Strategic directions of development of relations between the state and political parties in Ukraine

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1-2019) ◽  
pp. 212-224
Author(s):  
Аlina Chernoivanenko
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Piero Ignazi

The book integrates philosophical, historical, and empirical analyses in order to highlight the profound roots of the limited legitimation of parties in contemporary society. Political parties’ long attempts to gain legitimacy are analysed from a philosophical–historical perspective pinpointing crucial passages in their theoretical and empirical acceptance. The book illustrates the process through which parties first emerged and then achieved full legitimacy in the early twentieth century. It shows how, paradoxically, their role became absolute in the totalitarian regimes of the interwar period when the party became hyper-powerful. In the post-war period, parties shifted from a golden age of positive reception and organizational development towards a more difficult relationship with society as it moved into post-industrialism. Parties were unable to master societal change and favoured the state to recover resources they were no longer able to extract from their constituencies. Parties have become richer and more powerful, but they have ‘paid’ for their pervasive presence in society and the state with a declining legitimacy. The party today is caught in a dramatic contradiction. It has become a sort of Leviathan with clay feet: very powerful thanks to the resources it gets from the state and to its control of societal and state spheres due to an extension of clientelistic and patronage practices; but very weak in terms of legitimacy and confidence in the eyes of the mass public. However, it is argued that there is still no alternative to the party, and some hypotheses to enhance party democracy are advanced.


2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Ahmad El-Sharif

The Late King Hussein’s last Speech from the Throne in 1997 was given amidst public outcry over the outcomes of the parliamentary elections which resulted the triumph tribal figures with regional affiliations after the boycott of most political parties. This brought to public debate the questions of maintain the long-established balance between the several socio-political structures in the political life in Jordan. While the speech can be perceived as a reflection of King Hussein’s vision about ‘Jordanian democracy’, it can also be interpreted as an elaborate scheme to construct the conventional understanding of the exceptionality of Jordan and its socio-political institutions; including democracy. This article discusses the representation of ‘Jordanian democracy’, the state, and the socio-political structures in Jordan as reflected in the Late King’s last speech from the throne (1997). The analytical framework follows a critical metaphor analysis perspective in which all instances of metaphors used to epitomise these issues are primarily acknowledged from there sociocultural context. Herein, the article focuses on revealing the aspect of metaphorical language by which the Late King Hussein legitimizes and, hence, constructs, the prevailing ideology pf the ‘exceptionality’ of Jordan.


2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 459-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosa Monteiro ◽  
Virgínia Ferreira

Abstract This paper aims to contribute towards a better understanding of the dynamics of women's movements and their relations with institutions, political parties and the official mechanisms used to promote gender equality. It is the outcome of the first study on State feminism in Portugal. Our research was carried out using a case study which focused on the main gender equality official mechanism and its networks, which required a qualitative approach. We concluded that currently, while the Portuguese State is confronted with its persistent inability to implement gender equality policies, the present situation of Portuguese women's movements is that of redefining and adjusting to the major challenge of reinvention and resignification within a very difficult external environment.


2018 ◽  
pp. 8-15
Author(s):  
Іvan Pobochiy

The level of social harmony in society and the development of democracy depends to a large extent on the level of development of parties, their ideological and political orientation, methods and means of action. The purpose of the article is to study the party system of Ukraine and directions of its development, which is extremely complex and controversial. The methods. The research has led to the use of such scientific search methods as a system that allowed the party system of Ukraine to be considered as a holistic organism, and the historical and political method proved to be very effective in analyzing the historical preconditions and peculiarities of the formation of the party system. The results. The incompetent, colonial past and the associated cruel national oppression, terror, famine, and violent Russification caused the contradictory and dramatic nature of modernization, the actual absence of social groups and their leaders interested in it, and the relatively passive reaction of society to the challenges of history. Officials have been nominated by mafia clans, who were supposed to protect their interests and pursue their policies. Political struggle in the state took place not between influential political parties, but between territorial-regional clans. The party system of Ukraine after the Maidan and the beginning of the war on the Donbass were undergoing significant changes. On the political scene, new parties emerged in the course of the protests and after their completion — «Petro Poroshenko Bloc», «People’s Front», «Self-help»), which to some extent became spokespeople for not regional, but national interests. Pro-European direction is the main feature of the leading political parties that have formed a coalition in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Conclusion. The party system of Ukraine as a result of social processes is at the beginning of a new stage in its development, an important feature of which is the increase in the influence of society (direct and indirect) on the political life of the state. Obviously, there is a demand from the public for the emergence of new politicians, new leaders and new political forces that citizens would like to see first and foremost speakers and defenders of their interests.


