Letteratura scientifica selezionata sul tema "Antisemitism in higher education – europe – congresses"

The article provides a detailed analysis of the implementation of the state policy of education system’s Ukrainization in the course of the activities of Ukrainian governments (the Ukrainian Central Council, the Ukrainian State of the Hetmanate of Pavlo Skoropadskyi, the Directory of the Ukrainian People's Republic) and their influence on the development of the Ukrainian state formation in 1917-1920. The authors analyze a whole galaxy of congresses – (the First All-Ukrainian Teachers' Congress (April 1917), the First All-Ukrainian Peasants' Congress at the beginning of June 1917, the Second All-Ukrainian Teachers' Congress (August 1917)) that determined the position of educators regarding prospects and development of national education in the conditions of revolutionary restructuring of society. The desire of Ukrainian governments to create more opportunities to acquire education in their native language in the national educational institution is highlighted, which was the impetus for the opening of the Ukrainian National University in October 1917 as part of the historical-philological, physical-mathematical and of law faculties. Later similar educational institutions were opened in Mykolaiv, Kharkiv, Odesa. Projects of national universities were developed in Kamianets-Podilskyi and Uman. Also, departments of the Ukrainian language were founded in Kharkiv and Odesa ("classical") universities and four departments of Ukrainian studies - language, literature, history and law at the University of St. Volodymyr. In November 1917 the Ukrainian Scientific and Pedagogical Academy was opened, which became the first national higher educational institution in Ukraine. The state-building policy of Ukrainization of the education system of the government of the Ukrainian Central Rada, which was continued by the government of the Ukrainian State of Hetman P. Skoropadsky, was outlined, which made it possible to create more than 150 Ukrainian gymnasiums. A wide network of general cultural institutions and institutions was founded. In the past, Russian universities in Kyiv, Odesa, Kharkiv, as well as Katerynoslav Mining, Kharkiv Technological and Veterinary and Kyiv Polytechnic Institutes were nationalized and declared Ukrainian. Also, new departments in Ukrainian philology, history, culture, and Western Russian law were opened in scientific institutions, in addition to the existing ones. Kyiv National University was also reformed, turning it into a state. A law was adopted on the establishment of a Ukrainian university in Kamianets-Podilskyi with the prospect of developing higher humanities in Podillia and Western Ukraine and establishing scientific ties with universities in Western Europe.

Received 03.07.2020. This article represents a stage in a comprehensive interdisciplinary study of foreign policy institutions and personalities of the People’s Republic of China since the late 1990s. to November 2019. During this period there was a rapid growth in the economic, technological and cultural development of the country, which both allowed and demanded a greater foreign policy activity of China, which until then was focused on internal, maximum, regional problems. At the same time, people and institutions, that shaped and implemented this new foreign policy also developed and changed. The periods between the congresses of the Chinese Communist Party with the corresponding renewal of political leadership and foreign policy priorities correlate with the prevalence of human resources with certain biographical criteria (place of birth, higher education and practical work) in the Foreign Ministry and the International Department of the CPC Central Committee, those who were born in the East of the country, studied and worked in Europe, and not in the United States and Russia, as one might suppose on the basis of the discourse, for many decades concentrated on the military confrontation between the main nuclear powers. This article examines the biographies of key employees of the CPC International department in connection with the formation of foreign policy in the context of the overall development of China. Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded, firstly, about the strengthening of the technocratic approach to foreign policy specialists, which takes into account, first of all, their expert qualities, even in such a party structure as the CPC Central Committee International department, instead of the ideological approach that dominated in the past. Secondly, personnel dynamics are influenced by the specifics of the work of the International Department, which is currently aimed at maximizing the implementation of opportunities for cooperation, primarily of an economic nature, in the Eurasian direction, while the Foreign Ministry has the main current task of confronting the United States and regional rivals. Third, the revealed correlation and long-term effects of such a personnel policy can also stimulate Russian activity in terms of training the next generations of foreign policy human resources on the Chinese direction.

