Nowdays Karel Maria Drahotín baron Villani is practically unknown although he belonged to renowned and brilliant individualities of the Czech cultural life in the 19th century. First of all he was popular as liberal politician who held the same opinions like František Palacký. Villani gave himself to poetry as well though his poems did not reach the top. He was one of first authors who appreciated Mácha´s Máj. The thesis deals not only with baron Villani´s political opinions and his literary work but also his public activities, salon of his family and his legency created after his death as well.

In the debate generated by the authorization and reauthorization of the Patriot act we can find a wide range of opinions and ideas concerning the balance of freedom and security, and how that might affect the society. The government (the creators of the law) advocates the necessity of the Patriot act and its structural changes to secure the freedoms of USA. While opposing views suggest that these changes affect the balance of freedom and security in such a way that it might affect the way of life and be a threat to the civil liberties of the citizens. The aim of this thesis is to investigate how the debate reflects how the Patriot act may have affected the balance between the various practices of freedoms and national security in USA. This thesis investigates three aspects of the debate that concerns the Patriot act. The rhetoric’s used in the debate by both sides show some difference in the rationales of the debating sides. Some controversial aspects of the law undermine the safeguards that are suppose to protect the civil liberties and freedoms when their definitions are opened up for a wide arrange of interpretations. The third part of the thesis investigates the big brother mentality that is being fostered and culture of preparedness of all the nation’s dimensions and systems that is asked for in order to adapt to these systematic changes of their society that the law provides. The investigation of the debate conclude that state apparatus takes on a role of coordinative micromanaging, which together with the culture of preparedness fosters the nation to always be on its toes. As a result of these changes the practices of freedom and the democratic values they nourish are being destabilized and undermined in the climate of fear that is being established.

Biopolitics is a concept that, much like the apparatus it refers to, has kept evolving ever since Foucault coined its modern meaning in 1976. Its usage and interpretation have especially changed with the recent publication of The Birth of Biopolitics and Society, Territory, Population, books that helped expand its perceived field of application, specifically vis-à-vis the modern governmental rationales of neo-liberalism and, by association, neo-conservatism. In a separate development, the Western dispositif (apparatus) of biopolitics has undergone a dramatic transformation as a result of the terrorist attacks of 9/11, attacks after which, to quote Donald Rumsfeld, ‘everything changed’. My thesis takes both of these developments into account and provides a critical exploration of contemporary biopolitical US counter-terrorist measures. Emphasis is placed on a contextual juridico-political analysis that sheds more light on the complex interrelations between the relatively novel biopolitical dispositif and the classical legal dispositif of sovereignty. This is accomplished by a two-part empirical genealogical study that traces some of the pivotal judicial changes that have resulted from the counter-terrorist measures introduced in the wake of 9/11. It proposes that the PATRIOT Act, one of the primary legislative tools introduced after 9/11, is a distinctively ‘bio-legal’ document that allows for the integration of the biopolitical discourses of pre-emption, exception and contingency within the existing legal framework. I argue that this is a genuinely novel development that significantly alters the intersection of biopolitics, geopolitics and law. The second part of the empirical analysis presents a detailed interrogation of the legal disputes that involve the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and, over the course of three key legal cases, shows that, even though the logic of biopolitics has now established a foothold within the US juridical system, the classical apparatus of Sovereignty still plays a decisive role in US governance. My key arguments are preceded and supported by an extensive overview of the notion of biopolitics, both as it was first introduced and developed by Foucault over the course of five publications, and as it is currently being used by key contemporary social theorists, especially insofar as this usage relates to the changes in Western politics after 9/11. Overall, the thesis provides a profound interrogation of the epistemic status of biopolitics, and it supplements this purely theoretical analysis with a detailed overview of how biopolitics and sovereignty interact in practice through the mechanism of the law, in the context of US counter-terrorist policies after 9/11.

No description available.

No description available.

