Suchergebnisse

Danak u krvi uveo je sultan Murat II. godine 1420. Iako je taj danak u suprotnosti sa šerijatom, Osmanlije su svake pete godine odvodili kršćansku djecu u dobi od osam do deset, a pokatkad i do dvadeset godina. Tjelesno sposobniju djecu slali su na sultanov dvor, a ostalu turskim obiteljima u Anadoliju i Rumunjsku gdje su ih poučavali turskomu načinu života. Od djece dovedene dankom u krvi stvarane su janjičarske elitne vojne postrojbe. Janjičari su se nakon vojne službe mogli oženiti muslimankama i tako su njihovi potomci bili oslobođeni iste sudbine. Nakon pada Bosansko-humskoga Kraljevstva 1463. godine u janjičare i u hareme odvedeno je stotinu tisuća kršćanske djece. Kršćani su svojim dječacima odsijecali prste, učili ih da se pretvaraju gluhonijemima, tetovirali im križeve i na druge ih načine spašavali od odvođenja u janjičare. Međutim s Balkana je od XV. do kraja XVII. stoljeća u janjičare odvedeno dvije do tri stotine tisuća dječaka. Među tom djecom bio je i dječak koji je dobio ime Mehmed-paša Sokolović, koji je u Osmanskome Carstvu ostvario blistavu karijeru postavši velikim vezirom 1565. godine. Sjećajući se svoje majke koju je posljednji put vidio s mnogim drugim majkama kako su s druge strane Drine kroz plač i jecaje ispraćale svoju djecu u janjičare, Mehmed-paša Sokolović dao je na tome mjestu sagraditi most. ; Tribute in blood was introduced by Sultan Murat II. in 1420. Although the tribute was opposite to the Sharia, every five years the Ottomans took the Christian children aged eight to ten, and sometimes up to twenty years. Physically capable children were sent to the sultan's palace, while other children were sent to the Turkish families in Anatolia and Romania where they were trained by the Turkish way of life. Those children were used to create elite military units - the janissary. Janissaries could marry a Muslim after the military service so their descendants were exempted from the same fate. With the fall of the Bosnian-Hum kingdom, in 1463. one hundred thousand Christian children were taken away in Janissaries and harems. Christians would often cut off the finger to their boys, taught them to turn deaf-mute, tattooed the crosses on their body and in every way tried to save their own children so they wouldn't be taken away in the Janissaries. However, from the 15th century by the end of 17th century two hundred to three hundred thousand boys were taken away from Balkan to become the Janissaries. Among those children was a boy named Mehmed Pasha Sokolovic who made a brilliant career in the Ottoman Empire, becoming the Grand Vizier in 1565. Remembering his mother when he last saw her with many other mothers, who were on the other side of the Drina River crying and groaning because they were seeing off their children in the Janissaries, Mehmed-Pasha Sokolovic ordered to build the bridge on that place.

In this paper I analyse narratives and discourses mobilised in the prime-time videos Croatian Government aired on national television channels prior to the country's EU referendum, in which citizens were to be informed on the possible advantages and disadvantages of Croatia's accession to the EU. I adopt a double focus. First, I seek to identify some of the key communicative forms utilised in those videos for purposes of achieving the electoral consent to Croatia's entrance in the EU. Second, I discuss the significance of those videos for an understanding of Croatian government's relationship with citizens, that is, for the overall democratic process in which part of sovereignty is to be transferred to the supra-national level. By deconstructing linguistic (audiovisual) dynamics within the featured videos, I identify typical discursive components across the featured videos, that is, the implicit power relation between the producer of the videos (the Government) and the addressees (citizens), as articulated in the thematic consistencies (a systematic absence of the outcomes of EU entry negotiations) and structural patterns (a 'person in the street' performs posing a question to the camera and an anonymous voice responds through denial, ridicule or diversion from the posed question) within the analysed videos. My research suggests that the videos served not as information platforms (which they were supposedly designed to be) but as Government's propaganda. Instead of balanced information on Croatia's entry to the EU, the Government aired commercially formed advertisements in which it was 'selling' the alleged benefits of accession, guaranteed by nothing else but the mere 'entry'. Instead of demonstrating the results of Croatian negotiations with the EU, the videos told stories about miraculous economic welfares achieved by some of the member states. I contextualise the videos with reference to wider debates on political communications concerning the pre-accession period in some other member states, and to the legacy of authoritarian communications of the elites with the citizens in the specific Croatian context. Adapted from the source document.

