Background.

Gallicanism is a group of religious opinions that was for some time peculiar to the Church in France. These opinions were in opposition to the ideas which were called "ultramontane", which means "across the mountains" (the Alps). Ultramontanism affirmed the authority of the Pope over the temporal kingdoms of the rest of Europe, particularly emphasizing a supreme episcopate for the Bishop of Rome holding universal immediate jurisdiction. This eventually led to the definition by the Roman Catholic Church of the dogma of papal infallibility at the First Vatican Council.  Gallicanism tended to restrain the Pope's authority in favour of that of bishops and the people's representatives in the State, or the monarch. But the most respected proponents of Gallican ideas did not contest the Pope's primacy in the Church, merely his supremacy and doctrinal infallibility. They believed their way of regarding the authority of the Pope—more in line with that of the Conciliar movement and akin to the Orthodox and Anglicans—was more in conformity with Holy Scripture and tradition. At the same time, they believed their theory did not transgress the limits of free opinions.

General notions.

The "Declaration of the Clergy of France" of 1682 is made up of four articles.  According to the initial Gallican theory, then, papal primacy was limited first by the temporal power of monarchs, which, by divine will, was inviolable. Secondly, it was limited by the authority of the general councils and the bishops, and lastly by the canons and customs of particular churches, which the pope was bound to take into account when he exercised his authority.  Gallicanism was more than pure theory — the bishops and magistrates of France used it, the former to increase power in the government of dioceses, the latter to extend their jurisdiction so as to cover ecclesiastical affairs. There also was an episcopal and political Gallicanism, and a parliamentary or judicial Gallicanism. The former lessened the doctrinal authority of the pope in favour of that of the bishops, to the degree marked by the Declaration of 1682, and the latter augmented the rights of the state. There were eighty-three "Liberties of the Gallican Church", according to a collection drawn up by the jurisconsults Guy Coquille and Pierre Pithou. Besides the four articles cited above, which were incorporated, these Liberties included the following:  Parliamentary Gallicanism, therefore, was of much wider scope than episcopal; indeed, it was often disavowed by the bishops of France, and about twenty of them condemned Pierre Pithou's book when a new edition of it was published, in 1638, by the brothers Dupuy.

History.

John Kilcullen wrote, in the "Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy", that "in France conciliarism was one of the sources of Gallicanism."  Proponents of Gallicanism presented a number of theories as to its origin.  The majority of Gallicans rejected the first theory that described the Gallican liberties as time-honored privileges, since a privilege can always be revoked by the authority which granted it. This was unacceptable, as they maintained that the pope had no power to revoke them. The Ultramontanes pointed out that in that case, such liberties would also be claimed by the German emperors, also heirs of Charlemagne, and that was not the case. Moreover, some privileges the pope cannot grant, such as allowing any kings the privilege of suppressing or curtailing his liberty of communicating with the faithful in a particular territory.  Most of its partisans regarded Gallicanism as a revival of the most ancient traditions of Christianity, found in the conciliar decrees of the earliest centuries or in canon laws of the general and local councils, and the decretals, ancient and modern, which were received in France. "Of all Christian countries", says Fleury, "France has been the most careful to conserve the liberty of her Church and oppose the novelties introduced by Ultramontane canonists". They claimed that the popes had extended to their own primacy based upon the false Decretals rather than Divine law. What the Gallicans maintained in 1682 was claimed to be not a collection of novelties, but a body of beliefs as old as the Church, the discipline of the first centuries. The Church of France had upheld and practised them at all times; the Church Universal had believed and practised them in the past, until about the tenth century; St. Louis had supported, but not created, them by the Pragmatic Sanction; the Council of Constance had taught them with the pope's approbation. Gallican ideas, then, must have had no other origin than that of Christian dogma and ecclesiastical discipline.

The early Middle Ages.

To the similarity of the historical vicissitudes through which they passed, their common political allegiance, and the early appearance of a national sentiment, the Churches of France owed it that they very soon formed an individual, compact, and homogeneous body. From the end of the fourth century the popes themselves recognized this solidarity. It was to the "Gallican" bishops that Pope Damasus addressed the most ancient decretal which has been preserved to our times (Babut 1904). Two centuries later St. Gregory the Great pointed out the Gallican Church to his envoy Augustine, the Apostle of England, as one of those whose customs he might accept as of equal stability with those of the Roman Church or of any other whatsoever. But already (if we credit Babut's findings) a Council of Turin, at which bishops of the Gauls took part, had given the first manifestation of Gallican sentiment. Unfortunately for Babut's thesis, all the significance which he attaches to this council depends upon the date, 417, ascribed to it by him, on the mere strength of a personal conjecture, in opposition to the most competent historians. Besides, it is not at all plain how a council of the Province of Milan is to be taken as representing the ideas of the Gallican Church.  In truth, that Church, during the Merovingian period, testifies the same deference to the Holy See as do all the others. Ordinary questions of discipline are in the ordinary course settled in councils, often held with the assent of the kings, but on great occasions – the Council of Epaone (517), Vaison (529), Valence (529), Orléans (538), Tours (567) – the bishops declare that they are acting under the impulse of the Holy See, or defer to its admonitions; they take pride in the approbation of the pope; they cause his name to be read aloud in the churches, just as is done in Italy and in Africa they cite his decretals as a source of canon law; they show indignation at the mere idea that anyone should fail in consideration for them. Bishops condemned in councils (like Salonius of Embrun, Sagittarius of Gap, Contumeliosus of Riez) have no difficulty in appealing to the pope, who, after examination, either confirms or rectifies the sentence pronounced against them.

From Pepin to the Reformation.

The accession of the Carolingian dynasty is marked by a splendid act of homage paid in France to the power of the papacy: before assuming the title of king, Pepin made the point of securing the assent of Pope Zachary. Without exaggerating the significance of this act, the bearing of which the Gallicans have done every thing to minimize, one may still see it as evidence that, even before Gregory VII, public opinion in France was not hostile to the intervention of the pope in political affairs. From that time on, the advances of the Roman primacy find no serious opponents in France before Hincmar, Archbishop of Reims. With him there appears the idea that the pope must limit his activity to ecclesiastical matters, and not intrude in those pertaining to the State, which concern kings only; that his supremacy is bound to respect the prescriptions of the ancient canons and the privileges of the Churches; and that his decretals must not be placed upon the same footing as the canons of the councils. His attitude stands out as isolated. The Council of Troyes (867) proclaims that no bishop can be deposed without reference to the Holy See, and the Council of Douzy (871) condemns Hincmar of Laon only under reserve of the rights of the pope.  With the first Capets the secular relations between the pope and the Gallican Church appeared to be momentarily strained. At the Councils of Saint-Basle de Verzy (991) and of Chelles (c. 993), in the discourses of Arnoul, Bishop of Orléans, in the letters of Gerbert, afterwards Pope Sylvester II, sentiments of violent hostility to the Holy See are manifested, and an evident determination to elude the authority in matters of discipline which had until then been recognized as belonging to it. But the papacy at that period, given over to the tyranny of Crescentius and other local barons, was in a period of temporary decline. When it regained its independence, its old authority in France came back to it, the work of the Councils of Saint-Basle and of Chelles was undone; princes like Hugh Capet, bishops like Gerbert, held no attitude but that of submission. It has been said that during the early Capetian period the pope was more powerful in France than he had ever been. Under Gregory VII the pope's legates traversed France from north to south, they convoked and presided over numerous councils, and, in spite of sporadic and incoherent acts of resistance, they deposed bishops and excommunicated princes just as in Germany and Spain.  In the following two centuries we can still see no clear evidence of Gallicanism. The pontifical power attains its apogee in France as elsewhere, St. Bernard and St. Thomas Aquinas outline the theory of that power, and their opinion is that of the school in accepting the attitude of Gregory VII and his successors in regard to delinquent princes. St. Louis IX, whom some tried to represent as a patron of the Gallican system, is still ignorant of it — for the fact is now established that the Pragmatic Sanction of 1269, long attributed to him, was a wholesale fabrication put together (about 1445) in the purlieus of the Royal Chancellery of Charles VII to lend countenance to the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges. (Löffler 1911)  At the opening of the fourteenth century, however, the conflict between Philip the Fair and Boniface VIII brings out the first glimmerings of the Gallican ideas. That king does not confine himself to maintaining that, as sovereign, he is sole and independent master of his temporalities; he haughtily proclaims that, in virtue of the concession made by the pope, with the assent of a general council to Charlemagne and his successors, he has the right to dispose of vacant ecclesiastical benefices. With the consent of the nobility, the Third Estate, and a great part of the clergy, he appeals in the matter from Boniface VIII to a future general council — the implication being that the council is superior to the pope. The same ideas and others still more hostile to the Holy See reappear in the struggle of Fratricelles and Louis of Bavaria against Pope John XXII; they are expressed by the pens of William of Occam, of John of Jandun, and of Marsilius of Padua, professors in the University of Paris. Among other things, they deny the divine origin of the papal primacy, and subject the exercise of it to the good pleasure of the temporal ruler. Following the pope, the University of Paris condemned these views; but for all that they did not entirely disappear from the memory, or from the disputations, of the schools, for the principal work of Marsilius, "Defensor Pacis", was translated into French in 1375, probably by a professor of the University of Paris. The Western Schism reawakened them suddenly.  The idea of a council naturally suggested itself as a means of healing that unfortunate division of Christendom. Upon that idea was soon grafted the conciliary theory, which sets the council above the pope, making it the sole representative of the Church, the sole organ of infallibility. Timidly sketched by two professors of the University of Paris, Conrad of Gelnhausen and Henry of Langenstein, this theory was completed and noisily interpreted to the public by Pierre d'Ailly and Gerson. At the same time the clergy of France, disgusted with Benedict XIII, withdrew from his obedience. It was in the assembly which voted on this measure (1398) that for the first time there was any question of bringing back the Church of France to its ancient liberties and customs — of giving its prelates once more the right of conferring and disposing of benefices. The same idea comes into the foreground in the claims put forward in 1406 by another assembly of the French clergy; to win the votes of the assembly, certain orators cited the example of what was happening in England. Johannes Haller concluded from this that these so-called Ancient Liberties were of English origin, that the Gallican Church really borrowed them from its neighbour, only imagining them to be a revival of its own past. This opinion does not seem well founded. The precedents cited by Haller go back to the parliament held at Carlisle in 1307, at which date the tendencies of reaction against papal reservations had already manifested themselves in the assemblies convoked by Philip the Fair in 1302 and 1303. The most that we can admit is, that the same ideas received parallel development from both sides of the channel.  Together with the restoration of the "Ancient Liberties" the assembly of the clergy in 1406 intended to maintain the superiority of the council to the pope, and the fallibility of the latter. However widely they may have been accepted at the time, these were only individual opinions or opinions of a school, when the Council of Constance came to give them the sanction of its high authority. In its fourth and fifth sessions it declared that the council represented the Church and that every person, no matter of what dignity, even the pope, was bound to obey it in what concerned the extirpation of the schism and the reform of the Church; that even the pope, if he resisted obstinately, might be constrained by process of law to obey it in the above-mentioned points. This was the birth or, if we prefer to call it so, the legitimation of Gallicanism. So far we had encountered in the history of the Gallican Church recriminations of malcontent bishops, or a violent gesture of some prince discomforted in his avaricious designs; but these were only fits of resentment or ill humor, accidents with no attendant consequences; this time the provisions made against exercise of the pontifical authority had a lasting effect. Gallicanism had implanted itself in the minds of men as a national doctrine and it only remained to apply it in practice. This is to be the work of the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges. In that instrument the clergy of France inserted the articles of Constance repeated at Basle, and upon that warrant assumed authority to regulate the collation of benefices and the temporal administration of the Churches on the sole basis of the common law, under the king's patronage, and independently of the pope's action. From Eugene IV to Leo X the popes did not cease to protest against the Pragmatic Sanction, until it was replaced by the Concordat of Bologna in 1516. But, if its provisions disappeared from the laws of France, the principles it embodied for a time nonetheless continued to inspire the schools of theology and parliamentary jurisprudence. Those principles even appeared at the Council of Trent, where the ambassadors, theologians, and bishops of France repeatedly championed them, notably when the council discussed whether episcopal jurisdiction comes immediately from God or through the pope, whether or not the council ought to ask confirmation of its decrees from the sovereign pontiff, etc. Then again, it was in the name of the Liberties of the Gallican Church that a part of the clergy and the "Parlementaires" opposed the publication of the Council of Trent; and the crown decided to detach from it and publish what seemed good, in the form of ordinances emanating from the royal authority.

