57 research outputs found
DAS MODELL DER FRIEDLICHEN REINTEGRIERUNG UND MOGLICHKEITEN DES ZUSAMMENLEBENS
When differences in the language, religion, tradition and culture
in general grow into an obstacle to the communication
between nations, the possibility of living together becomes doubtful.
The burden of historic heritage in the Croato-Serbian relationship
has become intolerable due to Serbian rejection to recognise
Croatian independence. Through violence, plunder, banishment
and devastation of the Croatian villages and towns, the Serbs have
declared against co-existence with the Croats. Can the Plan of
Peaceful Reintegration convince the expelled Croats and other
non-Serbs that living together is possible? The Plan offered administrative
solutions that neglect essential characteristics of the
area (historical prerogatives, migrations, wars, cultural differences).
The displaced persons do not see the Plan as a humane, material
and moral satisfaction, but rather as additional protection for
the Serbs. They have formed their returnees\u27 consciousness mainly
from the point of view of their everyday living needs and expectations,
which so far have not approved or accepted all details of
the Plan.Kada razlika u jeziku, vjeri, tradiciji ili kulturi postane zapreka u
komunikaciji među narodima, tada je među njima suživot upitan.
Ovakav teret povijesnog naslijeđa u odnosima Hrvata i Srba
dobio je dimenziju neizdrživosti zbog srpskog neprihvaćanja državne
samostalnosti. Nasiljem, pljačkom, progonima i pustošenjem
hrvatskih sela i gradova Srbi su se izjasnili protiv suživota. Mogu
li se planom mirne reintegracije uvjeriti prognani Hrvati i drugi ne-
-srbi da je suživot moguć? Plan je ponudio administrativna rješenja
koja zaobilaze bitne specifičnosti ovoga kraja (povijesno prvenstvo,
migracije, ratovi, kulturne razlike). Prognanici u njemu ne
nalaze humanu, moralnu i materijalnu satisfakciju, već prije svega
zaštitu Srba. Oni su stoga svoju povratničku svijest više oblikovali
iz obzora svojih potreba i očekivanja koja uvjetuje život, a
koja nisu do sada u cijelosti potvrđivala prihvaćenost svih potankosti
plana.Wenn Unterschiede in Sprache, Religion, Tradition oder Kultur
zu Hindernissen in der Kommunikation zwischen den Volkern
werden, ist es fraglich, ob ein Zusammenleben noch mogli ch
ist. Die 8i.lrde des geschichtlichen Erbes in den 8eziehungen
zwischen Kroaten und Serben wuchs bis zur Unertraglichkeit an,
als die Serben es ablehnten, Kroatien als selbstandigen Staat anzuerkennen.
Durch Gewalt, Pli.lnderung, Vertreibung und Verwi.lstung
kroatischer Dorter und Stadte llefsen die Serben keinen
Zweifel daran, dass sie gegen ein Zusammenleben mit den Kroaten
waren. Kann der Plan der friedlichen Reintegrierung die vertriebenen
Kroaten sowie andere Nichtserben von der Moglichkeit
eines Zusammenlebens i.lberzeugen? Der Plan bietet administrative
Losungen an, in denen wesentliche Spezifika dieses Raums
(geschichtlicher Vorrang, Migrationen, Kriege, kulturelle Unterschiede)
umgangen werden. Die Vertriebenen erblicken darin keinerlei
humane, moralische und materielle 8efriedigung, sondern
in erster Linie eine Inschutznahme der Serben. Die Einstellung
der Vertriebenen im Hinblick auf die ersehnte Ri.lckkehr ist daher
eh er von 8edi.lrfnissen und Erwartungen gepragt, die durch das
Leben seibst bedingt sind, die sich je doch nicht in alle Einzelheiten
des Reintegrierungsplans finden kčnnen
EUROPE OF MONETARY UNITY IN CONTRAST WITH THE EUROPE OF NATIONAL AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY
The history of Europe is riddled with conflict and disagreement between its nations and the present has not managed to erase their traces. The establishment of the European Union, although started as an economic project (EEC), has gained some other dimensions as well: monetary, political and cultural. Not all EU member states are equally interested in each of these dimensions. Old member states, for example, wish to maintain economic development, social and individual standard, their national and cultural identities. New members, on the other hand, expect faster economic development, raising social and individual standard, social security and stability. These differences call into question the functional unity of the EU which definitely requires a common European identity. Transnationalization and cosmopolitization of today's world suppress the European traditionally national orientation. In addition, the pattern of a European standard emerging through a consumption culture demands abandonment of national traditions. Nevertheless, this does not necessarily mean the emergence of a unitary Europe for an obvious reason: there is significant inequality between European nations. Can perhaps monetary unity be the first important step in overcoming historical differences, economic inequality and national and cultural self-sufficiency? Can common goals of monetary policy, its elastic organization and expansion to new countries contribute to this? These are some of the issues analyzed in this paper, together with the relationship between the Croatian currency kuna and the euro.monetary unity, European identity, functional unity, consumption culture, European Union
