Suchergebnisse

The poll on political tolerance was conducted on a 772 -subject sample. Because of the long-lasting totalitarian system and the short period of democracy, a rather low level of political tolerance was expected. However, the results of the poll have not confirmed these expectations but showed a high Ievel of political tolerance instead. Similar findings have been obtained by an American survey conducted in several European countries, including Croatia. This means that the political tolerance in Croatia has not been shaped by the totalitarian system but by the pluralist traits of the Croatian culture, ensuing from numerous contacts with a plethora of different cultures. In order for the pluralist democracy in Croatia to function democratically, appropriate legal prerequisites and institutions do not suffice; the people who is in line with the principles of pluralist democracy are central to this as well. Pluralist democracy legalizes various political options and enables the citizens to organize themselves and act in accordance with the embraced option. All this, however, is a dead letter if people are not willing to accept the existence and the activism of different political options. That is why the concept of political tolerance always goes hand in hand with the concept of pluralist democracy. The Latin word "tolerantia" means 'indulgence', 'patience'. That is why political tolerance is usually understood as a readiness to bear or put up with political options and their operationalizations which are obnoxious and even repugnant to us ... . The essence of political life is not tolerance and patience but non-restriction of political freedoms and political pluralism. Those who accept political pluralism find it easier to bear the existence of various political options, even those they do not approve of. There are more a less intensive feelings of intolerance and bigotry. So, tolerance means accepting and not only forbearing different political options. (SOI : PM: S. 148)

The author presents the thesis about the difference between the cultural/historical and the political identity by distinguishing the cultural/historical majorities and minorities from the political winners and losers. He points to the democratic paradox according to which states are not ruled by the losers' political majorities but by the winners' political minorities. According to the author, in multi-ethnic societies it is necessary to equally develop the popular and the political culture - that is the culture and political tolerance. (SOI : PM: S. 56)

R. J. Kvaternik (1799-1851), professor of history at the Kings Academy of Sciences in Zagreb, had a great influence on several generation of Croatian intellectuals through his pedagogic work and his patriotic and liberal views. The Zagreb journal Südslawische Zeitung also reflected liberal and democratic views. The author compares Kvaternik's views, exposed in questions for public examinations in general and Hungarian History (positiones), with those expressed in the journal concerning actual political issues and institutional, economic, and cultural questions. In both cases, there is notable democratic orientation, inclination towards parlamentary system, and the need for education of the people as requirement for a general progress of the country. The ideas of equality, tolerance, and peaceful resolution of issues are fundamental to the views. S. Z. stands steadfastly to its views. The similarities between Kvaternik's views and those of S. Z. suggests that some of Kvaternik's disciples were contributors to the journal. Unfortunately, this remains only a presupposition, because articles in S. Z. were not signed. (SOI : CSP: S. 276)

The author examines attempts to reform the communist systems in Europe during the 1960s, especiallly as they relate to the process of election to organs of government in Croatia and Yugoslavia in 1967 and 1969. Issues surrounding the legitimacy of government, economic development, and internal political and national tensions provided the impetus for the growth of the reform movement. Economic reforms were geared towards recognition of market forces, while political reforms revolved around a general democratization of the system. The allowance for "slightly greater freedom" in politics meant minimum tolerance of diversity including national rights as well. The growing strength off the reform movement quickly revealed the threat reform posed to the fundamental social relations upon which the communist model of society was based. Reform especially threatened the dominant role played by the communist party. Conservative forces predominated in the ensuing political struggle, and the curtailment of reformist tendencies was also influenced by the involvement of the USSR. An example of the curtailment of reformist tendencies were the elections to the Croatian Sabor and the Federal Assembly of Yugoslavia. A relative liberalization of elective processes to the legislative branch took place when more than one candidate was allowed to run for a single mandate. In many instances during the 1967 elections, struggles between the candidate supported by the League of Socialists, the official candidate, and an independent, or "unofficial" candidate, were common. The loss of total control over the electoral process was viewed unfavourably by the ruling party and the former control over elections was quickly reestablished. (SOI : CSP: S. 346)