George Schöpflin
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- October 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780199248155
- eISBN:
- 9780191602955
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/019924815X.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
This paper explores the problems of liberal pluralism in post-Communist Central and South-Eastern Europe. It argues that the Anglo-Saxon analyses of post-Communism are hampered by the analysts’ own ...
More
This paper explores the problems of liberal pluralism in post-Communist Central and South-Eastern Europe. It argues that the Anglo-Saxon analyses of post-Communism are hampered by the analysts’ own cultural baggage – the assumptions they make on the nature of democratic best practice. Central and South Eastern Europe will develop their own democratic norms, concepts, and patterns which will be unique and democratic. Deeper and more thoughtful assessments of the success and failure criteria of democracy are needed than those offered by Anglo-Saxon analysis.Less
This paper explores the problems of liberal pluralism in post-Communist Central and South-Eastern Europe. It argues that the Anglo-Saxon analyses of post-Communism are hampered by the analysts’ own cultural baggage – the assumptions they make on the nature of democratic best practice. Central and South Eastern Europe will develop their own democratic norms, concepts, and patterns which will be unique and democratic. Deeper and more thoughtful assessments of the success and failure criteria of democracy are needed than those offered by Anglo-Saxon analysis.
Tomáš Doucha, Erik Mathijs, and F. M. Johan Swinnen
- Published in print:
- 2001
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199242177
- eISBN:
- 9780191697036
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199242177.003.0016
- Subject:
- Economics and Finance, Development, Growth, and Environmental
When the Czech Republic was still under the Communism regime, agriculture was still organized in collective farms and in large-scale states. By 1989, the last year of Communist rule, 174 state farms ...
More
When the Czech Republic was still under the Communism regime, agriculture was still organized in collective farms and in large-scale states. By 1989, the last year of Communist rule, 174 state farms accounted for 29.2% of the total agricultural land (TAL) while 1,024 collective farms covered the remaining 70.4%. Private agriculture, which was mostly operated on a part-time basis, proved to be marginal since it only made up 0.4% of TAL. The ownership of various farm assets could be divided into three categories which involve state-owned assets, privately-owned assets, and non-land assets that were collectively owned by the members of collective farms. As such, post-Communist agricultural reform included the following: restitution, transformation, and privatization. This chapter focuses on the legislative framework passed by the Czech parliament which encompasses land tenure and land access as a result of the laws.Less
When the Czech Republic was still under the Communism regime, agriculture was still organized in collective farms and in large-scale states. By 1989, the last year of Communist rule, 174 state farms accounted for 29.2% of the total agricultural land (TAL) while 1,024 collective farms covered the remaining 70.4%. Private agriculture, which was mostly operated on a part-time basis, proved to be marginal since it only made up 0.4% of TAL. The ownership of various farm assets could be divided into three categories which involve state-owned assets, privately-owned assets, and non-land assets that were collectively owned by the members of collective farms. As such, post-Communist agricultural reform included the following: restitution, transformation, and privatization. This chapter focuses on the legislative framework passed by the Czech parliament which encompasses land tenure and land access as a result of the laws.
Wojciech Sadurski
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199696789
- eISBN:
- 9780191741722
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199696789.001.0001
- Subject:
- Law, EU Law, Philosophy of Law
After the fall of Communism in Central and Eastern Europe, the newly democratized countries of this region joined two main pan‐European political and legal structures: the Council of Europe and the ...
More
After the fall of Communism in Central and Eastern Europe, the newly democratized countries of this region joined two main pan‐European political and legal structures: the Council of Europe and the European Union. This book shows how the eastward enlargement of these two structures fostered the ‘constitutionalization’ both of the Council of Europe and of the EU. As for the human‐rights focused Council of Europe, the book shows that its main judicial body, the European Court of Human Rights, became a quasi ‘constitutional court’ of Europe as a result of the widening of its agenda and the resulting need to make activist decisions about the compatibility of national laws with the European Convention. Essentially, this move has been prompted by the enlargement of the Council of Europe and the admission of a number of countries which brought unique and often more substantial problems onto the Court’s agenda. In terms of the EU, the book shows that the enlargement (both prospective and actual) has been an important agenda‐setter for the constitutionalization of the EU; in particular, for openly placing the issue of fundamental rights on the EU agenda as a legitimate (indeed, indispensable) matter of concern for the EU. But the ‘constitutional synergies’ are a two‐way street: the accession to both pan‐European structures has also affected the development of democratic constitutionalism in Central and Eastern European (CEE) states, raising difficult issues regarding the relationships between national sovereignty, democracy, and human rights that CEE policy‐makers have grappled with. These issues and responses by CEE member states have also had implications for the ‘old’ EU member states. It is these dynamics that will be explored through various case studies, providing a new perspective on the development of legal norms and institutions within European supranational bodies.Less
After the fall of Communism in Central and Eastern Europe, the newly democratized countries of this region joined two main pan‐European political and legal structures: the Council of Europe and the European Union. This book shows how the eastward enlargement of these two structures fostered the ‘constitutionalization’ both of the Council of Europe and of the EU. As for the human‐rights focused Council of Europe, the book shows that its main judicial body, the European Court of Human Rights, became a quasi ‘constitutional court’ of Europe as a result of the widening of its agenda and the resulting need to make activist decisions about the compatibility of national laws with the European Convention. Essentially, this move has been prompted by the enlargement of the Council of Europe and the admission of a number of countries which brought unique and often more substantial problems onto the Court’s agenda. In terms of the EU, the book shows that the enlargement (both prospective and actual) has been an important agenda‐setter for the constitutionalization of the EU; in particular, for openly placing the issue of fundamental rights on the EU agenda as a legitimate (indeed, indispensable) matter of concern for the EU. But the ‘constitutional synergies’ are a two‐way street: the accession to both pan‐European structures has also affected the development of democratic constitutionalism in Central and Eastern European (CEE) states, raising difficult issues regarding the relationships between national sovereignty, democracy, and human rights that CEE policy‐makers have grappled with. These issues and responses by CEE member states have also had implications for the ‘old’ EU member states. It is these dynamics that will be explored through various case studies, providing a new perspective on the development of legal norms and institutions within European supranational bodies.
