterized, on the one hand, by an artificialist project of organization, and, on the other, by a substantialist ideal of incorporation: both are realized in the Party, which is not only devised as an organization, but is also a "mystical person" in which all its members are brought together. As such, it incorporates the people. The figure of the indivisible people is put forward in the Party; the figure of the indivisible party is put forward in the figure of the people. In the first, organizational aspect the Party contains the project of an organisable whole, while in the other, substantialist aspect it contains the project of an incorporable whole. Adapted from the source document.

Autori članka propituju zašto je pojam postdemokracije postao sporan iako je tek nedavno uveden u raspravu. Ovaj pojam se koristi kao model intepretacije aktualne krize demokracije. Collin Crouch uvodi ovu poziciju u svojoj knjizi Postdemokracija. Na istom je tragu Sheldon Wolin koji drži da je postdemokracija vrsta demokracije koji je na djelu u postmoderno doba. Neovisno o njihovim razlikama, obojica smatraju da je aktualna kriza demokracije poseban fenomen. Međutim, izgleda da ona i nije toliko posebna pojava, prije svega, u europskim kontinentalnim demokracijama. Tako je još pedesetih godina prošlog stoljeća Hans Kelsen pisao o autorima koji su tada pokušavali redefinirati demokraciju na isti način na koji to rade današnji teoretičari postdemokracije. Isto diskurs kao i isti lijek (više demokracije u ekonomskoj sferi) može se pronaći mnogo prije Drugog svjetskog rata. Štoviše, ima mnogo primjera u kojima je narod u zadnjih 200 godina, u ime demokracije, tražio novu ravnotežu s predstavničkom demokracijom. Autori članka smatraju da Jacques Rancière nudi prikladnije objašnjenje ovog problema. On naime ne pronalazi postdemokraciju samo u postmodernom dobu ili u poretku koji nastupa nakon predstavničke demokracije nego uvijek kad se javlja 'legitimiranje demokracije nakon demosa'. ; The authors try to show why the concept of post-democracy has already become contestable even though it was only introduced recently. The concept of post-democracy has been used as a critical model to interpret the crises of democracy in last twenty years or so. Collin Crouch outlines this attitude in his book Post-democracy. Sheldon Wolin also occupies a similar position. He speaks about post-democracy as a democracy functioning in the postmodern era. Regardless of their differences both authors believe that today's crises of democracy is specific. It seems that today's crises of democracy is not particularly new, especially for the continental European democracies. Even in the 1950s Hans Kelsen was writing about such authors who tried to redefine democracy because of its crises between the two world wars. They used a similar discourse on democracy as that which is been used by some theoreticians of post-democracy. We can also find the same discourse on 'the crises of democracy' and the same cure (greater democracy in the economic sphere) much before the 2nd World War. Moreover, there are a lot of examples in which people, in the name of democracy, try to find a new balance with representative democracy in last 200 years. The authors find that Jacques Rancière offers a more appropriate explanation of this problem. He doesn't find post-democracy only er in the postmodern era, or in an order that comes after representative democracy but every time when there is 'legitimization of a democracy after demos'.

The use of policy networks in the research of public policies includes identifying policy actors (both state & non-state actors) & determining the type of their relations, with the purpose of description & analysis of the policy process. The basic assumption of the approach is that contemporary policy-making is characterized by sharing of responsibilities for policy-making among state & the non-state actors. The approach is faced with a critical charge that it doesn't make a clear distinction between dependent & independent variables, & that it does not contain an implicit causal logic that could be falsified. Even though this criticism is partly justified, the policy networks approach should not be dismissed, albeit it should not be understood as a theory (in the sense of E. & V. Ostrom's level of theoretical discourse). Furthermore, the criticism mostly affects the 'interest intermediation school', which understands policy networks as generic term for different forms of state-society relations. Thus, the 'governance school' is much more fruitful for the development of policy networks idea. The 'Governance school' of policy networks approach can be understood as a framework &/or a model. Firstly, the policy networks approach has most similarities with the cycle model of policy process & the two approaches are closely related frameworks of public policy research. The characteristics of contemporary policy-making calls for adding policy networks to the cycle model &, in this perspective, the policy networks approach becomes an analytical tool-box for organizing empirical material. Secondly, policy networks are conceived as a specific form of governance, which becomes dominant in the recent literature. Within this perspective, ideas about policy networks have bigger theoretical ambitions, but are still developed at a level of a model, & not theory. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

The policy of pressure on Croatia as an illustrative -- although not isolated -- example has not inspired empirical & theoretical studies of this phenomenon. The discussion has remained at the level of everyday political discourse, even "coffee-house politics." Due to its extreme topicality, as well as its theoretical "solvency," the author has attempted with this essay to come up with a theoretical definition of the concept of pressure & to demonstrate on the Croatian example its goals, scope, dynamics, & future prospects & outcomes. Among the existing approaches, the author has chosen the "politico-economic approach" which defines the policy of pressure as a specific form of political communication between the "center" & the "periphery" in Wallerstein's "world system." The example of Croatia serves the author as an ideal-type model of such communication through a combination of political science & sociological analysis. In his opinion, & due to certain favorable contingencies, Croatia is the nearest to the ideal type of such communication. Due to a lack of systematic empirical data, the discussion naturally remains at the theoretical-hypothetical level, & should be understood as an invitation to further discussion & as an incentive for more extensive empirical research. However, since this is a very dynamic phenomenon, the question is: is the author's argumentation still valid today as it was at the time when the essay was written? There have been two changes: (1) the war on Kosovo which proves the author's hypotheses; & (2) a certain "thaw" in the relations between the international community (particularly USA) & Croatia (it is still unclear whether this change concerns the fundamental strategic trends or is solely a "politico-meteorological" phenomenon (the alteration of colder & warmer periods). This is why the author did not deem any alterations in the text necessary; one should wait & in the meantime expose the (hypo)theses to some critical scrutiny. 12 References. Adapted from the source document.