After the Reformation.

The assassination of Henry IV, which was exploited to move public opinion against Ultramontanism and the activity of Edmond Richer, syndic of the Sorbonne, brought about, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, a revival of Gallicanism. In 1663 the Sorbonne declared that it admitted no authority of the pope over the king's temporal dominion, nor his superiority to a general council, nor infallibility apart from the Church's consent.  In 1682, Louis XIV having decided to extend to all the Churches of his kingdom the "droit de regale", or right of receiving the revenue of vacant sees, and of conferring the sees themselves at his pleasure, Pope Innocent XI opposed the king's designs. The king assembled the clergy of France and, on 19 March 1682, the thirty-six prelates and thirty-four deputies of the second order who constituted that assembly adopted the four articles summarized above and transmitted them to all the other bishops and archbishops of France. Three days later the king commanded the registration of the articles in all the schools and faculties of theology; no one could be admitted to degrees in theology without having maintained this doctrine in one of his theses and it was forbidden to write anything against them. Pope Innocent XI issued the Rescript of 11 April 1682, in which he voided and annulled all that the assembly had done in regard to the "regale"; he also refused Bulls to all members of the assembly who were proposed for vacant bishoprics.  In the same way Alexander VIII, by a Constitution dated 4 August 1690, quashed as detrimental to the Holy See the proceedings both in the matter of the regale and in that of the declaration on the ecclesiastical power and jurisdiction, which had been prejudicial to the clerical estate and order. The bishops designate to whom Bulls had been refused received them at length, in 1693, only after addressing to Pope Innocent XII a letter in which they disavowed everything that had been decreed in that assembly in regard to the ecclesiastical power and the pontifical authority. The king himself wrote to the pope (14 September 1693) to announce that a royal order had been issued against the execution of the edict of 23 March 1682.  In spite of these disavowals, the Declaration of 1682 remained thenceforward the living symbol of Gallicanism, professed by the great majority of the French clergy, obligatorily defended in the faculties of theology, schools, and seminaries, guarded from the lukewarmness of French theologians and the attacks of foreigners by the inquisitorial vigilance of the French parliaments, which never failed to condemn to suppression every work that seemed hostile to the principles of the Declaration.  From France Gallicanism spread, about the middle of the eighteenth century, into the Low Countries, thanks to the works of the jurisconsult Zeger Bernhard van Espen. Under the pseudonym of Febronius, Hontheim introduced it into Germany where it took the forms of Febronianism and Josephism. The Synod of Pistoia (1786) even tried to acclimatize it in Italy. But its diffusion was sharply arrested by the French Revolution, which took away its chief support by overturning the thrones of kings. Against the Revolution that drove them out and wrecked their sees, nothing was left to the bishops of France but to link themselves closely with the Holy See. After the Concordat of 1801 French Governments made some pretence of reviving, in the Organic Articles, the "Ancient Gallican Liberties" and the obligation of teaching the articles of 1682, but ecclesiastical Gallicanism was never again resuscitated except in the form of a vague mistrust of Rome. On the fall of Napoleon and the Bourbons, the work of Lamennais, of "L'Avenir" and other publications devoted to Roman ideas, the influence of Dom Guéranger, and the effects of religious teaching ever increasingly deprived it of its partisans.  When the First Vatican Council opened, in 1869, it had in France only timid defenders. When that council declared that the pope has in the Church the plenitude of jurisdiction in matters of faith, morals discipline, and administration that his decisions "ex cathedra" are of themselves, and without the assent of the Church, infallible and irreformable, it dealt Gallicanism a mortal blow. Three of the four articles were directly condemned. As to the remaining one, the first, the council made no specific declaration; but an important indication of the Catholic doctrine was given in the condemnation fulminated by Pope Pius IX against the 24th proposition of the "Syllabus of Errors", in which it was asserted that the Church cannot have recourse to force and is without any temporal authority, direct or indirect. Pope Leo XIII shed more direct light upon the question in his Encyclical "Immortale Dei" (12 November 1885), where we read: "God has apportioned the government of the human race between two powers, the ecclesiastical and the civil, the former set over things divine, the latter over things human. Each is restricted within limits which are perfectly determined and defined in conformity with its own nature and special aim. There is therefore, as it were a circumscribed sphere in which each exercises its functions "jure proprio"". And in the Encyclical "Sapientiae Christianae" (10 January 1890), the same pontiff adds: "The Church and the State have each its own power, and neither of the two powers is subject to the other."  After the First Vatican Council, Gallicanism was no longer a viable option within the French and Dutch Catholic Churches. A variation of Gallicanism, a more generalized Conciliar movement, has survived for some time among the Old Catholics; but owing to their tiny numbers in France and the Netherlands, it is, for all practical purposes, dead.

Gallicanism is the belief that popular civil authority—often represented by the monarch's or the state's authority—over the Catholic Church is comparable to that of the Pope. Gallicanism is a rejection of ultramontanism; it has something in common with Anglicanism, but is nuanced, in that it plays down the authority of the Pope in church without denying that there are some authoritative elements to the office associated with being "primus inter pares" (first among equals). Other terms for the same or similar doctrines include Erastianism, Febronianism, and Josephinism.

Galikanismus je církevně politické a dogmatické hnutí francouzského katolického duchovenstva, rozvíjené od 14. století a zavržené tzv. pragmatickou sankcí z roku 1438 a později francouzským konkordátem roku 1516. Galikanismus zdůrazňoval nadřazenost koncilu nad papežem a usiloval o získání dalekosáhlé nezávislosti francouzské římskokatolické církve na Římu. Hnutí bylo podporováno francouzskými králi, zejména Filipem IV. a Ludvíkem XIV. Ani po provedení odluky církve od státu ve Francii (1895) ideologie galikanismu nezanikla. Nejvýznamnějším ideologem galikanismu byl J. B. Bossuet.


Etymology.

The term "flume" comes from the Old French word "flum", from the Latin "flumen", meaning a river. It was formerly used for a stream, and particularly for the tail of a mill race. It is used in America for a very narrow gorge running between precipitous rocks, with a stream at the bottom, but more frequently is applied to an artificial channel of wood or other material for the diversion of a stream of water from a river for purposes of irrigation, for running a sawmill, or for various processes in the hydraulic method of gold-mining.

Types of flumes.

Millrace.

A diversionary flume is used to transfer water from one body to another, such as between two reservoirs.

Log flume.

Log flumes use the flow of water to carry cut logs and timber downhill, sometimes many miles, to either a sawmill or location for further transport.

Flow measurement flume.

Some varieties of flumes are used in measuring water flow of a larger channel. When used to measure the flow of water in open channels, a flume is defined as a specially shaped, fixed hydraulic structure that under free-flow conditions forces flow to accelerate in such a manner that the flow rate through the flume can be characterized by a level-to-flow relationship as applied to a single head (level) measurement within the flume. Acceleration is accomplished through a convergence of the sidewalls, a change in floor elevation, or a combination of the two.  Flow measurement flumes typically consist of a converging section, a throat section, and a diverging section. Not all sections, however, need to be present. In the case of the Cutthroat flume, the converging section directly joins the diverging section, resulting in a throat section of no length (hence the term "Cutthroat"). Other flumes omit the diverging section (Montana, USGS Portable Parshall, and HS / H / HL flumes).  Flumes offer distinct advantages over sharp-crested weirs:  Styles of flow measurement flumes include: Cutthroat, HS / H / HL-type, Khafagi, Montana, RBC, Parshall, Palmer-Bowlus, Trapezoidal, and Venturi Flume.  Flow measurement flumes can be installed in earthen channels, concrete canals, below ground chambers, or factory integrated into Packaged Metering Manholes.

