Abstract Uncertainty and unease surround both Europe’s current predicament and future prospects. Be it national governments devoid of European solidarity, the self-contained Brussels bureaucracy or fear of another economic recession, the status quo in Europe contains much to be concerned about. In particular, the rise of the far right casts a shadow over contemporary Europe from Poland and Hungary to France and Italy. The leitmotif of this article is social Europe, i.e. Europe with commitment to “good society”, conducive to human well-being. I seek to envision a reconstruction to the current maladies. Before taking up the main task of the article, I write about the two key developments that have lead to the decline of social Europe. I begin with the Maastricht Treaty which had a profound impact on the rules of economic governance in Europe, as well as contained a vision of competitive and individualistic social life. Thereafter, I probe into the divisive consequences that austerity has had in Europe in the 2010s. Lastly, I focus on a path forward and inquire into social thought that aims at a reconstruction of European politics and economy in order to arrive at a social Europe. I shall do this by engaging with the recent ‘Manifesto for the democratization of Europe’ (Boujou et al., 2019), an initiative led by prominent French intellectuals that seeks to save Europe from its current troubled state.
不确定性和不安围绕着欧洲当前的困境和未来的前景。无论是缺乏欧洲团结的国家政府、自给自足的布鲁塞尔官僚机构，还是对另一场经济衰退的担忧，欧洲的现状都有很多值得关注的地方。特别是，从波兰、匈牙利到法国和意大利，极右翼的崛起给当代欧洲蒙上了阴影。这篇文章的主题是社会欧洲，即致力于“美好社会”、有利于人类福祉的欧洲。我试图设想重建目前的弊病。在开始这篇文章的主要任务之前，我写了导致欧洲社会衰落的两个关键发展。我从《马斯特里赫特条约》开始，该条约对欧洲的经济治理规则产生了深远影响，并包含了竞争和个人主义社会生活的愿景。此后，我探讨了2010年代紧缩政策在欧洲造成的分裂后果。最后，我关注一条前进的道路，并探讨旨在重建欧洲政治和经济以实现社会欧洲的社会思想。我将通过参与最近的“欧洲民主化宣言”（Boujou et al.，2019）来做到这一点，这是一项由法国著名知识分子领导的倡议，旨在将欧洲从目前的困境中拯救出来。
{"title":"Europe at the Crossroad: Decline or Reconstruction?","authors":"M. Aidnik","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0045","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Uncertainty and unease surround both Europe’s current predicament and future prospects. Be it national governments devoid of European solidarity, the self-contained Brussels bureaucracy or fear of another economic recession, the status quo in Europe contains much to be concerned about. In particular, the rise of the far right casts a shadow over contemporary Europe from Poland and Hungary to France and Italy. The leitmotif of this article is social Europe, i.e. Europe with commitment to “good society”, conducive to human well-being. I seek to envision a reconstruction to the current maladies. Before taking up the main task of the article, I write about the two key developments that have lead to the decline of social Europe. I begin with the Maastricht Treaty which had a profound impact on the rules of economic governance in Europe, as well as contained a vision of competitive and individualistic social life. Thereafter, I probe into the divisive consequences that austerity has had in Europe in the 2010s. Lastly, I focus on a path forward and inquire into social thought that aims at a reconstruction of European politics and economy in order to arrive at a social Europe. I shall do this by engaging with the recent ‘Manifesto for the democratization of Europe’ (Boujou et al., 2019), an initiative led by prominent French intellectuals that seeks to save Europe from its current troubled state.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":"237 - 253"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47904249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The question of the application and impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (‘Charter’) in quotidian practice of human rights protection and review is a strategic one. Given the predominantly decentralised effects of EU law and with the due account to the wide interpretation of the scope of the Charter’s application (Art. 51(1)) presented by the CJEU (C-617/10 Fransson), the national dimension of the application of the Charter forms the crucial issue for the functioning of the EU system of fundamental rights protection. The Charter itself has a big potential to influence the content, nature and mechanisms of the fundamental rights protection at the national level. The present paper focuses on this phenomena in connection to the case-law, opinions and workload of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal (‘TK’). It analyses the approach of TK towards the Charter in abstract manner as well as the (non)appearance of the Charter in the reasoning of the court in concrete cases. The article reports on the main cases and analyses the reasons of the aloof approach of the TK towards the EU human rights catalogue.
