Skirmishes on the "Endless Frontier": Reexamining the Role of Vannevar Bush as Progenitor of U.S. Science and Technology PolicyForged Consensus: Science, Technology, and Economic Policy in the United States, 1921-1953. By David M. Hart Politics on the Endless Frontier: Postwar Research Policy in the United States. By Daniel Lee Kleinman American Science Policy since World War II. By Bruce L. R. Smith

Polity ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 633-641 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly M. Greenhill
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
American Science ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Vannevar Bush ◽  
Endless Frontier

scholarly journals THE ROLE OF AMERICAN AND SOVIET WOMEN REPORTERS IN COVERING WORLD WAR II: SPECIFICS OF COVERAGE OF MILITARY ISSUES IN 20th CENTURY JOURNALISM

World Science ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (11(51)) ◽  
pp. 37-40
Author(s):  
Tsitsino Bukia ◽  
Nana Parinos
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
Women Journalists ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
Absolutely Closed

A war correspondent has no border, no gender, no religion or race. The only thing a war reporter has - the skills of delivering truth, reflection of the reality in the way it is.The soviet space was absolutely closed to journalism and combat women journalists’ involvement in wars. The field almost consisted of males. Consequently, it seems impossible to analyze and compare the technique of writing of American and SovietWomen. If America freely accepts women for being actively involved in covering war activities, the Soviets obviously refused to do so.The role of a war correspondent is much bigger than one can suppose. Being a war reporter is more than implementing their responsibilities. It goes deeper into the history. A professional combat reporter is a historian facing the history and keeping it for the next generation.The paper considers advantages and disadvantages of being a female combat correspondent in the Soviet space and the United States of America.The role of American and Soviet women reporters in covering WWII.

Community Services: Contrasts Between Resident and Nonresident Landowners in the Adirondack Region of New York

1975 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-142
Author(s):  
Robert G. Craig ◽  
Harry P. Mapp
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
The United States ◽  
Community Services ◽  
World War ◽  
Revolutionary Change ◽  
Role Of Government ◽  
The Public

“There is more than enough evidence to show that the states and localities, far from being weak sisters, have actually been carrying the brunt of domestic governmental progress in the United States ever since the end of World War II … Moreover, they have been largely responsible for undertaking the truly revolutionary change in the role of government in the United States that has occurred over the past decade.”–Daniel J. Elazar, The Public Interest

The Rate of Profit, Aggregate Demand, and the Long Economic Expansion in the United States since 2009

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 525-535
Author(s):  
David M. Kotz
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Aggregate Demand ◽  
The United States ◽  
Jel Classification ◽  
World War ◽  
Economic Expansion ◽  
Asset Bubbles ◽  
Rate Of Profit

The current economic expansion in the United States, which began in the summer of 2009, has lasted for more than nine years as of this writing, making it the second longest expansion since the end of World War II. The previous two expansions, of the 1990s and 2000s, were prolonged by big asset bubbles, which have played a key role in the neoliberal era in promoting long economic expansions. However, the current expansion has not seen an asset bubble large enough to significantly affect the macroeconomy. This paper examines the expansion since 2009 by analyzing the movements of the rate of profit, and its determinants, and the role of aggregate demand, with the aim of determining the factors that have kept crisis tendencies at bay so far. JEL Classification: E32, E30, E11, E02

Brainstorming Revisited

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-69
Author(s):  
Claudia Mareis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
Creativity Research ◽  
Human Creativity ◽  
Self Actualization ◽  
History Of

