Kekuasaan dan Kekerasan
When states own power in a dominant position, do they tend to use violence? Is violence an instrument used by states to defend their power. To what extent the political system chosen by a state shapes the use of violence? This paper is aimed to anwer such questions. Compared to coercive communist, democratic-socialist, and traditional autocratic political systems, democratic political system has more persuasive power sources. But is there a guarantee that the democratic political system is sterile from the possibility of using violence by state?
States and Societies
For centuries the state has been the central element in the work of political scientists and philosophers. It is the focal point of many debates in sociology and economics. "States and Societies" provides a comprehensive selection of the amajor writings in the field. States and Societies addresses itself to fundamental questions. Is the state an independent entity above conflicts in society? Or is it enmeshed in those conflicts? Can we differentiate between types of state? Does the state diminish or increase freedom when it intervenes in our lives? In seven separate sections the editors examine classic conceptions of the state, the formation of modern states, the significance of citzenship, the roles of economy and capital, the interaction of power and legitimacy, states in relation to the world economy, and - finally - the future of the state. Extracts from the work of Machiavelli, Rousseau, Hobbes and other major theorists introduce the history of the state; essential contemporary articles by Anderson, Poulantzas, E.P. Thompson, Nozick and others focus on the nature and development of the state. Introdductions and analyses by the editors themselves provide a continuous critical narrative, linking separate themes. The whole is prefaced by David Held's substantial introductory essay, which provides a far-reaching analysis of the concept of the modern state.
Analysis: The Agenda 2007 Proposals: Evolution or Revolution?
On 10 February 2004 the Commission published its proposal for the financial perspective 2007-2013. A week later it adopted the third report on economic and social cohesion. These two documents form the basis of the so-called ‘Agenda 2007 reforms’. They will be the greatest challenge for the enlarged EU after the intergovernmental conference, since they will determine the financial basis for EU policy-making until the middle of the next decade. The Agenda 2007 proposals certainly hint at courageous reforms, because they place a previously unheard-of emphasis on performance and quality. Under the proposals, structural operations should generate value for money, and the funds should focus on projects which generate added value at a European level. Overall the Commission’s proposals point in the right direction, because they balance, on the one hand, solidarity for the new Member States and weak regions in the old Member States with, on the other hand, investments in future tasks. Moreover, they constitute a paradigm shift. For the first time, the Common Agricultural Policy will not be the dominant expenditure category. Now it is up to the Member States to examine the proposals politically and find a compromise between sometimes very divergent interests. It is to be hoped that, during the debate over expenditure limits and division of funds, national interests do not outweigh European interests.