Przegląd Strategiczny
Not a member yet
500 research outputs found
Sort by
Pojęcia imperium i imperializm w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych
No full textContrary to appearances, it is difficult to make a straightforward distinction between „internationalism” and „imperiality”. On the one hand, from the point of view of a normative theory of international politics, crossing this line seems to lead from legitimization of international relations (internationalism) to a lack of it (imperiality), and from normality to uniqueness. On the other hand, from a historical point of view, the empire is a ubiquitous form of participation in the internationalism of the social world. One of the „sacred” rules in the discourse on the modern international system seems to be the prohibition of the empire. During the last twenty years the notions „empire” and „imperialism” have returned to the language of analysis of international relations. One can observe a specific rehabilitation of the notion of empire as a unit of analysis and imperialism as an international relation practice. The article presents the understanding of the notions „empire” and „imperialism” in the studies of international relations and the history of international relations. The author discusses often ignored in the international relations studies ideas and practices shared by empires and the influence that the overseas empires exerted on Europe and its culture. A significant problem discussed by the author is the explanation of a lack of particular interest in imperialism in the main research streams in studies of international relations. Therefore, the author presents the essence of understanding of the problem of imperialism in the streams of theorizing in international relations inspired by Marxist critique of capitalism, starting with W. Lenin and K. Kautsky, through E. Wood, A. Gunder Franka, I. Wallerstein, and finishing with M. Hardt, A. Negri and theorists of new imperialism. In the last part of the article the author motivates his thesis that one hundred years of theoretical reflection over the empire and imperialism, in which a significant place is taken by research carried out in the 2nd half of the 20st century in the form of dependency theory and analysis of world-systems, has taken a roundabout way, returning at the beginning of the 21st century to the problem of violence and strength within the capitalist social relations. Recent events in international relations have shown troublesome relations between the ideal of social agreements, especially in the economic sphere, and using military force in international relations.Wbrew pozorom trudno przeprowadzić jednoznaczny rozdział pomiędzy „międzynarodowością” i „imperialnością”. Z jednej strony, z punktu widzenia normatywnej teorii polityki międzynarodowej przekraczanie tej linii wydaje się prowadzić od legitymizacji stosunków międzynarodowych (międzynarodowość) do jej braku (imperialność) i od normalności do wyjątkowości. Z drugiej strony, z historycznego punktu widzenia imperium jest wszechobecną formą uczestnictwa w międzynarodowości świata społecznego. Jedną ze „świętych” zasad w dyskursie o nowożytnym systemie międzynarodowym wydaje się być zakaz imperium. W ostatnich dwudziestu latach pojęcia „imperium” i „imperializm” wróciły do języka analizy stosunków międzynarodowych. Dokonuje się swoista rehabilitacja pojęcia imperium jako jednostki analizy i imperializmu jako praktyki stosunków międzynarodowych. Artykuł przedstawia rozumienie pojęć imperium i imperializm w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych i historii stosunków międzynarodowych. Autor omawia często pomijane w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych idee i praktyki podzielane przez imperia oraz wpływ jaki zamorskie imperia wywarły na Europę i jej kulturę. Istotnym problemem omawianym przez Autora jest wyjaśnienie braku szczególnego zainteresowania imperializmem w głównych nurtach badawczych w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych. Autor przedstawia zatem istotę rozumienia problemu imperializmu w nurtach teoretyzowania o stosunkach międzynarodowych inspirowanych marksowską krytyką kapitalizmu poczynając od W. Lenina i K. Kautskiego przez E.Wood, A. Gunder Franka, I. Wallersteina na M. Hardt, A. Negri oraz teoretykach nowego imperializmu kończąc. W końcowej części artykułu Autor uzasadnia tezę, że sto lat refleksji teoretycznej nad imperium i imperializmem, w której istotne miejsce zajmują także badania prowadzone w drugiej połowie XX w. w formie teorii zależności i analizy systemów-światów, zatoczyło koło powracając na pocz. XXI w. do problemu przemocy i siły w ramach kapitalistycznych stosunków społecznych. Ostatnie wydarzenia w stosunkach międzynarodowych ukazują kłopotliwe związki między ideałem umów społecznych, szczególnie w sferze ekonomicznej a stosowaniem siły militarnej w stosunkach międzynarodowych
Migracje zagraniczne do Polski a problem bezpieczeństwa społeczno-politycznego