{"title":"Keeping Safe Distance: Chapters from Randomised (Non)Application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights before Polish Constitutional Tribunal","authors":"Aleksandra Kustra-Rogatka, Ondrej Hamuľák","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0038","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The question of the application and impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (‘Charter’) in quotidian practice of human rights protection and review is a strategic one. Given the predominantly decentralised effects of EU law and with the due account to the wide interpretation of the scope of the Charter’s application (Art. 51(1)) presented by the CJEU (C-617/10 Fransson), the national dimension of the application of the Charter forms the crucial issue for the functioning of the EU system of fundamental rights protection. The Charter itself has a big potential to influence the content, nature and mechanisms of the fundamental rights protection at the national level. The present paper focuses on this phenomena in connection to the case-law, opinions and workload of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal (‘TK’). It analyses the approach of TK towards the Charter in abstract manner as well as the (non)appearance of the Charter in the reasoning of the court in concrete cases. The article reports on the main cases and analyses the reasons of the aloof approach of the TK towards the EU human rights catalogue.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":"107 - 72"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43483292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The article discusses the position of burden sharing in the US security policy vis-à-vis its European allies. It argues that this issue has always been important for the US administration, but never to the extent it is today. This is due to several factors, including: (a) current White House America First policy, which embraces a critical position against international institutions and emphasizes the importance of economic elements of US multi- and bilateral relationships; (b) reluctance of some of European allies—with Germany as the biggest concern for the US—to keep defense expenditures on the level of 2% of GDP, including 20% for major equipment, as it is required by NATO financial guidelines; and (c) a scale of US overpayment, which is lesser than presented by US officials. I suggest that burden sharing will remain a priority for the current US government and would cause certain economic and political-military (new posture of US troops in Europe) consequences.
{"title":"The Position of Burden Sharing in Current US Security Policy Vis-à-vis European Allies","authors":"G. Kozlowski","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0039","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article discusses the position of burden sharing in the US security policy vis-à-vis its European allies. It argues that this issue has always been important for the US administration, but never to the extent it is today. This is due to several factors, including: (a) current White House America First policy, which embraces a critical position against international institutions and emphasizes the importance of economic elements of US multi- and bilateral relationships; (b) reluctance of some of European allies—with Germany as the biggest concern for the US—to keep defense expenditures on the level of 2% of GDP, including 20% for major equipment, as it is required by NATO financial guidelines; and (c) a scale of US overpayment, which is lesser than presented by US officials. I suggest that burden sharing will remain a priority for the current US government and would cause certain economic and political-military (new posture of US troops in Europe) consequences.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":"108 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44508259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Against the background of research conducted in other EU countries, Euroscepticism is a marginal sentiment among Poles. Nevertheless, this attitude and the arguments associated with it are noticeable in many areas in the public space: among members of the public presenting Eurosceptic arguments on the social media, journalists in press commentaries or politicians themselves. The aim of this article is to analyse the scale of such statements, their specific character and presence in the Polish press during the election and post-electoral period in 2015–2017. The study involved content analysis of selected text units which allowed the fundamental research question to be answered—namely, what is the nature of Eurosceptic attitudes manifested in the Polish press during the electoral/post-electoral period of lively discussions on the role of the European Union in Poland.
{"title":"Euroscepticism in a Pro-European State on the Basis of Media Content Analysis","authors":"J. Jakubowski","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0044","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Against the background of research conducted in other EU countries, Euroscepticism is a marginal sentiment among Poles. Nevertheless, this attitude and the arguments associated with it are noticeable in many areas in the public space: among members of the public presenting Eurosceptic arguments on the social media, journalists in press commentaries or politicians themselves. The aim of this article is to analyse the scale of such statements, their specific character and presence in the Polish press during the election and post-electoral period in 2015–2017. The study involved content analysis of selected text units which allowed the fundamental research question to be answered—namely, what is the nature of Eurosceptic attitudes manifested in the Polish press during the electoral/post-electoral period of lively discussions on the role of the European Union in Poland.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"20 9","pages":"218 - 236"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41249300","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The article analyses the use of the preliminary ruling procedure by the Czech courts in the 15 years of the Czech membership in the European Union. It presents statistics of cases lodged to the EU Court of Justice and refers to the most important decisions. The article compares the practise of both lower courts as well as courts of last instance, namely the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court. It also outlines the attitude of the Czech Constitutional Court towards this procedure.