"„Sok szíves üdvözlettel régi barátos...” (“With kind regards, your old friend...”). Coriolan Petranu’s Friendly Connections to the Hungarian Historians. Coriolan Petranu is the founder of modern art history education and scientific research in Transylvania. He had received special education in this field of study that is relatively new in the region. He started his studies in 1911 at the University of Budapest, attending courses in law and art history. During the 1912-1913 academic year he joined the class of Professor Adolph Goldschmiedt (1863-1944) at the Friedrich-Wilhelm University in Berlin. The professor was an illustrious personality from the same generation as art historians Emil Mâle, Wilhelm Vögte, Bernard Berenson, Roger Fry, Aby Warburg, and Heinrich Wölfflin, specialists who had provided a decisive impetus to art historical research during the twentieth century. In the end of 1913, Coriolan Petranu favored Vienna, with its prestigious art historical school attached to the university from the capital of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. There he completed and perfected his education under the supervision of Professor Josef Strzygowski (1862-1941). The latter scholar was highly appreciated for his contributions to the field of universal art history by including the cultures of Asia Minor (Syria, Mesopotamia, Armenia, and Persia), revealing the influence that this area had on proto-Christian art, as well as by researching ancient art in Northern Europe. In March 1920 the young art historian successfully defended his doctoral dissertation entitled Inhaltsproblem und Kunstgeschichte (”Content and art history”). He thus earned his doctor in philosophy title that opened him access to higher education teaching and art history research. His debut was positively marked by his activity as museographer at the Fine Art Museum in Budapest (Szepműveszeti Muzeum) in 1917-1918. Coriolan Petranu has researched Romanian vernacular architecture (creating a topography of wooden churches in Transylvania) and his publications were appreciated, published in the era’s specialized periodicals and volumes or presented during international congresses (such as those held in Stockholm in 1933, Warsaw in 1933, Sofia in 1934, Basel in 1936 and Paris in 1937). The Transylvanian art historian under analysis has exchanged numerous letters with specialists in the field. The valuable lot of correspondence, comprising several thousands of letters that he has received from the United States of America, Great Britain, Spain, France, Switzerland, The Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Hungary, Poland, the USSR, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Egypt represents a true history of the stage and development of art history as a field of study during the Interwar Period. The archive of the Art History Seminary of the University in Cluj preserves one section dedicated to Hungarian letters that he has send to Hungarian specialists, art historians, ethnographers, ethnologists or colleagues passionate about fine art (Prof. Gerevich Tibor, Prof. Takács Zoltán, Dr. Viski Károly, Count Dr. Teleki Domokos). His correspondence with Fritz Valjavec, editor of the “Südostdeutsche Forschungen” periodical printed in München, is also significant and revealing. The letters in question reveal C. Petranu’s significant contribution through his reviews of books published by Hungarian art historians and ethnographers. Beyond the theoretical debates during which Prof. Petranu has criticized the theories formulated by Prof. Gerevich’s school that envisaged the globalization of Hungarian art between the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period and that also included in this general category the works of German masters and artists with other ethnic backgrounds, he has also displayed a friendly attitude and appreciation for the activity/works of his Hungarian colleagues (Viski Károly and Takács Zoltán). The previously unpublished Romanian-Hungarian and Hungarian-Romanian set of letters discussed here attest to this. Keywords: Transylvania, correspondence, vernacular architecture, reviews, photographs, Gerevich Tibor, Dr. Viski Károly "

Abstract Purpose To understand the influence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on clinical autonomic education and research in Europe. Methods We invited 84 European autonomic centers to complete an online survey, recorded the pre-pandemic-to-pandemic percentage of junior participants in the annual congresses of the European Federation of Autonomic Societies (EFAS) and European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and the pre-pandemic-to-pandemic number of PubMed publications on neurological disorders. Results Forty-six centers answered the survey (55%). Twenty-nine centers were involved in clinical autonomic education and experienced pandemic-related didactic interruptions for 9 (5; 9) months. Ninety percent (n = 26/29) of autonomic educational centers reported a negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education quality, and 93% (n = 27/29) established e-learning models. Both the 2020 joint EAN–EFAS virtual congress and the 2021 (virtual) and 2022 (hybrid) EFAS and EAN congresses marked higher percentages of junior participants than in 2019. Forty-one respondents (89%) were autonomic researchers, and 29 of them reported pandemic-related trial interruptions for 5 (2; 9) months. Since the pandemic begin, almost half of the respondents had less time for scientific writing. Likewise, the number of PubMed publications on autonomic topics showed the smallest increase compared with other neurological fields in 2020–2021 and the highest drop in 2022. Autonomic research centers that amended their trial protocols for telemedicine (38%, n = 16/41) maintained higher clinical caseloads during the first pandemic year. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic had a substantial negative impact on European clinical autonomic education and research. At the same time, it promoted digitalization, favoring more equitable access to autonomic education and improved trial design.

