This diploma thesis analyzes some of the most successful movements in the Czech Republic - ANO and Svoboda a přímá demokracie Tomio Okamury through the content analysis and the theory of populism by Cas Mudd. The aim of the thesis is to determine to what extent both movements are populist in view of the theory mentioned above and how their populism is different. The thesis is divided into two main parts. The first one - the theoretical part is devoted to the concept of populism. In this part three most distinctive streams of populism research are presented: 1) populism as a political (communication) style 2) populism as a strategy and 3) populism as an ideology. The second one - the analytical part includes a methodology in which the criteria for determining what populism is by using the populist core features defined by Francisco Panniza and Cas Mudd are defined. Subsequently, I analyze the content analysis of programming and media representation involving the Facebook social network of both political entities. The results of the analysis are that ANO and SPD - Tomio Okamury fulfill the criteria of all three core features in their media presentations and therefore can be described as populist. There are all three core features appearing in the programs of both movements, what is more SPD is more...

Im Koalitionsvertrag von 2014 haben die Regierungsparteien CDU und SPD ihre Vorhaben für die gemeinsame Regierungszeit festgelegt. Im Frühjahr 2017 ist die Hälfte der Legislaturperiode absolviert – ein guter Zeitpunkt, eine erste Bilanz zu ziehen. Redaktionsschluss: 04.05.2017

German question and Ostpolitik within the years 1963-1966 Petra Matějů MATĚJŮ, Petra. Německá a východní politika v letech 1963-1966. Praha, 2011. 103 s. Diplomová práce (Mgr.) Univerzita Karlova, Fakulta sociálních věd, Institut mezinárodních studií. Katedra německých a rakouských studií. Vedoucí diplomové práce PhDr. Tomáš Nigrin, Ph.D. The master thesis German question and Ostpolitik within the years 1963-1966 is focused on the attitudes of the parliamentary parties in the Federal Republic of Germany - CDU/CSU (Christian Democratic Union and Social Democratic Party of Germany), FDP (Free Democratic Party) and SPD (Social Democratics Party of Germany) - to the policy towards the countries of the Eastern Bloc and with the changes in these attitudes in the period from 1963 to 1966, when the Federal Cabinet of Ludwig Erhard held rule. The main thesis of this study is the premise that in all the parliamentary parties in the Federal Republic of Germany a significant shift in the approach to the German question and Ostpolitik within the years 1963-1966 occurred. This thesis should be verified or refuted by means of a detailed chronological description and analysis of the progress of the issue, followed by the comparative analysis of the attitudes of the parties in view to the policy towards the Soviet...

This thesis deals with European policy of the SPD, the oldest and biggest German left-wing political party. The main focus is on time period from 1998 to 2005, when Gerhard Schröder's government was in power. The aim of this thesis is to describe the social democratic change in approach to European policy. The study also examines three SPD internal debates about "Neue Mitte", European finality and first eastern enlargement of the European Union. The European policy of the German Social Democrats has undergone a significant change since 1998. The party became more assertive, pragmatic and realistic.

In 2017 an old law recirculated in Germany which illegalized doctors from informing about abortion other than verbally in person. According to previous research on feminist policy change, a removal (liberalization), of the law hinges on: the presence of an autonomous feminist organization, if civil society, norms and a political majority supports the removal. The more of these factors are present the higher the likelihood of liberalization. All these factors were present in the German case but the outcome of the debate and policy process that occurred, a preservation of the law after a one-year long struggle, was highly unexpected. This thesis aims to understand and explain the outcome focussing on the struggle between the confessional and secular government coalition members CDU/CSU and SPD, as the latter, as expected, supported the removal but then unexpectedly voted for preservation. The study is conducted as an abductive explanatory process tracing, concentrates on the factions within the SPD as well as the CDU/CSU throughout the different stages of the process. The main findings are that confessional parties can utilize formal and informal institutions in a parliamentary setting to avoid a substantial liberalization of abortion regulatory laws. The SPD was split on the issue where its leadership, who compromised to keep the government running, overrun the large faction within the party supporting revocation.

