CONSTITUTION AS AN INSTRUMENT AND A SYMBOL

Autor razmatra razvoj i značenje modernog ustava. Po njemu, osim institucionalizacije političkog, moderni ustav utvrđuje cilj i svrhu političkog poretka. Najčešće su to valjanost ljudskih prava, načelo demokracije, pravne i socijalne države. Moderni ustav nastaje činom ustavotvorstva, a ima oblik pisane ustavne povelje koja ima prednost pred jednostavnim zakonom. U osnovi, moderni ustav konstituira političku zajednicu, ograničava političku vladavinu, a građanima ostavlja slobodu djelovanja u socijalnoj, ekonomskoj i političkoj sferi. Postoje dva različita razumijevanja ustava. Thomas Paine, Amerikanci i kontinentalni Europljani pristaše su racionalno-volunarističkog shvaćanja ustava. Ustav je ovdje rezultat racionalnog promišljanja i izraz volje sudionika u ustavotvornom procesu. U Engleskoj se, s druge strane, razvilo shvaćanje da su institucija, zakoni i običaji nastali organski, u povijesnom kontinuitetu. Autor relativizira razlike između ovih shvaćanja naglašavajući da je bit u tome da ustav treba stalnu suglasnost da bi bio valjan i nakon konstitucijske faze. U tom smislu razlikuje dvije funkcije ustava: instrumentalnu i simboličku. Prva se sastoji od upravljanja političkim procesom kroz pripravu pravila i ograničavanja političke moći. Druga je funkcija simbolička jer je ustav simbol dobrog i pravednog društva. Autor zaključuje da je za ustav presudno da građani prihvaćaju poredak koji se njime održava. Otud je njegova simbolička funkcija više stvar tijeka vremena nego samog čina ustavotvorstva.The author holds that the constitutional theory today is put to the test in three areas. The first is the problem of the relationship between the trans-national regimes and the government institutions. The constitutional/legal theory is faced with the question how the norms concerning trans-national regimes can acquire the dignity of legal norms via “constitutionalization”. The second challenge is posed by trans-national regimes sui generis such as the EU’s legal system. The third concerns the process of EU’s expansion. For the author, a constitution is both an instrument and a symbol i.e. it is doubly coded. On the one hand, it leans on practice and instrumental implementation, and on the other on the world of representation. There are different types of constitutions. Type one are constitutions-manifests, largely solely symbolically coded. Type two are the constitutions in the form of contracts, structured more in the form of a legal relationship between discrete actors than a monolithic symbolic corpus. Type three are programmatic or planned constitutions, and they are associated with the rise and fall of socialist societies. They identify the already politically defined developmental goals. And finally, there are the so-called constitutions-cum-laws. These are a result of a regular legislative process that enables peoples in the capacity of presumed agents of sovereignty to debate constitutions and accept them. The author’s opinion is that the transition of Central- and East-European countries is a transition from the simple-coded with the primacy of the symbolic to the double-coded constitutions. This transition is not smooth. The first difficulty lies in “transplanting” constitutional solutions to different social/historical contexts. The other refers to the anti-constitutional mentality that prevails in these societies. Despite everything, the constitutional balance in Central and Eastern Europe is satisfactory on the whole. The constitutions of these countries are interesting because of three symbolic aspects. The first refers to the constitution formation processes in which these societies ceased to be objects of authoritarian rulers. The second aspect regards the search for new forms of identity and unity. The third aspect refers to the attempts to banish tyranny from politics and social life by means of legal chains

