Suchergebnisse

Purpose. The article is devoted to the topical in modern political-economic reality theme of architectonics of the state. The subject of analysis is the physical-ontological and social-political doctrines T. Hobbes. The author aims to reveal the category of the body as the primordial concept of Hobbes' metaphysics.Methodology. The basis of the research is the hermeneutic, phenomenological and comparative methods and the principle of the historical-philosophical reconstruction.Results. The results of the study are that the author explicates the essence of Hobbes' maxim that man can fully know only what he himself can do. As such an artifact in the philosophy of T. Hobbes is the body, and the social-political body, established by the man himself. The author supposes that the modern European project "social physics" can be considered a prototype of active theoretical-epistemic model describing social reality.Practical implications. The results of the study can be applied in the sphere of socio-political planning and forecasting. ; Цель. Статья посвящена актуальной в условиях современной политико-экономической реальности теме архитектоники государства. Предметом анализа выступают физико-онтологическая и социально-политическая доктрины Т. Гоббса. Автор ставит целью раскрыть категорию тела в качестве исконного понятия гоббсовой метафизики.Метод или методология проведения работы. Основу исследования образуют герменевтический, феноменологический и компаративистский методы, а также принцип историко-философской реконструкции.Результаты. Результаты работы заключаются в том, что автор эксплицирует сущность гоббсовой максимы о том, что человек в полной мере может познать лишь то, что он сам способен сделать. В качестве такого артефакта в философии Т. Гоббса выступает тело, причём не природно-физическое, а социально-политическое, учреждаемое самим человеком. Автор делает предположение, что новоевропейский проект «социальной физики» можно считать прообразом деятельностной теоретико-эпистемической модели описания социальной реальности.Область применения результатов. Результаты исследования могут быть применены в сфере социально-политического проектирования и прогнозирования.

Information and communication technologies and the global information environment are increasingly being used by various actors of international relations – including non-state actors – to distribute specially prepared content for malicious political and economic purposes. This article is devoted to the study of the methodology of information and political influence on public opinion and public consciousness. Based on the analysis of doctrinal documents, strategic planning documents of the US and specific examples of information operations, the authors reconstruct the stages of information operations and highlight the Thomas theorem as a theoretical basis for the mechanisms of influence on public consciousness. The authors also assess the impact of the latest ICTs, including those based on advances in artificial intelligence, on the ability to conduct information operations and counter them. ; Информационно-коммуникационные технологии и глобальная информационная среда во всё большей степени начинают использоваться различными акторами международных отношений – в том числе негосударственными – для распространения специально подготовленного контента в злонамеренных политических и экономических целях. Настоящая статья посвящена изучению методологии информационно-политического воздействия на общественное мнение и общественное сознание. Опираясь на анализ доктринальных документов, документов стратегического планирования США и конкретных примеров информационных операций, авторы реконструируют этапы информационных операций и выделяют теорему Томаса в качестве теоретической основы механизмов влияния на общественное сознание. Авторы также дают оценку влияния новейших ИКТ, в том числе опирающихся на достижения в сфере искусственного интеллекта, на возможность проведения информационных операций и противодействия им.

The theatrical metaphor (that is, the metaphor with the original conceptual sphere "All the world's a stage"), originated in Antiquity, is realized in literature from different eras and is widely spread in both dramatic and epic works. The historical novel often interprets historical events as a political game, the interaction of social roles, the clash of wills and characters - a dramatic action. The metaphor "All the world's a stage" is part of the artistic picture of the world of Hilary Mantel's historical novels "Wolf Hall" (2009) and "Bring Up the Bodies" (2012). ; В статье рассматривается театральная метафора, как часть художественной картины мира исторических романов английской писательницы Хилари Мантел "Волчий зал" и "Внесите тела".

China, Russia, and the United States are the three most active geopolitical actors today. One central question is whether the three powers can replicate the American-Chinese-Soviet strategic triangle of the 1970s that refashioned the global geopolitical landscape. That earlier triangle emerged as a consequence of a U.S. policy decision to reestablish relations with China as part of a strategic design to enable the United States to exit the war in Vietnam "with honor," restrain the Soviet Union's burgeoning power, and stabilize East Asia. Through deft diplomacy, Washington advanced its goals, but the triangle endured for most of the 1970s because it also advanced Soviet and Chinese interests. Today, the return of great-power competition has sparked debate about the emergence of a new strategic triangle. One does not now exist, primarily because the United States is not interested in establishing a working link with Russia. Because Washington does not believe that Russia adds much to the challenge it faces from China alone, it is unwilling to do much to disrupt growing Russian-Chinese alignment. Whether a strategic triangle comes into being depends largely on Russia. It has to convince both Washington and Beijing that its policy choices can significantly shift the balance between the two now and in the future. Neither capital believes that now, largely because they doubt Moscow's ability to revitalize the economy to generate the resources it needs to back up its great-power ambitions in the long run.

