Suchergebnisse

The author analyzes, on the basis of archival material, the phenomenon of fascism in its first phase when it was still exposed to various influences. The paper shows that the fascist movement, due to its heterogeneousness, had not created any consistent program, which brought about the appearance of numerous dissident groups and individuals whose vision of the development of fascism differed from the vision of the centre and the leader. (SOI : CSP: S. 306)

First, the author analyses Plessner's interpretation of Husserl's phenomenology. He goes on to outline the cognitive limits of the phenomenological-hermeneutical method, successful in text-analysis, but inadequate in illuminating pertinent historical processes. In his conclusion, the author points to Plessner's uncritical mixing of scientistic and phenomenological interpretations of fascism. (SOI : PM: S. 44)

The complexity of the partisan movement between 1941 and 1945 cannot be understood if one does not equalize it with the communist ideology. Also, one should be reminded of the fact that the winning world powers did not recognize the independent Croatian state. In 1945. Croats had to confirm their integrity within the supranational Yugoslavia. As the Independent State of Croatia stood next to Germany and Italy in foreign policy, that problem was indirectly associated with the defeat of fascism. On the contrary, the partisan movement gained the antifascist status. Croatian antifascism was not only verbal, it had also its historical causes. wing of the Croatian Peasant Party, trying to eliminate their political rivals. Parallelly, in Territorial Antifascist Council of National Liberation of Croatia conflicts began to occur in connection with the strengthening of the national aspirations. Thus, at the end of 1944, A. Hebrang, secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Croatia, was removed. (SOI : CSP: S. 439)

In this paper it had been started from the question what was in diachronic included in the term Middle Europe, and why it was impossible to define it precisely in any sense. 'New Middle European Concept', actual in the 80s of the previous century, had also political background, but in his creation Middle European intellectuals had part in it, and it meant the fight for cultural unity of Middle European, for the recognition of their European identity. One of the first, and the most important supporter of this concept from Yugoslav area is Danilo Kish in whose literary oeuvre this virtual space is additionally mythologized. The research attention was directed to Kish's essay 'Variations on Middle European Themes', in which he had elaborated in a concise manner his comprehension of Middle Europe, Middle European culture, Middle European writer, and numerous interviews in which he had thoroughly been elaborating these attitudes. There the writer expresses his comprehension of fascism, and Stalinism, Ahasuerus, and Judaism as 'family happiness', nationalism of small peoples, inferiorities of their 'barbarian languages', and attitudes on ironic lyrisms, 'consciousness on form', and stateless people as basic poetic features of Middle European writers. Due to all mentioned, and some universal truths on the mentioned symbolic tops, this essay is rightfully considered as one of Kish's most important self-poetic texts.

Kako osmisliti i operativno organizovati sećanja levice u delatnom, a ne u muzejskom pravcu? Šta znači otvoreno se suočiti sa kulturom poraza levice? Razmotrene su dimenzije poraza levice, priroda linearnog i kontingentnog vremena, različita proživljavanja poraza kod fašizma i liberalizma i dijalektika nade i razočarenja. Ukazano je da treba odbaciti jezik psihoanalize (čežnja, nostalgija, žalost, melanholija) i teleološku viziju neoliberalnog pobednika, pa levicu i desnicu shvatiti u novim dimenzijama vremena, unutar novog odnosa Kairosa i Hronosa u digitalnom dobu. Treba se samorefleksivno osvrnuti na greške levice, a naročito na greške iz kojih se može učiti. Treba teorijski probuditi ambiciju. Višeslojnom sećanju levice škodi dominacija jedne vrste sećanja, potrebna je samokontrola i ravnoteža pamćenja nestale socijalne države i vlastitog nasilja. ; How could we rethink and organize memories of the Left in an operational and active way? How could one openly confront the Left-Wing culture of defeat? The paper considers some dimensions of the Left-Wing defeat after 1989, the nature of the linear and the contingent time, various defeat experiences of fascism and liberalism and the dialectic of hope and disappointment. One should reject the language of psychoanalysis (longing, nostalgia, sorrow, melancholy) and the teleological vision of the neoliberal winner. The Left Wing and Right Wing should be understood in new dimensions of time within a new relationship between Cairos and Chronos in the digital age. The Left needs self-reflective review of its own mistakes, if it wants to learn lessons for the future. Theory can awake practical ambition. A desirable multilayered Left-Wing memory has been damaged by dominance of one type of memory. The Left needs self-control and a balanced memory of both badly missing socialist welfare state and its own violence.

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.