1. Compare the quality of life of the working class and the middle class between 1945 and 2000.
The working class in 1945 was struggling to create a new world in Britain and escape the issues of World War II, and starting around that point and within the next few years, working class living standards became undeniably improved by full employment and comprehensive welfare provision. However, educational opportunities were few and far between for the most part, as even two decades later, in the 1960s, only 9% of the population was enrolled in universities and only 3% OF that 9% was working class. So while job opportunities and welfare significantly improved the quality of life of the working class, there was still room for improvement with regards to education. As for the quality of life of the working class as of 2000, although British families earn significantly more on average than the average European family, due to the fact that "According to the report the British pay "the highest prices for diesel, 18% above the average, and the second-highest price for unleaded petrol, 6% more than average. Public spending on health and education is below-average. British workers have fewer holidays than average and retire later (they have the third-highest retirement age in Europe), while life expectancy is the third-lowest at 78.9 years, compared to 80.9 in France or 80.7 in Sweden. ", it can be inferred that for the working class, due to these comparatively high prices, the quality of life is more difficult than it would have been in past years, although this is still up for debate since nowadays, educational opportunities are much more significantly attainable today. Middle class quality of life follows a similar pattern, however life is easier for them than for the working class, considering that the middle class consists of professionals and independent business people, as well as white collar and clerical workers, so they make more money.
Sources:
http://www.marxist.com/british-quality-of-life-among-worst-in-europe.htm
GENDER AND WORKING CLASS IDENTITY IN BRITAIN DURING THE 1950sJournal article by Stephen Brooke; Journal of Social History, Vol. 34, 2001.
2. Compare and contrast avenues for social mobility in 1945 and 2000.
One avenue for social mobility is education, and in 1945 it would be assumed that approximately 9% of British people were in college if not less, given that over time this rate increases and by 1965 it was approximately that 9%, so in 1945 it must have been less, and part of this could have been that it was difficult to send your children to college if you didn't have the financial means to support them through the process. However, some sources today state that in 2000, approximately 20% of UK citizens hold a degree, which is quite a bit greater than 9%. Given that education opens doors and nowadays due to aspects such as financial aid and the ability to take student loans, students from poorer backgrounds can afford education, open themselves up to new opportunities and thus social mobility can become possible.
There are some things, on the other hand, that PREVENT social mobility, and these are said to be gender and race. It's not fair, but when examining status mobility, it is said that women and minorities have a harder time seeking promotions, and that women and minorities hold jobs with less rank, authority, opportunity for advancement, and pay than men and whites. This would have been more of a deterrent in the past, given that there is now attempt for equal opportunity, which attempts to even out these situations and therefore, race and gender are interfering far less with social mobility.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Economist Article. February 8, 2010.
Textbooks often portray "income inequality" as one of the major concerns facing modern economies. Given its mention in the Oxford History reading, and the Economist article (attached), to what extent to you believe income inequality is one of the three biggest problems facing Europe in the era we are studying? Please respond on your blog with at least a paragraph.
I believe that "income inequality" was one of the problems facing Europe in the area that we are studying, but I do not believe that it was one of the top three problems. While there was economic polarization taking place (a widening gap between the rich and the poor), there were other more influential reasons why Western Europe's economy began to take a turn for the worse. One is that there was increased competition from the Far East for exports, so Western Europe's share of exports was proportionally less than it previously had been, therefore less money was coming into Western Europe due to exports. "Oil shocks" (substantial increases in oil prices) also were another significant cause, given that since the prices of oil were dramatically increasing and Western Europe was not making as much money as a whole, they did not have the money to import the amount of oil they had previously been importing, thus global trade took a downward turn as well, as Western Europe previously imported more significantly. And finally, stagflation (economic stagnation coupled with inflation) was a large problem as well. I believe all three of these issues were far more significant in changing the economic climate in Europe during the 1970s, and the uneven distribution of wealth and the eventual economic polarization was a result of these other causes, rather than vice versa. Thus it doesn't make the list of the top 3 causes for economic problems, although it was a problem of its own.