DOI 10.15826/tetm.2020.1-2.008This article aims to discuss the reasons and consequences of the recent historical monuments' destruction in the United States. The author uses the concept of Foundation myths as well as opinion polls' results and cases from modern history to provide argumentation for the idea of ongoing polarization in American society. The results show that, although the political elites are relatively united on the issue of historical memory, there is a certain division among ordinary citizens. The causes for the recent attacks on the monuments and the historical figures they represent lies in the crisis, caused by the COVID-pandemic, economic downturn and protests over racism. However, the fundamental reason lies in the chronic socio-economic, cultural, and political difficulties, particularly income inequality, political polarization of elites and mass publics of American society. In the conclusion of the article, the author discusses how the discourse over historical figures and foundation myths shaped 2020 Presidential elections in the US and how specific agenda related to Founding Fathers was used by the US President Donald Trump during his campaign.For citation: Sherlock, T. (2020). Evaluating the Legitimacy of the American Foundation Myth. Tempus et Memoria, 1, 1–2, 76–81.Submitted: 30.10.2020Accepted: 02.12.2020 ; This article aims to discuss the reasons and consequences of the recent historical monuments' destruction in the United States. The author uses the concept of Foundation myths as well as opinion polls' results and cases from modern history to provide argumentation for the idea of ongoing polarization in American society. The results show that, although the political elites are relatively united on the issue of historical memory, there is a certain division among ordinary citizens. The causes for the recent attacks on the monuments and the historical figures they represent lies in the crisis, caused by the COVID-pandemic, economic downturn and protests over racism. However, the fundamental reason lies in the chronic socio-economic, cultural, and political difficulties, particularly income inequality, political polarization of elites and mass publics of American society. In the conclusion of the article, the author discusses how the discourse over historical figures and foundation myths shaped 2020 Presidential elections in the US and how specific agenda related to Founding Fathers was used by the US President Donald Trump during his campaign.For citation: Sherlock, T. (2020). Evaluating the Legitimacy of the American Foundation Myth. Tempus et Memoria, 1, 1–2, 76–81.Submitted: 30.10.2020Accepted: 02.12.2020

Einem rechtsstaatlichen und demokratischen Staatsverständnis ist inhärent, dass die Bürger gegenüber Maßnahmen der Exekutive nicht schutzlos gestellt sind, sondern diese durch eine unabhängige Justiz überprüfen lassen können. Wie alle postsozialistischen Transformationsstaaten Osteuropas hat auch die Ukraine nach der Wiedererlangung ihrer Unabhängigkeit 1991 an alte Traditionen angeknüpft und mit dem Aufbau einer Verwaltungsgerichtsbarkeit begonnen. Gleichwohl sind noch eine Reihe von Defiziten festzustellen, die nicht zuletzt ein Problem der personellen Ausstattung, daneben aber auch eine Folge noch fehlender dogmatischer Durchdringung sind, zumal es noch an einer klaren Verfahrenstruktur, allgemein gültigen Verfahrensmaximen und einer darauf aufbauenden Verfahrenspraxis mangelt. Anknüpfend an diesen Ausgangsbefund hat im September 2010 am Institut für Öffentliches Recht, Abteilung Verwaltungsrecht, der Universität Göttingen ein Kolloquium stattgefunden, das den wissenschaftlichen und praktischen Dialog zwi schen Deutschland und der Ukraine in Angelegenheiten der verwaltungsgerichtlichen Kontrolle der öffentlichen Gewalt befördern sollte. Dieser Band enthält die Referate dieses Kolloquiums in russischer und deutscher Sprache.

Einem rechtsstaatlichen und demokratischen Staatsverständnis ist inhärent, dass die Bürger gegenüber Maßnahmen der Exekutive nicht schutzlos gestellt sind, sondern diese durch eine unabhängige Justiz überprüfen lassen können. Wie alle postsozialistischen Transformationsstaaten Osteuropas hat auch die Ukraine nach der Wiedererlangung ihrer Unabhängigkeit 1991 an alte Traditionen angeknüpft und mit dem Aufbau einer Verwaltungsgerichtsbarkeit begonnen. Gleichwohl sind noch eine Reihe von Defiziten festzustellen, die nicht zuletzt ein Problem der personellen Ausstattung, daneben aber auch eine Folge noch fehlender dogmatischer Durchdringung sind, zumal es noch an einer klaren Verfahrenstruktur, allgemein gültigen Verfahrensmaximen und einer darauf aufbauenden Verfahrenspraxis mangelt. Anknüpfend an diesen Ausgangsbefund hat im September 2010 am Institut für Öffentliches Recht, Abteilung Verwaltungsrecht, der Universität Göttingen ein Kolloquium stattgefunden, das den wissenschaftlichen und praktischen Dialog zwi schen Deutschland und der Ukraine in Angelegenheiten der verwaltungsgerichtlichen Kontrolle der öffentlichen Gewalt befördern sollte. Dieser Band enthält die Referate dieses Kolloquiums in russischer und deutscher Sprache.

The period from the American War of Independence (1775-1783) to the sale of Alaska (1867) was the longest period of friendly relations in US-Russian history. This was hardly a period of close ties, however, or what we would now call partnership. Each country was of marginal concern to the other. The gulf in values was profound and unbridgeable, even if the two powers insulated relations from ideological disputes. Geopolitical tension was absent because the two countries largely operated in separate spheres. Where they did interact, friction did not erupt into serious conflict, because Russia was willing to accommodate American expansionism rather risk escalation in regions that were far from vital. The benefits that each country derived from the other were minimal and never arose from extensive collaboration. Rather they were the consequence of each country's refusal to take sides against the other in conflicts with third powers, including the War for Independence, the Crimean War, and the American Civil War. If relations were friendly, it was because there was no compelling reason to be rivals. The situation changed dramatically in the last decades of the 19th century, as the United States experienced an unprecedented period of rapid growth in wealth and power while Russia entered a prolonged period of imperial crisis. American ideological and geopolitical ambition eventually turned distant friendship into an incipient rivalry.