Search results
have supported rhetoric of hordes, deluges, and waves that assumed disruption, chaos, and fear – and aggression, signified by the crowds of males. Refugees were an unexpected consequence of the war and had emerged as a ‘liminal figure who threatened social stability partly by virtue of the sheer number of displaced persons, but also because the refugee was difficult to accommodate within conventional classification such as assigned people to a specific social class’ ( Gatrell, 2014 ). Having fled violence or persecution, refugees were not the same as immigrants who
Sam Edwards describes the period 1890–1925 as the first age of transatlantic memory diplomacy, a period in which the potential of commemoration as a mechanism through which to strengthen Anglo-American ties was first explored. Focusing on British efforts to re-Anglicize George Washington, he analyzes the placement of a new statue of the first US president outside London’s National Gallery as well as the rededication and memorialization of Sulgrave Manor, Washington’s ancestral family estate in Northamptonshire. Of particular interest to Edwards is the agency of both government elites and private associations, particularly the US National Society of Colonial Dames, and he perspicaciously dissects the intersections of gender roles, racial constructs, social class, strategic objectives, and patriotic identities that determined the goals and methods of commemoration in this era.
culture and class. Dobson has established a platform on which other scholars can build by seeking answers to related questions of ideology and the transatlantic transference of ideas, assumptions, and prejudices. For instance, further study is needed of how Britain’s comparatively stronger engagement with socialism has been received in America and potentially influenced the special relationship. The varying British and American approaches to social class, long a significant difference between these societies, also call out to be placed into context with the special
vicious struggle between social classes; yet he drew an optimistic sketch of interstate relations as a system of free competition harmonized by the law of ‘comparative advantage’. More common was the argument proposed by Kant ( 1970b ) and Hegel that domestic society is harmonious, whereas the interstate system is conflictual. Some thinkers refined this argument further. Mill and Mazzini claimed that only democratic society is harmonious. Godwin agreed, but added that democracies also behave peacefully on the international scene; that despotic regimes are belligerent by
Spencer , The Man Versus the State ( Carmel, IN : Liberty Fund , [ 1884 ] 2009 ). 11 William Graham Sumner , What Social Classes Owe to Each Other ( Caldwell, ID : Caxton Printers , 1978 ), 19 . 12 Richard Hofstadter , The American Political Tradition: And the Men Who Made It ( London : Jonathan Cape , 1967 ), 163 and 174 . 13 See for these and other remarks on wealth and the duty of the rich, see Andrew Carnegie , ‘ Wealth ,’ North American Review , CXLVIII , June 1889 . 14 See Henry George , ‘ Progress and Poverty ’ [ 1881
, social classes and ethno-national identities among others – that continue to drive international relations today. Yet accompanying these generally more visible forces of epochal change are historical undercurrents literally submerged below the sea’s surface which offer counternarratives to modern IR, or at least afford perspectives that enhance and complement prevailing conceptions of the modern world
perspicaciously dissects the intersections of gender roles, racial constructs, social class, strategic objectives, and patriotic identities that determined the goals and methods of commemoration in this era. His chapter is paired here with Robert Hendershot’s investigation of a broader pattern of Anglo-American ‘places of memory’ on both sides of the Atlantic, which assesses the role of historical markers, statues of historic figures, and churches in the creation of an Anglo-American imagined community. Exploring the government agendas behind (and popular reception of) a
) As groups fought each another, they acquired greater discipline and efficiency inward; through war ‘they were learning cooperation, perseverance, fortitude, and patience’. The more cohesive and efficient a group was within, the greater chances it had to emerge victorious in the struggle without. War is ‘the iron spur of the nature process’, for it is through war that human groups have evolved institutions of domestic order; laws and rights, political bodies, social classes, division of labour – even the nation-state itself and the economic base upon which its rests
kind of argument, together with the advent of new types of electronic media, opened up new fields of analysis. Social scientists asked new questions – for example about the nature and social impact of cable network news stations, satellite-distributed TV channels, film/video and other electronic media. They developed new fields of research – such as culture studies and media and communication studies. They asked questions about how a particular medium related to ideology, social class, nationality, ethnicity, gender and/or sexuality. Their aim was to show how meaning
, urban planners, writers, theology writers and more find (and search) together the strategies and solutions that the Romanian society will need in the near future. The Group for Social Dialogue will organize public debates among the different social classes: students, workers, army, intellectuals, that were until recently under the ideological veil of communism. The topics of discussion will be: pluralism, free unions, parliament, political parties, civil freedoms, human rights, the division of powers, culture and its values, ecology, urban studies and more. These