scottish police federation

Transcription

Post
www.iwm.at
No. 87 Winter 2005
Newsletter of the INSTITUT FÜR DIE WISSENSCHAFTEN VOM MENSCHEN, Vienna
and of the INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN SCIENCES at Boston University
IWM LECTURES ON HUMAN SCIENCES
As a reporter, he has traveled around the globe for several
decades and – by writing about his encounters with other people
and other worlds – has become one of the most renowned
Polish authors. In his IWM Lectures on Human Sciences on
December 1-3, 2004, Ryszard Kapuscinski discussed his views
Contents
3 Jan-Patocka-Gedächtnisvorlesung
Lord Dahrendorf
Engagierte Beobachter:
Die Intellektuellen und die
Versuchungen der Zeit
5 Conference
The Conditions of European Solidarity
9 IWM Friends
10 Forschungsprojekt
Tod und Kultur
12 Forschungsprojekt
Phänomenologie und Politik
13 Conference
Junior Visiting Fellows’ Conference
14 IHS Boston
The US and Europe: Partnership or
Competition?
18 Neue Reihe: Politischer Salon
Probleme der Demokratie heute
28 Notes on Books
Benjamin Frommer on
Noel Chalhoun, Dilemmas of Justice
30 Guest Contribution
Tatiana Zhurzhenko
Orange Victory: Ukraine Tastes the
Exotic Fruits of Democracy
Ausschreibungen
Milena Jesenska Fellowships
Research Fellowship:
The Meaning of Death in Society
Today
on the role of and relations with “the others.”
Ryszard Kapuscinski: On Others
DEPENDING ON one’s point of view, the term
the other can obviously carry manifold
meanings. In Ryszard Kapuscinski’s three
evening lectures, the Polish writer made the
distinction clear: although the other can refer
to many different groups of people in many
different contexts, he uses it mainly to distinguish between Europeans, Westerners or
“white people” and non-Europeans or nonwhites.
Naturally, the means to encountering
the other are, according to Kapuscinski,
traveling: The literature of people like Ibn
Battuta and Marco Polo has created the idea
that what is distant is different or other, and that the further
one goes, the more different everything becomes and the
easier it is to perceive otherness. As a reporter, he finds traveling to mean “challenges, efforts and sacrifices.” Reporters
must serve as witnesses of their travels. The road they travel
is important “because every step brings us closer towards
encountering the other. That is why we are on the road in
the first place.”
But the history of travel does not tell a pleasant story, as
the Polish writer recalled in his lectures. For most civilizations, interest in the world outside their borders was inspired by a desire to conquer and dominate. The history of
European contact with the other is no exception, as it has
been “plagued by violence and inequality.” The beginnings
of modernity brought the image of the other as a “naked
savage, cannibal, and pagan,” who needed to be subjugated and “saved” by the white, Christian Europeans. According to Kapuscinski, this image was a result largely of
the type of people who were sent to explore the world,
namely criminals and delinquents. The views of these “disgusting representatives” would come to strongly influence
the stereotypes, prejudices and phobias of the general public.
Long after the first violent and fearful reactions to the
Ryszard Kapuscinski bereist seit mehreren Jahrzehnten als Reporter die
ganze Welt. Seine Berichte in Buchform, die von
Begegnungen mit anderen Menschen und anderen Kulturen berichten,
machten ihn zu einem der
prominentesten Schriftsteller Polens. In seinen
IWM-Vorlesungen zu den
Wissenschaften vom
Menschen (1.-3. Dezember 2004) beleuchtete er
einmal mehr seine Erfahrungen und Erlebnisse im
Umgang mit “den Anderen”.
Ryszard Kapuscinski IWM LECTURES ON HUMAN SCIENCES
Born 1932 in Pinsk, now in
Belarus, Ryszard Kapuscinski is the pre-eminent
writer among Polish reporters and one of the
most renowned journalists of our time. From 1956
to 1981 he worked as foreign correspondent for
the Polish press, chronicling political shifts in Asia,
Latin America and Africa.
During his work he realized that newspaper articles could often not do
justice to the complex political situations and
changes he was confronted with. He began to
write books that used literary techniques to dissect the revolutions and
wars he witnessed.
2
Since 1981 Kapuscinski
has been living in Warsaw.
He has received many
awards, including the
Boleslaw Prus-Prize; Prize
of the International
Organisation of Journalists , Helsinki; Leipziger
Buchpreis zur Europäischen Verständigung ;
Hanseatischer GoethePreis der Alfred-ToepferStiftung, Hamburg; Polish
Journalist of the Century;
Linde-Literatur-Preis, together with Christa Wolf;
Premio Principe de
Asturias 2003, Communicación y Humanidades;
Bruno Kreisky-Preis für
das politische Buch.
other, there came a change in the European attitude
of brutality and hatred as a result of the Enlightenment – when the other came to be seen as a human
just like the Europeans. During this period many
scientists and scholars went on expeditions in
search of understanding of other cultures. The other
became of interest to Europeans, who began to see
that, although they had different beliefs and customs, there were also a great deal of common values
and desires among all humans.
The Enlightenment and its Consequences
Although the Age of Enlightenment did not solve
all of the problems at once – slavery and colonialism
did not end immediately – it made it necessary to
try to somehow justify these actions by calling them
“civilizing missions” with the aim of “bringing aid
to the poor and backward peoples.” During this
period, a new social science – anthropology – began. It was aimed at the more cosmopolitan and
universalistic visions of Europeans and sought to
understand the others by getting to know them and
accepting their diversity.
Two schools of thought emerged within anthropology: the evolutionists and the diffusionists.
The evolutionists believed that all humans began
from the same basic form and then started on the
same path of development towards becoming an
advanced civilization. They assumed that progress
was inevitable and positive, and that the “less advanced” civilizations were just lagging behind the
Europeans. The diffusionists held a different view,
believing that humanity was made up of many different civilizations and cultures that were always
coming into contact with and affecting the development of one another. They saw the world as a
diverse set of people, none of whom were any better
or worse than the others. Both of these schools had
faults, but they shared the common aim of “getting
to know and understand the others as deeply as possible, to describe them and make their world appear
closer to us.”
Anthropology has greatly shaped the current
view of the other. But another important figure in
the views we hold today is Emmanuel Levinas, as
Ryszard Kapuscinski further illustrated. Living in
the time of the two world wars and totalitarian systems, Levinas called for an end to the indifference
towards and hatred of the other. He believed that it
was important to encounter the other, to accept him
and enter into dialogue with him, and also to accept
responsibility for him. Through these positive relations, he saw a way to leave behind selfishness, indifference and isolation.
The Age of Multiculturalism
In the current age of multiculturalism, the world
has acquired a sense of openness and mobility as a
No. 87
Winter 2005
result of many
factors, such as
the revolution
in electronic
media, the end
of the Cold
War order, and
the process of
decolonization.
According to
Kapuscinski,
all of these factors “give our Ryszard Kapuscinski, Martin Pollack (writer and translator)
relations with
the others a new context.”
Since the middle of the 20th century, Europe’s
relationship with the rest of the world has changed
dramatically. The political, economic and cultural
dominance that Europe held over the rest of the
world has declined immensely as a result of
decolonization. Now civilizations that had been
forced to remain dormant for centuries are calling
for “a place of their own at the great table of the
world,” the table where Europe used to sit alone.
The end of the Cold War has led to a rise in
democracy, which has greatly facilitated travel all
over the world. Two factors have had an important
role in this rise in migration: the electronic revolution with its developments in communication and
transport, and the deepening of inequalities
throughout the world as well as the growing consciousness of those inequalities. Now people from
all over the world are coming into contact with each
other at an astounding rate. Unfortunately, with
more contact and exchange new problems arise, as
Kapuscinski pointed out: it becomes harder to really define oneself – and easier to blame one’s
troubles on the other.
However, according to the Polish writer, there
is an important reason for trying to overcome all of
these problems that occur through contact with the
others: “They are a mirror for us to see ourselves in
and to understand who we are.” He sees our identity as largely defined by contact with the other. This
contact is not something new historically, but there
has been a dramatic change in the awareness and
acceptance of the existence of the others and of their
right to be different. They are now able to speak
and express their thoughts and their ideas, “even if
not everyone is willing to listen yet.”
So, in this new multicultural world, every participant must have a strong sense of identity in order not to feel threatened by the close relations going on with the other. But this is not always easy. For
example, with the decrease of the farming class as a
result of migration to the cities, it is no longer possible to rely on them as bearers of traditions and
identities. As Kapuscinski put it, now cultures and
18. JAN-PATOCKA-GEDÄCHTNISVORLESUNG
Der tschechische Philosoph und Mitbegründer der Charta
‘77, Jan Patocka, starb 1977 nach einer Serie von
civilizations are coming into contact with each
other at such an astounding rate that it is becoming
harder and harder to clearly define oneself or others.
Kapuscinski concluded by advising more contact with the other and remembrance of what has
happened in past relations in order to improve the
quality of contact between Europe and the other(s)
in the future. As he put it, it is necessary to build
bridges and find mutual understanding between
Europe and the others “in a world so fragile and
haunted by demagogy, disorientation, fanaticism
and bad will.”
After its Lectures in Modern Philosophy (19911999), the IWM launched a
new public lecture series
on the occasion of the
100th birthday of HansGeorg Gadamer, supporter of the Institute
since its inception: the
IWM Lectures on Human
Sciences.
Nach den IWM-Vorlesungen zur modernen
Philosophie (1991-1999)
begann das IWM anlässlich
des hundertsten Geburtstags von Hans-Georg
Gadamer eine neue Reihe
öffentlicher Vorlesungen:
Die IWM-Vorlesungen zu
den Wissenschaften vom
Menschen.
The lectures are published by Harvard University
Press, Suhrkamp Verlag
(Frankfurt/Main) and
ZNAK publishers (Krakow).
Die Vorträge erscheinen
bei Harvard University
Press, Suhrkamp Verlag
(Frankfurt/Main) und
ZNAK publishers (Krakow).
Previous speakers
2003 Abraham B. Yehoshua (Haifa)
The Shaping of Jewish Identity:
Three Bible Stories
2002 Cornelia Klinger (Tübingen/Vienna)
„Nicht nach dem Maße des Menschen gebaut“
Der verlorene Ort des Subjekts im System der
modernen Gesellschaft
2001 Paul Ricoeur (Paris)
The Process of Recognition
2000 Charles Taylor (Montreal)
The Varieties of Religion Today: William James
Revisited after 100 Years
Polizeiverhören. Seit seinem 10. Todestag veranstaltet das
IWM zu seinem Gedenken die Jan-Patocka-Gedächtnisvorlesungen. 2004 lud das IWM Lord Dahrendorf ein, der
am 19. November im Wiener Palais Schwarzenberg einen
seltenen Typus des Intellektuellen vorstellte: Den „Erasmier“.
Lord Dahrendorf
Engagierte Beobachter:
Intellektuelle und die
Versuchungen der Zeit
IN DER DIESJÄHRIGEN Jan-Patocka-Gedächtnis-Vorlesung unternahm Ralf Dahrendorf den Versuch,
eine Figur des modernen Intellektuellen zu konturieren, der den moralischen Herausforderungen der
Zeit und den totalitären Versuchungen ein besonders kritisches Gegengewicht gegenüberzustellen
vermag. In Anlehnung an den Humanisten Erasmus von Rotterdam führte Dahrendorf diese Figur
unter dem Titel des „Erasmier“ in seine Auseinandersetzung mit der intellektuellen Geschichte des
20. Jahrhunderts ein.
Der Erasmier ist demnach eine spezifische Variante des öffentlichen Intellektuellen, der in „Zeiten der Prüfung“ auf eigentümliche Weise das
bewusste Engagement mit der Fähigkeit verbindet,
zu den aktuellen Fragen stets die Distanz des nachdenklichen Beobachters aufrecht zu erhalten. Den
Begriff des „engagierten Beobachters“ auf alle eminenten öffentlichen Intellektuellen anzuwenden,
wäre jedoch allzu vorschnell.
Tatsächlich birgt der engagierte Beobachter
ein fundamentales und in der langen Reihe der Intellektuellen des 20. Jahrhunderts – von Jan
Patocka und Thomas Masaryk bis Edward Said
und Czeslaw Milosz – kaum aufgelöstes Dilemma
in sich, das zum Kern des eigentlichen Erasmiers
gehört. Denn Akteur und Beobachter, Berufspolitiker und Berufswissenschaftler seien jeweils
wesentlich
unvereinbare
Tätigkeiten,
wie
Dahrendorf erklärte. Nun ist das eigentliche Instrument des engagierten Beobachters das Publizieren,
seine Triebfeder die Besessenheit von den Themen
der Zeit. Gleichwohl geht es dabei um mehr, als um
engagierte Publizistik. Was den Intellektuellen erst
zum Erasmier macht, ist der besondere Standpunkt
des Beobachters. Es geht um einen Standpunkt,
der umso objektiver ist, je schärfer der Beobachter
seine eigene Position kritisch reflektiert. Zum aktiven Engagement gehört Besessenheit, zum kriti-
On November 19, 2004,
Lord Dahrendorf, member of the British House of
Lords and former Warden
of St. Antony’s College in
Oxford, held the 18th Jan
Patocka Memorial Lecture in Vienna introducing
a specific type of intellectual: the „Engaged Observer“ or “Erasmian”.
According to him, there is
an obvious antagonism
between passionate engagement and objective
observation. Engagement needs obsession,
observation needs reflection. However, true
“Erasmians” have to
combine these two abilities – and this way of critical engagement is incompatible with any ideology.
No. 87
Winter 2005
3
Lord Dahrendorf 18. JAN-PATOCKA-GEDÄCHTNISVORLESUNG
4
Lord Dahrendorf, geboren 1929 in Hamburg, ist
Mitglied des britischen
Oberhauses. Er lehrte als
Professor für Soziologie
an deutschen und amerikanischen Universitäten,
war Direktor der London
School of Economics und
Warden des St. Antony’s
College in Oxford. 1968-70
war er Abgeordneter des
Landtages von BadenWürttemberg, 1969-70
MdB und Parlamentarischer Staatssekretär in
der ersten Regierung
Brandt und 1970-74 Mitglied der Kommission der
Europäischen Gemeinschaften.
Publikationen:
Der Wiederbeginn der
Geschichte: Vom Fall der
Mauer zum Krieg im Irak,
Reden und Aufsätze,
München, 2004; Auf der
Suche nach einer neuen
Ordnung: Vorlesungen
zur Politik der Freiheit im 21.
Jahrhundert , München,
2003; Über Grenzen. Lebenserinnerungen, München, 2002; Universities
after Communism. The
Hannah Arendt Prize and
the Reform of Higher
Education in East Central
Europe, Hamburg, 2000;
Liberal und unabhängig:
Gerd Bucerius und seine
Zeit, München, 2000.
No. 87
Winter 2005
schen Beobachten jedoch die Fähigkeit reflexiver
Distanznahme. Insofern ist die Leidenschaft der
Vernunft und nicht die leidenschaftliche Hingabe
an die politische Sache das formale Merkmal des
engagierten Beobachters, und so werden sie zuweilen auch zu Fremden für viele ihrer intellektuellen
Zeitgenossen. Substanzielle Folgen gewinnt diese
Art rationaler Passion, die den Erasmier vom öffentlichen Akteur und anderen Intellektuellen unterscheidet, als unerbittliches Schutzschild der Vernunft gegen jeden „Gott der keiner war“.
Dahrendorf machte an verschiedenen Fallbeispielen bedeutender Intellektueller des vergangenen europäischen Jahrhunderts – eines Jahrhunderts, das weitgehend geprägt war von den beiden
falschen Göttern totalitärer Systeme, den verschiedenen Formen des Faschismus und des Kommunismus – immer wieder darauf aufmerksam, dass
das kritisch-reflexive Engagement mit keiner Parteilinie oder Ideologie zu versöhnen ist. Genau diese
lebenslange Bereitschaft, immer neue Gründe für
die eigene Position geben zu können und sich dabei
von jedweder doktrinären Ideologie frei zu halten,
konnten aber im Sog zur Konformität mit vorherrschenden Meinungen und oft lebensbedrohenden
politischen Zwängen nur wenige Intellektuelle bewahren. Jene, die sich zu stark engagierten, hörten
unweigerlich auf, Beobachter zu sein, während jenen, die zu viel Abstand zum Beobachteten nahmen, das nötige Engagement fehlte.
Den einen, wie Arthur Koestler oder Edward
W. Said, mangelte es nach Dahrendorf an kritischer
Distanz zum aktuellen politischen Geschehen; andere, stärker künstlerisch inspirierte Intellektuelle,
wie Theodor W. Adorno oder Ernst Jünger, spielten
bloß ihr Engagement, betrieben aber in Wahrheit
ästhetische und nicht engagierte Reflexion; während wieder andere, wie Jan Patocka oder HansGeorg Gadamer zu sehr Philosophen blieben um
wirklich öffentliche Intellektuelle zu sein. Demgegenüber gehörte Karl Poppers Verteidigung der
„Offenen Gesellschaft“ etwa zu den genuinen Leistungen eines Erasmiers und so wären auch
Hannah Arendt, Czeslaw Milosz, Isaiah Berlin oder
Raymond Aron unbedingt in die kurze Liste der
