Suchergebnisse

Postmodernizam kao pojam obuhvata promene u kulturi, društvenim i ekonomskim odnosima i u načinu razmišljanja koje su vezane za ulazak u post-industrijsko društvo i u eru informacija. Osnovna karakteristika tog prelaska u načinu razmišljanja vezana je za prevlast znakova nad stvarnošću, odnosno nad objektima na koje mišljenje referira kao na polja istinitog iskustva. Autonomnost znakovnih sadržaja (simboličkih zajednica, društvenih i kulturnih praksi kojima je cilj konstrukcija stvarnosti, prevlast tehnologije i inženjeringa u svim sektorima života, kult želje, odnosno potrošačke kulture itd.) nameće potrebu za preispitivanje i menjanje osnovnih kategorija kojima operiše društvena misao. U antropologiji, reč je o preispitivanju ili dekonstrukciji osnovnih pojmova (čovek, evolucija, progres, priroda, kultura, tradicija, pol.) u pravcu kritike njihovog metafizičkog diskurzivnog utemeljenja i ukazivanja na političke aspekte takvog mišljenja. U radu se dovodi u pitanje teza da kritika antropocentrizma može da otvori nove i humanije povesne horizonte u društvenoj misli. Osnovna teza autorke je da je upravo 'antropocentrizam', shvaćen kao etičko i odgovorno mišljenje, bazirano na objedinjavanju praxisa, phronesisa i doxe, preduslov dekonstrukcije diskursa moći danas. ; The notion of postmodernism concerns changes in culture, social and economic relationships and ways of thinking related to post-industrial society and information epoch. The main feature of the changes in the sphere of thinking concerns supremacy of signs over reality, that is, over objects which thinking refers to as a field of true experience. Autonomy of signs (symbolic communities, social and cultural practices aimed at construction of reality, domination of technology and engineering in all sectors of life, cult of desire in regard to consumer culture) makes necessary rethinking over basic categories (man, evolution, progress, nature, culture, tradition, sex), with the purpose to criticize their metaphysical discursive background and to point to political aspects of such thinking. The standpoint from which the critique of anthropocentrism opens new and more human horizons in social thought today is questioned in the article. The author argues that 'anthropocentrism', as ethical and responsible attitude, based on connection between praxis, phronesis and doxa, is actually prerequisite to deconstruction of power discourse today.

Petnaest godina nakon Drugoga libanonskog rata – vođenoga 2006. između Države Izraela i Hezbolaha, militantne šijitske organizacije u Libanonu – analitičari su uglavnom jednodušni u ocjeni kako je Izrael u najmanju ruku doživio vojni neuspjeh u tome ratu. Premda danas s višegodišnjim odmakom ocjene ishoda rata nisu više toliko kategoričke i apsolutne, neki od čimbenika koji su utjecali na neuspješnost Izraelskih obrambenih snaga (DF) ipak su se pokazali relevantnima, a njihov odjek prepoznatljiv je i u aktualnoj izraelskoj vojnoj misli. Stoga je u ovome radu istraživački interes usmjeren na dosad nedovoljno proučavan aspekt Drugoga libanonskog rata – jezik. Pritom se tematizira terminologija koju su izraelske vojne snage rabile u ratnim operacijama protiv Hezbolaha. Prema izvješću izraelskoga povjerenstva ustrojenoga nakon završetka rata terminologija uvedena u vojne doktrine netom prije sukoba na više se mjesta izrijekom apostrofira kao jedna od determinanti izraelskoga vojnog neuspjeha. Istraživanjem primarnih izvora te sagledavanjem recentnih reevaluacija učinaka i ishoda rata osvjetljuju se razmjeri posljedica paušalnoga pristupa oblikovanju vojnojezične politike. Podrobnije se problematizira znanstvena težina koju terminologija nosi u jeziku svake struke, a posebice u vojno-obrambenim znanostima.

