Wyniki wyszukiwania - BazTech

1

Między Polską Piastów i Polską Jagiellonów a Rzeczpospolitą Obojga Narodów. Refleksje „anarchologiczne” i ich miejsce w rozwoju myśli historycznej Pawła Jasienicy

Mękarski Artur

Kwartalnik Historii Nauki i Techniki

|

2022

|

T. 67, nr 1

43--68

EN

In March 1962, Paweł Jasienica, known chiefly for his books on the history of Poland, published an article entitled ‘Polska anarchia’ (‘Polish anarchy’). The article, which appeared in the weekly Przegląd Kulturalny, sparked off a heated debate on the sources of the anarchy into which the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth began to descend in the latter half of the seventeenth century. Among those who contributed to the debate were some of the leading historians of the day. Encouraged by the response to his article, Jasienica decided to expand it into a full-length book (completed in the spring of 1963). The author first presents the views expounded in the article from Przegląd Kulturalny, and then he reconstructs the debate and examines how Jasienica referred to it in his work on the anarchy. Since Jasienica’s account of the anarchy covers the period with which he was also concerned in Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów (published in English as The Commonwealth of Both Nations) - the third part of his series on the history of Poland for which he is most acclaimed - the author also attempts to compare the interpretations advanced in one work with those advanced in the other. As regards the anarchy, Jasienica traced its origin back to the reign of the last two kings of the Jagiellonian dynasty . In compliance with their commitment to securing the support of the great magnates on whom they chose to base their power, Sigismund I the Old (1467-1548) and Sigismund II Augustus (1520-1572) refused to endorse political arrangements advocated by the representatives of the Lower House of Parliament. The failure to reform the country along the lines suggested by the latter group led, in the long term, to political chaos. Unlike Jasienica, according to whom the Commonwealth degenerated into anarchy because of the errors committed almost exclusively by the rulers, the academic historians, whose views were inspired by Marxism, linked the state’s political impotence with the policy pursued by the whole nobility as a class. However, as the author shows, in Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów Jasienica radically changed his views. In his later work, all responsibility for the future anarchy was shifted onto Sigismund III Vasa (1566-1632) and his Catholic fanaticism. In revising his interpretation of what is known as the nobles’ anarchy, Jasienica drew, at least to some extent, on works by Jarema Maciszewski and Władysław Czapliński, historians who also represented the official historiography of the Polish People’s Republic.

2

Towards a structural understanding of powerbrokers in weak states: From militias to alliances

Bruchmann Sascha

Security and Defence Quarterly

|

2020

|

Vol. 31, No. 4

53--75

EN

This article aims to contribute to a theoretical understanding and discussion of conflict in weak states. More granular than one at the level of systemic phenomena, this analysis is focused on the actors, and the political structure in weak states. The article aims to improve on efforts to accurately describe these conflicts. After a theoretical introduction, the theorem on powerbroker systems will be applied on the case studies of Afghanistan, Lebanon and Mali. Building on this, the contours of the political system in each case will be highlighted by looking at the very origins of socio-political life. The working hypothesis is that powerbrokers, built on self-governing communities, ally and bandwagon according to Balance of Threat (BoT). This working hypothesis will be tested by examining a derived hypotheses per case study and identifying a) self-rule communities, b) the political-military nexus of powerbrokers within each system, and c) the behaviour of the related BoT alliance. Afghan, Lebanese and Malian powerbrokers all confirm the hypotheses. The powerbrokers originate in a context of self-governing communities trying to maintain their internal autonomy vis-a-vis a more centralised state and world system. During conflict, the communities band together against a perceived external threat, building neo-feudal political-military bodies. Pooling military resources under skilled leadership and privileged access to outside sponsors sparks the birth of a post-conflict politicalmilitary elite. It is beneficial to maintain powerbrokers as they are better suited to distribute resources through patronage at scale. Powerbroker alliances in weak states can be well explained by a theoretical approach based on balance of threat and more research is needed.

3

Ochrona krajobrazu - czyli co chronimy i dlaczego. Spojrzenie historyczne i próba syntezy sytuacji w Polsce

Böhm A.

Teka Komisji Urbanistyki i Architektury Oddział PAN w Krakowie

|

2014

|

T. 42

159--181

PL

Ustawy o planowaniu przestrzennym z lat 1994 i 2003 zniosły obowiązek sporządzania planów miejscowych, więc 3/4 terytorium Polski zabudowywane jest bez planu. Zastępują go ułomne i korupcjogenne „Decyzje o warunkach zabudowy”. W roku 2014 zlikwidowane zostały uprawnienia urbanistyczne i samorząd zawodowy Izba Urbanistów. Środowiska profesjonalistów pozbawione zostały podstawowych narzędzi. Od roku 2015 indywidualne budownictwo mieszkaniowe i rekreacyjne może powstawać bez pozwolenia na budowę. Ta liberalizacja objawia się intensyfikacją zabudowy wokół „magnesów” krajobrazowych. Jakość krajobrazu stała się ofiarą politycznego populizmu. Co takiego wydarzyło się w transformacji rozpoczętej w roku 1989, że społeczeństwo nie podąża za głosem profesjonalistów i elit intelektualnych, a władza bezkrytycznie schlebia upodobaniom wyborców? Czy ceną demokracji i gospodarki wolnorynkowej musi być psucie jakości estetycznej wspólnego dobra? Bez odpowiedzi na to nie potrafimy podjąć skutecznej ochrony i poprawy krajobrazu, jako narodowego dziedzictwa.

EN

The spatial planning acts of 1994 and 2003 abolished the requirement to develop regulation and zoning plans, which means that three quarters of Poland is now left without one. They have been replaced by the "site development conditions decisions", which are defective and provide much room for corruption. The year 2014 saw the annulment of urban designer licenses and the dissolving of the Chamber of Urban Designers. The profession has been left without its most basic tools. From the year 2015 it is going to be possible to build nearly all single family houses and individual recreation structures without a building permit. This liberalization has caused an intensification of building construction around landscape "magnets". The quality of the landscape has fallen victim to political populism. What was it that has made society stop listening to the opinions of professionals and the intellectual elite, and has made the government unscrupulously follow the opinions of its voters? Is the deterioration of the aesthetic quality of our surroundings the price to be paid for democracy and a free market economy? Without providing an answer to this question we will not be able to find the proper means of protecting and improving our landscape, which is a part of our national heritage.