The author?s approach is based on three premises: 1. that Gajo Petrovic?s Praxis was an outstanding phenomenon in Croatian, Yugoslav and European culture, a challenge of freedom in a repressive society; 2. that there has never been such a thing as "Praxis group", "philosophers of practice" or "Praxis philosophers" with a unified philosophical and socio-theoretical orientation; and 3. that political and ideological attacks on Praxis were part of the repressive system that targeted every instance of cultural and scientific dissent. The (...) political leadership of Tito?s regime, its ideological and propaganda apparatus systematically disseminated allegations, denunciations and accusations against Praxis and Gajo Petrovic. The same style has survived through radical historical changes from the appearance of Praxis until today. The attackers have often been the same persons, with the difference that in earlier times they denounced Praxis and Gajo Petrovic as enemies of "socialism" and the "socialist self-management system", and in the changed political fashion as "servants" of Tito?s authoritarian rule. The fate of Praxis in the former regime has been triumphantly interpreted as a "family quarrel". This paper attempts a sociological analysis of the political destiny of Praxis. The analysis is essentially determined not by old and new political and ideological questionings of Praxis, but by Gajo Petrovic?s fundamental belief that there is no freedom without the human or humanity without freedom.. Osnovu autorovog pristupa cine tri stava: 1. da je Praxis Gaje Petrovica bio izuzetna pojava u hrvatskoj, jugoslovenskoj i evropskoj kulturi, izazov slobode u drustvu represije; 2. da ne postoji tako nesto kao "praxis-grupa", "filozofi prakse" ili "praxis filozofi" koji bi imali jedinstvenu filozofsku ili drustveno-teorijsku orijentaciju; 3. da su politicka i ideoloska osporavanja Praxisa bila deo represivnog sistema kojem je bilo podvrgnuto svako neistomisljenistvo u kulturi i nauci. Politicki vrh Titovog rezima, njegov ideoloski i propagandni aparat sistematski su sirili insinuacije, denuncijacije i optuzbe o Praxisu i Gaji Petrovicu, da bi taj manir u bitno promenjenim istorijskim okolnostima, trajao od pojave Praxisa do danasnjeg dana. Cesto su i akteri napada bile iste osobe, samo sto su nekada osporavali Praxis i Gaju Petrovica kao neprijatelje "socijalizma" i "sistema socijalistickog samoupravljanja", a u promenjenoj politickoj modi kao "sluge" Titove autoritarne vladavine. Sudbinu Praxisa u prethodnom rezimu slavodobitno su tumacili kao "obracun u obitelji". Rad je pokusaj socioloske analize politicke sudbine Praxisa, koju ce bitno odrediti temeljno uverenje Gaje Petrovica da nema slobode bez coveka ni ljudskosti bez slobode, a ne stara i nova politicka i ideoloska osporavanja Praxisa.. (shrink)

En tant que communaut? ethnique et groupe social d?favoris?, les Roms se heurtent quotidiennement aux probl?mes relatifs r l?obtention de papiers d?identit? ou autres documents, difficult? qui les prive de leur?galit? devant l?ensemble des citoyens, et les rend m?me inexistants. L?objet de cet te recherche porte sur les d?marches et probl?mes rencontr?s par les demandeurs en vue d?obtenir les documents suivants: a) num?ro d?immatriculation; b) extrait d?acte de naissance, dedans, de mariage; c) certificat de nationalit?; d) d?claration de s?jour et (...) de lieu de r?sidence; e) carte d?identit? et carte de travail, alors que les groupes vis?s par la recherche sont: employ?s et responsables d?offices d??tat civil; demandeurs, interm?diaires avec autorisations, militants roms et leurs associations, commissaires pour les r?fugi?s et personnes d?plac?es, fonctionnaires de certaines communes et secr?taires des communes, repr?sentants de MUP. Nous avons analys? le travail et les difficult?s de travail de certains organismes, ainsi que les probl?mes rencontr?s par les demandeurs et les interm?diaires avec autorisations en vue de se voir d? livrer des documents personnels ou lors des proc?dures d?obtention de documents personnels. En dernier lieu, nos recommandations concernent l?organisation et la coordination des organismes d??tat civil, une meilleure information s?adressant aux demandeurs, et contiennent le concept d?une am?lioration syst?matique de cet?tat de choses visant r ce que les roms de viennent des citoyens?gaux.. Kao deprivirana etnicka zajednica i socijalna grupa Romi se suocavaju u svakodnevnom zivotu sa problemima pribavljanja osnovnih licnih dokumenata, bez kojih su ne samo neravnopravni, nego cesto i neegzistentni gradjani. Predmet istrazivanja su bili postupci i problemi u sticanju sledecih dokumenata: a) jedinstveni maticni broj gradjana; b) izvodi iz maticnih knjiga rodjenih, umrlih, vencanih; c) uverenja o drzavljanstvu; d) prijava boravka i prebivalista e) licne karte i rad ne knjizice, a osnovne ciljne grupe istrazivanja bili su: sluzbenici i rukovodioci izmestenih maticnih ureda; neposredni podnosioci zahteva za izdavanje dokumenata; posrednici sa ovlastenjima ; romski aktivisti i udruzenja, javni zastupnici, poverenici za izbegli ce i raseljena lica; nacelnici pojedinih opstinskih sluzbi i sekretari opstina, predstavnici MUP-a. Analiziran je rad i poteskoce u radu maticnih i drugih sluzbi, problemi neposrednih podnosilaca zahteva za izdavanje nekog od licnih dokumenata i, posrednici sa ovlascenjima. Na kraju je u preporukama o organizaciji i koordinaciji rada maticnih sluzbi, preporukama za bolje informisanje Roma, podnosilaca zahteva i preporukama u korist podnosilaca zahteva sadrzan koncept sistematskog poboljsanja stanja, cime bi se Romima omogucilo da budu istinski ravnopravni gradjani Srbije. (shrink)

Autor analizira stavove intelektualaca s podrucja bivse Jugoslavije, okupljenih oko casopisa Praxis, prema nacionalizmu, kao i kritike koje su im upucivali nacionalisti, pre svega iz Hrvatske i Srbije. Analiza obuhvata period od pojave Praxisa do prve decenije dvadeset prvog veka.

On the basis of his own previous research the author examines views of Europe held by the Serbian political and cultural elite in the late 20th and early 21st century. Unable to meet the challenges of the historical moment, this elite has brought Serbia into open conflict with its closest neighbors and exposed its citizens to international sanctions. War-mongering propaganda of the major state-controlled media was developing feelings of xenophobia and frustration among citizens. The collusion between authoritarian government and war (...) profiteers was systematically destroying the lives of Serbian citizens, bringing them to the brink of material impoverishment and spiritual misery. The process of dissolution of the common Yugoslav state is coming to its end in the first decade of this century. Just as it lacked wisdom political will or strength to prevent armed conflicts and crimes, the Serbian elite today is unable to condemn war crimes, to face disastrous consequences of its own policies, and to help Serbian citizens find their way to prosperity. (shrink)