We kindly inform you that, as long as the subject affiliation of our 300.000+ articles is in progress, you might get unsufficient or no results on your third level or second level search. In this case, please broaden your search criteria.
Interview with Svetozar Livada by Darko Hudelist Prof dr. Svetozar Livada rođen je 1928. godine u Gornjem Primišlju, općina Slunj. Gimnaziju i Filozofski fakultet (grupa filozofija i sociologija) završio je u Zagrebu (1953.). Doktorirao je s temom iz ruralne sociologije 1975. godine. Bio je jedan od urednika časopisa "Sociologija sela" i znanstveni suradnik, a jedno kraće vrijeme i v.d. direktora Agrarnog instituta u Zagrebu. Na Filozofskom fakultetu u Zagrebu predavao je socijalnu demografiju od 1967. do 1972. godine. Od 1963. do 1972. godine bio je član savjetodavne Ad hoc grupe za ruralnu sociologiju pri međunarodnoj organizaciji FAO. Objavio je više od stotinu znanstvenih i stručnih radova s područja ruralne sociologije. Godine 1992. bio je tri mjeseca stručni suradnik za humanitarnu pomoć pri zapovjedništvu UN za tadašnji sektor Sjever, pa je uz još dva kasnija posjeta stekao uvid i u stanje na područjima koja su bila pod paradržavnom "krajiškom" vlašću. Svetozar Livada član je Srpskog demokratskog foruma u Zagrebu. Kao vrsnog poznavaoca Korduna pozvali smo ga da za Erasmus govori o aktualnoj kordunskoj drami s masovnim zbjegom Srba, povratkom prognanih Hrvata i mogućnostima za budućnost Korduna.
More...
Carlos (Drago) Zvonimir Pilsel rođen je 1962. u Buenos Airesu, u obitelji hrvatskih političkih emigranata koji su, kako je već tko uspio, između 1945. i 1955. stigli do Argentine. Studirao je strojarstvo i novinarstvo, surađujući u medijima od svoje sedamnaeste godine. Osobna i opća negativna iskustva s vojno-desničarskim režimom u Argentini i rat s Velikom Britanijom 1982. godine zbog Malvinskog (Falklandskog) otočja potakli su ga na preispitivanja koja su 1986. urodila odlukom da kao pripravnik stupi u franjevački samostan. U svibnju 1989. prvi je put došao u Hrvatsku kako bi započeo studije teologije. Miloševićeva najava rata na Gazimestanu te godine bila je druga prekretnica. Godinu dana kasnije iz Argentine stiže njegov šest godina mlađi brat i kao jedan od prvih gardista prolazi mnoga ratišta te u zoru 23. listopada 1991., s četvoricom drugova, nestaje u moru preko puta Slanoga. Na to Drago izlazi iz sjemeništa i narednih nekoliko mjeseci bori se kao vojnik u 4. brigadi ZNG na bojištima u Dalmaciji. U ožujku 1992. postaje urednik duhovnog programa zagrebačkog OTV-a, odakle je otišao u listopadu 1994., ne svojom odlukom. U međuvremenu piše za Glas Koncila, Kanu, Vjesnik i Globus. Od travnja 1995. komentator je riječkog Novog lista i u tom je svojstvu od početka kolovoza nekoliko puta proputovao oslobođeno zaleđe sjeverne Dalmacije. Član je Predsjedništva Helsinšikog odbora za ljudska prava, Žrtvoslovoga društva i Društva katoličkih novinara. Živi u Zagrebu i završava teološki studij.
More...
NOEL MALCOLM: Povijest Bosne - kratki pregled; Erasmus Gilda, Zagreb; NOVi Liber, Zagreb; DANI, Sarajevo 1995., 368 str.
More...
VESELKO KOROMAN: Hrvatska proza Bosne i Hercegovine od Matije Divkovića do danas, Mostar - Split - Međugorje 1995., 615 str.
More...
