Suchergebnisse

Throughout the year the controversial legislative elections dominated the political landscape. Huge anti-government demonstrations that called in vain for political alternance. The legislative elections of 20 December 2018, boycotted by the major opposition parties, resulted in an easy victory of the ruling party, however without the expected constitutional amendment majority. Therefore, the prime minister and his cabinet were replaced. The local elections, crucial for democratization at the grass-roots, but postponed time and again since 1987, were again postponed in December 2018 sine die. Economic growth remained stable at about 5% per annum. Public investment in infrastructure (e. g. roads, harbour) and increases in agricultural productivity, notably of export crops, had been the key drivers of economic growth. Moreover, money-laundering, illegal money transfers and trafficking grew alarmingly. Unemployment and lacking political change caused increasing migration.

The evolution of city regions and metropolises in both countries illustrates the theoretical debates on this particular geographical object. Political legitimacy, significant autonomy and a 'relevant' territorial area should form the basis of these regions. But there is a long way to go from this theoretical vision to practice. In Germany, a slow and contingent bottom-up process can be observed, whereas in France, following a long history of intermunicipality, institutional metropolises are emerging (MAPTAM law of 2014). Metropolregionen and métropoles thus differ. Germany shows incomplete and variable forms of metropolitan organisation, whereas French metropolises are satisfied with simple criteria of competences and resources. However, these 'intermunicipal' métropoles (one exception: Lyon) can also be compared with the large German cities, which are highly individualised political entities, with the city-states (e. g. Hamburg) being the most extreme cases. Two examples, Frankfurt and Lille, illustrate the comparison.

Examines a developing theory of socialism, distinct from the former real socialism, that can improve current global socioeconomic trends. It is argued that both capitalism & social democracy have failed to adapt to the social & economic needs of the majority working class; Swedish social democracy is used to illustrate. It is concluded that, because the economy is controlled by a central government that is influenced by the source of production, ie, business, the social democratic system is doomed to failure. The proposed system calls for a shift from global to regional production, & from a social marketplace to social corporations, similar to the autonomous structures of cooperatives, rather than a social marketplace. Several proposals for the control of capital are discussed, & criticisms that the new socialism will not permit risk taking are countered. Finally, it is noted that this change in social order will not be an abrupt one, but rather, a gentler, grassroots transformation. 2 References. T. Rosenberg

Le problème que je pose dans ce cadre consiste à voir quel sont les pratiques des médias de service public à l'égard des représentations de la diversité religieuse et, plus précisément, à l'égard des représentations de transmission et communication de la foi dans deux pays européens dont l'un fort religieux et l'autre fort laïc, la Roumanie et la France. Il est question de voir en quoi le discours des médias publics sur la diversité n'altère pas le principe de la laïcité, la neutralité, le respect du pluralisme et l'intégralité des consciences. Pour ce faire, je vais retenir deux cas de figure, deux émissions télévisées diffusées sur les chaînes publiques de télévision en France et en Roumanie: l'émission "Le jour du Seigneur", avec ses déclinaisons d'intitulé au fil du temps "Programme du dimanche" et "Les chemins de la foi", diffusée sur France 2 et "Universul credintei" ("l'Univers de la foi") diffusée sur TVR1. En considérant ces deux programmes de télévision, je vais tenter de répondre globalement aux questionnements suivants: est-ce que tous les mouvements religieux sont-ils présents dans les médias audiovisuels publics autant que les acteurs des confessions religieuses traditionnellement implantées? Oui, c'est une réalité, certains mouvements disposent de leurs propres chaînes, mais leur présence sur leurs chaînes privées ne remplace pas un droit par un autre. S'agit-t-il alors d'une situation de monopole et de visibilité maximale des courants religieux dominants dans l'espace public au travers des médias publics? Plus de normalisation garantit plus d'accès compte tenu que le principe de laïcité prévoit l'égalité et l'absence de hiérarchie entre les différentes croyances et cultes?