Get PDFThe subject of this article is a reflection on the impact of Polish migration processes on the level of socio-political security of the state and its citizens. This problem aroused much excitement since the early 90s of the twentieth century, because for some part of Polish society, the presence of immigrants caused public concern, in the opinion of others, it was desirable. In the article there is a brief analysis of the influx of foreigners to Poland for permanent residency with the division of their origin and the size of the flow of immigrants across Polish borders. There is also a reference to concrete examples of demonstration of dissatisfaction of Polish people due to the presence of foreigners. Subsequently in this article, it is referred to the adverse phenomena which, in the opinion of Poles, emerged with the influx of immigrants and could put a strain on the security level. These include: an increase in crime, illegal immigration, illegal employment and buying out Polish grounds. The analysis of these four issues was to assess whether they are indeed a real threat.Przedmiotem niniejszego artykułu są rozważania na temat wpływu procesów migracyjnych do Polski na poziom bezpieczeństwa społeczno-politycznego państwa i jego obywateli. Problemu, który od początku lat 90. XX wieku budził wiele emocji, ponieważ dla części polskiego społeczeństwa obecność imigrantów wywoływała niepokój, a w opinii innych była pożądana. Dokonano analizy napływu cudzoziemców do Polski na pobyt stały z podziałem na ich pochodzenie oraz rozmiarów przepływu imigrantów przez polskie granice. Odniesiono się także do konkretnych przykładów demonstracji niezadowolenia Polaków z powodu obecności obcokrajowców. Odwołano się do niekorzystnych zjawisk, które w opinii Polaków pojawiły się wraz z napływem imigrantów i mogły nadwyrężyć poziom bezpieczeństwa. Do nich zaliczono: wzrost przestępczości, nielegalnej imigracji, nielegalnego zatrudnienia i wykupu polskiej ziemi. Analiza tych czterech zagadnień miała na celu zbadanie czy rzeczywiście są one realnym zagrożeniem
Legal Foundations of the Human Right to Peace
Get PDFWhile most developed States refuse accepting the concept of human right to peace, developing States support civil society organizations’ contribution to the codification and progressive development of the emerging human right to peace. This study focuses on the strong legal foundations of the human right to peace in international human rights law. Therefore, developed States should listen to other States and civil society organizations and join the ongoing codification process of the human right to peace at the UN Human Rights Council
Specyfika zmilitaryzowanego aktora niepaństwowego we współczesnych stosunkach międzynarodowych. Przypadek Hezbollahu
Get PDFIn this paper Author has defined and classified a „militarized non-state actor” pointing that this term comprises many different non-state actors like for example: political parties with their military wings, international criminal groups, terrorist organizations, private military companies or independence movements. It is also a disputable issue if armed forces deployed within governmental organizations (like theUNorNATO) are treated as militarized non-state actors or not.Lebanese Hizballah has been used here as an example to describe the specificity of a militarized non-state actor. Hizballah has its own armed forces and has been active in international relations. As a result of the analysis, such actors like Hizballah are well adoptable to new phenomena and processes which occurred in international relations, they are challenging states in their activities, moreover: they are used in many cases by states to achieve their goals. It shows the ambiguity in functioning of such a non-state actor.In this paper Author has defined and classified a „militarized non-state actor” pointing that this term comprises many different non-state actors like for example: political parties with their military wings, international criminal groups, terrorist organizations, private military companies or independence movements. It is also a disputable issue if armed forces deployed within governmental organizations (like theUNorNATO) are treated as militarized non-state actors or not.Lebanese Hizballah has been used here as an example to describe the specificity of a militarized non-state actor. Hizballah has its own armed forces and has been active in international relations. As a result of the analysis, such actors like Hizballah are well adoptable to new phenomena and processes which occurred in international relations, they are challenging states in their activities, moreover: they are used in many cases by states to achieve their goals. It shows the ambiguity in functioning of such a non-state actor
Jedność nauki versus wielość nauk
No full textSince Middle Ages, a precondition to set apart any discipline and its transformation from real knowledge-science, i.e. theology to current state of the art, has been fighting the conviction of the science unity particular value, shared by all opponents of isolating new disciplines, who derived their approach from Manichean structure of reality-science. Verifying this approach I evoke various, still parallel experience of unsuccessful defence of the international law unity from the fragmentation of law, and subsequently results of partition of law and international law and its impact on the law coherence (including international law) and the coherence of international turnover legal regulation – the long road from law to domestic and international law, from international law to both European and international law, and at present, to (single) law of the European Area.Since Middle Ages, a precondition to set apart any discipline and its transformation from real knowledge-science, i.e. theology to current state of the art, has been fighting the conviction of the science unity particular value, shared by all opponents of isolating new disciplines, who derived their approach from Manichean structure of reality-science. Verifying this approach I evoke various, still parallel experience of unsuccessful defence of the international law unity from the fragmentation of law, and subsequently results of partition of law and international law and its impact on the law coherence (including international law) and the coherence of international turnover legal regulation – the long road from law to domestic and international law, from international law to both European and international law, and at present, to (single) law of the European Area
Socio-Political Manipulation – Incidental Pathology or Immanent Component of International Realm?
