Suchergebnisse

Kako primjereno politologijski istražiti, prikazati i vrednovati povijest i sadašnje stanje politologije u Hrvatskoj? Tekst se fokusira na pomno razmatranje predmeta znanosti o politici – što je politika? – kao pretpostavke znanstveno primjerenog odgovora na dvojbu o stručnoj profilaciji studija i polaznika studija-politologa. A u tom sklopu, na smisao određenja politologije kao "znanosti o općenitosti" i politologa kao "stručnjaka za općenitost". Objašnjava se smisao, teorijski i kontekstualni, tih određenja (Prpić, 1969), vrednuju njegove pretpostavke, domašaji i ograničenja. Dramatična, teorijska i praktična, dvojba s kojom nas je Prpić suočio neprevladiva je u povijesnom kontekstu demokratske države, s obzirom na svojstvenu joj epohalnu ambivalenciju. Pri čemu se pokazuje nesuvislost dileme između množine i jednine: politička znanost u singularu sluškinja je političke moći, a političke znanosti tek metaznanstvena humanistička kritika postojećeg svijeta, što znači da znanost o politici ne valja ni u singularu ni u pluralu. Kada je znanstvena i stručna, tada je opasna po političku slobodu, kada je pak humanistička i ne-stručna tada je nemoćna i suvišna. Politolog je pak ili "stručnjak za posebnost", etički i vrijednosno neutralni sluga političke moći, ili pak pretenciozni misionar. Izlaz iz začaranog kruga: znanost o politici, u plodnoj i nezamjenjivoj dvojini metodički osloniti na novo načelo konstitucije zajednice, koje je imanentna kritika i prevladavanje moderne demokratske države i građanskog društva. Time se osnažuje i shvaćanje političke znanosti kao "znanosti o općenitosti". Znanost o općenitosti kao znanost o političkome tvori se u autonomiji (ali i komplementarnosti) spram znanosti o "općosti" (filozofije, etike i prava) i spram znanosti o posebnosti (posebnih sektora političkoga i društvenog bitka). Općenito je zbiljsko samo u odnosu spram općega, kao oposebljenje općega, i u odnosu spram posebnoga, kao poopćavanje posebnoga. Čime se suzbija opasnost od prividne općenitosti, kao bahate pretenzije ...

Obituary is presented for Dag Strpic. Adapted from the source document.

Tribute to Ralf Dahrendorf, German-British sociologist, philosopher, political scientist and liberal politician, who died in 2009,.

The author looks into the life & work of Alexander von Humboldt, viewing him as a protagonist of a scientific globalization concept that linked the promotion of science with the trinity of liberty, equality, & fraternity. Humboldt saw fraternite as realized in the form of a worldwide dialogue of scientists. The author observes that Humboldt was a pragmatic & organizational genius of networking, ie, the strategy of public relations that included contacts with scientists & the popularization of scientific achievements. Humboldt's Eurocentrism, which comes to the fore in his work about his travels, is nevertheless as ambivalent as the history of the reception of that work. Truth to tell, this work lay the foundation for European colonization & exploitation of Latin America, but was also essential for its self-understanding & political emancipation. The author claims that Humboldt's private & political ambivalence, essentially productive, is the result of his magnificent incompleteness & imperfections. Adapted from the source document.

The author looks into the life & work of Alexander von Humboldt, viewing him as a protagonist of a scientific globalization concept that linked the promotion of science with the trinity of liberty, equality, & fraternity. Humboldt saw fraternite as realized in the form of a worldwide dialogue of scientists. The author observes that Humboldt was a pragmatic & organizational genius of networking, ie, the strategy of public relations that included contacts with scientists & the popularization of scientific achievements. Humboldt's Eurocentrism, which comes to the fore in his work about his travels, is nevertheless as ambivalent as the history of the reception of that work. Truth to tell, this work lay the foundation for European colonization & exploitation of Latin America, but was also essential for its self-understanding & political emancipation. The author claims that Humboldt's private & political ambivalence, essentially productive, is the result of his magnificent incompleteness & imperfections. Adapted from the source document.

