1951年,为平息火车头司机和水兵的罢工,军队出动

Boaz Garfinkel
{"title":"1951年,为平息火车头司机和水兵的罢工,军队出动","authors":"Boaz Garfinkel","doi":"10.51854/bguy-34a106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the second half of 1951 the State of Israel used the army to break up two strikes: the locomotive drivers’ strike and the seamen’s strike. In contrast to the latter, the locomotive drivers’ strike has been neglected by historical memory and ignored in historical research. Research devoted to the seamen’s strike has been carried out in isolation from other strikes during this period and presents it—mistakenly—as a unique case. As a result, it has been interpreted in the context of ideological and political confrontations, ignoring the fact that the government’s response to the strike was part of its broader approach to labor relations. This article will claim that in view of the proximity of the strikes and the similarity of the government’s responses, the seamen’s strike should be understood in light of the locomotive drivers’ strike, an approach that suggests a different interpretation of the strike. An analysis of the two strikes in sequence reveals that in the early years of Israeli statehood, Mapai had a policy of using the army to break up strikes, which was abandoned only after it had gained experience in dealing with them.","PeriodicalId":219032,"journal":{"name":"Iyunim, Multidisciplinary Studies in Israeli and Modern Jewish Society","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bringing in the Army to Break the Locomotive Drivers’ and Sailors’ Strikes in 1951\",\"authors\":\"Boaz Garfinkel\",\"doi\":\"10.51854/bguy-34a106\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the second half of 1951 the State of Israel used the army to break up two strikes: the locomotive drivers’ strike and the seamen’s strike. In contrast to the latter, the locomotive drivers’ strike has been neglected by historical memory and ignored in historical research. Research devoted to the seamen’s strike has been carried out in isolation from other strikes during this period and presents it—mistakenly—as a unique case. As a result, it has been interpreted in the context of ideological and political confrontations, ignoring the fact that the government’s response to the strike was part of its broader approach to labor relations. This article will claim that in view of the proximity of the strikes and the similarity of the government’s responses, the seamen’s strike should be understood in light of the locomotive drivers’ strike, an approach that suggests a different interpretation of the strike. An analysis of the two strikes in sequence reveals that in the early years of Israeli statehood, Mapai had a policy of using the army to break up strikes, which was abandoned only after it had gained experience in dealing with them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":219032,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Iyunim, Multidisciplinary Studies in Israeli and Modern Jewish Society\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Iyunim, Multidisciplinary Studies in Israeli and Modern Jewish Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51854/bguy-34a106\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iyunim, Multidisciplinary Studies in Israeli and Modern Jewish Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51854/bguy-34a106","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1951年下半年,以色列国动用军队镇压了两次罢工:火车头司机罢工和海员罢工。与后者相比,机车司机罢工一直被历史记忆所忽视,在历史研究中也被忽视。对这次海员罢工的研究与这一时期的其他罢工是分开进行的,并错误地把它当作一个独特的案例。因此,它被置于意识形态和政治对抗的背景下解读,忽略了一个事实,即政府对罢工的回应是其处理劳资关系的更广泛方法的一部分。这篇文章将声称,鉴于罢工的临近性和政府回应的相似性,海员罢工应该根据机车司机的罢工来理解,这种方法暗示了对罢工的不同解释。对这两次袭击的顺序分析表明,在以色列建国的早期,马派有一个使用军队来破坏袭击的政策,只有在获得处理罢工的经验后才放弃了这一政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bringing in the Army to Break the Locomotive Drivers’ and Sailors’ Strikes in 1951
In the second half of 1951 the State of Israel used the army to break up two strikes: the locomotive drivers’ strike and the seamen’s strike. In contrast to the latter, the locomotive drivers’ strike has been neglected by historical memory and ignored in historical research. Research devoted to the seamen’s strike has been carried out in isolation from other strikes during this period and presents it—mistakenly—as a unique case. As a result, it has been interpreted in the context of ideological and political confrontations, ignoring the fact that the government’s response to the strike was part of its broader approach to labor relations. This article will claim that in view of the proximity of the strikes and the similarity of the government’s responses, the seamen’s strike should be understood in light of the locomotive drivers’ strike, an approach that suggests a different interpretation of the strike. An analysis of the two strikes in sequence reveals that in the early years of Israeli statehood, Mapai had a policy of using the army to break up strikes, which was abandoned only after it had gained experience in dealing with them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信