No description available.

No description available.

Cette thèse de doctorat est une biographie politique de Paul Levi, militant marxiste qui a fait carrière en Allemagne durant la période de l’entre-deux-guerres. Dès 1914, Levi incarne un courant radical à l’intérieur du Parti social-démocrate d’Allemagne (SPD). Il dénonce, entre autres, aux côtés de Rosa Luxemburg l’appui du parti à l’effort militaire national. Levi s’inspire également de Lénine qu’il rencontre pour la première fois en Suisse en 1916-1917. Lorsqu’il prend les commandes du Parti communiste d’Allemagne (KPD) en 1919, Levi dirige celui-ci d’une main de fer, selon le concept du « centralisme démocratique ». Il fait également tout en son pouvoir pour faire éclater la révolution ouvrière en Allemagne afin d’installer une dictature du prolétariat qui exclurait toutes les classes non ouvrières du pouvoir. En ce sens, Levi imagine un État socialiste semblable à celui fondé par Lénine en Russie en 1917. Contrairement à l’historiographie traditionnelle, notre thèse montre conséquemment que Levi n’était guère un « socialiste démocrate ». Il était plutôt un militant marxiste qui, par son radicalisme, a contribué à diviser le mouvement ouvrier allemand ce qui, en revanche, a fragilisé la république de Weimar. Cette thèse fait également ressortir le caractère résolument rebelle de Paul Levi. Partout où il passe, Levi dénonce les politiques bourgeoises des partis non-ouvriers, mais aussi celles de la majorité des organisations dont il fait partie, c’est-à-dire les partis ouvriers de la république de Weimar et le Reichstag. Son tempérament impulsif fait de lui un homme politique isolé qui, d’ailleurs, se fait de nombreux ennemis. En 1921, à titre d’exemple, il se brouille avec d’importants bolcheviques, ce qui met fin à sa carrière au sein du KPD. Les communistes voient désormais en lui un ennemi de la classe ouvrière et mènent contre lui de nombreuses campagnes diffamatoires. Levi, de son côté, dénonce ouvertement la terreur stalinienne qui, selon lui, est en train de contaminer le mouvement communiste européen. Notre travail montre également que Levi, cette fois en tant qu’avocat juif, lutte corps et âme contre les nazis. En 1926, dans le cadre d’une commission d’enquête publique du Reichstag chargée de faire la lumière sur des meurtres politiques commis en Bavière, il tente par tous les moyens d’inculper certains criminels nazis. Levi est conséquemment la cible de la presse antisémite allemande. Il refuse toutefois de céder à l’intimidation et choisit plutôt de poursuivre en justice quelques-uns des plus importants membres du Parti nazi, dont Alfred Rosenberg et Hitler lui-même, en plus de forcer de nombreux autres nazis à comparaître devant la commission d’enquête du Reichstag. Bref, si ce travail se veut critique envers la pensée révolutionnaire de Levi, il souligne aussi l’intégrité politique de cet homme dont les convictions sont demeurées inébranlables face aux dérives criminelles des extrêmes idéologiques de son époque. / This Ph.D. thesis is a political biography of Paul Levi, a German Marxist of the interwar period. Already in 1914, Levi embodied a radical faction within the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD). Alongside Rosa Luxemburg, the leader of this same left wing, he is contesting, above all, the party’s participation in the national war effort. But Levi is also inspired by Lenin, who he met in Switzerland in 1916-1917. In fact, when taking over the leadership of the German Communist Party (KPD) in March 1919, Levi ruled with an iron fist according to the theory of “democratic centralism”. As Lenin has done in Russia in October 1917, Levi also did everything in his power to promote a workers’ revolution in Germany in order to set in power a dictatorship of the proletariat, which would exclude all other social classes from sitting in the government. Consequently, in opposition to traditional historiography, this thesis shows that Levi was not a “democratic Socialist” of the Luxemburg school, but rather a Marxist whose political thought resembled that of the Bolsheviks. In fact, his action contributed to further weaken an already frail Weimar Republic and all its democratic institutions. This study also shows that Levi’s outstanding career was in large part the result of his rebellious character. Throughout his life, Levi consistently denounced the bourgeois politics of the non-workers’ parties, but he also systematically went against the majority within the political organizations in which he took part: the workers’ parties and the Reichstag. His impulsive nature set him apart as a solitary politician. In fact, Levi had many enemies. In 1921, he ran afoul of major Bolshevik leaders, which caused him to lose the leadership of the KPD. The Communists subsequently saw him as an enemy of the working class, slandering him in the press and in the Reichstag. Levi denounced, for his part, the Stalinist terror and made a mockery of the KPD, which had become, according to him, no more than a Soviet puppet. But this thesis also reveals that Levi, as a Jewish lawyer, led a major political campaign against the Nazis. In 1926, for example, as he served on a Reichstag public commission investigating Bavarian political assassinations, he tried by all possible means to charge important Nazis with murder. The Nazi press replied with a vicious anti-Semitic press campaign against him. Levi, however, refused to kneel before such intimidation and rather chose to sue important Nazi leaders, such as Alfred Rosenberg and Hitler himself before the court, in addition to summoning many others before the above-mentioned Reichstag commission. In the end, despite the fact that this study very critically evaluates Levi’s ideology, it praises his political integrity, which remained unshakable though faced with adversity and the criminal drift of the political extremes of the interwar period.