This article discusses a particular strand in the history of creativity in the mid-twentieth century shaped by an instrumental, production-oriented understanding of the term. When the field of creativity research emerged in the United States after World War II, debates around creativity were driven not only by humanist intents of self-actualization but also by the aim of rendering individual creative potentials productive for both society and economy. Creativity was thus defined in terms of not mere novelty and originality but utility and productivity. There was a strong interest, too, in methods and techniques that promised to systematically enhance human creativity. In this context, the article looks at the formation of brainstorming, a group-based creativity method that came into fashion in the United States around 1950. It discusses how this method had been influenced by concepts of human productivity developed and applied during World War II and prior to it. Using the brainstorming method as a case in point, this article aims not only to shed light on the quite uncharted history of creativity in the mid-twentieth century, but also to stress the conducive role of allegedly trivial creativity methods in the rise of what sociologist Andreas Reckwitz has identified as the “creativity dispositif”: a seemingly playful, but indeed rigid, imperative in post-Fordist and neoliberal societies that demand the constant production of innovative outcomes under flexible, yet self-exploitative working conditions.

scholarly journals Swedish non-public diplomacy during World War II on the example of the activities of M. Wallenberg Jr.

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 69-75
Author(s):  
Anton B. Gekht
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
Political Leadership ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
World War ◽  
Industrial Group

This article examines the role of Marcus Wallenberg Jr., a prominent financier and industrialist, one of the leaders of the financial and industrial group of the Wallenberg family, in the foreign policy of Sweden on the eve of and during World War II. Having concentrated in his hands the main threads of influence on the industry and the financial sphere of the kingdom, Marcus Wallenberg was unofficially involved in the development of the foreign policy of the kingdom, which sought to be out of direct involvement in the war. The article examines various contacts with representatives of the opposing sides, carries out with the active participation of this banker and industrialist, both as part of official delegations and as individuals – the main focus is on establishing interaction between the USSR and Finland in 1943-1944, as well as cooperation with the Allies – Britain and the United States. The article also analyses the non-institutionalised regular contacts of Marcus Wallenberg Jr. with the political leadership of Sweden during 1938-1945, including the difficulties faced by the financial and industrial group under his control in the period immediately after the end of World War II.

Strategies for SALT

1971 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome H. Kahan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Political Relations ◽  
Strategic Balance ◽  
The Military

On November 17, 1969, after a three-year delay, the United States and the Soviet Union initiated Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT). Involving strategic systems and policies vital to the security of both superpowers, their allies, and the world, these talks have the potential of becoming the most important series of United States-Soviet negotiations since World War II. They can affect not only the military-technical aspects of the strategic balance but United States-Soviet political relations and the future role of nuclear weapons. Given the complexity and sensitivity of the subject, it is not surprising that negotiations are still continuing. Even if an early, limited agreement is reached, SALT meetings can be expected to span a period of many years.

The Evolution of Public Funding of Science in the United States From World War II to the Present

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kei Koizumi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
The United States ◽  
Government Support ◽  
World War ◽  
Experimental Development ◽  
Vannevar Bush ◽  
The U.S

Large-scale U.S. government support of scientific research began in World War II with physics, and rapidly expanded in the postwar era to contribute strongly to the United States’ emergence as the world’s leading scientific and economic superpower in the latter half of the 20th century. Vannevar Bush, who directed President Franklin Roosevelt’s World War II science efforts, in the closing days of the War advocated forcefully for U.S. government funding of scientific research to continue even in peacetime to support three important government missions of national security, health, and the economy. He also argued forcefully for the importance of basic research supported by the federal government but steered and guided by the scientific community. This vision guided an expanding role for the U.S. government in supporting research not only at government laboratories but also in non-government institutions, especially universities. Although internationally comparable data are difficult to obtain, the U.S. government appears to be the single largest national funder of physics research. The U.S. government support of physics research comes from many different federal departments and agencies. Federal agencies also invest in experimental development based on research discoveries of physics. The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Science is by far the dominant supporter of physics research in the United States, and DOE’s national laboratories are the dominant performers of U.S. government-supported physics research. Since the 1970s, U.S. government support of physics research has been stagnant with the greatest growth in U.S. government research support having shifted since the 1990s to the life sciences and computer sciences.

