Suchergebnisse

Two analyses have been carried out for the purpose of this study. The first refers to the analysis of the gender differences in the development of civil sense (understanding citizenship) & the practice of citizenship (practicing citizenship). The second refers primarily to the analysis of the variables of the "school experience" (the school climate or the perceived opportunity for an open classroom discussion, & the variables of the perceived tasks of classroom learning or education) & how they influence the expected voting behaviour of adults. The findings were compared to similar international comparative studies (the 2001 TEA study, C. Hahn's study of 1998). Our study has shown that the gender differences regarding the civil political sense & the culture among young people have been diminishing but have not fully disappeared, & that there are significant differences among individual countries in that respect. Our research has shown that there are significant gender differences in their understanding of citizenship; these differences are somewhat smaller for the variable of the practice of citizenship among high-school students. However, those differences are not particularly pronounced. It seems that it is no longer justified to talk about civil political culture as "male culture," though gender still creates marked differences but no longer solely in favour of men. We have not come to the end of the road leading to a balanced civil political culture yet, at least regarding gender. & secondly, our study has shown that the political education of students & the perceived tasks of political education in schools influence the expected adult voting behaviour. This confirms the thesis that the classroom political education is relevant, at least to a limited degree, for the key variables of civil sense & practice. 4 Tables, 6 References. Adapted from the source document.

The essay first highlights certain basic features of the attitude of European immigrant countries toward 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 individual "national responses" regarding the existence of new ethnic communities reflect differences in understanding of the ethnic/national identity of individual countries. The author then addresses specifically 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 West European practice of racial & increasingly cultural discrimination & a universal Western belief in the tradition of liberalism, pluralism, & democracy. In connection with this, the role of Islam & the "Muslim" identity in the Muslim communities in West European countries are analyzed. 15 References. Adapted from the source document.

The essay first highlights certain basic features of the attitude of European immigrant countries toward 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 individual "national responses" regarding the existence of new ethnic communities reflect differences in understanding of the ethnic/national identity of individual countries. The author then addresses specifically 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 West European practice of racial & increasingly cultural discrimination & a universal Western belief in the tradition of liberalism, pluralism, & democracy. In connection with this, the role of Islam & the "Muslim" identity in the Muslim communities in West European countries are analyzed. 15 References. Adapted from the source document.

The author compares Hobbes' state of nature & Rawls' original position in an attempt to answer the question: How to arrive at a community starting from individualistic premises? The comparison shows a striking similarity between Hobbes' & Rawls' initial positions showing itself in the radical equality of the denizens in both "states of nature" & the insistence on the part of both authors to secure recognition of such equality. The essentially similar conditions in the state of nature suggest that the difference between their "social contracts" should lie in the other parts of their theories. The decisive differences lie in Rawls' assumption that individuals are motivated by a sense of justice (much stronger than in Hobbes' theory) that enables a choice of principles of justice in Rawls' state of nature. The agreement on principles is an expression of human sociability, while an agreement on a sovereign is a concession to human unsociability. 17 References. Adapted from the source document.

The author compares Hobbes' state of nature & Rawls' original position in an attempt to answer the question: How to arrive at a community starting from individualistic premises? The comparison shows a striking similarity between Hobbes' & Rawls' initial positions showing itself in the radical equality of the denizens in both "states of nature" & the insistence on the part of both authors to secure recognition of such equality. The essentially similar conditions in the state of nature suggest that the difference between their "social contracts" should lie in the other parts of their theories. The decisive differences lie in Rawls' assumption that individuals are motivated by a sense of justice (much stronger than in Hobbes' theory) that enables a choice of principles of justice in Rawls' state of nature. The agreement on principles is an expression of human sociability, while an agreement on a sovereign is a concession to human unsociability. 17 References. Adapted from the source document.

Although our talk about human rights is part of the ethical awareness of contemporary politics, it still has not received adequate theoretical justification & foundation. Serious philosophical problems arose in the very beginning of the history of the "human rights" concept, with Locke's liberal natural right & Kant's reasonable right. According to the author, the difficulty stems from the concept of person, for in every liberal legal theory the person is perceived as bearer of human & fundamental rights. Meanwhile, the dominant constitutional theory of human & fundamental rights starts from the identical meanings of "person" as an individual, in its uniqueness, & of "man" as a general definition. It is, however, necessary to start from the fundamental difference between the two key concepts. While the "man" concept is defined universalistically, there is no universal concept for persons & no possibility of breaking them down into subcategories. While every individual, as instance of the concept, must be defined in the same way as everyone else, persons are defined individualistically; each person is a unique individual which can be neither duplicated nor multiplied. The author proposes a solution of the fundamental rights problem-matter within the framework of constitutional law. Personal rights are brought to existence as follows: organs of the state, in accordance with positive law, give to the individual the title of state-citizen as an individualistically unique legal person. Everyone receives it, in the same way, as a unique & irreplaceable person. In the normal conditions, the state has the obligation to make sure, via courts & the police, that everyone's personal right is untouchable. On the basis of this logic, a demarcation line can be drawn between the personal fundamental rights & the collective rights of citizens (such as political rights, which the individual can practice only together with others). Only such an interpretation would provide our libertarian fundamental rights with a consistently secular character, with no concession to the internal attachment, in whichever way it may be concealed, to metaphysical or religious presuppositions. Adapted from the source document.