ZNANOST U DRUŠTVU „POST-ISTINE“: NOVI MEDIJI I DRUŠTVENA PERCEPCIJA ZNANOSTI
The public has always had an ambivalent attitude towards science. Science has brought new knowledge and has made life easier, but the power of knowledge has always provoked doubts about ethics of scientific endeavours. Among other factors that might be attributed to contemporary postmodern society, various characteristics of media production lead to the communication errors and negative public attitudes towards science. However, the advent of the new media has exacerbated such issues within the relationship between science and the media, taking into account that non-selective information sources on the Internet destroy the role of "gate-keeping" residing in traditional mass media and journalists. Although at first sight such a process implies potential for information demokratization, it also entails possibilities of presenting completely false and unfounded opinions, especially those concerning science. In this paper, the authors show a detailed analysis of the socio-cultural changes and media production characteristics that cause misunderstandings, but they also indicate useful principles that could lead to the more successful communication and social understanding of science. The role of scientists as communicators of science is indispensable in this respect, but there is also a need to abandon the traditional and idealized concepts of science as an isolated and self-sufficient human endeavor.Odnos javnosti prema znanosti uvijek je bio ambivalentan. Znanost je donosila nove spoznaje i olakšavala život, no moć koju spoznaja nosi sa sobom izazivala je i dvojbe u pogledu etičnosti znanosti i rada znanstvenika. Uz druge čimbenike vezane za obilježja postmodernog društva, razne zakonitosti medijske produkcije dovode do šumova u komunikaciji i negativnih stavova javnosti. Međutim, s pojavom novih medija dolazi do posve promijenjenog odnosa znanosti i medija, s obzirom na to da neselektivnost izvora informacija na internetu ruši funkciju klasičnih masovnih medija i novinara kao „gate-keepera“. Iako takav proces na prvi pogled implicira demokratizacijske potencijale, on za sobom povlači i mogućnosti iznošenja posve pogrešnih i neutemeljenih mišljenja, osobito kada je znanost u pitanju. U ovome se radu detaljno prikazuju sociokulturne promjene i obilježja medijske produkcije koja pridonose skepsi i nesporazumima, ali i izlažu korisna načela koja mogu dovesti do bolje komunikacije i uspješnijeg javnog razumijevanja znanosti. U tom se pogledu osobito ističe uloga znanstvenika kao komunikatora znanosti, ali i potreba da se napuste tradicionalna i pretjerano idealizirana poimanja znanosti kao izolirane i samodostatne ljudske djelatnosti, odnosno da se komunikacija o znanosti odredi kao dvosmjerni proces
Capitalism, meritocracy and legitimacy: Croatian society thirty years after
Starting from the System Justification Theory, the aim of this paper is to explore levels of general system legitimation, inequality perception and meritocracy perception among Croatian citizens, as well as to determine whether there is a difference between social groups of lower and higher social standing in this regard. Survey research on a sample of the Croatian general population (N = 353) revealed that on balance the respondents do not perceive the Croatian social system as legitimate, equal and meritocratic. Regression analyses showed that retired persons express a substantially higher level of system legitimation and meritocracy perception when compared to employed persons, while higher religiosity was also a significant predictor in this regard. When it comes to the inequality perception, only female gender was a significant predictor. The results are discussed within the framework of the contemporary theories of meritocracy and system legitimation, as well as with reference to specific social and economic characteristics of the Croatian society, such as the Croatian War of Independence, transition to capitalism, welfare state development and labour market situation. Overall, the study results provide only a partial confirmation of the System Justification Theory
Europäertum als Entwicklungsidentität – Recht oder Privileg?
Europska postsocijalisti~ka dru{tva svoju su tranziciju u proteklom
desetlje}u obilje`ila orijentacijom prema efikasnom tr`i{nom
gospodarenju i politi~koj demokratizaciji. Sva su ta dru{tva
otpo~ela s novom modernizacijom koja im daje nov identitet.