Navigable canal flume.

In some nineteenth-century canals, a bypass flume diverted water around a lift lock from the level (or pound) above to the level below the lock, so that the level below would have sufficient water.

Recreational flumes.

In competitive swimming, specialized flumes with transparent sides are often employed by coaches to analyze a swimmer's technique. The speed of the flow is variable to accommodate the full spectrum of swimming styles and ability.

A flume is a human-made channel for water in the form of an open declined gravity chute whose walls are raised above the surrounding terrain, in contrast to a trench or ditch. Flumes are not to be confused with aqueducts, which are built to transport water, rather than transporting materials using flowing water as a flume does. Flumes route water from a diversion dam or weir to a desired materiel collection location.

Vantroky (z něm. "Wandtrog" – „nástěnné koryto“) jsou dřevěná koryta na vodu obvykle přiléhající ke stěně mlýna, která slouží jako přívod vody pro vodní kolo na vrchní vodu vodního mlýna, vodní pily, hamru či jiného zařízení.


Primary stage of socialism.

During Mao Zedong era.

The concept of a primary stage of socialism was conceived before China introduced economic reforms. In the early 1950s, economists Yu Guangyuan, Xue Muqiao and Sun Yefang raised the question of socialist transformation in which China's economy of low productive force was in a transitional period, a position which Mao Zedong endorsed briefly until 1957. When discussing the necessity of commodity relations at the 1st Zhengzhou Conference (2–10 November 1958), for example, Mao—the Chairman of the Communist Party of China's Central Committeesaid that China was in the "initial stage of socialism". However, Mao never elaborated on the idea and his successors were left to do this.

After Mao Zedong's death.

On 5 May 1978, the article "Putting into Effect the Socialist Principle of Distribution According to Work" () elaborated on the idea that China was still at the first stage of reaching pure communism and that it had not become a truly socialist society. The article was written by members in the State Council's Political Research Office led by economist Yu Guangyuan on the orders of Deng Xiaoping so as to "criticize and repudiate" the beliefs of the communist left. After reading it, Deng himself authored a brief memo saying that it was "well-written, and shows that the nature of distribution by labor is not capitalist, but socialist [...] [and] to implement this principle, many things are to be done, and many institutions to be revived. In all, this is to give incentives for us to do better". The term reappeared at the 6th plenum of the 11th Central Committee on 27 June 1981 in the document "Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of our Party since the Founding of the PRC". Hu Yaobang, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, used the term in his report to the 12th National Congress on 1 September 1982. It was not until the "Resolution Concerning the Guiding Principle in Building Socialist Spiritual Civilization" at the 6th plenum of the 12th Central Committee that the term was used in the defense of the economic reforms which were being introduced.  At the 13th National Congress, acting General Secretary Zhao Ziyang on behalf of the 12th Central Committee delivered the report "Advance Along the Road of Socialism with Chinese characteristics". He wrote that China was a socialist society, but that socialism in China was in its primary stage, a Chinese peculiarity which was due to the undeveloped state of the country's productive forces. During this phase of development, Zhao recommended introducing a planned commodity economy on the basis of public ownership. The main failure of the communist right according to Zhao was that they failed to acknowledge that China could reach socialism by bypassing capitalism. The main failure of the communist left was that they held the "utopian position" that China could bypass the primary stage of socialism in which the productive forces are to be modernized.  On 5 October 1987, Yu Guangyuan, a major author of the concept, published an article entitled "Economy in the Initial Stage of Socialism" and speculated that this historical stage will last for two decades and perhaps much longer. This represents, says Ian Wilson, "a severe blight on the expectations raised during the early 70s, when the old eight-grade wage scale was being compressed to only three levels and a more even distributive system was assumed to be an important national goal". On 25 October, Zhao further expounded on the concept of the primary stage of socialism and said that the party line was to follow "One Center, Two Basic Points"—the central focus of the Chinese state was economic development, but that this should occur simultaneously through centralized political control (i.e. the Four Cardinal Principles) and upholding the policy of reform and opening up.  General Secretary Jiang Zemin further elaborated on the concept ten years later, first during a speech to the Central Party School on 29 May 1997 and again in his report to the 15th National Congress on 12 September. According to Jiang, the 3rd plenum of the 11th Central Committee correctly analyzed and formulated a scientifically correct program for the problems facing China and socialism. In Jiang's words, the primary stage of socialism was an "undeveloped stage". The fundamental task of socialism is to develop the productive forces, therefore the main aim during the primary stage should be the further development of the national productive forces. The primary contradiction in Chinese society during the primary stage of socialism is "the growing material and cultural needs of the people and the backwardness of production". This contradiction will remain until China has completed the process of primary stage of socialism—and because of it—economic development should remain the party's main focus during this stage.  Jiang elaborated on three points to develop the primary stage of socialism. The first—to develop a socialist economy with Chinese characteristics—meant developing the economy by emancipating and modernizing the forces of production while developing a market economy. The second—building socialist politics with Chinese characteristics—meant "managing state affairs according to the law", developing socialist democracy under the party and making the "people the masters of the country". The third point—building socialist culture with Chinese characteristics—meant turning Marxism into the guide to train the people so as to give them "high ideals, moral integrity, a good education, and a strong sense of discipline, and developing a national scientific, and popular socialist culture geared to the needs of modernization, of the world, and of the future".  When asked how long the primary stage of socialism would last, Zhao replied "[i]t will be at least 100 years [...] [before] socialist modernization will have been in the main accomplished". The state constitution states that "China will be in the primary stage of socialism for a long time to come". As with Zhao, Jiang believed that it would take at least 100 years to reach a more advanced stage.

Socialist market economy.

Deng Xiaoping, the architect of the Chinese economic reforms, did not believe that the market economy was synonymous with capitalism or that planning was synonymous with socialism. During his southern tour, he said that "planning and market forces are not the essential difference between socialism and capitalism. A planned economy is not the definition of socialism, because there is planning under capitalism; the market economy happens under socialism, too. Planning and market forces are both ways of controlling economic activity".

Ideological justification.

In the 1980s, it became evident to Chinese economists that the Marxist theory of the law of value—understood as the expression of the labor theory of value—could not serve as the basis of China's pricing system. They concluded that Marx never intended his theory of law of value to work "as an expression of 'concretized labor time'". Marx's notion of "prices of production" was meaningless to the Soviet-styled planned economies since price formations were according to Marx established by markets. Soviet planners had used the law of value as a basis to rationalize prices in the planned economy. According to Soviet sources, prices were "planned with an eye to the [...] basic requirements of the law of value". However, the primary fault with the Soviet interpretation was that they tried to calibrate prices without a competitive market since according to Marx competitive markets allowed for an equilibrium of profit rates which led to an increase in the prices of production. The rejection of the Soviet interpretation of the law of value led to the acceptance of the idea that China was still in the primary stage of socialism. The basic argument was that conditions envisaged by Marx for reaching the socialist stage of development did not yet exist in China.  Mao said that the imposition of "progressive relations of production" would revolutionize production. His successor's rejection of this view according to A. James Gregor has thwarted the ideological continuity of Maoism—officially Mao Zedong Thought. Classical Marxism had argued that a socialist revolution would only take place in advanced capitalist societies and its success would signal the transition from a capitalist commodity-based economy to a "product economy" in which goods would be distributed for people's need and not for profit. If because of a lack of a coherent explanation in the chance of failure this revolution did not occur, the revolutionaries would be forced to take over the responsibilities of the bourgeoisie. Chinese communists are thus looking for a new Marxist theory of development. Party theorist Luo Rongqu recognized that the founders of Marxism had never "formulated any systematic theory on the development of the non-Western world" and said that the Communist Party of China should "establish their own synthesized theoretical framework to study the problem of modern development". According to A. James Gregor, the implication of this stance is that "Chinese Marxism is currently in a state of profound theoretical discontinuity".

Private ownership.

The concept of private ownership is rooted in classical Marxism. Since China adopted socialism when it was a semi-feudal and semi-colonial country, it is in the primary stage of socialism, because of this, certain policies and system characteristicssuch as commodity production for the market, the existence of a private sector and the reliance of the profit motive in enterprise management—were changed. These changes were allowed as long as they improve productivity and modernize the means of production and thus further develop socialism.  The Communist Party of China still considers private ownership to be non-socialist. However, according to party theorists the existence and growth of private ownership does not necessarily undermine socialism and promote capitalism in China. It is argued that Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels never proposed the immediate abolishment of private ownership. According to Engel's book "Principles of Communism", the proletariat can only abolish private ownership when the necessary conditions have been met. In the phase before the abolishment of private ownership, Engels proposed progressive taxation, high inheritance taxes and compulsory bond purchases to restrict private property while using the competitive powers of state-owned enterprises to expand the public sector. Marx and Engels proposed similar measures in "The Communist Manifesto" in regards to advanced countries, but since China was economically undeveloped party theorists called for flexibility regarding the party's handling of private property. According to party theorist Liu Shuiyuan, the New Economic Policy program initiated by Soviet authorities in the aftermath of the war communism program is a good example of flexibility by socialist authorities.  Party theorist Li Xuai said that private ownership inevitably involves capitalist exploitation. However, Li regards private property and exploitation as necessary in the primary stage of socialism, claiming that capitalism in its primary stage uses remnants of the old society to build itself. Sun Liancheng and Lin Huiyong said that Marx and Engels—in their interpretation of "The Communist Manifesto"—criticized private ownership when it was owned solely by the bourgeoisie, but not individual ownership in which everyone owns the means of production and hence cannot be exploited by others. Individual ownership is considered consistent with socialism since Marx wrote that post-capitalist society would entail the rebuilding of "associated social individual ownership".

The theoretical system of socialism with Chinese characteristics () is a broad term for political theories and policies that are seen by their proponents as representing Marxism–Leninism adapted to Chinese circumstances and specific time periods. For instance, in this view Xi Jinping Thought is considered to represent Marxist–Leninist policies suited for China's present condition while Deng Xiaoping Theory was considered relevant for the period when it was formulated.

