Racial Conflict in the United States of America : A Deconstructive Perspective on Native Speaker by Changrae Lee

Written about the time of the Golden Venture incident, Chang-rae Lee’s Native Speaker makes a particular reference to that incident, whereby implying that particular immigrants, on the grounds of their racial identities, are mistreated and considered as aliens by some Americas. While some whites discriminate against immigrants, there is widespread ethnic tension between Korean Americans and African Americans. Significantly, racial conflict between Koreans and blacks and the racist attitude of some whites toward immigrants are mirrored in the relationship between the Korean-American protagonist Henry and his American wife Lelia. That is, due to their different racial identities they do not understand each other and they always argue. However, toward the end of the novel, Henry and Lelia come to understand each other. While ethnic conflict between Koreans and blacks and certain whites’ discriminatory attitudes toward immigrants is serious one, the novel suggests the unimportance of racial identity. In other words, the novel concludes that there is no discriminatory treatment of immigrants and, in fact, every one is a native Speaker in America. In the novel there is no message of how racial conflict could be resolved. However, this essay suggests that by investigating how the tension between Henry and Lelia is resolved, one could suggest a solution for the ethnicity problem in America and in real life.

Ukrainas konstitutionella sicksackande : Regimförändring och partiutveckling under semipresidentialism

Ukraine has repeatedly shifted between the two sub-types of semi-presidentialism, i.e. between premier-presidentialism and president-parliamentarism. The aim of this article is to discuss to what extent theoretical arguments against premier-presidential and president-parliamentary systems are relevant for understanding the shifting directions of the Ukrainian regime. As a point of departure, I formulate three main claims from the literature: 1) “President-parliamentarism is less conducive to democratization than premier-presidentialism.”; 2) “Semi-presidentialism in both its variants have built-in incitements for intra-executive conflict between the president and the prime minister.”; 3) “Semi-presidentialism in general, and president-parliamentarism in particular, encourages presidentialization of political parties.” I conclude from the study’s empirical overview that the president-parliamentary system– the constitutional arrangement with the most dismal record of democratization – has been instrumental in strengthening presidential dominance and authoritarian tendencies. The premier-presidential period 2006–2010 was by no means smooth and stable, but the presidential dominance weakened and the survival of the government was firmly anchored in the parliament. During this period, there were also indications of a gradual strengthening of institutional capacity among the main political parties and the parliament began to emerge as a significant political arena.

Towards Presidential Rule in Ukraine : Hybrid Regime Dynamics under Semi-Presidentialism

This article sets out to analyse recent regime developments in Ukraine in relation to semi-presidentialism. The article asks: to what extent and in what ways theoretical arguments against semi-presidentialism (premier-presidential and president-parliamentary systems) are relevant for understanding the changing directions of the Ukrainian regime since the 1990s? The article also reviews the by now overwhelming evidence suggesting that President Yanukovych is turning Ukraine into a more authoritarian hybrid regime and raises the question to what extent the president-parliamentary system might serve this end. The article argues that both kinds of semi-presidentialism have, in different ways, exacerbated rather than mitigated institutional conflict and political stalemate. The return to the president-parliamentary system in 2010 – the constitutional arrangement with the most dismal record of democratisation – was a step in the wrong direction. The premier-presidential regime was by no means ideal, but it had at least two advantages. It weakened the presidential dominance and it explicitly anchored the survival of the government in parliament. The return to the 1996 constitution ties in well with the notion that President Viktor Yanukovych has embarked on an outright authoritarian path.