The author's comprehensive research project, of which this article is but an introductory outline, inquires into the kind of history written out by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). In order to investigate the interrelation between criminal law & history, the author faced the following question: what would the history of the disintegration of Yugoslavia & of conflicts in its territory look like if all we had were the judgments of the Hague Tribunal? The author bases his reply on an analysis of first-instance judgments of the Trial Chamber, from which he singles out "historical facts," & rejects the reflections of the Chamber on legal & procedural issues. As a model case he uses the first ICTY judgment pronounced against Dusko Tadic (the trial started on May 7, 1996, & the judgment was pronounced a year later). Although he estimates that the first judgment was not written in an optimal way, the author deems that most preliminarily established historical facts were relevant to historiography, & that, in particular, the judgment offers a universally acceptable notion of the history of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia & of socialist Yugoslavia. He is of the opinion that the extensive documentation of ICTY (the "Hague Tribunal") will have a major influence on the work of future generations of historians. Such a unique & replete archive of historical material is increasingly available to the public & to scientists through ICTY's online database. The most recent scientific works dealing with the former Yugoslavia also make use of the Tribunal's judgments & documentation. Scientists will have to pay due attention to the narratives included therein. Adapted from the source document.

In memoriam of Paule Mihalj (1944-2009).

The author takes issue with the quasi-scientific ideological manifesto that M. Kasapovic presented to the political-science community in her "revisionist text," as she herself characterized it, entitled "Leaving the Plural? The End of Internal Colonisation of Croatian Political Science?" (2007). "Leaving the Plural?" is the introductory & pivotal text in a collection encompassing works by a group of political scientists, which proffers a peculiar view on "the history & state of Croatian political science." In the first part of this article, published in the 2009 issue of Annals of the Croatian Political Science Association, the author's minute analysis unequivocally demonstrated that M. Kasapovic's belligerent manifesto, which does not meet even the minimal professional standards, is an arrogant amalgam of inequity & incomprehension, as well as an implacable attack on the Faculty of Political Science, its professors & its entire history. Here in the second part of the article the author first provides a brief review of a text which is part of M. Kasapovic's recent scientific production, with the aim of showing that the failure to meet the requirements of standard political-science discourse in "Leaving the Plural?" was not an exception. In the final section, the author reflects on the meaning & purpose of the accusations & personal slander contained in M. Kasapovic's defamatory text "Drifting Duo" (2008). In his judgment, the latter text disregards the basic rules of academic communication & is in itself a barbarization of Croatian political science. Adapted from the source document.

This analysis of textbooks and working material is based on documents determining the curriculum standards and plans and the programme for primary schools of the Ministry of science, education and sport, as well as the UN conventions regarding the abolishment of all forms of discrimination of women. Covered by the analysis are the textbooks approved by the Ministry of science, education and sport. As focal points of the paper's subject matter and the centres of analysis, six aspects have been singled out: 1) contextualisation of women (individually or as social groups) in the thematic (textbook) framework, integration into the contents or mere addition of separate parts to the textbook whole, 2) lack of specific material pertaining to the equality of the sexes, 3) so-called women contents or subjects (housekeeping, female beauty, fashion), 4) wives, widows, mothers, sisters... of illustrious husbands, sons, brothers, 5) important women -- inclusion or ignoring of eminent women -- rulers, scientists, artists, 6) successful examples -- entire textbooks or some individual solutions. The analysis shows that only a small part of the textbooks and working material successfully integrates contents relating to women in such a way as to portray them uninfluenced by stereotypes. Further, the textbook authors had major problems with incorporating material dealing with women into historical events as a whole. Women and their activities, even the ones perceived as "male", as still merely added to history. Neglect or complete absence of certain great historical subjects has also been noted, e.g. of matriarchate/matrilineality and the subsequent development of the patriarchate. All authors found it much easier to portray women separately, either individually or as social groups, though the latter has, in general, been less successful than the former (important women, rulers, scientists, artists). Their position in various times is almost without exception described by the phrase "women remain at home, they cook, they look after the children, they have no rights..." with some variations in detail, but not in the essentials. Adapted from the source document.