Socialismus s čínskými rysy (: 中国特色社会主义, pchin-jin "zhōngguó tèsè shèhuìzhǔyì") je čínský úřední název pro hospodářství Čínské lidové republiky, které je od roku 2006 smíšenou ekonomikou se soukromým i státním vlastnictvím, soutěžícím v tržním prostředí. Jde fakticky o kapitalismus se silnou úlohou státu.


Recording and production.

After "Get Behind Me Satan", "Icky Thump" marks a return to the punk, garage rock and blues influences for which the band is known. Additionally, the album introduces Scottish folk music, avant-garde, trumpet, and bagpipes into the formula, whilst simultaneously reintroducing older characteristics such as the first studio recording of the early White Stripes song "Little Cream Soda".  "Icky Thump" was recorded and mixed entirely in analog at Nashville's Blackbird Studio by Joe Chiccarelli. According to Chiccarelli in an interview with HitQuarters, the band had already rehearsed and demoed around half the album, with the rest being conceived in the studio. The album took almost three weeks to record—the longest of any White Stripes album. The recording differed from previous albums in that White had the comparative luxury of recording to 16-track analog rather than his usual 8-track. Also, Chiccarelli said: "We spent a little more time than he is used to experimenting and trying different things on that album, whether it was different ways to record the drums or the vocals, or different arrangements, or cutting takes together." Trumpet player Regulo Aldama, who appears on "Conquest", was discovered by Jack White at a local Mexican restaurant.  Jack White said that the album would appeal to fans of the band's self-titled debut, suggesting a stripped-down garage rock sound. A statement on the band's official website (spuriously attributed to "Kitayna Ireyna Tatanya Kerenska Alisof" of the "Moscow Bugle", a reference to the 1966 "Batman" film) humorously claims that:  "Entertainment Weekly"'s online site had an interview with Michel Gondry in which he said he would be directing a video for "I'm Slowly Turning Into You". He mentions the idea for the video. Gondry also says that the video idea came first, and after mentioning the idea to Jack White, White wrote the song to fit that idea.  On May 30, 2007, Chicago radio station Q101 aired the entire album without the band's permission. Jack called into the station and reacted angrily about them playing it. There is speculation that the label supplied the album to the station in order to promote its release. In the liner notes of "Icky Thump", "Electra" is thanked on the second line, just after God. According to Ben Blackwell, Jack White's nephew, this is not directed towards the radio DJ, Electra, but to a pet Jack and Meg White used to have.  The White Stripes announced the completion of "Icky Thump" on February 28, 2007. The title is derived from "ecky thump", a Lancashire colloquial response of surprise, popularized by an episode of the 1970s UK comedy series "The Goodies". On "Later with Jools Holland" (broadcast June 1, 2007) Jack attributed the album's name to its use as an exclamation by his wife, who is from Oldham, historically in Lancashire. He added that the deliberate misspelling was to make it easier for an American audience to identify with. The liner notes for "Icky Thump" also suggest the spelling variation was due to concerns over copyright infringement.  The Pearly Kings and Queens costume theme that the band used for this album is a traditional Cockney outfit, somewhat contrary to the Northern dialect of the title.

Theme.

Jack White told "Blender" in July 2007 that "Icky Thump" "is about feeling positive about being alive, taking deep breaths and just being really happy."

Promotion and release.

The album artwork features Jack and Meg dressed as Pearlies.  To promote "Icky Thump" before its release, the band distributed custom-designed boxes and previewed tracks from the record through Ice Cream Man. The ice cream promotion focused on the Coachella, Sasquatch, and Bonnaroo festivals and culminated in the band's release show on June 20, 2007 at the site of the former West Hollywood Tower Records on Sunset Blvd., temporarily rechristened Icky Thump. Records.  In addition to being released on CD and 180 gram vinyl, the band released the album on a limited edition 512 MB USB drive which was designed by British artist Stanley Chow There are two versions, one of which depicts Jack, the other depicting Meg. The pressing was limited to 3,333 of each, and were shipped the week of the U.S. release. Each drive contained the album in Apple lossless format.  The 180 g vinyl edition contains alternate versions of both "Icky Thump" and "Rag and Bone". "Icky Thump" is a slightly different mix to the digital version and is also edited to be 14 seconds shorter. "Rag and Bone" is also a different mix but in addition contains totally different vocals for each verse (possibly the original guide vocals and there are no vocals from Meg) and is missing the harmonies from the last chorus.  The sound quality of the digital versions has been criticized for being mastered too loudly and with excessive peak limiting. Critics claim this results in clipping or "digital distortion" which can be heard as crackling, particularly during bass drum hits. The vinyl version was mastered by Steve Hoffman.  A special mono mix of "Icky Thump" was available on 180 gram vinyl for a short time to Third Man Vault Premium Account subscribers.

Reception.

The album received critical acclaim, with an overall average rating of 80 out of 100 at Metacritic. Barry Nicolson with British magazine "NME" wrote, ""Icky Thump" is brilliant, there's no way around that." Commenting on the album's "fuller sound and relaxed flights of fancy," Heather Phares of AllMusic said ""Icky Thump" is a mature, but far from stodgy" album, and that "it's just great fun to hear the band play." Jody Rosen, writing for "Blender", called the album "the sound of a band not stretching out so much as digging in: burrowing deeper into loamy soil they know well." In one of the more negative reviews, Josh Tyrangiel of "Time" remarked, "The White Stripes are too weird and talented to be boring, but it sounds like they might be a little bored." Ultimately giving the album 3.5 out of 5 stars and giving an (A-) on his website, Robert Christgau, with "Rolling Stone", summed up the return album this way "Although the new constructions don't entice as consistently as they should, their noise stays with you. And what that noise stands for is itself." He added, "Like his sometime heroes Led Zeppelin, Jack White builds monuments. They're suitable for awestruck visits. But they're no place to settle down."  On December 6, 2007, "Icky Thump" was nominated for four 2007 Grammy Awards: Best Alternative Album, Best Boxed or Special Limited Edition Package, Best Rock Song, and Best Rock Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal for the single "Icky Thump", winning Best Alternative Album and Best Rock Performance by a Duo or Group With Vocal. Q Magazine named Icky Thump as the 2nd best album of 2007. Furthermore, the album placed #17 on "Rolling Stone"s list of the Top 50 Albums of 2007.

Personnel.

The White Stripes  Additional personnel

Icky Thump is the sixth and final studio album by the American rock duo the White Stripes. It was released June 15, 2007 in Germany, June 18, 2007 in the rest of Europe, and June 19, 2007 in the rest of the world. It was the band's only album on Warner Bros. Records.

Icky Thump je šesté studiové album kapely The White Stripes. V Evropě vyšlo 18. června 2007. Album vychází také na 512 MB USB flash disku, který je vydán ve dvou verzích. Na první je zobrazen Jack White, na druhé Meg White. Počet kusů každé verze je omezen na 3'333. Skladby jsou ve formátu Apple Lossless.


Location.

Cydonia lies in the planet's northern hemisphere in a transitional zone between the heavily cratered regions to the south and relatively smooth plains to the north. Some planetologists believe that the northern plains may once have been ocean beds, and that Cydonia may once have been a coastal zone. It is in the Mare Acidalium quadrangle.

"Face on Mars".

Cydonia was first imaged in detail by the "Viking 1" and "Viking 2" orbiters. Eighteen images of the Cydonia region were taken by the orbiters, of which seven have resolutions better than 250 m/pixel (820 ft/pixel). The other eleven images have resolutions that are worse than 550 m/pixel (1800 ft/pixel) and are of limited use for studying surface features. Of the seven good images, the lighting and time at which two pairs of images were taken are so close as to reduce the number to five distinct images. The "Mission to Mars: Viking Orbiter Images of Mars" CD-ROM set image numbers for these are: 035A72 (VO-1010), 070A13 (VO-1011), 561A25 (VO-1021), 673B54 & 673B56 (VO-1063), and 753A33 & 753A34 (VO-1028).  In one of the images taken by "Viking 1" on July 25, 1976, a Cydonian mesa, situated at 40.75° north latitude and 9.46° west longitude, had the appearance of a humanoid face. When the image was originally acquired, Viking chief scientist Gerry Soffen dismissed the "Face on Mars" in image 035A72 as a "trick of light and shadow". However, a second image, 070A13, also shows the "face", and was acquired 35 Viking orbits later at a different sun-angle from the 035A72 image. This latter discovery was made independently by Vincent DiPietro and Gregory Molenaar, two computer engineers at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. DiPietro and Molenaar discovered the two misfiled images, Viking frames 035A72 and 070A13, while searching through NASA archives. The resolution of these images was of about 50 m/pixel.

Later imagery.

More than 20 years after the "Viking 1" images were taken, a succession of spacecraft visited Mars and made new observations of the Cydonia region. These spacecraft have included NASA's "Mars Global Surveyor" (1997–2006) and "Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter" (2006–), and the European Space Agency's "Mars Express" probe (2003–). In contrast to the relatively low resolution of the Viking images of Cydonia, these new platforms afford much improved resolution. For instance, the "Mars Express" images are at a resolution of 14 m/pixel (46 ft/pixel) or better. By combining data from the High Resolution Stereo Camera (HRSC) on the "Mars Express" probe and the Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) on board NASA's "Mars Global Surveyor" it has been possible to create a three-dimensional representation of the "Face on Mars".  Since it was originally first imaged, the face has been accepted by scientists as an optical illusion, an example of the psychological phenomenon of pareidolia. After analysis of the higher resolution "Mars Global Surveyor" data NASA stated that "a detailed analysis of multiple images of this feature reveals a natural looking Martian hill whose illusory face-like appearance depends on the viewing angle and angle of illumination". Similar optical illusions can be found in the geology of Earth; examples include the Old Man of the Mountain, the Romanian Sphinx, Giewont, the Pedra da Gávea, the Old Man of Hoy, Stac Levenish, Sleeping Ute, and the Badlands Guardian.