U radu se, u formi preglednog izlaganja sa elementima rasprave, komentariše graditeljska delatnost Srpske Pravoslavne crkve, intenzivirana tokom poslednje dve decenije na prostorima bivše SFRJ i u dijaspori. Sa gašenjem jednopartijskog političkog sistema u Jugoslaviji, buđenjem nacionalne svesti i jačanjem društvene uloge crkve, građenje pravoslavnih hramova početkom devedesetih godina doživljava veliki procvat. Od tada do danas, diljem Republike Srbije, Republike Srpske, Republike Hrvatske i Republike Crne Gore, sagrađeno je preko trista pravoslavnih crkava različitih tipova i struktura, dok je veći broj decenijama nezavršenih hramova dovršen. Njihovo istoriografsko tumačenje, bez obzira na neveliku istorijsku distancu neophodno je pokrenuti i produbiti. ; Building activities of the Serbian Orthodox Church was intensified during the last two decades on the territory of former Yugoslavia and in Diaspora firstly was commented in domestic publicist literature, rarely in works with scientific character. Estimate argumentation of all up to now judges, from anonymous publicists until specialized academic researchers with this contribution we wish to instigate more complete historiography valorization of that comprised segment of our contemporary building culture. Pressed beck in decades and from 1990 spirited and branched, new Serbian church building was found in front of much demanded civilization tasks. Appeared need for its creative renewal as much as for radical accommodation to needs of enlightened believers from the end of the 20th century. Conceptually satisfied interest of two primary strategies stimulated by the financial means of local and republic authorities domestic and foreign donators: more extended and more conservative mimetic monumentality options, conditioned by the megalomania of inpatient, frustrated in decades believers, hold by the liberal intellectual circles as much as with formalistic discipline of unbounded builders. Literally and exclusively took example by own building sources, characteristic for the first building stream, partly is originated from coercive cultural and political isolation of Serbian society during the nineties of the last century when it could not in the right time get introduce to actual world aspiration and with that transform and radically turn to symbolic forms of expression in sacral architecture. Examples of both strategies show that their representatives respected proclaimed ideological prerequisite for national recognition of new built temples. There from is structurally and morphologically concept of their realizations was directed to return of extensive neglected national identity of the Serbs in communist Yugoslavia. The most of the new temples has recognizable national and geopolitical marks, expressed in evocative shaped silhouette of historicity compositions permeated by the citations. Retrospective aesthetic of the epoch of postmodernism united three dominant streams of new Serbian sacral architecture. In the first is evocative paraphrased approach more expressed (churches of Predrag Ristic, Radoslav Prokic, Ljubisa Folic) while in the second approach is less literally and freely worked out (temples of Mihajlo Mitrovic, Miladin Lukic), and in third completely abandoned (works of Branislav Mitrovic, Spasoje Krunic, Sasa Budjevac). Significantly for cultural public in Raska district, except note that temples recently built on its territory should comment separately is the fact that old Raska's architecture in many segments successfully evoked in the best examples of the new sacral building. Among those examples is separated church of Saint Apostle Luke (1995-1999) built in the settlement Filmski grad in the southwest edge of Belgrade, by the architect and conserver Miladin Lukic (1956) winner of the great expert competition. In a whole and in fragments this church represents some kind of homage to whole Raska style group of ancient monuments, the oldest and fundamental for entire development of Serbian medieval sacral building.

The education system per se, despite its central position in the field of study proclaimed by the scholarly community of Comparative and International Education, has never taken a central stage/role in Comparative and International Education scholarly enquiry. Through the various stages of its history, Comparative and International Education research has either focused on the societal-contextual forces (geography, demography, social system, economy, political system, religio-philosophical viewpoints) shaping education or on the societal outcomes/effects of education, to such an extent that the education system has always remained the blind spot in the centre of the field. A model explaining the structure of the education system which shows the components of "the" education system and their interrelationships has resultantly not been developed. This article attempts to address this shortcoming by discussing and outlining the structure of the education system on the basis of recent epistemological developments. Four components of the education system, along with their elements, are identified: education system policy, organisation and administration, structure for teaching, and support services. ; Obrazovni sustav per se, usprkos svojoj središnjoj ulozi za koju se zauzimaju stručnjaci unutar Komparativne i međunarodne edukacije nikada nije bio u žarištu znanstvenih istraživanja u spomenutom području. Istraživanja unutar Komparativne i međunarodne edukacije do sada su, u različitim razdobljima svoje povijesti, bila usredotočena ili na društveno-kontekstne snage (geografiju, demografiju, društveni sustav, ekonomiju, politički sustav, religijsko-filozofski svjetonazor) koje oblikuju obrazovanje ili na ishode/učinke obrazovanja na društvo do te mjere da je obrazovni sustav uvijek ostajao nejasan u odnosu na glavni dio toga područja. Stoga još uvijek nije razvijen model koji bi objasnio strukturu obrazovnog sustava prikazujući komponente ,,obrazovnog sustava" i njihove međusobne odnose. U ovom se radu nastoji istaknuti taj nedostatak putem rasprave i prikaza strukture obrazovnog sustava na temelju novijih epistemoloških razvojnih ideja. Identificirane su četiri komponente obrazovnog sustava, kao i njihovi elementi, a to su: politika obrazovnog sustava, organizacija i administracija, struktura potrebna za nastavu i službe podrške.