Balcanica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 225-244
Author(s):  
Boris Milosavljevic

The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was internationally recognized during the Paris Peace Conference in 1919-20. Even though there was neither a provisional nor a permanent constitution of the newly-formed state, factually there was a state as well as a system of governance, represented by supreme bodies, the King and the Parliament. Many draft constitutions were prepared by different political parties and notable individuals. We shall focus on the official Draft Constitution prepared during the premiership of Stojan Protic. He appointed the Drafting Committee as a governmental (multi-ethnic) advisory team of prominent legal experts from different parts of the new state consisting of Professors Slobodan Jovanovic (President), Kosta Kumanudi and Lazar Markovic (Serbia), Professor Ladislav Polic (Croatia) and Dr Bogumil Vosnjak (Slovenia). After two months of work, the Committee submitted its draft to the Prime Minister. The leading Serbian legal scholar and president of the committee, Slobodan Jovanovic (1869-1958), was well-acquainted with the details of Austro-Hungarian and German legal traditions. Since he was an active participant and witness of the events that led to the creation of the new state, while also being an objective and critical historian, it is important to shed light on his firsthand account of the emergence of the state of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Đorđije Blažić ◽  
◽  
Anika Kovačević ◽  

The author analyzes the provisions of the Vidоvdan Constitution which regulate the position and competence of the executive branch. With the Vidovdan Constitution, the Kingdom of Serbs Croats and Slovenes was proclaimed a constitutional parliamentary and hereditary monarchy in which the King has a central constitutional position and the position of an undisputed holder of executive power. The executive power is made available to the king, which is exercised by the ministers for him, with him and his subordinates. Ministers form the Council of Ministers (Government) and are at the head of certain administrative departments. Although the Constitution proclaimed parliamentarism, there was no classic parliamentary responsibility of ministers before the Assembly. The king was a political factor that enters the field of competence of other holders of power, and thus the division of power provided by the constitution "falls away". The king's power extends to the civil and military field of life of the state, to the external and internal spheres. Although the adoption of the Vidovdan Constitution aimed to create a unified system of organization and division of power, the internal state and political situation in the country, after the adoption of the Constitution, became more complicated and filled with frequent ministerial crises and conflicts of political parties. The King's domination and his frequent "going out" outside the constitutional framework resulted in increasing centralization and, in the end, a coup d'etat and the establishment of King Alexander Karadjordjevic's personal dictatorship.


2019 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Fabio Wolkenstein

In addition to summarizing the book’s main themes as described, this Introduction places special emphasis on connecting the problem animating the book—the apparent incapacity of contemporary parties to mediate between citizens and the state—to current political developments in established Western democracies, showing that the issues the book addresses are not only of academic interest but also directly relevant to ongoing public debates about the state and health of representative democracy. Chief amongst the themes foregrounded here is the rise of so-called ‘populist’ parties on the left and right of the political spectrum, as well as the re-branding of established political actors as ‘movements’ (think, e.g. of Emmanuel Macron’s La République en Marche). These phenomena are interpreted as part of a larger ‘revolt against intermediary bodies’—meaning first and foremost a rebellion against political parties. The Introduction suggests that this ‘revolt’ brings with it only a temporary shift in how representative politics looks, without actually reversing the disconnect between parties and voters or compelling established political parties to give up their privileges and de-colonize the institutions of the state. This argument sets the stage for the book’s core contention that more thought has to be put into finding ways to reconnect political parties with society.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document