Speculation.

The Cydonia facial pareidolia inspired individuals and organizations interested in extraterrestrial intelligence and visitations to Earth, and the images were published in this context in 1977. Some commentators, most notably Richard C. Hoagland, believe the "Face on Mars" to be evidence of a long-lost Martian civilization along with other features they believe are present, such as apparent pyramids, which they argue are part of a ruined city.  While accepting the "face" as a subject for scientific study, astronomer Carl Sagan criticized much of the speculation concerning it in the chapter "The Man in the Moon and the Face on Mars" in his 1995 book "The Demon-Haunted World". The shape-from-shading work by Dr. Mark J. Carlotto was used by Sagan in a chapter of his famous series. In 1998 a news article about the "Space Face" quoted a scientist talking about deciphering "intelligent design" in nature. A cutting of this was used by Charles Thaxton as an overhead visual for a lecture at Princeton, in his first public use of the term "intelligent design" as a substitute for creation science.  The "face" is also a common topic among skeptics groups, who use it as an example of credulity. They point out that there are other faces on Mars but these do not elicit the same level of study. One example is the Galle Crater, which takes the form of a smiley, while others resemble Kermit the Frog or other celebrities. On this latter similarity, "Discover" magazine's "Skeptical Eye" column ridiculed Hoagland's claims, asking if he believed the aliens were fans of "Sesame Street".

In popular culture.

As a result of the speculation concerning their artificial origins, Cydonia and the "Face on Mars" appear frequently in popular culture, including feature films, television series, video games, comic books, and even popular music. For example: films featuring the structures include "Mission to Mars" (2000); TV series include "The X-Files" ("Space", 1993), "Invader Zim" ("", 2002), "Futurama" ("Where the Buggalo Roam", 2002), "Phineas and Ferb" ("Unfair Science Fair", 2009); video games include "Zak McKracken" (1988), "Final Fantasy IV" (1991), "" (1991), "" (1993), "SWIV 3D" (1996), "" (1999), "" (2009), "Kerbal Space Program" (2015), "" (2016); comic books include "Martian Manhunter" (#1, 1998), "" (2014); and music includes "Cydonia" from the album "Implant" by Eat Static (1994), "Telemetry of a Fallen Angel" by The Crüxshadows (1995), "Cydonia" by Crimson Glory (1999), "Knights of Cydonia" by Muse (2006) and "Hunting & Gathering (Cydonia)" by Sunn O))) (2009).  In 1958, almost two decades prior to the first images of the Face from the Viking probes, the comic book artist Jack Kirby wrote a story entitled "The Face on Mars" for Harvey Comics ("Race for the Moon" Number 2, September 1958), in which a large face (oriented vertically rather than horizontally) served as a monument to an extinct humanoid race from Mars.  In, most of SDF members and officers came from the area.

Cydonia (, ) is a region on the planet Mars that has attracted both scientific and popular interest. The name originally referred to the albedo feature (distinctively coloured area) that was visible from Earthbound telescopes. The area borders the plains of Acidalia Planitia and the Arabia Terra highlands. The area includes the regions: ""Cydonia Mensae"", an area of flat-topped mesa-like features, ""Cydonia Colles"", a region of small hills or knobs, and ""Cydonia Labyrinthus"", a complex of intersecting valleys. As with other albedo features on Mars, the name Cydonia was drawn from classical antiquity, in this case from "Cydonia" or "Kydonia" (; ; ), a historic polis (city state) on the island of Crete. Cydonia contains the "Face on Mars", located about halfway between Arandas Crater and Bamberg Crater.

Cydonia Mensae je název jedné z pojmenovaných oblastí na planetě Mars. Leží na sever od rovníku v přechodné zóně mezi jižními vysočinami (polokoulí s vyšší topografií, silně posetou krátery) a severními nížinami (relativně plochou oblastí planin na severu) v oblasti Acidalia Planitia. Cydonia je pokryta četnými pahorky a v dávné minulosti mohla touto oblastí procházet pobřežní zóna, pokud severní nížiny v minulosti vyplňoval oceán. Nachází se zde také i velmi známá „Tvář na Marsu“, skalní útvar připomínající lidskou tvář.


Early life.

Sieyès was born on 3 May 1748 as the fifth child of Honoré and Annabelle Sieyès in the town of Fréjus in southern France. His father was a local tax collector who made a humble income, and while the family had some noble blood, they were commoners. His earliest education came by way of tutors and of the Jesuits. He also spent some time at the "collège" of the "Doctrinaires" of Draguignan. He originally wanted to join the military and become a soldier, but his frail health, combined with his parents' piety, led him instead to pursue a religious career. The vicar-general of Fréjus offered aid to Sieyès, because he felt he was obliged to his father.

Education.

Sieyès spent ten years at the seminary of Saint-Sulpice in Paris. There, he studied theology and engineering to prepare himself to enter the priesthood. He quickly gained a reputation at the school for his aptitude and interest in the sciences, combined with his obsession over the "new philosophic principles" and dislike for conventional theology. Sieyès was educated for priesthood in the Catholic Church at the Sorbonne. While there, he became influenced by the teachings of John Locke, Condillac, Quesnay, Mirabeau, Turgot, the Encyclopédistes, and other Enlightenment political thinkers, all in preference to theology. In 1770, he obtained his first theology diploma, ranking at the bottom of the list of passing candidates – a reflection of his antipathy toward his religious education. In 1772, he was ordained as a priest, and two years later he obtained his theology license.

Religious career.

Despite Sieyès' embrace of Enlightenment thinking, he was ordained to the priesthood in 1773, but was not hired immediately. He spent time researching philosophy and developing music until about a year later in October 1774 when, as the result of demands by powerful friends, he was promised a canonry in Brittany. Unfortunately for Sieyès, this canonry went into effect only when the preceding holder died. At the end of 1775, Sieyès acquired his first real position as secretary to the bishop of Tréguier where he spent two years as deputy of the diocese. It is here that he sat in the Estates of Brittany and became disgusted with the immense power the privileged classes held. In 1780, the bishop of Tréguier was transferred to the bishopric of Chartres, and Sieyès accompanied him there as his vicar general, eventually becoming a canon of the cathedral and chancellor of the diocese of Chartres. Due to the fact that the bishop of Tréguier had high regards for Sieyès, he was able to act as a representative of his diocese in the Upper Chamber of the Clergy. It was during this time that Sieyès became aware of the ease with which nobles advanced in ecclesiastical offices compared to commoners. In particular, he was resentful of the privileges granted to the nobles within the Church system and thought the patronage system was a humiliation for commoners.  While remaining in ecclesiastical offices, Sieyès maintained a religious cynicism at odds with his position. By the time he determined to enter priesthood, Sieyès had "freed himself from all superstitious sentiments and ideas". Even when corresponding with his deeply religious father, Sieyès showed a severe lack of piety for the man in charge of the diocese of Chartres. It is theorised that Sieyès accepted a religious career not because he had any sort of strong religious inclination, but because he considered it the only means to advance his career as a political writer.

"What Is the Third Estate?".

In 1788, Louis XVI of France proposed the convocation of the Estates-General of France after an interval of more than a century and a half. This proposal, and Jacques Necker's invitation to French writers to state their views as to the organization of society by Estates, enabled Sieyès to publish his celebrated January 1789 pamphlet, "Qu'est-ce que le tiers-état?" ("What Is the Third Estate?"). He begins his answer: This phrase, which was to remain famous, is said to have been inspired by Nicolas Chamfort. The pamphlet was very successful, and its author, despite his clerical vocation (which made him part of the First Estate), was elected as the last (the twentieth) of the deputies to the Third Estate from Paris to the Estates-General. He played his main role in the opening years of the Revolution, drafting the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, expanding on the theories of national sovereignty, popular sovereignty, and representation implied in his pamphlet, with a distinction between active and passive citizens that justified suffrage limited to male owners of property.  Sieyès's pamphlet incited a radical reaction from its audience because it involved the "political issues of the day and twisted them in a more revolutionary direction". In the third chapter of the pamphlet, Sieyès proposed that the Third Estate wanted to be "something". But he also stated that, in allowing the privileged orders to exist, they are asking to become "the least thing possible". The usage of such rhetoric in his pamphlet appealed to common causes to unite the audience. At the same time it influenced them to move beyond simple demands and take a more radical position on the nature of government. In this case, the radical position taken by the Third Estate created a sense of awareness that the problems of France were not simply a matter of addressing "royal tyranny", but that unequal privileges under the law had divided the nation. It was from this point that the Revolution's struggle for fair distribution of power and equal rights began in earnest.

Impact on the Revolution.

Sieyès's pamphlet played a key role in shaping the currents of revolutionary thought that propelled France towards the French Revolution. In his pamphlet, he outlined the desires and frustrations of the alienated class of people that made up the third estate. He attacked the foundations of the French Ancien Régime by arguing the nobility to be a fraudulent institution, preying on an overburdened and despondent bourgeoisie. The pamphlet voiced concerns that were to become crucial matters of debate during the convocation of the Estates-General of 1789.  Whereas the aristocracy defined themselves as an élite ruling class charged with maintaining the social order in France, Sieyès saw the third estate as the primary mechanism of public service. Expression of radical thought at its best, the pamphlet placed sovereignty not in the hands of aristocrats but instead defined the nation of France by its productive orders composed of those who would generate services and produce goods for the benefit of the entire society. These included not only those involved in agricultural labor and craftsmanship, but also merchants, brokers, lawyers, financiers and others providing services. Sieyès challenged the hierarchical order of society by redefining who represented the nation. In his pamphlet, he condemns the privileged orders by saying their members were enjoying the best products of society without contributing to their production. Sieyès essentially argued that the aristocracy's privileges established it as an alien body acting outside of the nation of France, and deemed noble privilege "treason to the commonwealth".  Sieyès's pamphlet had a significant influence on the structural concerns that arose surrounding the convocation of the Estates general. Specifically, the third estate demanded that the number of deputies for their order be equal to that of the two privileged orders combined, and most controversially "that the States General Vote, Not by Orders, but by Heads". The pamphlet took these issues to the masses and their partial appeasement was met with revolutionary reaction. By addressing the issues of representation directly, Sieyès inspired resentment and agitation that united the third estate against the feudalistic traditions of the Ancien Régime. As a result, the Third Estate demanded the reorganization of the Estates General, but the two other orders proved unable or unwilling to provide a solution. Sieyès proposed that the members of the First and Second order join the Third Estate and become a united body to represent the nation as a whole. He not only suggested an invitation, however, but also stated that the Third Estate had the right to consider those who denied this invitation to be in default of their national responsibility. The Third Estate adopted this measure on 5 June 1789; by doing so, they assumed the authority to represent the nation. This radical action was confirmed when they decided to change the name of the Estates General to the National Assembly, indicating that the separation of orders no longer existed.