Anastassia V. Obydenkova and Alexander Libman
- Published in print:
- 2019
- Published Online:
- June 2019
- ISBN:
- 9780198839040
- eISBN:
- 9780191874918
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198839040.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics, Comparative Politics
The post-Cold War world has witnessed the extensive development of regional international organizations world-wide. The realtionship between their membership and democratization remains a topic of ...
More
The post-Cold War world has witnessed the extensive development of regional international organizations world-wide. The realtionship between their membership and democratization remains a topic of intense scholarly debate. This book opens up a new aspect of the debate by examining regional organization as set up by autocracies (e.g. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Russia, and China)—referring to them as “non-democratic regional organizations.” How do these newly emerged organizations counteract and confront the democratization process in their own member states and beyond their borders? How and why do the political regimes, the economic development and the cultures of their member states impac the foundation and development of these organizations? What influence do these organizations have on migration, trade, conflicts, and democratization? The book addresses these questions by developing a new theory of authoritarian regionalism. Employing quantitative analysis of authoritarian regionalism world-wide and its historical development since the 1950s, as well as analysing case studies of post-Soviet Eurasia, the book argues that authoritarian regionalism is a new phenomenon in world politics and that modern non-democratic organizations differ from their historical predecessors and that their influence has radically increased in terms of geographic scope and intensity in the last few years. As such, authoritarian regionalism is an important addition to studies of comparative regionalism and the international dimension of authoritarianism. From the policy perspective, non-democratic regional organizations pose a challenge for Western actors in promoting democracy around the world.Less
The post-Cold War world has witnessed the extensive development of regional international organizations world-wide. The realtionship between their membership and democratization remains a topic of intense scholarly debate. This book opens up a new aspect of the debate by examining regional organization as set up by autocracies (e.g. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Russia, and China)—referring to them as “non-democratic regional organizations.” How do these newly emerged organizations counteract and confront the democratization process in their own member states and beyond their borders? How and why do the political regimes, the economic development and the cultures of their member states impac the foundation and development of these organizations? What influence do these organizations have on migration, trade, conflicts, and democratization? The book addresses these questions by developing a new theory of authoritarian regionalism. Employing quantitative analysis of authoritarian regionalism world-wide and its historical development since the 1950s, as well as analysing case studies of post-Soviet Eurasia, the book argues that authoritarian regionalism is a new phenomenon in world politics and that modern non-democratic organizations differ from their historical predecessors and that their influence has radically increased in terms of geographic scope and intensity in the last few years. As such, authoritarian regionalism is an important addition to studies of comparative regionalism and the international dimension of authoritarianism. From the policy perspective, non-democratic regional organizations pose a challenge for Western actors in promoting democracy around the world.
Archie Brown and Whitefield Stephen
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- May 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780199682218
- eISBN:
- 9780191762741
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199682218.003.0013
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
The chapter traces the teaching and study of Communist and post-Communist politics at Oxford from the 1950s to the present day. Attention is paid to changes in student numbers, including the growth ...
More
The chapter traces the teaching and study of Communist and post-Communist politics at Oxford from the 1950s to the present day. Attention is paid to changes in student numbers, including the growth of graduate studies, and the professionalization of teaching and research. Study of the government and politics of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe developed earlier at Oxford than that of China, but in the twenty-first century Chinese political studies have been a growth point. The authors highlight the international significance of Oxford scholars’ publications in three particular areas—the study of political institutions, political culture, and problems of democratization. They note that specialists at Oxford have influenced public understanding of these issues and at times have made a significant impact on government policy. The chapter concludes with an assessment of the challenges and dilemmas of combining area and disciplinary expertise both at Oxford and in academia more generally.Less
The chapter traces the teaching and study of Communist and post-Communist politics at Oxford from the 1950s to the present day. Attention is paid to changes in student numbers, including the growth of graduate studies, and the professionalization of teaching and research. Study of the government and politics of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe developed earlier at Oxford than that of China, but in the twenty-first century Chinese political studies have been a growth point. The authors highlight the international significance of Oxford scholars’ publications in three particular areas—the study of political institutions, political culture, and problems of democratization. They note that specialists at Oxford have influenced public understanding of these issues and at times have made a significant impact on government policy. The chapter concludes with an assessment of the challenges and dilemmas of combining area and disciplinary expertise both at Oxford and in academia more generally.
