Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny:
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Elektronisch E-Book |
| Sprache: | Czech |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Praha [Czech Republic]
Ústav mezinárodních vztahů
2016
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | BSB01 |
| Beschreibung: | This study analyzes the level of democracy and its perception in the policies of Russia, Belarus, Uzbekistan and China. First, they assess these countries with the optics of Western research into democracy and hybrid regimes. From this point of view, in three cases, hegemonic electoral regimes (Belarus, Russia and Uzbekistan) and in the fourth case the closed authoritarian regime. It is therefore the country in the least democratic part of the classification spectrum. Russia has long been the most democratic of the four analyzed countries; in the last 15 years, the situation has changed and Russia has gradually moved closer to the level of authoritarianism in Belarus. On the other hand, Uzbekistan is approaching China, whose development in recent years has also been witnessing a renewed strengthening of authoritarian tendencies.Secondly, the study revealed similar positions in these countries in a number of areas in terms of democracy perception by representatives of the four countries surveyed. In all cases, the primary role of democracy was the link not to formal political procedures but to socio-economic stability and security. It can be assumed that this view is shared by the population of the surveyed countries, which is further supported by massive government propaganda and little understanding of the institutional aspects of democracy in the West.Emphasis is not usually placed on democracy, but on the legitimacy of a regime that is not derived from electoral results, but just from the degree of stability, security or prosperity. There are, however, significant differences between the countries studied: In the case of Russia, there are in parallel different discourses about democracy, many of which are very close to the Western concept. In China, there is a relatively open intellectual debate on democracy. In relation to the West, however, democracy in all four countries is perceived as an instrument of power intervention or, for example, in Putin's Russia, as a source of dual standards. If these limitations and cultural limits are taken into account, there is considerable room for effective democracy support in all these countries (see the recommendations in the conclusion of the study) |
| Beschreibung: | 1 Online-Ressource(1 p. 93) |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nmm a2200000zc 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV048262255 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 00000000000000.0 | ||
| 007 | cr|uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220609s2016 |||| o||u| ||||||cze d | ||
| 035 | |a (ZDB-45-CGR)ceeol749646 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)1334015000 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV048262255 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e aacr | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a cze | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 | ||
| 084 | |a OST |q DE-12 |2 fid | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Kratochvíl, Petr |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny |
| 264 | 1 | |a Praha [Czech Republic] |b Ústav mezinárodních vztahů |c 2016 | |
| 264 | 2 | |a Frankfurt M. |b CEEOL |c 2016 | |
| 300 | |a 1 Online-Ressource(1 p. 93) | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a This study analyzes the level of democracy and its perception in the policies of Russia, Belarus, Uzbekistan and China. First, they assess these countries with the optics of Western research into democracy and hybrid regimes. From this point of view, in three cases, hegemonic electoral regimes (Belarus, Russia and Uzbekistan) and in the fourth case the closed authoritarian regime. It is therefore the country in the least democratic part of the classification spectrum. Russia has long been the most democratic of the four analyzed countries; in the last 15 years, the situation has changed and Russia has gradually moved closer to the level of authoritarianism in Belarus. | ||
| 500 | |a On the other hand, Uzbekistan is approaching China, whose development in recent years has also been witnessing a renewed strengthening of authoritarian tendencies.Secondly, the study revealed similar positions in these countries in a number of areas in terms of democracy perception by representatives of the four countries surveyed. In all cases, the primary role of democracy was the link not to formal political procedures but to socio-economic stability and security. It can be assumed that this view is shared by the population of the surveyed countries, which is further supported by massive government propaganda and little understanding of the institutional aspects of democracy in the West.Emphasis is not usually placed on democracy, but on the legitimacy of a regime that is not derived from electoral results, but just from the degree of stability, security or prosperity. | ||
