Suchergebnisse

This paper deals with concepts of images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen's Union, the Latvian Aizsargi, and the Estonian Kaitseliit, with the aim of identifying factors that predetermined qualitative changes in these images in the different periods of activity of these paramilitary organisations. In addition, possible functions of the images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian riflemen are analysed. The study is based on the presumption that, in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen's Union, the Latvian Aizsargi and the Estonian Kaitseliit, the formation of the images of ethnic minorities in the different periods of activity of these organisations (the struggles for independence, the formation of the parliamentary system, authoritarian coups and presidential power, and national political crises) was predetermined by the practice of attaching ethnic groups to the relative camps of allies or foes, and by the policy of dividing ethnic minorities into groups of 'reliable' and 'unreliable'.

This paper deals with concepts of images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen's Union, the Latvian Aizsargi, and the Estonian Kaitseliit, with the aim of identifying factors that predetermined qualitative changes in these images in the different periods of activity of these paramilitary organisations. In addition, possible functions of the images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian riflemen are analysed. The study is based on the presumption that, in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen's Union, the Latvian Aizsargi and the Estonian Kaitseliit, the formation of the images of ethnic minorities in the different periods of activity of these organisations (the struggles for independence, the formation of the parliamentary system, authoritarian coups and presidential power, and national political crises) was predetermined by the practice of attaching ethnic groups to the relative camps of allies or foes, and by the policy of dividing ethnic minorities into groups of 'reliable' and 'unreliable'.

This paper deals with concepts of images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen's Union, the Latvian Aizsargi, and the Estonian Kaitseliit, with the aim of identifying factors that predetermined qualitative changes in these images in the different periods of activity of these paramilitary organisations. In addition, possible functions of the images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian riflemen are analysed. The study is based on the presumption that, in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen's Union, the Latvian Aizsargi and the Estonian Kaitseliit, the formation of the images of ethnic minorities in the different periods of activity of these organisations (the struggles for independence, the formation of the parliamentary system, authoritarian coups and presidential power, and national political crises) was predetermined by the practice of attaching ethnic groups to the relative camps of allies or foes, and by the policy of dividing ethnic minorities into groups of 'reliable' and 'unreliable'.

This paper deals with concepts of images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen's Union, the Latvian Aizsargi, and the Estonian Kaitseliit, with the aim of identifying factors that predetermined qualitative changes in these images in the different periods of activity of these paramilitary organisations. In addition, possible functions of the images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian riflemen are analysed. The study is based on the presumption that, in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen's Union, the Latvian Aizsargi and the Estonian Kaitseliit, the formation of the images of ethnic minorities in the different periods of activity of these organisations (the struggles for independence, the formation of the parliamentary system, authoritarian coups and presidential power, and national political crises) was predetermined by the practice of attaching ethnic groups to the relative camps of allies or foes, and by the policy of dividing ethnic minorities into groups of 'reliable' and 'unreliable'.

Researchers of Kant's political philosophy have not paid enough attention to the problem of certainty in politics which is inseparable from the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon. The primacy of practical reason means that morality has a higher value than knowledge. This is a fundamental presupposition of Kant's philosophy. However, this emphasis on the importance of morality leads to the problematic question of certainty in politics. The recognition of the primacy of morality seems to lead to a situation where politics loses the certainty that belongs to the sphere of noumenon. Such a situation seems to lead to an impossible situation when the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon reappears in the theory of practical reason. The paper puts forward a thesis that for Kant morality is the only ground that allows speaking about the certainty of politics. However, his understanding of certainty in politics has its drawbacks. Politics is dependent not only on the ontology of morality that was emphasized by Kant, but it is also dependent on the kind of certainty that one finds in the sphere of interpersonal relationships. Kant did not pay enough attention to this aspect which remains outside the sphere of the universal law of morality.

Researchers of Kant's political philosophy have not paid enough attention to the problem of certainty in politics which is inseparable from the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon. The primacy of practical reason means that morality has a higher value than knowledge. This is a fundamental presupposition of Kant's philosophy. However, this emphasis on the importance of morality leads to the problematic question of certainty in politics. The recognition of the primacy of morality seems to lead to a situation where politics loses the certainty that belongs to the sphere of noumenon. Such a situation seems to lead to an impossible situation when the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon reappears in the theory of practical reason. The paper puts forward a thesis that for Kant morality is the only ground that allows speaking about the certainty of politics. However, his understanding of certainty in politics has its drawbacks. Politics is dependent not only on the ontology of morality that was emphasized by Kant, but it is also dependent on the kind of certainty that one finds in the sphere of interpersonal relationships. Kant did not pay enough attention to this aspect which remains outside the sphere of the universal law of morality.

Researchers of Kant's political philosophy have not paid enough attention to the problem of certainty in politics which is inseparable from the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon. The primacy of practical reason means that morality has a higher value than knowledge. This is a fundamental presupposition of Kant's philosophy. However, this emphasis on the importance of morality leads to the problematic question of certainty in politics. The recognition of the primacy of morality seems to lead to a situation where politics loses the certainty that belongs to the sphere of noumenon. Such a situation seems to lead to an impossible situation when the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon reappears in the theory of practical reason. The paper puts forward a thesis that for Kant morality is the only ground that allows speaking about the certainty of politics. However, his understanding of certainty in politics has its drawbacks. Politics is dependent not only on the ontology of morality that was emphasized by Kant, but it is also dependent on the kind of certainty that one finds in the sphere of interpersonal relationships. Kant did not pay enough attention to this aspect which remains outside the sphere of the universal law of morality.

