The author analyzes the interpretations by Jean-Marie Guehenno and Helmut Willke of the end of the national state within the context of contemporary debates on globalisation. The author thinks that in their analyses both authors have come up th similar insights, particularly those regarding the assessment of the functional role which may be analytically attributed to the national state in the present and the future. Although their observations coincide with the debates on globalisation going on in political economy and political science, their conclusions are not in line with the special structure of political activity. Unlike their state/theoretic "hegelianism" (Guehenno) and system theory, functional definition of government activity (Willke), the author looks into the contemporary operation of the state from the legal/philosophical perspective. (SOI : PM: S. 37)
The revival of the nation has shocked German intellectuals who think that the nation-state is historically obsolete and that new models should be upheld: the united Europe, a world community of responsible states, globalisation of markets, a universe of human rights. The contrary tendencies in today's world are marked by giving up on huge political entities which have been replaced by smaller nationality-based states. It seems that political freedom leads to the formation of nation-states based on democratic constitution. This process requires looking into the relation between the nation-state and democracy. The key for the explanation of their relationship can be found in the notion of nation. Citizenship mediates between the people (in its real manifestation as a social group), and democracy as a constitutional principle. It gives to the state as a personal entity legal structure on which to build a democratic form of the state and guarantees legally applicable taxonomies and limitations. (SOI : SOEU: S. 17)
The European entrepreneurial undertaking, in the form of an equipped and armed merchant ship, ready to circumnavigate and conquer the Globe, created the modern world as a world with one side only: the mondialised West. To be globalised today, such a world has to be made as a new net, but now as a new multitask and multidirectional entrepreneurial feedback. Contemporary global liberal interventionism and governmental entrepreneurship are segmented today into a dangerously simplified multitask global pyramid of governance through onedirectional cascades. For a real globalisation, this process has to be twodirectional at least: from the center to the periphery - but from the periphery to the center, too. Otherwise, at the beginning of a new "centennial trend" and a "great cycle" there is the risk that the collapse of the liberal civilization of the 19th century could be repeated. Once again because of the weakness of the world system peripheries. The question how to strengthen the "anonymous" global economic, cultural and political processes of that twodirectional kind, is becoming the central global and strategic issue for today's politics and political science. It has turned out that this kind of state and its processes real global environment could be successfuly analyzed and effectively made use, of only with the complete unreduced methodical front of all the fields of political science together and even more than that. So as they could be practically surmounted only with a very complex political and economic action through the whole set of expertly managed public policies. From the historically based Croatian point of view, a possibility of integration into the world center was always in founding a world-market "niche", and never in making even a mini-empire or in controlling a mondialized or a mega- national net. Without a methodically global political science approach, also leaning on Central European and Mediterranean cultural and politological traditions, such Croatian interest will not be accomplished. (SOI : PM: S. 179)