Assemblies, Convention, and the Terror.

Although not noted as a public speaker (he spoke rarely and briefly), Sieyès held major political influence, and he recommended the decision of the Estates to reunite its chamber as the National Assembly, although he opposed the abolition of tithes and the confiscation of Church lands. His opposition to the abolition of tithes discredited him in the National Assembly, and he was never able to regain his authority. Elected to the special committee on the constitution, he opposed the right of ""absolute veto"" for the King of France, which Honoré Mirabeau unsuccessfully supported. He had considerable influence on the framing of the departmental system, but, after the spring of 1790, he was eclipsed by other politicians, and was elected only once to the post of fortnightly president of the Constituent Assembly.  Like all other members of the Constituent Assembly, he was excluded from the Legislative Assembly by the ordinance, initially proposed by Maximilien Robespierre, that decreed that none of its members should be eligible for the next legislature. He reappeared in the third national Assembly, known as the National Convention of the French Republic (September 1792September 1795). He voted for the death of Louis XVI, but not in the contemptuous terms sometimes ascribed to him. He participated to the Constitution Committee that drafted the Girondin constitutional project. Menaced by the Reign of Terror and offended by its character, Sieyès even abjured his faith at the time of the installation of the Cult of Reason; afterwards, when asked what he had done during the Terror, he famously replied, "" ("I lived").  Ultimately, Sieyès failed to establish the kind of bourgeois revolution he had hoped for, one of representative order "devoted to the peaceful pursuit of material comfort". His initial purpose was to instigate change in a more passive way, and to establish a constitutional monarchy. According to William Sewell, Sieyès' pamphlet set "the tone and direction of The French Revolution... but its author could hardly control the Revolution's course over the long run". Even after 1791, when the monarchy seemed to many to be doomed, Sieyès "continued to assert his belief in the monarchy", which indicated he did not intend for the Revolution to take the course it did. During the period he served in the National Assembly, Sieyès wanted to establish a constitution that would guarantee the rights of French men and would uphold equality under the law as the social goal of the Revolution; he was ultimately unable to accomplish his goal.

Directory.

After the execution of Robespierre in 1794, Sieyès reemerged as an important political player during the constitutional debates that followed. In 1795, he went on a diplomatic mission to The Hague, and was instrumental in drawing up a treaty between the French and Batavian republics. He resented the Constitution of the Year III enacted by the Directory, and refused to serve as a Director of the Republic. In May 1798, he went as the plenipotentiary of France to the court of Berlin, in order to try to induce Prussia to ally with France against the Second Coalition; this effort ultimately failed. His prestige grew nonetheless, and he was made Director of France in place of Jean-François Rewbell in May 1799.  Nevertheless, Sieyès considered ways to overthrow the Directory, and is said to have taken in view the replacement of the government with unlikely rulers such as Archduke Charles of Austria and Karl Wilhelm Ferdinand of Brunswick (a major enemy of the Revolution). He attempted to undermine the constitution, and thus caused the revived Jacobin Club to be closed while making offers to General Joubert for a.

Second Consul of France.

The death of Joubert at the Battle of Novi and the return of Napoleon Bonaparte from the Egypt campaign put an end to this project, but Sieyès regained influence by reaching a new understanding with Bonaparte. In the coup of 18 Brumaire, Sieyès and his allies dissolved the Directory, allowing Napoleon to seize power. Thereafter, Sieyès produced the constitution which he had long been planning, only to have it completely remodeled by Bonaparte, who thereby achieved a coup within a coup – Bonaparte's Constitution of the Year VIII became the basis of the French Consulate of 1799–1804.  The Corps législatif appointed Bonaparte, Sieyès, and Roger Ducos as "Consuls of the French Republic". In order to once again begin the function of government, these three men took the oath of "Inviolable fidelity to the sovereignty of the people; to the French Republic, one and indivisible; to equality, liberty and the representative system". Although Sieyès had many ideas, a lot of them were disfavored by Bonaparte and Roger-Ducos. One aspect that was agreed upon was the structure of power. A list of active citizens formed the basis of the proposed political structure. This list was to choose one-tenth of its members to form a communal list eligible for local office; from the communal list, one-tenth of its members were to form a departmental list; finally, one further list was made up from one-tenth of the members of the departmental list to create the national list. This national list is where the highest officials of the land were to be chosen.  Sieyès envisioned a and a to act as the shell of the national government. The would present laws and discuss ratification of these laws in front of a jury. This jury would not have any say in terms of what the laws granted consist of, but rather whether or not these laws passed. The would be renewed from the national list. The main responsibility of the was to choose the members of the two legislative bodies, and protect the constitution by right of absorption. By this curious provision, the could forcibly elect to its ranks any individual deemed dangerous to the safety of the state, who would then be disqualified from any other office. This was a way to keep a closer eye on anyone who threatened the state. The power of the was extended to electing the titular head of government, the. The would hold office for life but have no power. If the threatened to become dangerous, the would absorb him. The central idea of Sieyès' plan was a division of power.

Napoleonic era and final years.

Sieyès soon retired from the post of provisional Consul, which he had accepted after 18 Brumaire, and became one of the first members of the Sénat conservateur (acting as its president in 1799); this concession was attributed to the large estate at Crosne that he received from Napoleon. After the plot of the Rue Saint-Nicaise in late December 1800, Sieyès defended the arbitrary and illegal proceedings whereby Napoleon ridded himself of the leading Jacobins.  During the era of the First Empire (1804–1814), Sieyès rarely emerged from his retirement. When Napoleon briefly returned to power in 1815, Sieyès was named to the Chamber of Peers. In 1816, after the Second Restoration, Sieyès was expelled from the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences by Louis XVIII. He then moved to Brussels, but returned to France after the July Revolution of 1830. He died in Paris in 1836 at the age of 88.

Contribution to social sciences.

In 1795, Sieyès became one of the first members of what would become the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences of the Institute of France. When the Académie Française was reorganized in 1803, he was elected in the second class, replacing, in chair 31, Jean Sylvain Bailly, who had been guillotined on 12 November 1793 during the Reign of Terror. However, after the second Restoration in 1815, Sieyès was expelled for his role in the execution of King Louis XVI, and was replaced by the Marquis of Lally-Tollendal, who was named to the Academy by a royal decree.  In 1780, Sieyès coined the term "sociologie" in an unpublished manuscript. The term was used again fifty years later by the philosopher Auguste Comte to refer to the science of society, which is known in English as sociology.

Personal life.

Sieyès was always considered intellectual and intelligent by his peers and mentors alike. Through the virtue of his own thoughts, he progressed in his ideologies from personal experiences. Starting at a young age, he began to feel repulsion towards the privileges of the nobility. He deemed this advantage gained by noble right as unfair to those of the lower class. This distaste he felt for the privileged class became evident during his time at the Estates of Brittany where he was able to observe, with dissatisfaction, domination by the nobility.  Aside from his opinions towards nobility, Sieyes also had a passion for music. He devoted himself assiduously to cultivating music as he had plenty of spare time. Along with cultivating music, Sieyes also enjoyed writing reflections concerning these pieces. Sieyès had a collection of musical pieces he called "".  Although Sieyès was passionate about his ideologies, he had a rather uninvolved social life. His journals and papers held much information about his studies but almost nothing pertaining to his personal life. His associates referred to him as cold and vain. In particular, Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord remarked that "Men are in his eyes chess-pieces to be moved, they occupy his mind but say nothing to his heart."

Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès (3 May 174820 June 1836), most commonly known as the abbé Sieyès (), was a French Roman Catholic "abbé", clergyman and political writer. He was one of the chief political theorists of the French Revolution, and also played a prominent role in the French Consulate and First French Empire.

Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyès (3. května 1748, Fréjus, departement Var, jihovýchodní Francie – 20. června 1836, Paříž) byl francouzský duchovní, spisovatel, ústavní expert a jeden z hlavních politiků francouzské revoluce v období Direktoria.


Club career.

Grêmio.

Born in Porto Alegre, Anderson joined Grêmio as a youth player. He made his first appearance for the team on 23 October 2004 in a 3–1 loss to Internacional in the Brazilian Série A, in which he scored a goal from a free-kick. Grêmio, however, were relegated at the season's conclusion and Anderson followed the team to the Brazilian Série B.  It was reported in June 2005 that Portuguese group GestiFute had paid €5 million for 70% of the economic rights to Anderson. On 18 June 2005, Anderson was reported to have signed a pre-contract with Portuguese side Porto.  Anderson earned himself iconic status by scoring the goal that lifted Grêmio back into Serie A in a promotion playoff against Náutico in November 2005. This goal was particularly memorable because Grêmio only had seven players on the pitch at the time and had just seen the opposition have a penalty saved. The goal, scored 16 minutes into extra time, gave Grêmio a 1–0 victory in the most unlikely of circumstances.

Porto.

