The e aim of this article is to cultivate Schmitt’s concept of the political, employing a funcional-systematic framework which was formulated in German sociology and social philosophy. By way of Luhmann’s systems theory and Habermas‘ systemising reconstruction of Weber’s conception of spheres of value, a model of intensity is worked out, which is constituted by two concepts: differentiation and politicisation. Whereas the systems theory of Niklas Luhmann is significant for the final delineation of the political as a system, Habermas’s Kantian differentiation of culture grounds the semantics of politicisation. This semantics also exploits considerations about re-distribution and recognition, with particular attention on Nancy Fraser’s “perspectival dualism”. The reason for cultivating Schmitt’s concept of the political is to develop the political as an independent concept which is an alternative to a conception that concentrates the political in politically active or activated civil society.
Sociologists studying the renewal of local government in post-communist Central European countries have formulated a hypothesis that local politics are becoming increasingly politicised. Political scientists focusing on local coalitions have provided a tool for examining this politicisation. This article is based on a secondary analysis of research to date on local political elites and compares their outcomes with the conclusions of the author's recent study of a panel of municipalities that was previously studied by Czech researchers in the early 1990s.The structure of local representation, the attitudes of municipal representatives, and the structure of local coalitions have not fulfilled the expected increased politicisation. The most important determinant is still the size of a municipality. Nevertheless, its influence can be modified by other factors, for example, institutional variables. Detailed observations on the origins of local coalitions and how they change indicate the scope and limits of this method for analysing the behaviour of local political elites.
This paper argues whether the Czech Constitutional Court should be the example of Activism, and whether the Japanese Supreme Court should be characterised as the example of Restraint in the context of constitutional justice. For instance, the former has declared numerous laws unconstitutional in the past two decades, while the latter has declared only a limited number unconstitutional in the past 68 years. We will examine the appropriateness of these characterisations by comparing and contrasting their brief histories, competences, and the nomination processes and precedents, in order to discuss their roles in the transitional period towards the new constitutionalism, paying specific attention to the extent politicisation has impacted each Courts.