Koliko se pri tome razilaze naslije|ene vrijednosti i obrasci
dru{tvenoga `ivota (identitet naslije|a) s onima zacrtanim
orijentacijom na tr`i{nu ekonomiju i demokratizaciju politike
(identitet razvoja), razli~ito je od dr`ave do dr`ave. Ve}a ili manja
neuskla|enost naslije|a i razvojnih ciljeva ne smije postati
nepremostiva zapreka uklju~ivanju u europski prostor. Koliko se,
pak, europski prostor otvara pojedinim tranzicijskim dru{tvima,
toliko se pojedina dru{tva opisuju kao perspektivna ili ne.
Posebno je pitanje koliko se perspektivnost nekoga dru{tva ti~e
njega samoga i njegove spremnosti na transformaciju identiteta,
a koliko dobre volje europskih mentora i transformacije koju su
propisali. Jer, biti u europskom prostoru, a ne sudjelovati i u
europskom vremenu raspodjele mo}i i bogatstva, sudbina je
europskog Istoka, dok je Zapad Europe posebna Europa. Kod
onih prvih europejstvo se i dalje shva}a kao slu`enje, dok je za
one druge europejstvo pozicija gospodarenja. Stoga je ukupan
napor oko uklju~ivanja u europske integracije za jedne
rezervirano pravo i privilegij, a za druge i dalje samo pravo na
`elju. Antiglobalisti bi to ocrtali kao novi vid kolonijalizma.The transitions of European postsocialist countries have been
marked in the past decade by an orientation towards efficient
market economy and political democratisation. All of these
societies started new modernisation processes which have
rendered them new identity. However, what varies from state to
state is the gap between inherited values and patterns of social
life (inherited identity) on the one hand, and the targeted
orientation to market economy and democratisation of politics
(development identity) on the other. A greater or lesser
incompatibility of heritage and aims of development should not
become an insurmountable barrier to being included into the
European family. In as much as Europe opens up to particular
transitional societies, they are then described as promising or
not. It is quite another matter whether the promising prospects
of a society have to do with that very society and its readiness to
transform its identity, or how much this depends on the good will
of the European mentors and the transformation prescribed by
them. Furthermore, to be yet a part of Europe and not participate
in the European time of distribution of power and wealth, is
the fate of the European East, while the West of Europe has a
privileged position. With the former, Europeanism is still
understood as servitude, while for the latter, Europeanism means
being in the position of those who rule. Thus the overall effort of
joining the European integrations is for some a reserved right
and privilege, while to others it just represents the right to wish.
Antiglobalists would describe it as a new aspect of colonialism.Die Transition der europäischen postsozialistischen
Gesellschaften war im Laufe des letzten Jahrzehnts durch die
Ausrichtung auf eine effiziente Marktwirtschaft und politische
Demokratisierung charakterisiert. In allen diesen
Gesellschaften sind Modernisierungsprozesse in Gang
gesetzt worden, die ihnen eine neue Identität verliehen haben.
Inwieweit nun tradierte Werte und Grundmuster des
gesellschaftlichen Lebens (Identität des Überlieferten)
abweichen von Werten und Lebensmustern, die durch die
Ausrichtung auf Marktwirtschaft und politische
Demokratisierung bedingt sind – das unterscheidet sich von
Staat zu Staat. Eine in größerem oder geringerem Umfang
bestehende Nichtübereinstimmung zwischen Überlieferung
einerseits und Entwicklungszielen andererseits darf nicht zu
einer unüberbrückbaren Barriere werden, die die
Involvierung in den europäischen Raum verhindert. In dem
Maße jedoch, in dem sich der europäische Raum einzelnen
Transitionsgesellschaften erschließt, erweisen sich diese
entweder als perspektivenreich oder aber als das Gegenteil.
Es ist eine gesonderte Frage, inwiefern der
Perspektivenreichtum einer Gesellschaft die Angelegenheit
ebendieser Gesellschaft und ihrer Bereitschaft zur
Identitätstransformierung ist und inwiefern sie angewiesen ist
auf den guten Willen europäischer Mentoren und die
wiederum von dieser Seite vorgeschriebene Transformation.
Denn es ist das Schicksal des europäischen Ostens, auch
weiterhin dem europäischen Raum zuzugehören, ohne
jedoch auch an der europäischen Zeit der Verteilung von
Macht und Reichtum teilzuhaben, während der Westen des
Kontinents ein gesondertes Europa darstellt. Für Erstere
bedeutet Europäertum auch weiterhin Dienstbarkeit, für
Letztere eine Herrscherposition. Daher ist die gesamte
Anstrengung um den Anschluss an die europäischen
Integrationsprozesse Recht und Privileg für die einen und
lediglich das Recht auf einen Wunsch für die anderen.
Globalisationsgegner würden dies als eine neue Art von
Kolonialismus bezeichnen
- …