Three months before his 18th birthday, Anderson officially joined Porto for a €7 million transfer fee in January 2006. As FIFA prohibits the international transfer of any underage players (subject to the exception that the player is moving to other countries to accompany their parents), Anderson's mother, Doralice de Oliveira, relocated to Portugal to facilitate his move abroad. Porto owned 65% of the economic rights, from which Porto would receive 65% of the future transfer fee of the player.  Anderson made his league debut for Porto on 5 March 2006, playing a part in helping the team seal the 2005–06 Primeira Liga title. In the 2006–07 season, he made his UEFA Champions League debut in Porto's first group game against CSKA Moscow. Anderson, however, was forced to miss five months of the season due to a broken leg, as a result of a tackle by Benfica midfielder Kostas Katsouranis. Despite his injury, he managed to appear in 15 games in the 2006–07 season, scoring two goals, and again picking up a league-winners' medal. In total, he made 21 starts for Porto in all competitions.

Manchester United.

2007–08 season.

On 30 May 2007, the Manchester United website confirmed that the club had agreed in principle to sign Anderson from Porto for an undisclosed fee. The initial application for a work permit for Anderson was rejected on the ground that he did not have enough international caps. Manchester United subsequently argued that only his youth had prevented him from acquiring more caps and that, given his exceptional talent and the size of the transfer fee, clearance was justified. On 29 June 2007, he was granted a work permit to play in the United Kingdom, and the move was completed on 2 July, with Anderson signing a five-year contract to become United's second Brazilian player after Kléberson. The transfer fee Porto announced was €30 million, which was equivalent to around £20 million as of July 2007.  Anderson was friends with Portuguese-speaking new teammates Cristiano Ronaldo and Nani prior to joining the club. He was handed the number 8 shirt, previously worn by Wayne Rooney, who changed to number 10, and made his Manchester United debut on 3 August 2007, playing 45 minutes of a pre-season friendly against Doncaster Rovers, which United won 2–0.  On 1 September 2007, Anderson made his competitive debut for United against Sunderland, before he was substituted at half-time and replaced by striker Louis Saha, who eventually scored the game winner. Anderson made his Champions League debut against Sporting Clube de Portugal in a 0–1 away win on 19 September, coming on as a substitute for Ryan Giggs in the 76th minute. On 26 September, Anderson made his League Cup debut, playing the full 90 minutes in a 2–0 loss to Coventry City, in a team consisting almost entirely of youth and reserve team players.  In the 2008 Champions League final in Moscow, Anderson was brought on as a substitute in the final minute of extra time to replace Wes Brown, and converted United's sixth attempt in the penalty shootout. United won the game 6–5 on penalties to give Anderson the first European honour of his career.

2008–09 season.

On 6 December 2008, Anderson won the 2008 Golden Boy award. On 21 December 2008, Anderson played 88 minutes of the 2008 FIFA Club World Cup final against LDU Quito, which United won courtesy of a single Wayne Rooney goal to claim the world title. On 1 March 2009, Anderson came on in the 56th minute of the 2009 League Cup final against Tottenham Hotspur, replacing Danny Welbeck. He went on to score the winning penalty in the penalty shootout, winning his first League Cup medal. On 18 May, in the penultimate game of the season against Arsenal, United only needed one point to seal their third successive Premier League title and Anderson's second in two years at the club. Anderson was brought on for Wayne Rooney in the final minute, helping United lift the title at home to their fierce rivals.

2009–10 season.

Anderson scored his first goal for Manchester United in the Audi Cup friendly tournament against Boca Juniors on 29 July 2009. After United were awarded a free kick on the right side of the penalty area, Anderson stepped up and curled the ball into the far top corner of the goal with his left foot. On 12 September, Anderson went on to score his first competitive goal for Manchester United against Tottenham in his 78th appearance for the club. He latched onto a loose ball at the edge of the area and hammered the ball into the bottom right corner with his left foot, scoring United's second goal of a 1–3 league win at White Hart Lane. In January 2010, Anderson was believed to have returned home to Brazil without manager Sir Alex Ferguson's permission and fined £80,000 by Manchester United.  Anderson returned to the first-team for a match against West Ham United on 23 February, but after just 20 minutes of the match, Anderson ruptured the cruciate ligament in his left knee and had to be substituted by Park Ji-sung. He was later ruled out for the remainder of the season, as well as the 2010 FIFA World Cup, after analysis determined that he would be out for the next six months.

2010–11 season.

On 20 August 2010, Sir Alex Ferguson confirmed that Anderson had returned to training after the combination of an injury and being involved in a serious car accident. He made his return to action in the 3–2 home victory over Liverpool as an 88th-minute substitute on 19 September. On 7 December, Anderson scored his first goal at Old Trafford and also first European goal for the club in a 1–1 draw with Valencia.  Anderson signed a new -year contract with United on 15 December, keeping him at the club until June 2015. Anderson doubled his United goal tally in one game as he scored twice in a 4–1 second leg semi-final home win over Schalke 04 in the Champions League. The game's aggregate score ended 6–1 to United and therefore reached the final for the third time in four years. In his next game, he scored only his second league goal for United, equalising against Blackpool on 22 May 2011, the final day of the league season, in a match that United went on to win 4–2.

2011–12 season.

Anderson started the season curtain-raiser, the 2011 FA Community Shield, which resulted in a 3–2 win over Manchester City. He also started the first three games, a 2–1 win against West Bromwich Albion, a 3–0 win against Tottenham Hotspur at home, where he scored his first goal of the season, and the 8–2 win against Arsenal, where he assisted on Danny Welbeck's opening goal.  Anderson scored his second goal of the season in a 2–0 home win against Norwich City in the Premier League. He broke the deadlock on 68 minutes, heading in from six yards after a corner had been knocked back across goal. During a match in the Champions League, Anderson injured his knee, ruling him out until February 2012. Anderson made a surprise return earlier than expected on 31 December 2011, coming on as a second-half substitute in a 3–2 home defeat to Blackburn Rovers. Further injuries led to Anderson, however, being sidelined for the remainder of the season.

2012–13 season.

Anderson returned in the 2012–13 season, setting an early highlight in the third round League Cup match against Newcastle United on 26 September in 2012, when he scored an excellent opener in a 2–1 victory. He carried his form into the next round of the League Cup on 31 October in a match against Chelsea. He managed to earn three assists in the 80 minutes he played whilst leaving the pitch with United winning 3–2, although they went on to lose 5–4 after extra time. He continued to impress when given the opportunity, and garnered praise for a substitute appearance in the 3–1 win over Queens Park Rangers at Old Trafford. Sir Alex Ferguson stated that "Anderson changed the game".  On 1 December 2012, Anderson scored his first league goal of the season in a 4–3 victory away at Reading. Despite his excellent run of form, Anderson had picked a hamstring injury up in the match and was substituted just before half-time. On 30 January 2013, Anderson played 68 minutes on his return from injury in a 2–1 defeat of Southampton at Old Trafford.  On 19 May 2013, Anderson played the full 90 minutes in Sir Alex Ferguson's final match as Manchester United manager, a 5–5 draw with West Brom at The Hawthorns.

2013–14 season.

After falling out of favour under new Manchester United manager David Moyes, playing just eight games in the first half of the 2013–14 season, Anderson joined Italian club Fiorentina on loan on 18 January 2014 for the remainder of the season. During his five-month loan, Anderson only made seven appearances for Fiorentina, three of which were from the bench. At the end of the season, he returned to Manchester United.

2014–15 season.

Anderson was not part of the 25-man squad that flew to the US for United's pre-season tour, missing out because of a calf injury he sustained during training. Under new manager Louis van Gaal, Anderson was allocated the number 28 shirt, with Juan Mata having taken the number 8 upon signing in January 2014. His first appearance of the season came in a 4–0 loss at Milton Keynes Dons in the League Cup, where he played the full 90 minutes. After this, Anderson appeared in only one more game for Manchester United, a 0–0 draw with Burnley at Turf Moor. Anderson finally parted with Manchester United by making a switch to Internacional, on a free transfer, during the January transfer window.

Internacional.

On 3 February 2015, Anderson ended his -year association with Manchester United by signing with Brazilian side Internacional on a four-year deal. A statement on Internacional's website read, "Sport Club Internacional concluded on Tuesday the procedures to announce the signing of midfielder Anderson. He signs a four-year contract."  On his debut for Internacional, Anderson missed a penalty kick against Cruzeiro in the Campeonato Gaúcho. In his second match, a 3–1 defeat to The Strongest in the Copa Libertadores on 17 February, Anderson was substituted after 36 minutes and required an oxygen mask due to La Paz's Estadio Hernando Siles being 3.68 km above sea level.  On 1 April, Anderson was sent off in Inter's 1–1 draw with Ypiranga de Erechim.  On 10 May, Anderson made his first Campeonato Brasileiro appearance for Internacional in the team's opening game of the 2015 season; a 3–0 loss at Atlético Paranaense. He received his second red card for the club in a 1–3 home defeat to Atlético Mineiro on 5 July.  On 9 August, Anderson was substituted at half-time in a 5–0 defeat to his former club and Inter's Porto Alegre rivals Grêmio. He then received threats and insults from the club's fans at training on the following Monday and was dropped from Inter's starting line-up for their following ten league fixtures. He returned to the team in a 3–1 loss to Santos on 27 September and remained a regular starter as Inter finished fifth in the league.

Adana Demirspor.

On 30 July 2018, Anderson joined TFF First League side Adana Demirspor. In his first season there, he made just 14 appearances. He started the first match of the 2019–20 season, but was substituted at half-time; he was on the bench for the next game, but then missed the next two entirely. On 20 September, the Adana Demirspor president announced that Anderson had decided to retire from football.  Anderson announced his retirement from football in September 2019.

International career.

In April 2005, Anderson played for Brazil in the South American under-17 Championship. The following October, he featured in the 2005 FIFA U-17 World Championship and he won the Golden Ball as Brazil took second place. When Brazil were in danger of going out of the tournament after their opening game defeat against Gambia, Anderson helped to turn their fortunes around in the next match against the Netherlands. Anderson played well against the Dutch, contributing crosses and runs that aided his side. Anderson kept up his level of performance after that, scoring one goal and playing a key role in others, notably setting up Ramon for the first strike against Korea DPR in the quarter-final. After helping to lead Brazil into the final after a 4–3 semi-final victory over Turkey, Anderson lasted only 15 minutes of the final with Mexico before being stretchered off.  Anderson made his international debut for the Brazilian senior team on 27 June 2007 in their 2–0 loss against Mexico in the 2007 Copa América, coming on as a second-half substitute. He made his first start for Brazil on 1 July 2007 against Chile in a 3–0 victory.  In July 2008, Brazil coach Dunga named Anderson in the 18-man squad for the 2008 Summer Olympics. He scored Brazil's first goal in their second group match against New Zealand, a match they went on to win 5–0. On 22 August 2008, Brazil won the bronze medal as they defeated Belgium 3–0.