Cette thèse porte sur les conceptions d’Egon Bahr dans le domaine de la politique à l’Est (Ostpolitik) de la République fédérale d’Allemagne (RFA) entre 1945 et 1975. L’analyse se concentre sur le lien entre l’Ostpolitik et l’idée que Bahr se fait de la place et du rôle de l’Allemagne en Europe. Plus précisément, cette étude veut cerner les buts poursuivis par Bahr dans le cadre de la politique orientale. La première partie traite du développement conceptuel de l’Ostpolitik (1945-1969), tandis que la seconde examine sa mise en application entre l’élection de Willy Brandt comme chancelier de la RFA et la conclusion des accords d’Helsinki (1969-1975). Les principales sources utilisées sont les écrits de Bahr ainsi que des documents inédits se trouvant dans divers centres d’archives non seulement en Allemagne, mais aussi aux États-Unis, en France et en Grande-Bretagne. Pour Bahr, l’Ostpolitik ne saurait se résumer à l’élimination des obstacles qui gênent la diplomatie ouest-allemande durant la guerre froide. Bahr poursuit plutôt un projet nationaliste ambitieux dans le contexte des relations avec le bloc soviétique : créer les conditions d’une redéfinition de la place de l’Allemagne en Europe. Pour lui, l’Ostpolitik constitue un instrument idéal pour faire de l’Allemagne la puissance prépondérante dans un nouvel ordre de paix européen. Trois éléments complémentaires participent à l’accomplissement de cette vision : 1) la consolidation de la paix et de la sécurité continentales; 2) la réunification allemande et 3) l’émancipation de la politique étrangère (ouest-)allemande. Cette thèse éclaire la pensée politique de Bahr et contribue à une meilleure compréhension de la signification de l’Ostpolitik dans le contexte plus large de la politique étrangère de la RFA. Les conceptions de Bahr sont uniques dans l’Allemagne de la guerre froide parce qu’elles sont centrées sur les notions de puissance, d’intérêt national et de « normalité ». En même temps, Bahr comprend que la coopération doit toujours rester l’instrument diplomatique privilégié des Allemands vu leur position géographique centrale. À travers le prisme des conceptions de son « architecte », l’Ostpolitik apparaît comme un véritable effort de réconciliation entre la paix en Europe et l’affirmation de l’influence allemande sur la scène internationale. / This thesis deals with Egon Bahr’s understanding of the Federal Republic of Germany’s (FRG) Eastern policy (Ostpolitik) between 1945 and 1975. The analysis is centered on the link between Ostpolitik and Bahr’s conception of Germany’s position and role in the European system. More precisely, this study aims at finding out which goals Bahr pursued in the context of Bonn’s Eastern policy. The first part of the thesis deals with the conceptual development of Ostpolitik (1945-1969). The second part takes a look at its implementation for the period between Willy Brandt’s election as West German Chancellor and the conclusion of the Helsinki Final Act (1969-1975). This thesis relies primarily on Bahr’s writings, including a vast number of unpublished sources, located mostly in German archives, but also in American, French and British archives. According to Bahr, Ostpolitik was not limited to the elimination of West Germany’s burdens in foreign policy during the Cold War. In fact, he pursued an ambitious, nationalistic project in the context of relations with the Soviet bloc. Bahr sought to create the necessary conditions for Germany to redefine its place in Europe. With Ostpolitik as his diplomatic instrument, his ultimate goal was to see Germany become the central power in a new European peace order. Three interrelated objectives formed the core of this vision: 1) the consolidation of peace and security on the continent; 2) German reunification and 3) the emancipation of (West) German foreign policy. This thesis sheds new light on Bahr’s political thought and contributes to a better understanding of Ostpolitik’s significance in the larger context of West German foreign policy. Bahr’s conceptions were unique in Cold War Germany because they were based on notions of power, the national interest and “normality”. At the same time, Bahr understood that Germans, because of their central geographic position, always had to rely on cooperation as the prime instrument of all their diplomatic initiatives. Through its “architect”, Ostpolitik appears as an effort at reconciliation between a peaceful Europe and the unhindered affirmation of German influence in world affairs.

