The role and scope of the state's activities in the field of social security are quite often problematic. This is related both to the attitude of citizens and to the use of social slogans, particularly in election campaigns. One could say that the electoral struggle is a kind of race, in which the winner is the politician or party whose promises are best suited to their voters. In order to address social security, politicians manipulate economic data. But above all, the influence of electoral promises (usually narrowed down to matters of welfare) on the evolution of the political system is not considered, despite the fact that this influence is considerable and very often neglected, as exemplified by the situation in the Republic of Poland after 2015. ; W debacie publicznej dość często występującym problemem jest rola i zakres działań państwa w obszarze bezpieczeństwa społecznego. Związane to jest zarówno z postawą obywateli, jak i wykorzystywaniem haseł społecznych, szczególnie w kampaniach wyborczych. Można wręcz powiedzieć, że w trakcie walki wyborczej następuje pewnego rodzaju wyścig polegający na tym, które obietnice socjalne trafią do przekonania wyborców, dzięki czemu polityk/partia polityczna osiągnie sukces wyborczy. Tym samym, odwołując się do hasła bezpieczeństwa społecznego, manipuluje się danymi ekonomicznymi, ale przede wszystkim pozostawia się poza sferą refleksji wpływ obietnic wyborczych ze sfery społecznej (zazwyczaj zawężanej do socjalnej) na ewolucję systemu politycznego. Niewątpliwie jest on znaczny i bardzo często lekceważony, czego przykładem może być Rzeczpospolita Polska po 2015 roku.
The first constitution of the Ottoman-Turkish Empire was adopted in 1876 – the Kânûn-ı Esâsî (Eng. Fundamental Law). In its history, Turkey has had four constitutions. They were adopted in 1921, 1924, 1961, and 1982, with the latter being presently in force. Nowadays, the creation of a new constitution is the main issue on Turkey's political agenda. The government of Turkey and Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdogan want to amend the constitution, and envisage creating an executive presidential system (Tur. Başkanlık sistemi), similar to that of the Russian Federation and the United States. Critics are concerned about what Recep Tayyip Erdogan's motivation may be. This article analyzes the historical roots of the constitution, its amendments, the presidential system in Turkey and the arguments of the Republican People's Party (CHP) and Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) against the adoption of a presidential system. The key issues that the authors address are the changes that could be made under Turkey's new constitution and whether all political power would be concentrated in president's hands.
On 29 March 2017, President of the European Council Donald Tusk received a note from UK Ambassador Tim Barrow. Under the document, the procedure of UK's leaving of the European Union was initiated.1 Gideon Rachman from "Financial Times" compared Brexit to a divorce, stating that the representative of the British government "granted the divorce papers", thus beginning a "long (planned for two years) attempt to redefine mutual relations" (Rozpoczyna się Brexit…, 2017). In his announcement for the press, Donald Tusk commented: "There is no reason to pretend that this is a lucky day, both in Brussels and in London […] Most Europeans, including almost a half of British voters, would prefer us to be still together" (Wielka Brytania rozpoczyna…, 2017). The stance of the European Council clearly mirrors the moods caused by the decision on Brexit, which are prevailing among all EU member states. It should be noted, however, that leaving the EU by the Brits not only has an impact on their political situation, but it also determines the actions of states aspiring to become members of the Community. The aim of this paper is to discuss the reasons for Brexit and to present the position of the Turkish government on this issue on the basis of the analysis of press articles and politicians' speeches. The hypothesis we posed assumes that Brexit meant Turkey losing its most important advocate in the Union. Thus, the future of accession negotiations between Turkey and the European Union has been called into question. One should also wonder to what degree Turkey's foreign policy priorities, which have already been redefined under the influence of the war in Syria, the battle with ISIS, the immigration crisis and the futile accession process so far, will be affected by the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union. Will Turkey choose to follow the so-called Trexit route, giving up its membership in the EU?
