This paper presents the results of qualitative research on academic inbreeding in Czech higher education, the first of its kind. Its focus is on exploring the significance of academic inbreeding, its types, practices, and possible solutions. The research for this paper was done among academic staff at eight institutions of higher education in the Czech Republic. It was conceptually informed by ideas about different types of inbred employees (immobile, mobile, silver-corded, and adherent) and available policy tools. The results show that (...) academic inbreeding has long flown under the radar as an issue. Its impact is perceived ambivalently, as both positive and negative, by academics and experts alike. Generally, its avoidance has not been taken into account in staff recruitment, which has allowed it to become widespread among Czech higher education institutions. The policy tools for combatting academic inbreeding include nodality (open recruitment), reorganization of recruitment procedures, capacity-building (including stays abroad), and hortatory proclamations (paying attention to the issue). Overall, the evidence gathered in the course of research suggests that some progress has been made in limiting academic inbreeding at some workplaces, and that what we would call purely immobile inbred employees are giving way to mobile and “silver-corded” inbred academic staff. Finally, Czech higher education institutions register few cases of pseudo-inbreeding, combining work at the same institution where a PhD was taken with an academically relevant position in a state research institute or the Academy of Sciences. (shrink)

The issue of the crisis of democracy has been debated abundantly and intensively in recent years. The body of academic literature on the topic has gradually increased. However, a similar debate took place almost one-hundred years ago in the Central European region. At that time, the debate was closely intertwined with the geopolitical situation, especially with the rise of fascism and Nazism. The paper conceptualizes the intellectual discussion on the reasons of the democratic crisis in the 1930s in Czechoslovakia from (...) a sociological and philosophical perspective. The opinions of important Czech intellectuals, such as František Modráček, Emanuel Rádl, Karel Čapek, Edvard Beneš, František Žilka, F.X. Šalda, T.G. Masaryk, J.B. Kozák, and J.L. Fischer, are clarified. Furthermore, some main features of the nature of the past and present crises of democracy are compared. (shrink)

The paper clarifies Havel’s perception of post-democracy through his various writings and speeches, in comparison with the concepts of post-democracy as proposed by C. Crouch, J. Rancière, R. Rorty, S. Wolin, J. Habermas, and Ch. Mouffe. Consequently, Havel’s critique of the then Western parliamentary democracy and the very essence of his notion of post-democracy will be thoroughly illuminated. The historical and intellectual circumstances that shaped his thinking on the topic will be analysed as well. Some misinterpretations of Havel’s thinking that (...) have emerged in the meantime will also be clarified. (shrink)

Ota Weinberger was a Czech-Austrian jurist, whose core academic work on issues of democracy was mostly published in the 1990s. In his writings, he focused primarily on legal philosophy from a positivist perspective. However, there are also significant overlaps with the field of political theory as Weinberger examined the conditions for the functioning of contemporary democracies. In this paper, some of the main features of his conception of the so-called “structured democracy” are clarified. The conception opposed several other democratic theories, (...) especially the elitist (Schumpeterian), the majoritarian, but also the discursive one, as represented by Jürgen Habermas, with whom Weinberger fundamentally disagreed. The paper focuses on several key elements of his theory, such as the leading ideas, the role of institutions, open society, and his critique of marketing methods in politics. (shrink)