THE IDEA OF A EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION

Autor analizira utemeljenost zahtjeva za europskim ustavom. Smatra da postoje europska ustavna načela utvrđena ugovorima te pravni i institucionalni poredak koji svoju valjanost i funkcionalnosti izvodi iz tih ugovora. Premda Rimski ugovori nemaju izričiti katalog temeljnih prava, ipak jamče četiri ekonomske slobode: slobodu kretanja ljudi, dobara, kapitala i usluga. Međutim, karakter Europske unije kao pravne zajednice počiva na pojedinačnim ustavima što povlači dva pitanja. Prvo, države članice su i dalje gospodari integracije čime je EU sličnija kasnosrednjovjekovnom pravnom stanju djelomične juridizacije političke vladavine nego zajednici s modernim ustavom. Drugo, Europska unija ne posjeduje pouvoir constituant. Ova je činjenica predmet kritike pobornika ideje europskoga ustava koji misle da EU treba ustav koji će uspostavljati i održavati veze među građanima. Prema njima, na ovaj bi se način stvorio početni poticaj za političku zajednicu. Autor zaključuje da od europskoga ustava ne treba očekivati više od pripreme institucija koje stvaraju osjećaj zajedništva odnosno jedinstva građana. Međutim, ne bi trebalo očekivati ni manje od toga.The author analyses the feasibility of the call for a European constitution. It is thought that there is something that may be called the European constitutional principles as defined in various agreements and also a legal and institutional system that derives its validity and viability from those agreements. Although the Treaties of Rome do not include an explicit catalogue of fundamental rights, they nevertheless guarantee four economic freedoms: the freedom of movement of people, goods, capital and services. However, the character of the European Union as a legal community is based on individual constitutions. Two questions arise from this: first, the member-countries remain the masters of the integration, which makes the EU more similar to the late medieval legal condition of partial juridization of political rule than a community with a modern constitution. Second, the European Union does not have pouvoir constituant. This fact has been criticized by the advocates of the idea of a European constitution who think that the EU needs a constitution that is to establish and maintain links among its citizens. According to them, this would represent the initial impetus for the political community. The author concludes that a European constitution will but pave the way for the institutions that create a feeling of togetherness or unity of the citizens. On the other hand, one should not expect anything less

CONSTITUTION AS AN INSTRUMENT AND A SYMBOL

Autor razmatra razvoj i značenje modernog ustava. Po njemu, osim institucionalizacije političkog, moderni ustav utvrđuje cilj i svrhu političkog poretka. Najčešće su to valjanost ljudskih prava, načelo demokracije, pravne i socijalne države. Moderni ustav nastaje činom ustavotvorstva, a ima oblik pisane ustavne povelje koja ima prednost pred jednostavnim zakonom. U osnovi, moderni ustav konstituira političku zajednicu, ograničava političku vladavinu, a građanima ostavlja slobodu djelovanja u socijalnoj, ekonomskoj i političkoj sferi. Postoje dva različita razumijevanja ustava. Thomas Paine, Amerikanci i kontinentalni Europljani pristaše su racionalno-volunarističkog shvaćanja ustava. Ustav je ovdje rezultat racionalnog promišljanja i izraz volje sudionika u ustavotvornom procesu. U Engleskoj se, s druge strane, razvilo shvaćanje da su institucija, zakoni i običaji nastali organski, u povijesnom kontinuitetu. Autor relativizira razlike između ovih shvaćanja naglašavajući da je bit u tome da ustav treba stalnu suglasnost da bi bio valjan i nakon konstitucijske faze. U tom smislu razlikuje dvije funkcije ustava: instrumentalnu i simboličku. Prva se sastoji od upravljanja političkim procesom kroz pripravu pravila i ograničavanja političke moći. Druga je funkcija simbolička jer je ustav simbol dobrog i pravednog društva. Autor zaključuje da je za ustav presudno da građani prihvaćaju poredak koji se njime održava. Otud je njegova simbolička funkcija više stvar tijeka vremena nego samog čina ustavotvorstva.The author holds that the constitutional theory today is put to the test in three areas. The first is the problem of the relationship between the trans-national regimes and the government institutions. The constitutional/legal theory is faced with the question how the norms concerning trans-national regimes can acquire the dignity of legal norms via “constitutionalization”. The second challenge is posed by trans-national regimes sui generis such as the EU’s legal system. The third concerns the process of EU’s expansion. For the author, a constitution is both an instrument and a symbol i.e. it is doubly coded. On the one hand, it leans on practice and instrumental implementation, and on the other on the world of representation. There are different types of constitutions. Type one are constitutions-manifests, largely solely symbolically coded. Type two are the constitutions in the form of contracts, structured more in the form of a legal relationship between discrete actors than a monolithic symbolic corpus. Type three are programmatic or planned constitutions, and they are associated with the rise and fall of socialist societies. They identify the already politically defined developmental goals. And finally, there are the so-called constitutions-cum-laws. These are a result of a regular legislative process that enables peoples in the capacity of presumed agents of sovereignty to debate constitutions and accept them. The author’s opinion is that the transition of Central- and East-European countries is a transition from the simple-coded with the primacy of the symbolic to the double-coded constitutions. This transition is not smooth. The first difficulty lies in “transplanting” constitutional solutions to different social/historical contexts. The other refers to the anti-constitutional mentality that prevails in these societies. Despite everything, the constitutional balance in Central and Eastern Europe is satisfactory on the whole. The constitutions of these countries are interesting because of three symbolic aspects. The first refers to the constitution formation processes in which these societies ceased to be objects of authoritarian rulers. The second aspect regards the search for new forms of identity and unity. The third aspect refers to the attempts to banish tyranny from politics and social life by means of legal chains

WHAT KEEPS LIBERAL DEMOCRACY TOGETHER?