Erasmier aufzunehmen. An dieser Liste wird gleich
noch ein weitere Kontur des Erasmiers erkennbar:
Die meisten von ihnen waren „äußere Emigranten“, Intellektuelle, für die das Exil zur Heimat
wurde, wie für Erasmus selbst, der unentwegt auf
Wanderschaft war.
Das Dilemma, mit dem die Diktatur die Integrität eines jeden einzelnen Individuums herausfordert und dem sich der engagierte Beobachter zu
stellen hat, macht ihn zuweilen zu einem Helden
seiner Zeit. Dass der engagierte Beobachter selbst
keine vorgefertigten Antworten auf die Fragen liefert, die sich der moderne Mensch stellt, sondern
parteien- und staatenlos und doch kosmopolitisch,
auf dem Weg der rationalen Argumentation, der
Überzeugungskraft des Dialogs und doch nicht
humorlos, um der gewaltlosen Veränderung und
der Bewahrung des Friedens willen kämpft – dies
macht ihn jedenfalls zu einem für jede offene Gesellschaft unerlässlichen Zeitgenossen.
Ohne selbst der Versuchung zu erliegen, die
Zwiespältigkeiten des Erasmiers vorschnell glätten
zu wollen, schloss der selbst parteienlose britische
Abgeordnete Lord Dahrendorf seine Skizze dieses
Zeitgenossen folgerichtig mit einer weiteren Figur,
einem persönlichen Bild aus dem politischen Alltag
– den so genannten „Querbänklern“ des britischen
House of Lords: diese parteienlose Parlamentarier
die quer zur regierenden Position und der Opposition von ihren „cross benches“ aus das Konfliktgeschehen zwischen den Parteien beeinflussen, machen den eigentlichen Witz des Oberhauses aus.
Dessen Mandatsverteilung mache sie zu unverzichtbaren Entscheidungsträger der demokratischen Prozesse, wiewohl die Querbänkler keine einheitliche
Interessensgruppe
darstellten,
so
Dahrendorf. Die individuellen Stimmen dieser
Querbänkler seien somit immer nur so stark, wie es
ihre Argumente sind. Diese Stimmen aber sind genau die Stimmen der Erasmier, die Stimmen jener
von ihm vorgestellten „engagierten Beobachter“.
Jan Patocka (1907-1977) war Schüler von Edmund
Husserl und Martin Heidegger und gilt als einer der bedeutendsten tschechischen Philosophen des 20. Jahrhunderts. 1937 habilitierte er sich über „Die natürliche
Welt als philosophisches Problem“. Im Jahre 1949, kurz
nach der kommunistischen Machtergreifung, mußte er
die Universität verlassen. Er widmete sich daraufhin Forschungen zu Aristoteles, Comenius und Masaryk. 1968,
während des „Prager Frühlings“, wurde er zum Ordinarius berufen, aber bereits 1972 im Zuge der „Normalisierung“ zwangsemeritiert. Bis zu seinem Tode lehrte er in
privaten Seminaren weiter. Sein Werk umfaßt Arbeiten
zur antiken Philosophie, zur Phänomenologie, Ästhetik,
Geschichtsphilosophie und zur tschechischen Kultur
und Geschichte. Als Denker, Lehrer und moralische
Autorität übte Jan Patocka großen Einfluß auf zwei Generationen von tschechischen Intellektuellen aus.
Patocka gehört zu den Initiatoren der Charta ’77 und war
einer ihrer ersten Sprecher. Er starb am 13. März 1977
nach einer Serie von Polizeiverhören.
Am IWM wird seit 1984 zum Werk des tschechischen
Denkers geforscht (http://www.iwm.at/r-janpat.htm).
CONFERENCE
On November 6-7, 2004, an international conference on
“The Conditions of European Solidarity” was held at the
Im Passagen Verlag, Wien, sind erschienen:
Palais Schwarzenberg in Vienna. In three sessions, more
Mario Vargas Llosa
Demokratie heute
François Furet
Jean-Jacques Rousseau und die Französische
Revolution
George Soros
Die Macht der Fehlbarkeit
Albert O. Hirschman
Tischgemeinschaft.
Zwischen öffentlicher und privater Sphäre
Tadeusz Mazowiecki
Politik und Moral im neuen Europa.
Mit einem Essay von Jan Patocka
William Julius Wilson
Soziale Ungleichheit in den USA. Plädoyer für eine multiethnische Bündnispolitik
than sixty participants debated the question, “What Can
Previous speakers
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
George Steiner (Cambridge)
Das Cordelia-Paradox
Giuliano Amato (Rome / Brussels)
United Europe: What Should It Be?
Edward W. Said (New York)
The Public Role of Writers and Intellectuals
Czeslaw Milosz (Berkeley/Krakow)
Lesung aus seinen Gedichten
William Julius Wilson (Harvard)
Rising Inequality in the United States and the
Case for Multiracial Political Coalitions
Elie Wiesel (Boston)
Hasidic Modes
Tadeusz Mazowiecki (Warschau)
Politik und Moral im neuen Europa
Albert O. Hirschman (Princeton)
Between Private and Public Spheres
George Soros (New York)
A Failed Philosopher Tries Again
François Furet (Paris)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the French
Revolution
Mario Vargas Llosa (Lima/London)
Democracy Today
Jacques Derrida (Paris)
Le secret – de la réponse et de la
responsabilité
Charles Taylor (Montreal)
Two Theories of Language
Paul Ricoeur (Paris)
The Person: Its Ethical and Moral Structure
Zbigniew Brzezinski (New York)
The General Crisis of Communism
Leszek Kolakowski (Oxford/Chicago)
Die Illusionen der Entmythologisierung
Hans-Georg Gadamer (Heidelberg)
Phänomenologie und das Problem der Zeit
Hold the New European Union Together?” A matinee panel
discussion about “The Spiritual and Cultural Dimension of
Europe” closed the conference.
Solidarity in the European Union
AFTER
THE WELCOMING ADDRESS by Krzysztof
Michalski, Rector of the IWM, and Markus Beyrer,
Secretary General of the Federation of Austrian Industry, which has generously supported the confer-
ence, the first session, “Economic Cohesion and the
Need for Political Unity,” was introduced by Pascal
Lamy, Commissioner for External Trade. According
to him, the European Union is entering “a period of
troubled waters.” The “affectio societatis,” the interests and values that bind the EU countries together,
is diminishing as a result of enlargement and the
decline of European legitimacy in the eyes of the
public. At its core is the relationship between economic integration and political unity.
Lamy argued that for the last 50 years there
have been two schools of thought on the relationship between economic and political integration:
the idea that “economic integration leads gradually
and naturally to political integration,” and the notion that “political integration is a process in itself ”
that does not necessarily follow economic integration.
The first school of thought was that which the
founding fathers of the EU used as a theoretical
base after the failure of the European Community
of Defense, a politically driven entity. As a result of
their steps taken towards economic integration, this
school of thought can now boast the development
of the Euro. But the Euro has not been the only
result. In order to create an internal market for the
European Union, issues like environmental and social standards and consumer protection – all valuebased political issues – have had to be addressed.
Unfortunately, this school of thought has also
run into some failures, such as the European Patent,
an economy-driven idea that has had problems for
purely political reasons, or the Stability Pact, where
a common currency could not eliminate political
problems between Germany and France. These
failures show that economic integration does not
guarantee political solidarity.
The second school of thought views solidarity
as an option rather than as a direct effect of economic integration. In order to create political integration, it is necessary to actively share the same
values. This is visible in areas such as foreign policy
Was kann die „neue“ Europäische Union nach der
Erweiterung um zehn Mitgliedsländer zusammen
halten? Zu dieser Frage
debattierten am 6. und 7.
November 2004 mehr als
60 Teilnehmer der Konferenz „Die Bedingungen
der europäischen Solidarität“ im Wiener Palais
Schwarzenberg. In drei
Sitzungen wurden verschiedene Problematiken
erörtert. Die Veranstaltung schloss mit einer Podiumsdiskussion zum Thema „Die geistige und kulturelle Dimension Europas“.
No. 87
Winter 2005
5
Solidarity in the European Union CONFERENCE
Pascal Lamy
and security issues. In order to agree on these issues,
money and goods are not as important as “sharing
dreams and nightmares,” according to Lamy.
Lamy concluded that only a combination of
the two schools of thought could raise public support for European integration: “You need both the
economic integration because it leads to many of
the results we care about, but it also now needs this
political process which of course is much more difficult because it does not stem from the economic
system we live in.”
The American Perspective
Emil Brix, Erhard Busek
Wanda Rapaczynski, Ira Katznelson
6
Vlado Dimovski
Ralf Fücks
Ulrike Lunacek
No. 87
Winter 2005
The lecture of Ira Katznelson, Professor of Political
Science and History at Columbia University, New
York, introduced the second session on “European
Cohesion from a (North) American Perspective.”
According to the scholar, the US shares various issues with the EU, such as broadly liberal, democratic organizations and values. He described the
US as a country that is remarkably diverse demographically and spatially, and that is characterized
by multiple dimensions of inequality. Questions
about integration, legitimacy, solidarity and stability are issues and challenges that the US and Europe have in common.
There are bases of solidarity, such as a shared
commitment to liberty, a shared commitment to
certain moral values and the conditions of citizenship. Therefore, there are “perpetually choices to be
made, not just about whether to promote a common – say European or American or Western – solidarity but what kind of solidarity to have.” As
Katznelson explained, it is best not to assume that
more solidarity is better, but instead to focus on
finding a beneficial solidarity with a strong base.
Moreover, solidarity should not be assumed to be
good in and of itself, but instead good in terms of
what it can accomplish and in its ability to deal with
human diversity and crisis: “If we cannot deal with
diversity, if solidarity cripples diversity, then it [solidarity] will fail.”
Katznelson moved on to speak particularly
about the situation in the US. He pointed out that,
in the last election, Bush won majorities in only
three states that had not been part of the former
American South, where up until 1954 racial segregation was still mandated by law. In other words,
the US continues, even after 200 years, to experience the effects of the legacy of two social systems.
Finally, Katznelson recommended that we look at
Europe and America “in more subtle and richer relational, not comparative, terms.” He sees more
similarity between the liberal side of the New Deal
and post-war European social democracy than between pre- and post-war democracy in Europe.
A working dinner by invitation of the Austrian
Federal Chancellor, Wolfgang Schüssel, who was
Poul Nyrup Rasmussen
represented by Martin Bartenstein, Austrian Federal
Minister for Economic Affairs and Labour, closed
the day. During the dinner, speeches on the
conference’s prevailing topics were held by Poul
Nyrup Rasmussen, President of the Party of European Socialists; Jan Figel, Commissioner for Education, Training, Culture and Multilingualism; and
Jan Rokita, Chairman of the Polish Parliamentary
Faction of “Citizens Platform.”
Challenges for European Politics
Kurt Biedenkopf, former Minister President of
Saxony, held the third keynote speech, “Challenges
for European Politics,” in which he introduced the
concluding remarks of the IWM Reflection Group on
the Spiritual and Cultural Dimension of Europe (see
newsletter 86). Set up in 2002 on the initiative of
Romano Prodi, the group members – amongst
them Kurt Biedenkopf – have analyzed the conditions of European cohesion since enlargement.
The politician warned against predicting the
future based on the past. He based this on the fact
that since the early 1970s there has been a trend in
Europe that will result in a revolution in the next
ten years: “the aging of Europe.” As a result of the
European population having fewer children, soon
the balance between young and old will be different than it has ever been before. And, as
Biedenkopf put it, “We don’t really know, and we
cannot possibly know from past experience, how
aging societies will act.”
Biedenkopf next moved on to the question of
what holds Europe together: Faced with growing
diversity, what forces can hold the expanded European Union together? What moral concepts, which
traditions, what goals are capable of bringing together the Union’s diverse inhabitants in a democratic structure and so underpin and anchor the
European Constitution?
He believes that this question has arisen as the
result of three events – the disappearance of the
threat from outside with the end of the Cold War;
the enlargement of the EU, increasing diversity;
and the last enlargement, with the EU now comprising 25 countries, which will increase the “centrifugal force emanating from competition among
countries with very different standards of living
and with very different political and economic experiences in the past.”
Biedenkopf stressed the necessity of the new
members having a lot of freedom in order for them
to “untie and stimulate all the political and economic and scientific energies within these countries
to progress to the expectations the old Europe was
signaling to them before they joined.” Also in regards to future policies, he pointed out that the
European market alone is not the source of cohesion in Europe, and that Europe as a political entity
can only function with a common European solidarity as its basis.
But what kind of solidarity? In America, there
is a national solidarity that is not based on social
policy. According to Biedenkopf, “In Europe we
don’t have that kind of national solidarity. Europe
will not be a nation-state.” In fact, the more the
states integrate and transfer power to the European
Union, the more they will rely on their own nations
when there are problems, tensions, or political conflicts within the EU. He believes that it will not be
possible to have a European social policy that
would be equivalent to a national social policy.
In conclusion, Biedenkopf indicated that an
increase in diversity will bring about the need for an
increase in cohesion within Europe. It will be necessary to look at what outside changes will bring Europeans together on the basis of a common culture.
He offered as some examples the areas where Europe will have to work together, such as the redistribution of resources in the world and the Middle
East crisis.
Culture and Spirit in Focus
After the third session, a public panel discussion
and presentation of Transit 26 and 27 was held,
entitled “The Spiritual and Cultural Dimension of
Europe.” Both issues of the journal, which is published by the IWM, contain articles and essays on
different aspects discussed in the framework of the
IWM Reflection Group mentioned above. The
chair, Michael Naumann, Editor-in-Chief of the
German weekly Die Zeit, began the discussion by
pointing out that the European cultural budget is
extremely low.
But Danuta Hübner, Polish Commissioner for
Regional Policy, responded that “culture is not
about money or budgeting.” She chose to focus on
the issue of whether or not culture would be able to
hold Europe together the way other factors have in
the past. Rather than seeing the increasing diversity
and enlargement of the EU as a hindrance to European cohesion, she sees it as a “new potential for the
re-integration, for the revitalization of European
integration.” As Hübner further explained, she prefers Europe to be integrated from within rather
than identifying itself through its differences from
the rest of world.
Claus Offe, Professor of Political Science at
Humboldt University, pointed out that neither
language nor religion could really be seen as unifying factors in Europe – based on the fact that there
are 20 languages and three forms of Christianity,
and because Europe is the most secularized continent. According to the scholar, the members of the
EU have not merged into one territory without
borders, and they have joined only in the interest of
economic advantage and opportunity. In Offe’s
opinion, a European identity is actually “a giant
process of auto-critique, of a critical reflection and
review of its own history.”
The Hungarian Vice President of the EPP-ED
Group, Josef Szajer, commented that, observing
Europe as an “outsider” – a Hungarian citizen – he
now sees Europe as embodying both a cultural and
legal/economic identity. He believes that Europe’s
Christian heritage is at the root of many of its current values, such as human rights and tolerance.
Szajer also commented that language divides Europeans in many ways, especially due to the lack of
reciprocity between “smaller cultures or cultures of
Central Eastern Europe” and larger countries in
Western Europe.
Michael Naumann pointed out that funding
would be an obvious solution to this problem because it would allow smaller nations to have their
works translated into the larger languages. He finally ended the discussion by stating that defining
the EU’s intellectual, cultural and political identity
in opposition to the US is probably one of the worst
things that Europeans can do.
A working luncheon by invitation of the Austrian Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs, Ursula
Plassnik, closed the conference. Veit Sorger, President of the Federation of Austrian Industry,
greeted the participants before Lech Kaczynski,
Mayor of Warsaw,
spoke about the values
of
the
European
Union.
The
conference
was organized in collaboration with Prince
and
Schwarzenberg
generously supported
by the Austrian Federal
Chancellery, the Austrian Ministry for Foreign
