Abstracts

CONFRONTATIONS AND LAW

Vladimir Rukavishnikov: A Letter and Comment to the Russia-Ukraine confrontation
In fact, there was no Kremlin’s plan to include Novorossia in Russia in February of this year, 2014. At least, such a conclusion could be made on basis of media sources. As it could be easy drawn from the previous text, the two aforementioned variants – the Russian military intervention, and acceptance of the failure of Novorossia – bring to the RF a lot of negative consequences. Those, who are standing for an intervention, have to understand that the best chance to use troops today has been lost. In the coming weeks, all will depend on whether Kiev will be able to take one of the two key cities by force, and if such a situation would arise, Moscow would have to take the decision about either entering troops to Ukraine or about a delivery of Novorossia to the enemy. Nobody believes in a long-lasting cease-fire. Analytics of media reported that after the beginning of May 2014 the entire tone of Russian propaganda about the Ukraine became softer, while the statements by Russian politicians – more moderate, and the speed of this changes is related not to the threat of Western sanctions but to the change of public sentiment: most Russians do not want a war with Ukraine; the Russian public will not support any military intervention in the neighboring state. Nobody in Kremlin, according to numerous media reports, was concerned with the western sanctions. Personal sanctions occurred to be not “working”, at least as planned by the western powers.

Csaba Varga: Fight for Law – Or What Does »Rule of Law« versus »Rechtsstaatlichkeit« Mean?
Rechtsstaatlichkeit, on the one hand, in its historical background with princely authority into which popular ultimate trust can exclusively be placed, strives to achieve its goals through comprehensive and across-the-board regulations, issued by the force of state authority. It attaches guarantee to each aspect it wishes to protect through these regulations. Its overall conception of law postulates that we subject ourselves to the authority of a text. This accounts for the axiomatic ideal and logical pattern of legal thinking, rooted in the ideal according to which that what mental operation is is basically a sequence of logical submission and, in the form of normative syllogism, also the sequence of a series of deductive conclusion. The Rule of Law, on the other hand, rests on the principle of all-covering justiciability. All it institutionalizes is the right to contact a judicial forum for a definitive legal verdict via due process in any case that may have legal relevance. As an off-spring of British and American historical experience, it has trust in the self-reconstruction of social processes themselves. It considers both the self-organization and the permanent renewal of societal processes the foundation on which the legal system, too, rests. Their historical experience has not elevated artificial human constructions to the role of the buttresses of continuity. Accordingly, the law is not embedded symbolically in concrete, but rests on the natural self-organization of human processes themselves. Law is committed to the care of the continuity of organic social existence.

Peter Jasek: Causes and Consequences: Slovak Historiography and the Communist Past
Slovak historiography has not paid the attention to the issue of communism that such an important topic would deserve for various reasons. It is a relatively new topic which the researchers, be it historians or others from related scientific areas. This statement is valid despite the fact that recently many archive resources were made available, which, alongside those who still remember period of communism, allow to map the very broad scope of aspects of communism, but a comprehensive publication based on a systematic research of archive documents has not been published in the Slovak historiography, yet. But it didn’t mean, that Slovak historiography has ignored period of communism. There are several very good books and partial studies focusing on the several issues.

Juan de Dios Torralbo Caballero: Areopagitica of John Milton – Law, Praxis and Defense of Freedom
Against the new law of 1643, John Milton reacted vehemently through his political prose. The writer did not want the state to judge the suitability of a work before it could be printed, considering that the act of removing a book amounted to taking a life, committing a murder; an act of slaughter. Using flowery language, where the pomposity and biblical references exude everywhere, Milton wields a handful of reasons against the ”Licensing Act”. This provides the basis of political liberalism and freedom of expression.

José Villegas: Malvinas versus Falkland Islands – The Argentinian – British Confrontation of Belonging
On April 2, 1982, Argentina, with their “disembarkment” on the Malvinas / Falkland Islands, began the process that lead to the recovery of Democracy, with the fall of the bloodiest dictatorship she suffered throughout her history. That is why we say that 1982 is a pivotal year between two well-defined segments of our historic homeland. Definitely, the Malvinas / Falklands War contributed to the collapse of the ‘de facto’ government. But that also that brought us to the real world that existed behind the ‘walls’ within which we were fenced in. A world in which we recognized there are enemies and friends. We could see, that we belonged to that part of the world in which people demanded an end to colonialism and there was those who expressed their solidarity by being on our side against hegemonic powers. When we ask our people whether ”Are the Malvinas Argentine”?; we get a resounding YES for an answer. But when we then ask ”Why are they Argentine”?; few claim to know the answer. Following we shall see the texts, that acted as causes and effects of those events, in order to bring them back to our readers’ memory. May these succinct contributions help us to accurately understand why the Falklands / Malvinas Islands belong to us?

József N. Szabó – Zoltán Császár: The Hungarian Communist Party and the Academic Elite after the 2th WW
Horgony Academics’ “convertibility” during the change of a regime is also easier than that of theother groups because their entering and remaining in the elite is connected with special, scientific achievements rather than system specific reasons. Scientific excellence does not only mean prestige, but it provides a relative independence. Being a part of the elite and having a partial independence is not only accepted by the society but also by the actual authority. However independent the academic elite and autonomous their institutions may be, for different reasons they can only ensure their independence in the purest pluralist democracy. Since between the two world wars Hungary was not a role model of civil democracy, there were direct connection points between the academic elite and those in power. This is not only due to the fact that most of the academic elite came from the ranks of the ruling class, but also because the government’s cultural political objectives and scientific political actions affected the scientists. Not only did the internationally high standard cultural policy of Klebelsberg have an influence on them but also the right wing and moreover the professedly fascist cultural policies, as well. However, the latter’s influence was insignificant. The academic elite had to face a challenge after the fall of the Horthy regime. They were challenged by the change of the political regime and the modernization of academic life, and furthermore by scientists ignored between the two world wars, who arrogated a place in the academic elite. Out of all the parties, the Hungarian Communist Party paid special attention to the academic and artistic elite.