A Transformation of the Philosophical Thought of West European Liberalism in the Multi-National Central and South-Eastern European Milieu

This work was devoted to individual child development. Psychogenetic research has emphasised the importance of social factors in children's intellectual development and two social factors are looked at here, family size and birth order. The effect of the formal parameters is, however, very unstable and they should therefore be considered together with certain informal factors. Of these, parental educational style, which is an expression of national traditions at the family level, is of particular interest. Educational style is culture-dependent and only a comparative cross-cultural study can reveal the real mechanisms through which educational style influences children's intellectual and personality development. Dumitrascu carried out an experimental cross-cultural study dedicated to the effects of family environment on child intellectual development. This involved three distinct populations, each of which has a distinct status in their geographical area, namely Romanians, Romanies from Romania, and Russians from the Republic of Moldova. It showed a significant difference between child intelligence in those from large families and in only children, with a huge gap in the case of Romany children. This suggests that the simultaneous action of several negative factors (low socio-economic status, large family size, socio-cultural isolation of the population) may delay a child's development. Subjected to such a precarious environment, Romany children do not seek self-realisation but rather struggle to overcome hardship and the majority remain outside civilisation. Unfortunately, adult Romanies rarely show concern about their children's successful social integration, placing no value on the school as a major socialising tool. This leads to the conclusion that a major effort is needed to help Romanies' social integration.

Liberal Nationalism: A Historical and Critical Analysis of Conceptions

At the end of the 20th century we live in a pluralist world in which national and ethnic identities play an appreciable role, sometimes provoking serious conflicts. Nationalist values seem to pose a serious challenge to liberal ones, particularly in the post-communist countries. Malinova asked whether liberalism must necessarily be contrasted with nationalism. Although nationalist issues has never been a major concern for liberal thinkers, in many countries they have had to take such issues into consideration and a form of 'liberalism nationalism' has its place in the history of political ideas. Some of the thinkers who tried to develop such an idea were liberals in the strict sense of the word and others were not, but all of them tried to elaborate a concept of nationalism that respected the rights of individuals and precluded discrimination on ethnic grounds. Malinova studied the history of the conceptualisation of nations and nationalism in the writings, of J.S. Mill, J.E.E. Acton, G. Mazzini, V. Soloviev, B. Chicherin, P. Struve, P. Miljoukov and T.G. Masaryk. Although it cannot be said that these theories form a coherent tradition, certain common elements of the different approaches can be identified. Malinova analysed the way that liberal nationalists interpreted the phenomenon of the nation and its rights in different historical contexts, reviewed the structure of their arguments and tried to evaluate this theoretical experience from the perspective of the contemporary debate on the problems of liberal nationalism and multiculturalism and recent debates on 'the national idea' in Russia.

Russian Writers and the Third Section

The Third Section was an instrument not so much of oppression as of information, propaganda and education. Under Nicholas I, the press did not represent public opinion, but rather the official point of view. It was intended to shape public opinion rather than to express it and much of the Third Section's activity focused on creating the best possible contacts with journalists and men of letters. The Third Section supervised literary activities by examining works in print and collecting information through its agents. It rewarded those authors whose work was approved by the emperor, it used writers to pursue its goals, especially in order to "direct minds", but acted as a mediator between the tsar, censors and writers, or sometimes as arbiter in conflicts between writers themselves, and it also acted as a censor. Writers, for their part, served in the Third Section, becoming its agents or consultants, delivering reports to it and writing texts commissioned by the Section. The majority of writers did not see any problems with serving or assisting the Third Section. Ideologies offering an alternative to state monarchism /in professional literature or individual liberalism/ were very weak. The only exception was a small group, mostly composed of eminent and highly educated aristocrats who possessed alternative moral and financial resources. Reitblat showed that the strong ties maintained by some journalists and writers with the Third Section were not unfortunate exceptions due to the low moral qualities of those individuals, but rather a natural phenomenon which reflected the specific nature of the Russian literary system and, more generally, of Russian society as a whole.