Suchergebnisse

Zusammenfassung: Vesti su loše po naše zdravlje. Čitanje vesti vodi do osećanja straha i čini nas nespokojnim ili agresivnim, istovremeno sputavajući našu kreativnost i sposobnost da sveobuhvatnije promišljamo svet. Rešenje? Prestanimo da ih čitamo. Prestanite da čitate vesti je Dobelijev kritički osvrt na opasnosti najtoksičnijeg oblika informacija – vesti. Dobeli ukazuje na štetu koju nanose našoj pažnji i blagostanju. Knjiga autora bestselera Umetnost jasnog razmišljanja nudi čitaocu smernice ka mnogim mogućim prednostima života bez vesti. U svetu sve većih potresa i podela, Prestanite da čitate vesti je putokaz ka životu sa više slobodnog vremena, dubljim uvidima i manje strepnje. --page [4] of cover.

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.

Predmet ove disertacije je teorijska analiza regulatornog, komunikološkog, tehnološkog i socio-kulturnog okvira u kome nastaje i širi se "govor mržnje", kao i analiza sadržaja i analiza efekata govora mržnje u internet komunikaciji u Srbiji. Cilj disertacije bio je da preciznije definiše sadržaj govora mržnje i kontekst u kome on nastaje, da u odnosu na kulturološke specifičnosti Srbije preciznije utvrdi granicu između mere u kojoj je neophodno omogućiti nesmetanu slobodu izražavanja i ograničiti širenje govora mržnje. Osnovna hipoteza u ovom radu bila je da je koncept govora mržnje višeznačan i da njegovo razumevanje zavisi od geografskog, kulturnog i uopšte socijalnog konteksta u kome se on manifestuje. Govor mržnje na internetu negativno utiče na javnu komunikaciju te samim tim i na proces formiranja javne sfere. Budući da tako ometa kvalitetnu raspravu o problemima od društvenog značaja, govor mržnje otežava donošenje demokratskih odluka i na direktan način urušava demokratske vrednosti u društvu. U istraživanju je sprovedena komparativna analiza evropskih i nacionalnih pravnih akata u oblasti govora mržnje i slobode izražavanja, dat je kritički pregled ključnih međunarodnih naučnih studija i istraživanja govora mržnje na internetu, kao i institucionalna analiza postojećih mehanizama za suzbijanje govora mržnje. Pored toga sprovedena je analiza odabranih aktera i analiza sadržaja internet stranica na kojima je plasiran govor mržnje prema određenim manjinskim grupama u Srbiji. U istraživanju je identifikovan, opisana i problematizovan fenomen govora mržnje na internetu u kontekstu javne komunikacije u Srbiji. U definisanju samog pojma govora mržnje, kroz komparativnu analizu različitih izvora, uočeno je da njegovo identfikovanje zavisi od toga šta se u određenom društvenom, političkom i kulturnom konetkst smatra za osnovni problem koji želi da se reši ovakvim definicijama. Posebno je istaknuta razlika u shvatanju govora mržnje u različitim pravnim tradicijama u svetu. Pored toga, u široj 4 javnosti kao i u različitoj stručnoj literaturi često nije dovoljno dobro definisana jasna granica govora mržnje u odnosu na uvrede, klevete, negaciju nekih istorijskih događaja ili opravdavanje zločina, vređanje simbola, kritiku javnih ličnosti, različitih političkih stavova i religija. Nedovoljno jasna granica između dozvoljenog i potencijalno zabranjenog izražavanja dovodi do nesporazuma i neefikasne borbe protiv govora mržnje koji bi potencijalno mogao da izazove ozbiljne negativne posledice. Oštra kritika nekog pojedinca ili neke grupe veoma lako može biti protumačena kao govor mržnje, a takav pristup zapravo zatvara prostor za diskusiju o nekom problemu i na direktan način sputava slobodu izražavanja, te ugrožava deliberativan proces u demokratskom društvu. ; The topic of this dissertation is the theoretical analysis of the regulatory, communication, technological and socio-cultural framework in which the "hate speech" is being developed, as well as analysis of the content and analysis of the effects of hate speech in online communication in Serbia. The aim of the dissertation was to more precisely define the content of hate speech and the context in which it arises, and in relation to the cultural specifics of Serbia, more precisely determines the boundary between the measure in which it is necessary to provide unhindered freedom of expression and limit the spread of hate speech. The main hypothesis in this work was that the concept of hate speech is multidimensional and that its understanding depends on the geographical, cultural and general social context in which it manifests itself. Hate speech online has a negative impact on public communication and, consequently, on the process of forming a public sphere. Since it hinders the quality debate on the problems of social coercion, hate speech makes it difficult to make democratic decisions and directly undermines the stability of democratic values in society. The study has conducted a comparative and normative analysis of European and national legal acts in the field of hate speech and freedom of expression, as well as other international scientific studies and research in order to better understand the problem of hate speech online, as well as institutional analysis of existing mechanisms for combating hate speech. In addition, an analysis of selected actors of hate speech was conducted through an analysis of the content of the websites where hate speech was addressed to certain minority groups in Serbia. The research described the phenomenon of hate speech online as a complex phenomenon needed to be analysed from several angles to show more clearly all the problems and all the challenges of its precise definition. In defining the notion of hate speech itself, through a 8 comparative analysis of various sources, it is noted that it depends on what is considered to be a basic problem which particular country wants to solve with such definitions. There is a particular difference in understanding of the hate speech in various international legal traditions. In general public, as in various professional literatures, the definition of hate speech is often not clear enough in relation to insults, defamation, denial of some historical events or justification of crimes, insulting symbols, and criticism of public figures, political affiliations and religions. The insufficiently clear boundary between permitted and potentially prohibited expression leads to misunderstandings and ineffective fight against hate speech that could potentially cause serious negative consequences. A sharp critique of an individual or of a group can easily be interpreted as hate speech, and such an approach actually closes the space for discussion and directly suppresses freedom of expression and endangers the deliberative process in a democratic society.