U Erasmusu broj 8 objavio sam tekst Očevi zapisi s podnaslovom Tlapnja o slamci spasa. Bio je to dio prozne cjeline nastale pod jesen i na početku zime 1991. U uvodnoj napomeni naveo sam kako pokatkad pomislim da i pred tim zapisima moram bježati u sklonište, jer je u njima sublimirana muka zbira sudionika u događajima o kojima Zapisi govore. Povjerovao sam kako pred nevoljama valja uzmicati, pa makar i u tlapnju spasa, koja se može nazvati i razumijevanjem tuđe muke, ili pozivom na shvaćanje zajedničke nevolje. Od objavljivanja tog teksta protekla je godina dana. Za to vrijeme moj Radovan Vujanić sve određenije gubi i ono malo nade, čak i u tlapnju o slamci spasa, te - svjestan u što se razvijaju uvjeti egzistiranja građanina Hrvatske sa srpskom rodovnicom pokušava (zajedno sa mnom) preispitati kamo čovjeka vodi razumijevanje sredine koju razdražuje i sama pomisao da netko sa srpskom rodovnicom, usprkos posjedovanju hrvatske domovnice, može osjećati i razmišljati drukčije od onoga što ta sredina od njega očekuje. A kad i pokuša tako osjećati, misliti i govoriti, onda ta ista sredina iskaztlje svoje čuđenje i nevjericu; u smislu: Ne vjeruj Danajcima i kad darove nose! Rezultat gubitka nade Radovan Vujanić sažima u ispovijed za koju unaprijed znamo da ne zanima nikoga, a najmanje onoga tko nas potiče na tu uzaludnost. I tako sam počeo bilježiti Radovanovu ispovijest koja je, u toku bilježenja, sve određenije postajala i moja stvarnost. A onda je - poslije Bljeska ... kao predigre - uslijedila Oluja. I - krug se zatvara neočekivano lakim rješenjem položaja Srba u Hrvatskoj, u procesu kojeg krunska uloga pripada srpskim svjetovnim i duhovnim vođama. U drugom dijelu ovoga teksta - u reinterpretaciji moga zgotovljenog rukopisa, ali neobjavljene knjige o dalmatinskim manastirima - pokušavam se snaći u onome što je ostalo od dvostruke brige za "našeg čovjeka i građanina", s posebnim osvrtom na kolone samoprognanih Krajišnika koje su krenule, a možda već i stigle, u - neizvjesnost.
More...
Review: Ks. Andrzej Hanich, Dekanaty i parafie Administracji Apostolskiej Śląska Opolskiego w latach 1945–1946 [The deaneries and parishes of the Apostolic Administration in Opole Silesia in 1945-1946], Opole 2009
More...
The fundamental question articulated in the article addresses the issue of whether what happened in Poland in 1998 was a social crisis, and if it was, what its background was and what its specific features were? Can we, and should we, thus refer to a crisis of the then authorities? And what did it mean, in general, under the actual conditions of real socialism? And finally, can one say that 1968 marked the beginning of the systemic changes? Pointing out that, in Poland, this process was, by its nature, multi-faceted, the author is of the opinion that, a term inadequate as far as its logic is concerned, namely, ‘Marches ‘68’ (that is, plural rather than singular) should be applied, bearing in mind that this concept encompassed several diverse, not necessarily inter-related, and sometimes even mutually exclusive and contrary strands. An opinion is voiced that the ‘March events’ also contributed to the formation of something which may be symbolically referred to as ‘the ‘68 generation’, consisting of the 20-year old youths who were then students. The circumstances of the student protests in Poland, differing from those in the West, are emphasised. The author also maintains that the then events in Poland may be possibly compared to the Prague Spring and the Czech reform movement alone. Recapitulating, the author posits that what happened in 1968 in Poland was both a serious social crisis and a crisis of authority, or perhaps, more precisely, a crisis of leadership in the PUWP.
More...