Style of play.

Regarded as a talented and highly promising player in the media in his youth, Anderson later struggled to replicate his precocious performances as his career progressed, and has been accused by some pundits – including "Marca's" Fran Villalobos and "The Guardian's" Barney Ronay – of failing to live up to his potential. Keith Griffin of "Bleacher Report" remarked in 2008 that Anderson was "[o]ne of the most impressive young players to grace the Premier League this season," noting that the midfielder was gifted "with blinding pace, hulkish upper body strength, and vision." Alex Ferguson added that Anderson "can tackle, he's lightning quick, he's brave and he can pass the ball." In 2009, Will Evans of "Bleacher Report" described him as a player gifted with pace, physical strength, flair, and technical skills, as well noting his range of passing, crossing ability, defensive skills, and accuracy from penalties as some of his key strengths. He also cited that although Anderson was capable of creating chances for teammates, his biggest weaknesses were his shooting accuracy and lack of goals going forward, something which Ferguson had also previously noted. He felt that Anderson's best positions were either as a central midfielder or as a winger, although Evans's colleague Sam Tighe noted in 2013 that the Brazilian was often deployed as an attacking midfielder in his youth, and was also capable of playing in other positions, and was even used as a deep-lying playmaker on occasion; he labelled him as a dangerous free kick taker with good acceleration and dribbling ability. Regarding Anderson's difficulties in living up to his potential during his time at Manchester United, Chris Atkins of "Bleacher Report" commented: "Before joining Porto, Anderson was touted as the next Ronaldinho. Having emerged through the Gremio academy system as a tricky attacking midfielder, the comparisons were only natural and, prior to his injury in Portugal, the signs were promising. With excellent acceleration, impressive close control and a powerful shot, he certainly appeared to be an important player for Brazil's future." A left-footed player, his other most noticeable trait was his stamina. Anderson's former Manchester United teammate Michael Owen described the former as "very talented" and surmised that his failure to establish himself at the top level was due to his mentality and poor work-rate, combined with his injuries, health issues, and his struggle to operate in different positions, with Tighe noting that Anderson performed poorly when he was deployed in both a holding and a box-to-box role. Former Brazil midfielder Tostão also criticised Anderson for his static off-the-ball movement when commenting on his performance at the 2005 U17 World Cup, during which he won the Golden Ball after leading Brazil to the final, stating: "He was clearly the best player, but there were times when he just stood around."

Career statistics.

International.

"Statistics accurate as of match played 31 December 2008"

Honours.

Grêmio  Porto  Manchester United  Internacional  Brazil U23  Brazil  Individual

Personal life.

It was reported that Anderson was hospitalised after a serious car crash in Portugal on 31 July 2010. He had spent the night before at a nightclub before leaving in his Audi R8. The crash occurred at 7 am when the car came off the road and hit a farm wall before entering a field. Anderson was unconscious but was pulled from the car minutes before it exploded. Another man and a woman were also in the car. All three suffered minor injuries and were treated for whiplash, concussion and shock at a hospital. Anderson returned to United to continue his rehabilitation. Anderson refused to take a breathlyser test during the early hours in his native Porto Alegre and police forced his bodyguard to drive him home a week before his 24th birthday.  Anderson's father died at the age of 41, when Anderson was 14. He has three siblings. Anderson has five children – three daughters and two sons.

Anderson Luís de Abreu Oliveira (born 13 April 1988), commonly known as Anderson, is a retired Brazilian footballer who played as a midfielder. He is best known for his tenure with Manchester United.

Anderson Luís de Abreu Oliveira (*13. dubna 1988, Porto Alegre), známý jako Anderson, je brazilský fotbalový záložník, v současnosti hraje v brazilském klubu SC Internacional.


World Championship Group B (Poland).

Played April 12–21 in Katowice and Krakow. This was the final year of the qualifying tournaments (except for the "Far East"), so it was a simple matter of the winner being promoted. This was also the final year of the traditional eight team tournament. Beginning in 2001 Group B would be renamed 'Division I' and consist of two six team divisions.

Final Round 17–24 Place.

"Germany was promoted to the 2001 IIHF World Championship. No team was relegated."

World Championship Group C (China PR).

Played March 20–26 in Beijing. In 1999 Group C was disrupted because of political issues surrounding Kosovo. The IIHF chose to have no team relegated and have Yugoslavia retain their position, the result was a nine team tournament this year. With the forthcoming realignment, four nations had the opportunity to be promoted to Division I, the remaining five would participate in next year's Division II.

Group 1.

"Hungary was promoted to Division I"

Group 2.

"Croatia came back from a two goal deficit to tie Romania, and thereby clinch a promotion to Division I."

Group 3.

"China was promoted to Division I."

Consolation Round 28–30 Place.

"Lithuania was promoted to Division I."

World Championship Group D (Iceland).

Played April 10–16 in Reykjavik. The upcoming realignment meant that seven of the nine teams moved up to "Division II" for 2001.

Group 1.

"Both Israel and Iceland were promoted to Division II."

Group 2.

"Both Australia and New Zealand were promoted to Division II."

Group 3.

"Both Belgium and South Africa were promoted to Division II."

Consolation Round 40–42 Place.

"Both Luxembourg and Turkey had to stay behind in what was initially called Division II Qualification (later renamed Division III). There was no third team to play against so they both simply skipped a year and joined Division II in 2002  See also: "Women's Championship, World Juniors"

The 2000 Men's Ice Hockey World Championships were the 64th such event organized by the International Ice Hockey Federation. 42 teams representing their countries participated in several levels of competition. The competition also served as qualifications for division placements in the 2001 competition.

64. Mistrovství světa v ledním hokeji 2000 se konalo v Rusku v Petrohradě ve dnech 29. dubna – 14. května 2000. Mistrovství vyhrál výběr Česka.


Taxonomy.

In 1760 the French zoologist Mathurin Jacques Brisson included a description of the boat-billed heron in his "Ornithologie" based on a specimen collected in French Guiana. He used the French name "La Cuillière" and the Latin "Cochlearius". Brisson placed the species in a new genus "Cochlearius" (with the same name as that of the species). When in 1766 the Swedish naturalist Carl Linnaeus updated his "Systema Naturae" for the twelfth edition, he added 240 species that had been previously described by Brisson. One of these was the boat-billed heron. Linnaeus included a brief description, coined the binomial name "Cancroma cochlearia" and cited Brisson's work.  Although Brisson coined Latin names, these do not conform to the binomial system and are not recognised by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). However, Brisson also introduced names for genera and these are accepted by the ICZN. The boat-billed heron is now placed in Brisson's genus and has the tautonym "Cochlearius cochlearius". The name "Cochlearius" is from the Latin "cocleare", "coclearis" or "cochlearium" for a "spoon in the form of a snail shell".  There are five subspecies:

Description.

The boat-billed heron grows to about long. Adults are pale grey to white in color, with chestnut-colored abdomens and black flanks. The massive, broad, scoop-like bill, which gives rise to this species' name, is mainly black. This bird is also adorned with a crest which is thought to be used in mate attraction as it is larger in males. The sexes are similar in appearance, the main differences being that females are slightly smaller, grayer in appearance, and have shorter crests than males. Newly hatched nestlings have green-yellow skin, with their upperparts covered in gray down feathers. Their upper bill is black and they have green-yellow legs. Juveniles are darker in color than adults and lack a crest.

Distribution and habitat.

Boat-billed herons range from Mexico to Peru, Brazil, and northeastern Argentina. They are nonmigratory birds that tend to live in seasonal lagoons and estuaries, and nest in mangroves.

Behaviour and ecology.

Breeding.

Boat-billed herons breed during the rainy season and have been recorded as producing two clutches during this time, laying their first clutch in February during the end of the dry season. Their clutch sizes range from two to four eggs, with more eggs being laid during the first nesting period than the second. They usually nest in colonies, but have been observed nesting solitarily. Human disturbance can lead to a decrease in reproductive success, as herons tend to avoid human contact and will abandon nests if necessary.

Food and feeding.

Boat-billed herons feed on shrimp and small fish such as "Dormitator latifrons", a species of sleeper goby. They tend to forage in vegetative streams, shallow water, and lagoons. When foraging in streams, they use low-hanging branches and mangrove roots to stand over the water. In ponds they will walk slowly through the water up to deep or will forage near the water's edge. In order to capture prey they will lunge at fish or scoop the surface of the water with their bills which are uniquely shaped for this method of capture. Additionally, they have been observed using two different feeding techniques; standing and slowly stalking prey, or disturbing the water and chasing prey. Boat-billed herons will forage nocturnally, and have been seen leaving the roost 30 minutes after sundown to feed. It has been observed that they do not feed when a light source is present such as daylight, moonlight, or artificial light. One study hypothesized that in order to forage for food in the dark and in shallow, muddy water, their bills are sensitive to touch which helps them feel for their prey.

The boat-billed heron ("Cochlearius cochlearius"), colloquially known as the boatbill, is an atypical member of the heron family, and was formerly placed in a monotypic family, the Cochlearidae. It lives in mangrove swamps from Mexico south to Peru and Brazil. It is a nocturnal bird, and breeds semicolonially in mangrove trees, laying two to four bluish-white eggs in a twig nest.

Ilýrie (albánsky "Iliria"; řecky Iλλυρία, "Illyría"; latinsky "Illyricum") bylo ve starověku území rozkládající se na západě dnešního Balkánského poloostrova, jež obývaly divoké kmeny Ilyrů – starověkého národa indoevropského původu, dorozumívajícího se ilyrskými jazyky.