2004年后的后共产主义转型:波兰和匈牙利的案例

I. Koval, O. Brusylovska
{"title":"2004年后的后共产主义转型:波兰和匈牙利的案例","authors":"I. Koval, O. Brusylovska","doi":"10.36059/978-966-397-183-4/56-71","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION The last years have showed that post-communist countries, which generally completed transition from one system to another, face serious political, social and ethno-national problems. This confirms an idea, that Central Europe keeps originality in creation of democratic institutes. Despite the process of European integration, it continues to differ from the Western Europe. As Gallup stated from all regions of the world Central Europe is the most sceptical of the thesis that democracy is the best form of rule. Professor of Poznan University M. Zhulkovski notes pragmatism of his country approach: majority of Poles believe that democracy is useful only when it brings prosperity; much less they value the freedom associated with democracy. Even after 2004 up to 52% of Poles tended to authoritarianism. Only 10% of the population participates in the civil society`s activities; this is the lowest index in Central Europe. Famous Polish sociologist A. Ryhard in his study of new phraseology of political life concluded that institutions do not arise from nothing; they are rooted in the culture. For Poland the roots of its democratic values remain quite weak. Ryhard even considers that maybe here, in Central Europe, a new model of democracy is emerging, which includes elements of populism, authoritarianism, and “democratic majority”. He concluded that the “new institutional system was formed with the own logic of development, identity, structure, recreation ability and connection mechanism. As a rule, this system is reflected in term “post-communism”. He means that the concept of “postcommunism” is not normative, but descriptive. The aim of the work is to reveal the special features of “postcommunist” countries after their accession to the European Union in 2004. The main method is case-study (Poland and Hungary).","PeriodicalId":112657,"journal":{"name":"MAN, SOCIETY, POLITICS: TOPICAL CHALLENGES OF THE MODERNITY","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"POST-COMMUNIST TRANSFORMATION AFTER 2004: CASES OF POLAND AND HUNGARY\",\"authors\":\"I. Koval, O. Brusylovska\",\"doi\":\"10.36059/978-966-397-183-4/56-71\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"INTRODUCTION The last years have showed that post-communist countries, which generally completed transition from one system to another, face serious political, social and ethno-national problems. This confirms an idea, that Central Europe keeps originality in creation of democratic institutes. Despite the process of European integration, it continues to differ from the Western Europe. As Gallup stated from all regions of the world Central Europe is the most sceptical of the thesis that democracy is the best form of rule. Professor of Poznan University M. Zhulkovski notes pragmatism of his country approach: majority of Poles believe that democracy is useful only when it brings prosperity; much less they value the freedom associated with democracy. Even after 2004 up to 52% of Poles tended to authoritarianism. Only 10% of the population participates in the civil society`s activities; this is the lowest index in Central Europe. Famous Polish sociologist A. Ryhard in his study of new phraseology of political life concluded that institutions do not arise from nothing; they are rooted in the culture. For Poland the roots of its democratic values remain quite weak. Ryhard even considers that maybe here, in Central Europe, a new model of democracy is emerging, which includes elements of populism, authoritarianism, and “democratic majority”. He concluded that the “new institutional system was formed with the own logic of development, identity, structure, recreation ability and connection mechanism. As a rule, this system is reflected in term “post-communism”. He means that the concept of “postcommunism” is not normative, but descriptive. The aim of the work is to reveal the special features of “postcommunist” countries after their accession to the European Union in 2004. The main method is case-study (Poland and Hungary).\",\"PeriodicalId\":112657,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MAN, SOCIETY, POLITICS: TOPICAL CHALLENGES OF THE MODERNITY\",\"volume\":\"82 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MAN, SOCIETY, POLITICS: TOPICAL CHALLENGES OF THE MODERNITY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36059/978-966-397-183-4/56-71\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MAN, SOCIETY, POLITICS: TOPICAL CHALLENGES OF THE MODERNITY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36059/978-966-397-183-4/56-71","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

过去几年表明,后共产主义国家一般完成了从一种制度到另一种制度的过渡,面临着严重的政治、社会和民族问题。这证实了一种观点,即中欧在创建民主机构方面保持了独创性。尽管欧洲正在进行一体化进程,但它仍然与西欧存在差异。正如盖洛普所指出的,在世界所有地区,中欧对民主是最佳统治形式这一论点最持怀疑态度。波兹南大学(Poznan University)教授朱尔科夫斯基(M. Zhulkovski)指出了他的国家策略的实用主义:大多数波兰人认为,民主只有在带来繁荣时才有用;他们更不重视与民主相关的自由。即使在2004年之后,仍有52%的波兰人倾向于威权主义。只有10%的人口参与公民社会的活动;这是中欧最低的指数。著名的波兰社会学家A.莱哈德在研究政治生活的新术语时得出结论:制度并非无中生有;它们根植于文化之中。对波兰来说,其民主价值观的根基仍然相当薄弱。Ryhard甚至认为,也许在这里,在中欧,一种新的民主模式正在出现,其中包括民粹主义、威权主义和“民主多数”的元素。他总结道:“新的制度体系形成了自己的发展逻辑、身份逻辑、结构逻辑、再创造能力逻辑和联系机制逻辑。”通常,这种制度反映在“后共产主义”一词中。他的意思是,“后共产主义”的概念不是规范性的,而是描述性的。这项工作的目的是揭示“后共产主义”国家在2004年加入欧盟后的特点。主要方法是个案研究(波兰和匈牙利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
POST-COMMUNIST TRANSFORMATION AFTER 2004: CASES OF POLAND AND HUNGARY
INTRODUCTION The last years have showed that post-communist countries, which generally completed transition from one system to another, face serious political, social and ethno-national problems. This confirms an idea, that Central Europe keeps originality in creation of democratic institutes. Despite the process of European integration, it continues to differ from the Western Europe. As Gallup stated from all regions of the world Central Europe is the most sceptical of the thesis that democracy is the best form of rule. Professor of Poznan University M. Zhulkovski notes pragmatism of his country approach: majority of Poles believe that democracy is useful only when it brings prosperity; much less they value the freedom associated with democracy. Even after 2004 up to 52% of Poles tended to authoritarianism. Only 10% of the population participates in the civil society`s activities; this is the lowest index in Central Europe. Famous Polish sociologist A. Ryhard in his study of new phraseology of political life concluded that institutions do not arise from nothing; they are rooted in the culture. For Poland the roots of its democratic values remain quite weak. Ryhard even considers that maybe here, in Central Europe, a new model of democracy is emerging, which includes elements of populism, authoritarianism, and “democratic majority”. He concluded that the “new institutional system was formed with the own logic of development, identity, structure, recreation ability and connection mechanism. As a rule, this system is reflected in term “post-communism”. He means that the concept of “postcommunism” is not normative, but descriptive. The aim of the work is to reveal the special features of “postcommunist” countries after their accession to the European Union in 2004. The main method is case-study (Poland and Hungary).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信