Affairs, and the Federation of Austrian Industry.
Participants
Martin Bartenstein
Federal Minister for
Economic Affairs and
Labour, Vienna
Ference Bartha
Chairman, TriGránit
Holding Limited, Budapest
Markus Beyrer
Secretary General,
Federation of Austrian
Industry, Vienna
Kurt Biedenkopf
former Minister President
of Saxony, Dresden
Emil Brix
Head of the Cultural and
Educational Policy Department, Austrian
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Vienna
Erhard Busek
Special Coordinator of
the Stability Pact for
South Eastern Europe;
Chairman, Institut für den
Donauraum und Mitteleuropa, Vienna
Ramiro Cibrian
Head of Cabinet of
Commissioner design.
Vladimir Spidla,
European Commission,
Brussels
Just De Visser
Ambassador of The
Netherlands, Vienna
Vlado Dimovski
Slovenian Minister of
Labour, Family and Social
Affairs, Ljubljana
Caspar Einem
Spokesman for European
Affairs, Austrian Social
Democratic Party, Vienna
Ján Figel
Member of the European
Commission, Brussels
Georg Fischer
Head of Unit (Social
Protection, Pensions and
Health), European
Michael Fleischhacker
Editor-in-Chief, Die Presse,
Vienna
Claus Offe, Michael Naumann, József No.
Szájer,
87
Danuta Hübner
Winter 2005
7
8
Ralf Fücks
Chairman of the Heinrich
Böll Foundation, Berlin
Daniela Graf
Head of the “Grüne
Bildungswerkstatt” of
the Austrian Green
Party, Vienna
Alfred Gusenbauer
Chairman of the Austrian
Social Democratic Party,
Vienna
Friedrich Hoess
Advisor to the Board,
Federation of Austrian
Industry; former
Ambassador to Washington and Bonn, Vienna
Hans-Henning Horstmann
Ambassador of
Germany, Vienna
István Horváth
Ambassador of Hungary,
Vienna
Danuta Hübner
Marek Jedrys
Ambassador of Poland,
Vienna
Rudolf Jindrak
Ambassador of the
Czech Republic, Vienna
Lech Kaczynski
Mayor of Warsaw
Ira Katznelson
Professor of Political
Science and History,
Columbia University, New
York
Júlia Király
Dean and CEO, ITCB
Training und Consulting
Ltd., Budapest
Albrecht Konecny
Secretary of Internatio-
No. 87
nal Affairs, Austrian
Social Democratic Party,
Vienna
János M. Kovács
Permanent Fellow,
Institute for Human
Sciences, Vienna
Pascal Lamy
Commission (External
Trade), Brussels
Paul Lendvai
Editor-in-chief, Europäische Rundschau, Vienna
Peter Lennkh
Member of the Managing
Board, Raiffeisen International Bank-Holding,
Vienna
Agnieszka Liszka
Marketing and
Communications Manager, KPMG, Warsaw
Jaroslav Lobkowicz
Deputy to the Czech
Parliament, Prague
Reinhold Lopatka
Secretary General,
Austrian People’s Party
(ÖVP), Vienna
Michael Löwy
Head of the International
Department, Federation
of Austrian Industry, Vienna
Ulrike Lunacek
Member of Parliament;
Spokesperson on
Foreign Policy of the
Austrian Green Party,
Vienna
Krzysztof Michalski
Rector, Institute for Human Sciences, Vienna;
Professor of Philosophy;
Chair of the Reflection
Group “The Spiritual and
Cultural Dimension of
Europe“
Michael Naumann
Editor-in-Chief, Die Zeit,
Frankfurt
Klaus Nellen
Permanent Fellow,
Institute for Human
Sciences, Vienna
Ewald Nowotny
Professor of Economics,
Vienna; former VicePresident of the European
Investment Bank
Claus Offe
Science, Humboldt
University, Berlin
Andrzej Olechowski
European Deputy
Chairman of the Trilateral
Commission; former
Polish Minister of Foreign
Affairs, Warsaw
Anton Pelinka
Science, University of
Innsbruck
Wanda Rapaczynski
President of the Management Board, Agora
S.A., Warsaw
Poul Nyrup Rasmussen
President of the Party of
European Socialists,
Brussels; former Prime
Minister of Denmark
Hans Rauscher
Columnist, Der Standard,
Vienna
Jan Rokita
Chairman of the
Parliamentary Faction of
“Citizens Platform“ in the
Sejm, Warsaw
Christian Schmidt
CDU/CSU Spokesman for
Defence in the German
Bundestag, Berlin
Aleksander Smolar
Research Fellow at the
Centre National de Recherche Scientifique,
Paris; President of the
Stefan Batory
Foundation, Warsaw
Miroslav Somol
Deputy Minister for
European Affairs,
Ministry for Industry and
Trade, Prague
Veit Sorger
President, Federation of
Austrian Industry, Vienna
Andreas Stadler
Adviser to the Austrian
Federal President in
Scientific and Cultural
Affairs, Vienna
Hannes Swoboda
Vice-Chairman of the
PSE Group in the
European Parliament;
Head of the Delegation
of Austrian Social
Democratic members in
the EP
József Szájer
MEP; Vice-Chairman,
Group of the European
People’s Party (Christian
Democrats) and
European Democrats;
Vice President of Fidesz,
Budapest
Alexander Van der Bellen
Chairman of the
Parliamentary Faction
and Spokesperson of
the Austrian Green
Party, Vienna
Peter Van Lieshout
Member of the
Netherlands Scientific
Council for Government
Policy, The Hague
Alexander Vondra
Director of the Prague
Security Studies Institute
Lord Weidenfeld
Chairman, Weidenfeld &
Nicolson, London
Observers
Marc Fähndrich
Deputy Head of the
Representation of the
European Commission in
Austria, Vienna
Johannes Kopf
Ministry of Economic
Affairs and Labour,
Cabinet of the Minister,
Vienna
Andrzej Kosnikowski
European Commission,
Cabinet of Commissioner
Danuta Hübner, Brussels
Peter Krauth
Chief of Protocol, Federal
Chancellery, Vienna
Jana Lovsin
Head of International
Relations and European
Affairs Department,
Ministry of Labour, Family
and Social Affairs,
Ljubljana
Janja Romih
Head of Cabinet, Ministry
of Labour, Family and
Social Affairs, Ljubljana
Winter 2005
Andrzej Olechowski, Caspar Einem, Hans-Henning Horstmann, Hans Swoboda, Ewald Nowotny
Elisabeth Niesielska (translator), Lech Kaczynski, Lord Weidenfeld, Kurt Biedenkopf,
Aleksander Smolar
With Your Support, We Can Make a Change
„I think that the IWM remains a rare
place where neither geopolitical nor
disciplinary boundaries matter too
much.“
Slavica Jakelic was a
Junior Visiting Fellow at
the IWM in the academic
year 2001/2002. She is
now Associate Director
and Lecturer at the
Center on Religion and
Democracy of the University of Virginia.
As a Junior Fellow at the IWM I very much enjoyed
the encounters among Western and Eastern European scholars and the representatives of the North
American academia. I think that the IWM remains
a rare place where neither geopolitical nor disciplinary boundaries matter too much.
But what I particularly remember from my
IWM fellowship tenure is the way in which the
institute shaped the context and provided the resources for a conversation between junior and senior scholars. My work greatly benefited from the
questions raised by some of the leading scholars in
my field. They challenged my premises and sharpened my analysis, daring me to define my project
on religion and collective identity in a way in which
I probably would not have done otherwise.
Slavica Jakelic
“The IWM has created an exceptional,
perhaps a unique synthesis. It is at
once an institute for advanced study, a
think tank, a forum for informed
Each year approximately 20 Junior Visiting Fellows
from East Central Europe, Western Europe, and
the United States are awarded scholarships to pursue their studies at the IWM – as members of the
institute’s international and multidisciplinary
scholarly community. Join the circle of IWM friends
– your contribution helps to support and extend
these opportunities for young scholars such as
Slavica Jakelic.
Jedes Jahr bietet das IWM etwa 20 europäischen
und amerikanischen Nachwuchswissenschaftlern
die Möglichkeit, während eines sechsmonatigen
Studienaufenthaltes ein Forschungsprojekt zu verfolgen – als Mitglieder der internationalen und
multidisziplinären Gelehrtengemeinschaft am
IWM. Werden auch Sie ein IWM friend – Ihr Beitrag
hilft mit, diese Stipendienprogramme für junge
Wissenschaftler wie Slavica Jakelic weiterzuführen
und auszubauen.
All donations for IWM
friends are greatly appreciated.
Donations can be transferred to the following
account:
The IWM is registered as
a non-profit organization
according to Austrian
law. Financial contributions are tax deductible.
Banking account:
Erste Österreichische
Sparkasse
Bank code: 20111
Account number:
28056986103
For bank transfers from
abroad:
IBAN:
AT50 2011 1280 5698 6103
BIC: GIBAATWW
discussion – and a bridge between
the ‘old’ and the ‘new’ Europe.”
Lord Dahrendorf has
been a close friend and
supporter of the IWM for
many years.
Lord Dahrendorf
www.iwm.at/friends
No. 87
Winter 2005
9
RESEARCH PROJECT
Death – Religion – Ritual, the second workshop of the project The Meaning of Death in Society
Today, took place on December 10-11, 2004, at the IWM. The participants delved into the changes
that death, burial, and mourning have gone through as a result of modernity.
Places of the Dead in Modernity
Gemeinsam mit der BerlinBrandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Berliner Akademie der Künste hat das
IWM 2004 ein Forschungsprojekt zur Bedeutung
des Todes in der Gesellschaft heute gestartet.
Der zweite workshop am
10. und 11. Dezember in
Wien stand unter dem
Thema Tod – Religion –
Ritual.
10
Die wissenschaftliche
Leitung wird vom IWM
und der Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften gleichermaßen wahrgenommen. Die Federführung
über Planung und Durchführung von Veranstaltungen im Bereich Kunstund Kulturwissenschaften liegt bei der Berliner
Akademie der Künste.
Unterstützt wird das Projekt von der Fritz Thyssen
Stiftung.
HOW AND WHY have the spaces where the dead are
laid to rest changed over time? Thomas Laqueur attempted to answer these questions in his public lecture.
The relationship between the dead and the living has changed immensely over the past 200 years
– death has, in many ways, become more private
and secularized. But at the same time it has taken on
a marked pluralism which has had a large effect on
the places we bury the dead.
Burial in cemeteries began in the 18th century,
but its popularity is largely a result of public health
awareness in the 19th century. The dead body
came to be described medically and scientifically as
simply a decaying object, a source of anxiety and
disgust. According to Laqueur, the metaphysical aspects of death have virtually disappeared in the face
of the modern pluralism of death.
Death in the Hereafter
In his introductory statement to the first session of
the colloquium, “How Religion and Theology
Help Us to Prepare for Death,” Christoph
Markschies showed that Christianity has not always described death as the beginning of a new and
better life.
The Old Testament includes passages where
death is simply described as the end of life - rather
than looking forward to an afterlife, people should
enjoy life to the fullest. Throughout history, there
have been different views within Christianity on
the existence of an afterlife.
Religion and theology play many roles in the
preparation for death. How people use religion and
theology in their own personal preparation for
death is highly dependent on the culture in which
they live.
Death in the Here and Now
Introducing the second session on “The Hopelessness of Mourning a ‘Preventable’ Death,” Daniel
Callahan focused his lecture on death and mourning in the current age of medical technology and
progress.
For thousands of years humans accepted death
as a natural event and did not focus their attention
on trying to prevent it. In modern countries, this
has been replaced by a fight against death at all
costs. We are now in a new phase of modernity
where medical research rejects the inevitability of
death. Determined medical researchers see death as
a problem that, with the proper research and technology, could be prevented altogether.
No. 87
Winter 2005
Mourning has been greatly affected by this attitude: it is difficult to come to terms with – following above – a death that could have been prevented. It seems much better emotionally for humans to accept death as a natural part of life, the
way it has been accepted for centuries.
Participants
Ulrike Brunotte
Senior Assistant, Institute of Cultural Studies,
Humboldt University,
Berlin
Daniel Callahan
Philosophy, Director of
International Programs,
The Hastings Center,
New York
Christa Frateantonio
Religious Studies,
University of Erfurt
Alois Hahn
Professor of Sociology,
University of Trier
Evelyn Hansen
Akademie der Künste
(AdK), Berlin
Hanfried Helmchen
Professor em. of
Psychiatry, Free
University, Berlin;
Member, BBAW
Cornelia Klinger
Permanent Fellow, Institute for Human
Sciences, Vienna; apl.
Professor in Philosophy,
University of Tübingen
Wolf-Hagen Krauth
Head of Department for
Interdisciplinary
Working Groups, BerlinBrandenburgische
Akademie der Wissenschaften (BBAW)
Gary Laderman
Associate Professor,
Department of Religion,
Emory University, Atlanta
Thomas W. Laqueur
Professor of History,
University of California,
Berkeley
Christoph Markschies
Professor of Church
History, Humboldt
University, Berlin;
Member, BBAW
Krzysztof Michalski
Professor of Philosophy,
Boston University and
University of Warsaw;
Rector, Institute for Human Sciences, Vienna
Ferdinand Muehlbacher
Professor of Surgery,
University Hospital of
Surgery, Vienna
Istvan Rev
Professor of History and
Political Science, Central
European University,
Budapest; Director,
Open Society Archives,
Budapest
Hans-Ludwig Schreiber
Professor of Criminal
Law and Theory of Law,
University of Göttingen
Angelo Volandes
M.D., Post-doctoral
Researcher (Ethics),
Harvard University
P r o c e d u r e
4
The objective of the fellowships is to support research that:
_ contributes to the present understanding of death and dying, considering historical, cultural, religious, and societal
aspects
_ analyzes the implications for society as
well as society’s coping with death
_ creates awareness for ethical, legal,
political and scientific issues related to
death and dying.
Transdisciplinary and comparative approaches looking at a specific question (or
set of questions) from a broader angle will
be given preference.
A p p l i c a t i o n
O b j e c t i v e
1
The fellowships shall enable doctoral, postdoctoral or senior scholars to concentrate
on their research while working in residence at the Institute for Human Sciences
(IWM) in Vienna for three to six months
during the academic year 2005/06. The
Research Fellows will receive a stipend to
compensate for a loss of income and to
cover travel, accommodation and other living expenses. The amount of the stipend
will be determined with prospective fellows
according to the “no gain, no loss” principle based on the current income of the
recipient. Furthermore, fellows will be provided with an office and personal computer, and will have access to e-mail,
Internet, in-house research facilities and
other relevant sources in Vienna. During
their stay fellows will take part in the scholarly community and activities of the IWM.
E l i g i b i l i t y
R e q u i r e m e n t s
3
Candidates for the fellowships must:
_ be pursuing a Ph.D. degree in the humanities or social sciences, or
_ be engaged in post-doctoral research
at an academic institution, or
_ hold a senior academic position
with a research focus related to the objective of this program.
In addition to pursuing their own research
project, prospective fellows will be asked
to provide editorial assistance during their
Research Fellowship in the publication of a
collection of essays, which will result from
the project on “The Meaning of Death in
Society Today.” Perfect command of German and English is a prerequisite.
Deadline for application is
May 15, 2005
Please send your application to:
Institut für die Wissenschaften vom
Menschen
Fellowship Coordinator
Spittelauer Lände 3
1090 Wien
AUSTRIA
Research Fellowships
The Meaning of Death
in Society Today 2005/06
The Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften,
the Akademie der Künste, Berlin, and the Institut für die
Wissenschaften vom Menschen (IWM), Vienna, have
launched a project in 2003 on “The Meaning of Death
in Society Today” with the support of the Fritz Thyssen
Stiftung. It is based on the presumption that European/
Western modernity is characterized by a break with tradition in many aspects, including its relation to death.
The secularization of modern society has ended the role
of religion as the leading normative discourse covering
all levels and aspects of society. It has led to the
privatization of all religious questions, including the central dilemma of giving meaning to life and death. In a
series of four workshops, this project sets out to discuss
the specific occidental and epochal understanding of
death – not least with regard to the possible ‘end of
modernity,’ which might eventually lead to a change in
our relation to death again.
The project aims at the scientific examination of and
scholarly reflection on death with regard to the specific
and presently relevant issues related to the subject, their
genesis as well as possible scenarios for their development in the future. For a more detailed outline of the
project’s theme and main questions, see www.iwm.at/fdeath.htm.
11
or submit by e-mail to:
[email protected]
Subject header:
Fellowships on “The Meaning of Death”
5
S e l e c t i o n
C o n d i t i o n s
2
The application consists of the following
materials:
1. the application form (please download
from www.iwm.at/f-death.htm)
2. a concise research proposal (max. 4
pages) in English or German, including:
_ the scientific problem(s) addressed
_ a critical consideration of current relevant research and literature
_ research goals and expected results
_ the planned work and time schedule (if
the proposal is part of a larger, ongoing project, please indicate which part
you intend to complete during the fellowship)
3. a Curriculum Vitae
4. Ph.D. and Post-doctoral candidates are
asked to provide two letters of reference