{"title":"The Use of the Preliminary Ruling Procedure by Czech Courts: Historical Retrospective and Beyond","authors":"V. Stehlík, David Sehnálek","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0041","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article analyses the use of the preliminary ruling procedure by the Czech courts in the 15 years of the Czech membership in the European Union. It presents statistics of cases lodged to the EU Court of Justice and refers to the most important decisions. The article compares the practise of both lower courts as well as courts of last instance, namely the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court. It also outlines the attitude of the Czech Constitutional Court towards this procedure.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":"150 - 172"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43179989","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The article explores the implications of the smart specialisation approach on core-periphery relations in Estonia and Slovakia. Despite accounting for one-third of the entire EU budget, Cohesion Policy has produced only modest results in achieving its goal of territorial cohesion between centres and peripheries. This raises the question of the role of Cohesion Policy’s current approach—smart specialisation. By applying the analytical concept of peripheralisation, the article examines how the formulation and implementation of smart specialisation is governed in Estonia and Slovakia, both of which are characterised by large territorial disparities between the capital region and the rest of the country in terms of socio-economic development and participation in decision-making. Specifically, the article explores how the smart specialisation approach is interpreted domestically in terms of strategy formulation, priority-setting and spatial targeting of measures, and whether the particular domestic interpretation of smart specialisation acknowledges the unequal economic and research and innovation potential as well as different institutional capacities of central and peripheral regions. Drawing on extensive document analysis and 20 expert interviews with policy-makers and stakeholders in Estonia and Slovakia, it is argued that while ambitiously promoting an approach of ‘inclusive growth’ for the benefit of all regions, the influence of smart specialisation on core-periphery relations shows to be ambiguous. Fuzzy priority-setting, a lack of strategic and administrative capacities at the regional level and inhibiting policy-making routines discourage and, at times, prevent such a demanding approach. The article concludes that smart specialisation in its current form does not benefit central and peripheral regions equally. Rather, its demands in terms of formulation and implementation are likely to reinforce the disparities between those regions with capacities to handle such an ambitious approach and those regions without such capacities.
{"title":"Ambitious or Ambiguous? The Implications of Smart Specialisation for Core-Periphery Relations in Estonia and Slovakia","authors":"Sebastian Schulz","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0037","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article explores the implications of the smart specialisation approach on core-periphery relations in Estonia and Slovakia. Despite accounting for one-third of the entire EU budget, Cohesion Policy has produced only modest results in achieving its goal of territorial cohesion between centres and peripheries. This raises the question of the role of Cohesion Policy’s current approach—smart specialisation. By applying the analytical concept of peripheralisation, the article examines how the formulation and implementation of smart specialisation is governed in Estonia and Slovakia, both of which are characterised by large territorial disparities between the capital region and the rest of the country in terms of socio-economic development and participation in decision-making. Specifically, the article explores how the smart specialisation approach is interpreted domestically in terms of strategy formulation, priority-setting and spatial targeting of measures, and whether the particular domestic interpretation of smart specialisation acknowledges the unequal economic and research and innovation potential as well as different institutional capacities of central and peripheral regions. Drawing on extensive document analysis and 20 expert interviews with policy-makers and stakeholders in Estonia and Slovakia, it is argued that while ambitiously promoting an approach of ‘inclusive growth’ for the benefit of all regions, the influence of smart specialisation on core-periphery relations shows to be ambiguous. Fuzzy priority-setting, a lack of strategic and administrative capacities at the regional level and inhibiting policy-making routines discourage and, at times, prevent such a demanding approach. The article concludes that smart specialisation in its current form does not benefit central and peripheral regions equally. Rather, its demands in terms of formulation and implementation are likely to reinforce the disparities between those regions with capacities to handle such an ambitious approach and those regions without such capacities.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"26 2","pages":"49 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41258623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The article is predicated upon the allegation that there is a similarity between the scientific uncertainty linked to the hazard which human interventions pose to the natural environment and the hazard which the development of automated decision-making techniques poses to certain aspects of human lives in the digital environment. On the basis of this allegation, the analysis examines the similarities between the European environmental law, which is crucial for the natural environment, and the European data protection law, which is fundamental for the digital environment. As there are measures already adopted by the data protection law from the environmental law, such as impact assessments and the right to access information, the main hypothesis of this analysis is to consider whether there are further inspirations for the development of European data protection law which could be drawn from environmental law, regarding the scientific uncertainty which is common to these two areas of regulation. The article examines a legal measure, namely, the precautionary principle, as the conjectural response to the challenges linked to the development of the new technologies. The experiences collected in the area of environmental law concerning the precautionary principle are analysed as a source of lessons to be learned concerning the regulatory measures adopted in order to deal with scientific uncertainty, not only in the natural environment, but also in the digital one.