Rad istražuje model društvenosti, interakcije i participacije kao političke elemente postmoderne umjetnosti. Postmoderno stanje nastupa nakon propasti glavne ideje modernizma, što se temelji na vjeri u napredak i emancipaciju čovječanstva odnosno nakon kraha velikih spekulativnih pripovijesti poput idealizma, scijentizma, marksizma ili utopije o promjeni svijeta pomoću umjetnosti. Otuda se kao opće mjesto nadaje teza da umjetnost nema više onu ulogu kakva joj se pripisivala od XIX. stoljeća nadalje, kao što je politička borba, kritika društva ili socijalni angažman, odnosno da više nema funkciju kritike, onoga što upozorava i što se avangardno suprotstavlja svemu postojećem. Nasuprot takvom stavu, rad nastoji podastrijeti kritički i politički potencijal postmoderne umjetnosti, pri čemu se usmjerava na umjetničku praksu nakon 1990-ih te njezino isticanje relacija, susreta i interakcije s publikom. Riječ je o aproprijaciji avangardnih strategija, ali s povijesnim odmakom i drukčijim kontekstom. ; The paper explores the model of sociability, interaction and participation as political elements of postmodern art. The postmodern condition emerged after the failure of the main idea of modernism, which was based on the belief in the progress and emancipation of humanity, namely, after the collapse of large speculative narratives such as idealism, scientism, Marxism or a utopia of changing the world through art. Not surprisingly, therefore, the principal thesis in it is that art no longer has the role attributed to it since the 19th century, the one of political struggle, criticism of society or social engagement, namely, it no longer has the function of criticism, of something that acts as a warning and is avant-gardly opposed to everything that exists. Contrary to this view, this paper seeks to present the critical and political potential of postmodern art, focusing on post-1990s artistic practice and its emphasis on relationships, encounters and interaction with audiences. It is an appropriation of avant-garde strategies, but with a historical distance and in a different context.

The article represents critical reasoning about the emergence and development of feminist epistemology from 1980s until nowadays. Feminist epistemology started in part as a critique of traditional epistemology and dualisms underlying traditional epistemological projects. On the other side, feminist epistemologies do not represent merely a critique but they develop alternative theories to masculinistic theories of knowledge. Feminist epistemologies are based on the insight into the relationship between knowledge and power and they claim that there are not epistemological inquiries that are not at the same time political. The relationship between knowledge and politics can be seen in the case of the most developed feminist epistemological theories - standpoint theories that have different forms and variants. The article shows the field of feminist epistemology as highly dynamic, as a field where internal critiques of different approaches to epistemological problems have been already developed. As an example of this internal debate, the article examines critiques of standpoint theories developed within the framework of so called feminist postmodernism. ; Tekst predstavlja kritičko razmatranje nastanka i razvoja feminističke epistemologije od 1980-ih godina do današnjih dana. Feministička epistemologija nastaje jednim delom kao kritika tradicionalne epistemologije i dualizama koji su u osnovi tradicionalnih epistemoloških projekata. Sa druge strane, feminističke epistemologije se ne zadržavaju samo na nivou puke kritike već razvijaju i alternativne teorije maskulinističkim teorijama saznanja. Feminističke epistemologije počivaju na uverenju o vezi između znanja i moći i tvrde da ne postoje epistemološka razmatranja koja nisu istovremeno i politička. Veza između znanja i politike može se videti na primeru najrazvijenijih feminističkih epistemoloških teorija - standpoint teorija koje imaju različite oblike i varijante. Tekst pokazuje područje feminističke epistemologije kao izuzetno dinamično, kao područje u kome su već razvijene takozvane unutrašnje kritike različitih pristupa saznajnoj problematici. Kao primer unutrašnjeg spora, tekst razmatra pristup takozvanog feminističkog postmodernizma u čijem okviru su razvijene kritike standpoint teorija.