by senior faculty familiar with their work.
Senior scholars are asked to substantiate their expertise in the field with their
publication record.
A jury of experts comprised of a representative nominated by each of the three
cooperation partners will meet in June 2005
to evaluate the applications and select the
finalists.
To complement this project, the Berlin-Brandenburgische
Akademie der Wissenschaften, the Akademie der Künste,
Berlin, and the Institut für die Wissenschaften vom Menschen
jointly invite scholars in the humanities and social sciences to submit proposals for Research Fellowships at
the IWM, Vienna.
Applicants will be notified of the jury
decision in July 2005. It is not required for
the jury to publicly justify its decisions.
FOR
Institut für die
Wissenschaften
vom Menschen
T I OcieNncSes
A
C
I
L
A P P r Human S
fo
stitute
N E
hen In
c
I
s
n
L
e
D
vom M
D E A 5, 2005
haften
1
issensc
W
May
ie
d
für
Institut
CALL
No. 87
Winter 2005
FORSCHUNGSPROJEKT
Am Montag, den 15. November 2004, fand am IWM ein Workshop der Arbeitsgruppe des FWFgeförderten Forschungsprojekts „Projekt Europa. Die politische Philosophie Jan Patockas“ statt.
Unter dem Titel „Phänomenologie und Politik“ wurden dabei Analysen zu Patockas Werk und
weiterführende Ansätze einer „Phänomenologie des Politischen“ diskutiert.
Phänomenologie und Politik
12
On November 15, 2004, the
first workshop of the recently launched research-project „Project
Europe. The Political Philosophy of Jan Patocka“
(for more information
please visit www.iwm.at/
r-patpp.htm) was held at
the IWM. The main goal of
this workshop was to
present and discuss the
ongoing research and to
open perspectives for future work which should
aim at elaborating a phenomenological account
of the political. Papers
presented during this
workshop dealt with
problems related to
Patocka‘s work as well as
with other positions which
share the same interest in
a political ethos.
No. 87
Winter 2005
DER ERSTE WORKSHOP der Arbeitsgruppe des im
Jahr 2004 neu begonnenen Forschungsprojekts
„Projekt Europa. Die politische Philosophie Jan
Patockas“ war dem Themenkreis „Phänomenologie
und Politik“ gewidmet. Diskutiert wurden aktuelle
Arbeiten von Projektmitarbeitern sowie Ansätze zu
einer „Phänomenologie des Politischen“, die neben
Patocka auch eine Reihe anderer phänomenologischer Ansätze berücksichtigte.
Ludger Hagedorn gab in seinem Vortrag einen
Überblick über die im letzten Forschungsprojekt
aufgearbeiteten ideengeschichtlichen Forschungen
Patockas, die er als einen möglichen Leitfaden für
dessen spätere Beschäftigung mit dem Politischen
interpretierte. Im Anschluss daran stellte Ana
Santos (Paris/Prag) ihre systematisch zusammenfassende Lesart von Patockas Schriften zur Kunst vor,
die hinsichtlich der Überlegungen zur Rolle des
Opfers auch auf ein politisches Moment verweisen.
Peter Trawny (Wuppertal) widmete sich Patockas
kontrovers diskutiertem Begriff des Krieges, den er
insbesondere mit Überlegungen Heideggers zu
diesem Thema konfrontierte. Ivan Chvatik
beschloss die Reihe der Referate, die sich explizit
mit Patockas Philosophie befassten; er präsentierte
eine eingehende Lektüre vor allem der späten
Schriften Patockas, in denen eine „Phänomenologie
des Sinnes menschlichen Lebens“ in Aussicht gestellt wird.
Die anschließenden Vorträge öffneten das
Thema dann auch auf die Diskussion anderer
phänomenologischer Positionen, die mit Patockas
Denken das Interesse an der grundsätzlichen Klärung eines Ethos des Politischen teilen. Giovanni
Leghissa untersuchte in dieser Hinsicht Derridas
„dekonstruktives“ Vorgehen auf dessen mögliche
ethisch-politische Implikationen. Sandra Lehmann
stellte eine originäre Lektüre von E.T.A.
Hoffmanns „Elixieren des Teufels“ vor, wobei hier
nicht nur die phänomenologische Perspektive den
philosophischen Hintergrund bildete, sondern
auch die Auseinandersetzung mit Schellings
„Freiheitsschrift“. Michael Staudigls Vortrag über
Alfred Schütz und dessen sozialphänomenologische Analyse rassistischer Praktiken im politisch
definierten Raum der Lebenswelt beschloss den
Workshop. Eine größere Konferenz zum Thema
„Phänomenologie und Politik“ soll im Winter
2005 folgen.
Michael Staudigl, APART-Stipendiat der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Visiting Fellow
IWM, Mitglied der Arbeitsgruppe des Forschungsprojekts „Projekt Europa. Die politische Philosophie Jan
Patockas“ und Organisator des Workshops.
Information: http://www.iwm.at/r-janpat.htm
Programm
Ludger Hagedorn
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter IWM, Wien
Ideengeschichte Europas in den frühen Werken Jan
Patockas
Ana Santos
Paris, Prag
Kunst, Philosophie und Opfer. Welche Wahrheit,
welches Scheitern?
Peter Trawny
Universität Wuppertal
Der Krieg bei Heidegger und Patocka
Ivan Chvatik
Direktor Patocka-Archiv, Prag; Zentrum für
phänomenologische Forschung Prag
Prolegomena zu einer Phänomenologie des Sinnes
menschlichen Lebens in den späten Essays Jan
Patockas
Giovanni Leghissa
Universität Triest
Derridas Grenzen
Sandra Lehmann
Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin IWM, Wien
Die Ambiguität des Standpunkts
Michael Staudigl
APART-Stipendiat der Österreichischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften, Visiting Fellow IWM
Ungleichheit, Rassismus, Gewalt. Perspektiven und
Grenzen von Schütz‘ Analyse der Sozialwelt
CONFERENCE
The IWM’s Junior Visiting Fellows meet on a regular basis at the JVF seminar to discuss their
ongoing projects. The results of their research are then presented at the Junior Visiting Fellows’
Conference at the end of their stay. Last semester’s conference took place on December 9.
Junior Visiting Fellows’ Conference
Program
Chair:
Title:
Speaker:
IWM Project:
Respondent:
Panel 1:
Mathias Thaler
Chair:
Otto Mühl and the Aesthetics of Seduction
Thomas Nesbit
Ph.D. candidate in Religion and Literature, Boston
University
Gender and Violence in “Wiener Aktionismus“
(Viennese Actionism)
Cornelia Klinger
Title:
Speaker:
IWM Project:
Title:
Speaker:
IWM Project:
Respondent:
Spinoza and the Continuum of Activity
Justin Steinberg
Ph.D. candidate in Philosophy, Boston University
The Concept of Freedom in Spinoza’s Political
Writings
Michael Staudigl
Respondent:
Title:
Speaker:
Chair:
Title:
Speaker:
IWM Project:
Respondent:
Title:
Speaker:
IWM Project:
Panel 2:
Christoph Bärenreuter
Positive Progress or the Crisis of Enlightment
Uner Daglier
Ph.D. candidate in Political Science, Boston College
Mill’s Argument for Free Expression
Ludger Hagedorn
Just Numbers? Theoretical and Practical
Considerations for the Measurement of Poverty
in Rich Societies
Matthias Till
Doktorand (Soziologie, Technische Universität
Wien); DOC-Stipendiat der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
Stations of Being Poor in New Europe – Social
Change and Persistence of Precarious
Living Conditions in
Budapest, Dublin
and Vienna
IWM Project:
Respondent:
Chair:
Title:
Speaker:
IWM Project:
Respondent:
Title:
Speaker:
Mathias Thaler, Uner Daglier
IWM Project:
Respondent:
Thomas Nesbit, Justin Steinberg
Panel 3:
Michael Staudigl
Clashing Claims, from Baghdad to Belgrade:
Humanitarian Intervention between Law, Morals
and Politics
Mathias Thaler
Doktorand (Philosophie, Politikwissenschaft, Universität Wien); DOC-Stipendiat der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
Gründen, Fundieren, Rechtfertigen. Eine Archäologie moralischer Argumente im Feld des Politischen
Franz M. Wimmer
Women – the Paradigmatic Victims in Warsituations? Gender, Victimization and War in the
Symbolical Order
Maria Katharina Moser
Doktorandin (Institut für Fundamentaltheologie, Katholisch-Theologische Fakultät, Universität Wien);
DOC-Stipendiatin der Österreichischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften
Opfer – eine politische und theologische Kategorie
zwischen Affirmation und Ablehnung. Zur feministisch-ethischen Reformulierung eines Begriffs
Franz M. Wimmer
13
Panel 4:
What remains for Nationalism Studies?
Michal Luczewski
Ph.D. candidate in Sociology, Warsaw University;
Chairman of the Polish Invisible College; Jozef
Tischner Junior Visiting Fellow
National Experience. Practice and Theory of the
Nation in Everyday Life
Marci Shore
Identity, Responsiveness and Empty Signifiers:
Some Remarks on the Theorization of the
European Public Sphere
Doktorand (Politikwissenschaften, Universität
Wien); DOC-Stipendiat der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
Researching the European Public Sphere. Theory
of democracy and empirical evidence.
Johannes Pollak
No. 87
Michal Luczewski
Winter 2005
IHS BOSTON
The activities of the Institute for Human Sciences at Boston University – founded in 2001 – mainly
focus on the relationship between Europe and the United States. The following overview of IHS
Boston events gives an impression of the institute’s work.
The US and Europe: Partnership or Competition?
The US and Europe: Partnership or Competition?
Alain Juppé
14
James Hoge, David Phillips
Michael Mertes, Thérèse Delpech
On November 16, 2004, the Institute for Human
Sciences at Boston University, in cooperation with
the Duitsland Instituut at the University of
Amsterdam, convened its second international conference on “The US and Europe: Partnership or
Competition.” Introductory remarks were given by
John Silber, President Emeritus of Boston University, University Professor and Professor of International Relations, who expressed his hope that the
conference might mark the beginning of a “renewed and reinvigorated transatlantic partnership.”
The first session focused on the diverse conflicts in the region stretching from the Maghreb
countries to Iran, and on American and European
responses. The key note speech was given by former
French Prime Minister Alain Juppé. The panel was
chaired by James Hoge, Editor-in-Chief of Foreign
Affairs and a member of the Institute’s Board of
Directors. Rachel Bronson, Director of Middle East
and Gulf Studies; David Phillips, Senior Fellow and
Deputy Director of the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations; Therese
Delpech, Director of Strategic Affairs at the Atomic
Energy Commission in Paris; and Michael Mertes,
former policy advisor to Helmut Kohl, joined
Prime Minister Juppé for the discussion.
The second session focused on the changing
forms, institutions, and structures which, as IHS
board member and chair of the session’s panel discussion, Aleksander Smolar, put it, are the foundations of trust. Smolar is the Senior Research Fellow
at the CNRS in Paris and President of the Stefan
Batory Foundation in Warsaw. The key note speech
was given by Wolfgang Ischinger, Ambassador of the
Federal Republic of Germany to the United States.
Members of the panel included Maarten Brands,
Professor of History at the University of Amsterdam; Charles Kupchan, Professor of International
Relations at Georgetown University and Director
of Europe Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations; and Steven Walt, Belfer Professor of International Relations at Harvard’s Kennedy School of
Government.
Wolfgang Ischinger
A “Courageous Policy of Dialogue and Cooperation”
In his key note address, Prime Minister Juppé reiterated the importance of peace and stability in the
Middle East to both Europe and the US, despite
their differences over the means to achieve it. He
emphasized the multitude of geographic and hisNo. 87
Winter 2005
Charles Kupchan, Aleksander Smolar
torical ties between Europe and the Middle East,
and called for a “courageous policy of dialogue and
cooperation” with the US moving forward.
Juppé outlined his main concerns: the unresolved situation in Iraq, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the current uncertainty in Iran and the growing phenomenon of Islamic terrorism. He expressed
hope that the dialogue with Iran would succeed,
but said he felt the goal of a Middle East free of
weapons of mass destruction to be a utopian one.
There is, “a genuine aspiration of people in those
countries for democracy, human development,
freedom and social justice. We must, refrain from
attempting to impose our model from outside, risking offending the pride and dignity of the people
concerned.”
Finally, Juppé addressed the question of Turkish membership in the EU. Such enlargement
“would fundamentally change the European
project of a political entity sharing the will of carrying out our own foreign policy and building our
own security force in the framework of friendship
and frank partnership with the United States.”
US and European Policy: Complementary or
Contradictory?
Before introducing the panellists, Hoge underscored the urgency of the “partnership or competition” debate in the Middle East, stating that how
we come out will have deep and lasting effects on
the transatlantic relationship. Bronson agreed, attributing the tensions in the transatlantic relationship to the changed international environment in
the wake of 9/11, and blaming the failure of US
policy in the Middle East on the Bush administration’s mistaken belief that, given sufficient US
resolve, other countries would come along in the
end. She argued that, while the US and Europe
perceived the threat of terrorism differently, their
agendas were complementary and not at odds.
Delpech addressed Europe’s shortcomings, in
particular the “narrowest vision of its strategic environment in its history.” Particularly alarming to
Delpech is that Asia is “absent from the European
radar.” As Europe enlarges its territory, it should
enlarge its strategic vision, accepting a more political role.
Whereas Bronson offered an explanation for a
Bush policy gone awry, her colleague Phillips was
openly critical. Echoing Juppé, he stressed the need
for a policy that addresses the injustices and inequities that give rise to terrorism. He disagreed with the
former prime minister on the question of Turkish
IHS Boston University ACTIVITIES
membership in the EU, however, arguing that a
rejection of Turkey would compromise European
security, “shifting the frontline of terrorism from
Turkey’s eastern border closer to the heart of Europe.”
Mertes agreed with Phillips that Europe cannot afford to define itself against Islam, given its
growing Islamic population. The answer to the
Turkish question depends on what sort of Europe
one has in mind: a “United States of Europe” or a
looser confederation or free trade zone? Mertes
stressed the need for the US and Europe to develop
and coordinate a common strategy for promoting
democracy in the Middle East.
Walt noted that the whole idea of a transatlantic community was a historical accident whose demise should not shock us. He attributes the breakdown in the relationship to structural changes and
shifting power relations. Walt did not agree that
institutions could salvage the transatlantic relationship. As he put it, institutions allow states to reach
shared interests and common goals more effectively; they are less useful in resolving differences.
He suggested that, rather than trying to recreate a
partnership, we might lower our expectations, focusing on areas where we agree and where we can
cooperate successfully, intelligence-sharing being
only one example.
The Breakdown of Trust
Opening the second part of the conference, Ambassador Ischinger traced the turning points in the
transatlantic relationship to the key dates of 11/9/
89 and 9/11/01. He expressed hope that the US
and Europe might act in tandem in the future. He
stated that Germany shares the US objective of a
stable and peaceful Iraq. The real problem in the
transatlantic relationship today, according to Ischinger,
is one of trust. He expressed hope that Europe’s
diplomatic negotiations with Iran would succeed,
leading the US to review its position.
“Do international alliances still matter?” was
the question taken up in the discussion which followed. Smolar questioned whether the breakdown
in trust was a result of the weakening of the institutions established to safeguard it. There is, at least in
Europe, a feeling of “rupture.” He asked whether
this was, in fact, as Bronson suggested, a normal
redistribution of roles and powers in the new situation created by 9/11.
Brands agreed with Ischinger that the events of
11/9 and 9/11 have changed the world completely, but added that it is foolish to think that
post-WWII alliances could be rebuilt as they were,
noting Europe’s growing insignificance in US foreign policy. For his part, he cannot imagine European integration succeeding without the US. Cooperation is possible, Brands suggested, but a socalled equal partnership between the US and Europe is an illusory goal.
Kupchan argued that the re-election of George
Bush marked the triumph of an “assertive nationalism” over liberal internationalism and an end to the
transatlantic alliance. He expressed hope for a renewed partnership between the United States and
a united Europe. Taking issue with Brands, he said
he thought the EU could indeed emerge as a world
power, citing the weakness of the United States in
the years following the civil war. He added, however, that it is vital for European politicians to resist
anti-Americanism rather than capitalizing on it to
win elections if Europe is to emerge as a geopolitical
power.
A Celebration of Jacek Kuron’s Life
On December 5, 2004, the Institute for Human
Sciences, in cooperation with the American Council on Learned Societies and the journal East European Politics and Societies, organized a panel to commemorate the Polish opposition leader Jacek
Kuron, who died on June 17, entitled “Jacek
Kuron’s Legacy: The Last Dissident.” The panel,
