Search results

The dominant note in the literature of rebellion produced by Communist writers in Poland & Hungary in 1956 is one of mourning over ideals sullied, promises betrayed, the image of man insulted with the writer's own connivance. It would be wrong to interpret these passionate outbursts of self-accusation as signs of a final break with the Communist doctrine & movement. Their authors cannot envisage a satisfactory ethical system without collectivist underpinnings. To them, active participation in the revolutionary struggle is still the supreme moral task; a purely individualist ethic, unrelated to this task, is considered hopelessly inadequate for our age. Yet they note with anguish that the Communist movement, & they themselves as its spokesmen, have gone too far in stressing the collective goal & in disregarding the moral, aesthetic & intellectual demands of the individual. The one-sidedness is now seen as having led to tragic consequences; the climate it has created within the movement is now felt to be humanly unendurable. Hence, nothing remains but to make a fresh start & work out a new, balanced relationship between the individual & the collectivity. The rebellious writers deny that opposition to the entrenched apparatus can be equated with reaction. It is rather the apparatus of bureaucracy that they equate with reactionary tendencies in the Communist world. J. A. Fishman.

This paper is concerned with two questions: What was iron and steel used for in the course of the late nineteenth century? And how were the uses of iron and steel affected by changes in the methods of production of iron and steel? The first question asks what was the composition of the iron and steel industry's output, that is, what products were being produced. The second question asks if the changes in this composition were caused by changes in the supply schedules of the industry.