ТЕРРОРИЗМ, СПРАВЕДЛИВОСТЬ И ВОЙНА. СКОЛЬКО ВСАДНИКОВ у АПОКАЛИПСИСА?
The article deals with the problem of normative evaluation of war and mass violence. The doctrines of Realism, Pacifism, Militarism, Realism and Just War are the most widely used theoretical and normative tools of this evaluation and normative practice. The latest developments have brought the Just War theory to the fore. The peak of popularity of the Just War Theory may prove, nevertheless, to be its swan's song. The recent theoretical findings as well as the political applications of this ethical theory in Kosovo and Iraq, have proved to be somewhat less then adequate, to say the least. Theoretically it hovers uneasily in between Militarism and Pacifism, pragmatically it may work as a smoke screen for the most hideous forms of agression and an instrument of the wide scale information war. The author of this article is holding that we must not put aside the idea of the morally constrained war, it may be modified. The result of this modification may be entitled Necessary War doctrine. The necessary war differs significantly from the just war, it is closer to pacifism and less prone to theoretical critisism. The foundations of this doctrine has been laid by Russian philosopher Ivan Ilyin.
The international team of authors from all over the world is united in the book by the disire to work out some practical guide lines against violence. Violence reigns supreme in our political and even daily life. Violence is the major threat to mankind. Nevertheless we do not really understand the scope of the threat. The book addresses the problem of violence from all possible perspectives. The major concern of the book is the practical applicability of nonviolence. The authors claim that our world can and should be nonviolent and that is the only possible way to save the planet and ourselves.
The article touches approach of the modern Islamic legal thought to the Islamic state and caliphate. The author explains the fundamental principles if Islamic concept of the power (caliphate) and points out that this concept was gradually deviating from real political practice. The caliphate itself remained as a political institution till the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after the World War I. After emergence of Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) the caliphate converted to concrete political project. In June 2014 ISIL which changed its name to become “Islamic State” (IS) declared creation of caliphate. In practice the Shariat implementation in IS comes to mass killings, forcing nonmuslims to adopt Islam, interference into internal life of Muslim states and terror attacks. The modern Islamic legal thought criticizes IS severely stressing on its violence of religious postulates and Shariat provisions.
A multifaceted, multidimensional, changing, and inconsistent Islamism is a subject under study in this chapter. It is impossible to comprehend modern Muslim societies without an account of the impact of Islam on all sides of life. It would be a mistake to present Islamism as a node on the body of Muslim societies. In fact, Islamism in many respects reflects the essence of modern Muslim societies, of their mode of thought and life. It helps to maintain social, economic, political sphere at different societal levels as well as create a peculiar Islamic pattern of modernization. That is why Islamism cannot be eliminated at the present stage; it can be only overgrown. And this will take a long time. One should understand clearly that it is impossible to reduce the dangers of radical and terrorist Islamism only by force. It will decrease only after it is separated from moderate Islamism having made the latter a more respectable, open, and involved in normal political life movement. We analyze in this chapter a number of issues. Among them are general characteristics and functions of Islamism; confrontation of Islamism with secular regimes; evolution of Islamism; modern trends and the future of Islamism, etc.
The January uprising, 1863-1864 was estimated by its contemporaries as a turning point not only in the Polish history and Russian-Polish relations, but also in the fate of the Russian Empire and nation-building. Though Russian evaluations varied dramatically depending on political and ideological preferences of conservatives, liberals and revolutionaries, they had some common features. In Soviet period many old approaches to the history of uprising were forgotten, it was examining in the narrow framework of formational and class paradigm and progressive international revolutionary cooperation. In post-Soviet period transformation of theoretical basis of historical studies in spirit of pluralism was accompanied by rebirth of the old approaches with both positive and negative consequences.
The results of cross-cultural research of implicit theories of innovativeness among students and teachers, representatives of three ethnocultural groups: Russians, the people of the North Caucasus (Chechens and Ingushs) and Tuvinians (N=804) are presented. Intergroup differences in implicit theories of innovativeness are revealed: the ‘individual’ theories of innovativeness prevail among Russians and among the students, the ‘social’ theories of innovativeness are more expressed among respondents from the North Caucasus, Tuva and among the teachers. Using the structural equations modeling the universal model of values impact on implicit theories of innovativeness and attitudes towards innovations is constructed. Values of the Openness to changes and individual theories of innovativeness promote the positive relation to innovations. Results of research have shown that implicit theories of innovativeness differ in different cultures, and values make different impact on the attitudes towards innovations and innovative experience in different cultures.