The subject of this dissertation comprises three segments: while the primary focus is on the research of the female characters of the three chosen authors, this paper also deals with the issue of female authorship, that is, the social circumstances that have to a great extent shaped and still impact the literary work of female writers and finally, the dissertation reflects on the manner in which female authors approach the women's issue, that is, how they shape the female identity. The aim of this dissertation is to explore and answer the question what is that makes women from culturally opposed communities different, and what is that they, despite the numerous sociological discrepancies, still have in common. Thus, the main task of this research was to shed light on, still rather vaguely defined, "women's issue" by drawing parallels between the women, that is, the female characters who live in specific political, sociological and cultural conditions typical of the West (female characters of Margaret Atwood and Toni Morrison) and typical of the East (female characters of Anita Desai). In order to reach the answer to a complex question such as this one, the dissertation tackles the matters that the authors themselves find the most relevant, that is, the themes instrumental in defining the female identity. By means of the analysis of these life matters, the dissertation provides insight into not just the psyche of individual characters, but also illustrates the dynamics of an entire society: beliefs, customs, hierarchies of power, etc. The themes that have been given the most attention are: marriage, motherhood, friendship between women, female sexuality, family and the relationship of one with the community and with oneself. By the method of comparison, the research work reached the conclusion that social factors, such as economic climate, political orientation and the quality of the educational system, undoubtedly affect the level of awareness of women, the attitude of the society toward women and the attitude women nurture toward themselves. Nevertheless, regardless of the numerous and significant differences between the women in the East and West, there are segments they have in common, despite the external, social factors. ; Predmet ove doktorske disertacije sastoji se iz tri dela: dok je primarni fokus istraživanja bio na junakinjama tri navedene autorke, rad se takođe bavi i pitanjem ženskog autorstva, tj. društvenim okolnostima koje su u velikoj meri formirale, a i danas utiču na književni rad ženskih pisaca, i na kraju, posvećena je pažnja i načinu na koji autorke pristupaju ženskom pitanju, tj. tome kako oblikuju ženski identitet. Cilj disertacije je da istraži i odgovori na pitanje šta je to što žene sa različitih meridijana, iz kulturološki nespojivih zajednica razdvaja, a šta im, pak, uprkos tome ostaje zajedničko. Dakle, zadatak ovog istraživanja bio je da rasvetli, još uvek donekle nejasno definisano, "žensko pitanje", tako što će uspostaviti paralele između žena, tj. ženskih likova, koji žive u specifičnim političkim, sociološkim i kulturološkim uslovima tipičnim za Zapad (junakinje Margaret Etvud i Toni Morison) i Istok (junakinje Anite Desai). Da bi se došlo do odgovora na ovako složeno pitanje, rad se prvashodno bavi temama kojima su same autorke podarile najviše pažnje, tj. onim temama koje su se pokazale ključnim za definisanje ženskog identiteta. Na osnovu analize ovih segmenata života, disertacija pruža uvid ne samo u psihu pojedinačnih likova, već oslikava i celokupnu društvenu dinamiku: verovanja, običaje, hijerarhije moći, itd. Teme kojima je dato najviše prostora su: brak, majčinstvo, prijateljstvo među ženama, ženska seksualnost, porodica i odnos pojedinca prema sebi i zajednici. Metodom komparacije došlo se do zaključaka da društveni faktori poput ekonomske situcije, političkog usmerenja i kvaliteta obrazovnog sustema nesumnjivo utiču na nivo svesti kod žena, odnos društva prema ženi, kao i žene prema sebi. Međutim, bez obzira na brojne i značajne razlike između žena na Istoku i Zapadu, ostaju sfere koje su im zajedničke, bez obzira na spoljne, društvene faktore. Ove sličnosti daju odgovor na pitanje šta čini suštinu žene, tj. šta žene čini posebnim i drugačijim.