{"title":"Automated Decision-Making and the Precautionary Principle in EU Law","authors":"J. Mazur","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0035","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article is predicated upon the allegation that there is a similarity between the scientific uncertainty linked to the hazard which human interventions pose to the natural environment and the hazard which the development of automated decision-making techniques poses to certain aspects of human lives in the digital environment. On the basis of this allegation, the analysis examines the similarities between the European environmental law, which is crucial for the natural environment, and the European data protection law, which is fundamental for the digital environment. As there are measures already adopted by the data protection law from the environmental law, such as impact assessments and the right to access information, the main hypothesis of this analysis is to consider whether there are further inspirations for the development of European data protection law which could be drawn from environmental law, regarding the scientific uncertainty which is common to these two areas of regulation. The article examines a legal measure, namely, the precautionary principle, as the conjectural response to the challenges linked to the development of the new technologies. The experiences collected in the area of environmental law concerning the precautionary principle are analysed as a source of lessons to be learned concerning the regulatory measures adopted in order to deal with scientific uncertainty, not only in the natural environment, but also in the digital one.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":"18 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44299725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This paper analyses the legal and practical implementation of the right to be heard and be represented of children in criminal proceedings, both in the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and in the context of Estonian and Cambodian legal systems. Estonia has been chosen as a model state of EU by which also the EU principles are reflected. Particularly, this paper provides a comparative analysis of the implementation of a child’s right to be heard and be represented in Estonia and Cambodia by examining the legal standards concerning children’s right to be heard and be represented enshrined under the CRC together with the regulations and policies of each respective country, and, to a smaller extent, how the principles of the CRC are reflected in EU law and policies. Examples of actual practices in Estonia and Cambodia are discussed to understand whether both countries are compliant with the principles of the CRC. This paper suggests that Estonia and Cambodia both acknowledge their human rights obligations regarding children’s rights, and their legal regulations and policies are in accordance with the CRC principles. However, there remain gaps in the implementation of these policies and regulations in both countries. This view is justified by the analysis of the performance of judicial professionals, including judicial police, lawyers, prosecutors and judges. While critically analyzing the challenges, this article also suggests changes to address the problem.
{"title":"A Child’s Right to Be Heard and Be Represented in the Criminal Procedure: A Comparative Analysis of Estonian and Cambodian Law to CRC","authors":"Kristi Joamets, Muy Seo Ngouv","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0040","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper analyses the legal and practical implementation of the right to be heard and be represented of children in criminal proceedings, both in the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and in the context of Estonian and Cambodian legal systems. Estonia has been chosen as a model state of EU by which also the EU principles are reflected. Particularly, this paper provides a comparative analysis of the implementation of a child’s right to be heard and be represented in Estonia and Cambodia by examining the legal standards concerning children’s right to be heard and be represented enshrined under the CRC together with the regulations and policies of each respective country, and, to a smaller extent, how the principles of the CRC are reflected in EU law and policies. Examples of actual practices in Estonia and Cambodia are discussed to understand whether both countries are compliant with the principles of the CRC. This paper suggests that Estonia and Cambodia both acknowledge their human rights obligations regarding children’s rights, and their legal regulations and policies are in accordance with the CRC principles. However, there remain gaps in the implementation of these policies and regulations in both countries. This view is justified by the analysis of the performance of judicial professionals, including judicial police, lawyers, prosecutors and judges. While critically analyzing the challenges, this article also suggests changes to address the problem.