I believe that "income inequality" was one of the problems facing Europe in the area that we are studying, but I do not believe that it was one of the top three problems. While there was economic polarization taking place (a widening gap between the rich and the poor), there were other more influential reasons why Western Europe's economy began to take a turn for the worse. One is that there was increased competition from the Far East for exports, so Western Europe's share of exports was proportionally less than it previously had been, therefore less money was coming into Western Europe due to exports. "Oil shocks" (substantial increases in oil prices) also were another significant cause, given that since the prices of oil were dramatically increasing and Western Europe was not making as much money as a whole, they did not have the money to import the amount of oil they had previously been importing, thus global trade took a downward turn as well, as Western Europe previously imported more significantly. And finally, stagflation (economic stagnation coupled with inflation) was a large problem as well. I believe all three of these issues were far more significant in changing the economic climate in Europe during the 1970s, and the uneven distribution of wealth and the eventual economic polarization was a result of these other causes, rather than vice versa. Thus it doesn't make the list of the top 3 causes for economic problems, although it was a problem of its own.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Current events in Egypt - what should Obama do?
In my opinion, the United States and Obama should not get involved in what is going on in Egypt right now, as it could be potentially disastrous regardless of what we could do. The United States has supported Mubarak because he has maintained peaceful policies toward Israel, so if the United States were to be on the side of those protesting, it might (in an indirect manner) more quickly put another leader in charge that is more favorable with the Egyptians that might not actually maintain peaceful policies with Israel, and since Egypt is the largest and most populous Arab country, if any Arab could destroy Israel single-handed it would probably be Egypt. On the other hand, if the United States decides to support Mubarak, it will alienate the majority of the Egyptian people and when Mubarak is finally not in power, it is likely that the next Egyptian leader would not want to cooperate with us and it could provoke future conflicts, be it a lack of economic cooperation or even war. It is just safer for the United States to stay out of the conflicts in Egypt right now, since we already are at war and don't need to make any more enemies. I think that it is not the business of the United States to interfere with peaceful protests and if the protests intensify, it is not our responsibility to stop it.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Adenauer Questions, 1/31/11
1. Adenauer's greatest achievements;
-he reestablished German democracy following the Nazis, (Verdict A)
-he oversaw the beginning of an economic miracle, secured a place for West Germany in the international community, brought economic prosperity, material wealth, political stability, and relative security. (Verdict B)
-brought Germany out of the abyss Hitler caused, tied West Germany into Western Europe and brought them closer (Verdict C)
2. Criticisms of Adenauer are not justified because although some said that he completely neglected the concerns of East Germany, it seems to me that he just did not want to do anything risky such as reunite the country so long as the Soviet Union was so closely tied in with East Germany, as there was no predicting what might have happened otherwise. However, it is true that he did not keep his promise of focusing on German reunification.
-he reestablished German democracy following the Nazis, (Verdict A)
-he oversaw the beginning of an economic miracle, secured a place for West Germany in the international community, brought economic prosperity, material wealth, political stability, and relative security. (Verdict B)
-brought Germany out of the abyss Hitler caused, tied West Germany into Western Europe and brought them closer (Verdict C)
2. Criticisms of Adenauer are not justified because although some said that he completely neglected the concerns of East Germany, it seems to me that he just did not want to do anything risky such as reunite the country so long as the Soviet Union was so closely tied in with East Germany, as there was no predicting what might have happened otherwise. However, it is true that he did not keep his promise of focusing on German reunification.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
IRL - European Union. 1/25/10.
URL; https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ee.html
The European Union today, according to the CIA fact book, has done a lot in Europe, including the abolishment of trade barriers (which is consistent with the idea of European economic cooperation that began in the 1950s and 1960s), has adopted a common currency (the Euro), and is striving toward convergence of living standards. The only limitation to this is that due to differences in average income in various countries as well as the standard of living which varies, it will be difficult to standardize the quality of living and work toward one common European economy.
This is significant to what we have learned in class because it demonstrates that the countries of Europe are cooperating in order to level out their standards of living and make opportunities greater for all European countries who are part of the European Union. This is definitely a continuation of the past attempts to unite Europe economically and move past the divisions due to wars which created rivalries and significant economic gaps from one country to another. Also, statistics demonstrate that this is working, as the unemployment rate of the EU is only 9% compared to the rest of the world which is slightly higher, and that the EU is very technologically advanced compared to most of the world and home to a number of industries (metal, coal, cement, electronics and communication, etc.).