This research is premised on two theoretical constructs: that maps do not objectively depict space and that traditional cartography produces a geopolitical narrative. The research aim is to investigate geopolitical influence in modern, digital representations of space, and vice versa. This paper is divided into three parts: In the first, the digital representation of space is introduced and explained, and two widely acknowledged digital cartographic services are established as the empirical foundation of the research – Google (Google Maps and Google Earth), designed by cartographic and geo-data professionals, and OpenStreetMap, built through crowdsourcing. In the second part, the geopolitical features of traditional cartography are discussed in the context of digital mapping, including ethnocentricity and hierarchical representations of space, similarities to geopolitische karte, and "minor geopolitics." The final part asks and answers a key question about geopolitical subjectivity: "Who benefits from the geopolitical narratives in digital representations of space?" ; This research is premised on two theoretical constructs: that maps do not objectively depict space and that traditional cartography produces a geopolitical narrative. The research aim is to investigate geopolitical influence in modern, digital representations of space, and vice versa. This paper is divided into three parts: In the first, the digital representation of space is introduced and explained, and two widely acknowledged digital cartographic services are established as the empirical foundation of the research – Google (Google Maps and Google Earth), designed by cartographic and geo-data professionals, and OpenStreetMap, built through crowdsourcing. In the second part, the geopolitical features of traditional cartography are discussed in the context of digital mapping, including ethnocentricity and hierarchical representations of space, similarities to geopolitische karte, and "minor geopolitics." The final part asks and answers a key question about geopolitical subjectivity: "Who benefits from the geopolitical narratives in digital representations of space?"

In Macedonian culture and remembrance, the children evacuated from northern Greek villages in 1948 by communist activists during the Greek Civil War and sent to socialist states in the Balkans and in Eastern Europe are known as "child refugees from the Aegean part of Macedonia." Such narratives, as part of a contested past, play an important part in the national politics of memory, usually as a tool utilized in the master narratives, but are not theoretically analyzed any further and lack further epistemic and educational presence in the historical curriculum. Thus, I am interested in the position of these oral testimonies in the politics of memory and their potential to challenge the politics of memory. ; U makedonskoj kulturi i sjećanju, djeca koju su 1948. za vrijeme Grčkog građanskog rata komunisti evakuirali iz sela na sjeveru Grčke i poslali u socijalističke države na Balkanu i u Istočnoj Europi danas su poznata kao "djeca izbjeglice iz egejskog dijela Makedonije". Takvi narativi, kao dio sporne povijesti, igraju bitnu ulogu u nacionalnoj politici sjećanja, obično kao sredstvo koje se koristi za izgradnju metanarativa, ali ih se dalje od toga teoretski ne analizira niti oni drže epistemičko i edukacijsko mjesto u povijesnom kurikulumu. Stoga, zainteresirana sam za poziciju tih oralnih svjedočanstava u politici sjećanja i njihov potencijal da ospore politiku sjećanja.