Nekoliko godina nakon sloma komunističkih sustava pokazuje se da je uvjerenje o ultimativnom trijumfu liberalne demokracije bilo preuranjeno. Otrežnjenje nije samo posljedica poteškoća u transformaciji postkomunističkih društava, nego i intelektualne skepse glede normativnog potencijala liberalne demokracije u razvijenim zapadnim društvima. Problem se najopćenitije može formulirati kao nesposobnost liberalne demokracije da stvori i reproducira normativne pretpostavke vlastitog opstanka. Autor smatra da se rješenje ovoga paradoksa ipak može pronaći unutar institucionalnog okvira liberalne demokracije: ako su doista istrošene tradicijske moralne pretpostavke na kojima je liberalna demokracija počivala u prošlosti, a na vidiku nema ni civilnoreligijskog supstituta za tu tradiciju, onda je ona upućena na to da stvori vlastitu, modernu ili postmodernu, moralnost mehanizmima javnog diskursa i političkog sudjelovanja građana. Normativna dimenzija liberalizma ne smije se reducirati na teoriju privatnog vlasništva, tržišta i konkurencije, nego uz konstitucionalnu teoriju ljudskih prava i ograničene vladavine treba izgraditi i teoriju ravnopravne raspodjele dobara i šansi.A few years after the collapse of communist regimes, it is evident that the confidence about the ultimate triumph of liberal democracy was premature. This waking up to the reality is not only the consequence of the hardships in the transformation of post-communist societies, but of the intellectual scepticism regarding the normative potential of liberal democracy in the developed western societies. The problem might in most general terms be formulated as the incapacity of liberal democracy to generate and reproduce the normative requirements for its own survival. The author thinks that the solution to this paradox can nevertheless be found within the institutional framework of liberal democracy: if the traditional moral concepts on which liberal democracy was founded in the past are worn out indeed, and no civil-religious substitute for that tradition has emerged as yet, then its only possibility is to create its own, modern or postmodern, morality by means of the public discourse mechanism and the political participation of citizens. The normative dimension of liberalism must not be reduced to the theory of private ownership, market and competition, but be envisaged as a constitutional theory of human rights and restricted government and the egalitarian distribution of goods and opportunities

SUPREMACY OF CONSTITUTION

Autor analizira što znači “suverenost ustava” i postavlja pitanje ne bi li “ustavnu demokraciju” trebalo shvatiti kao mješavinu dobrog političkog poretka u aristotelovskome smislu taxisa? Autor ispituje različite tradicije u razvoju konstitucionalizma na primjerima Francuske, Engleske i Sjeverne Amerike. U slučaju Sjeverne Amerike on se poziva na ideju stvaranja miješanog oblika ustava ili ustavne demokracije kojim se postiže demokratsko legitimiranje moći ali i njezino konstitucionalno ograničavanje. Iz razvoja konstitucionalizma pokazuje se da ustav zauzima mjesto koje je najprije zauzimala suverena osoba monarha, a zatim, suvereni narod u demokraciji. U osnovi, normativni konstitucionalizam dovodi do situacije u kojoj ustavni sud daje autoritativno tumačenje ustava čime demokratskoparlamentarna država postaje ustavnosudska jurisdikcijska država. Autor zaključuje da sakralizacija ustava i ustavnog sudstva nije uvijek sasvim poticajna za politički proces što otvara nove kontroverzije.The author analyses the meaning of the phrase “sovereignty of constitutions” and wonders whether “constitutional democracy” should be understood as a combination of a good political order in the Aristotelian meaning of taxis? The author looks into the different traditions in the evolution of constitutionalism using the example of France, Britain and North America. In the case of North America he refers to the idea of creating a mixed form of constitution or constitutional democracy which makes for the democratic legitimation of power as well as for its constitutional restriction. The evolution of constitutionalism shows that constitutions now occupy the position which at first used to belong to sovereign monarchs and later to sovereign peoples in democracy. Basically, normative constitutionalism leads to the situation in which constitutional courts give authoritative interpretation of constitutions which turns democratic/parliamentary state into constitutional- court jurisdiction state. The author concludes that the sacralization of constitutions and constitutional courts does not necessarily stimulate the political process, the fact that opens new controversies