| 500 | |a There are, however, significant differences between the countries studied: In the case of Russia, there are in parallel different discourses about democracy, many of which are very close to the Western concept. In China, there is a relatively open intellectual debate on democracy. In relation to the West, however, democracy in all four countries is perceived as an instrument of power intervention or, for example, in Putin's Russia, as a source of dual standards. If these limitations and cultural limits are taken into account, there is considerable room for effective democracy support in all these countries (see the recommendations in the conclusion of the study) | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Government/Political systems | |
| 650 | 4 | |a International relations/trade | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Electoral systems | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fürst, Rudolf |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Najšlová, Lucia |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Varkočková, Martina |4 aut | |
| 912 | |a ZDB-45-CGR | ||
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 940 | 1 | |q BSB_OE_CEEOL | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033642458 | ||
| 966 | e | |u https://www.ceeol.com/search/gray-literature-detail?id=749646 |l BSB01 |p ZDB-45-CGR |x Verlag |3 Volltext | |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804184066000420864 |
|---|---|
| adam_txt | |
| any_adam_object | |
| any_adam_object_boolean | |
| author | Kratochvíl, Petr Fürst, Rudolf Najšlová, Lucia Varkočková, Martina |
| author_facet | Kratochvíl, Petr Fürst, Rudolf Najšlová, Lucia Varkočková, Martina |
| author_role | aut aut aut aut |
| author_sort | Kratochvíl, Petr |
| author_variant | p k pk r f rf l n ln m v mv |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV048262255 |
| collection | ZDB-45-CGR |
| ctrlnum | (ZDB-45-CGR)ceeol749646 (OCoLC)1334015000 (DE-599)BVBBV048262255 |
| format | Electronic eBook |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>03580nmm a2200433zc 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV048262255</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">00000000000000.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr|uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">220609s2016 |||| o||u| ||||||cze d</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ZDB-45-CGR)ceeol749646</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)1334015000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV048262255</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">aacr</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">cze</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">OST</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kratochvíl, Petr</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Praha [Czech Republic]</subfield><subfield code="b">Ústav mezinárodních vztahů</subfield><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Frankfurt M.</subfield><subfield code="b">CEEOL</subfield><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1 Online-Ressource(1 p. 93)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This study analyzes the level of democracy and its perception in the policies of Russia, Belarus, Uzbekistan and China. First, they assess these countries with the optics of Western research into democracy and hybrid regimes. From this point of view, in three cases, hegemonic electoral regimes (Belarus, Russia and Uzbekistan) and in the fourth case the closed authoritarian regime. It is therefore the country in the least democratic part of the classification spectrum. Russia has long been the most democratic of the four analyzed countries; in the last 15 years, the situation has changed and Russia has gradually moved closer to the level of authoritarianism in Belarus. </subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">On the other hand, Uzbekistan is approaching China, whose development in recent years has also been witnessing a renewed strengthening of authoritarian tendencies.Secondly, the study revealed similar positions in these countries in a number of areas in terms of democracy perception by representatives of the four countries surveyed. In all cases, the primary role of democracy was the link not to formal political procedures but to socio-economic stability and security. It can be assumed that this view is shared by the population of the surveyed countries, which is further supported by massive government propaganda and little understanding of the institutional aspects of democracy in the West.Emphasis is not usually placed on democracy, but on the legitimacy of a regime that is not derived from electoral results, but just from the degree of stability, security or prosperity. </subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">There are, however, significant differences between the countries studied: In the case of Russia, there are in parallel different discourses about democracy, many of which are very close to the Western concept. In China, there is a relatively open intellectual debate on democracy. In relation to the West, however, democracy in all four countries is perceived as an instrument of power intervention or, for example, in Putin's Russia, as a source of dual standards. If these limitations and cultural limits are taken into account, there is considerable room for effective democracy support in all these countries (see the recommendations in the conclusion of the study)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Government/Political systems</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">International