On 29 March 2017, President of the European Council Donald Tusk received a note from UK Ambassador Tim Barrow. Under the document, the procedure of UK's leaving of the European Union was initiated.1 Gideon Rachman from "Financial Times" compared Brexit to a divorce, stating that the representative of the British government "granted the divorce papers", thus beginning a "long (planned for two years) attempt to redefine mutual relations" (Rozpoczyna się Brexit…, 2017). In his announcement for the press, Donald Tusk commented: "There is no reason to pretend that this is a lucky day, both in Brussels and in London […] Most Europeans, including almost a half of British voters, would prefer us to be still together" (Wielka Brytania rozpoczyna…, 2017). The stance of the European Council clearly mirrors the moods caused by the decision on Brexit, which are prevailing among all EU member states. It should be noted, however, that leaving the EU by the Brits not only has an impact on their political situation, but it also determines the actions of states aspiring to become members of the Community. The aim of this paper is to discuss the reasons for Brexit and to present the position of the Turkish government on this issue on the basis of the analysis of press articles and politicians' speeches. The hypothesis we posed assumes that Brexit meant Turkey losing its most important advocate in the Union. Thus, the future of accession negotiations between Turkey and the European Union has been called into question. One should also wonder to what degree Turkey's foreign policy priorities, which have already been redefined under the influence of the war in Syria, the battle with ISIS, the immigration crisis and the futile accession process so far, will be affected by the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union. Will Turkey choose to follow the so-called Trexit route, giving up its membership in the EU? ; 29 marca 2017 r. szef Rady Europejskiej Donald Tusk otrzymał od brytyjskiego ambasadora Tima Barrowa pismo, które uruchamia zapisaną w artykule 50 traktatu lizbońskiego procedurę wystąpienia Wielkiej Brytanii z Unii Europejskiej. Gideon Rachman z "Financial Times" porównał Brexit z rozwodem, stwierdzając, że przedstawiciel rządu brytyjskiego w Brukseli "wręczył papiery rozwodowe" i tym samym zapoczątkował "długotrwałą (na razie zaplanowaną na ponad dwa lata) próbę poukładania sobie stosunków na nowo". Z kolei w oświadczeniu dla prasy D. Tusk skomentował to wydarzenie w następujący sposób: "Nie ma powodu, żeby udawać, że to szczęśliwy dzień, zarówno w Brukseli, jak i Londynie […] Większość Europejczyków, włączając w to prawie połowę brytyjskich głosujących, wolałaby, żebyśmy zostali razem". Z całą pewnością stanowisko RE odzwierciedla nastroje wywołane przez decyzję o Brexicie, które są i będą odczuwalne dla wszystkich państw członkowskich Wspólnoty. Warto jednak zauważyć, że opuszczenie przez Brytyjczyków UE oddziałuje nie tylko na sytuację polityczną ich samych, ale także określa działania władz państw aspirujących do członkostwa we Wspólnocie. Celem niniejszego artykułu nie jest omówienie powodów Brexitu, ale zaprezentowanie postawy tureckiego rządu. W tym kontekście na podstawie analizy artykułów prasowych oraz wystąpień polityków omówiona zostanie prawdopodobna strategia Ankary. Teza, którą postawiliśmy, zakłada, że wraz z Brexitem Turcja straciła jedyne poparcie na drodze wejścia do Unii Europejskiej. Turcja zaczyna nowy etap w stosunkach między UE i Wielką Brytanią. Należy się również zastanowić, jak Turcja postrzega i ocenia prowadzoną obecnie politykę zewnętrzną, zredefiniowaną przez trwający konflikt w Syrii, walkę z ISIS i problem imigracyjny, oraz bezcelowość procesu prowadzącego do opuszczenia Unii Europejskiej przez Wielką Brytanię. Jaki będzie kierunek tureckiej polityki zagranicznej w relacjach z Zachodem? Czy Turcja odejdzie od statusu kandydata unijnego (tzw. Turexit)?