Get PDFIn terms of specialization in social influence, the sphere of international relations is one of the most specific fields of social activity. Competitive and anarchized structure of international interactions works in favor of standard’s relativization and dispersion of responsibility, which provokes use of ambiguously evaluated means of pressure. Legitimacy gained from Machiavel lian paradigm of effectiveness puts term of manipulation on the higher level in hierarchy of strategic social influence. The scope of its potential use is as broad as the field of diffusion between different scientific approaches to the issue of international manipulation. This shows the background for synthetic conception of social control, which simultaneously involves interest of various academic disciplines such as psychology, sociology and political science. Despite difficulties in grasping an equivocal substance of manipulation, both historical and theoretical context of its occurrence lead to consideration about its structural role in transformation of international sphere. Beyond the field of political realism, the case of legitimacy for manipulative influence is also undertaken within the reach of theories of constructivism. Suitable references to this issue reflect concepts of social control originally related to categories of rhetoric, diplomacy and propaganda. Under the common denominator of civil development strictly bounded to improvement of influential content and its distribution, all of mentioned factors build a wide area for research on manipulation within international environment
Cultural Studies: nowa perspektywa dla nauki o stosunkach międzynarodowych?
Get PDFThe main goal of this article is to show, in which way the main assumptions of cultural studies may be useful for development and enrichment the explanatory perspectives of international relations theory. Since that discipline concerns about social and cultural mechanisms, by which power is being created and reproduced, it opens in front of global system scholars a new analytical dimension, located so far rather outside to the main stream of their interests. Cultural studies theorists aspire to reveal, of how is it happening, that coherent and complex structures of knowledge, so called discoursive formations, determine certain forms of social reality, among which some groups obtain privileged position to the others. This case was related to international relations topic by Edward Said in Orientalism, a well-known and respected thesis, that combine the main assumptions of cultural studies with the matter of colonial and post-colonial domination. That is also why the deconstruction of western orientalistic discourse becomes the key aspect of this article.To make E. Said’s remarks clear enough, they need to be preceded, however, by general reflection about cultural studies as such and their connections with cognitive constructivism and widely grasped postmodernism. The first part of this article is dedicated to these thoughts. The second (middle) part contains basic arguments of discourse theory formulated by Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault, because without them it would be impossible to understand a specific meaning of „power” in cultural studies – the power by forcing and legalizing certain descriptions of reality. Showing the essence of this category seems to be indispensible to explain, in which way, according to E. Said’s opinion, the orientalistic discourse became an instrument of western imperial domination over territories and societies of Orient. This problem will be considered in the last part of the article.The main goal of this article is to show, in which way the main assumptions of cultural studies may be useful for development and enrichment the explanatory perspectives of international relations theory. Since that discipline concerns about social and cultural mechanisms, by which power is being created and reproduced, it opens in front of global system scholars a new analytical dimension, located so far rather outside to the main stream of their interests. Cultural studies theorists aspire to reveal, of how is it happening, that coherent and complex structures of knowledge, so called discoursive formations, determine certain forms of social reality, among which some groups obtain privileged position to the others. This case was related to international relations topic by Edward Said in Orientalism, a well-known and respected thesis, that combine the main assumptions of cultural studies with the matter of colonial and post-colonial domination. That is also why the deconstruction of western orientalistic discourse becomes the key aspect of this article.To make E. Said’s remarks clear enough, they need to be preceded, however, by general reflection about cultural studies as such and their connections with cognitive constructivism and widely grasped postmodernism. The first part of this article is dedicated to these thoughts. The second (middle) part contains basic arguments of discourse theory formulated by Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault, because without them it would be impossible to understand a specific meaning of „power” in cultural studies – the power by forcing and legalizing certain descriptions of reality. Showing the essence of this category seems to be indispensible to explain, in which way, according to E. Said’s opinion, the orientalistic discourse became an instrument of western imperial domination over territories and societies of Orient. This problem will be considered in the last part of the article