Today's universities are transforming into the entrepreneurial university model. Along with that is a strong innovation in governance towards autonomy and associated with entrepreneurship, innovation and creativity. The article presents research results on the model of the entrepreneurial university and the advanced university governance in terms of structure and management methods to adapt to this model in the world. Through the review of studies on the current situation, the article contributes a number of policy proposals to meet the requirements of university governance innovation for Vietnamese public universities in the context of transition to a model of entrepreneurial university. Keywords University, Entrepreneurial university, University governance, Vietnam public universities. References [1] D.V. Toan, 2020, Factors Affecting Third Mission Implementation and The Challenges for Vietnam’s Universities in The Transitioning Period. VNU Journal of Science: Economics and Business, 37(3) (2020) 75-84 (in Vietnamese), https://doi.org/10.25073/2588-1108/vnueab.4355.[2] A. Bramwell, D.A. Wolfe, Universities and regional economic development: the entrepreneurial University of Waterloo, Res. Policy 37(8) (2008) 1175-1187.[3] K. Yokoyama, Entrepreneurialism in Japanese and UK Universities: Governance, Management, Leadership and Funding, High Education 52 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-1168-2.[4] C. Shore, L. McLauchlan, Third mission’ activities, commercialisation and academic entrepreneurs, Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale, 20 (3) (2012) 267-286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8676.2012.00207.x.[5] H. Etzkowitz The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university - industry linkages, Research Policy, 27(8) (1998) 823-833.[6] H. Etzkowitz, L. Leydesdorff, The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a Triple Helix of University - Industry - Government Relations, Research Policy, 29(2) (2000) 109-123.[7] L.B. Costa, A.L. Torkomian, Um Estudo Exploratório sobre um Novo Tipo de Empreendimento: os Spin-ffs Acadêmicos, Rev. Adm. Contemp. 12(2) (2008) 395-427.[8] J.J. Degroof, E.B. Roberts, Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructures for academic spin-off ventures, J. Technol. Transf. 29(3–4) (2004) 327-352.[9] A. Vohora, M. Wright, A. Lockett, Critical junctures in the development of uni-versity high-tech spinout companies, Res. Policy 33(1) (2004) 147-175.[10] V. Revest, A. Sapio, Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: what do we know?, Small Bus. Econ. 39(1) (2010) 179-205.[11] E. Rasmussen, O.J. Borch, University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: a longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities, Res. Policy 39(5) (2010) 602-612.[12] L. Aaboen, Explaining incubators using firm analogy, Technovation 29(10) (2009) 657-670.[13] M. Abreu, V. Grinevich, The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities, Res. Policy 42(2) (2013) 408-422.[14] E. Rasmussen, S. Mosey, M. Wright, The influence of university departments on the evolution of entrepreneurial competencies in spin-off ventures. Res. Policy 43(1) (2014) 92-106.[15] H. Etzkowitz, The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action, Taylor and Francis, London, 2008. [16] D.B. Audretsch, From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the en-trepreneurial society, J. Technol. Transfer. 39(3) (2014) 313–321.[17] B.R. Clark, Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation, Issues in Higher Education, Elsevier, Oxford: IAU Press and Pergamon, New York 1998. [18] B. Sporn, Building Adaptive Universities: Emerging Organisational Forms Based on Experiences of European and US Universities, Education and Management, 7:2 (2001) 121-134. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011346201972.[19] H. Etzkowitz, Research group as ‘quasi-firm’? The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Res. Policy 32 (1) (2003) 109-121.[20] M. Guerrero, D. Kirby and D. Urbano, A Literature Review on Entrepreneurial Universities: An Institutional Approach, Working paper presented at the 3rd Conference of Pre-communications to Congresses, Autonomous University of Barcelona, June 2006.[21] F.T. Rothaermel, S.D. Agung and L. Jiang, University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature, Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4) (2007) 691-791. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtm023.