Basis Of Self-government Research Articles

ECOLOGICAL SELF-SUFFICIENCY OF THE INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION AS AN ECOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC BASIS OF ITS DEVELOPMENT

From the standpoint of environmental theory, the concept of environmental self-sufficiency of higher education institution (HEI) can be interpreted as an essential attribute of any civilized scientific (educational, social, etc.) community, which is a form of management of internal and (or) external natural and material resources with maximum environmental and economic benefits for ourselves. In the scientific literature there is a classification of well-known in world practice models of organization of such economic activities, which is based on relations between all stakeholders in this process, which includes central government and local government: for HEI, in general, and “Lviv Polytechnic”, in particular, the support is on the state level and the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine and the city administration. The article considers the most common world practices and approaches in the organization of environmental self-sufficiency of organizations, in particular, higher education institutions, notes their characteristics, as well as strengths and weaknesses. Statistical data are presented and the sources of ecological self-sufficiency of HEI in Ukraine and abroad are compared, and the peculiarities of the current models of ecological self-sufficiency of the HEI economic zone of Lviv are compared and analysed. In addition, the article presents an analysis of current innovations in the context of the effectiveness of the resource approach to the system of environmental self-sufficiency of the HEI economic zone. Also the main obstacles to the implementation of the principle of environmental self-sufficiency of the HEI economic zone and difficulties in the formation of internal budgets are outlined of it. The issues of planning, implementation, control, optimization and improvement of environmental self-sufficiency of organizations in general, and HEI economic zones in particular, through self-financing as the basis of self-government in terms of environmental self-sufficiency are also considered. The variant of constant sources of realization of basic and (or) primary level of ecological self-sufficiency of the budget of ZVO is offered, the description of advantages and lacks of the presented variant of HEI ecological self-sufficiency is given, and also requirements for maintenance of functioning of such mechanism on the example of “Lviv Polytechnic” and formulated relevant conclusions from this study.

ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF DECENTRALIZATION OF THE ACTIVITY OF CENTRAL EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT BODIES

The article examines the administrative and legal principles of decentralization in the activities of central executive bodies. The theoretical and methodological essence of traditions in the process of functioning of public power is considered and generalized taking into account the peculiarities of the science of public administration. The fruitfulness of the traditions of decentralization of public power of Ukraine is analyzed and substantiated. It is stated that taking into account the traditions of public power is important for the reform of central executive bodies, as the traditions of public power enshrine in the public consciousness of the people legal norms; store information, are a means of overcoming the crisis, perform the functions of protection against ill-considered innovations, the implementation of which leads to devastating consequences have a significant impact on public sentiment and the current political and legal situation. The term "decentralization" and its impact on the domestic management tradition are revealed. The classification of the main forms and types of decentralization is given. Theoretical approaches to the identification of European and domestic traditions of decentralization in the activities of central executive bodies on the basis of economic, political, administrative-territorial criteria, which can determine the signs of decentralization of public power in different countries in different periods. The tradition of decentralization in Ukraine is defined as a political and managerial legacy of the past in terms of building a system of government on the basis of self-government and selforganization and which falls under an objective definition, preserves and modifies its content in the transition to the present. The scientific periodization of decentralization processes in Ukraine was established, which allowed to determine the specific historical models and organizational forms acquired by the tradition of decentralization in Ukraine, the factors of stability of the decentralization tradition processes of decentralization are set by the specific historical stage of development of society. The concept of improving the system of central executive bodies in Ukraine on the basis of the tradition of decentralization by developing the principle of deconcentration of power in the system of public power is proposed.

Методология функционально-стоимостного подхода к совершенствованию системы управления корпорации в современных условиях

According to the author, the corporate structure of economic entities is objective need today owing to the fact that the created conditions of acceleration of economic development of the country often demand association of several legal entities and individuals conducting an entrepreneurial activity to achieve the required result. At the same time, the corporation is not independent legal form and its activity is not regulated by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. In this regard, there is a set of various interrelations and the relations of economic entities which are based on a basis of self-government and membership of participants of corporation on long-term contractual and contract conditions. This, in turn, predetermines the search of new, most effective forms and methods of formation and development of control systems of corporations including increases in level of their personnel potential.

Magdeburg rights as basis of self-government of cities of Get'manshchiny

Magdeburg rights as basis of self-government of cities of Get'manshchiny

Lincoln and Van Buren in the Steps of the Fathers: Another Look at the Lyceum Address