29 marca 2017 r. szef Rady Europejskiej Donald Tusk otrzymał od brytyjskiego ambasadora Tima Barrowa pismo, które uruchamia zapisaną w artykule 50 traktatu lizbońskiego procedurę wystąpienia Wielkiej Brytanii z Unii Europejskiej. Gideon Rachman z "Financial Times" porównał Brexit z rozwodem, stwierdzając, że przedstawiciel rządu brytyjskiego w Brukseli "wręczył papiery rozwodowe" i tym samym zapoczątkował "długotrwałą (na razie zaplanowaną na ponad dwa lata) próbę poukładania sobie stosunków na nowo". Z kolei w oświadczeniu dla prasy D. Tusk skomentował to wydarzenie w następujący sposób: "Nie ma powodu, żeby udawać, że to szczęśliwy dzień, zarówno w Brukseli, jak i Londynie […] Większość Europejczyków, włączając w to prawie połowę brytyjskich głosujących, wolałaby, żebyśmy zostali razem". Z całą pewnością stanowisko RE odzwierciedla nastroje wywołane przez decyzję o Brexicie, które są i będą odczuwalne dla wszystkich państw członkowskich Wspólnoty. Warto jednak zauważyć, że opuszczenie przez Brytyjczyków UE oddziałuje nie tylko na sytuację polityczną ich samych, ale także określa działania władz państw aspirujących do członkostwa we Wspólnocie. Celem niniejszego artykułu nie jest omówienie powodów Brexitu, ale zaprezentowanie postawy tureckiego rządu. W tym kontekście na podstawie analizy artykułów prasowych oraz wystąpień polityków omówiona zostanie prawdopodobna strategia Ankary. Teza, którą postawiliśmy, zakłada, że wraz z Brexitem Turcja straciła jedyne poparcie na drodze wejścia do Unii Europejskiej. Turcja zaczyna nowy etap w stosunkach między UE i Wielką Brytanią. Należy się również zastanowić, jak Turcja postrzega i ocenia prowadzoną obecnie politykę zewnętrzną, zredefiniowaną przez trwający konflikt w Syrii, walkę z ISIS i problem imigracyjny, oraz bezcelowość procesu prowadzącego do opuszczenia Unii Europejskiej przez Wielką Brytanię. Jaki będzie kierunek tureckiej polityki zagranicznej w relacjach z Zachodem? Czy Turcja odejdzie od statusu kandydata unijnego (tzw. Turexit)? ; On 29 March 2017, President of the European Council Donald Tusk received a note from UK Ambassador Tim Barrow. Under the document, the procedure of UK's leaving of the European Union was initiated.1 Gideon Rachman from "Financial Times" compared Brexit to a divorce, stating that the representative of the British government "granted the divorce papers", thus beginning a "long (planned for two years) attempt to redefine mutual relations" (Rozpoczyna się Brexit…, 2017). In his announcement for the press, Donald Tusk commented: "There is no reason to pretend that this is a lucky day, both in Brussels and in London […] Most Europeans, including almost a half of British voters, would prefer us to be still together" (Wielka Brytania rozpoczyna…, 2017). The stance of the European Council clearly mirrors the moods caused by the decision on Brexit, which are prevailing among all EU member states. It should be noted, however, that leaving the EU by the Brits not only has an impact on their political situation, but it also determines the actions of states aspiring to become members of the Community. The aim of this paper is to discuss the reasons for Brexit and to present the position of the Turkish government on this issue on the basis of the analysis of press articles and politicians' speeches. The hypothesis we posed assumes that Brexit meant Turkey losing its most important advocate in the Union. Thus, the future of accession negotiations between Turkey and the European Union has been called into question. One should also wonder to what degree Turkey's foreign policy priorities, which have already been redefined under the influence of the war in Syria, the battle with ISIS, the immigration crisis and the futile accession process so far, will be affected by the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union. Will Turkey choose to follow the so-called Trexit route, giving up its membership in the EU?
The role and scope of the state's activities in the field of social security are quite often problematic. This is related both to the attitude of citizens and to the use of social slogans, particularly in election campaigns. One could say that the electoral struggle is a kind of race, in which the winner is the politician or party whose promises are best suited to their voters. In order to address social security, politicians manipulate economic data. But above all, the influence of electoral promises (usually narrowed down to matters of welfare) on the evolution of the political system is not considered, despite the fact that this influence is considerable and very often neglected, as exemplified by the situation in the Republic of Poland after 2015. ; W debacie publicznej dość często występującym problemem jest rola i zakres działań państwa w obszarze bezpieczeństwa społecznego. Związane to jest zarówno z postawą obywateli, jak i wykorzystywaniem haseł społecznych, szczególnie w kampaniach wyborczych. Można wręcz powiedzieć, że w trakcie walki wyborczej następuje pewnego rodzaju wyścig polegający na tym, które obietnice socjalne trafią do przekonania wyborców, dzięki czemu polityk/partia polityczna osiągnie sukces wyborczy. Tym samym, odwołując się do hasła bezpieczeństwa społecznego, manipuluje się danymi ekonomicznymi, ale przede wszystkim pozostawia się poza sferą refleksji wpływ obietnic wyborczych ze sfery społecznej (zazwyczaj zawężanej do socjalnej) na ewolucję systemu politycznego. Niewątpliwie jest on znaczny i bardzo często lekceważony, czego przykładem może być Rzeczpospolita Polska po 2015 roku.
