Political Systems and the Perspective on Nursing Education during the Spanish Transition (from the Franco Regime to Democracy). A Contribution based on Nursing History

The aim of this study is to describe the changes in nursing education during the process prior to and after the establishment of democracy in Spain. It begins with the hypothesis that differences in social and political organization influenced the way the system of nursing education evolved, keeping it in line with neopositivistic schemes and exclusively technical approaches up until the advent of democracy. The evolution of a specific profile for nursing within the educational system has been shaped by the relationship between the systems of social and political organization in Spain. To examine the insertion of subjects such as the anthropology of healthcare into education programs for Spanish nursing, one must consider the cultural, intercultural and transcultural factors that are key to understanding the changes in nursing education that allowed for the adoption of a holistic approach in the curricula. Until the arrival of democracy in 1977, Spanish nursing education was solely technical in nature and the role of nurses was limited to the tasks and procedures defined by the bureaucratic thinking characteristic of the rational-technological paradigm. Consequently, during the long period prior to democracy, nursing in Spain was under the influence of neopositivistic and technical thinking, which had its effect on educational curricula. The addition of humanities and anthropology to the curricula, which facilitated a holistic approach, occurred once nursing became a field of study at the university level in 1977, a period that coincided with the beginnings of democracy in Spain.

Shared Rule in Federal Political Systems: Conceptual Lessons from Subnational Switzerland

This article reconceptualizes shared rule and uses novel data to measure it, thus addressing two shortcomings of federal literature. First, while most studies focus on self-rule, one question that is largely neglected is how lower-level governments can influence politics at a higher level in the absence of “second” chambers. The answer is through shared rule. A second shortcoming is that even when addressing this question, scholars concentrate on constitutional-administrative aspects of vertical intergovernmentalism, neglecting more informal, “political” dynamics. Comparing the twenty-six Swiss cantons allows drawing two lessons for federal studies: That shared rule is multifaceted and complex, and that to study informal territorial actors as well as direct political processes is indispensable to understand how power is actually distributed in federal political systems.

Minding and not minding your own business: What justifies attempts to assess the democratic quality of political systems? IHS Political Science Series No. 139, May 2015

Founded in 1963 by two prominent Austrians living in exile – the sociologist Paul F. Lazarsfeld and the economist Oskar Morgenstern – with the financial support from the Ford Foundation, the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, and the City of Vienna, the Institute for Advanced Studies (IHS) is the first institution for postgraduate education and research in economics and the social sciences in Austria. The Political Science Series presents research done at the Department of Political Science and aims to share “work in progress” before formal publication. It includes papers by the Department’s teaching and research staff, visiting professors, graduate students, visiting fellows, and invited participants in seminars, workshops, and conferences. As usual, authors bear full responsibility for the content of their contributions.

Government by constitution; the political systems of democracy. -

Includes bibliography.

The Socioeconomic Background of the Divergence of Belarusian and Ukrainian Political Systems

The aim of this paper is to analyze the political, social and economic background of the divergence of Belarusian and Ukrainian transitions. We focus on Belarus in order to find explanation for questions such as why could Lukashenko remain the authoritarian leader of Belarus, while in Ukraine the position of the political elite had proved less stable and collapsed in 2004. On the theoretical framework of elite-sociology, we seek to determine whether the internal factors (as macroeconomic conditions, standard of living, the oppressive nature of the political system and the structure of the political elite) play a significant role in the operation of the domino effect. This article emphasises the determining role of immanent internal factors, thus the political stability in Belarus can be explained by the role of the suppressing political regime, the hindrance of democratic rights and the relatively good living conditions that followed the transformational recession. Whilst in Ukraine, the markedly different circumstances brought forth the success of the Orange Revolution.

Self-organized sociopolitical interactions as the best way to achieve organized patterns in human social systems: going beyond the top-down control of classical political regimes

La monografía presenta la auto-organización sociopolítica como la mejor manera de lograr patrones organizados en los sistemas sociales humanos, dada su naturaleza compleja y la imposibilidad de las tareas computacionales de los regímenes políticos clásico, debido a que operan con control jerárquico, el cual ha demostrado no ser óptimo en la producción de orden en los sistemas sociales humanos. En la monografía se extrapola la teoría de la auto-organización en los sistemas biológicos a las dinámicas sociopolíticas humanas, buscando maneras óptimas de organizarlas, y se afirma que redes complejas anárquicas son la estructura emergente de la auto-organización sociopolítica.

Federalism and the Concept of Political Territoriality: Towards an Analytical Framework for Comparative Territorial Politics

The core issues comparative territorial politics addresses are how and why territory is used to delimit, maintain, or create political power; and with what kind of consequences for efficiency (output) and legitimacy (input). The aim of this article is to integrate various research strands into the comparative study of territorial politics, with federal studies at its core. As an example of a conceptual payoff, ‘political territoriality’ refers the observer to three dimensions of the strategic use of areal boundaries for political power. By focusing on territory as a key variable of political systems, the actors, processes and institutions are first analytically separated and continuously measured, enhancing internal validity, and then theoretically integrated, which allows more valid external inferences than classic, legal-institutionalist federal studies. After discussing the boundaries and substance of comparative territorial politics as a federal discipline, political territoriality is developed towards an analytical framework applicable to politics at any governmental level. The claims are modest: political territoriality does not serve so much as an explanatory concept as rather an ‘attention-directing device’ for federal studies.

The Eurasian Economic Union – more political, less economic. OSW Commentary Number 157/20.01.2015

The Eurasian Economic Union is undoubtedly the most comprehensive form of economic integration of the post-Soviet countries since the break-up of the Soviet Union. However, the way in which the integration process has been unfolding, as well as Russia’s aggressive policy over the last year, are indications that the EEU has become primarily a political project, and the importance of its economic aspects has eroded. This has triggered a change in the way Kazakhstan and Belarus treat the EEU. Initially, the two countries viewed integration as an opportunity for the development of genuine economic co-operation. However, Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the conflict in Ukraine have revealed the real significance of the EEU project – as a tool to reinforce Russian influence in the post-Soviet area and isolate the post-Soviet countries from the West and China. While the Kremlin presents the EEU as the Eurasian equivalent of the European Union, the project is in reality an imitation of integration. The reasons for this include the nature of the political systems in the participating countries, which are authoritarian, prone to instrumentalise law, and affected by systemic corruption; the aggressive policy that Russia has been pursuing over the last year; and Russia’s dominant role in defining the shape of the EEU. The EEU appears to be based on forceful integration, and is becoming less and less economically attractive for its member countries other than Russia. Moreover, it is clearly assuming a political dimension that those other member countries perceive as dangerous. For these reasons, its functioning will depend on the power and position of Russia. In the longer term it is likely that the other member states will try to ‘sham’ and delay closer integration within the EEU. This means that if Russia becomes politically and economically weaker, the EEU may evolve into an increasingly dysfunctional organisation – a development that will be reinforced by the low standards of legal culture in its member states and their reluctance to integrate. Should Russia’s power increase, the EEU will become an effective instrument of Russian dominance in the area of the former USSR.