What I find most significant is that the European Union covers a wide range of European regions that were once previously separated culturally and economically, for instance all of Western Europe minus Switzerland, but also Eastern European countries such as Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, etc . are also members, and they were on the other side of the "Iron Curtain", but now seem to be showing interest in cooperating with the rest of Europe, which shows definite progress. There are currently 27 member states of the European Union, which is more than half of all Europe.
The European Union today, according to the CIA fact book, has done a lot in Europe, including the abolishment of trade barriers (which is consistent with the idea of European economic cooperation that began in the 1950s and 1960s), has adopted a common currency (the Euro), and is striving toward convergence of living standards. The only limitation to this is that due to differences in average income in various countries as well as the standard of living which varies, it will be difficult to standardize the quality of living and work toward one common European economy.
This is significant to what we have learned in class because it demonstrates that the countries of Europe are cooperating in order to level out their standards of living and make opportunities greater for all European countries who are part of the European Union. This is definitely a continuation of the past attempts to unite Europe economically and move past the divisions due to wars which created rivalries and significant economic gaps from one country to another. Also, statistics demonstrate that this is working, as the unemployment rate of the EU is only 9% compared to the rest of the world which is slightly higher, and that the EU is very technologically advanced compared to most of the world and home to a number of industries (metal, coal, cement, electronics and communication, etc.).
What I find most significant is that the European Union covers a wide range of European regions that were once previously separated culturally and economically, for instance all of Western Europe minus Switzerland, but also Eastern European countries such as Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, etc . are also members, and they were on the other side of the "Iron Curtain", but now seem to be showing interest in cooperating with the rest of Europe, which shows definite progress. There are currently 27 member states of the European Union, which is more than half of all Europe.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Spain Chapter 5.5 Questions, January 6, 2011
1. Successes Spain experienced in international relations in the 1950s included the $62 million dollar loan from the US as part of the European Co-Operation Adminstration, the 1952 decision to allow Spain membership of UNESCO, and in 1955 full membership of the United Nations.
2. Economic troubles Spain faced included the per capita meat consumption that was in 1950 only half of what it was in 1926, bread consumption being only half of what it was in 1936, and shortages and corruption that forced people to buy goods at black market prices double those in the shops.
3. A technocrat is a technical expert put in a position of power or control. Opus Dei was an organization within the Catholic Church that believed that economic development lead to the spread of liberal ideas and therefore, anti-Catholic thought.
4. Desarrollo means Spanish Miracle. The Stabilization Plan of 1957 was made up of cutting public spending, wages were frozen, credit restricted, and the peseta (the Spanish currency) was devalued. The goal of this was to tackle inflation and the balance of payments deficit and in the longer term to break with the Falangist policy of autarky, which had restricted the possibility of economic growth.
5. The Spanish economy was boosted in the 1960s because foreign investment was attracted by the low cost of labour and the lack of civil rights the authoritarian regime guaranteed, and Northern Europe's expanding middle class started to take holidays on the rapidly developing Spanish costas. Spanish people working in the service sector abroad sent home one third of their earnings to family left behind, and by 1973 there were 750,000 Spanish working in Germany and France.
6. Three examples of the economic improvement experienced by the Spaniards during the 1960s include the fact that they ceased to be on the list of UN-designated "Developing Nations", and when the Desarrollo ended with the world oil crisis of 1973, Spain was the world's ninth biggest industrial power. Additionally, average incomes nearly tripled during the 1960s.
7. Types of media that came to dominate Spanish culture during the 1960s were television, and Television Espanola (TVE) was established as a state monopoly in 1956. By 1970, 90% of the Spanish owned a television. Also, the cinema was another media, as it had more seats per capita than in any other European country. Football also offered a similar means of escape and was fully exploited by the nation.
8. Three ways that economic growth in Spain undermined the social structure that helped create Franco's regime were the fact that Falangists had glorified the peasant farmer and traditional class structure of southern Spain, but the urbanization of the Desarrollo did much to destroy this. Also Falangist propaganda denigrated the moral turpitude of the liberal democracies but Spain's economic revival depended on the remittances of Spaniards living in these democracies. Also, the Spanish brought home with them liberal ideas when they returned.
9. The "anti-democratic" legacy of the Franco regime is the fact that the state and laws were fundamentally unchanged from the system established at the end of the civil war, and in 1975 when Franco died, Spain stood alone in Western Europe as the only remaining authoritarian regime that owed its origins to pre-war fascism. Also, Spain was still overwhelmingly focused on the Cortes representing not political parties but interest groups drawn from the monarchists, army, church, and Falange.
