http://hdl.handle.net/10506/1307 2026-03-15T10:51:55Z 2026-03-15T10:51:55Z Атанасов, Никола Atanasov, Nikola http://hdl.handle.net/10506/1164 2015-07-16T13:40:18Z 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Ролята на публичността при дефинирането на модела на делиберативната демокрация (Опит върху философията на Юрген Хабермас) Authors: Атанасов, Никола; Atanasov, Nikola Abstract: This article attempts to clarify the relationship between the concepts of public sphere and deliberative democracy as they are represented in the political theory of Jürgen Habermas. The aim is to explain the role of the political public sphere in the definition and justification of the procedural model of deliberative politics. The article is divided into an introduction, two main parts (focusing accordingly on The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere and on Between Facts and Norms) and conclusion. In dealing with The Structural Transformation the focus is on the early interest of Habermas in democratic institutions and practices, which is caused by his discontent with liberal model of public sphere. In this book Habermas is interested in the historical forms of public sphere and its institutions as it can be considered as the beginning or the historical precedent of the ideal of democratic politics. Bourgeois public sphere is represented as having normative potential, which can be used to criticize contemporary democratic ideas and practices. This potential is connected with the idea of discursive process of opinion and will-formation, which is guided by the principles of public sphere. Another important line in this part is the attempt to prove that The Structural Transformation contains ideas and problems that motivate later researches of Habermas. The idea of public use of reason and the faith in possibility for rational organisation of society are lasting thread, running through the various research projects of Habermas. The second part of the article deals with relations between deliberative democracy and the public sphere, represented in Between Facts and Norms. Habermas constructs his procedural model of deliberative politics as a third way between two influential conceptions: classical liberalism and civic republicanism. He examines these traditions from critical perspective and the comparative analysis goes through many key concepts such as popular sovereignty and human rights. The elements of liberalism and republicanism that Habermas accepts are integrated into the scheme of basic rights and in the ideal deliberative procedure for decision-making. In general it can be said that Habermas needs the public sphere to solve the problem with the legitimacy of legal norms by linking it with the discursive nature of communication in the formal and informal public sphere. On the other hand, the public sphere is used as an argument for justification of the empirical plausibility of the normative model of deliberative democracy.

2013-01-01T00:00:00Z Христов, Момчил Hristov, Momchil http://hdl.handle.net/10506/1163 2015-07-16T13:37:59Z 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Биополитиката като техника и технология Authors: Христов, Момчил; Hristov, Momchil Abstract: The article focuses on one often noticed and mentioned but only partially analyzed theme in Foucault’s discussion of biopolitics: namely that the latter is seen as a complex and historically developing set of techniques of power and control over the biological life of the population. The following analysis proceeds by two main steps: at first, it attempts to clarify the theoretical and methodological relation between the notions of technique and technology and Foucault’s general understanding of power relations. Thus technique is seen as a means to exercising power and stabilizing an ensemble of power relations; technology on the other hand functions in the Foucauldian analysis as the general practical knowledge mobilized in order to exercise power, and crystallized in concrete recipes of action – i.e. techniques – in a given field of force relations. The historical nature of power techniques, shown by Foucault in the example of the disciplines, demonstrates their peculiar dynamics and specificity of form: each power technique has its functions, privileged objects, modes of intervention, tactical deployment, history of polemical uses and contestations, transfers and transformations, etc. The second part of the analysis is a close reading of the problem of biopolitics precisely through the lens of power techniques in order to close the article with some methodological conclusions concerning the historical and sociological study of biopolitics.

2013-01-01T00:00:00Z Петров, Мартин Petrov, Martin http://hdl.handle.net/10506/1162 2015-07-16T13:39:17Z 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Образи на интимност: любов и полови роли в българската популярна култура от 90-те години на ХХ век Authors: Петров, Мартин; Petrov, Martin Abstract: I outline three ideal types of imagery of the intimate relationship and gender roles in Bulgarian popular culture in the years after the fall of the totalitarian regime. In the years after 1989 no hegemony could be established so the collective imagination was fragmented. By analysing song lyrics, street slang, jokes and subcultural groups, I try to reconstruct the different images of a love relationship and gender roles. I argue that these are reducible to three ideal types: a liberal, a conservative and a carnivalesque imagery of intimacy. The liberal imagines the intimate relationship as entered by a completely autonomous individual, author of himself and opposing broader society with its rules and institutions, whose members, in complying with these rules, are undistinguishable one from the other. The conservative, quite on the contrary, imagines each part in an intimate relationship as defined by what it presents as ‘traditional’ to a group defined as ‘Bulgarians’ or ‘Balkan peoples’ strict roles. In reality even the imaginary ideal lover that either of these discourses construct is a hybrid of autonomy and clearly defined gender roles. The carnivaleque imagery of intimacy mocks any kind of social roles and the ideologies that legitimate them. When it does offer a positive image of a love relationship it is completely mystical and in open denial of any possible world.

2013-01-01T00:00:00Z Медаров, Георги Medarov, Georgi http://hdl.handle.net/10506/1161 2015-07-16T13:38:39Z 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Между (анти)авторитаризма и демокрацията: възможността за либерален авторитаризъм Authors: Медаров, Георги; Medarov, Georgi Abstract: This article traces the sociological conditions for the articulation of political subjectivities in post-1989 Bulgaria from the perspective of Ernesto Laclau’s theory of populism. Firstly, it starts from proposing a general understanding for the conditions of various instances of antiauthoritarian subjectifications. Secondly, I move to my main assertion: the post-2001 collapse of the empty signifiers, that were enabling the constitution of stable (liberal) subjectivities, produced peculiar floating signifiers that are opening a space for the convergence between liberalism and authoritarianism. The latter, far from being some kind of a new populist threat to democracy, marks a crisis of the 1990s populisms.

2013-01-01T00:00:00Z