Transzendenz und Gemeinsinn: Themen und Perspektiven des Dresdner Sonderforschungsbereichs 804

VORWORT: Ikonisch verdichtet sich auf dem Umschlag dieser Broschüre das Selbstbild Dresdens. Von der Brühlschen Terrasse, „Balkon Europas“ genannt, geht der Blick auf die Kunstakademie, mit der gläsernen Kuppel des Kunstvereins, die mit einer eigenartigen Figur an ihrer Spitze besetzt ist, die sich beim näheren Hinsehen als Chimäre aus Nike und Fama zu erkennen gibt. Auf dem Sockel in der Bildmitte steht Gottfried Semper, der jene Oper baute, die heute medial auch als „das schönste Brauhaus Deutschlands“ bekannt ist. Und am hinteren Bildrand werden das neu errichtete Coselpalais, benannt nach der berühmten Mätresse August des Starken, und die wiedererrichtete Frauenkirche sichtbar. Sie ist das Stein gewordene Symbol für die Rekonstruktion des „alten“ Dresden und zugleich Objekt eines neu-alten Bürgerstolzes. Betrachtet man dieses Bild, mag es verständlich erscheinen, dass manche sagen, Dresden sei gar keine Stadt, sondern ein Mythos. Indes, so wäre zu entgegnen, macht der Mythos erst die Stadt. „Elbflorenz“ – das ist die Erzählung von barocker Schönheit, Liebe zur Kunst und Prunk der alten Residenz. Es ist ein Erinnerungsmythos, zugleich aber auch ein Mythos der Wiederbegründung. Zwischen beide schiebt sich der Mythos des Opfers: die Zerstörung Dresdens am 13. und 14. Februar 1945. In den Konflikten um die Kirchen- und die Stadtrekonstruktion, um die Restituierung von räumlicher Mitte und urbaner Identität, hat sich eine die Bürgerschaft mobilisierende Energie zu erkennen gegeben. Sie hat es vermocht, dass mehr als drei Viertel der Kosten für den Wiederaufbau der Kirche von privaten Geldgebern gespendet wurde. Zugleich hat diese gemeinsinnige Kraft aber auch bei der Bebauung der die Frauenkirche umgebenden Brachen zu einer Emphase historistischer Rekonstruktionstreue auf dem Neumarkt geführt. In der Erzählung von Zerstörung und Wiederauferstehung verschränken sich mithin mythische Eigentranszendierung der Stadt und aktuelle Gemeinsinnsbehauptungen in einer höchst spannungsvollen Weise. Dresden illustriert die Fragestellung des Sonderforschungsbereichs, der in dieser Stadt auch seinen Sitz hat. Der Sonderforschungsbereich 804 „Transzendenz und Gemeinsinn“ wurde im Mai 2009 von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft bewilligt und besteht seit dem 1. Juli 2009 an der Technischen Universität Dresden. Er umfasst 20 Teilprojekte aus drei Fakultäten und neun Instituten der TU Dresden sowie von Partnern der italienischen Universitäten Turin und Matera und der Universität Zürich, Schweiz. Zudem besitzt der SFB 804 ein Integriertes Graduiertenkolleg zur Ausbildung von Doktoranden und internationalen Stipendiaten. Das Forschungsprogramm sieht vor, jenseits herkömmlicher Epocheneinteilungen Ordnungsformationen wie Stadt, Republik, Demokratie, Nation, bürgerliche Gesellschaft, Adel und Hof, religiöse und nicht-religiöse Gemeinschaften miteinander zu