[22] A. A. Gibb, G. Haskins & Robertson, Leading the entrepreneurial university, National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship (NCGE). http://www.ncge.org.uk (accessed 10 November 2020). [23] M. Guerrero, D. Urbano, The development of an entrepreneurial university, The Journal of Technology Transfer 37(1) (2010) 43-74. DOI: 10.1007/s10961-010-9171-x.[24] L.K. Sooreh, Salamzadeh, A., Safarzadeh, H. Salamzadeh, Y., Defining and Measuring Entrepreneurial Universities: A Study in Iranian Context Using Importance-Performance Analysis and TOPSIS Technique, Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal, 3(2) (2011) 182-199. [25] J.Y. Farsi, N. Imanipour and A. Salamzadeh, Entrepreneurial university conceptualization: case of developing countries, Global Business and Management Research, 4(2) (2012) 193-204. [26] Y.C. Chang, P.Y. Yang, B.R. Martin, H.R. Chi, T.F. Tsai-Lin, Entrepreneurial universities and research ambidexterity: A multilevel analysis, Technovation 54 (2016) 7-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.02.006[27] G. Dalmarco, W. Hulsink, G.V. Blois, Creating entrepreneurial universities in an emerging economy: Evidencefrom Brazil, Technological Forecasting & Social Change 135 (2018) 99-111. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.04.015.[28] S. Boffo, A. Cocorullo, University Fourth Mission: Spin-offs and Academic Entrenreneurship: Connecting Public Policies with new missions and management issues of universities, Higher Education Forum 16 (2019) 125-142.[29] D.V. Toan, Entrepreneurial Universities and the Development Model for Public Universities in Vietnam, International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 24(1) 2020 1-16. [30] J. Röpke, The Entrepreneurial University, Innovation, academic knowledge creation and regional development in a globalized economy, Working Paper Department of Economics, Philipps- Universität Marburg, Germany: 15, 1998[31] D.V. Toan, H.V. Hai, N.P. Mai, The Role of Entrepreneurship Development in Universities to Promote Knowledge Sharing: The Case of Vietnam National University Hanoi, Proceedings of Asia Pacific Conference on Information Management “Common Platform to A Sustainable Society In The Dynamic Asia Pacific”, VNU Press, Hanoi, October, 2016. [32] D.V. Toan, Development of enterprises in universities and policy implications for university governance reform in Vietnam VNU Journal of Science: Economics and Business, 35(1) (2019) 83-96 (in Vietnamese).[33] P. Zgaga, Higher Education in Transition - Reconsiderations on Higher Education in Europe at the Turn of Millennium, Monographs on Journal of Research in Teacher Education, Ed. Gun-Marie Frånberg, Publisher: Umeå University, 2007. ISBN: 978-91-7264-505-9.[34] J. Fielden, Global Trends in University Governance. Education Working Paper Series, number 9, World Bank, Washington, 2008.[35] A.H. Dooley, The role of academic boards in university governance, Policy paper formulated at the National Conference of Chairs of Academic Boards and Senates, The University of New South Wales, October 2005.[36] A. Lizzio, Student participation in university governance: the role conceptions and sense of efficacy of student representatives on departmental committees, Studies in Higher Education Journal, Taylor & Francis 34(1) (2009) 69-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802602000.[37] D.V. Toan, Development of Enterprises in Universities: From International Experience to Practices in Vietnam, Vietnam National University Press, Hanoi, 2019, 49-64 (in Vietnamese),.[38] D.V. Toan, H.T.C. Thuong, International experience in university governance and lessons for Vietnam, Economy and Forecast Review 20 (2020) 41-45. [39] D.V. Toan, Business development in universities: International experience and policy recomendation for Vietnam Economy and Forecast Review 35 (2018) 58-60 (in Vietnamese). [40] D.V. Toan, Entrepreneurship in public universities in Vietnam in the context of transition to autonomy (in Vietnamese), Economy and Forecast Review 30 (2019) 111-116.[41] D.V. Toan, University - Enterprise Cooperation in International Context and Implications for Vietnam (in Vietnamese), VNU Journal of Science: Economics and Business 32 (4) (2016) 32-44.

