Suchergebnisse

Responds to the conundrum for the antiwar left of either supporting an evidently fascistic, fundamentalist Iraqi resistance or inadvertently justifying US imperialism. The US has a long history of demonizing anti-imperialist resistance; thus it is important for today's left to regard anti-imperialist movements, regardless of ideology, as aspects of the international fight for social justice because they undermine imperialism, not because they do or do not explicitly promote a progressive agenda. Every move toward unsettling the strongholds of neoliberalism & militarism furthers the international struggle for social justice. K. Coddon

For more than a generation, as the authors rightly point out, the impact of organized labor on electoral politics has been neglected in scholarly literature. Indeed, only a tiny minority of social scientists explicitly focuses on organized labor in the United States. Although the impact of the social movements of the 1960s appeared to heighten awareness of the importance of class, race, and gender, class and its organized expression, the union movement, has received less attention, while studies of race and gender have flourished.

The appraisal of background conditions is an important but often neglected element of political interpretation. Influential interpretations of US politics, such as Louis Hartz's The Liberal Tradition in America, dismiss the importance of changing political contexts. Set in terms of the debate over "US exceptionalism," this article explores changes in political mood in the US during the 20th century. Hartz is not wrong to assert the persistence of a uniform underlying political culture in the US, nor the lasting impact of Lockeanism in establishing boundaries to possibility -- for the Left & the Right. But a finer-grained appraisal of the interaction between political-cultural ethos & activism is possible. As David Greenstone rightly argued, contestation still occurs within a predominantly liberal society. This article contends that the character of this contestation is determined by the nature of political periods produced by interpretations of the underlying Lockean bedrock by political actors. It makes explicit that Hartz & Greenstone were operating at different levels of analysis -- Hartz established the persistence of dedication to Lockean liberal tenets in the deep structure of US politics, while Greenstone's interpretation established a mesolevel of analysis above this deep structure. The present article adds temporal periodization to this mesolevel. Political actors make history upon a stage received from the past in the US, the Lockean bedrock -- but they inflect this stage with crucial interpretations that set or stretch the limits of political expression in a new period. It discerns four varieties of liberalism -- economic liberalism, social state liberalism, social movement liberalism, & cold war liberalism -- that have interpreted the deep structure differently since the 1920s. It also suggests that sensitivity to historical changes in political mood does not necessitate repudiation of Hartz's thesis of Lockean liberal predominance in the US. 1 Table. Adapted from the source document.

Standard migration theories see receiving countries as the dynamic agent which pull migrants to them. These theories, while useful for explaining many cases, appear inadequate for the case of labor migration from Haiti to Cuba and the Dominican Republic in the early twentieth century. This article examines this history and offers an alternative theoretical framework for explaining this migration flow. It is argued that the prime cause of migration from Haiti is factors in the sending country.