The development of a formerly poor state in a great European power to a rich state in a small European country is remarkable. But the interest of this article is mainly on the methodology which is based on the exclusive focus on three key periods in the history of the observed region. This methodology leads to a very specific understanding of development and economic growth. The periods chosen in this example are the five years before the First World War, as it was a period of development and growth that in the end led to the fundamental crisis in the 20th century. The second period consists of five years following the Second World War. This period was crucial, as many fundamental developments were laid in this time. The final period begins with another big economic crisis in 2008. The selection is based on three rationales. First, it allows a comparison of how the population deals with crisis. Second, it provides a cross-section of over hundred years, and third, the topicality of these years increase the relevance of the paper.
The article aims to illustrate how Azerbaijan appeared in the eyes of an Italian who, in the first half of the nineteenth century, had the opportunity to visit it during a trip to Constantinople. Between 1841 and 1842, Felice De Vecchi, a wealthy Milanese passionate about painting and travel, embarked on a journey, together with his naturalist friend Gaetano Osculati, to Constantinople and then, through Persia, visited India. He kept a diary of that journey, only recently found in its almost totality, dedicating an entire chapter to Azerbaijan, the “land of fires”. From his account, rich in anthropological and pictorial notations, emerges a very well-defined sketch that does not hide the wonder of those who meet housing situations and customs far from their country of origin. In order not to lose the most emotional component contained in De Vecchi’s writing, the frequent quotations of passages from the diary are presented in the English translation, followed by the original text in nineteenth-century Italian.
For many researchers, the new categorical imperative by philosopher Theodor Adorno about thinking and acting in the way so that Auschwitz is never repeated, has become the new starting point for rethinking the rules of practicing the humanities. In the article, I present the postwar history of Jewish thought that has been manifested in the discourse about the Shoah.
Scholars have long debated the normative rationality, the temporal and legal aspects, and finally the limits and modern practices of parliamentary immunity. Therefore, this study does not insist on these classical interpretations anymore, but seeks to contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the conceptual history of parliamentary immunity. Embracing two schools of thought, the Koselleckian interpretation and the Skinnerian variant, this paper aims to establish and clarify in detail the story of the concept of parliamentary immunity in order to elucidate, in a Socratic fashion, what we really mean when we say that a senator or a deputy benefits from legislative immunity. This inquiry will help us emphasise how this concept leaves behind its abstract notion and becomes an institution with strict rules and practices. In addition, considering the importance of this concept in the modern legislative and rhetoric histories and the frequency with which it is used, this study will question the meanings of parliamentary immunity in the light of different historical settings and will eventually trace out a single, coherent, and unified conceptual matrix. My contention is that once parliamentary immunity – seen as a conceptual construct only adjusting the balance of power between the executive and the legislative powers – becomes an institution with strong practices, it enforces the parliament as a unified and independent body and creates the prerequisite conditions for the democratic development.
Perspectives on Federalism is closing its seventh year and its issue 2/2015 confirms the interdisciplinary nature of this intellectual enterprise. This issue is a very rich one, as it includes legal, historical and philosophical contributions. In spite of the evident diversities of these articles, we can identify three main connecting themes: latest developments in EU law, history of thought and European integration, and constitutional developments in national and supranational contexts.
Constitutional scholarship in Canada since Confederation has been characterized by two primary narratives. The dualist narrative, which characterized constitutional scholarship between the late-nineteenth and mid-twentieth centuries, focussed on the parallel developments of provincial and federal constitutions. The monist narrative, which has become the dominant model of interpretation since the mid-twentieth century, focusses on the federal constitution as a singular foundation of constitutionalism in Canada. As a result of the shift from dualism to monism, provincial constitutions have become largely ignored in Canada and subsumed by the “mega-constitutional” politics of the federal constitution. This paper examines provincial constitutions to highlight the significant reorientation of constitutional scholarship in Canada over the past 150 years, which has become primarily focussed on post-Confederation constitutional history and written constitutionalism.
The phenomenon of Italian migration is characterized by a clear caesura, which makes Italy a country with a long history of emigration and a much shorter experience of immigration. The mid-1970s are considered a breakthrough, when the zero-migration balance was recorded for the first time. The growing wave of arriving foreigners forced the rulers to change the current immigration policy, which rarely responded to the needs of both foreigners and citizens of the Republic. Subsequent laws, usually created in extraordinary circumstances, were also subject to the process of alternating power. Lack of legislative continuity and insufficient social integration gave birth to additional tensions around the observed influx of refugees. In this situation, it seems that the management of the migration crisis is no longer the responsibility of a single nation, but should be an action taken at the level of solutions of the European community.
In this paper, I argue that contemporary political and intellectual conflicts over the right course for European integration are reflected in the historiography of Jean Monnet, the so-called founding father of the European Union (EU). Multiple and mutually antithetical representations of Monnet are explored across the central themes of the contemporary European debate: nationalism, sovereignty, political methodology, and economic ideology. I investigate how the different faces of Monnet are constructed and used to legitimate contradictory scholarly standpoints regarding these central themes. Along the way, I attempt to decipher the puzzle of Monnet’s elevation to the status of a theoretical pioneer in EU Studies. Finally, I also explore how different roles assigned to Monnet in the various narratives of the EU’s origins contribute to the construction of European identity.