The author demonstrates that the envisaged solutions for the conflict between the liberal concept of freedom & the common good differ greatly. Also presented is a miscellany of possible solutions as well as the related contentious issues. However, the analysis has shown that almost all the mentioned authors see the need for some common good, for a "measure of freedom," but their proposed ways for solving the issue vary: while some think that the universal common good is necessary for regulating procedures conducive to the achievement of freely chosen individual aims, others think that the tolerance of cultural & value differences is a sufficient condition for solving the said problem. For example, J. Raz emphasizes moral pluralism as the basis of autonomy, while S. Nathanson thinks that pluralist aims can exist, but not morally varied ways of their achievement. These different concepts of the relationships between freedom & common good can have different effects on the concepts & the practice of public politics in contemporary societies. That is why the need for looking into the conflict between freedom & common good, differences & unity, private & public interest, is highly topical & represents a true challenge for all those who want to contribute to solving the problems of modern age & liberal democracies. Adapted from the source document.

The author looks into one of the most important concepts in the last decade of comparative research: social capital. The concept of social capital was originally developed in sociology, where it denotes potential benefits that individuals enjoy, derived from their involvement in various social networks. This concept was fully utilized in the field of comparative politics into which it was "introduced" by Robert Putnam in Making Democracy Work, in which he presents the results of his research in which he establishes a positive link between social capital -- embodied in the norms of generalized reciprocity, horizontal networks, & trust -- & higher levels of democratic efficiency. In the last decade, the concept has been used in a number of studies in comparative politics, the starting point of which was the thesis that spatial & temporal differences in the levels of political efficiency may, at least partly, be explained by the level of social capital of a community. By comparing the concepts of political culture & social capital, the author concludes that social capital is a major conceptual innovation in comparative politics & represents a revival of social/cultural variables in comparative analysis. 63 References. Adapted from the source document.

The author looks into one of the most important concepts in the last decade of comparative research: social capital. The concept of social capital was originally developed in sociology, where it denotes potential benefits that individuals enjoy, derived from their involvement in various social networks. This concept was fully utilized in the field of comparative politics into which it was "introduced" by Robert Putnam in Making Democracy Work, in which he presents the results of his research in which he establishes a positive link between social capital -- embodied in the norms of generalized reciprocity, horizontal networks, & trust -- & higher levels of democratic efficiency. In the last decade, the concept has been used in a number of studies in comparative politics, the starting point of which was the thesis that spatial & temporal differences in the levels of political efficiency may, at least partly, be explained by the level of social capital of a community. By comparing the concepts of political culture & social capital, the author concludes that social capital is a major conceptual innovation in comparative politics & represents a revival of social/cultural variables in comparative analysis. 63 References. Adapted from the source document.

In numerous European countries, majority nations & national minorities that live in them, aware of the complexity of relations between majorities & minorities in the ethnic sense & the ensuing dangers, have engaged in mutual accommodation & compromise, thus fashioning certain models of coexistence. Constitutional provisions of European states prove that there is no single model of recognition of the rights of national minorities. Still, European states may be divided into three groups: (1) those that advocate the constitutional principle of the integral nation & refuse to recognize any other ethnic origin of their citizens; (2) those that do not divide their ethnic communities into majority & minority ones, which means that they do not recognize the category of the national minority, but protect the ethnic identity of their members by distinguishing their citizens by the languages they use; & (3) those that recognize the notion of the majority nation & national minorities. The latter states have elaborated provisions regarding the rights of national minorities, particularly the protection of their national, cultural, religious, & linguistic identity, with major differences in the scope of individual rights. 6 References. Adapted from the source document.

In numerous European countries, majority nations & national minorities that live in them, aware of the complexity of relations between majorities & minorities in the ethnic sense & the ensuing dangers, have engaged in mutual accommodation & compromise, thus fashioning certain models of coexistence. Constitutional provisions of European states prove that there is no single model of recognition of the rights of national minorities. Still, European states may be divided into three groups: (1) those that advocate the constitutional principle of the integral nation & refuse to recognize any other ethnic origin of their citizens; (2) those that do not divide their ethnic communities into majority & minority ones, which means that they do not recognize the category of the national minority, but protect the ethnic identity of their members by distinguishing their citizens by the languages they use; & (3) those that recognize the notion of the majority nation & national minorities. The latter states have elaborated provisions regarding the rights of national minorities, particularly the protection of their national, cultural, religious, & linguistic identity, with major differences in the scope of individual rights. 6 References. Adapted from the source document.