Kako dominantni državni narativ utječu na komemorativne prakse u lokalnim zajednicama u različitim povijesnim razdobljima? Ovom pitanju pristupamo provodeći studiju komemoracija Drugoga svjetskog rata u Gospiću u dva različita perioda promjene političkog režima. Studija se temelji na dokumentima iz gospićkog arhiva, člancima iz lokalnih novina, postojećim znanstvenim radovima o ovom kraju, kao i izvješćima državnih institucija i nevladinih organizacija. Uz to, fotografirali smo očuvane spomenike i groblja iz Drugoga svjetskog rata ili pak prikupili arhivske snimke i građu onih koji su uklonjeni ili uništeni u promjeru od pedeset kilometara oko Gospića. Članak pokazuje kako su se narativi, simboli i rituali koji su činili dio komemoracija nasilja iz Drugoga svjetskog rata promijenili kada su suprotstavljeni politički akteri pokušali uspostaviti vlastitu političku legitimaciju ili zadobiti političku podršku. ; How do dominant state narratives influence commemorative practices in local communities in different historical periods? We address this question by carrying out a study of World War Two commemorations in Gospić in two distinct periods of a political regime transition. The study is based on the documents from the archive of Gospić, articles from the local paper, existing scholarly publications on this area, as well as reports from state institutions and non-governmental organizations. We also photographed standing monuments and graveyards dating back to World War Two, or collected archival images and documentation of those that were removed or destroyed, in a fifty-kilometer radius around Gospić. We show how the narratives, symbols, and rituals that formed part of commemorations of World War Two violence changed when competing political actors attempted to establish their political legitimacy or gain political support.

U usporedbi s drugim pričama u knjizi Dablinci, priči "Pansion" pridavalo se relativno malo pozornosti. Jedan od razloga jest njezina očita jednostavnost u odnosu na druge priče u ovoj knjizi. To je, naizgled, stara priča, poput narodne, o tome kako spletkarske majka i kći prevare naivnoga muškarca. Namjera je ovoga rada demonstrirati uistinu profinjenu strategiju pripovijedanja, kako se "varanje" Boba Dorana najbolje razumijeva u usporedbi sa serijom drugih duplikata, dvojnika, priča koje ju dopunjuju te kroz takvo štivo ponuditi objašnjenje seksualne/tekstualne politike u priči "Pansion". S tim ciljem autor je krenuo od širokih razmatranja ove priče i konteksta djela kao cjeline, progresivno do posebnih koncepata pripovijedanja i jezika, završavajući s gramatičkim ispitivanjem jedne riječi. ; Compared with many of the stories in Dubliners, "The Boarding House" has received relatively little attention. This is due perhaps to its apparent "simplicity" when compared with the other stories in the volume. It is, on the surface, an old story, the folktale-like tricking of the naive male by a scheming mother and daughter. It is the purpose of this paper to demonstrate just how sophisticated the narrative strategy really is, how the "duping" of Bob Doran is best read against/within a series of other duplications, or doublings, or counterparts, and through such a reading to offer an explication of the sexual/textual politics of "The Boarding House." In order to do this I move from a broad consideration of the story in the context of the volume as a whole to a progressively more particular concern with narrative and language, ending with the grammatical interrogation of one word.

Tko su naši suvremeni pučki tribuni? Kakva je njihova zastupnička namjera? U čije točno ime govore zastupnici naroda? I kakav ih odaziv zajednice prati? Zastupaju li u istoj mjeri »elitne«, »svenarodske« i vlastite interese unutar šire interpretativne zajednice? Stvara li svako uzimanje zastupničkog ili reprezentacijskog prava ujedno i osobit socijalni otpor (neuključenih ili prozvanih glasova), baš kao i s njime povezane političke progone? Tekst tumači javnu sferu kao dinamičko polje ideologijskih i estetičkih sučeljavanja, s posebnim naglaskom na umjetničko stvaralaštvo Olivera Frljića i Mate Matišića kao aktualnih pučkih tribuna. Obojicu prati licemjerna optužnica za »manjak patriotizma«, premda upravo napor navedenih umjetnika za uvažavanjem socijalno najranjivijih skupina i pojedinaca svjedoči u prilog osobite etike skrbi, samim time i povišene brižnosti prema zajednici kojoj se obraćaju. Tekst također sadrži i kratke razgovore s obojicom umjetnika na temu umjetnosti kao javnog zastupništva i njegovih kriza. ; Who are our contemporary tribuni plebis? What is their representative intent? What kind of communal response they receive, both from »elite« and from »common« interpretative communities? What kind of public resistance and public persecution follow from their choice to speak as the public representatives? The text understands public sphere as a contesting ideological and aesthetical field and therefore approaches works of Oliver Fljić and Mate Matišić as two artists who fiercely challenge the irresponsibility of the Croatian community and insist on public duty of intellectuals and artists to reveal both structural patterns and private schemata of social injustice. The fact that both of them are oftentimes accused in the media for their »lack of patriotism« is viewed as a grotesque form of social hypocrisy, since Matišić and Frljić demonstrate consistent care about the most wounded parts of our political community, therefore building intense field of social empathy and communal ethics of care. Text also includes voices of Mate Matišić and Oliver Frljić in response to the questions the author made.