Among the many determinants of political behaviour in democratic systems, electoral decisions can be considered crucial. In line with the theory of rational choice voters cast their votes for those candidates who represent their important interests. Searching for factors determining contemporary politics is one of the basic tasks of social science researchers. The aim of this article is to determine whether a candidate's place of permanent residence in a district plays a significant role in the political behaviour of people voting in local government elections and whether — thus — it can be included in the above set. The research hypothesis is that a candidate's place of permanent residence matters for electoral decisions made in local government elections in Poland. The research was conducted between December 2018 and February 2019 as part of the nationwide research project "Political preferences. Attitudes — identifications — behaviours". The sample was selected in a quota and stratified manner. Indivisible strata were provinces (N = 16), while quota included elements such as gender, age and place of residence (urban/rural). The research team consisted of 16 provincial coordinators. The research, involving 968 participants, was conducted using a survey questionnaire. The results obtained confirm the great importance of the candidate's place of residence as a determinant of electoral decisions, and also the validity of Article 10 § 1 point 3 of the Electoral Code.
On November 4, 2021, the draft act on the establishment of the Polish Institute of Family and Demography [Pol. Polski Instytut Rodziny i Demografii – PIRiD] was submitted to the Sejm of the Republic of Poland. The PIRiD is a new institution, the task of which would be to deal with problems connected with the demographic security of Poland and the protection of family. In recent years, during the rule of the Law and Justice party, almost 40 new institutions financed directly or indirectly from the state budget have been established. Not all of them execute all the tasks entrusted to them by the legislator. The case of the PIRiD will help us consider the motives behind the new solutions. In this paper, on the basis of the analysis of texts, I present the course of the debate on the establishment of the Institute and discuss the arguments raised by its participants.
The purpose of the research is to analyze the special aspects of imposition and implementation of the state of emergency within the USSR during the German-Soviet War (1941 – 1945). The methodology of the research is based on the principles of scientificity, historism, authorial objectivity, the use of general (analysis, synthesis, generalization) and special historical (historical-genetic, historical-typological, historical-systemic) methods. The scientific novelty is the reconstruction of the process of the state of emergency imposing during the German-Soviet War 1941 – 1945 based on the analyzed documents. The Conclusions. It has been found out that the State Defense Committee (GKO), which became the main military-economic center of the USSR and ensured the process of mobilization, creation of new military units and switch of economy and agriculture to a war footing, played a pivotal role in the realization of the state of emergency. The priority was given to the mass evacuation of valuable property and population, the establishment of new enterprises manufacturing military goods. It has been illustrated in the research that the Soviet government used emergency measures for manufacture intensification through increasing working hours, production standard and calling citizens for labour service. The attention was drawn to the formation of local emergency bodies, such as the commission for urban defense, which were tasked with mustering defense of settlements, maintaining order and bringing provocateurs, spies and hostile agents to the Military Tribunal. It is proved that GKO activities across the Ukrainian lands liberated from the Nazi invaders didn't contribute to the stabilization of the lives of the people, taking into account deportations, "cleans" and creation of the conditions for a man-made famine of 1946. It has been noted in the research that imposition of the state of emergency was an important element for the restructuring of the Soviet system of government and public administration in the context of wartime. And the GKO with its exclusive powers in all areas of the social and political life of the country, economy, agriculture and transport was the main body developing and implementing the state of emergency.
