Willard Hurst and the Archipelago of American Legal Historiography

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 197-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Y. Welke

Leading works published since the 1980s relating to law and the modern administrative state that privilege economy and politics—work by scholars like William Novak tracing the nineteenth-century common law roots of the modern regulatory state, Stephen Skowronek on the construction of a national administrative state, and Martin Sklar on the intersection of reform with the rise of corporate capitalism in reshaping the political economy of the American state—remain intensely engaged with the work of Willard Hurst. Leading works published in the same period relating to law and the modern administrative state that privilege gender—work by scholars like Kathryn Kish Sklar on Florence Kelley and women's political culture, Linda Gordon on the welfare state, and Leslie Reagan on abortion—do not cite Hurst in the footnotes or, for the most part, in their bibliographies. For that matter, those from one subfield do not cite the other and vice versa. There is a simple, innocuous explanation for these silences—we all have too much to read.

2008 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Montgomery

Jefferson Cowie and Nick Salvatore have offered us two distinct arguments, one persuasive, the other anything but. There is much to be said for their proposition that the political coalitions that instituted New Deal reforms, far from being the historic culmination of an inexorable march from laissez-faire to the welfare state, were fragile and limited from the start and crumbled beyond the possibility of retrieval after 1970. Much more dubious is their contention that the basic explanation of both the limits and the defeat of the New Deal is to be found in a political culture of individualism, which they claim has circumscribed the political life of the United States from the nation's founding to the present.


1983 ◽  
Vol 98 (4) ◽  
pp. 734
Author(s):  
John B. Williamson ◽  
Thomas Wilson ◽  
Dorothy J. Wilson

1981 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 171
Author(s):  
Stuart D. Brandes ◽  
Edward Berkowitz ◽  
Kim McQuaid

1986 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Carrier ◽  
Ian Kendall

ABSTRACTMarxist accounts of welfare have been characterized by a critical view of social administration and an uncritical view of the concept of the ‘welfare state’. In this paper both these views are questioned. We explore the problems associated with basing analyses of welfare on the ‘welfare state’ and the limitations of certain criticisms of the ‘social administration tradition’. We conclude that whatever the merits of the more substantive elements in Marxist accounts of welfare, there are problems associated with their assumptions about social administration and the ‘welfare state’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document