Public Forum 2.0 | ScienceGate

The establishment of theNemzeti Casino(National Casino) in Pest helped establish civil society in nineteenth-century Hungary. Count István Széchenyi, hoping to modernize Hungary on the English model, established the casino in 1827 as a public forum for the Hungarian nobility. By transcending caste divisions between nobles and bourgeois elites, Széchenyi's casino served as an unofficial parliament and stock exchange, and generally helped cultivate Hungarian patriotism. The Pest Casino inspired a nation-wide trend for casinos, which in turn formed a civil society in opposition to Habsburg absolutism. Yet when the casino movement spread to Hungary's minority nationalities, Jews, Slovaks, Romanians, and particularly Croats, the casino also contributed to national divisions in Hungary's ethnically diverse population that affected the course of the 1848 Revolution.

Download Full-text

Rehabilitating Public Forum Doctrine: In Defense of Categories

The Supreme Court Review ◽

10.1086/scr.1992.3109668 ◽

1992 ◽

Vol 1992 ◽

pp. 79-122 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Lillian R. BeVier

Keyword(s):

Public Forum

Download Full-text

British East Asian Actors Call for Public Forum over RSC Casting Controversy

Contemporary Theatre Review ◽

10.1080/10486801.2014.947159 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 24 (4) ◽

pp. 504-506

Author(s):

Keyword(s):

East Asian ◽

Public Forum

Download Full-text

Grundrechtsbindung Privater

10.5771/9783748927457 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Maximilian Seyderhelm

Keyword(s):

Data Protection ◽

Fundamental Rights ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Public Forum ◽

Federal Constitutional ◽

Existing Data

The effect of fundamental rights among private individuals is breaking away from the usual patterns as a result of recent decisions by the Federal Constitutional Court. The work not only provides terminological clarity, but also elaborates the criteria that directly bind private individuals to fundamental rights. The author then looks at emerging constellations and examines the binding nature of fundamental rights there. The operator of Facebook fulfils both criteria described in more detail. These are the opening of a "public forum" and a predominant position of power. It is thus bound by fundamental rights. SCHUFA is not bound by this obligation, also because it is kept in check by existing (data protection) provisions of the legislator.

Download Full-text