moderated by Irena Grudzinska Gross, discussed the
relationship between Kuron’s politics and social activism. Participants included Padraic Kenney, Professor of History at the University of Colorado;
David Ost, Professor of Political Science at Hobart
and William Smith Colleges; Joanna Regulska, Professor and Chair of Women’s and Gender Studies at
Rutgers University; Jacques Rupnik, Professor of
Political Science at CERI and at the Institut
d’Etudes Politiques in Paris and Professor of History
at the Sorbonne; and Andrzej Tymowski, Director of
International Programs at the American Council on
Learned Societies. The evening was less a presentation of the facts of Kuron’s life than a celebration of
his extraordinary character, in Gross’s words, “his
political inventiveness, his courage, and his indomitable energy.” Emerging from the discussion were
several themes – compassion, honor, justice –
which resonated throughout Kuron’s life and, as
Kenney brought to light, were evidenced even in
Kuron’s childhood reading. Kuron’s was not a life
without contradictions, but they were wrought of
his unwavering commitments to social justice and
citizens’ self-organization.
Das Institute for Human
Sciences at Boston University wurde im Jahr 2001
gegründet, um den Austausch zwischen europäischen und US-amerikanischen Wissenschaftlern,
IHS Board of Directors
Timothy Garton Ash
Director, Center for European Studies, St. Antony’s
College, Oxford
Irena Grudzinska Gross
Professor of Modern
Foreign Languages and
Literatures, Boston University (Executive Director)
James Hoge
Editor-in-Chief, Foreign
Affairs
Ira Katznelson
Ruggles Professor of Political Science and History,
Columbia University
Michael Mertes
Partner at “dimap consult,“ a commercial think
tank based in Bonn and
Berlin
Krzysztof Michalski
Professor of Philosophy,
Boston and Warsaw Universities; Rector, IWM,
Vienna (Chair)
Pierre Rosanvallon
Director of Studies, Centre
de Recherches Politiques
Raymond Aron, EHESS,
Paris; Professor of Modern and Contemporary
Politics, Collège de France
Lilia Shevtsova
Senior Associate, Carnegie Moscow Center
Aleksander Smolar
Senior Research Fellow at
the CNRS, Paris; President,
Stefan Batory Foundation,
Warsaw
Fareed Zakaria
Editor-in-Chief, Newsweek International
Intellektuellen und Politikern zu fördern. Es ist regelmäßig mit Berichten
über Konferenzen, Vorträge und andere Veranstaltungen im Newsletter
des IWM vertreten.
No. 87
Winter 2005
15
TUESDAY LECTURES
Every Tuesday evening the
IWM hosts a speaker, often a
current fellow or guest, who
Tuesday Lectures
holds a public lecture related
to one of the Institute’s projects
or research fields. An e-mail
information service on
upcoming events is available at
www.iwm.at.
Jeden Dienstag ist die Bibliothek des IWM
Schauplatz eines öffentlichen Vortrags, gefolgt
von einer informellen Diskussion. Fellows und
Gäste des Instituts sowie internationale Wissenschaftler und Intellektuelle werden eingeladen, ihre aktuellen Forschungsergebnisse zu
präsentieren. Einen E-Mail-Informationsservice zu bevorstehenden Veranstaltungen
bietet die Website des IWM, www.iwm.at.
16
Ulrike Lunacek, Anne Phillips
4. NOVEMBER
9. NOVEMBER
Anne Phillips
Reihe: Die Rolle des Staates
Gender Equality, Cultural
Diversity, and the
Interventionist State
Tomas Halik
Europe’s Unknown God
WHAT HAPPENS when recognising cultural
diversity threatens to conflict with protecting women’s equality? When those in
an ethno-cultural minority call on society
to recognise and accommodate minority
practices and traditions, they sometimes
invoke highly contested versions of these
practices and traditions, and may even defend ones that are particularly harmful to
women. Meanwhile, when those in an
ethno-cultural majority call on public authorities to protect women from practices
such as veiling or forced marriage or socalled “honour killings”, they may invoke
the language of gender equality in ways
that encourage cultural stereotyping, or
even promote hostility towards minority
ethnic groups. What, in this context, is appropriate
for
governments to
do?
Drawing
mainly on examples from the
UK,
Anne
Phillips’ lecture
explored the alternative strategies associated
with regulation,
exit and dialogue.
Anne Phillips is Director of the Gender Institute,
London School of Economics.
Kommentatorin: Birgid Weinzinger
Abgeordnete zum Nationalrat und Frauensprecherin der Grünen
In Zusammenarbeit mit der
Grünen Bildungswerkstatt.
No. 87
Winter 2005
THE EXPERIENCE OF Communism’s militant
atheism and the abuse of religion by radical Islamists should make Europeans rethink the relationship between secularism
and faith – two paths which have coexisted for so long in this spiritual space. In a
culture where the world was full of gods,
the apostle Paul found an “altar to the unknown god.” Perhaps in this secularised
age we must again seek islands of the sacred, as Tomas Halik argued in his lecture,
so that this altar might once more be a
starting point for an intelligible interpretation of the same gospel. Christianity expresses the ambivalent and paradoxical
nature of God and therefore must be
preached on the thin borderline between
religion and atheism.
Tomas Halik is Professor of Sociology,
Charles University, Prague.
16. NOVEMBER
Sabine Berghahn
Staat und Privatheit: Warum
der Staat so an der Ehe hängt
DIE EHE als verfassungsrechtlich privilegierte Institution hat in konservativen „Wohlfahrtsstaatsregimen“ wie Deutschland und Österreich einen hohen Rang. Sie
wird daher gerne bei politischen Kontroversen um
sozial-, steuer- und familienpolitische Veränderungen und um die Verbesserung
der Rechtssituation von gleichgeschlechtlichen und „eheähnlichen“ Paaren als
Reformbremse verwendet. Auf diese Weise erweist sich die Institution Ehe tendenziell auch als Gleichstellungshindernis im
Geschlechterverhältnis. Sabine Berghahn
stellte in ihrem Vortrag die Frage nach den
Gründen und Motiven: Worin besteht
das Interesse des Staates an der Institution
Ehe?
TUESDAY LECTURES
Sabine Berghahn ist Professorin für Politikund Sozialwissenschaften, Freie Universität
Berlin.
Michel Wieviorka est Directeur d’études à
l’EHESS et directeur du CADIS, Paris.
In Zusammenarbeit
mit dem
7. DEZEMBER
23. NOVEMBER
Timothy Snyder
Brotherlands: A Proposal for a
Family History of the East
European Nation
WHILE MOST SCHOLARS agree that the nation is a political idea, few have drawn the
important conclusion that it must also be a
political choice. Because most political history is written within the national framework, the element of freedom tends to disappear. At certain historical moments,
however, people who became national
leaders were indeed free to choose their
own nationality. To recreate their situation, and to revise theories of nationalism,
Timothy Snyder’s lecture followed the biography of European families in which
siblings or close relatives chose different
nationalities, and became important in rival national movements.
Timothy Snyder is Associate Professor of
History, Yale University and currently IWM
Visiting Fellow.
30. NOVEMBER
Michel Wieviorka
Violence: une nouvelle
approche
LES APPROCHES CLASSIQUES de la violence
circulent généralement autour de trois
axes: ou bien la violence répond a une
crise, des frustrations, des dysfonctionnements; ou bien elle relève du calcul et de la
stratégie; ou bien encore elle correspond à
l’état d’une culture, voire a une personnalité. Il n’y a pas a rejeter entièrement ces
raisonnements. Mais si l’on centre l’analyse sur les processus de perte et de surcharge de sens qui caracterisent le sujet violent, si l’on s’interesse à la cruauté, si l’on
fait l’hypothèse que la violence peut correspondre à une réaction de survie sans
agressivité, alors la réflexion peut prendre
un tout autre tour.
Gabriele Wilde
Europäische Verfassung und
Bürgerschaftspolitik –
Herausforderungen und
Perspektiven politischer
Integration
DIE KONSTITUTIONALISIERUNG der EU
weckt Hoffnungen für eine Demokratisierung europäischer Strukturen ebenso wie
für die Herausbildung einer europäischen
Bürgerschaft. Gabriele Wildes Vortrag
fragte nach den Möglichkeiten einer nicht
nur rechtlichen, sondern auch politischen
Integration europäischer Bürgerinnen
und Bürger im Kontext europäischer
Verfassungspolitik. Reflektiert wurden
besonders Probleme, die sich aufgrund
der Pluralität europäischer Bürgergesellschaften ergeben. Die Politikwissenschaftlerin verdeutlichte dies unter anderem am Beispiel der Geschlechterdifferenz. Ihre These: Die mit der europäischen Verfassung intendierten Ziele können nur dann erreicht werden, wenn die
verfassungsrechtlichen Normen und
Grundsätze die Bedingungen bürgergesellschaftlicher Differenz und Heterogenität berücksichtigen.
Gabriele Wilde ist wissenschaftliche
Mitarbeiterin im Fach Politikwissenschaft,
Bergische Universität, Wuppertal.
14. DEZEMBER
Hans-Ludwig Schreiber
Wann beginnt menschliches
Leben? Die neue biorechtliche
und bioethische Diskussion um
den Menschen
MIT DER ENTWICKLUNG von Technologien
zur Gewebe- und Organgewinnung aus
Embryonen hat eine breite, internationale
Diskussion über den Beginn menschli-
chen Lebens und die
Verwendung von Embryonen für Forschung
und Therapie begonnen. Auch Möglichkeiten genetischer Eingriffe
in den Embryo vor der
Geburt und in die
Keimbahn zur Bekämpfung bisher nicht heilbarer Erbkrankheiten werden diskutiert. Hans-Ludwig Schreibers
Vortrag beleuchtete die rechtliche Dimension der dabei zu diskutierenden Fragen:
Wann beginnt der Mensch? Und: Von
welchem Zeitpunkt an verdient er
Schutz?
Hans-Ludwig Schreiber ist Professor em. für
Strafrecht und allgemeine Rechtstheorie an
der Universität Göttingen. Er ist Mitglied des
Arbeitskreises zum IWM-Forschungsprojekt
„Die Bedeutung des Todes in der heutigen
Gesellschaft“, das von der Fritz Thyssen
Stiftung gefördert wird.
17
18. JANUAR, 2005
Michael Staudigl
Über Geben und Nehmen. Eine
Phänomenologie der Gewalt
DASS GEWALT mit Mitteln selbstreflexiver Beschreibung nicht verstanden werden kann,
ist ein Gemeinplatz der
Gewaltforschung. Der
Vortrag von Michael
Staudigl widmete sich
vor diesem Hintergrund
der Frage, ob die
Phänomenologie dieser Beschränkung
entkommt und andere Möglichkeiten eröffnet, Gewalt zu denken. Insbesondere
um das Ereignis Gewalt zu fassen, sind
demnach methodische Adaptionen notwendig. Dies erfordere eine Vertiefung
des Erfahrungsbegriffs und eine Kritik an
klassischen Konzeptionen von Subjektivität. Lasse sich auf diesem Wege ein „verletzliches Subjekt“ erkennen, so könne
eine wirkliche Sensibilität für Gewaltphänomene schließlich dadurch gewonnen werden, dass die Modalitäten ihrer
Praxis in Begriffen beschrieben werden,
die die Verletzungsoffenheit des Menschlichen reflektieren.
No. 87
Winter 2005
NEUE REIHE: POLITISCHER SALON
Gemeinsam mit der Tageszeitung Die Presse hat das IWM ein
Michael Staudigl ist APART-Stipendiat der
Österreichischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften und IWM Visiting Fellow.
neues Diskussionsforum zu aktuellen politischen und gesellschaftlichen Fragestellungen eingerichtet: Die Veranstaltungsreihe der „Politischen Salons“. Als erster Gast diskutierte am 18.
25. JANUAR, 2005
18
Podiumsgespräch und
Buchpräsentation
Avantgarden gestern und heute
November Lord Dahrendorf über „Probleme der Demokratie
BEREITS IN DAS WORT Avantgarde ist das
geschichtsphilosophische Credo der Moderne eingeschrieben. Seit ihren ersten
Anfängen ist die Avantgarde den großen
Narrativen der Moderne verpflichtet gewesen – mit all ihren Hoffnungen, aber
auch ihren Schrecken. Fast von Anfang an
bildeten Krisen und Katastrophen die
Rückseite der Fortschrittsidee. Die Wirkungen und das Scheitern der Avantgarden des vergangenen Jahrhunderts,
das sich wie vielleicht kein anderes zuvor
als das Jahrhundert des Neuen verstanden
hat, standen 2001 im Mittelpunkt einer
internationalen Konferenz des IWM. Deren Ergebnisse versammelt das nun erschienene Buch „Das Jahrhundert der
Avantgarden“, das im Rahmen eines Podiumsgespräches in Wien präsentiert wurde.
Probleme der Demokratie heute
Podiumsgespräch mit:
Hans Belting, Direktor des IFK, Wien
Cornelia Klinger, Permanent Fellow, IWM
Vivian Liska, Universität Antwerpen
Wolfgang Müller-Funk, Universität Wien
Moderation:
Daniela Hammer-Tugendhat, Hochschule für
Angewandte Kunst
In Zusammenarbeit mit
Wilhelm Fink Verlag
No. 87
Winter 2005
heute“.
IM KONTEXT der politischen
und gesellschaftlichen Integration der erweiterten Europäischen Union hat das Thema governance einen ganz
neuen Stellenwert erhalten.
Demokratie heute steht vor
der Herausforderung, die
Formen politischer Beteiligung und Entscheidungsfindung zu erneuern – eine Notwendigkeit, die während des Krzysztof Michalski, Lord Dahrendorf, Michael Fleischhacker
europäischen Verfassungskonvents und der Utopie eines „europäischen Staates“.
angesichts der niedrigen Wahlbeteiligung
Nach Dahrendorf könnte die Zuan den letzten EU-Parlamentswahlen ein- sammenarbeit der einzelnen Nationalstaamal mehr deutlich wurde. Traditionelle ten innerhalb der EU als globales Modell
Institutionen der politischen Interessens- der Demokratiebeschleunigung dienen.
vertretung verlieren an Gewicht und Dies werde aber nur gelingen, wenn die
Durchschlagskraft; gleichzeitig hat sich in Herausforderung einer geopolitischen
den letzten Jahren eine Vielzahl von zivil- und kulturellen Öffnung ernst genomgesellschaftlichen Vereinigungen (NGOs) men werde.
entwickelt, die immer effizienter
Partikularinteressen auf lokaler, nationaler Ralf Dahrendorf ist Mitglied des britischen
und auch internationaler Ebene vertreten. Oberhauses. Er lehrte als Professor für SozioAls erster Gast der neuen Reihe „Politi- logie an deutschen und amerikanischen Unischer Salon“, einer Kooperation des IWM, versitäten, war Direktor der London School of
der Direktion für Sicherheitspolitik im Economics und Warden des St. Antony’s ColVerteidigungsministerium und der „Pres- lege in Oxford.
se“, diskutierte Lord Dahrendorf über
„Probleme der Demokratie heute“ mit In Zusammenarbeit mit der Direktion für SicherMichael Fleischhacker, Chefredakteur, heitspolitik des Bundesministeriums für LanDie Presse, und Krzysztof Michalski, Rek- desverteidigung.
tor des IWM.
Die größte Bedrohung für die mo- Als nächster Gast in der Reihe „Politischer
dernen
Demokratien
sieht
Lord Salon“ diskutiert der renommierte IslamDahrendorf demnach im schleichenden wissenschaftler Bernhard Lewis, Professor
Autoritarismus technisch zunehmend Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies an der Unikomplexer demokratischer Prozesse. Mul- versität Princeton, am 9. März 2005 über die
ti- und supranationale politische Gebilde Bedeutung des Islam für die Europäische Inwie die EU hätten nicht nur mit tegration.
Legitimationsdefiziten zu kämpfen, sondern begünstigten zudem die Intransparenz der politisch-ökonomischen Sphäre – bei gleichzeitiger Abnahme des politischen Interesses der Bürger. Die Stärkung
europäischer Demokratien bestünde
gleichwohl nicht in der Verwirklichung
2005
/
2006
Call for Applications
Milena Jesenská
Fellowships
for Journalists
Milena Jesenská (1896-1944) was an outstanding
journalist and mediator between the Czech and the
German cultures in Bohemia as well as an astute political commentator. She was detained in the Nazi
concentration camp in Ravensbrück for her political
involvement and resistance, where she died in 1944.
She is widely known for her famous correspondence
with Franz Kafka.
The European Cultural Foundation is
an independent non-profit organization that promotes cultural participation and cooperation within Europe
and beyond its borders. It was founded
in 1954 as the cultural counterpart to
economic Europe. It strives to reinforce
Europe’s cultural dimension and to
stimulate intercultural dialogue.
www.eurocult.org
E U R O P E A N
C U L T U R A L
F O U N D A T I O N
The Institute for Human Sciences
(IWM) is an institute for advanced
study. Its mission is to offer, in Austria, a
place for research and discussion that
crosses borders and disciplines with a
view to contributing to the formation
of a new intellectual geography in Europe.
www.iwm.at
Institut für die
Wissenschaften
vom Menschen
Project Syndicate is an international association of 226 newspapers in 107
countries, devoted to bringing distinguished voices from around the world
to informed national audiences so as to
create a global forum for broadening
debate and exchanging ideas.
www.project-syndicate.org
PROJECT
S Y N D I C AT E
AN ASSOCIATION OF NEWSPAPERS AROUND THE WORLD
I Objective
III The Jury
The Milena Jesenská Fellowship program was
established by the Institute for Human
Sciences and by the European Cultural
Foundation and is supported by Project
Syndicate .
Sabine Aßmann, Public Relations, IWM, Vienna
Helena Luczywo, Managing Editor-in-chief,
Gazeta Wyborcza, Warsaw
Gerfried Sperl, Editor-in-chief, Der Standard,
Vienna (Chair)
Laura Starink, NRC-Handelsblad, Rotterdam
Gottfried Wagner, Director of the European
Cultural Foundation, Amsterdam
It offers journalists working in print, broadcast
and electronic journalism time off from their
professional duties in order to pursue in-depth
research on a European topic of their choice.
The call for applications 2005/06 is directed
towards cultural journalists, with the term
‘cultural’ interpreted in a broad sense to
encompass a wide variety of artistic and
intellectual fields.
II Conditions
Milena Jesenská Fellows are invited to spend
three months at the IWM in Vienna, Austria.
Recipients of the fellowships are given a
stipend of € 7.630 and are provided with office