U radu se ljubav poima kao kulturna pojava čije značenje je, za pojedinca, rezultat različitih diskursa o ljubavi. Dok je jedan od njih diskurs o romantičnoj ljubavi te ulazak u brak, koji se na nju nadovezuje, a potom i zasnivanje obitelji (Giddens 1992; Illouz 2012), diskurs o demokratskoj i fluidnoj ljubavi obuhvaća "odstupanja" od takva slijeda (Giddens 1992; Bauman 2003). Uvidom u različite narative, znanstvene i kolokvijalne, u radu se problematizira stvaranje predodžbi o budućoj ljubavnoj vezi i braku. ; In the paper love is perceived as a cultural phenomenon the significance of which – for the individual – is the result of different discourses on love. One of them is the discourse on romantic love and its follow-up, marriage and family (Giddens 1992; Illouz 2012). On the other hand, the discourse on democratic and fluid love covers "departures" from such a sequence (Giddens 1992; Bauman 2003). After due consideration of different (scientific and colloquial) narratives, the paper problematises the development of ideas about future love relationships and marriage.

Pri analizi dvaju suprotstavljenih narativa povezanih s temom uspostave vojske Europske unije (EU) u europskom medijskom i političkom prostoru u ovome radu upotrebljava se teorija sekrutizacije te se temeljem analize diskursa i javnog mnijenja dokazuje da suprotstavljeni narativi ispunjavaju uvjete da ih prema definiciji Kopenhagenske škole svedemo pod pojam sekuritizacije. Prema autorima Kopenhagenske škole, sekuritizacija je govorni čin kojim provoditelj sekuritizacije do tada nepolitizirani odnosno politizirani predmet debate prikazuje kao egzistencijalnu prijetnju prema referentnom objektu koja zahtijeva hitne mjere. Prvi narativ koji rad analizira je neizvjesna sigurnosna situacija u Europi i oko nje koja bi mogla prerasti u egzistencijalnu prijetnju društvu Europske unije i europskom identitetu zbog nepostojanja vojske Unije. Drugi, tome oprečni narativ pak interpretira uspostavu vojske Europske unije kao egzistencijalnu prijetnju NATO savezu i suverenitetu država članica Unije. Rad postavlja pitanje je li sekuritizacija upotrebljiva poluga u nastojanju provođenja odnosno blokiranja čvršće intergracije EU na području obrane. Analizom diskursa glavnih aktera, provoditelja sekuritizacije i sigurnosnih strategija EU, Velike Britanije i Sjedinjenih Američkih Država te analizom prihvaćanja narativa od strane publike, rad zaključuje da su ti oba narativa činovi sekuritizacije. Prvi narativ, sekuritiziran od strane europskih federalista na čelu s predsjednikom Europske komisije Jean-Claudeom Junckerom, kao referentne objekte koji se pod hitno moraju zaštiti postavlja društvo EU i europski identitet. Egzistencijalna prijetnja referentnim objektima dolazi od ruske politike, ali i neizvjesne sigurnosne situacije u neposrednom susjedstvu EU-a. Ovaj narativ kao rješenje nameće uspostavu vojske EU-a. Drugi narativ, sekuritiziran od strane euroskeptika, NATO saveza te političkih elita Velike Britanije, SAD-a i Rusije, kao referentne objekte koji se pod hitno moraju zaštititi postavlja suverenitet država članica EU i opstanak NATO saveza koji se nalaze u egzistencijalnoj prijetnji od strane uspostave vojske Europske unije, čija bi uspostava oduzela nacionalne vojske tj. suverenitet država članica u području obrane, a postojanje NATO saveza učinilo izlišnim ; The thesis proves that around the establishment of the European Union army, we can infer two opposing narratives in European Union's media and political space and that both meet the conditions to be called a securitization. The first narrative (positive securitization) that the thesis analyses argues that the precarious the security situation in and around Europe could become an existential threat to the society of European Union (EU) and European identity because of the paucity of the EU army. The second narrative (negative securitization) that the thesis analyses interprets the establishment of the EU army as an existential threat to the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) and the sovereignty of EU member states. Securitization is defined through the Theory of Securitisation by the scientists belonging to Copenhagen School (Barry Buzan, Ole Wæver and Jaap de Wilde) as a speech act by which an actor (securitizing actor) presents a specific issue, until then only politicised in the political or public space, as an existential threat to the referent object that requires extraordinary measures. For a speech act