In this text, the state of political theory in Serbia is looked into with regard to the achieved level of self-reflection & professionalisation. Political theory is developing as a special way of research into politics which, in addition to refusing to fit to any discipline-related definitions, has its own professional standards of argumentation, approaches, theories & heroes; however, it has no well-balanced methodological instruction & no professional training. It is a pluralized field of research which tends to reject the delegitimizing & self-positioning practices, the aim of which is to pass judgment, exclude or label, & develops standards of justification & criticism. The second part of the text puts forward the assertion that political theory in Serbia is far from achieving these standards. This is not due to lack of relevant works, but to lack of self-reflection on what has been accomplished so far. There are two reasons for such a state of affairs. First, a rather unfortunate history of the discipline: it developed initially within the ideological surroundings of Marxism, which did not leave much room for theory, & then through political disorder & conflicts of the 1990s, which encouraged delegitimizing practices & self-positioning rather than criticism & self-reflection. The second reason has to do with inadequate institutionalization of political science & social sciences in general, which apparently leaves enough room for political theory, but not for professional self-identification. Adapted from the source document.

The Ministry of Science of the Republic of Croatia decided on a new Rule Book of Definition of Scientific Areas. According to the book, Politology is a scientific field in the area of social science. It is divided into 3 branches: (1) Politology, (2) Theory and History of Politics, & (3) Political Philosophy. By using documents, the author of this article shows how political science is differently structured by IPSA & APSA. The author describes 120 years of dominantly American development of political science & of professions of political scientists, which brought out a recent new world standard with around 100 subdisciplines & areas of expertise that are structured in 8 fundamental disciplines: (1) Political Institutions, (2) Political Behavior, (3) Comparative Politics, (4) International Relations, (5) Political Theory, (6) Public Policy & Public Administration/Management, (7) Political Economy, & (8) Political Methodology. The author points out that a voluntaristic intervention in the definition of scientific areas could mean an attack on the development of science, research organization, renewal of teaching staff at the university, & academic education of political scientists, as well as internationally comparable competence of Croatian experts & Croatian democratic political thought & political culture in general. 133 References. Adapted from the source document.

U radu "Izlazak iz Lepušićeve?" Kasapović se ponovno bavi vrlo važnom temom kritičke procjene razvoja discipline političke znanosti u Hrvatskoj, osvrćući se posebno na stanje u komparativnoj politici. Autorica proučava zašto se Hrvatska rijetko nalazi u međunarodnim komparativnim istraživanjima, s tim da problem analizira iz vanjskog ugla, pitajući se zašto strani politolozi i veliki međunarodni istraživački programi rijetko uključuju Hrvatsku. Nadovezujući se na Kasapović, sumirat ću glavne boljke, a zatim utvrditi da se razvoj empirijske politologije u Hrvatskoj odvija u odsutnosti sustavne znanstvene politike, ali i u kontekstu nedovoljne brige samih znanstvenika i o uvjetima produkcije znanja i o mehanizmima reprodukcije discipline. ; In the article "Exiting Lepušićeva?" Kasapović engages once again with the very important issue of critical evaluation of the development of political science in Croatia, with a particular focus on the status of comparative politics within the discipline. The author takes an outside perspective in the approach to the analysis of the reasons why Croatia can rarely be found in international comparative studies, and inquires into the reasons why political scientists abroad, involved in large-scale international research programs, rarely include Croatia as one of their case studies? In addition to Kasapović's argument, I begin by summing up the main problems, and afterwards I argue that the development of empirical political science in Croatia takes place in the absence of a comprehensive Science and research policy on the national level, but also in the context of insufficient concern of the scientists themselves for the conditions of knowledge production and the mechanisms of reproduction of the discipline.