The impact of the 1968 events on the FRG’s Ostpolitik and its reception in Poland may be considered in the short and the long term. What the article takes into consideration are the short-term effects of this political approach, observed in the years 1968–1969. Writing about the events of 1968, the author dwells on March 1968 in Poland, or more precisely, on those of its aspects which were related to the formation and implementation of the state’s policy, namely, the turbulence in ruling circles, the replacing of the people who occupied the high-ranking posts and the staffing changes in Poland’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Nevertheless, from the point of view of the creators of Germany’s Eastern politics, what was fundamental was the intervention of the Warsaw Treaty armies in Czechoslovakia. The rebellion among the youth was of lesser importance to the current politics at the time. Its consequences were felt mostly in the succeeding years and were related, i.a., to public opinion in the FRG and its attitude toward the forms and extent of normalising relations with the countries of East Europe, including Poland. After 1968, in the case of the FRG, the mode of implementation of its Eastern politics was modified. It was concluded that it is the Soviet Union which must be the main partner in any talks (though it was the most important interlocutor anyway, albeit attempts were also made to hold autonomous talks with the satellite countries) and that attention must be paid to avoiding the impression that for Bonn, Ostpolitik is just an instrument to help loosen intra-block dependencies. For Poland, the events of 1968 implied a reduced field of manoeuvre, not so much because not only in Bonn, but also in other Western capitals, it was formally acknowledged that the priority lies with Moscow, but also because of diplomatic practice. Warsaw did not, however, intend to give up the right to pursue its interests, tangible evidence of which was provided by the diplomatic activity of 1969, manifest both by a turn in its policy toward Germany, and by undertaking efforts to sell its own vision of the European Conference.
More...
The article attempts to provide an answer to the query as to what role fell to the year 1968 in the development of terrorism. Being but one of its chapters, it was clearly not that of the beginning of terrorism. The author describes briefly the genesis of terrorism and points out that, after 1945, terrorism had returned to its revolutionary connotations, namely, to fighting the incumbent regime, as well as the colonial regimes. It was then that the concept was born of terrorism as a weapon of the weak and the poor, of those who got into trouble and of the oppressed, for whom reaching for the methods of terrorism reflected their desperation and dejection. From the end of the 1960s, together with the youth rebellion (in May1968!), the political arena is entered by ideologically motivated groups for whom it is fighting the social and political system as such, rather than a specific regime, that has become the basic motivating factor. The circumstances which contributed to the emergence of post-1968 terrorist organisations and the process of radicalisation which led from the debates and public speeches to terrorism, are analysed by the author, who also points to the specific combination, in West Germany’s case, of 1968 and nationalism.
More...
The mass communication media are one of the most effective means of influencing public opinion. It was for this reason that exercising control over them was so important for the authorities in the People’s Republic of Poland. Thanks to the censorship and the guidelines as to what could be presented, and how, society received a pre-set image of events, subordinated to Poland’s foreign policy. Television, radio and the print media communicated a depressing vision of the Western states coping with gravely serious problems, both domestic and in foreign policy. In 1968, there were two central negative characters, the USA and the FRG. The USA was presented as a state breaching human rights, both in the international arena and in its domestic policy, immersed in deep social and moral problems, with political assassinations, employed as a dubious method of solving political problems being pointed to as evidence of that situation, and with the murky ties of leading politicians to the mafia structures providing the basis of the economic success so envied by other nations, including the Poles. The RFG, in its turn, was treated as a real threat to European and global peace and security, because of its running a revisionist policy, its expectations in regard of arming the country, and the West German opposition to disarmament. Against this backdrop, only the manner in which France was presented was markedly distinct, this being in view of the differences in the manner by which it carried out its foreign policy and, in particular because of its criticism of the USA and its reservations regarding Germany’s growing role in Europe, as well as its blocking of the enlargement of the European Communities. The other Western States were the focus of attention on the part of the Polish press, radio and television only occasionally.
More...