space, a PC with broadband Internet access,
and the use of IWM’s in-house research
facilities as well as other relevant sources in
Vienna. Travel grants of up to € 1.820 will be
available for research visits to neighbouring
countries.
Candidates for the Milena Jesenská fellowships must have several years of experience
in professional journalism. Their work may deal
with any topic related to cultural issues of
European relevance, especially having to do
with the issue of European integration. Fellowships are not intended for entry-level journalists or students.
IV Application
The application consists of the following:
- the application form (please download
from www.iwm.at/f-milena.htm,
or request by fax: +43-1-313 58-30
or by e-mail: [email protected]
- a concise project proposal in English (not
more than 3 double-spaced pages)
- a Curriculum Vitae including a list of publications
Deadline for applications is March 25, 2005
(date of receipt).
Applicants will be notified of the decision in
June 2005. The jury is not obliged to publicly
justify its decisions.
Please address applications to:
Institut für die Wissenschaften vom Menschen
(IWM)
Milena Jesenská Fellowships for Journalists
1090 Vienna, Austria
Applications by e-mail are also eligible:
[email protected]
subject header: Milena Jesenska
The program has also been generously
supported by VÖZ (Association of
Austrian Newspapers) and Oberbank
AG Linz.
No. 87
Winter 2005
19
Visiting Fellows
All IWM Fellows are asked to present their research
projects in the Institute’s quarterly newsletter. Some of the
current fellows have already given a more detailed insight
into their work in the previous newsletter or will do so in the
next one.
Benjamin Frommer
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
20
Project:
there a “future for nostalgia” 15 years after the fall of
communism? How do different cultures (Bulgarian, Czech, Slovak) deal with nostalgia and difficult feelings like insecurity and shame? Her interest
also lies in the possibility for new narratives about the
past to be created in and shared through the internet.
Assistant Professor of History, Northwestern University, Evanston
September 2004 – June
2005
Living in the Shadow of
the Iron Curtain: The
Czech/Slovak – Austrian/German Borderlands, 1945 – 2000
Having recently completed his first book, National
Cleansing: Retribution against Nazi Collaborators in
Postwar Czechoslovakia, Frommer is currently writing a comparative history of the frontier on both
sides of the former “Iron Curtain.” In particular, he
aims to evaluate how individuals, communities, and
governments experienced and managed the borderlands in the context of the Cold War and its
aftermath.
Length of stay:
Ludger Hagedorn
Length of stay:
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter, Johannes-GutenbergUniversität, Mainz und IWM, Wien
Research Associate, Patocka Project
Projekt Europa: Die politische Philosophie Jan
Patockas
Vlasta Jalusic
Project:
Susanne Lettow
Project:
Research:
Diana Ivanova
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
No. 87
Freelance journalist, Sofia
Milena Jesenska Fellow
January – March 2005
Human Library on Socialism
Diana Ivanova has broad journalistic experience in
Bulgarian TV and print media and seven years of
international broadcasting experience working for
Radio Free Europe in Prague. In 2004, she was one
of the initiators of an internet-based storytelling
project about socialism (together with the writer
Georgy Giospodinov, the psychiatrist Rumen
Petrov and the journalist Kalin Manolov) – the first
website in Bulgaria to offer personal stories from the
time of socialism, www.spomeniteni.org. During her
stay at the IWM she will try to develop further the
idea of the project as a “human library on socialism,” and through collecting stories, interviews and
talks in Prague and Bratislava to look for an answer
to several questions: What is the place for memories
when political dreams become reality in the former
socialist countries? Is there a place for memories? Is
Winter 2005
Associate Professor, The Peace Institute, Ljubljana
November – December 2004
Sex Work Between Catholicism,
Liberalism and Social Democracy. A Comparison of Austria
and Slovenia
Lehrbeauftragte Gender Studies,
Institut für Philosophie, Freie
Universität Berlin
Lise Meitner Fellow
October 2004 – October 2005
Gender in the Philosophical Debates on Biotechnology
At the beginning of the 21st century information- and biotechnology seem to be the key technologies of the future.
The technological revolutions of biological reproduction, food production and medicine are far-reaching processes with consequences, especially concerning gender relations, not yet to foresee. Lettow’s
project centers on the question of how these processes are articulated in philosophical discourse .
Marci Shore
Length of stay:
Project:
Assistant Professor of History, Indiana
University
July 2004 – August 2005
The Wonder of Words: Cosmopolitanism and the Avant-garde in East-Central Europe, 1919 – 1930
Research: The project focuses on EastCentral European avant-garde movements in Vienna, Prague, Bratislava,
Krakow, Lviv, Warsaw, and Kiev, exploring how the
avant-gardes’ understanding of the materiality of
language shaped their philosophy.
Marta Simeckova
Length of stay:
Project:
(aesthetic) taste and, in a broader sense, of judgment, and re-thought in the terms of modern aesthetic thinking by many philosophers from Lord
Shaftesbury, to Hutcheson and Hume to Kant.
Hence 18th century taste always presupposes the
inherent sociability of men, a genuine plurality and,
as such, is a communal sense, a faculty of creating
community, while its inherent social-political contents cannot be divided from its aesthetic nature.
And it connects to the concept of freedom, which is
one of the clues to Arendt’s political philosophy.
She says that the original political faculty is not the
lawgiving reason, but the judgement (phronesis),
which a priori considers the standpoints of others:
“Im Sinne der Polis war der politische Mensch in
seiner ihm eigentümlichen Ausgezeichnetheit
zugleich der freieste, weil er die größte
Bewegungsfreiheit vermöge seiner Einsicht, seiner
Fähigkeit, alle Standorte zu berücksichtigen, hatte.”
Taking this and her understanding of freedom as a
kind of virtuosoship of political activity especially
in the cases of Machiavelli and Montesquieu,
Szecsenyi adds to these insights Lord Shaftesbury’s
and Hutcheson’s virtuosoship of polite conversation (its traces can be found in Kant’s third Critique) as a kind of “aesthetic” freedom in order to reinterpret Arendt’s theory of judgement, and her
conception of freedom in a new way, and to exploit
some theoretical potentials of both her interpretation and the Kantian treatment of aesthetic judgement.
Editor at the Slovak
daily “Sme”, Bratislava
Milena Jesenka Fellow
January – March
2005
New Democracies and
Their Questions
Timothy Snyder
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
Assistant Professor of
History, Yale University
July 2004 – August
2005
Brotherlands: A Family History of the
Slavic, German, and
Jewish Nations
Timothy Snyder is beginning a family history of
nationality in Europe. His method is the serial biography of prominent families whose members chose
different national identities, 1848 – 1948.
Michael Staudigl
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
Habilitand (Phänomenologie, Politische Philosophie), Universität Wien, APART-Stipendiat der
Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
October 2003 – June 2005
Phänomen Gewalt. Perspektiven phänomenologischer Forschung
Verletzlichkeit und verletzen Können des handelnden Subjekts verweisen auf das anthropologische
Grundfaktum leiblicher Verletzungsoffenheit, dessen phänomenologische Auslegung im Zentrum des
Forschungsprojektes von Michael Staudigl steht.
Seine Forschungen gelten der Auslotung des scheinbar unbegrenzt modulier- und erweiterbaren Spektrums des Gewalthandelns.
Philipp Ther
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
Endre Szecsenyi
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
Associate Professor of
Philosophy, Eötvös
Lorand University,
Budapest
Andrew W. Mellon
Fellow
January – March
2005
Hannah Ahrendt
and the “Aesthetic” Freedom
Hannah Arendt’s Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, a stimulating interpretation of Kant’s Critique
of Judgement, is the starting point of Szecsenyi’s research. In these lectures, Arendt’s major interest is to
elaborate the political aspects of taste as sensus communis – but tacitly at the expense of its very aesthetic nature. Though the Roman Stoic concept of
sensus communis has been connected to the issue of
Junior Professor of Polish and Ukrainian Studies,
Europa-Universität Frankfurt/Oder
Körber Visiting Fellow
October 2004 – March 2005
The History and Legacy of 20th Century Ethnic Cleansing in Europe
Philipp Ther’s research project focuses on the 20th
century as an age of ‘ethnic cleansing.’ Over its course,
about 50 million people have been forced to permanently leave their homelands within Europe alone.
In the Balkans, the legacy of ethnic cleansing is very
destructive to this day. Ther therefore sees an urgent need to publish a book which goes beyond the
national(ist) interpretation of this process.
Junior Visiting Fellows
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
Doktorand
(Politikwissenschaften,
Universität
Wien), DOC-Stipendiat der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
July 2004 – January 2005
Researching the European Public Sphere. Theory
of democracy and empirical evidence.
The project focuses on the role of a European PubNo. 87
Winter 2005
21
lic Sphere in the construction of a European identity and for legitimizing the European polity.
tries, EU accession meant the
promise of new laws conforming to the European Convention
on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which guarantees “freedom to hold opinions
and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and
regardless of frontiers.” But while
these governments have been quick to push their
countries’ markets toward Western standards, they
have been slower to protect independent reporting.
Many governments continue to block access to public records, and many impose prison sentences for
insulting state officials. Reporters also face coercion
from criminals who prefer to keep their activities
secret and from foreign investors concerned not with
the public interest, but with the bottom line. Eoin
O’Carrol’s report will study the challenges faced by
reporters in Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
Asli Baykal
Length of stay:
Project:
Ph.D. Candidate in Anthropology, Boston University
February – July 2005
Socioeconomic and Cultural Change in Uzbekistan
Greg Charak
Length of stay:
Project:
Ph.D. candidate in Philosophy, University of California, San Diego; guest scholar of Institut Wiener Kreis
February – March 2005
Reduction and Liberal Renewal: the Fate of the
‘Höherer Standpunkt’
Susan Costello
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
22
Ph.D. Candidate in Anthropology, Boston University
January – June 2005
Tibetan Pastoralists’ Uses of Wealth in an Environment of Risk: Choosing Between Tribal and Religious Moral Ideals and Market Efficiency?
Susan Costello’s dissertation describes the conditions
of pastoral production, consumption and exchange
of the Tibetan nomads who live in the high altitude
Golok Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Qinghai
Province, China. She finds that the choices they
make regarding their economic activities – such as
minimizing the slaughter of livestock, and ‘investing’ discretionary income in the religious sphere,
not only reflect their strong faith in Buddhism but
also their lack of trust in the alternatives the modern
world offers them – namely the Chinese Communist government and the developing free market –
to provide security of livelihood. While Buddhism
orients their otherworldly concerns, they continue
to find practical this worldly support in traditional
social relations based on kinship and tribe. Their
economic activities thus include relationship building practices of hospitality, mutual aid and gift exchange. Having these relationships to draw on is
crucial when they make attempts to take advantage
of the new opportunities the developing market
offers. Currently, Susan Costello is exploring the
applicability of the theme of ‘trust’ that runs through
these issues as a unifying theoretical framework.
Eoin O’Carroll
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
No. 87
Candidate for MS degree in Print Journalism, Boston
University
Regardless of Frontiers: Press Freedom in the EU’s
Newest Members
At the stroke of midnight on May 1, 2004, the EU
grew from 15 to 25 states, eight of which had spent
a generation behind the Iron Curtain. At that moment, nearly 75 million people, from the Baltic to
the Adriatic, came closer than ever before to the
promise of free markets, open governments and respect for human rights. For reporters in these coun-
Winter 2005
Thomas Nesbit
Length of stay:
Project:
Ph.D. candidate in Religion and Literature, Boston
University
July 2004 – January 2005
Gender and Violence in Wiener Aktionismus
(Viennese Actionism)
Emily Rohrbach
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
Ph.D. Candidate in English
Literature, Boston University
European Historiography
1770-1830, Revolution in
Literary Time
Emily Rohrbach’s research
concerns early nineteenthcentury historiographical debate and competing notions
of contemporaneity in British and European historical writings. In her dissertation on British Romantic literature, that debate helps to account for
the ways in which the poetics of Keats and Byron
respond to the problems of modernity in their lateral temporal movements—their dilations of the
moment, a spatialization of coexistent, incompatible times: “hours by hours,” Keats writes in “To
Autumn.” In the course of the European eighteenth century certain notions of linear progress,
enabled by modernity’s new constellation of the
“present” in relation to the past and future, had
begun to shape both popular historical writing (the
writing of history as a progress through periods)
and narratives of personal development (the
Bildungsroman). Against these forms, Keats’s and
Byron’s aesthetics, she argues, resist any singular, totalizing march through time by way of a more radi-
cal immediacy and sense of modernity’s present as
history, as the new historical age. Their non-totalizing poetics insist on an intersection of subjectivity
with historiography so that modern epistemological uncertainty can be seen as a problem for both
national-historical and subjective self-understanding, and as a negotiation of the modern philosophical problem of finding the “present” on its own terms.
Astrid Swenson
Length of stay:
Project:
Research:
Ph.D. Candidate in History, Cambridge University
Körber Junior Visiting Fellow
Conceptualizing Heritage in 19th Century France,
Germany, and Britain
Astrid Swenson’s dissertation analyses the
conceptualization of ‘cultural heritage’ in 19th century Europe, with particular reference to France,
Germany and England. Within the framework of
the Körber Foundations’ fellowship on ‘History and
Memory in Europe’ the project addresses the need
to historicize the central, yet often so poorly defined
concepts of ‘heritage’ and ‘memory’. Whereas most
previous studies only consider national contexts, it combines a comparative approach with an analysis
of intercultural transfer. This
method helps to explain similarities and differences but is also revealing with regard to the question of the construction of a
transnational identity. The study
investigates the emergences of a Pan-European ‘culture of memory’ in which the preservation of ‘heritage’ was increasingly promoted as a “yardstick of a
people’s cultural attainment.” Within the domestic
scene, proponents of competing ideas on heritage
sought to bolster their desired policy by citing examples from other countries. The question then arises
of how far this entangled process involved the idea
of a common identity. In the first instance, European states were intent on establishing their standing within Europe, but this very habit of confrontation also bound them together, engendering the
idea that Europe was more ‘civilized’ and legitimizing colonialism.
23
No. 87
Winter 2005
Publications
Krzysztof Michalski
Junior Visiting Fellow
„Massenmedien und Europäische
Öffentlichkeit(en)“, in: science.ORF.at
(online publiziert am 1. November
2004).
Rector of the IWM
“What holds Europe together?”, Kurt
Biedenkopf, Bronislaw Geremek,
Krzysztof Michalski, and Michel Rocard;
published in several European media,
amongst them Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland,
December 11, 2004), La Vanguardia
(Spain, December 5, 2004), Diario de
Notocias (Portugal, November 21,
2004), Kristeligt Dagblad (Denmark,
January 6, 2005), and Caffe’Europa
(Italy, published online December 11,
2004).
Benjamin Frommer
Visiting Fellow
National Cleansing: Retribution against
Nazi Collaborators in Post-war Czechoslovakia. New York 2005.
“Getting the Small Decree: Czech
National Honor in the Aftermath of Nazi
Occupation”, in Pieter M. Judson and
Marsha L. Rozenblit (eds.), Constructing
Nationalities in East Central Europe,
New York 2004.
Cornelia Klinger
24
Permanent Fellow
Das Jahrhundert der Avantgarden,
Cornelia Klinger, Wolfgang-Müller-Funk
(Hrsg.), München 2004.