Does science have a moral component? Today, as well as in the past, the perspectives of scientists diverge. Some scientists join political groups and work for them. They only care about financial benefits and waiving moral and ethical rules. Others take an alienated stance, arguing that science only has scientific objectives that must be addressed. They lack concern for ethical aspects and stand by the motto “science for the sake of science.” Others say it is important to have ethical rules in science and that we cannot preserve humankind and its movement towards the future without ethical and moral principles. Considering that the world is currently in the second decade of the 21st century, it is evident that it has been divided into two distinct axes: the first being democracy, with its significance to every human life, and the second being dictatorship and tyranny, where human life is deemed worthless in pursuit of a particular objective. Ukraine has become the first outpost of this division and an example for humankind, where moral and ethical rules serve as the foundation of its statehood, which it has been defending in the cruel war with the Moscow nuclear empire since 2014. Ukraine, through its centuries-old sacrifices and historical experience, has enlightened humanity with the authentic foundations of morality: the heroism of its defenders, the fervent patriotism of its people, spiritual principles, empathy, saving people and animals, aiding the needy, the volunteer movement, the humane treatment of prisoners of war, and adherence to international legal principles. Our main goal is to protect our personal freedom, which is vital for every scientist to be self-fulfilled. What is the distinction in morality/ethics between homo sovieticus and a doctor? The Hippocratic Oath has been a moral compass for all doctors for several millennia. Its essence has not changed. The Soviet government abolished the Hippocratic Oath in 1917 because it prevented their political objective of enslaving the population [1]. The Bolsheviks imposed a new healthcare system through a decree: they legalized abortions in 1920 and active euthanasia (by medical professionals) in 1922 [1,2]. The Presidium of the Verkhovna Rada reinstated the Hippocratic Oath in 1971. Called “The Oath of the Soviet Doctor,” it was meant to raise the doctor’s prestige and emphasize their duty before the Soviet state [3]. The decline of medical ethics in the Russian Federation also saw the abandonment of ancient traditions focused on the patient in the principles of medical practitioners’ activities and the continued functioning as a tool of the ruling government [4]. The oath of Russian physicians, with its patronizing and sexist language, completely disregards the rights of the patient and the physician’s responsibility to take preventive measures and fulfill their duties before society. The expert in medical ethics, Pellegrino, observed, “It’s hard to imagine a more devastating mutilation of the body of medical ethics.” The re-emergence of pre-existing medical behavior patterns, which were rooted in the Ukrainian environment and influenced by Greek-Catholic customs prior to the Soviet era, was observed with the declaration of Ukraine’s independence in 1991. Professor Bohdan Nadraha was a strong supporter of the creation of updated medical ethics [5]. As one of the initiators of the revival of the Ukrainian Medical Society in Lviv and as the head of the Court of Medical Honor from 1992 to 1996, he firmly advocated for the reinstatement of bioethical principles among physicians and their practice in accordance with the principles of Hippocrates. Professor Ihor Herych created a document called “The Hippocratic Oath of the Doctor”, and Lviv Regional Medical Administration officially accepted it in 2007 [6]. Article 81 describes the ethical behavior of a doctor, including the doctor’s attitude towards the patient, the quality of medical care, confidentiality, the doctor’s role in end-of-life care, transplantation issues, conducting clinical trials, patient’s informed consent, and responsibility of doctors before the society. During a meeting with members of the Medical Commission of the Shevchenko Scientific Society and the Ukrainian Medical Society in Lviv, His Beatitude Liubomyr Husar addressed the physicians regarding the observance of the Hippocratic Oath, “In my opinion, it is imperative to comprehend that medicine is not merely a profession, but a calling, regardless of the form of oath.” He further stated that “understanding the significance of one’s profession and performing it with the utmost diligence is essential” [7]. The doctor has a calling that obliges them to do everything possible for the patient’s benefit. His important advice on de-communization was, “Corruption is part of the Soviet legacy. In my perspective, it is imperative that the authorities, scientists, historians, and every member of society analyze the legacy of the Soviet era and the remaining negative elements and swiftly eradicate