The essay first highlights certain basic features of the attitude of the European immigrant countries towards the new (migrant) ethnic minorities in their midst, the attitude that at the same time is indicative of the existence of various forms of ethnicity in the development of the European nation-states. The differences in the individual "national responses" regarding the existence of new ethnic communities reflect these differences in the understanding of the ethnic/national identity of individual countries. The author then goes on to deal more specifically with the presence of the Muslim population in West-European countries, the population that - perhaps more than any other group of "aliens" - is torn between the Westeuropean practice of ethnic and increasingly cultural discrimination, and a belief in liberalism and pluralism. ln connection with this, the role of Islam and the "Muslim" identity in the Muslim communities in West- European countries is analyzed. (SOI : PM: S. 108)
In numerous European countries, majority nations and national minorities that live in them, aware of the complexity of relations between majorities and minorities in the ethnic sense, and the ensuing dangers, have engaged in mutual accommodation and compromise, thus fashioning certain models of coexistence. Constitutional provisions of European states prove that there is no single model of the recognition of the rights of national minorities. Still, European states may be divided into three groups. The first group includes those states which advocate the constitutional principle of the integral nation and refuse to recognize any other ethnic origin of their citizens. The second group comprises those states which do not divide its ethnic communities into majority and minority ones, which practically means that they do not recognize the category of the national minority; they protect the ethnic identity of their members by dividing their equal citizens by the languages they use. The third group includes those countries which recognize the notion of the majority nation and national minorities. This group has elaborated the provisions regarding the rights of national minorities, particularly the protection of their national, cultural, religious and linguistic identity, with major differences in the scope of individual rights. (SOI : PM: S. 84)
This article firstly focuses on the initial recognition, in the final period of the second Yugoslavia, of the existence of social inequalities, as the first serious symptoms of abandoning the ideology of social equality and socialism as a whole. Moreover, the nationalist mobilization was used as a lever for restoration of capitalism as a typical class society. After that it briefly outlines two post-war periods of structuring social opportunities in societies in the West, and partly also in the East. The first period is designated primarily by egalitarian tendencies, which is manifest in increased popularity of critical and radical trends in social sciences. The second period, which still lasts, is quite opposite in orientation, and this is, in turn, manifest in ever greater relevance of social Darwinism as a discursive foundation of a series of sciences. The next, and largest, part of the article is dedicated to an attempt at explaining the permanence of social inequalities, and the author stresses the inexhaustible character of Rousseau's question regarding the origin of social inequalities. In the present-day quest for an answer to that question, certain similarities are noticeable between (neo) evolutionism and (neo) Marxism. Although Marx himself stressed the correspondence of his conception of class struggles in history with Darwin's conception of struggles for survival in nature, but also took into account the differences (between natural evolution and human history), the conclusion on the identity of their conceptions imposes itself through observations about the constant defeat of the proletariat in age-long struggles against the oppressors, which continue to this very day in the epoch of neo-liberal global capitalism. Reflecting on possibilities of a generally different outcome in the struggles for a more just society, the author finds that there are two interrelated prerequisites to their existence. The first has to do with connecting the theory and practice of liberalism and socialism with the aim of establishing a balance between the mechanisms of individual freedom and competition on the one hand, and social sensitivity or solidarity on the other. The second prerequisite is the construction of a world democratic state. Its political interest and scope of governing would neutralize the key concept (and self-reproduction mechanism) of social Darwinism -- inclusive fitness. Quite simply, the latter means to favour "one's own" group while humiliating or excluding the other. In a society with a globally ruling government, the division between "one's own" and "somebody else's" parts of the world -- the boundaries of which are nowadays all too often shifted to and fro as a consequence of the erratic character of expansion and contraction of the market and the breaking out of conflagrations of war, producing a permanent Hobbesian "state of nature" -- would make way for wisdom of governing and for work of all for the benefit of all. Adapted from the source document.
У овом раду разматрали смо допринос дела функционера најзначајнијег професионалног удружења музичара у међуратној Југославији – Савеза музичара у Краљевини СХС Југославији, спровођењу словенске културне интеграције. Пратећи деловање групе окупљене око званичног гласила организације Jugoslavenski muzičar / Muzičar, у међународним оквирима, издвојили смо кључне подухвате који су покренути у периоду између 1923. и 1929. с циљем зближавања и интеркултурне размене са словенским музичарима и стручњацима. Резултати анализе видова и интензитета колаборације загребачких музичара с музичарима из словенских земаља посматрани су у компарацији с резултатима ранијих истраживања. Циљ тога био је да се размотри да ли су и у којој мери настојања ове групације кореспондирала са сродним тежњама других југословенских и словенских музичара, као и с доминантним ставовима и праксом политичке и интелектуалне елите с ових простора. ; Although many Slavic peoples were given long-awaited political independence after the Great War, it did not suppress their strivings to attain stronger cultural bonds and cultural integration that thrived throughout the 19th century. In the new geopolitical circuimstances, All-Slavism was mostly interpreted as a vehicle to actualize the potentials of Slavs to create cultural forms of universal value through a synthesis of opposing values of Western and Eastern civilizations. Despite the fact that its definitions varied significantly depending on the differences of ideological basis of individuals and groups that promoted it, the common ground represented a belief that Slavs shared the same worldviews, values and spiritual properties and that this similarity needed to be used as an emancipatory tool – for mutual cultual exchange, support, development, and progress. In interwar Yugoslavia of 1920s, All-Slavism was particularly promoted among musicians and music specialists. Among the numerous keen supporters were the representatives of the Association of Musicians of the Kingdom of SCS/Yugoslavia gathered around the periodical Jugoslavenski muzičar/Muzičar (Yugoslav musician). Led by Fran/Franjo Šidak and Jaroslav Šidak, this group contributed to the expansion of All-Slavic tendencies in the Yugoslav public and music spheres. From 1923 to 1929, these musicians settled in Zagreb initiated numerous activities aimed at developing collaboration with Slavic musicians around Europe. Unlike many like-minded groups in different Slavic countries of the time, Zagreb musicians created friendly relations with their Soviet colleagues, specifically with the leaders of the Всесоюзным профессиональным союзом работников искусств, ВСЕРАБИС (All-Soviet Professional Association of Art Workers). During the five years of extensive exchange with other Slavic musicians and specialist, they established fruitful correspondence and coperation with Bulgarian musicians, most of all with the high representatives of Bulgarian musical organizations. As a result of that, series of articles dealing with Bulgarian music history and musical life were published in Jugoslavenski muzičar/Muzičar together with detailed reports, while a number of essays of Yugoslav authors were reprinted in Bulgarian music journals. Results of the analysis of type and extent of collaboration between Zagreb and other Slavic musicians were compared with the results of previous researches. The aim of this paper was to consider whether the efforts of this group corresponded with the related tendencies of Yugoslav and Slavic musicians, as well as with the dominant views and practices of the Yugoslav political and intellectual elite.