Rad počiva na ideji evropskog kulturnog identiteta, pojma koji se, poslednjih decenija posebno, etablirao kao važno uporište evropske političke zajednice, zajedničkih evropskih vrednosti ali i značajnih drugosti koje uprkos heterogenosti i asimetričnosti prisutnih kultura, zajedno tvore jedinstveni evropski kulturno-istorijski prostor Evrope. Različiti integrativni procesi koji se danas sve intenzivnije odvijaju, doprinose brzoj promeni konstelacija društava i re-konfiguraciji geopolitičkog, socio-ekonomskog i kulturnog ambijenta Evrope, tražeći novo sagledavanje tvorbe evropskog kulturnog identiteta koji nastaje kao rezultat tih različitih kretanja. Medij filma stoga, predstavlja idealnu perspektivu sagledavanja tvorbe evropskog transnacionanog kulturnog identiteta. Pitanje (ne)postojanja evropskog identiteta sagledano je kroz korpus teorija studija filma i medija i drugih, a na primerima dvadeset sedam (27) filmova laureata godišnje nagrade za najbolji evropski film (EFAs), Evropske filmske akademije (EFA), u periodu 1989–2014. godine, čiji su autori, između ostalih, Pedro Almodovar (Pedro Almodovar), Mihael haneke (Michael Haneke), Paolo Sorentino (Paolo Sorrentino), Lars fon Trir (Lars von Trier, i drugi. U ovoj disertaciji, evropski kulturni identitet sagledan je kroz filmske i kinematografske upise, preko kategorija identitetske drugosti, akcentovanih i asimilovanih identiteta, kao i preko elemenata (ko)produkcione drugosti. U istraživanju smo pošli od pretpostavke da filmovi nagrađeni za najbolji evropski fil nagradom EFAs nose elemente narativa interne drugosti, duboko podeljene Evrope, koji učestvuju u konstrukciji evropskog kulturno supra-identiteta u/na filmu kao i da se evropksi kulturni identitet u filmskim ostvarenjima laureata EFAs, gradi kroz dijalog Evrope, odnosno Evropske unije sa nacionalnim kinematografijama. Sa tog polazišta pristupilo se i istraživanju fenomena evropskog kulturnog identiteta drugosti. Cilj istraživanja bio je da se u kontekstu društveno-istorijskih i političkih procesa identifikuju i objasne elementi građenja identiteta kao i da se istakne uloga drugosti u formiranju evropskog kulturnog identiteta. Istraživačka pitanja u vezi sa odnosima međuzavisnosti koje formiraju pojmovi Evropa, identitet, drugost, evropski film i evropska nagrada u građenju prepoznatljivog fenomena evropskog kulturnog identiteta i fenomena evropskog filma. Problemska osnova na temelju koje je strukturisana analiza i sistematizovani naslovi nagrađenih filmskih ostvarenja u studiji slučaja, izvedena je iz teorijskih postavki koje se odnose na sledeće fenomene i pojmove: fazu ogledala Žaka Lakana (Jacques Lacan), heterotopije Mišela Fukoa (Michael Foucault), deteritorijalizacije / nomadizma Žila Deleza i Feliksa Gatarija ( Jules Deleuze / Félix Guattari), granice Jurija Lotmana (Yuri Lottman) i liminalnosti Arnolda van Genepa (Arnold van Gennep), kao postuliranje postmodernističkih tendencija u kojima se reflektuje pitanje (evropskog) kulturnog identiteta, primenjeno na polje filmske odnosno ekranske umetnosti. Svedoci smo da se u složenim procesima integracije i previranja nacionalnih i transnacionalnih tokova u Evropi, u periodu nakon pada Berlinskog zida (1989–2014), evropski kulturni identitet u/na filmu iznova konstruisao kroz narative drugosti, rezultirajući višestrukim akcentovanim i asimilovanim identitetima, što se pokazuje na primerima filmskih ostvarenja nagrađenih za najbolji evropski film EFAs. Činjenica je da značajne evrospke institucije u svojim dokumentima evropski identitet navode kao realitet, uprkos činjenici da sama konstrukcija evropskog identiteta ukazuje na (nezavršen) permanentan proces. Temeljne pretpostavke ovog istraživana su stoga: 1. nije reč o (id)entitetu kao o datosti; 2. identitet se gradi u društvenoj interakciji; 3. drugosti su sastavni deo (kulturnog) identiteta; 4. razlikama se obogaćuju i druge kulture; 5. evropski kulturni identitet je proces tj. gradilište u permanentnom nastajanju. Ishod analitičko-istraživačkog procesa je potvrđivanje da evropski kulturni identitet jeste skup različitosti tj. drugosti koje tvore jedan entitet, evropski kulturni identitet, koji međutim nije moguće fiksirati i precizno definisati, te on nadalje ostaje fenomen otvoren za različite interpretacije. ; The work is based on the idea of European cultural identity, a concept