20 世纪 70 年代乌特勒支 Houtplein 的公民项目之间的冲突

Jasper Bongers
{"title":"20 世纪 70 年代乌特勒支 Houtplein 的公民项目之间的冲突","authors":"Jasper Bongers","doi":"10.52024/tseg.11257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the clashing of two citizenship projects at Utrecht’s Houtplein, a re-education facility for so-called asocial families. On the one hand, there was a citizenship project led by the Public Housing Association, which existed between 1924 and 1974. This organisation’s view was that inhabitants of the Houtplein could be developed into full members of the community if they learned to adhere to the norms of neatness and orderliness. On the other hand, there was the Action Committee Pijlsweerd, a left-leaning organisation consisting of students and other inhabitants of the Pijlsweerd neighbourhood, which challenged the Public Housing Association’s project in the 1970s. Although their goals were very different, also the Action Committee pursued a citizenship project. Their aim was to encourage the inhabitants of the Houtplein to claim citizenship in a direct manner, by standing up against the Housing Association’s alleged paternalism. Analysing the interactions, and ultimate clash, between these two projects provides insight into how citizenship was contested, at the Houtplein and beyond.","PeriodicalId":420105,"journal":{"name":"TSEG - The Low Countries Journal of Social and Economic History","volume":"19 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clash between Citizenship Projects at Utrecht’s Houtplein in the 1970s\",\"authors\":\"Jasper Bongers\",\"doi\":\"10.52024/tseg.11257\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article explores the clashing of two citizenship projects at Utrecht’s Houtplein, a re-education facility for so-called asocial families. On the one hand, there was a citizenship project led by the Public Housing Association, which existed between 1924 and 1974. This organisation’s view was that inhabitants of the Houtplein could be developed into full members of the community if they learned to adhere to the norms of neatness and orderliness. On the other hand, there was the Action Committee Pijlsweerd, a left-leaning organisation consisting of students and other inhabitants of the Pijlsweerd neighbourhood, which challenged the Public Housing Association’s project in the 1970s. Although their goals were very different, also the Action Committee pursued a citizenship project. Their aim was to encourage the inhabitants of the Houtplein to claim citizenship in a direct manner, by standing up against the Housing Association’s alleged paternalism. Analysing the interactions, and ultimate clash, between these two projects provides insight into how citizenship was contested, at the Houtplein and beyond.\",\"PeriodicalId\":420105,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TSEG - The Low Countries Journal of Social and Economic History\",\"volume\":\"19 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TSEG - The Low Countries Journal of Social and Economic History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52024/tseg.11257\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TSEG - The Low Countries Journal of Social and Economic History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52024/tseg.11257","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

本文探讨了乌特勒支 Houtplein(一个所谓的非社会家庭再教育机构)的两个公民项目之间的冲突。一方面是由公共住房协会领导的公民项目,该项目存在于 1924 年至 1974 年间。该组织认为,如果豪特普林的居民学会遵守整洁和有序的规范,他们就可以发展成为社区的正式成员。另一方面,皮尔斯韦尔德行动委员会(Action Committee Pijlsweerd)是一个由学生和皮尔斯韦尔德(Pijlsweerd)社区其他居民组成的左翼组织,它在 20 世纪 70 年代对公共住房协会的项目提出了挑战。虽然他们的目标截然不同,但行动委员会同样追求公民项目。他们的目标是鼓励 Houtplein 的居民以直接的方式要求获得公民权,反对住房协会所谓的家长作风。通过分析这两个项目之间的互动和最终冲突,我们可以深入了解公民权是如何在胡特普林及其他地方受到质疑的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clash between Citizenship Projects at Utrecht’s Houtplein in the 1970s
This article explores the clashing of two citizenship projects at Utrecht’s Houtplein, a re-education facility for so-called asocial families. On the one hand, there was a citizenship project led by the Public Housing Association, which existed between 1924 and 1974. This organisation’s view was that inhabitants of the Houtplein could be developed into full members of the community if they learned to adhere to the norms of neatness and orderliness. On the other hand, there was the Action Committee Pijlsweerd, a left-leaning organisation consisting of students and other inhabitants of the Pijlsweerd neighbourhood, which challenged the Public Housing Association’s project in the 1970s. Although their goals were very different, also the Action Committee pursued a citizenship project. Their aim was to encourage the inhabitants of the Houtplein to claim citizenship in a direct manner, by standing up against the Housing Association’s alleged paternalism. Analysing the interactions, and ultimate clash, between these two projects provides insight into how citizenship was contested, at the Houtplein and beyond.
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