Who Owns The Ukrainian State? Tensions between the People and the Elites After 1991
Identifikátory výsledku
Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11230%2F22%3A10470750" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11230/22:10470750 - isvavai.cz</a>
Výsledek na webu
<a href="https://doi.org/10.13173/9783447117715.025" target="_blank" >https://doi.org/10.13173/9783447117715.025</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.13173/9783447117715.025" target="_blank" >10.13173/9783447117715.025</a>
Alternativní jazyky
Jazyk výsledku
angličtina
Název v původním jazyce
Who Owns The Ukrainian State? Tensions between the People and the Elites After 1991
Popis výsledku v původním jazyce
This research examines the post-1991 history of Ukraine through tensions between its people and the elites, which carves out space for an examination of the political agency of the people, subsequently re-imagined as populus, demos, and plebs. Acemoglu andRobinson's framework (2019) that defines a political regime through relations between a state and a society stands as a conceptual backbone of the present study. It is complemented with a political rendering of Albert O. Hirschman's approach (1970) to explicate the main strategies of political action Ukrainians lean upon. Several ideal-typical settings are distinguished and described: 1) 'Potemkin democracy', referring to patronal politics with disempowered people falling back on the 'exit'strategy, interpreted as migration, curtailed reproduction, and disengagement from the political sphere; 2) 'radical democracy', in which people resort to mass protests in order to acquire a 'voice'in strategic decision-making; 3) 'ocular democracy', in which people form the audience in a political theatre, defined through their 'loyalty'to a leader as their political 'trustee', with social media presence and sociological polls acting as feedback loops.
Název v anglickém jazyce
Who Owns The Ukrainian State? Tensions between the People and the Elites After 1991
Popis výsledku anglicky
This research examines the post-1991 history of Ukraine through tensions between its people and the elites, which carves out space for an examination of the political agency of the people, subsequently re-imagined as populus, demos, and plebs. Acemoglu andRobinson's framework (2019) that defines a political regime through relations between a state and a society stands as a conceptual backbone of the present study. It is complemented with a political rendering of Albert O. Hirschman's approach (1970) to explicate the main strategies of political action Ukrainians lean upon. Several ideal-typical settings are distinguished and described: 1) 'Potemkin democracy', referring to patronal politics with disempowered people falling back on the 'exit'strategy, interpreted as migration, curtailed reproduction, and disengagement from the political sphere; 2) 'radical democracy', in which people resort to mass protests in order to acquire a 'voice'in strategic decision-making; 3) 'ocular democracy', in which people form the audience in a political theatre, defined through their 'loyalty'to a leader as their political 'trustee', with social media presence and sociological polls acting as feedback loops.
Klasifikace
Druh
C - Kapitola v odborné knize
CEP obor
—
OECD FORD obor
50601 - Political science
Návaznosti výsledku
Projekt
—
Návaznosti
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Ostatní
Rok uplatnění
2022
Kód důvěrnosti údajů
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku
Název knihy nebo sborníku
Analyzing conflict settings. Case studies from Eastern Europe with a focus on Ukraine.
ISBN
978-3-447-11771-5
Počet stran výsledku
20
Strana od-do
25-44
Počet stran knihy
333
Název nakladatele
Harrassowitz Verlag
Místo vydání
Wiesbaden
Kód UT WoS kapitoly
—