La construction européenne fut entre la conférence de La Haye en 1969 et la signature de l’Acte unique européen en 1986, une entreprise d’intégration des sociétés européennes principalement économique, notamment fondée sur la libre circulation des marchandises, des hommes mais aussi des services et des capitaux. Ce projet de marché unique transnational fut un défi inouï lancé aux Etats et aux partis politiques qui organisent l’expression politique au sein de chaque nation. Deux partis, profondément enracinés par leur identité socialiste et démocratique dans la vie de leur nation et également mus par l’idéal européen, le parti social-démocrate d’Allemagne (SPD) et le Parti socialiste français (PS), furent, par l’action de leurs dirigeants au pouvoir, étroitement associés à la réalisation du projet européen.Ces partis furent-ils des acteurs qui imprimèrent la marque du socialisme démocratique à la construction européenne ou l’accompagnèrent-ils sans en corriger les traits originaux ? Ont-ils façonné le modèle économique de l’intégration européenne ou s’est-il imposé à eux ? Partant, cette expérience européenne les conduisit-elle à préserver ou à modifier leur identité ? Notre recherche nous conduit ainsi à étudier la rencontre entre deux utopies, l’utopie européenne et l’utopie du socialisme démocratique et à mesurer l’extrême difficulté pour ces deux partis de créer un modèle qui fasse converger ces deux caractéristiques du PS et du SPD et leur permette de rester des forces politiques d’avenir, riches de propositions partagées à l’échelle européenne. / Between the conference of The Hague (1965) and the signing of the Single European Act (1986), the European Construction was foremost an economic endeavour aiming at integrating the European societies and based on the free movement of goods, people, services and money. The creation of the common market was an extraordinary challenge for the nation states and for the political parties which are responsible for the expression of the political life of their nation. Two parties, the French socialist party (PS) and the social-democratic party of Germany (SPD), both deeply rooted in the political life of their own nation, with a socialist and democratic identity, but also moved by European ideals, were greatly involved in the realisation of the European project, mainly through the action of their leaders when these were exercising their national responsibilities and ruling their nation.Thus the questioning: did these parties leave the mark of democratic socialism on the European construction or did they only accompany it without correcting the original features? Did they participate in the definition of the European economic model or not? And in turn, did the European construction lead them to preserve or to modify their identity?Our inquiry leads us to study how two utopian ideas, the path towards democratic socialism and the path towards European unity, interfere. The extreme difficulty for both parties to create a convergence between these two paths could prevent them from remaining political strengths with great future at national and European scale.