that, in recent decades, in particular, has established itself as an important mainstay of the European political community, common European values but also significant otherness which, despite the heterogeneity and asymmetry of present cultures, together form a unique cultural and historical space of Europe. The various integrative processes that are increasingly intensifying nowadays contribute to the rapid change of constellations of societies and re-configuration of the geopolitical, socioeconomic and cultural environment of Europe, seeking a new perception and definition of both national and European cultural identity that ensues from these various developments. The medium of film, therefore, represents an ideal perspective of perceiving the creation of a European transnational cultural identity. The issue of (non)existence of European identity is considered through a corpus of theories of Film and Media Studies and others, and on the examples of twenty-seven (27) films, laureates of the annual award for the best European film (EFAs) of the European Film Academy (EFA) in the period 1989−2014, whose authors are, among others, Pedro Almodovar, Michael Haneke, Paolo Sorrentino, Lars von Trier and others. In this dissertation, European cultural identity is viewed through film and cinematic inscriptions, through the categories of identity otherness, accented and assimilated identities, as well as through the elements of (co)production otherness. In the research we started from the assumption that the films awarded for the best European film by the EFAs award carry elements of narratives of internal otherness, of a deeply divided Europe, which participate in the construction of European cultural supra-identity in/on film and that European cultural identity in the film achievements of EFAs laureates is built through the dialogue of Europe, i.e. the European Union with national cinemas. That was the starting point for the research of the phenomenon of the European cultural identity of otherness. The aim of the research was to identify and explain the elements of identity construction in the context of socio-historical and political processes, as well as to emphasize the role of otherness in the formation of European cultural identity. Research questions are related to the interdependence relations formed by the concepts of Europe, identity, otherness, European film and the European award in building a recognizable phenomenon of European cultural identity and the phenomenon of European film. The problem basis on which the analysis and systematized titles of the awarded film achievements in the case study are structured is derived from theoretical assumptions related to the following phenomena and concepts: Jacques Lacan's mirror phase, Michael Foucault's heterotopias, deterritorialization and the nomadism of Jules Deleuze and Félix Guattari, the boundaries of Yuri Lottman and the liminality of Arnold van Gennep, as a postulation of postmodernist tendencies that reflect the question of (European) cultural identity, applied to the field of film or screen arts. We are witnesses that in the complex processes of integration and turmoil of national and transnational trends in Europe, in the period after the fall of the Berlin Wall (1989–2014), European cultural identity in/on film was reconstructed through narratives of otherness, resulting in multiple accented and assimilated identities, as shown by examples of film achievements awarded with EFAs for the best European film. The fact is that important European institutions recognize European identity as a reality in their documents, despite the fact that the very construction of European identity indicates a(n) (unfinished) permanent process. The basic assumptions of this research are therefore: 1. it is not about (id)entity as a given; 2. identity is built in social interaction; 3. otherness is an integral part of (cultural) identity; 4. differences also enrich other cultures; 5. European cultural identity is a process, i.e. a permanent construction site. The outcome of the analytical-research process is the confirmation that the European cultural identity is a set of differences/othernesses that form one entity, the European cultural identity, which, however, cannot be fixed and precisely defined, and it still remains a phenomenon open to different interpretations.