U radu se raspravlja o prisutnosti i aktualnosti filozofskog, dakle kritičkog promišljaja fenomena psihe i psihijatrije na geo-povijesnom tlu Republike Hrvatske, s metodološkim fokusom na: reprezentativne autore, spise i inicijative relevantne za navedeni diskurs, prisutnost sistematskog provođenja obrazovanja u sklopu fakultetskih kurikuluma, te izdavačku aktivnost tematski usmjerenu na problematiku psihe. Usmjerit će se i na domenu odnosa filozofije i psihe/psihijatrije u povijesnoj mereološkoj konstelaciji, njezin značaj za filozofiju psihe, kao i kategorički neodvojivi odnos filozofije i izučavanja psihe per se. Autor uvodi tezu da je filozofija psihe idealan misaoni poligon na kojem se isprepliću rudimentarni filozofijski disciplinarni smjerovi u rasponu od hermeneutike, fenomenologije, ontologije, epistemologije, logike, pa do socijalne i političke filozofije, filozofije egzistencije i etike. Kao idealni znanstveno-filozofski meritor predlaže se orijentacijska disciplina integrativne bioetike kao teleološki most za sjedinjavanje navedenih filozofskih disciplina. Pritom je naglasak na predmetu fenomena života, koji je evaluiran u analogiji sa semantikom predsokratovskog pojma ψυχή (psukhe). ; The paper discusses the presence and actuality of the philosophical, and therefore critical, think-ing of the phenomena of psyche and psychiatry in the geo-historical space of the Republic of Croatia. Its methodological focus is on: representative authors, writings and initiatives relevant to the mentioned discourse, the presence of systematic education within the faculty curriculum, and the publishing activity focused on the issues ofpsyche. The focus will be on the relationship between philosophy and psyche/psychiatry in the historical mereological constellation, on its importance for the philosophy of psyche, as well as the categorically inseparable relationship between philosophy and the perception of psyche. The author introduces the thesis that the philosophy of psyche is an ideal thinking polygon upon which rudimentary philosophical disciplinary directions are intertwined, ranging from hermeneutics, phenomenology, ontology, epistemology, and logic, to social and political philosophy, the philosophy of existence, and ethics. As an ideal scientific-philosophical descriptor, I suggest the discipline of integrative bioethics, which I look at as a teleological bridge for combining these disciplines. The emphasis will be on the subject of life phenomena, which I look at in an analogy with the pre-Socratic semantics of ψυχή (psukhe) as the dialectical synthesis of mind (nousj) and body (soma).

Ovaj rad bavi se analizom položaja Makedonije koja kroz kritičke leće europskog odnosno eurocentričnog pogleda i geopolitičku kontekstualnost na području Balkana ima značajke subdrugosti. Uzimajući u obzir dosege postkolonijalnih teorija i moguću primjenu određenih koncepata (drugost, hibridnost, mimikrija, ambivalencija, egzotizacija, samokolonizacija, itd.) u analizi položaja Makedonije kao dijela postsocijalističkog prostora, rad posebno istražuje načine na koji se tijekom zadnja dva desetljeća uspostavlja i održava identitetska razlika Makedonije u odnosu na europski prostor i druge države Balkana. Posebni fokus je stavljen na istraživanje suvremenih diskurzivnih praksi kojima se Europska unija koristi pri održavanju identitetske razlike Republike Makedonije pri čemu se historijska diskurzivna analiza (Wodak, 2011) pokazala prikladnom metodom. U tom cilju napravljena je analiza medijskih članaka s Internet stranica EUObserver i EURACTIV za vrijeme političke krize (od listopada 2016. do lipnja 2017.) uslijed nepriznavanja rezultata parlamentarnih izbora u Makedoniji. Ovaj rad donosi zaključak o paralelnom koloniziranju Makedonije kroz proces europeizacije, i to putem delegitimiranja identitetskih značajki njezinog nacionalnog identiteta od strane Europske unije i od strane njezinih susjeda. Zaključno, analizom se došlo do dvije razine europskog pogleda – prva je definirana problemima vezanima za proces pristupanja Makedonije Europskoj uniji, dok je druga definirana diskursom o nedostatku demokratičnosti kao zalogom dugoročne drugosti. ; This paper deals with the analysis of the position of Macedonia, which displays characteristics of subalternity through the critical lens of a European or Eurocentric view and geopolitical contextuality in the Balkans. Taking into account the scope of postcolonial theories and possible applications of its particular concepts (subalternity, hybridity, mimicry, ambivalence, exoticisation, self-colonisation, etc.) in the analysis of the position of Macedonia as a part of a post-socialist space, the main focus of the paper is the research of ways in which the identity difference of Macedonia in relation to Europe and other Balkan states during the last two decades is established and maintained. Special focus is placed on the research of modern discursive practices which the European Union uses in the reproduction of identity differences of Macedonia, where historical discursive analysis (Wodak, 2011) proved as an appropriate method. Analysis of media articles from the EUobserver and EURACTIV websites during the political crisis (October 2016 to June 2017) due to recognition of parliamentary election results in Macedonia has been conducted. This paper offers conclusions about the parallel colonisation of Macedonia through the process of Europeanisation, by means of delegitimizing identity characteristics of its national identity by the European Union and its neighbours. In conclusion, the analysis reached two European worldviews – the first is defined by problems related to the process of entering the European Union, while the other is defined by a discourse about the lack of democracy as collateral for long-term subalternity even after entering the EU.