LINCOLN AND VAN BUREN IN THE STEPS OF THE FATHERS: ANOTHER LOOK AT THE LYCEUM ADDRESS Major L. Wilson On January 27, 1838, Abraham Lincoln delivered an address to the Young Men's Lyceum at Springfield, IUinois, entitled "The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions." Less than a year earlier, on March 4, 1837, President Martin Van Buren dealt with the same matter in his Inaugural Address. Both expressed concerns widely shared at the time and the ambiguous nature of these concerns: they proudly claimed success for the "repubUcan experiment" begun by the fathers, yet warned that it might fail if the present age proved false. "It impresses on my mind a firm beUef," the president observed, "that the perpetuation of our institutions depends upon ourselves."1 To the sons had faUen the solemn duty of preserving the work of the founding fathers. While both expressed a common concern for preserving the republic, Lincoln and Van Buren differed in their assessment of the specific dangers facing it. One was the widespread incidence of mob action. Deploring "the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country ," Lincoln feared thelong-run effectofthe "mobocratic spirit" would be to erode "the attachment of the People" and destroy the basis of self government. "Let reverence for the laws," he urged, "become the pohrical reUgion of the nation." Van Buren likewise saw how the "ardor of public sentiment" often outran "the regular progress ofthe judicial tribunals ." By wounding "the majesty of the law," moreover, mob action might eventually provide the occasion "for abridging the liberties of the people." On balance, however, Van Buren was far less concerned about mob violence than Lincoln. Reaffirmingat this point aJeffersonian trust in the "generous patriotism" and "sound common sense" of the people, he believed they would soon return to the "landmarks of social order."2 1 Roy P. Basler, ed., TheCollectedWorks ofAbraham Lincoln,9vols. (New Brunswick: Rutgers Univ. Press, 1953), 1:108-15; James D. Richardson, A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 20 vols. (New York: Bureau of National Literature, 1897), 4:1530-37, 1532; Rush Welter, The Mind of America, 1820-1860 (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1975), pp. 276-93. 2 Basier, Works of Lincoln, 1:109, 111, 112; Richardson, Messages, 4:1533. 198CIVIL WAR HISTORY On two other dangers to the republic the differences were much clearer and sharper. Lincoln devoted only two sentences to the rising voice of abolitionist agitation and expressed no personal opinion on the matter. In a lengthy passage, by contrast, Van Buren condemned abolitionism as the greatest threat to the republic. Regarding the menace of Caesarism Van Buren made no explicit references at all, whereas Lincoln placed central emphasis on it in his address. The Lyceum Address has been the subject of a considerable number of studies. Done mainly from the perspective oflater events—mounting sectional controversy and the Civil War—these studies impute to the young Lincoln prophetic powers of one sort or another. Some argue that he was very ambitious and that he identified with the Caesarian figure he predicted would arise. Otherstudies see Lincoln as a prophet of"poUtical reUgion." During the controversy over the expansion of slavery in the 1850s he accordingly held up the principle of equaUty to judge and redeem a divided nation; after war began he invoked divine providence in behalf of a new birth of freedom. Relatively little attention, on the other hand, has been given to Van Buren's views and none to a comparison of them with the views of Lincoln . In taking up the matter this essay focuses particularly on the political context of the 1830s, at a time when the system oftwo-party competition was approaching maturity. If a prophet of some sort, the young Lincoln was also a Whig politician. As a Whig, moreover, his views on the perpetuation of republican institutions surely gained greater clarity and force in dialectical contrast with the party ideology of Democrats. And no other Democrat had contributed more to the organization of his party and its ideological identification than President Van Buren. A closer look at his views will throw further Ught on the Lyceum Address and, in reciprocal fashion...

OUTSTANDING RUSSIAN SOCIALIST AND POLITICAL THEORIST P.M. ABOVIN-EGIDES (TO THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE BIRTHDAY)

P.M. Abovin-Egides was theorist and practitioner of the innovative model of “socialist self-administration”. His political socialization P.M. Abovin-Egides took place in Soviet Union that led to his formation as a young communist (komsomolets) and later as a dissident communist. He volunteered for the front, was taken prisoner, but escaped and eventually received 10 years “for treason”, 7 years of which he spent in the camps. After rehab he joined the party, led the collective farm (kolkhoz) and having analyzed his management practices he made a conclusion about the possibility of building socialism from below on the basis of selfgovernment. After returning to the University he made his PhD in philosophical sciences with the theme: “The meaning of life problem and its solution in Marxist ethics”, prepared innovative monograph. At the end of the 1960s he joined the dissident movement. In their manuscripts, P.M. Abovin-Egides argued in his manuscripts that Soviet socialism was not built, since socialism and democracy in their authenticity are impossible without each other. Nihilistic assessment of real socialism was contrary to the official doctrine of Soviet Marxism and therefore the authorities decided to isolate the author in a mental hospital. After his release in the 1970s he organized the oppositional socialist magazine “The Search”, for which he was actually expelled from the USSR. P.M. Abovin-Egides continued his sociophilosophical research in France, producing typographically old and new The Search. Back in the USSR, he published the book “Through Hell. In search of a third way” in 1991, which not only convincingly presented his concept of “socialist self-administration”, but took a deep scientific analysis of the discussions in Soviet society during the period of perestroika. Later P.M. Abovin-Egides harshly criticized Gaidar reforms and fiercely denounced the B. Yeltsin’s shelling of the Parliament. Denying the Soviet system as “totalitarian statism”, P.M. Abovin-Egides refused at the same time to extol the authoritarian regime of B.N. Yeltsin. In mid-September 1992 the podium of the constitutional Court of the dissident recalled the new government all its crimes spread of poverty and unemployment to moral decay of the Russian people. His diverse activities, all his works, including the posthumous collection of his writings, “Our finest hour”, convinced that P.M. Abovin-Egides wrote his name in the history of the world socialist thought.