No description available.

No description available.

Aus dem Inhalt: 1 Einleitung 2 Forschungsstand 2.1 Erklärungsansätze auf der Makroebene 2.1.1 Der Regimeansatz von Esping-Andersen 2.1.2 Feministische Ansätze 2.1.3 Der sozio-kulturelle Geschlechter-Arrangement-Ansatz 2.1.4 Forschungsbefunde auf Makroebene 2.2 Erklärungsansätze auf der Mikroebene 2.2.1 Humankapitaltheorie 2.2.2 Theorie der Neuen Haushaltsökonomik 2.2.3 Ressourcentheorie 2.2.4 Präferenztheorie 2.2.5 Forschungsbefunde auf Mikroebene 2.3 Hypothesenableitung 3 Empirische Analyse 3.1 Grundlagen der empirischen Untersuchung 3.1.1 Forschungsdesign 3.1.2 Datenbasis 3.1.3 Variablen und Operationalisierung 3.1.4 Analyseschritte und methodisches Vorgehen 3.2 Empirische Befunde 3.2.1 Modellierung der Entscheidung für eine Voll- bzw. Teilzeit-Erwerbstätigkeit 3.2.2 Modellierung der tatsächlich geleisteten Arbeitsstunden pro Woche 4 Zusammenfassung und Schlussfolgerungen

Aus dem Inhalt: 1 Einleitung 2 Entwicklungen auf dem deutschen Arbeitsmarkt 2.1 Das Normalarbeitsverhältnis und seine Bedeutung für den deutschen Arbeitsmarkt 2.2 Flexibilität von Beschäftigungsverhältnissen 2.3 Die Entwicklung der Beschäftigungsverhältnisse in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 3 Das deutsche System sozialer Sicherung 3.1 Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland als konservativer Wohlfahrtsstaat 3.2 Zur Prekarität atypischer Beschäftigung im deutschen System sozialer Sicherung 4 Die Flexicurity-Strategie anderer Länder 4.1 Dänemark 4.2 Niederlande 5 Die Bewährung der dargestellten arbeitsmarkt- und sozialpolitischen Modelle und Schlussfolgerungen für die Bundesrepublik 5.1 Zur Performanz der Modelle in Dänemark, Deutschland und den Niederlanden 5.2 Ansatzpunkte für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland 6 Fazit und Ausblick

Inhalt: 1 Einleitung 2 Familienpolitik 2.1 Was ist „Familie“? 2.2 Begriffsbestimmung - Familienpolitik 2.2.1 Kurzer Rückblick: Wandel der familialen Lebensform im Industriezeitalter 2.2.2 Warum Familienpolitik? Strukturelle Veränderungen der familialen Lebensform 2.2.3 Familienpolitische Wirkung auf die Bevölkerung 2.3 Wohlfahrtslogiken nach Gøsta Esping-Andersen 2.4 Familienpolitische Leistungen in Schweden, Großbritannien und Deutschland 2.4.1 Monetäre Leistungen und Fiskalpolitik 2.4.2 Zeitwerte Anrechte 2.4.3 Infrastrukturelle Angebote der Kinderbetreuung 3 Fazit und Ausblick

The attitude of the East Germans to the Polish is burdened with the heritage of the past. After 1945 the composition of the population on both sides of the new border along the Oder and Neisse rivers changed drastically. On the eastern side the Germans were expelled and Polish people were settled. On the western side many expelled Germans found a new home. Despite the fact that the GDR signed the Oder-Neisse border treaty, the ruling communist party (SED) did not encourage contacts between the people living on both sides of Oder and Neisse in the following years. The policy of the SED towards the Polish communists during the whole period between 1946-1989 was characterised by arrogance and suspicion, at times falling back on old anti-Polish stereotypes. Especially in the 1980s, the GDR tried to prevent the influence of Solidarnosc and dissident ideas from entering the country. Despite this policy, substantial personal contacts developed, particularly in the 1970s when the border was fully opened. The authors argue that current German-Polish relations should make use of these experiences.

The self-awareness of the subject is always dependent on interaction with others. Thus, self-awareness and social awareness are two sides of the same coin. The Self is not only to be won through social ties with others, but at the same time through distance from them. So long as this does not lead to isolation, there is a possibility of working out common values and identities. The construction of common identities is a process of social definition and construction. Materials for this are space-time, social, cultural, economic, and administrative-legal attributes which are transformed into identity-building attributes. Ethnic movements are often portrayed as social dramas. The processes of institution-building and nation-building never stop. Their supporters relate identity management to the central nation-state and consensus, possible minorities count on a strategy of differentiation and conflict instead.

Germany gained its unity, but the restoration of virtual national cohesion presents itself as a lasting problem. The rebuilding of common national identity forms one complex aspect. Particular West and East German political, social and cultural features still exist. The East Germans brought elements of a peculiar identity into the unity; as a repercussion of some setbacks in their position and of some actual inter-German distinctions, their peculiarities are not yet in retreat. They prolong their role as conventional feelings, in temporary behaviours as an answer to their actual stance, and to a certain extent also with traits staged and suggested by entrenched media interpretations about the presently hampered inter-German evolution.

Lithuania and Poland had cooperated for centuries and even created a political union. The pacts had been very useful for both sides and consequently, the peoples and especially the Lithuanian elite was ready to absorb parts of the Polish culture. Lithuania broke with this tradition dating back to the Middle Ages only after the first division of Poland. During 1944- 1990, the so-called "Soviet period in Lithuania", two different processes could be observed: Russification and Lithuanification. Although dependent on Moscow, the leading Lithuanian politicians never forgot Lithuanian interests and supported the national conscience. After Lithuania gained independence in 1990, a huge wave of national enthusiasm swapped over the country. In the meantime, politicians came back to reality: The independence of Lithuania seems consolidated and the old tradition to re-establish the Polish-Lithuanian cooperation seems to be on the run since Aleksander Kwasniewski had visited Lithuania in January 1996.

J. Kiaupiene, a severe critic of Kosman’s ideas, presents a different view on Lithuanian history. Kosman's description of Lithuania's past is neither exact nor new. Scholars in Russia, Poland and Belorussia have interpreted Lithuania's history in very different ways. The reason for this variety is the difference of national interests. Kosman's view reflects Polish messianism and cultural hybris. But even among Lithuanian scholars there are conflicting views on this nation's history and cultural identity.