its protest and hope that a political party, which – in principle – opposes the official establishment, would improve their situation. From discussions with various groups of citizens, we can observe a phenomenon that we call conflicting memories. Translated into the language of common communication, we can state it as follows: people in Slovakia are often unable to allow “the worlds of others” into their minds and, moreover, they are not even willingto admit their existence. This statement is the result of my active participation and participant observation of the
you be willingto accept Muslims as members of your family?
% of the population
The Netherlands is among the top five most tolerant EU countries on the matter. The other four are Norway (82%), Denmark (81%), Sweden (80%), and Belgium (77%).
Moreover, Western Europeans are very likely to accept Muslims in their neighborhoods ( Table 3 ) (Question: “Would you be willing..?” 2018 ).
Would you be willingto accept Muslims
Aside from looking at political history, any examination of the politicization of bourgeois elites needs topay particular attention to the history of ideas and political thought too. Looking at it from a Central European perspective, this approach has a strong tradition, especially in Poland and Hungary, partly also in Slovakia, but not in the Czech lands. This is yet another reason why we need to build on analytical works within political theory (e.g., works of the Slovak philosopher Tibor Pichler ) See especially Pichler Tibor , Etnos a
are too few foreigners in the country, and 8% “did not know” ( Čadová 2016 , 2). Looking at it from a longitudinal perspective, the data show a clear time correlation between decreasing willingness of Czech citizens for the permanent settlement of foreigners and solving the migration crisis, as Graph 1 shows.
Attitude of Czech citizens to the issue of permanent settlement of foreigners
Note: “Yes” category summarizes the answers “strongly or rather in favor of permanent settlement”, “no” category counts for “strongly or rather against permanent
The Crimean Tatars’ fate after the 2014 Crimea’s annexation by Russia is gradually becoming an object of studies. Some of them pay tribute to the complexity of the relationship between the Crimean Tatars and Russian state due to certain developments in the past. These were the first Crimea’s annexation by the Russian Empire in 1783 and the deportation of the Crimean Tatars by the Soviet regime in May 1944, which are crucial for shaping the Crimean Tatars’ perception of Russian policy in contemporary Crimea. Some authors discuss the importance of