these undesirable elements” [8]. Ukrainian scientists have a lot to be proud of because they started the foundations back in the 19th century when they founded the Shevchenko Scientific Society in Lviv in 1873 with support from philanthropists from Naddniprianshchyna. The Ukrainian intelligentsia and academics united and forged a solid foundation for the ethical values they pursued, embracing the ideals of liberty and tolerance being stuck among the two empires – the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the oppressive autocratic Russian Empire. This Society experienced significant development under the leadership of academician Mykhailo Hrushevskyi. The medical commission was established and supervised by Yevhen Ozarkevych, a prominent public figure, scientist, and physician, in 1898. As a global Ukrainian multidisciplinary academy of sciences, the medical commission has given impetus to the development of various directions of Ukrainian science, culture, and language and became the intellectual foundation of the Ukrainian state in 1918. The Shevchenko Scientific Society operated in Poland until 1939 and was destroyed by the Soviet authorities. In 1989, the Ukrainian diaspora recommenced its operations in Ukraine. The active intellectual diaspora, with its centers in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia, has been operational for 50 years (working outside Ukraine). So, we have a story about moral scientists who lived and worked for their country and the world [9]. Doctors and scientists who were forced to emigrate continued the traditions of the Lviv Ukrainian Medical Society and the Shevchenko Scientific Society during the 46 years of communist rule in western Ukraine. They started the Ukrainian Medical Society of North America in 1950 and published their works in the world’s only medical journal, “Medical Herald” (1954). Roman Osinchuk, who graduated from Lviv University and emigrated to New York in 1947, was its Editor-in-Chief. The basis of their activities were moral and ethical principles. Pavlo Dzhul, who edited the “Medical Herald” from 1967 to 2003, said it was better to follow the rules of medical ethics and follow the Hippocratic Oath instead of making a new code of ethics. “Hippocrates, in his oath, called for the honest fulfillment of duties according to one’s abilities and knowledge... a physician should alleviate the suffering of the sick and preserve human life... should lead a pure and blameless life, be committed to their profession to the fullest, and stay far from all that is malicious, unjust, and harmful. The aforementioned adage “primum non nocere” ought to remain relevant throughout time. A doctor who adheres to these principles will be able to fulfill their duties with a clear conscience, even during times of great revolutionary breakthroughs in medicine. Therefore, there is no need to draft a new code of medical ethics, but rather to reaffirm the ideals of our forefathers” [10]. In modern times, Ukraine is again fighting for the eternal principles of morality against the essence of the Russian Federation distorted by Soviet narratives and other dictatorial regimes. The democratic world underestimated the threats of dictatorial and terrorist regimes. Aggressors use economic and informational methods to manipulate people with a false ideology. They shape their supporters into “biomass” and instill in them a hidden “dark” morality also involving their religions. This is the second year that Ukraine is experiencing war particularly painfully, and this was also demonstrated during the attack on Israel. How methodically and uniformly the dictator-terrorist regimes operate! What a treachery, deceit, and cruelty! Someone teaches well, and executors learn quickly! The world must arrive at lucid and expeditious conclusions, as this poses a serious threat to the democratic principles of humanity. Joe Biden spoke about it in his special address from the White House on October 19, 2023: “We’re facing an inflection point in history... those moments where the decisions we make today are going to determine the future... History has taught us that when terrorists don’t pay a price for their terror, when dictators don’t pay a price for their aggression, they cause more chaos and death and more destruction... making sure Israel and Ukraine succeed is vital for America’s national security... global democracy” [11]. Everyone should reflect on these words, especially the intellectual elite. Scientists worldwide need to know which direction they are moving in by using their knowledge, abilities, and work. The