Rethinking the American antinuclear movement
In: American Social and Political Movements of the Twentieth Century
19 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: American Social and Political Movements of the Twentieth Century
In: Peace & change: PC ; a journal of peace research, Band 49, Heft 2, S. 163-165
ISSN: 1468-0130
In: Peace & change: PC ; a journal of peace research, Band 47, Heft 3, S. 292-294
ISSN: 1468-0130
In: Peace & change: PC ; a journal of peace research, Band 48, Heft 1, S. 66-68
ISSN: 1468-0130
In: Peace & change: PC ; a journal of peace research, Band 46, Heft 1, S. 98-100
ISSN: 1468-0130
In: European history quarterly, Band 47, Heft 4, S. 749-750
ISSN: 1461-7110
In: Presidential studies quarterly: official publication of the Center for the Study of the Presidency, Band 47, Heft 2, S. 399-400
ISSN: 1741-5705
In: Peace & change: PC ; a journal of peace research, Band 42, Heft 2, S. 304-306
ISSN: 1468-0130
In: Understanding the Imaginary War, S. 238-259
The Cold War forced scientists to reconcile their values of internationalism and objectivity with the increasingly militaristic uses of scientific knowledge. For decades, antinuclear scientists pursued nuclear disarmament in a variety of ways, from grassroots activism to transnational diplomacy and government science advising. The U.S. government ultimately withstood these efforts, redefining science as a strictly technical endeavor that enhanced national security and deeming science that challenged nuclear weapons on moral grounds "emotional" and patently unscientific. In response, many activist scientists restricted themselves to purely technical arguments for arms control. When antinuclear protest erupted in the 1980s, grassroots activists had moved beyond scientific and technical arguments for disarmament. Grounding their stance in the idea that nuclear weapons were immoral, they used the "emotional" arguments that most scientists had abandoned. Redefining Science shows that the government achieved its Cold War "consensus" only by active opposition to powerful dissenters and helps explain the current and uneasy relationship between scientists, the public, and government in debates over issues such as security, energy, and climate change. ; https://vc.bridgew.edu/fac_books/1163/thumbnail.jpg
BASE
In: Cold war history, Band 14, Heft 1, S. 47-69
ISSN: 1743-7962
During the 1980s, Carl Sagan and other scientists used the theory of nuclear winter to criticize the arms race. Historians have largely dismissed nuclear winter as a political movement. In fact, nuclear winter influenced debate over nuclear weapons in the United States, despite contentious scientific and political arguments. In addition, an analysis of nuclear winter's reception in the Soviet Union reveals that the theory resonated on both sides of the Iron Curtain. The global debate over nuclear winter shows the potency of scientific arguments against nuclear weapons during the Cold War, and demonstrates the complex relationship between science and politics. Adapted from the source document.
During the 1980s, Carl Sagan and other scientists used the theory of nuclear winter to criticize the arms race. Historians have largely dismissed nuclear winter as a political movement. In fact, nuclear winter influenced debate over nuclear weapons in the United States, despite contentious scientific and political arguments. In addition, an analysis of nuclear winter's reception in the Soviet Union reveals that the theory resonated on both sides of the Iron Curtain. The global debate over nuclear winter shows the potency of scientific arguments against nuclear weapons during the Cold War, and demonstrates the complex relationship between science and politics.
BASE
In: Cold war history: a Frank Cass journal, Band 14, Heft 1, S. 47-69
ISSN: 1468-2745
In: Cold war history, Band 14, Heft 1, S. 47-69
ISSN: 1743-7962
In: Diplomatic History, Band 35, Heft 2, S. 283-319