On September 16, 2015 theOriental Institute of the CAS organized an international conference, which addressed the question of the meanings of democracy in the Middle East, Asia, and Russia and the role that democracy plays in the discourse of the political elites and non-state actors in these regions. The case studies at the conference described the situation in Egypt, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, China and Russia. Democracy plays a crucial role in the efforts of the Western world to promote peace and stability and maintain international security. However, in recent years, countries such as China and Russia have explicitly offered an alternative interpretation of democracy to the public, both domestically and internationally, one which builds on national, cultural and political traditions and contradicts the claims for universality common in theWest. Furthermore, non-universalistic discourses on democracy have become popular among diverse non-state actors, such as Islamicmovements, non-formal authorities, or civil society across the Middle East and Central Asia. These developments have important implications for both the efforts aimed at the promotion of democracy and for the advance of democracy in general. and Věra Exnerová.
Cílem příspěvku z dějin českého politického myšlení je rekonstrukce představy ''dynamické demokracie'' Zdeňka Nejedlého. Studie chce objasnit následující otázky: Jaké formy demokracie Nejedlý rozlišuje? Jaké jsou charakteristiky, základy, výhody a nevýhody různých forem demokracie? Východiskem Nejedlého pochopení demokracie je normativní protiklad mezi demokracií a aristokratismem, z kterého vychází teorie ''dynamické demokracie''. Ta je výrazem názoru, že historický vývoj demokracie nutně vede od feudální přes měšťanskou k hospodářské a sociální demokracii i k demokracii sovětského typu, tzn. k systému sovětů. Feudální a měšťanská demokracie pro Nejedlého představovaly dobré formy, současně je však považoval za zastaralé. Měšťanská demokracie je jako taková spojena s ideologií měšťanstva, s liberalismem a s parlamentem. Nejedlý měšťanské demokracii vyčítal omezení na politiku, ztrátu vztahů mezi lidem a poslanci, a skutečnost, že neodpovídala daným společenským poměrům, což podle něj vedlo k zvrhnutí demokracie v aristokracii. Proto Nejedlý považoval za nutné rozšířit dosavadní politickou demokracii na hospodářskou a sociální úroveň. Zároveň bylo pro něj nevyhnutelné změnit dosavadní reprezentační systém, který je spojen s parlamentem. Místo parlamentu chtěl zavést systém sovětů, který byl podle něj pro 20. století vhodnější.Demokracie sovětského typu se na rozdíl od měšťanské nemůže zvrhnout v aristokracii. Nejedlého teorie ''dynamické demokracie'' popisuje rudimentární koloběh ústav. Demokratické ústavy se mohou zvrhnout v aristokracii, pokud zastupitelé lidu ztratí kontakt s lidem. Zavedením systému sovětů a rozšířením politické demokracie na další oblasti společenského života je však možné se této hrozbě vyhnout., This article is about the history of Czech political thinking reconstructs Zdeněk Nejedlý’s conception of ''dynamic democracy''. The author clarifies which concepts of democracy are distinguished by Nejedlý and which attributes, bases, advantages and disadvantages result from these forms of democracy. Nejedlý’s conception of ''dynamic democracy'' is based on a normative contradiction of democracy and aristocratism. He was convinced that the development of democracy inevitably emerges from feudal and bourgeois states of democracy to its contemporary economic and social forms but also to a democracy of the Soviet type (system of Soviets). According to Nejedlý, feudal and bourgeois types of democracy have been forms of a good quality, but they were outdated in the 20th century. The bourgeois form of democracy is based on the ideology of citizenship, on liberalism and on parliamentary principals. Nejedlý criticized its limitations - for example its strict political definition and the lack of relationships between people and their representatives. Bourgeois democracy simply did not correspond with contemporary society, which, according to Nejedlý, led to the transition from democracy to aristocracy. Therefore, he struggled for a broadening of political (bourgeois) democracy towards a more liberal form in its economic and social sense. At the same time, he advocated the transition from representative parliamentary systems to the system of soviets, which in his eyes would be more appropriate for the 20th century. Unlike bourgeois democracy, its soviet form could not be transited into aristocracy. Nejedlý’s theory of ''dynamic democracy'' describes fundamental alternations of constitutions. Democratic constitutions can be transited into aristocracy if people’s representatives lose their contact with their voters. This threat can be avoided only by introducing the soviet system and by the broadening of the political democracy. (Translated by Dirk Dalberg), and Překlad resumé: Dirk Dalberg
Energy prices are increasing all the time. Further worldwide supplies of fossil fuels are decreased. These supplies will be exhausted in the future. Therefore, it is necessary to find new energy sources. The direct transformation of solar energy into electrical energy through the use of photovoltaic cells is one of the possibilities. The aim of this paper is to illustrate the working principle of the photovoltaic system FVS 2001E that is located on an external wall of a building of Tomas Bata University in Zlín.