10. The "institutionalized discrimination against married women" in Spain in the 1970s because women were in Franco's Spain considered second class citizens, the basis of the relationship between men and women was the idea of permiso marital (permission of marriage), where without the husband's permission, a wife could not take job, open a bank account or even travel any significant distance. Married women didn't have rights to property and had to pass everything to their husbands, and although adultery was a crime punishable 6 years in prison, it was only a crime for men if the affair became public knowledge, and there was no divorce and contraception was illegal. Basically, women had no choices.
11. Nationalist minority groups in Spain during the 1960s and 1970s such as the Catalans and Basques protested the suppression of regionalism. In Catalonia the protests were expressed peacefully through cultural means but in the Basque country, the protest became associated with the terrorist group ETA which became caught up in a spiral of retaliatory violence which continues today.
2. Economic troubles Spain faced included the per capita meat consumption that was in 1950 only half of what it was in 1926, bread consumption being only half of what it was in 1936, and shortages and corruption that forced people to buy goods at black market prices double those in the shops.
3. A technocrat is a technical expert put in a position of power or control. Opus Dei was an organization within the Catholic Church that believed that economic development lead to the spread of liberal ideas and therefore, anti-Catholic thought.
4. Desarrollo means Spanish Miracle. The Stabilization Plan of 1957 was made up of cutting public spending, wages were frozen, credit restricted, and the peseta (the Spanish currency) was devalued. The goal of this was to tackle inflation and the balance of payments deficit and in the longer term to break with the Falangist policy of autarky, which had restricted the possibility of economic growth.
5. The Spanish economy was boosted in the 1960s because foreign investment was attracted by the low cost of labour and the lack of civil rights the authoritarian regime guaranteed, and Northern Europe's expanding middle class started to take holidays on the rapidly developing Spanish costas. Spanish people working in the service sector abroad sent home one third of their earnings to family left behind, and by 1973 there were 750,000 Spanish working in Germany and France.
6. Three examples of the economic improvement experienced by the Spaniards during the 1960s include the fact that they ceased to be on the list of UN-designated "Developing Nations", and when the Desarrollo ended with the world oil crisis of 1973, Spain was the world's ninth biggest industrial power. Additionally, average incomes nearly tripled during the 1960s.
7. Types of media that came to dominate Spanish culture during the 1960s were television, and Television Espanola (TVE) was established as a state monopoly in 1956. By 1970, 90% of the Spanish owned a television. Also, the cinema was another media, as it had more seats per capita than in any other European country. Football also offered a similar means of escape and was fully exploited by the nation.
8. Three ways that economic growth in Spain undermined the social structure that helped create Franco's regime were the fact that Falangists had glorified the peasant farmer and traditional class structure of southern Spain, but the urbanization of the Desarrollo did much to destroy this. Also Falangist propaganda denigrated the moral turpitude of the liberal democracies but Spain's economic revival depended on the remittances of Spaniards living in these democracies. Also, the Spanish brought home with them liberal ideas when they returned.
9. The "anti-democratic" legacy of the Franco regime is the fact that the state and laws were fundamentally unchanged from the system established at the end of the civil war, and in 1975 when Franco died, Spain stood alone in Western Europe as the only remaining authoritarian regime that owed its origins to pre-war fascism. Also, Spain was still overwhelmingly focused on the Cortes representing not political parties but interest groups drawn from the monarchists, army, church, and Falange.
10. The "institutionalized discrimination against married women" in Spain in the 1970s because women were in Franco's Spain considered second class citizens, the basis of the relationship between men and women was the idea of permiso marital (permission of marriage), where without the husband's permission, a wife could not take job, open a bank account or even travel any significant distance. Married women didn't have rights to property and had to pass everything to their husbands, and although adultery was a crime punishable 6 years in prison, it was only a crime for men if the affair became public knowledge, and there was no divorce and contraception was illegal. Basically, women had no choices.
11. Nationalist minority groups in Spain during the 1960s and 1970s such as the Catalans and Basques protested the suppression of regionalism. In Catalonia the protests were expressed peacefully through cultural means but in the Basque country, the protest became associated with the terrorist group ETA which became caught up in a spiral of retaliatory violence which continues today.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Franco questions, January 4, 2010
1. Compare and contrast the views of Paul Preston and Filipe Ribeiro de Meneses on Franco. To what extent do they disagree with one another?