everyday work and moral decisions made by scientists represent the symbolic placement of weights on various platforms of the historical scales: either for democracy or for dictatorship. They are two components of the real world today. What prevails now will be our future! This is a challenging question for scientists living in dictatorial states. They either have to leave them or refrain from supporting the development of these societies by speaking at international congresses or publishing articles about their developments in scientific journals. It is imperative that they wait for better times, refrain from supporting and sustaining the dictatorship, and refrain from contributing to its perpetuation. Living in a country that routinely commits mass genocide against other nations, commits humanitarian and ecological crimes, kills children and prisoners of war, and demolishes churches, museums, hospitals, educational institutions, and cemeteries was not a lucky break for them. Hence, scientists in democratic societies must clearly define their objectives: are they engaged in genuine scientific research with a moral component and generating a perspective for humanity, or are they focusing on the financial aspect and inviting scientists from dictatorial regimes to international conferences and publishing their articles in reputable journals in exchange for financial support? Scientists from the Russian Federation are not victims, and the world must refrain from using the term “good” Russians. They are the representatives of a terrorist state, and they must be isolated during the war to enable their minds and conscience to comprehend the significance of human life [9]. The ethical oversight of scientific endeavors, viewed as a vital necessity, is a crucial prerequisite for the advancement of research and the existence of humankind in its entirety. Every scientist should be aware of their responsibility for the fate of humanity. True science must have a moral face! The war is a test to see how well the Ukrainian people believe in morals and science. Ukrainian scientists have taken a stand to defend their state, democracy, and freedom despite the circumstances of war by establishing an intellectual front [10]. Some scientists volunteered and sacrificed their lives for the democratic future of Ukraine and humankind. More than 80 scientists died in 2022-2023. Some scientists help the Armed Forces of Ukraine with their developments [11], and others save wounded Heroes [12]. We thank the scientists of Europe, America, Canada, and Australia who have supported and continue to support Ukraine [13,14], who do not create a platform for the propaganda of Russian science, and who do not invite Russian scientists to their professional congresses and conferences. Ferenc Krausz, the Hungarian Nobel Prize laureate in physics, donated his prize money to help Ukraine, which, contrary to the official policy of the Hungarian government in the international arena, has become an example of morality. Yet many scholars advocate the principle of neutrality and the grey zone. Many scientific conferences and professional gatherings don’t mention the war in Europe, they allow scientists from the Russian Federation to speak and moderate, and they don’t commemorate peaceful researchers who perished because of the war. This is what happened at an international conference organized by the European Society for Primary Immunodeficiency in Gothenburg on April 16-18, 2022. The professional community did not honor the memory of Oksana Leontiieva, a scientist and hematologist from Kyiv who was supposed to talk at this conference about her developments in transplanting primary immunodeficiency on October 17. On October 10, 2022, seven days before the scheduled speech, she was killed by a Russian bomb while en route to work. At that time, Russian scientists were actively delivering their speeches at the conference. Haven’t scientists around the world had enough of the horrible things happening in Europe, like Russian bombings of hospitals, schools, libraries, theaters, homes, cafés, and funerals? Aren’t they equated to the high crimes of war, genocide, and terrorism? Several independent organizations cited in the Raoul Wallenberg Center for Human Rights report for May 2022 established this. The report also concludes that “states have a legal obligation to prevent genocide beyond their borders when they become aware of a serious risk of genocide”. The threshold established by this report has been reached, and states are no longer allowed to deny it. For the past two years, there have