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":"127 - 149"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48479249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract There are many arguments to support the idea that the Baltic nations (and other “victimized” areas) adhere to ‘victimhood nationalism’, a form of nationalism that explains the region’s recognition of its history and the related problems. Since the start of the 21st century, memory and area studies experts have used the concept of ‘victimhood nationalism’. However, the framework of victimhood nationalism is critically flawed. Its original conceptual architecture is weak and its effectiveness as an explanatory variable requires critical examination. This paper presents a theoretical examination of victimhood nationalism from the perspective of political and social historiology. Further, the paper criticizes the concept from the perspective of the empirical area studies of the Baltic region. First, it argues that the killing or damaging of one community by another does not automatically transform into a nationalism of victimhood. Unless it has been established that one community was the ‘victim’ and the other the perpetrator of the crime, these events will not be remembered as the basis of victimhood nationalism. Second, the effectiveness of this concept is criticized from two perspectives: “tangle” as an explanatory variable and its doctrinal history. It is tautological to claim that victimhood nationalism explains political issues, as was already being implied in the early twentieth-century collective memory studies. In conclusion, the assumption of victimhood is a preliminary necessity to a community claiming victimhood nationalism. Victimhood nationalism is not an explanatory, but an explained, variable. Therefore, the concept should be renamed otherwise. The alternative framework of collective memory studies framework of “victimhood” is needed. This research argues that Baltic area studies, particularly regarding history recognition, should be phenomenologically reconsidered to reimagine the framework of “victimhood”.
{"title":"A Critical and Theoretical Re-imagining of ‘Victimhood Nationalism’: The Case of National Victimhood of the Baltic Region","authors":"K. Okawara","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0043","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There are many arguments to support the idea that the Baltic nations (and other “victimized” areas) adhere to ‘victimhood nationalism’, a form of nationalism that explains the region’s recognition of its history and the related problems. Since the start of the 21st century, memory and area studies experts have used the concept of ‘victimhood nationalism’. However, the framework of victimhood nationalism is critically flawed. Its original conceptual architecture is weak and its effectiveness as an explanatory variable requires critical examination. This paper presents a theoretical examination of victimhood nationalism from the perspective of political and social historiology. Further, the paper criticizes the concept from the perspective of the empirical area studies of the Baltic region. First, it argues that the killing or damaging of one community by another does not automatically transform into a nationalism of victimhood. Unless it has been established that one community was the ‘victim’ and the other the perpetrator of the crime, these events will not be remembered as the basis of victimhood nationalism. Second, the effectiveness of this concept is criticized from two perspectives: “tangle” as an explanatory variable and its doctrinal history. It is tautological to claim that victimhood nationalism explains political issues, as was already being implied in the early twentieth-century collective memory studies. In conclusion, the assumption of victimhood is a preliminary necessity to a community claiming victimhood nationalism. Victimhood nationalism is not an explanatory, but an explained, variable. Therefore, the concept should be renamed otherwise. The alternative framework of collective memory studies framework of “victimhood” is needed. This research argues that Baltic area studies, particularly regarding history recognition, should be phenomenologically reconsidered to reimagine the framework of “victimhood”.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":"206 - 217"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43157048","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Freedom of expression does not only mean absence of censorship or other restrictive content laws—it also means that people have real access to communication. Nowadays, internet is a key means of communication. In this article we explain the relevance of access to internet from legal, practical and market aspects for freedom of expression. To illustrate the question, we present the situation in Ukraine. We look at legislation, including restrictions due to national security—availability, affordability and accessibility of internet. Ukraine is an interesting example of a mixture of very positive indicators and some remaining restrictions.
{"title":"Is Internet Access a Matter of Freedom of Expression? Some Examples from Ukraine","authors":"Bogdan Kelichavyi, Katrin Nyman Metcalf","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2019-0022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0022","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Freedom of expression does not only mean absence of censorship or other restrictive content laws—it also means that people have real access to communication. Nowadays, internet is a key means of communication. In this article we explain the relevance of access to internet from legal, practical and market aspects for freedom of expression. To illustrate the question, we present the situation in Ukraine. We look at legislation, including restrictions due to national security—availability, affordability and accessibility of internet. Ukraine is an interesting example of a mixture of very positive indicators and some remaining restrictions.","PeriodicalId":42700,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of European Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":"63 - 81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48928866","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：