Suchergebnisse

Poljska javnost bila je zainteresirana za zbivanja među Južnim Slavenima. Nastanak Kraljevstva Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca poljski tisak tretirao je kao prirodno pravo malih naroda na samoodređenje. Sa simpatijama su promatrana nastojanja Slovenaca, Hrvata i Srba. Nije to, naravno, bila tema prvih stranica novina budući da se u tom trenutku obnavljala i sama Poljska. No poljska je javnost bila upoznata s djelatnošću glavnih slovenskih, hrvatskih i srpskih političara, bili su joj poznati problemi njihove borbe s Talijanima oko granica, a izražavane su i bojazni o jedinstvu države katolika, pravoslavaca i muslimana. Nije favorizirana nijedna strana. Često su se koristili pojmovi Jugoslavija i Jugoslaveni, i to još i prije negoli je došlo do ujedinjenja Slovenaca, Hrvata i Srba. ; Public opinion in Poland was much interested in the developments concerning the South Slavs in the final phase of World War I. Poland was still partitioned at that time, so there was no Polish national press. However, Polish newspapers and periodicals published under Russian, German, and Austro-Hungarian administration, as well as those published in already independent Poland, welcomed the establishment of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes as the realisation of the natural law of small nations to independence and thus cheered the efforts of the Slovenes, Croats, and Serbs to build their own state. There were more absorbing issues at the time, with Poland herself in the dramatic process of reclaiming independent statehood, and there was no involvement with the South Slavs, so the topic did not make it to the front pages. Nevertheless, public opinion in Poland was well versed in the activity of leading Slovenian, Serbian, and Croatian politicians and the Italian challenge to the negotiation of the borders of the newly-established state. It was also aware of the state's religious heterogeneity—Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and Muslims—as a potential threat to national unity. No particular side was favoured. Even before the unification of the Slovenes, Croats, and Serbs in a common state, the nations of Southeastern Europe were often referred to as Yugoslavia and the people as Yugoslavs. Occasionally, news concerning the South Slavs were printed in bold to emphasise the topic's importance to Polish editors and readers.

The objective is to analyze if religious orientation affects Swedish political opinion. To test for possible spurious correlation, demographic factors & ideological position are also included in the study. The study also tests the validity of functional theory & substantive theories regarding the correlation between religious orientation & political opinion. Data consists of a national mail survey (conducted by the SOM Institute at Goteborg University in 1999) to 5260 persons representing inhabitants in Sweden of age 15-80 years, of which a total of 67 percent (3503 persons) responded. The main conclusion is that religious orientations affect Swedish political opinion. Demographic factors & ideological position only explain a small amount of the significant correlation between religious orientation & political opinion. Functional theory is not supported by the empirical data, while substantive theories get strong support. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

Na stajališta hrvatskih građana o Europskoj uniji te ishod budućeg referenduma o ulasku Republike Hrvatske u tu zajednicu, izravno će utjecati njihova percepcija Europske unije. Istražujući percepciju Europske unije u hrvatskoj javnosti možemo prepoznati sporne točke u odnosu EU-Hrvatska, naslutiti razloge pada potpore hrvatskih građana ulasku Hrvatske u Europsku uniju te ujedno razumjeti mogućnosti promjene te percepcije. Analizirajući odnose između Hrvatske i Europe posljednja dva desetljeća, autor uočava temelje današnje percepcije Europske unije u odnosima Hrvatske i Europe prilikom raspada Jugoslavije 1991. i stvaranja Republike Hrvatske. Današnja percepcija Europske unije, naime, uvjetovana je ne samo konkretnim očekivanjima (koristima i štetama) u aspektima društvenog i gospodarskog života, već i općim dojmovima građana o EU-u te odnosom Europe prema Hrvatskoj. Istraživanje otkriva kako je razina očekivanja, odnosno nada i strahova te stereotipa o Europskoj uniji uvjetovana i nedovoljnom razinom informiranosti građana o različitim aspektima funkcioniranja Europske unije. ; Attitudes of Croatian citizens towards the European Union and the outcome of the future referendum on the entry of the Republic of Croatia into this Community will be directly infl uenced by their perception of the European Union. By examining the perception of the European Union among the Croatian public, we can identify sticking points in the relationship between the European Union and Croatia, identify the causes of the decline of support of Croatian citizens for the entry of Croatia into the European Union and understand the possibility of changing this perception. Through an analysis of the relations between Croatia and Europe during the last two decades, the author notes the foundations of today's perception of the European Union in the relations between Croatia and Europe during the collapse of Yugoslavia in 1991 and the creation of the Republic of Croatia. Today's perception of the European Union is determined not only by ...

The authors explore the question of whether activity on the part of Swedish authorities aimed at shaping public opinion has shifted from the dissemination of information to the issuing of propaganda. Their project involves four case studies of different agencies. Issues explored are the questions and themes taken up by authorities and which forms of opinion shaping organizations share in common, as well as which forms are unique to a specific type of administration. Adapted from the source document.

The perceptions of science by the Croatian public & the political elite are a combination of scientific-technological optimism, the exemption of science from social responsibility, the skepticism regarding the speed of changes that science brings into people's lives, & a mixture of cognitive realism & optimism, & the reservations towards the cognitive possibilities of science. Also, the perceptions of science by the public & by the elite differ significantly. The public perceptions link modernism & traditionalism, confidence & a lack of it in the socially responsible role of science (& technology). Politicians nurture three different views of science. The first view implies both the beneficial & the neutral social role of science. The second view implies the reservations of the elite regarding the humanistic social role of science & its cognitive power, while the third way links the cognitive limitations of science & the skepticism regarding the way in which it changes the traditional way of life. The perception of science by the public depends on the social composition, while the politicians' views are significantly influenced by their political worldview & orientations & party allegiance. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

In a response to Vujcic's reply to the earlier polemics regarding the review of the author's Politicka i medijska kultura u Hrvatskoj (Political and Media Culture in Croatia), the question of how to define tolerance, & whether this should imply support for the minority instead of just acceptance is taken up once again. The author defends himself against Vujcic's charge that he has not analyzed his own data correctly, pointing out that public opinion & media polling show a broad & general correlation for tolerance of minority viewpoints. Disagreements over the semantics of "tolerance" continue, as Voltaire's definition is once again held up as a model. 1 Table. A. Siegel

As the medium of democracy, the Public is a communicational trace of the missing Collective Sovereign: the People or Demos. In political life, we often refer to the People, but in reality the People does not make a community. It is instead a notion, a missing Sovereign, the one who exists as concept but does not speak for oneself. The community is yet to be established, and this can be done only by communication. The aim of such communication is to formulate norms, rules and principles which are to be implemented or encouraged in public life. On a more normative level, this can be done in the process of writing a Constitution. The other objective is to discuss the concept of public good. This is left to communicational functions of the Public. The concept of the Public is left to citizens, who communicate with other citizens, and thus create public opinion. By doing that, the Public is here to remind the government that somebody else is to be Sovereign, i.e. that there is also the People. The Public is thus a substitute for the "missing Sovereign". There can be no Democracy without this role of the Public. Adapted from the source document.