Researchers of Kant's political philosophy have not paid enough attention to the problem of certainty in politics which is inseparable from the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon. The primacy of practical reason means that morality has a higher value than knowledge. This is a fundamental presupposition of Kant's philosophy. However, this emphasis on the importance of morality leads to the problematic question of certainty in politics. The recognition of the primacy of morality seems to lead to a situation where politics loses the certainty that belongs to the sphere of noumenon. Such a situation seems to lead to an impossible situation when the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon reappears in the theory of practical reason. The paper puts forward a thesis that for Kant morality is the only ground that allows speaking about the certainty of politics. However, his understanding of certainty in politics has its drawbacks. Politics is dependent not only on the ontology of morality that was emphasized by Kant, but it is also dependent on the kind of certainty that one finds in the sphere of interpersonal relationships. Kant did not pay enough attention to this aspect which remains outside the sphere of the universal law of morality.

The paper argues that the distinction between the pre-political and the political in the form of the household and the state is essential to the understanding of Aristotle's communal projects. The analysis with the help of this distinction reveals the structure and principles of Aristotelian communal projects and removes tensions, which are rooted in different and frequently incompatible statements of Aristotle. In the course of the paper, it is showed that the household and the state can be defined as separate and yet interdependent communities and how these definitions affect the understanding of concrete constitutional communities.

The paper argues that the distinction between the pre-political and the political in the form of the household and the state is essential to the understanding of Aristotle's communal projects. The analysis with the help of this distinction reveals the structure and principles of Aristotelian communal projects and removes tensions, which are rooted in different and frequently incompatible statements of Aristotle. In the course of the paper, it is showed that the household and the state can be defined as separate and yet interdependent communities and how these definitions affect the understanding of concrete constitutional communities.

The paper argues that the distinction between the pre-political and the political in the form of the household and the state is essential to the understanding of Aristotle's communal projects. The analysis with the help of this distinction reveals the structure and principles of Aristotelian communal projects and removes tensions, which are rooted in different and frequently incompatible statements of Aristotle. In the course of the paper, it is showed that the household and the state can be defined as separate and yet interdependent communities and how these definitions affect the understanding of concrete constitutional communities.

The paper argues that the distinction between the pre-political and the political in the form of the household and the state is essential to the understanding of Aristotle's communal projects. The analysis with the help of this distinction reveals the structure and principles of Aristotelian communal projects and removes tensions, which are rooted in different and frequently incompatible statements of Aristotle. In the course of the paper, it is showed that the household and the state can be defined as separate and yet interdependent communities and how these definitions affect the understanding of concrete constitutional communities.

This article examines the impact of political cleavages existing in the host state on the receptivity of the political system toward minority claims, its proneness to accommodation and inclusivity toward minority political participation. Applying the theoretical framework of Political Opportunity Structure, the nation-wide political spectrum is regarded an as important element of the structure of political opportunities available to minority communities. By bringing together the cases of Russians in Estonia and Hungarians in Serbia, the article hypothesizes that in post-socialist nation-states, a higher degree of polarization of the political spectrum is more likely to expand the political opportunity structure for ethnic minorities in terms of inclusivity toward minority claims, compared to a political environment characterized by a consensus on the main directions of the country's development. The structure of established political conflicts in Estonia and Serbia are analyzed from the point of view of ethnic minority politics, assessing the effect of nation-wide cleavages on the patterns of cooperation with ethnic minority political forces and concrete impact on minority-related policies.

This article examines the impact of political cleavages existing in the host state on the receptivity of the political system toward minority claims, its proneness to accommodation and inclusivity toward minority political participation. Applying the theoretical framework of Political Opportunity Structure, the nation-wide political spectrum is regarded an as important element of the structure of political opportunities available to minority communities. By bringing together the cases of Russians in Estonia and Hungarians in Serbia, the article hypothesizes that in post-socialist nation-states, a higher degree of polarization of the political spectrum is more likely to expand the political opportunity structure for ethnic minorities in terms of inclusivity toward minority claims, compared to a political environment characterized by a consensus on the main directions of the country's development. The structure of established political conflicts in Estonia and Serbia are analyzed from the point of view of ethnic minority politics, assessing the effect of nation-wide cleavages on the patterns of cooperation with ethnic minority political forces and concrete impact on minority-related policies.

This article examines the impact of political cleavages existing in the host state on the receptivity of the political system toward minority claims, its proneness to accommodation and inclusivity toward minority political participation. Applying the theoretical framework of Political Opportunity Structure, the nation-wide political spectrum is regarded an as important element of the structure of political opportunities available to minority communities. By bringing together the cases of Russians in Estonia and Hungarians in Serbia, the article hypothesizes that in post-socialist nation-states, a higher degree of polarization of the political spectrum is more likely to expand the political opportunity structure for ethnic minorities in terms of inclusivity toward minority claims, compared to a political environment characterized by a consensus on the main directions of the country's development. The structure of established political conflicts in Estonia and Serbia are analyzed from the point of view of ethnic minority politics, assessing the effect of nation-wide cleavages on the patterns of cooperation with ethnic minority political forces and concrete impact on minority-related policies.