The purpose of the research is to analyze the special aspects of imposition and implementation of the state of emergency within the USSR during the German-Soviet War (1941 – 1945). The methodology of the research is based on the principles of scientificity, historism, authorial objectivity, the use of general (analysis, synthesis, generalization) and special historical (historical-genetic, historical-typological, historical-systemic) methods. The scientific novelty is the reconstruction of the process of the state of emergency imposing during the German-Soviet War 1941 – 1945 based on the analyzed documents. The Conclusions. It has been found out that the State Defense Committee (GKO), which became the main military-economic center of the USSR and ensured the process of mobilization, creation of new military units and switch of economy and agriculture to a war footing, played a pivotal role in the realization of the state of emergency. The priority was given to the mass evacuation of valuable property and population, the establishment of new enterprises manufacturing military goods. It has been illustrated in the research that the Soviet government used emergency measures for manufacture intensification through increasing working hours, production standard and calling citizens for labour service. The attention was drawn to the formation of local emergency bodies, such as the commission for urban defense, which were tasked with mustering defense of settlements, maintaining order and bringing provocateurs, spies and hostile agents to the Military Tribunal. It is proved that GKO activities across the Ukrainian lands liberated from the Nazi invaders didn't contribute to the stabilization of the lives of the people, taking into account deportations, "cleans" and creation of the conditions for a man-made famine of 1946. It has been noted in the research that imposition of the state of emergency was an important element for the restructuring of the Soviet system of government and public administration in the context of wartime. And the GKO with its exclusive powers in all areas of the social and political life of the country, economy, agriculture and transport was the main body developing and implementing the state of emergency.
The purpose of the research is to analyze the special aspects of imposition and implementation of the state of emergency within the USSR during the German-Soviet War (1941 – 1945). The methodology of the research is based on the principles of scientificity, historism, authorial objectivity, the use of general (analysis, synthesis, generalization) and special historical (historical-genetic, historical-typological, historical-systemic) methods. The scientific novelty is the reconstruction of the process of the state of emergency imposing during the German-Soviet War 1941 – 1945 based on the analyzed documents. The Conclusions. It has been found out that the State Defense Committee (GKO), which became the main military-economic center of the USSR and ensured the process of mobilization, creation of new military units and switch of economy and agriculture to a war footing, played a pivotal role in the realization of the state of emergency. The priority was given to the mass evacuation of valuable property and population, the establishment of new enterprises manufacturing military goods. It has been illustrated in the research that the Soviet government used emergency measures for manufacture intensification through increasing working hours, production standard and calling citizens for labour service. The attention was drawn to the formation of local emergency bodies, such as the commission for urban defense, which were tasked with mustering defense of settlements, maintaining order and bringing provocateurs, spies and hostile agents to the Military Tribunal. It is proved that GKO activities across the Ukrainian lands liberated from the Nazi invaders didn't contribute to the stabilization of the lives of the people, taking into account deportations, "cleans" and creation of the conditions for a man-made famine of 1946. It has been noted in the research that imposition of the state of emergency was an important element for the restructuring of the Soviet system of government and public administration in the context of wartime. And the GKO with its exclusive powers in all areas of the social and political life of the country, economy, agriculture and transport was the main body developing and implementing the state of emergency.
The problem of the lack of "generational replacement" in Poland is particularly evident on the local self-government level. For years, there has been an ongoing public debate on the adoption of legal solutions introducing term-limits for the office of commune head, mayor and president of the city. Politicians of Law and Justice returned to their idea from 2005 and, shortly before the local elections of 2018, decided to prepare new regulations in this respect. They argued that the adopted solutions create real prospects for implementing projects by young politicians and activists. However, the issue was hotly debated and the initiators' motives were put into question. There is no doubt that a two-term limit in local selfgovernment units has always stirred up emotions. A lot of self-government officials perceive it as a regulation which violates the provisions of the Constitution of the RP. The aim of this paper is to present the public debate on the adopted solutions and discuss their assumptions.
In the modern world, security is some one of the basic human needs. In addition to the multiple threats that can be considered traditional, i.e. military or political ones, new, unconventional risks to the public appear. Unconventional threats are so dangerous for the society that they are not fully identified and there are no developed ways of dealing with them. These threats can be called social hazards that defy the existential basis of human existence. The answer to the more and more frequent occurrences of such phenomena are social security instruments and tasks assigned to it, for which both the state, institutions shaped by civil society and the citizen are responsible.
