Although we have seen studies on religion and sexuality in the West come to dominate the relevant scholarship, the postsocialist environment with a predominantly Orthodox population has received less attention. This paper fills the gap by examining the attitudes of Adventist and Baptist believers in Montenegro, with a particular focus on abortion, premarital sexual activities and non-heteronormative sexuality. Because we were dealing with a minority population, we opted for a qualitative methodology and conducted semistructured interviews with 17 Adventist and 15 Baptist believers. As observed, our research participants’ position towards sexuality is closely related to the teachings found in the Bible. However, it is possible to observe certain differences between the two groups; for example, the interviewed Adventists tend to be more conservative than the interviewed Baptists. In addition, the male Adventists seem slightly more liberal than female Adventists, whereas the situation is different among Baptists, where women come across as more liberal than men.
Category: Branislav Radeljić, Ph.D.
Branislav Radeljić, Ph.D.
Biography
LinkedIn
Google Scholar
-
Digitization and Political Participation in the MENA Region: Egypt, Kuwait, and Tunisia
The article highlights the link between digitization and political participation in three Middle Eastern countries: Egypt, Kuwait, and Tunisia. The role of the Internet and social media in political engagement is thoroughly discussed from a historical-comparative perspective. Using micro and macro level data, the study analyzes the usage of new online technologies and online political participation.
The findings provide valuable insights for understanding the intricate nature of online political participation and the paradox between digital engagement and traditional political involvement. Despite the expansion of digital media, traditional political interest and participation has decreased. Egypt and Kuwait demonstrate advanced stages of digitization with widespread Internet access, while Tunisia’s progress is varied. -
De la gestión de crisis a la crisis de gestión: Responsabilidad y democracias liberales en el estallido de la pandemia de la COVID-19
El estallido de la pandemia de la COVID-19 conmocionó a las sociedades de todo el mundo. En su esfuerzo por adaptar sus respuestas a la crisis a sus propias condiciones de supervivencia, los gobiernos tendieron desde el principio a recurrir a argumentos que limitaban la rendición de cuentas frente a la población. Las democracias liberales no fueron ajenas a esta forma de abordar el problema. En ese contexto, sus dirigentes esgrimieron la metáfora de la guerra para describir su posición como garantes de la supervivencia de la población frente a la nueva amenaza. Atenazados entre la incertidumbre y la necesidad de predecir la naturaleza y la evolución del enemigo invisible, sus respuestas pusieron en entredicho la responsabilidad política, profesional y personal de los dirigentes. En este artículo se ofrece una reflexión sobre el nivel de responsabilidad de los gobiernos de las democracias liberales en la gestión de la pandemia. Durante la crisis, los decisores tendieron a dejarse llevar por las narrativas que les resultaban más beneficiosas para escabullirse de sus responsabilidades, apuntalando así sus necesidades políticas a corto plazo a través del uso de metáforas belicistas, el juego de culpas, la competición con otros países y la dispersión de las fuentes en el proceso de toma de decisiones. Esta realidad supone hoy un llamado a la reflexión a los actores sociales, incluidos los expertos, intelectuales y medios de comunicación, para trascender la retórica predominante en la gestión de la pandemia y la “nueva normalidad” que le siguió, de manera que la dinámica de alteraciones constantes de las reglas del juego y las responsabilidades pueda dar paso, en el futuro, a un escenario con menos arbitrariedad y más rendición de cuentas.
-
You are either with us, or against us: the small state of Serbia between domestic ambition and external pressures
This article examines the position of Serbia as a small state in the context of external pressures, largely reflecting an ambition to balance the East and the West. While clearly interested in offers and benefits from collaboration with both geostrategic realms, Serbia’s authorities have always left space for possible alternatives—a trend that is expected to serve power preservation or to inform external players to what extent Serbia is keen on balancing and juxtaposing great powers in the region. While analyzing the limited case of the Covid-19 pandemic and the never-ending case of Kosovo, additionally actualized by the Russo-Ukrainian war, the present study suggests that Serbia is at the crossroads between growing ambitions and the real limitations of what its smallness can achieve. The paper concludes that Serbian foreign policy contains all the prerogatives of movement without a goal, a search for strategic partnerships, but without a coherent political vision—an approach that generates suspicion of being labelled as distracted and unreliable.
-
Do They Really Care about Us? On the Limits of State Intervention
This paper examines the limits of state intervention through the relationship between freedom and equality, the rule of law and social justice, as well as through two highly contradictory concepts regarding the scope of government action – the concepts of minimal state and paternalistic state. Accordingly, we seek to identify a model capable of outlining the extent to which the state can intervene in the light of socially beneficial goals, but without compromising individual freedom. Since we cannot find such a model within the extreme positions of liberalism and socialism, this paper seeks to offer a satisfactory solution by mitigating some of the ideologically exclusive positions. It embraces Aristotle’s teaching about the middle as a virtue and proposes sophisticated neoliberalism as a potential alternative to the status quo. Still, as insisted, the government should never be allowed to assume uncontrollable powers and create conditions for collectivist doctrines that recognize no individual freedom.
-
Does “Fortress Europe” have an alternative? EU member states between solidarity and national interests
This paper examines the repercussions of the 2015 European migrant/refugee crisis, which culminated with the 2018 dispute between Italy and France. It is concerned with the Dublin Regulation and the New Pact on Asylum and Migration, which are critical to the division and consequent polarizations across the EU. The Member States’ failure to show solidarity and agree to share the burden in relation to the distribution of immigrants and asylum seekers has brought the European integrationist project into question. In addition to considering the general theoretical explanations, the paper also looks into the African-origin migration/displacement as a proper trigger of widespread disagreements among European governments. The deliberate and systematic impoverishment of the local inhabitants – largely through the use of the French Treasurytied Communauté Financière Africaine (CFA) franc – exposes the neo-colonial nature of the current practices and thus jeopardizes all those discourses and policy initiatives focused on the provision of peace and stability.