Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTHistorical research has turned in the last years more intensively toward entangled and transnational histories of biopolitics, the family, and the welfare state, but without renewed interest in aging and pension policy, a sphere of human experience that is often interrogated in parochial terms, if at all. An analysis of the culture and policies of old age in East Germany in the 1950s and 1960s shows the importance of a transnational history of this subject. The GDR, the Communist state with the greatest proportion of elderly citizens, needed to create a socialist model of aging. Neither the Communist tradition in Weimar Germany, nor the experience of the other states in the Communist bloc provided substantial guidance. East Germans looked instead for inspiration to West Germany, which was itself engaged in a debate about aging and pension policy. By grappling with the Western experience, including its perceived and real limitations, the GDR in the Ulbricht developed a vision of what it meant to age as a socialist.

Prologue : first, America first -- The American dream 1900-1916 : the spirit of American dreams -- America first 1900-1916 : pure Americanism against the universe -- The American dream 1917-1920 : what do you call that but socialism? -- America first 1917-1920 : we have emerged from Dreamland -- The American dream 1921-1923 : salesmen of prosperity -- America first 1920-1923 : the simplicity of government -- The American dream 1924-1929 : a willingness of the heart -- America first 1923-1929 : a super patriot, patriot -- The American dream 1930-1934 : das Dollarland -- America first 1930-1934 : the official recognition of reality -- The American dream 1934-1939 : the pageant of history -- America first 1935-1939 : it can happen here -- America first and the American dream 1939-1941 : Americans! Wake up! -- Epilogue : 1945-2017 still America firsting.

This collection explores the questions of whether, how, and why the histories of German Nazism and Soviet Communism could and should be situated within a single coherent narrative. The contributors examine ideology, terror, secular religion, museum exhibits, and denial in order to critically analyze these complex, entangled historical phenomena.

In the early 1930s, fascism emerged as a global phenomenon. In Europe, Mussolini's Italy was the driving force behind this development, whereas in Asia the center of gravity lay in the Japanese Empire. But the relationship between Japan and the mother country of fascism, Italy, in the interwar period has been hardly examined. The following article thus focuses on the process of interaction and exchange between these two countries. Moreover, the question of Japanese fascism has previously been discussed from a comparative perspective and thereby generally with a Eurocentric bias. In contrast, this article adopts a transnational approach. Thus, the question under consideration is not whether Japan 'correctly' adopted Italian Fascism, so to speak, but rather the extent to which Japan was involved in the process of fascism's globalization. I will show that the pattern of influence in the early 1930s was certainly not limited to a single West-East direction and that fascism cannot be understood as a merely European phenomenon. This article begins by describing the rise and fall of universal fascism in the period from 1932 to 1934 from a global perspective. It secondly explores the legacies of fascism's global moment and its consequences for the subsequent formation of the Tokyo-Rome-Berlin Axis when, following the end of an utopian phase, a more 'realistic' phase of global fascist politics began, with all its fatal consequences.

This article analyzes the East German and Soviet campaign against the West German federal minister Theodor Oberländer in 1959–60 as an exemplary case of how the Cold War and east-west entanglements influenced the memory of the Holocaust and Stalinist crimes. These entanglements were complex and went beyond the relations between the two German states. The article examines also the interrelations with the Soviet Union's propagandistic struggle against Ukrainian nationalism. It addresses the diverse impact that the campaign had in the two German states, the Ukrainian diaspora, and the Soviet Union. It argues that in the German context the campaign contributed to critical reckonings and remembrance of the Holocaust, which it did not do in the Soviet Union and among the Ukrainian diaspora. Moreover, in the Soviet Union it amplified an enemy image of Ukrainian nationalism that still exists today and serves Russia to justify its current war against Ukraine with the accusation that Ukraine is ruled by a "Nazi" regime.