Gør som tusindvis af andre bogelskere
Tilmeld dig nyhedsbrevet og få gode tilbud og inspiration til din næste læsning.
Ved tilmelding accepterer du vores persondatapolitik.Du kan altid afmelde dig igen.
The USSR¿s dissolution resulted in the creation of not only fifteen recognized states but also of four non-recognized statelets: Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria. Their polities comprise networks with state-like elements. Since the early 1990s, the four pseudo-states have been continously dependent on their sponsor countries (Russia, Armenia), and contesting the territorial integrity of their parental nation-states Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Moldova. In 2014, the outburst of Russia-backed separatism in Eastern Ukraine led to the creation of two more para-states, the Donetsk People¿s Republic (DNR) and the Luhansk People¿s Republic (LNR), whose leaders used the experience of older de facto states. In 2020, this growing network of de facto states counted an overall population of more than 4 million people. The essays collected in this volume address such questions as: How do post-Soviet de facto states survive and continue to grow? Is there anything specific about the political ecology of Eastern Europe that provides secessionism with the possibility to launch state-making processes in spite of international sanctions and counteractions of their parental states? How do secessionist movements become embedded in wider networks of separatism in Eastern and Western Europe? What is the impact of secessionism and war on the parental states? The contributors are Jan Claas Behrends, Petra Colmorgen, Bruno Coppieters, Nataliia Kasianenko, Alice Lackner, Mikhail Minakov, and Gwendolyn Sasse.
Britain does not have a written constitution. It has rather, over centuries, developed a set of miscellaneous conventions, rules, and norms that govern political behavior. By contrast, Bosniäs constitution was written, quite literally, overnight in a military hanger in Dayton, USA, to conclude a devastating war. By most standards it does not work and is seen to have merely frozen a conflict and all development with it. What might these seemingly unrelated countries be able to teach each other? Britain, racked by recent crises from Brexit to national separatism, may be able to avert long-term political conflict by understanding the pitfalls of writing rigid constitutional rules without popular participation or the cultivation of good political culture. Bosnia, in turn, may be able to thaw its frozen conflict by subjecting parts of its written constitution to amendment, with civic involvement, on a fixed and regular basis; a ¿revolving constitution¿ to replicate some of that flexibility inherent in the British system. A book not just about Bosnia and Britain; a standard may be set for other plural, multi-ethnic polities to follow.
During the 1950s, Michael Randle helped pioneer a new form of direct action against nuclear war, based on the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi. At the forefront of the British campaign, he worked closely with Peace News editor Hugh Brock (1914¿1985) and other distinguished ¿anti-nuclear pacifists¿ such as Pat Arrowsmith, April Carter, and Ian Dixon, serving as chairman of the Direct Action Committee against Nuclear War (1958-1961) and secretary of the Committee of 100 (1960-1961).In 1966, he helped ¿spring¿ the Russian spy George Blake from Wormwood Scrubs Prison. Thereafter, he campaigned vigorously on behalf of the Greek democratic opposition, conscientious objectors, and Soviet dissidents. He has always been a man of rare candor and singular energy and principles, even enduring imprisonment for his beliefs.Nowadays, Michael lives in Shipley near Bradford, where he continues to write as a respected expert on ¿people power¿. Martin Levy¿s interviews with Michael Randle introduce the reader to a tumultuous life that is nothing short of extraordinary.
2019 was a defining year for the radical right globally. From national and supranational elections that witnessed a surge in support for radical right parties to transnationally-inspired terrorist attacks in New Zealand, the USA, and Germany, the radical right is not just on the rise, but becoming an international mainstream phenomenon. The yearbook draws upon insightful analyses from an international network of scholars, policymakers, and practitioners who explore the processes and impact of the radical right. Beginning with reflections on the ideology and then historical perspectives of the radical right, the volume then turns to contemporary manifestations of movements and political parties as well as terrorism and the role of online spaces. It ends by examining various perspectives towards countering and challenging the radical right. This overview provides a widespread examination of the global radical right in 2019, which will be useful to scholars, students, policy makers, and the public.
The book explores transformations of the apocalyptic figure of the Antichrist in various post-Soviet discourses, including ecclesiastical and political writings, conspiracy theories, and literary texts. Drawing on the extensive research into diverse materials published in the Russian Federation after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it demonstrates how an initially religious idea has penetrated secular discourses and what implications this entails. By applying the innovative analytical category of ideomyth, the book successfully answers the question of how and why the figure of the Antichrist is employed within the Russian post-Soviet semiosphere, with a special focus on texts that emerged within nationalist and religious milieus.
In 2012, soon after his election to a third presidential term as president, following a four-year stint as prime minister (to avoid modifying the constitution), and in the wake of an unprecedented wave of popular protests, Vladimir Putin issued his ¿May Decrees.¿ Notable among them was the government¿s commitment to increase the salaries of doctors, scientific researchers and university teachers to double the average in their respective regions by 2018. But then on December 30 of that year, the government issued a ¿road map¿ for education, revealing that the salary increases in higher education would be paid for, not by significant new government funding, but by ¿optimization,¿ which would eliminate 44% of the current teaching positions in higher education. This was justified in part by a forecasted drop in student enrollment. Thus opened a new, accelerated period of reform of higher education. David Mandel examines the impact of these reforms on the condition of Russiäs university teachers and the collective efforts of some teachers, a small minority, to organize themselves in an independent trade union to defend their professional interests and their vision of higher education. Apart from the subject¿s intrinsic interest, an in-depth examination of this specific aspect of social policy provides valuable insight into the nature of the Russian state as well as into the condition of ¿civil society,¿ in particular the popular classes, to which Russian university teachers belong according to their socio-economic situation, if not necessarily their self-image.
Tilmeld dig nyhedsbrevet og få gode tilbud og inspiration til din næste læsning.
Ved tilmelding accepterer du vores persondatapolitik.