This work is about the spirit of Western civilization and its temptations. Drawing on Hegel's philosophy of history, the text explains why, until recently, this civilization was dominant over the rest of the world. The thing is that she understood the importance of rationality, subordinated all manifestations of life to her and especially, during capitalism (modernism), developed science and technology, and produced powerful weapons. Along the way, she incorporated all the significant achievements of other civilizations and peoples into her system of rationality. In this regard, Hegel says in the introduction to the Philosophy of History: "The only Thought which Philosophy brings with it to the contemplation of History, is the simple conception of Reason; that Reason is the Sovereign of the World; that the history of the world, therefore, presents us with a rational process." In other words, history is exclusively occupied with showing how Reason (Mind) comes to a recognition and adoption of the Truth. Of course, rationality is something that belongs to all civilizations and peoples, but other societies, for various reasons (geographical, climatic, religious, etc.) subordinated rationality to some other imperatives. Therefore, many of these communities were non-historical. Whatever it was, the West exploited its supremacy by colonizing other civilizations and destroying some. From the usual moral point of view, it is unacceptable, criminal. However, Hegel's philosophy, somewhat in Marx and Engels's interpretation, says something else. History makes sense. Its primary goal is to preserve humankind from anything that could destroy it, especially from various natural cataclysms and deadly diseases. The meaning of history is also its progress towards civil society as the realization of freedom and the end of history. This was only possible by adopting and practicing absolute rationality. Why guns and violence? Absolute rationality, in order to be histo-rically efficient, had to cover the whole world. In the West, as a "chosen civilization", it was to make it happen and he, militarily superior, did so by submiting other civilizati-ons and nations to the extreme violence. On the other hand, with this relentless exploitation of colonized areas, the West was able to develop rapidly in every way and thus, at the level of possibility, achieve the best destiny of humankind. Especially important was the XX century. Then this civilization, developing medicine, genetics, computer science, nanotechnology and robotics, managed to defeat various deadly diseases, begin space exploration, and turn deserts into fertile soils and, with the "green revolution", produce food for all the inhabitants of the planet. Seeing the advantages of rationality, other areas of the world, with varying success, followed the example of the West. Colonialism disappeared, and human rights and international relations were institutionalized, especially throughout the United Nations. The détente between the two blocs, capitalism and socialism, was established, and the nonaligned movement contributed to the stabilization of the world. As for the world's environmental prob-lems arising from the often-uncontrolled industrialization, they too, although excruciating and slow, seek to be solved on a global scale. Unlike modernism, which was constituted as a modern civil society with the adopted principle of equality of all, the current postmodernism is the opposite of everything civil. The market economy is functioning less and less, major utopian ideas, Christianity and Marxism, have been abandoned, the "new human rights" destroyed everything noble of the already proclaimed universal human rights. In the resulting hopeless chaos, worried about the rise of China and Russia, the most important forces in the West crossed in the "illegal" making a global deep state, the New Leviathan. They operate, as needed, both through formal and in-formal mechanisms. If necessary, they also oppose the authorities of their states if they deem their actions to be collapsing this civilization. As good disciples of Carl Schmitt, the German political philosopher, they are against the humanization of interpersonal relations; they have enormous financial and technical means and inhuman, eugenic ideas about reducing the world's population. There is no longer any doubt that their methods include the production and dissemination of deadly viruses. The action of these anti-liberal shadow minds is the destruction of all existing humanism, and has not-hing to do with history or any sense. Note. Leviathan is a sea monster mentioned in the biblical Book of Job, where it is associated with the forces of chaos and evil. Metaphorically, Leviathan is a huge and powerful social organism living secretly in the darck deep, out of any legal social con-trol. The work has two parts: - The Sense of History, Modernism and the Necessity of Western Violence - Postmodernism, the twilight of the West and the New Leviathan The following is a conclusion about the future of humanity. ; Ovo djelo govori o duhu zapadne civilizacije i njezinim iskušenjima. Oslanjajući se na Hegelovu filozofiju povijesti, tekst objašnjava zašto je donedavno ova civilizacija bila dominantna nad ostatkom svijeta. Stvar je u tome što je razumjela važnost racionalnosti, podredila sve manifestacije života njoj, a posebno, tijekom kapitalizma (modernizma), razvila znanost i tehnologiju i proizvela moćno oružje. Usput je u svoj sustav racionalnosti uključila sva značajna dostignuća drugih civilizacija i naroda. U tom smislu, Hegel u uvodu filozofije povijesti kaže: "Jedina misao koju filozofija donosi sa sobom u kontemplaciju povijesti je jednostavna koncepcija Uma; da je Um vladar svijeta; da nam povijest svijeta, dakle, predstavlja racionalan proces." Drugim riječima, povijest je isključivo okupirana pokazivanjem kako Um dolazi do priznanja i usvajanja Istine. Naravno, racionalnost je nešto što pripada svim civilizacijama i narodima, ali su druga društva, iz različitih razloga (geografskih, klimatskih, vjerskih itd.) podredila racionalnost nekim drugim imperativima. Stoga mnoge od tih zajednica nisu bile povijesne. Što god da je bilo, Zapad je iskoristio svoju nadmoć kolonizirajući druge civilizacije i uništavajući neke. Sa uobičajenog moralnog stajališta, to je neprihvatljivo, kriminalno. Međutim, Hegelova filozofija, donekle u Marxovoj i Engelsovoj interpretaciji, govori nešto drugo. Povijest ima svoj smisao. Njegov primarni cilj je sačuvati čovječanstvo od svega što bi ga moglo uništiti, osobito od raznih prirodnih kataklizmi i smrtonosnih bolesti. Smisao povijesti je i njegov napredak prema civilnom društvu kao ostvarenju slobode i kraja povijesti. To je bilo moguće samo usvajanjem i prakticiranjem apsolutne racionalnosti. Zašto oružje i nasilje? Apsolutna racionalnost, da bi bila povijesno učinkovita, morala je pokriti cijeli svijet. Na Zapadu je, kao "izabrana civilizacija", to trebalo ostvariti, a on je, vojno superioran, to učinio koristeći nad drugim civilizacijama i narodima ekstremno nasilje. S druge strane, ovom nemilosrdnom eksploatacijom koloniziranih područja, Zapad se mogao brzo razvijati u svim domenima i tako, na razini mogućnosti, omogućiti najbolju sudbinu čovječanstva. Posebno je važno bilo XX stoljeće. Tada je ova civilizacija, razvijajući medicinu, genetiku, informatiku, nanotehnologiju i robotiku, uspjela pobijediti razne smrtonosne bolesti, započeti istraživanje svemira i pretvoriti pustinje u plodna tla i, uz "zelenu revoluciju", proizvoditi hranu za sve stanovnike planeta. Vidjevši prednosti racionalnosti, druga područja svijeta, s različitim uspjehom, slijedila su primjer Zapada. Kolonijalizam je nestao, a ljudska prava i međunarodni odnosi bili su institucionalizirani, osobito u deklaracijama Ujedinjenih naroda. Uspostavljen je detant između dva bloka, kapitalizma i socijalizma, a pokret nesvrstanih pridonio je stabilizaciji svijeta. Što se tiče svjetskih ekoloških problema koji proizlaze iz često nekontrolirane industrijalizacije, i oni, iako mučno i sporo, nastoje biti riješeni na globalnoj razini. Za razliku od modernizma, koji je konstituiran kao moderno civilno društvo s usvojenim načelom jednakosti svih, sadašnji postmodernizam je suprotan svemu građanskom. Tržišna ekonomija sve lošije funkcionira, napuštene su velike utopijske ideje: kršćanstvo i marksizam, "nova ljudska prava" uništila su sve plemenito od već proglašenih univerzalnih ljudskih prava. U nastalom beznadnom kaosu, zabrinute zbog uspona Kine i Rusije, najvažnije snage na Zapadu prešle su u "ilegalu", stvaranjem globalne duboke države, Novog Levijatana. Djeluje, prema potrebi, putem formalnih i neformalnih mehanizama. Ako je potrebno, on se također protivi vlastima svojih država ako smatra da njihovi postupci urušavaju ovu civilizaciju. Kao dobar učenik Carla Schmitta, njemačkog političkog filozofa, on je protiv humanizacije međuljudskih odnosa; ima ogromna financijska i tehnička sredstva i neljudske, eugeničke ideje o smanjenju svjetske populacije. Više nema sumnje da njegove metode uključuju proizvodnju i širenje smrtonosnih virusa. Ciljevi djelovanja tih antiliberalnih svjetskih vlasti u sjeni, je uništenje cijelog postojećeg humanizma i nema nikakve veze s poviješću ili bilo kakvim smislom. Primjedba. Levijatan je morsko čudovište spomenuto u biblijskoj Knjizi o Jobu, gdje je povezan sa silama kaosa i zla. Metaforički, Levijatan je ogroman i moćan društveni organizam koji živi skriven u dubokoj tami, izvan bilo kakve pravne društvene kontrole. Rad ima dva dijela: - Smisao povijesti, modernizam i nužnost zapadnog nasilja - Postmodernizam, sumrak Zapada i Novi Levijatan Slijedi zaključak o budućnosti čovječanstva.