Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Alternativ können Sie versuchen, selbst über Ihren lokalen Bibliothekskatalog auf das gewünschte Dokument zuzugreifen.
Bei Zugriffsproblemen kontaktieren Sie uns gern.
106 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: VOR Geneeskunde
Twenty-five years have passed since the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), which led to the disruption of the regional check-and-balance system aimed at resolving national issues and political and socioeconomic contradictions. It also resulted in a number of armed conflicts, including those in the Chechen Republic, Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria, Tajikistan, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and later in the South-East of Ukraine. Immediately following the collapse of the USSR, key international actors paid special attention to the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) region while trying to secure own interests. This led to the further stratification of the CIS region. A "geopolitical pluralism" started to form there, marked by the fragmentation of nation-state sovereignty over the territory. The concept and policy of "geopolitical pluralism" as developed by Zbigniew Brzezinski meets the interests of the United States by making the CIS region more manageable, while at the same time making it more difficult for Russia to implement its own strategic tasks there. The key goal of Russia is the creation of an integrated economic and political union able to take a rightful place in the world. Only the development of deep and comprehensive integration with the CIS states can ensure the competitiveness of Russia's position in the world as well as the positions of its partners in the former Soviet space. The purpose of this article is to assess the level of geopolitical pluralism in the CIS space taking account of the membership of the CIS countries in international organizations and their voting on UN General Assembly resolutions. The study is based on the interconnection of quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis of international relations and world politics. During the past quarter century following the collapse of the Soviet Union, a regional system of international relations has formed in its place. Despite the fact that the CIS is a kind of linking element which unites most of the former Soviet republics, a certain competition between the new states has become the characteristic feature of the political relations in the region. The policy of the west (primarily the United States) became a kind of a branched, diversified strategy aimed at the phased development, transformation and fragmentation of the region. The diversity of foreign policy priorities among the CIS states and the presence of many actors in the region makes mutual understanding and good-neighbourliness between these countries difficult to achieve. To the contrary, this diversity seriously complicates and slows down the development of deep and comprehensive integration, making it more unstable and ineffective. © HSE, 1993-2018.
BASE
In: Vestnik Instituta sociologii: setevoj žurnal = Bulletin of the Institute of Sociology : online electronic journal, Band 12, Heft 2, S. 19-35
ISSN: 2221-1616
The article analyzes the results of a sociological study of the historical memory of students about the World War II in general (and the Great Patriotic War in particular), conducted by the Russian Society of Sociologists in 2020, as well as materials from surveys of other research teams. The author comes to the conclusion that historical memory is formed, first of all, by the information field, set by state institutions or encouraged by them (school, mass media, network resources). Contradictory assessment of the events of the twentieth century led to the rupture of the historical memory of generations and the formation of a large group of people ready to accept the revision of the geopolitical results of the war from the standpoint of history falsifiers. The attitude of young people to the past, without taking into account the cause-and-effect liaison of the events of that time, is explained not only by the extinction of communicative memory for the departure of war generations, the desacralization of their life, deed, death. The range of factors is much wider. Since there is no integral picture of the history of the USSR, there is no value core for assessing events of the Great Patriotic War either. In the absence of historical hygiene in the Russian Federation, the entire Soviet period turns into historical antiques for new generations. They treat this in different ways: with reverence, condescension, aggressiveness, indifference, but it is excessive for the daily life of the majority. The slogan "If required, we repeat / can repeat", replicated on May 9, is nothing more than a short-term emotional reaction, including to PR management, but not the readiness / mindset / promise of action in a real war. The opposition of the state to the country, that is reflected in the popular among young people song of the group Lumen, actually testifies to alienation from both the state and the country, since there is no one without the other. Questions are inevitable: how adequate are the methodologies and techniques based on which social scientists choose the range of factors that form the portrait of modern youth and predict the direction of further socialization of its individual groups? How many meaningful collaborators should there be to lose / win a civilizational battle in which historical memory is only one of the components? According to the author, the conditions and opportunities for the realization of the desired worldview values in modern Russia adjust the attitude to the present and the life strategies of young people to a greater extent than historical memory.
In: Annalen van het Thijmgenootschap 85,1
In: Dissertatieserie 10b
In: Subreeks Grondslagen van de EU
In: Sociologičeskij žurnal: Sociological journal, Band 25, Heft 2, S. 8-32
ISSN: 1684-1581
Some of the most significant consequences of transnational immigration is growing religious diversity and finding a way to manage it. This article considers the concept of pluralism, the differences in religious pluralism between America and Western Europe occurring due to immigration, as well as the roles and possibilities of immigrant religions in the process of adapting to the host society. The history of immigration, models of immigrant incorporation and adaption, patterns of religious pluralism and types of secularism strongly vary in the aforementioned regions. Religion in America is a positive resource and a basis for incorporating immigrants into American society, their recognition in public life, assimilation and construction of an American identity. By contrast, in Western Europe immigrant religions, particularly Islam, are perceived primarily as an obstacle to incorporating immigrants into European societies and their recognition in the public domain. This is explained mainly by the secularist mindset of European people in general, their uncertain "private" religiosity in the context of "Euro-secularity", the European concept of religion's place in the "private domain", as well as types of state-religion relations and institutional patterns of recognition which differ from America.
The paper provides a historical and philosophical analysis of the problem of ideology. The attention is focused on its place in the public knowledge, functions, and the most promising transformations. The approaches of foreign researchers are summed up. The paper states that ideology has a significant effect on the course of political, economic, civil processes in society, that is it is a significant factor of influence on social reality. ; Выполнен историко-философский анализ проблемы идеологии. Акцентировано внимание на ее месте в общественном знании, функциях и наиболее перспективных трансформациях. Обобщены подходы зарубежных исследователей. Констатировано, что идеология существенно влияет на ход политических, экономических, гражданских процессов в обществе, то есть существенным фактором влияния на социальную реальность.
BASE
In: KWALON: Tijdschrift voor Kwalitatief Onderzoek, Band 23, Heft 1
ISSN: 1875-7324
Het punt dat Baarends en Simon in KWALON 66 willen maken, is dat volgens hen in de Nederlandse basisliteratuur over kwalitatief onderzoek 'het replicatie-perspectief en parallelle perspectief domineren' (Baarends & Simon, 2017, p. 8). Voor het 'diversificatie-perspectief en vrije perspectief' is geen ruimte. Baarends en Simon illustreren hun aanname aan de hand van een analyse van twee Nederlandstalige boeken over praktijkgericht kwalitatief onderzoek. Zij vragen zich af of dat praktijkgericht onderzoek haar beloftes waarmaakt, namelijk de praktijk serieus nemen. Zij hebben hun twijfels daarbij. Volgens hen sluit praktijkgericht onderzoek vanuit het diversificatie-perspectief en vrije perspectief aan 'bij de betekenisverlening van mensen zelf én (daardoor) bij praktijkgerichtheid' (onderaan p. 9).
In: Meijers-reeks MI-183