Janos Kovacs
Permanent Fellow
“‘Western Enlargement’. Studying
Economic Cultures in Eastern Europe”,
in: Petya Kabakchieva and Roumen
Avramov (eds.), East-West Cultural
Encounters. Entrepreneurship, Governance,
Economic Knowledge, Sofia 2004.
“Vergangenheit oder Vorvergangenheit?
Kultur und Wirtschaftsentwicklung in
Osteuropa nach 1989”, in: Berliner
Debatte INITIAL, Bd. 5/6 2004.
Susanne Lettow
Visiting Fellow
„Nutzen, Wert und Würde.
Fortpflanzung im Diskurs der Bioethik“,
in: Forum für Feministische GangArten,
Nr. 51 (Dezember 2004).
Thomas Nesbit
“Umstrittene Kunst: Otto Mühl unter
der ‘Gender-Lupe’”, in: science.ORF.at
(online publiziert am 17. November
2004).
Emily Rohrbach
“Representing Time and Gender: Keats’s
Prose, Keats’s Poetics”, in: Revue d’Etudes
Anglophones (Autumn 2004).
“Austen’s Later Subjects”, in: SEL: Studies
in English Literature 1500-1900
(Autumn 2004).
MAGEEQ Senior Researcher
Geschlecht und Politik. Institutionelle
Verhältnisse, Verhinderungen und
Chancen, Bd. 1 der Reihe “Alte und neue
Ungleichheiten”, Berlin 2004.
Visiting Fellow
Sketches from a Secret War: A Polish Artist’s
Mission to Liberate Soviet Ukraine, New
Haven/London, forthcoming 2005.
“In die Falle getappt (über das Rätsel der
Wiederwahl des George W. Bush)”, in:
Falter (12. November 2004).
“War is Peace,” in: Prospect, Number 104,
(November 2004), German: “George
Orwell trifft George Bush”, in: Transit –
Europäische Revue Nr. 28; Polish, “‘Rok
1984’ czytany w roku 2004: George
Orwell spotyka George’a Busha: o jezyku
amerykanskiej polityce po 11 wrzoenia”,
in: Tygodnik Powszechny, (October 31,
2004); Czech, “Jak eist 1984 v roce
2004”, in: Lidove Noviny (October 30,
2004); Turkish, “Sava Baritir”, in: Vizon
(December 2004).
“Eine Chance für Europa: Die EU ist in
der Ukraine als Schutzmacht der
Demokratie gefordert”, in: Der Standard,
(26. November 2004).
“Revolutionäre Republikaner”, in: Falter
(29. Oktober 2004).
Michael Staudigl
Transformationen und Perspektiven von
Geschlechterverhältnissen, Berlin 2004.
Visiting Fellow
“Phänomenologie der Gewalt. Eine
Problemskizze”, in: Analecta Husserliana,
Bd. 84, New York 2005.
“Ein ewiges Pilotprojekt? Gender
Mainstreaming in Österreich”, in:
Meuser, Michael/Neusüß, Claudia
(Hrsg.): Gender Mainstreaming. Konzepte
- Handlungsfelder - Instrumente, Bonn
2004.
“Der Anspruch des Anderen und das
Problem der Gewalt. Zur Problematik
gerechten Handelns bei Levinas”, in: I.
Copoeru / N. Szabo (Hg.), Beyond
Identity. Transformations of Identity in a
(Post)Modern World, Cluj 2004.
Visiting Fellow
Caviar and Ashes: A Warsaw Generation’s
Life and Death in Marxism, 1918-1968,
New Haven/London, forthcoming
2006.
Winter 2005
Timothy Snyder
Birgit Sauer
Marci Shore
No. 87
“Children of the Revolution: Communism, Zionism, and the Berman Brothers”, in: Jewish Social Studies, vol. 10, no.
3 (2004).
Travels and Talks
Astrid Swenson
Benjamin Frommer
Marci Shore
“Image(ining) Antifascism: Politicizing
women in France and Britain in the
1930s”, in: K. Cronin, K. Robertson
(eds.), Image(ining) Resistance, Kingston,
Ontario, forthcoming 2005.
Visiting Fellow
Seminar Europe or the Globe?: “The
Czechoslovak Gleichschaltung: Retribution Courts in the Aftermath of ‘Victorious February’,” IWM, Vienna
(December 15, 2004).
Visiting Fellow
Seminar Europe or the Globe?: “Once
Upon a Time, in a Café Called
Ziemianska: Making Choices and
Coming to Marxism in Interwar Poland,”
IWM, Vienna (November 24, 2004).
Endre Szecsenyi
Ludger Hagedorn
Andrew W. Mellon Fellow
“Lord Shaftesbury’s ‘Aesthetic Freedom’”,
in: Ferenc Hörcher and Endre Szecsenyi
(eds.), Aspects of the Enlightenment:
Aesthetics, Politics, and Religion, Budapest
2004.
Patocka Research Associate
Vortrag „Ideengeschichte Europas in den
frühen Werken Jan Patockas“, Workshop
„Phänomenologie und Politik“, realisiert
im Rahmen des IWM-Forschungsvorhabens Projekt Europa, Wien
Lecture “A Funeral for Futurism: Or,
How the Polish Avant-Garde Found Its
Way to Marxism in the 1920s,” School
of Slavonic and East European Studies,
London (November 5, 2004).
“John Macmurray – egy skot
szabadsagfilozofus” [John Macmurray – a
Scottish Philosopher of Freedom], in:
Ivan Zoltan Denes (ed.), A szabadsag
ertelme – az ertelem szabadsaga: filozofiai es
eszmetörteneti tanulmanyok [The
Understanding of Freedom – The
Freedom of Understanding: Studies in
Philosophy and Intellectual History],
Budapest 2004.
Lecture Some remarks on ‘knowledge
society’. The phenomenological perspective of
Jan Patocka, given on the invitation of
the faculty of philosophy at Södertörns
högskola (University College),
Stockholm (December 3, 2004).
Janos Kovacs
Permanent Fellow
Participation in several national workshops of the comparative research project
DIOSCURI in Sofia, Zagreb, Ljubljana,
Belgrade, Bucharest, Warsaw and
Budapest (November and December 2004).
“Little America. On the Non-European
Features of Eastern European Societies”,
paper presented to the conference on
Past and Present: Is There Anything New
with Anti-Americanism Today?, Center
for Policy Studies, Central European
University, Budapest (December 11-12,
2004).
Krzysztof Michalski
Rector of the IWM
Interview with Giancarlo Bosetti, La
Repubblica, on “Cosa tiene unita l’
europa” [“What holds Europe together”],
published December 8, 2004.
Birgit Sauer
Lecture “When God Died: Slavoj Zizek
on Modernity and Revolution in Eastern
Europe”, workshop Modernity and Its
Disciplines, University College London
and School of Oriental and African
Studies, London (November 4, 2004).
Timothy Snyder
Visiting Fellow
Lecture “Poles, Jews, and Soviets in
Volhynia, 1939-1941”, at an international workshop jointly organized by the
Institute on Historical Justice and
Reconciliation (Salzburg), the Carnegie
Council on Ethics and International
Affairs (New York), and the Simon
Dubnow Institute for Jewish History
and Culture at the University of Leipzig,
Leipzig (January 21, 2005).
“How Was Bush Elected?”, radio
interview, broadcasted in FM4, Vienna
(November 3, 2004).
“Orwell’s 1984 Today,” interview, BBC,
Night Waves (November 9, 2004).
“The Democratic Revolution in
Ukraine,” radio interview, broadcasted in
FM4 (November 29, 2004).
Lecture “Two Views of a Common
History: Ukrainian and Polish Historiography,” Osteuropäisches Institut der
Universität Wien (December 16, 2004).
MAGEEQ Senior Researcher
“Relevance of (Research on) Representation”, paper presented at the Workshop
Gender and Representation, Department
de Science Politique, Universite de
Geneve, (December 3, 2004).
No. 87
Winter 2005
25
Michael Staudigl
Visiting Fellow
Lecture “Phenomenological Explanations of
Violence and Their Interdisciplinary Value,” at
the conference Cultures of Violence, Mansfield
College, University of Oxford (September 20,
2004).
„Ungleichheit und Rassismus als Problem bei
Levinas und Schütz“, Vortrag im Rahmen des
Workshops Phänomenologie und Politik der
Arbeitsgruppe des FWF-geförderten
Forschungsprojekts Die politische Philosophie Jan
Patockas, IWM, Wien (15. November 2004).
Vortrag „Gewalt als Problem bei Husserl,
Merleau-Ponty und Lévinas“, im Rahmen der
Third Central and Eastern European Conference on
Phenomenology – Subjectivity, Intentionality, Evil.
In memory of Jozef Tischner, Warschau
Astrid Swenson
Lecture “Memory or Maternity’. (En)gendering
Antifascism in 1930s France and Britain,” at an
international workshop on Gendering Memory,
Mannheim University (January 21, 2005).
26
Lecture “La Patrie du Patrimoine? Conceptualising
Heritage in 19th Century France. A European
Perspective” at the Hexagonal Forum (Interdisciplinary French Studies Seminar), Cambridge
University (November 30, 2004).
Lecture “Entangled Memories. ‘National Heritage’ in France, Germany and England. 18701914,” at an international conference on The
Politics of Cultural Memory, Centre of the Study of
Location, Memory and Visuality, Manchester
Metropolitan University (November 4, 2004).
Maria Szmeja
Visiting Fellow
Seminar Europe or the Globe?: “History – How
People Use It in Poland,” IWM, Vienna
(December 1, 2004).
Mieke Verloo
MAGEEQ Research Director
Participation in the European conference Gender
Equality Policy in Europe: Making Progress in
Difficult Times; lecture on “Challenges in gender
mainstreaming and gender budgeting,”
Athens (November 25-26, 2004).
No. 87
Winter 2005
Varia
Assisting the UNECE Secretariat in
drafting the Chairpersons Conclusions to
the BEIJING +10 Conference, Geneva
(December 13-15, 2004).
Discussant to the session on gender
mainstreaming, at the workshop
Enlargement, Gender and Governance,
European Commission, Brussels
(January 25, 2005).
Mathias Thaler
Kommentar zum Vortrag von Jan Sokol,
„Woher kommen die Menschenrechte?“,
im Zuge der Konferenz Menschenrechte
zwischen Wirtschaft, Recht und Ethik,
Institut für Wissenschaft und Kunst der
Universität Wien
(3. bis 4. Dezember, 2004).
Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, langjähriges Mitglied des Wissenschaftlichen Beirats des IWM, wurde am 3. Dezember
2004 der Hannah-Arendt-Preis verliehen.
Die Jury würdigt mit ihrer Entscheidung
nicht nur die produktive Rolle, die der
Rechtsphilosoph und ehemalige Bundesverfassungsrichter durch seine fundierten
Interventionen in verfassungsrechtlichen
Kontroversen gespielt hat, sondern auch
seine Beiträge, die sich mit der Stellung
von Religion in modernen säkularen Gesellschaften beschäftigen.
Nikolai Butzki studiert Journalistik an der
HS Magdeburg-Stendal und absolviert von
Januar bis März 2005 ein Praktikum am
IWM. Sein Schwerpunkt liegt im Bereich
Presse- und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit.
Slavenka Drakulic, 1994 Visiting
Fellow und 2001 Milena Jesenska Visiting
Fellow am IWM, erhält den Leipziger
Buchpreis zur Europäischen Verständigung 2005. Mit ihrem Buch “Keiner war
dabei – Kriegsverbrechen auf dem Balkan
vor Gericht” zeige die Autorin das Banale
und das Böse als das große europäische
Motiv des 20. Jahrhunderts sowie die Psychologie des Terrors als ein zentrales Problem der heutigen Welt, erklärte die Jury.
Anna Verner studied Global Studies at
the University of California, Santa Barbara, and is an intern at the IWM from
January to March 2005. Her interests lie
in European languages as well as cultural
and social interactions. She plans to pursue
a career in publishing and editing.
27
No. 87
Winter 2005
NOTES ON BOOKS
The IWM regularly invites its fellows, guests and friends to share their thoughts on current
publications with the readers of the IWM Post. This time, Benjamin Frommer, historian and currently
a Visiting Fellow at the institute, comments on a book dealing with Dilemmas of Justice.
Dilemmas of Justice
Die IWM Post bringt regelmäßig Buchbesprechungen von Fellows, Gästen
und Freunden des Institutes. In der vorliegenden
Ausgabe kommentiert der
Historiker Benjamin Frommer, derzeit als Visiting
Fellow am Institut zu Gast,
ein Buch von Noel Calhoun:
Dilemmas of Justice in
Eastern Europe’s Democratic Transition.
28
Zu den Publikationen von
Benjamin Frommer zählt
sein 2004 erschienenes
Buch National Cleansing:
Retribution against Nazi
Collaborators in Postwar
Czechoslovakia, New York,
Cambridge University Press.
No. 87
Winter 2005
IN CONTRAST TO the mass expulsions and vigilante
retribution that characterized the end of the Second World War, the 1989-1991 Eastern European
revolutions and their aftermath have proved remarkably bloodless. Nonetheless, over the past decade and a half the region’s peoples have still
fought, verbally not violently, over the need and
proper means to come to terms with the legacy of
communist rule. In Dilemmas of Justice, a new comparative study of transitional justice in Poland, Russia, and the former East Germany, Noel Calhoun
argues that the tenets of liberal democracy have
shaped and constrained the region’s efforts to punish communism’s enablers and rehabilitate its victims. In the 1990s political competitors as diverse
(and at odds) as Solidarity and the Polish ex-communists adopted the same language to describe
their beliefs and goals. This liberal democratic language, in turn, both reflected and inflected the
field of politics.
In addition to offering a detailed and enlightening analysis of post-1989 retribution, Dilemmas
of Justice challenges a number of assumptions common to the social science literature. For example,
the chapter on Germany rebuts the view that transitional justice in the reunified country represented
the conquest of the East by the West. Through a
careful and absorbing revisiting of the events of
1989-90, the book demonstrates that most of the
ideas about coming to terms with the past predate
the demise of the DDR. Calhoun perceptively reminds us that the Wende did not end with the
toppling of the Wall. The leaders of the SED (Socialist Unity Party) continued to temporize and
plot for several months more, during which the
Stasi retained control over its files and burned what
it could. It took a second revolution in January
1990, when ordinary East Germans stormed and
occupied Stasi offices, to secure what remained of
the secret police records. The leaders of West Germany and the SED ironically shared a desire to keep
the files closed, albeit for different reasons: the communists sought to cover their tracks while Bonn
aimed to monopolize control over information.
Thus, the decision to open the files to former victims ultimately represented a victory of East over
West. It became “an emblem of the East German
revolution.”
In “Poland’s Long Search for Justice,” Calhoun
challenges the dominant view that the type of transition determines the intensity of retribution, in
particular, that drawn-out negotiated handovers of
power necessarily inhibit purges. At first, Poland
seemed to demonstrate this rule: with Wojciech
Jaruzelski as president and a communist Minister of
Interior, Solidarity’s leaders initially adopted the
“Spanish Model,” based on the idea that Franco’s
successors built a stable democracy in the 1970s
and 1980s by collectively ignoring the fascist past.
Over the next years, however, a series of scandalous
disclosures about Polish politicians’ alleged secret
police connections showed that the “thick line” had
not fully isolated Poland’s present from its past.
Ironically, rumour-mongering hurt the former
communists far less than the political offspring of
the Solidarity movement. While no one was surprised by revelations about the communists, allegations about former spies in Solidarity were fodder
for muckraking journalists and political opponents.
After years of acrimonious debate, by the late
1990s the Poles ultimately chose a variant of the
German model of opening files and “lustration”
(the Czech neologism now widely used to describe
post-communist purges). As the recent controversy
over “Wildstein’s List” demonstrates, however, Poland may not yet be ready to (re)draw that thick
line between the present and the past.
At first, the book’s inclusion of Russia may
seem a bit of a stretch, but the relative absence of
transitional justice in the former Soviet Union casts
into stark relief the remarkable similarity between
developments in Poland and Germany. If the Poles
and Germans bound themselves in the language of
liberal democracy, then Russian politicians rarely
paid lip service to human rights and due process.
Even for committed liberals, Calhoun comments,
“Using the Western experience—whether in introducing trial by jury or the right of habeas corpus—
demanded detailed explanations and half-hearted
apologies.” Although the book’s detailed analysis
stops before Vladimir Putin came to power, the
events of the past several years, in particular, the
Russian president’s effective mixture of nationalism, authoritarianism, and just enough Soviet nos-
Benjamin Frommer NOTES ON BOOKS
talgia, only serve to confirm the author’s thesis.
Without political consensus, attempts to work
through the past have either faltered or become a
weapon in a power struggle of “kto-kogo.” Nonetheless, Calhoun reminds us, there was a brief burst
of retribution in the wake of the failed August
1991 putsch. But Yeltsin’s most radical measures
(outlawing the Communist Party and confiscating
its property) were primarily an attempt to cement
his position in Russia by burying the Soviet Union.
The trials that took place were of the putsch’s leaders. In other words, they were a purge of presentday political rivals, not an investigation into a communist legacy, in which Yeltsin, like so many other
reformers, was implicated. After the Communist
Party regained its legality, the few half-hearted attempts to work through the country’s past ended
with the bombing of the parliament in October
1993. Thereafter, calls for investigation of communist crimes led to demands for an investigation of
Yeltsin’s actions. The Russian army’s more recent
conduct in Chechnya has merely added to this burden. Russia, it might be argued, can hardly come to
terms with its past crimes, when it is still committing them in the present.
Over the past two decades, Calhoun argues,
there has been a remarkable “convergence” in attempts to deal with the legacy of authoritarian regimes. By the mid-1990s countries as diverse as
South Africa and the Czech Republic had settled
on some combination of a few high profile trials, an
investigative commission (often parliamentary), a
limited purge (lustration), and the opening of secret police files to former victims. This convergence,
this adherence to policies of “truth and justice,” as
the author terms it, can exacerbate divisions in societies and distract governments from other tasks.