vergleichen. Stets geht es um die Analyse des spannungsvollen Zusammenspiels von Transzendenzformen und Gemeinsinnsvorstellungen bei Entstehung, Stabilisierung und Scheitern von vormodernen und modernen sozialen und politischen Ordnungen. Mit dieser interdisziplinär und international vernetzten Fragestellung setzt der SFB 804 die erfolgreiche Grundlagenforschung der Dresdner Geistes-, Sozial- und Kulturwissenschaften fort, die in der zweiten Hälfte der 1990er Jahre mit dem Sonderforschungsbereich 537 „Institutionalität und Geschichtlichkeit“ und einem Internationalen Graduiertenkolleg begonnen hat. Die folgenden Seiten beabsichtigen, den gemeinsamen Forschungsansatz und die Ziele der einzelnen Projekte des SFB 804 der wissenschaftlichen und interessierten Öffentlichkeit vorzustellen. Sie möchten auch zu Anregung und Auseinandersetzung einladen.:6 Hans Vorländer: Einleitung 16 Maria Häusl: Trennung und Öffnung. Alttestamentarische Diskurse um die Konstituierung des nachexilischen Israel 22 Matthias Klinghardt: Mahl und Kanon. Gemeinschaftsbildung im frühen Christentum 28 Martin Jehne: Die Investition eigener Ressourcen in die Gemeinschaft von der mittleren Republik bis in die hohe Kaiserzeit 34 Fritz-Heiner Mutschler: Tradition, Vernunft, Gott. Zur wechselnden Fundierung gemeinsinnigen Handelns vom Ausgang der Republik bis in die Umbruchphase des 3. Jahrhunderts 40 Cristina Andenna/Gert Melville: Dynastie, Idoneität und Transzendenz. Vergleichende Untersuchungen zum hohen und späten Mittelalter 46 Bruno Klein: Die Kirche als Baustelle. Großstädtische Sakralbauten im Mittelalter 52 Jürgen Müller: Das subversive Bild. Religiöse und profane Deutungsmuster in der Kunst der Frühen Neuzeit 58 Gerd Schwerhoff: Gottlosigkeit und Eigensinn. Religiöse Devianz in der Frühen Neuzeit 64 Winfried Müller: Gemeinsinnsdiskurse und religiöse Prägung zwischen Spätaufklärung und Vormärz (ca. 1770 - ca. 1848) 70 Hans Vorländer: Demokratische Ordnung zwischen Transzendenz und Gemeinsinn 76 Werner J. Patzelt: Transzendenz und Gemeinsinn als Ressourcen politischer Ordnungskonstruktion 82 Karl-Siegbert Rehberg: Kunstsakralisierung und Gemeinsinn 88 Hans-Georg Lippert: Das Planbare und das Unverfügbare. Modelle von Transzendenz und Gemeinsinn in Architektur und Städtebau im 20. Jahrhundert 94 Thomas Hänseroth: Das Fortschrittsversprechen von Technik und die Altruismusbehauptung der Ingenieure in der technokratischen Hochmoderne (ca. 1880 - 1970) 100 Christian Schwarke: Konstruktionen von Transzendenz und Gemeinsinn in Technik und Theologie 106 Karl Lenz: Transzendenz und Gemeinsinn in privaten Lebensformen 112 Thomas Rentsch: Transzendenz und Gemeinsinn in Geschichte und Gegenwart der Philosophie 118 Pier Paolo Portinaro: Die Sakralisierung der Kulturnation im italienischen Risorgimento 124 Georg Kohler: Die Kontingenz des Unverfügbaren - Die „Willensnation Schweiz“ 130 Marina Münkler: Das Ethos der Freundschaft 136 Gerd Schwerhoff: Integriertes Graduiertenkolleg 138 Kontakt und Impressu