To a significant extent they disagree with each other, because the underlying thought behind what they have stated is contrasting - de Meneses believes that Franco was not a fascist because fascists want to provoke a change in society, but he says that Franco tried to preserve Spain from change, which is contrary to what fascism is - while on the other hand, Preston states that the only way it can be justified to state that Franco was not a fascist is if fascism is made synonymous with Nazism, since Mussolini's Italy is in many ways comparable to Spain under Franco.
2. Franco ruled Spain for nearly 40 years. Why does this make it more difficult to conclude whether he was a fascist or not?
Due to the different circumstances that Franco would have had to face and the influence of several leaders of other countries and the sharing of ideas between them (Franco, Hitler, Mussolini, etc.) and the fact that Spain under Franco, according to Source G on this paper, had "Fascist trimmings in the early years" but later on was rather modified over time and never became a totalitarian state, it is difficult to determine if Franco is fascist or not since the nature of his regime might have shifted focus for one reason or another.
3. In 1944 the English writer George Orwell wrote that the word fascism was "entirely meaningless". Does the word have any meaning or use in today's world?
From my experience I have only heard it used in reference to leaders who have existed in the past, mainly Hitler and Mussolini, but in today's world it is taught that fascism is the 'extreme right' on the political spectrum, thus it seems that someone with extreme right-wing views, if going all the way to the extreme with them, could be considered a fascist if they put these views into practice and ruled their country similarly to how established fascist leaders (Hitler, Mussolini, etc.) did. I have not heard any modern leaders referred to as fascist although this might be due to my limited experience.
4. List the characteristics of a fascist state. How does Franco's rule conform to these definitions?
- Right-wing views
- Brutality and a desire for war
- One political party exists
- Totalitarian
- Desire to create change in the society
Franco's rule conforms to the definitions of right-wing, brutal/war desiring, but not totalitarian or the existence of only one political party (since the Falangists only existed for a period of time before Franco diminished their importance and eventually they ceased to exist or be significant). The main difference is that Franco was said to have tried to preserve Spain from change, which is seen as un-fascist, as opposed to trying to create radical change the way someone like Hitler and Mussolini did.
To a significant extent they disagree with each other, because the underlying thought behind what they have stated is contrasting - de Meneses believes that Franco was not a fascist because fascists want to provoke a change in society, but he says that Franco tried to preserve Spain from change, which is contrary to what fascism is - while on the other hand, Preston states that the only way it can be justified to state that Franco was not a fascist is if fascism is made synonymous with Nazism, since Mussolini's Italy is in many ways comparable to Spain under Franco.
2. Franco ruled Spain for nearly 40 years. Why does this make it more difficult to conclude whether he was a fascist or not?
Due to the different circumstances that Franco would have had to face and the influence of several leaders of other countries and the sharing of ideas between them (Franco, Hitler, Mussolini, etc.) and the fact that Spain under Franco, according to Source G on this paper, had "Fascist trimmings in the early years" but later on was rather modified over time and never became a totalitarian state, it is difficult to determine if Franco is fascist or not since the nature of his regime might have shifted focus for one reason or another.
3. In 1944 the English writer George Orwell wrote that the word fascism was "entirely meaningless". Does the word have any meaning or use in today's world?
From my experience I have only heard it used in reference to leaders who have existed in the past, mainly Hitler and Mussolini, but in today's world it is taught that fascism is the 'extreme right' on the political spectrum, thus it seems that someone with extreme right-wing views, if going all the way to the extreme with them, could be considered a fascist if they put these views into practice and ruled their country similarly to how established fascist leaders (Hitler, Mussolini, etc.) did. I have not heard any modern leaders referred to as fascist although this might be due to my limited experience.
4. List the characteristics of a fascist state. How does Franco's rule conform to these definitions?
- Right-wing views
- Brutality and a desire for war
- One political party exists
- Totalitarian
- Desire to create change in the society
Franco's rule conforms to the definitions of right-wing, brutal/war desiring, but not totalitarian or the existence of only one political party (since the Falangists only existed for a period of time before Franco diminished their importance and eventually they ceased to exist or be significant). The main difference is that Franco was said to have tried to preserve Spain from change, which is seen as un-fascist, as opposed to trying to create radical change the way someone like Hitler and Mussolini did.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)