relations/trade</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Electoral systems</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fürst, Rudolf</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Najšlová, Lucia</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Varkočková, Martina</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-45-CGR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="q">BSB_OE_CEEOL</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033642458</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="966" ind1="e" ind2=" "><subfield code="u">https://www.ceeol.com/search/gray-literature-detail?id=749646</subfield><subfield code="l">BSB01</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-45-CGR</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | DE-604.BV048262255 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-03T19:59:35Z |
| indexdate | 2024-07-10T09:33:25Z |
| institution | BVB |
| language | Czech |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033642458 |
| oclc_num | 1334015000 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 |
| physical | 1 Online-Ressource(1 p. 93) |
| psigel | ZDB-45-CGR BSB_OE_CEEOL |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publishDateSearch | 2016 |
| publishDateSort | 2016 |
| publisher | Ústav mezinárodních vztahů |
| record_format | marc |
| spelling | Kratochvíl, Petr Verfasser aut Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny Praha [Czech Republic] Ústav mezinárodních vztahů 2016 Frankfurt M. CEEOL 2016 1 Online-Ressource(1 p. 93) txt rdacontent c rdamedia cr rdacarrier This study analyzes the level of democracy and its perception in the policies of Russia, Belarus, Uzbekistan and China. First, they assess these countries with the optics of Western research into democracy and hybrid regimes. From this point of view, in three cases, hegemonic electoral regimes (Belarus, Russia and Uzbekistan) and in the fourth case the closed authoritarian regime. It is therefore the country in the least democratic part of the classification spectrum. Russia has long been the most democratic of the four analyzed countries; in the last 15 years, the situation has changed and Russia has gradually moved closer to the level of authoritarianism in Belarus. On the other hand, Uzbekistan is approaching China, whose development in recent years has also been witnessing a renewed strengthening of authoritarian tendencies.Secondly, the study revealed similar positions in these countries in a number of areas in terms of democracy perception by representatives of the four countries surveyed. In all cases, the primary role of democracy was the link not to formal political procedures but to socio-economic stability and security. It can be assumed that this view is shared by the population of the surveyed countries, which is further supported by massive government propaganda and little understanding of the institutional aspects of democracy in the West.Emphasis is not usually placed on democracy, but on the legitimacy of a regime that is not derived from electoral results, but just from the degree of stability, security or prosperity. There are, however, significant differences between the countries studied: In the case of Russia, there are in parallel different discourses about democracy, many of which are very close to the Western concept. In China, there is a relatively open intellectual debate on democracy. In relation to the West, however, democracy in all four countries is perceived as an instrument of power intervention or, for example, in Putin's Russia, as a source of dual standards. If these limitations and cultural limits are taken into account, there is considerable room for effective democracy support in all these countries (see the recommendations in the conclusion of the study) Government/Political systems International relations/trade Electoral systems Fürst, Rudolf aut Najšlová, Lucia aut Varkočková, Martina aut |
| spellingShingle | Kratochvíl, Petr Fürst, Rudolf Najšlová, Lucia Varkočková, Martina Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny Government/Political systems International relations/trade Electoral systems |
| title | Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny |
| title_auth | Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny |
| title_exact_search | Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny |
| title_full | Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny |
| title_fullStr | Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny |
| title_full_unstemmed | Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny |
| title_short | Významy demokracie v politickém diskurzu Ruska, Běloruska, zemí Střední Asie a Číny |
| title_sort | vyznamy demokracie v politickem diskurzu ruska beloruska zemi stredni asie a ciny |
| topic | Government/Political systems International relations/trade Electoral systems |
| topic_facet | Government/Political systems International relations/trade Electoral systems |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT kratochvilpetr vyznamydemokracievpolitickemdiskurzuruskabeloruskazemistredniasieaciny AT furstrudolf vyznamydemokracievpolitickemdiskurzuruskabeloruskazemistredniasieaciny AT najslovalucia vyznamydemokracievpolitickemdiskurzuruskabeloruskazemistredniasieaciny AT varkockovamartina vyznamydemokracievpolitickemdiskurzuruskabeloruskazemistredniasieaciny |