SUPREMACY OF CONSTITUTION

Autor analizira što znači “suverenost ustava” i postavlja pitanje ne bi li “ustavnu demokraciju” trebalo shvatiti kao mješavinu dobrog političkog poretka u aristotelovskome smislu taxisa? Autor ispituje različite tradicije u razvoju konstitucionalizma na primjerima Francuske, Engleske i Sjeverne Amerike. U slučaju Sjeverne Amerike on se poziva na ideju stvaranja miješanog oblika ustava ili ustavne demokracije kojim se postiže demokratsko legitimiranje moći ali i njezino konstitucionalno ograničavanje. Iz razvoja konstitucionalizma pokazuje se da ustav zauzima mjesto koje je najprije zauzimala suverena osoba monarha, a zatim, suvereni narod u demokraciji. U osnovi, normativni konstitucionalizam dovodi do situacije u kojoj ustavni sud daje autoritativno tumačenje ustava čime demokratskoparlamentarna država postaje ustavnosudska jurisdikcijska država. Autor zaključuje da sakralizacija ustava i ustavnog sudstva nije uvijek sasvim poticajna za politički proces što otvara nove kontroverzije.The author analyses the meaning of the phrase “sovereignty of constitutions” and wonders whether “constitutional democracy” should be understood as a combination of a good political order in the Aristotelian meaning of taxis? The author looks into the different traditions in the evolution of constitutionalism using the example of France, Britain and North America. In the case of North America he refers to the idea of creating a mixed form of constitution or constitutional democracy which makes for the democratic legitimation of power as well as for its constitutional restriction. The evolution of constitutionalism shows that constitutions now occupy the position which at first used to belong to sovereign monarchs and later to sovereign peoples in democracy. Basically, normative constitutionalism leads to the situation in which constitutional courts give authoritative interpretation of constitutions which turns democratic/parliamentary state into constitutional- court jurisdiction state. The author concludes that the sacralization of constitutions and constitutional courts does not necessarily stimulate the political process, the fact that opens new controversies

The good, the bad, and the ugly: über das Verhältnis von Populismus und Demokratie ; eine Skizze

"Die Politikwissenschaft hat den Populismus bis heute weder konzeptuell noch begrifflich fassen können - und auch sein Verhältnis zur Demokratie gilt als ungeklärt. Der Essay fasst wichtige Merkmale des Populismus zusammen und zeigt, wie vielfältig und widersprüchlich die Effekte auf die moderne Demokratie sind: Neben den guten, die Demokratie in bestimmten Situationen belebenden, und den schlechten, zum Autoritarismus neigenden, aber doch kontrollierbaren, tritt der hässliche, die Demokratie zerstörende Populismus." (Autorenreferat)"Political science has been unable to grasp populism both comprehensively and conceptually up to today - and its relationship to democracy is seen as unsolved as well. The essay summarizes important characteristics of populism and shows how diverse and contradictory the effects are on modern democracy: beside the good populism that stimulates democracy in certain situations and the bad populism that tends toward authoritarianism while still controllable, appears the ugly populism that destroys democracy." (author's abstract

Dresden Summer School 2012 - Dokumentation: Von der Vitrine zum Web 2.0 - Museen, Bibliotheken und Archive im digitalen Zeitalter

Die Dresden Summer School 2012 gliedert sich in vier aufeinander folgende Sektionen. Diese bestehen aus Vorträgen, Diskussionen, Workshops, Kuratorengesprächen und Führungen. Die Kooperation der fünf renommierten Dresdner Kunst-und Kulturstätten bietet den TeilnehmerInnen ein vielfältiges inhaltliches Angebot und einen Ideen- und Erfahrungsaustausch in verschiedenen Fachbereichen. Die Sektionen der Dresden Summer School 2012: 1. Digitalisierung in Museen und Bibliotheken. Erfahrungen, Methoden, Strategien. 2. Akademische Forschung und universitäre Sammlungen im digitalen Zeitalter. 3. Virtuelle Inventarisierung – Potentiale der Provenienzforschung. 4. Kulturelle Bildung und Social Media.:EINLEITUNG S. 9 SEKTIONEN S. 15 Kulturelle Gedächtnisinstitutionen und ihre digitale Zukunft - Sächsische Landesbibliothek – Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Dresden S. 17 Akademische Forschung und universitäre Sammlungen - Technische Universität Dresden S. 25 Datenbanken, Inventarisierung, Provenienzforschung - Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden S. 31 Kulturelle Bildung und Social Media - Deutsches Hygiene-Museum Dresden / Militärhistorisches Museum der Bundeswehr S. 41 EXKURSIONEN S. 47 Nur Mut zum Prozess! Oder: Wie kann zeitgemäße, mediale Ausstellungsgestaltung gelingen? Exkursion in das Staatliche Museum für Archäologie Chemnitz S. 48 Exkursion ins Museum der deutschsprachigen Bewohner der böhmischen Länder in Ústí nad Labem (Aussig) S. 58 PRÄSENTATIONEN S. 63 Speicherchip der Vergangenheit S. 65 Der Maya-Countdown 21/12 S. 73 Ich sammle S. 81 Steuerung Alt Entfernen / Re-boot Science S. 87 BIOGRAPHIEN S. 95 Teilnehmer S. 96 Referenten S. 102 INSTITUTIONEN S. 11