Abstract Contemporary Montenegro was created as a result of the break-up of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Although this country was for a short time an integral part of Serbian Republic and functioned on the international arena as the so-called new Yugoslavia, Montenegrin society decided in a referendum to proclaim independence in 2006. Despite the fact that the separation took place in a peaceful manner, the frozen conflict between these countries slowly began to intensify. The areas it covered were legal, political and especially religious issues. The dispute reached its climax during the Covid-19 epidemic, when the Montenegrin authorities put to a parliamentary vote a draft of the Law on Religious Freedoms, which would de facto deprive all property of the Serbian Orthodox Church that has been operating in Montenegro for centuries. This led to mass protests by the indigenous Serb population identifying with the Serbian Patriarchate. The regulations against which the supporters of the pro-Serb opposition protested provided that religious communities would have to prove the transfer of ownership of real estate and land they had acquired before 1918, when Montenegro became part of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes – a state created after the World War I, which was renamed Yugoslavia on January 6, 1929. The main goal of the article is to present the genesis and development of the conflict summarized above, as well as to show its legal, religious and political consequences not only for the Montenegrin state, but indirectly for the entire region. The article consists of two main parts. The first one covers a short description of the Montenegrin nation/regional/ethnic group with the general problem of its identity outlined. The second describes the genesis, essence and recent events of the Serbo-Montenegrin conflict, which is taking place on the legal, political and cultural-religious level. The text includes an introduction and final conclusions.
Sciendo provides publishing services and solutions to academic and professional organizations and individual authors. We publish journals, books, conference proceedings and a variety of other publications.
This article aims to analyze the Gezi Park social movement, which started in Istanbul in 2013 and spread all over Turkey in a short time, in the context of class dynamics. In this context, firstly, the adequacy of examining the Gezi Park movement within the scope of new social movements will Gezi Park analysis as an example of social movement be emphasized. Secondly, the study will attempt to establish an alternative critical approach based on class. With this approach, class dynamics of the Gezi Park movement will be sought under the titles of historicity, antagonism, and holism.
Migration is a phenomenon accompanying humanity from its beginnings. The issue of migration is dealt with not only by scholars, but also by writers and novelists. Among them is Radek Knapp (1964-) from Warsaw, who came to Vienna at the age of twelve, and where he lives to this day. In his novels and short stories, Knapp presents the reality of Vienna and its inhabitants from the perspective of ordinary people. Among them are people from Poland who settled in Austria looking for a better life there. They quickly experience that you have to work hard in the Western Paradise. Failures are not uncommon life experiences. Knapp, writing about Vienna and its inhabitants, those from many generations and the newest ones, does so with a specific sense of humour. One of his most popular works is the novel Mr. Kuka’s Recommendations (1999). It has been translated from the original German into the following languages: Croatian, Czech, Dutch, Italian, Polish and Russian. It became the basis for the script of a feature film with the same title (2007). It is worth emphasizing that no works by Knapp were published in English.
The late 19th century saw a national awakening of the Belarusian people. During World War I, under German occupation, the Catholic Belarusian national movement intended to create a sovereign Belarusian state (the Belarusian People;s Republic) or in union with Lithuania (a revived Grand Duchy of Lithuania). After the February Revolution of 1917 in Russia, Orthodox national activists wanted a sovereign Belarus within a federal and democratic Russia. The Belarusian People’s Republic, established in March 1918, was not recognized by any state. Poland, Lithuania and Soviet Russia intended to incorporate the Belarusian lands on an autonomous basis. As a result of the Riga Peace Treaty (1921), the Belarusian lands were divided between Poland and Soviet Russia.