to be an act of securitization and not just an attempt of securitisation, public (or a target group) needs to accept the speech as such. Thus, the Theory of Securitization affirms that the chosen narratives are acts of securitizations through discourse analysis and public opinion analysis. Elements of securitization are before mentioned securitization actor, referent object and public, as well as functional actors, which indirectly affect security decisions by lobbing or directing the securitization actors, and context, as a speech act cannot be an independent factor in the securitization process but is dependent on historical, political, societal, economic, geographic, and other variables. The principal difference between Theory of Securitisation and the mainstream security theories: Traditional Security Studies (TSS) and Critical Security Studies (CSS), is that Theory of Securitization is not concerned if the issue that a speech act wants to present as a security issue, really is a security issue, but how a speech act presents the issue as a security issue. Unlike the Theory of Securitisation, TSS is a realistic security theory that examines is the issue a real security threat while CSS is a constructive security theory that examines the reality of security threat. Both, TSS and CSS, analyze already present security threat, while Theory of Securitisation analyses the creation of the security threat. Positive securitisation, the precarious security situation in and around Europe that could become an existential threat to the society of the EU because of the paucity of the EU army, is securitised by European federalists headed by European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and HR/VP Federica Mogherini. Referent objects that are in urgent need of protection are the EU society and the European identity (values and principles) that are in the existential threat of Russia and uncertain security situation in the immediate neighbourhood of the EU. As a solution for the existential threat, securitising actors impose the establishment of the EU army. Functional actors of positive securitisation are stakeholders in the European defence industry who have a purely economic reason for the backing of positive securitisation, and European elite which advocates the federalisation of the European Union. The prime public, core target group, for the positive securitisation should be the Heads of 28 EU member states who make decisions concerning Common Security Defence Policy (CSDP). As the decisions concerning CSDP must be unanimous, and some member states, mostly United Kingdom (UK), steadily use the instrument of veto to block further development of the CSDP, the thesis assumes that the securitising actors of positive securitisation decided to expand the target group for their securitisation onto European Union society as a whole. Reasons behind the expansion of the target public, which thus makes the whole society of the European Union a the public is a pressure onto the Heads of EU member states since the citizens of the EU have a very favourable opinion about the further development of the CSDP and mostly positive opinion regarding the establishment of the EU army. Negative securitisation, which interprets the establishment of the EU army as an existential a threat to the NATO and the sovereignty of EU member states, is a complex form of securitisation. Instead of one securitising actor or one group of securitising actors with the same motive (European federalist with Juncker as champion in positive securitisation), negative securitisation is securitised by several securitising actors without the leading champion with sometimes the same and sometimes different motives: Eurosceptics, NATO, decision-makers in the United Kingdom, the United States (US) and Russia. Furthermore, negative securitisation accumulates the referent objects that are in urgent need of protection: the sovereignty of the EU member states and the survival of the NATO alliance. The only element of the negative securitisation that is unambiguous is the existential threat from the establishment of the EU army whose establishment would take away the national armies, i.e. the sovereignty of the EU member states and made the NATO alliance vulnerable. Hence, for the sake of simplicity of understanding the elements of negative securitisation and their synergy, the thesis uses the Classical Security Complex Theory (CSCT) for the proper consideration of the patterns of the