been discussions about whether Western publications should refuse to publish scientific papers from Russian institutions. Only the Journal of Molecular Structure has issued a clear statement based on the humanitarian crisis arising from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, ceasing the acceptance of manuscripts from scientists working in institutions of the Russian Federation [15]. Several journals declined to endorse a boycott for the sake of “universal science” (The British Medical Journal) [16] or to prevent “dividing the global research community and inhibiting the exchange of scientific knowledge” (Nature) [17]. Science has also decided not to boycott Russian submissions [18]. The “Journal of Hematopathology” has emerged as a prominent publication among Springer Nature’s journals, expressing its condemnation of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine while retaining a proactive approach towards evaluating manuscripts from Russian authors [19]. The war in Ukraine is condemned in several publications [20-21]. This is an example of outrage without real action. Russians are not even denied electronic access to scientific publications. Did these publications accept manuscripts from the Nazi regime during World War II or the Soviet regime during the Cold War era? When asked if American universities should have boycotted German/Nazi universities during World War II, they answered, “...when the Nazis criminalized higher education, they ceased to be universities” [22]. The united comprehensive approach of the civilized world, scientists in the first place, was able to defeat fascism and collapse the Soviet Union. Scientists all over the world are now deeply concerned about the Russian Federation’s actions in Ukraine. You learn nothing from history! Scientists from the Russian Federation supported the war with Ukraine during its early days, and many of them continue supporting it. The Russian Federation has criminalized its own research institutes and universities through its stringent regulations that suppress free speech and, consequently, academic freedom. Research institutions operate for the war machine in three shifts. Russian scientists are essential supporters of government policy. For example, about one million Russian scientists left the country in protest against the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Those who stayed don’t have enough important lab supplies from the West because of sanctions or reduced national funding for science [23]. But now is not the time for them to create the conditions for the development of science. Supporting them is a threat of the third world war! The manuscripts of Russian scientists with Homo sovieticus origins deserve to be boycotted by Western scientific publications until the war ends, with the complete withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory, the reparations for the killed population, registered justice and convicted war crimes, restoration of the destroyed infrastructure; mitigating the environmental catastrophe in the Ukrainian territory due to widespread mining, dam explosion, etc. During wartime, international sanctions in the realm of science should be imposed, much like those for economic, sporting, and cultural spheres. For humankind to have perspective, isolation of the aggressor must function in the scientific field. Scientists should make a conscious decision regarding the purpose for which they live, work, think, and create. Think before the nuclear monster destroys the planet!!!

This chapter discusses Jewish doctors of the Victorian and Edwardian period, demonstrating why there were so few of them in England in comparison with their numbers in Continental Europe. If Jews wanted a higher education in the early Victorian period, they had to go to the University of London; elsewhere there were restrictions on the admission of Jews to the universities. Mindful, no doubt, of the potential obstacles, Jewish parents in lower-middle-class families as well as from the Anglo-Jewish elite remained reluctant to allow their sons to study medicine. Accordingly, the number of Jewish doctors remained small in Victorian England, both within and outside London. Notwithstanding some antisemitism facing Jews trying to obtain hospital posts in the mid-nineteenth century, English and Welsh society was more open in the late Victorian and Edwardian years than it was to be between the two world wars, and a number of Jews rose to eminence in the medical profession, holding appointments as consultants in the London teaching hospitals and elsewhere.