Symposium on Barry Eidlin’s Labor and the Class Idea in the United States and Canada

2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-422
Author(s):  
Nelson Lichtenstein ◽  
Cedric de Leon ◽  
Judith Stepan-Norris ◽  
Barry Eidlin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
State Response ◽  
The Great Depression ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Ruling Party

AbstractBarry Eidlin’s book, Labor and the Class Idea in the United States and Canada (Cambridge University Press, 2018) explains why unions are weaker in the United States than they are in Canada, but have not always been that way. Indeed, unionization rates were virtually identical for much of the twentieth century, then diverged in the 1960s. Against dominant accounts focused on long-standing differences in political cultures and institutions, Eidlin argues that the divergence resulted from different ruling party responses to working class upsurge in both countries during the Great Depression and World War II. In Canada, an initially more hostile state response ended up embedding “the class idea”—the idea of class as a salient, legitimate political category—more deeply in policies, policies, and practices than in the United States, where class interests were reduced to “special interests.” In this symposium, three noted labor scholars engage critically with the book. Cedric de Leon interrogates Eidlin’s account of the role of racial divisions in explaining divergence, noting “more persistence and convergence than there is rupture and divergence” between these two countries on this issue. Nelson Lichtenstein’s critique focuses on the exceptionally vociferous character of US employer hostility, which he argues that Eidlin downplays. And Judith Stepan-Norris notes the surprising lack of actual class actors in a book about class organization, while raising interpretive questions about the relation between labor and the Communist Party in both countries. Eidlin concludes the symposium with a response to the critics.

Symposium on Barry Eidlin’s Labor and the Class Idea in the United States and Canada

2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-417
Author(s):  
Nelson Lichtenstein ◽  
Cedric de Leon ◽  
Judith Stepan-Norris ◽  
Barry Eidlin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
State Response ◽  
The Great Depression ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Ruling Party

AbstractBarry Eidlin’s book, Labor and the Class Idea in the United States and Canada (Cambridge University Press, 2018) explains why unions are weaker in the United States than they are in Canada, but have not always been that way. Indeed, unionization rates were virtually identical for much of the twentieth century, then diverged in the 1960s. Against dominant accounts focused on long-standing differences in political cultures and institutions, Eidlin argues that the divergence resulted from different ruling party responses to working class upsurge in both countries during the Great Depression and World War II. In Canada, an initially more hostile state response ended up embedding “the class idea”—the idea of class as a salient, legitimate political category—more deeply in policies, policies, and practices than in the United States, where class interests were reduced to “special interests.” In this symposium, three noted labor scholars engage critically with the book. Cedric de Leon interrogates Eidlin’s account of the role of racial divisions in explaining divergence, noting “more persistence and convergence than there is rupture and divergence” between these two countries on this issue. Nelson Lichtenstein’s critique focuses on the exceptionally vociferous character of US employer hostility, which he argues that Eidlin downplays. And Judith Stepan-Norris notes the surprising lack of actual class actors in a book about class organization, while raising interpretive questions about the relation between labor and the Communist Party in both countries. Eidlin concludes the symposium with a response to the critics.

Lions and Lambs

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah Benezra Strote
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
Weimar Republic ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
Postwar Germany ◽  
The Holocaust

Not long after the horrors of World War II and the Holocaust, Germans rebuilt their shattered country and emerged as one of the leading nations of the Western liberal world. This book analyzes this remarkable turnaround and challenges the widely held perception that the Western Allies—particularly the United States—were responsible for Germany's transformation. Instead, the book shows how common opposition to Adolf Hitler united the fractious groups that had once vied for supremacy under the Weimar Republic, Germany's first democracy (1918–1933). The book's character-driven narrative follows ten Germans of rival worldviews who experienced the breakdown of Weimar society, lived under the Nazi dictatorship, and together assumed founding roles in the democratic reconstruction. While many have imagined postwar Germany as the product of foreign-led democratization, this study highlights the crucial role of indigenous ideas and institutions that stretched back decades before Hitler. Foregrounding the resolution of key conflicts that crippled the country's first democracy, the book presents a new model for understanding the origins of today's Federal Republic.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document