The Slovenian model of political system envisages that the president of the Republic has only representative, initiative & protocolary functions. According to Elgie's definition, Slovenia might be categorized as a sort of a semipresidential regime; hence, the historical, constitutional & political circumstances in which the role of the president of the Republic in the Slovenian political system should be looked into. After a careful analysis of the political tradition & culture, & the development of the constitutional culture in particular, the author analyzes the constitutional-political practice & the results of the presidential elections, their political orientation & the difference between the constitutional powers & the presidential performances. The author concludes that Slovenia does not have a powerful but a symbolic president of the state, despite the fact that the presidents are elected directly; consequently, the political system of Slovenia should be classified as a "parliamentary system with a president." Since the history of the individual presidency in Slovenia is still very short, for the time being it is very hard to assess all its major aspects; only the future developments will reliably demonstrate the real competences & the constraints of the president of the Republic as a legal & political actor. References. Adapted from the source document.

The regimes created after the collapse of communism are based on the belief that the liberal-democratic political system & the market economy are a sufficient guarantee for the personal prosperity & the proclaimed political equality of all individuals. Practice, however, shows that this is not so & that, when women are concerned, only an "intervention" via a variety of support mechanisms enables the realization of equal opportunities. This is true both for the field of politics & employment. European policies offer a number of solutions, tested in Croatia & within the project "Attitudes of employers in the employment of women." The findings show that the attitudes concerning women at the workplace are more modern than those regarding their role in the family. Also, the support mechanisms in the employment of women & the performance of women at their workplace are selectively accepted. Women are still perceived as employees optimally linked to the traditional female professions & the mid-level executive posts in companies. The gender differences are the sole criterion on which employers base their attitudes, which leads to the conclusion that the problems of women in society are still not recognized as communal. 6 Tables, 12 Graphs, 12 References. Adapted from the source document.

The regimes created after the collapse of communism are based on the belief that the liberal-democratic political system & the market economy are a sufficient guarantee for the personal prosperity & the proclaimed political equality of all individuals. Practice, however, shows that this is not so & that, when women are concerned, only an "intervention" via a variety of support mechanisms enables the realization of equal opportunities. This is true both for the field of politics & employment. European policies offer a number of solutions, tested in Croatia & within the project "Attitudes of employers in the employment of women." The findings show that the attitudes concerning women at the workplace are more modern than those regarding their role in the family. Also, the support mechanisms in the employment of women & the performance of women at their workplace are selectively accepted. Women are still perceived as employees optimally linked to the traditional female professions & the mid-level executive posts in companies. The gender differences are the sole criterion on which employers base their attitudes, which leads to the conclusion that the problems of women in society are still not recognized as communal. 6 Tables, 12 Graphs, 12 References. Adapted from the source document.

The future of the contemporary state is considered genealogically via a reconstructive review of Rousseau's theory of political law, which depicts the original project of the constitution of the democratic state as a political community of citizens. Rousseau envisaged the modern state as an epochal legal/political program of the concurrent subjectivization of a nation (as ethos) into a people (as demos) & the selfish man (raisonneur violent) into the citizen (citoyen). The rationale of this subjectivization is expressed in the theory of the general will. A people exist as a political subject, as a law-giver, only as a subject of the general will, just as individuals become free citizens through the process of democratic generalization of their political will. The logic of the process of the generalization of the will, as political emancipation, lies within one nation as demos. A legitimate state is possible only if it realizes the individuality of a people as a substantial totality. General will is always solely public, the political will of a people, its will for its own identity. The national democratic state is not a historical given; the free will is a creation, a project of the actualization of the rule of the general will realized by a sovereign people. The state is an unavoidable space of the equalization of the general will of a people & the will of all free individuals, in which citizens within the legislative process accomplish their collective, inter-subjective autonomy. From the point of view of the prospects of the realization of this project, contemporary states are unfinished, even unfinishable. Although in the contemporary plural society, the national democratic state is no longer the sole space of the political & the legal subjectivization of the citizens, it is still undoubtedly the central one. Rousseau's theory of the general will offers the epochal criteria for the recognition of the political character of any citizen's "political association," not only with the state, but also with sub-state or supra-state formations. Each & every political association is a genuine democratic community only if it is the "work of art" of the citizens themselves who self-confidently shape their collective activity, since a community of citizens is possible only if this integration represents the will of all of them as a sum of the irreducible differences among them. 47 References. Adapted from the source document.