Nonetheless, Dilemmas of Justice concludes, the attempt to construct an effective and just retributive
system is salutary. The effort to seek justice without
causing greater injustice forces a debate over values
that is essential to the construction of a democratic
polity. It is a debate that Poland and Germany have
had, and one that Russia still awaits.
Benjamin Frommer is Assistant Professor of History at
the Northwestern University, Evanston/IL. His research
project which he currently pursues at the IWM is entitled “Living in the Shadow of the Iron Curtain: The Czech/
Slovak – Austrian/German Borderlands, 1945 – 2000.” In
2004, his book National Cleansing: Retribution against Nazi
Collaborators in Postwar Czechoslovakia, New York,
Cambridge University Press was published (see p.28)
Noel Calhoun
Dilemmas of Justice in Eastern Europe’s
Democratic Transitions
New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004
Transit
Europäische Revue Heft 28
»1984« – neu gelesen
Aus heutiger Sicht ist das fiktive Datum von Orwells near-futureDystopie Realität einer immer noch nahen Vergangenheit. Transit
lädt ein zum Nachdenken über die Zukunft des Zukunftsdenkens
im Rückblick auf eine Zukunftsvision der Vergangenheit, die unsere Gegenwart offenkundig verfehlt – oder vielleicht doch trifft?
Cornelia Klinger Erinnerungen an »1984«
Timothy Snyder George Orwell trifft George Bush
Barbara Holland-Cunz Orwell und Foucault
Rena Tangens und padeluun Informationen sind schnell.
Wahrheit braucht Zeit
Gerald Heidegger Kino als Utopie, Utopien im Kino
Katja Stuke CCTV (Closed Circuit Television).
Photographien
Was hält Europa zusammen?
Zentrale Thesen der Reflexionsgruppe über die geistige und kulturelle
Dimension Europas werden zur Diskussion gestellt.
Diskussionspapier Biedenkopf, Geremek, Michalski und
Rocard
Kommentare Abraham (Bratislava), Amato (Rom),
Bauböck (Wien), Carnogursky (Bratislava),
Frevert (Yale), Hübner (Brüssel), Kaczynski
(Warschau), Katznelson (New York), Krastev
(Sofia), Leggewie (Gießen), Lunacek
(Wien), Mertes (Bonn), Miller (Moskau),
Murphy (London), Pelinka (Innsbruck),
Riabchuk (Kiew), Rokita (Warschau),
Scheffer (Amsterdam), Snyder (Yale)
Jan-Werner Müller Europäischer Verfassungspatriotismus?
Claus Offe Die Zukunft des eropäischen Sozialmodells
Weitere Beiträge aus dem Kontext der Reflexionsgruppe in Transit 26 und 27.
Transit (ISSN 0938-2062) ist zu bestellen über:
Verlag neue kritik
T. +49-69-72 75 76
F. +49-69-72 65 85
Kettenhofweg 53
60325 Frankfurt a.M.
Deutschland
oder online: www.iwm.at/transit.htm
Herausgegeben am
Institut für die
Wissenschaften
vom Menschen
Preis: Abo € 24,- (D)
Zwei Hefte pro Jahr
Einzelheft € 14,- (D)
No. 87
Winter 2005
29
GUEST CONTRIBUTION
With the inauguration of the new Ukrainian president, liberal opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko,
on January 23, 2005, dramatic weeks of struggle for justice and of resistance against a corrupt
regime came to a happy end. But the new leadership faces a lot of challenges, at home and in
international relations. Ukrainian scholar Tatiana Zhurzhenko gives her insights.
Orange Victory: Ukraine Tastes the Exotic Fruits of
Democracy
30
Mit der Amtseinführung
des neuen Ukrainischen
Präsidenten Viktor Juschtschenko am 23. Januar
2005 fanden dramatische
Wochen des Kampfes für
Gerechtigkeit und Widerstands gegen ein korruptes Regime ihr glückliches
Ende. Doch die neue politische Führung des Landes steht vor großen Herausforderungen – zuhause
wie in den internationalen
Beziehungen. In ihrem
Gastbeitrag versucht die
ukrainische Wissenschaftlerin
Tatiana
Zhurzhenko eine erste Bilanz der “Orangen Revolution”.
No. 87
Winter 2005
UKRAINIAN HISTORY has not had many of such moments, and it is hard not to be optimistic and
proud. Whatever the political arrangements among
the ruling elite will be, it is the people who are the
main winners. The citizens of Ukraine woke up
from years of political passivity to defend their
choice. In a little more than a month, a society has
emerged which wants to be informed and respected, which insists on its newly won freedoms.
The unique moment of solidarity between the poor
and the rich, between the Russian-and the Ukrainian-peakers, between students, workers and pensioners against the corrupted regime represents the
birth of the Ukrainian political nation. It is the first
time in Ukrainian post-Soviet history that the president has a truly democratic mandate, that his victory is not a result of dirty political techniques and
clever manipulations of formal democratic rules.
Unlike his predecessors, Yushchenko has been
elected in a situation of real choice and hard, sometimes brutal competition against the enormous
pressure of the state propaganda machine. The
moral credit he got from the people is the best starting point for the long-expected reforms.
It seems, however, that too many political and
moral expectations are now projected on
Yushchenko. Maybe it is unavoidable that the “Orange Revolution” is widely perceived in
eschatological terms, as a final victory over evil. But,
if the promised reforms succeed, what the Ukrainians will have is a boring Western type of democracy
which does not need heroes and mass street actions.
The paradox is that democracy cannot function
without a founding myth of a heroic sacrifice encoded in the national memory. It is not the least
achievement of the Orange Revolution that now
the Ukrainians finally have their own myth, indispensable for every modern nation. Since 1991,
state-employed intellectuals and politologists have
tried, without much success, to construct a “national identity” and “national idea.” Finally they
can relax: “It is fashionable now to be Ukrainian,”
Yushchenko recently said.
An essential element of this new national myth
is that, for example, the students from Russianspeaking Kharkiv rallied at the Majdan together
with L’viv students. Despite the persistent EastWest divide of the country, the Orange Revolution
has made it much easier for Russian-speakers to
identify with the Ukrainian nation now than it was
for them in the early ‘90s, when Ukrainian postSoviet identity referred to an exclusive ethnic and
linguistic core. With the Orange Revolution, a political nation of Ukrainians has emerged, which includes all Ukrainian citizens regardless of their language and ethnicity. In 1991, the hopes of many
Russian-speaking Ukrainians for reforms were still
connected more with Moscow and Yeltsin than
with Kyiv and its provincial and conservative communist nomenklatura. It was only in November
2004 that orange Kyiv has become the real capital
of the Ukrainian nation.
A New Deal between Ukraine’s West and East?
The East-West divide of the country, which became so visible again during these elections, will of
course not disappear overnight. Unlike in the earlier “Velvet Revolutions” in Central Eastern Europe, Ukrainian opposition leaders will have to deal
with a more heterogeneous society. It will be a difficult challenge for the new president to follow his
reformist course and, at the same time, find a way to
meet the interests of those Ukrainian citizens who
voted for his opponent. But there is also a positive
side to the threat of separatism evoked by some regional leaders in the East and South: it has made the
Ukrainians aware that the unity of the country is
not something given and guaranteed, but that it
has to be protected by its citizens. Mass demonstrations in Russian-speaking Kharkiv against the separatist course of governor Kushnaryov are only one
example. To play the separatist card was perhaps the
biggest mistake of Yanukovich, especially given his
official position as Prime Minister.
Contrary to common fears, Yushchenko’s victory could open the way to a new political deal
between the East and West of Ukraine. Some politicians from the opposition, such as businessmen
and the leader of the “Yabluko” party, Brodskiy,
have already proposed some compromises in cultural policy: for example, reintegrating Russian literature into the school curricula. Yushchenko
agreed that the issue of Russian language in
Ukraine should become a subject of serious discussion free from political speculation. Indeed, if
Yushchenko wants to find the way to the hearts of
Tatiana Zhurzhenko GUEST CONTRIBUTION
his East Ukrainian compatriots he has to
be sensitive to the language issue. In a
more independent Ukraine, there is a
chance that Russian language and culture
will not be seen anymore as a threat to national unity and identity, but as an asset.
And, in perspective, Russian-speakers will
win: Russian language rights can be better
protected within the European legal space
than through the help of populist Russian
politicians like Moscow’s mayor Luzhkov.
Orange and Velvet Revolutions
The other difference between the Ukrainian situation and the Velvet Revolutions
in Central Eastern Europe is that some
tasks have already been finished.
Privatization is more or less done, no matter how unjust it might look in the eyes of
the people. Ukraine has already passed the
low point of transformation hardships: its
economy, though destabilized by the recent political crisis, is growing. At the same
time, Yushchenko will not be a Ukrainian
Putin (who also owes his popularity to an
anti-oligarchic program), and it is rather
improbable that there will be a Ukrainian
Khodorkovski case. The best Yushchenko
could achieve is to establish transparent
rules for the Ukrainian capitalists and
force them to work for and not against the
national interests. This will be difficult,
but there are already some encouraging
developments, e.g., business groups
which show some interest in bringing
their corporate policy in line with European standards. In any case, the interests
of the powerful Donetsk clan go far beyond the borders of the region and even of
Ukraine, and its representatives probably
do understand that they need active support of the state to enter European markets.
There are of course also some geopolitical parallels with the era of the Velvet
Revolutions of 1989. Ukraine seems to be
Foto: © PIOTR OSSOWICZ (Polish Invisible College),
Kiev im November 2004
repeating the scenario of escaping its satellite status in order to “return to Europe.”
Attempts to construct a Ukrainian geopolitical identity according to the Central
European model – Ukraine as an authentic part of Europe having been kidnapped
by Russia – are very popular among
Ukrainian intellectuals. But, in fact, this
model only fits for the west of Ukraine.
For the rest, it is more complicated: proEuropean and pro-Russian orientations
are not mutually exclusive here. Against
this backdrop, imposing the agenda of a
NATO membership right now could add
to the existing tensions in Ukrainian society.
Ukraine between a Divided West and
Russia
Contrary to 1989 – the golden age of Velvet Revolutions – the West itself is now
divided. The US as a model of perfect democracy is rather compromised by its foreign and domestic policy. The Western
anti-American sentiment has contributed
to the interpretation that the democratic
opposition in Ukraine is a creation of
Washington. Indeed, the support of the
Bush administration makes it difficult for
many to appreciate the truly democratic
achievements of the Ukrainians. Ukrainian troops in Iraq were aimed at covering
dubious deals of Ukrainian oligarchs and
Kuchma’s administration. Democratic
Ukraine does not need these kinds of arrangements anymore. NATO membership is certainly not the most urgent issue
on the Ukrainian agenda, and the US
would show real commitment to Ukrainian democracy by supporting it even if it
does not bring an immediate geopolitical
dividend.
The issue of EU membership for
Ukraine is a different question. Such an
aim could unite the Ukrainian elites in the
long run. The Orange Revolution has certainly put a challenge to the EU in terms
of its moral and political responsibility in
the region. But are Europeans, and EU
officials in particular, really happy that
their values have triumphantly traveled to
the East? If Yushchenko’s government will
successfully implement his reforms, the
EU has to respond with something more
serious than just offering the status of a
“good neighbor.” There have already been
initial signs that the prevailing attitude is
changing: on January 13, the European
Parliament voted overwhelmingly to endorse Ukraine’s aspirations for EU membership.
Finally, Russia seems to be the most
difficult problem at the moment. The reactions of Putin show that the Ukrainian
oppositional movement is seen as a threat
not only to Russia’s plans for economic
and political integration of the post-Soviet
space, but also as a threat to the authoritarian political regimes in Russia and in other
CIS countries. Lukashenka in Minsk must
have had some orange nightmares recently. Until now, Russian regional hegemony has been based on corrupted, and
therefore controllable national ruling
elites. This might change now.
Yushchenko’s presidency can be seen as a
chance to build serious pragmatic relations
between the Ukraine and Russia that are
not dependent on personal deals and interests of oligarchic clans, but instead on
national interests.
Tatiana Zhurzhenko is Associate Professor of
Philosophy, V. Karazin Kharkiv National
University (Kharkiv, Eastern Ukraine). She was
an IWM Junior Fellow in 2001, and from 2002-04
a Lise Meitner Fellow at the Institut für Osteuropäische Geschichte, Universität Wien,
where she worked on a research project on
the Ukrainian-Russian border regions.
No. 87
Winter 2005
31
IWM EVENTS
Upcoming Events
The following events will take place at the IWM
at 6 p.m.
Die folgenden Veranstaltungen finden um
18:00 Uhr in der Bibliothek des IWM statt.
Montag, 7. März
On Modern History of Central and Eastern Europe
New Series: Tischner Debates
Peter Berger
Professor Emeritus of Religion, Sociology and Theology
and Director of the Institute on Culture, Religion and
World Affairs at Boston University
The IWM and Warsaw
University have jointly
launched a new series in
remembrance of the Polish
priest and philosopher Jozef
Tischner, former President of
the IWM.
Orthodoxy Confronting Modernity
Mittwoch, 9. März, 19:00 Uhr
Politischer Salon
Die Presse and IWM present
The Role of Islam in the Integration of Europe
Institut für
die Wissenschaften
vom Menschen
Jozef Tischner
The first debate takes place at Warsaw University.
1090 Wien
AUSTRIA
Bernard Lewis
Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at
Princeton University
On Solidarity
March 7, 2005, 6:00 PM
Ph. (+43 1) 313 58-0
F. (+43 1) 313 58-30
Panel members:
Participants:
[email protected]
www.iwm.at
Michael Fleischhacker, Die Presse
Krzysztof Michalski, IWM
32
Impressum
Responsible for the
contens of the IWM Post:
In collaboration with the Austrian Newspaper Die
Presse, and with the Austrian Ministry of Defence.
15. März
Barbara Cassin
Directrice de recherches au Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique et codirecteur de la collection
L’Ordre philosophique aux Editions du Seuil
Le vocabulaire européen des philosophies.
Dictionnaire des intraduisibles
In Zusammenarbeit mit dem Französischen
Kulturinstitut
Kurt Biedenkopf
Ombudsman of the German government for the labor
market reform; former Prime Minister of Saxony
Marek Borowski
Chairman of “Social Democracy of Poland”
Jan Maria Rokita
Chairman of “Citizens Platform,” Sejm
Aleksander Smolar
President of the Stefan Batory Foundation, Warsaw
Jerzy Szacki
Professor of Sociology, Warsaw University
In cooperation with the City of Warsaw, the Austrian
Cultural Forum, Warsaw, the journal Rzeczpospolita,
and the Polish Broadcasting Corporation.
5. April
Arjo Klamer
Chair of Economics of Art and Culture, Erasmus University Rotterdam; Research Professor of Economics, The
George Washington University
Dear Readers,
Benjamin Frommer
Assistant Professor of History, Northwestern University, Evanston
We hope you will agree that the IWM Newsletter has
grown to become something more than an ordinary
newsletter. Aside from reporting on the institute’s fellows
and activities, it offers exclusive articles, such as guest
commentaries and book reviews by renowned scholars
and friends of the IWM. While providing an insight into
our work, it also offers readers an opportunity to reflect
upon important issues of the day. With this in mind, we
have decided to rename our publication. We thank you
for your interest in our work, and hope that you will enjoy
the IWM Post.
One Country, Two Reckonings: Czech and Slovak
Retribution against Nazi Collaborators, 1945-1948
The IWM
Money and its Limits
In collaboration with the Royal Netherlands
Embassy
12. April
No. 87
Winter 2005
Editor
Sabine Aßmann
Editorial Assistance
Christoph Bärenreuter,
Nikolai Butzki, Claudia
Stadler, Thomas Szanto,
Anna Verner
Production Manager,
Layout
Iris Strohschein
Photos
Renate Apostel, IHS
Boston University,
IWM, Piotr Ossowicz,
Krzysztof Wojciewski
Design
Gerri Zotter
The IWM Post is
published four times a
year. Current circulation:
6200. Printed by Rema
Print.
© IWM 2005

scottish police federation

Transcription

Similar documents

Rockmusik und im fiktionalen Film

Ethik: Reproduktionsmedizin im Licht von Verantwortungs ethik und

Erweiterung: Vergessene Reiche

Wiener Kongress - Carl Gerold`s Sohn Verlagsbuchhandlung

The Muslim World and Europe

Bulletin 1

ApokAlypsen - Swissfuture

Barbara Frischmuth. Frankfurt/M.

Zu einer gemeinsamen Kultur der Zusammenarbeit zwischen der

Germanistik im europäischen Kontext

IWM Newsletter 85

als PDF - Kulturstiftung der Länder

- Mariaberg eV