History of the Labor Movement in the United States, Volume IV: The Industrial Workers of the World, 1905-1917.

ILR Review ◽  
1967 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 129
Author(s):  
Melvyn Dubofsky ◽  
Philip S. Foner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Labor Movement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Industrial Workers ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of

Mexican Radicals and Traditionalists Unionize Workers in the United States

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Flores
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Labor Movement ◽  
Mexican Americans ◽  
The United States ◽  
Industrial Workers ◽  
Mexican Culture ◽  
International Labor ◽  
Mexican State ◽  
The World ◽  
International Labor Movement

This chapter explains why Mexicans joined the CIO and compares the aspirations of radicals and traditionalists within the United Packinghouse Workers of America and the United Steelworkers of America. Radical Mexican nationalists entered the CIO, because they remained committed to building a broad and left-of-center international labor movement. By comparison, traditionalists supported the CIO, because they defined it as an alternative to the radical Industrial Workers of the World and Magonistas. Repulsed by postrevolutionary Mexican radicalism and anticlericalism, traditionalists naturalized as they joined the CIO, but they did not, however, sever their cultural ties to Mexico. By the 1950s, naturalized traditionalists had developed a deterritorialized brand of mexicanidad that celebrated aspects of Mexican culture but was devoid of any allegiance to the Mexican state. Mexican traditionalists were becoming Mexican Americans.

Histoire du mot «démocratie» au Canada et au Québec. Analyse politique des stratégies rhétoriques

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-343
Author(s):  
Francis Dupuis-Déri
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
Institutional Changes ◽  
Founding Fathers ◽  
Discursive Strategies ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Masses ◽  
Le Canada

Résumé.L'étude des discours des «pères fondateurs» du Canada moderne révèle qu'ils étaient ouvertement antidémocrates. Comment expliquer qu'un régime fondé dans un esprit antidémocratique en soit venu à être identifié positivement à la démocratie? S'inspirant d'études similaires sur les États-Unis et la France, l'analyse de l'histoire du mot «démocratie» révèle que le Canada a été associé à la «démocratie» en raison de stratégies discursives des membres de l'élite politique qui cherchaient à accroître leur capacité de mobiliser les masses à l'occasion des guerres mondiales, et non pas à la suite de modifications constitutionnelles ou institutionnelles qui auraient justifié un changement d'appellation du régime.Abstract.An examination of the speeches of modern Canada's “founding fathers” lays bare their openly anti-democratic outlook. How did a regime founded on anti-democratic ideas come to be positively identified with democracy? Drawing on the examples of similar studies carried out in the United States and France, this analysis of the history of the term “democracy” in Canada shows that the country's association with “democracy” was not due to constitutional or institutional changes that might have justified re-labelling the regime. Instead, it was the result of the political elite's discursive strategies, whose purpose was to strengthen the elite's ability to mobilize the masses during the world wars.

History, Theory, and Education

2011 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 218-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
John L. Rury
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Theory ◽  
History Of Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
John Maynard Keynes ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
Attention To Detail

The distinguished Africanist Robert Harms once observed that “we historians are a practical people who pride ourselves on our attention to facts and our painstaking attention to detail.” If this is the case in other parts of the world, it is certainly true of American historians, who have been periodically admonished for their disinterest in questions of theory and purpose related to their craft. In this issue we have an opportunity to discuss the question of theory as it may pertain to the history of education, with particular attention to the United States. Regardless of whether one believes that historians should be ardent students of social theory, after all, there is little question about whether they should be cognizant of it. Indeed, there is danger in ignoring it. Quoting John Maynard Keynes, Harms suggested that practical people who feel “exempt from any intellectual influences” run the risk of “becoming slaves to some defunct economist.”

The Cambridge History of America and the World

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
The United States ◽  
Military Power ◽  
American Empire ◽  
Global Power ◽  
Cultural Terms ◽  
The World ◽  
Fourth Volume ◽  
History Of

The fourth volume of The Cambridge History of America and the World examines the heights of American global power in the mid-twentieth century and how challenges from at home and abroad altered the United States and its role in the world. The second half of the twentieth century marked the pinnacle of American global power in economic, political, and cultural terms, but even as it reached such heights, the United States quickly faced new challenges to its power, originating both domestically and internationally. Highlighting cutting-edge ideas from scholars from all over the world, this volume anatomizes American power as well as the counters and alternatives to 'the American empire.' Topics include US economic and military power, American culture overseas, human rights and humanitarianism, third-world internationalism, immigration, communications technology, and the Anthropocene.

The Wright Brothers

1948 ◽  
Vol 52 (447) ◽  
pp. 141-150
Author(s):  
Wilbur ◽  
Orville
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
Wilbur Wright

On 6th January 1916 Lord Northcliffe, seconding a vote of thanks to Mr. Griffith Brewer for his lecture on the Life and Work of Wilbur Wright, said among other things : “The fact remains, however, that after more than one hundred years of experiment with aeroplanes, these two brothers were the first people in the world who made a machine to fly, and flew it. I make that remark emphatically, because there is one point to which Mr. Griffith Brewer did not call attention, and that is the attempt that has been made to rob the Wright brothers of the credit of their invention. We have not heard much of that in England, but ‘a prophet is not without honour save in his own country,’ and in the United States there have been long and persistent attempts to belittle the work of Wilbur and Orville Wright. I have closely read and followed the history of the hundred years of aeroplane experiments, and I am convinced that the credit of the first flying aeroplane is due to the Wright Brothers, and from the point of practical flying to nobody else. As an Englishman I am in an independent position, and I know that these words of mine will go across the Atlantic, and I believe they will assist in stopping the spread of the insidious suggestion that the Wrights did not invent the aeroplane.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document