It has been more than seven years since the events of the September 11 terrorist attacks have changed the way in which American citizens live on a daily basis. Some of us have become anxious while traveling, some more guarded in what we choose to discuss in public and with whom we associate, some more suspicious of other races and religions, some more suspicious of our own government. All American citizens-whether or not they were victims of racial profiling post September I I-have had to change the way in which they obtain information and understand their rights to privacy and knowledge. In my thesis, I explore how the enactment of the Patriot Act and the affiliated surveillance of American citizens (as well as foreign nationals) have not only violated our constitutional rights to free expression, but have also violated our intellectual and privacy rights. Specifically, I am concerned with the negative impact of the Patriot Act on the ability and willingness of American citizens to obtain information and to express their opinions about politically sensitive topics. This fear of being labeled a threat to national security or a potential terrorist has created a nation in which many citizens are increasingly complacent about violations of their intellectual rights, negligent about upholding their epistemic responsibilities, and increasingly ignorant about their own nation's policies, as well as global events In order to eradicate the negative influence of the Patriot Act on the epistemic rights and responsibilities of American citizens, I propose that the American public cultivate the epistemological virtues necessary to educate themselves on domestic as well as global matters. I suggest that this would enhance our national security, in addition to preserving our civil liberties and enlarging our intellectual understanding of global events and relationships.

The United States military has an enormous presence in American society. Not only is the military currently engaged in two wars, one in Iraq and another in Afghanistan, but it also employs hundreds of thousands of people in work within US borders and overseas. As a function of its size and prominence in American society, it participates in discourse with American society and apart from it. This thesis investigates and describes the US military in terms of two spheres of discourse, an external and internal. Through three case studies-featuring the Patriot missile system, the America's Army video game, and the scandal of prisoner treatment at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq-it will be shown that not only does the military·engage in corresponding public facing and introspective discourse, but that the external and internal discourses can also exert dominance over each other.

During the Revolutionary War, many key Patriot leaders believed that militia were untrustworthy and useless in battle. After the American victory, many of the same men proclaimed their support for the militia as the foundation of the new nation's defense. The debate on the efficacy of Patriot militia continues into modern scholarship; some historians credit the militia with an important strategic role in the war, while others consider them a mere footnote in a conflict that was truly won by the Continental Army. This series of case studies examines four American expeditionary militia units to assess their level of military competence and professionalism. The results show that militia units were far from amateur, and many conducted their operations in a professional military manner. This supports a conclusion that militia both contributed to the American victory and remained a practical means of defense for the young nation.

This thesis examines the British monarchy in the eighteenth century and how the philosophy of Frederick, Prince of Wales, helped to shape that monarchy. The early Hanoverians were seen with contempt by many of their subjects, often being ridiculed as ignorant outsiders. They helped matters none by their indifference to Britain, its people, or its culture. Prince Frederick, George II’s eldest son, however, changed all of this. His philosophy on kingship, influenced by Henry, Viscount Bolingbroke’s work, The Patriot King, helped to change the perception of the Hanoverian dynasty. When Prince Frederick died in 1751 before he could take the throne, it was left up to his son, Prince George, to carry out Frederick’s vision. As George III, he fulfilled the philosophy and became the embodiment of the patriot king. This resulted in a surge in popularity for the Hanoverians, solidifying their place on the British throne.

Freedom and safety are two ideals that American citizens value greatly; however, the balance between privacy and security determines whether or not both can be achieved in a reasonable manner. Security and privacy are not mutually exclusive; however, they tend to exhibit an inverse correlation with regards to maintaining individual liberties. Security and privacy are highly beneficial, but when one is given too much weight, the other most often suffers. When the United States citizens are given too much privacy through regulations, the citizens risk their well-being by not allowing the government the ability to prevent dangerous activities being done by criminals. Citizens are unable to defend themselves against foreign and domestic threats of terrorism that affect large amounts of people such as bombings in public settings; however, the federal government can help to prevent such attacks in public settings through surveillance of public areas and monitoring of internet and intracellular communications. When the United States federal government is given too much discretion in security powers through legislation, citizens are at risk of losing their civil rights granted in the Bill of Rights and in Supreme Court cases. The United States of America has had a dangerous imbalance of power in favor of national security since the adoption of the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001, and the imbalance has continued to the present even after the passage of the USA FREEDOM Act in 2015. This thesis will be a comparative analysis of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 to the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015. This thesis will show what specific powers are granted through provisions of the acts, whether or not the provisions are unconstitutional, how the privacy and security of American citizens will change due to the provisions in the USA FREEDOM Act, and suggestions for how the United States federal government can continue to tilt the balance between security and liberty to ensure more protection for civil liberties and a decrease in national security powers. The suggestions will include three options for gaining the protection of civil liberties and the elimination of certain national security powers and the options are through Supreme Court cases on national security laws pertaining to individual cases or states, Congress passing concurring minor bills with the proposed plan to fully repeal granted national security powers without disturbing congressional alliances on other measures, and Congress passing a single act called the State Surveillance Repeal Act in order to fully repeal the USA PATRIOT Act provisions that would still be in effect after the passage of the USA FREEDOM Act.