security connections. Using discourse analysis of the speech acts and official documents the thesis shows how the decision-makers in the US (regardless of their political affiliation) securitise the establishment of the EU army as an existential threat to NATO and future of Atlantic security cooperation. Same is evident with the NATO as a securitising actor. The decision-makers in the UK (mostly conservatives) securitise the establishment of the EU army and further development of CSDP as an existential threat to the national sovereignty of EU member states. Russia too securitises the establishment of the EU army as an existential threat to the national sovereignty of EU member states but does the deed backstage financially supporting nationalist and Eurosceptic EU parties and via cyber-attacks and disinformation campaign. Functional actors of negative securitisation are stakeholders in the non-EU defence industry and other industries which prosper due to unstable global security situation, private military organisations, non-independent think thanks, etc. The public for the negative securitisation is the Eurosceptic part of the EU society, but the core target group are the citizens of the UK. Securitising actors of the negative securitisation narrowed the public of their securitisation for the same reason why the securitising actors of the positive securitisation broaden theirs – decisions concerning CSDP must be unanimous. Consequently, the securitising actors of the negative securitisation to be successful in their securitisation need to persuade only citizens of the UK that their narrative is correct. As already mentioned, the Theory of Securitisation analyses the creation of the security threat, so very important for the understanding of the results of discourse analysis is the context behind the construction of the securitisation. In the case of the securitisations analysed in the thesis, the contexts of both narratives have foundations in the conflict between neorealist and neoliberal doctrines in foreign politics, different security strategies of the countries, and change in a global security system, as well as historical, political, societal, economic, geographic and other variables. No EU member state can be a superpower on its own in today's world. This notion and aim to hinder the possibility of another armed conflict in Europe prompted the creation of the Union. After more than 60 years of enlargement and integration, the EU is an economic superpower. Nevertheless, to protect its economic superiority as well as to impose its doctrine in foreign politics and expand its multilateral security strategy, the EU needs to be and defence union. This idea is not a new one but exists and was attempted to be implemented from the beginning of the EU existence. The securitising actors of the positive securitisation believe that with the establishment of the EU army, the EU can keep the US hegemony in the global security system and the Russian renewal of bloc-system aspirations under control. Some securitising actors of the positive securitisation also believe that the further integration of the EU is necessary to prevent the disintegration. Above all, is the strong desire of the EU elite for the federation of the EU. Expectedly, not least because of the postulate of the security dilemma, the US and Russia are afraid of the military-strong EU which could change the current global security system, while the UK believes that with the strengthening of the EU its military and political strength will wane or disappear. As the UK is the EU member state and its citizens are the most Eurosceptic the public in the EU, both and the US and Russia focused most of their securitisation's efforts toward the UK's citizens. The US also uses the UK as a tool of disruption in the EU – it's right to veto decisions about the further development of CSDP, integration of the EU in the defence field and the establishment of the EU army. The thesis hypothesises that the two opposed narratives that the thesis considers to be securitisations have generated the status quo in the development of CSDP. Through the discourse analysis of speech acts and the official documents of securitising actors of both narratives as well as analysis of the acceptance of narratives by the audience (public opinion analysis), the thesis positively answers the research question: Is the securitisation theory usable the instrument in the effort to implement/block more effective EU integration?