紧缩的限度

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Jim Tomlinson
{"title":"紧缩的限度","authors":"Jim Tomlinson","doi":"10.3828/hsir.2023.44.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the challenges of historical work is the way in which concepts that have a powerful but limited traction in understanding episodes in the past are then used promiscuously and therefore unhelpfully. A recent example is ‘neoliberalism’, a term productively used to understand and analyse an important post-1940 intellectual movement, but commonly deployed to characterize all kinds of political and economic developments across the West since the 1970s. This is not, of course, an argument for not using the concept, but rather for its careful deployment. A similar problem can occur with ‘austerity’, which Clara Mattei applies to the years after the First World War when, following the initial post-war boom, restrictive economic policies were developed from 1920–21. Mattei offers a comparative account of Britain and Italy organized around ‘austerity,’ framed as a recurrent ruling-class strategy to suppress workingclass revolt. Her account is flawed by an exaggeration of the scale of the post-war labour insurgency in both Britain and Italy, and by the failure to assess the constraints imposed on their governments by the interconnectedness of the world capitalist order. She also greatly overestimates the role of economists in shaping the policy of austerity.","PeriodicalId":36746,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘The Limits of Austerity’\",\"authors\":\"Jim Tomlinson\",\"doi\":\"10.3828/hsir.2023.44.12\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One of the challenges of historical work is the way in which concepts that have a powerful but limited traction in understanding episodes in the past are then used promiscuously and therefore unhelpfully. A recent example is ‘neoliberalism’, a term productively used to understand and analyse an important post-1940 intellectual movement, but commonly deployed to characterize all kinds of political and economic developments across the West since the 1970s. This is not, of course, an argument for not using the concept, but rather for its careful deployment. A similar problem can occur with ‘austerity’, which Clara Mattei applies to the years after the First World War when, following the initial post-war boom, restrictive economic policies were developed from 1920–21. Mattei offers a comparative account of Britain and Italy organized around ‘austerity,’ framed as a recurrent ruling-class strategy to suppress workingclass revolt. Her account is flawed by an exaggeration of the scale of the post-war labour insurgency in both Britain and Italy, and by the failure to assess the constraints imposed on their governments by the interconnectedness of the world capitalist order. She also greatly overestimates the role of economists in shaping the policy of austerity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36746,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2023.44.12\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historical Studies in Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/hsir.2023.44.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

历史研究工作面临的挑战之一,是那些在理解过去事件方面具有强大但有限的牵引力的概念如何被乱用,从而无益于研究。最近的一个例子是 "新自由主义",这一术语被有效地用于理解和分析 1940 年后的一场重要思想运动,但却被普遍用于描述 20 世纪 70 年代以来西方的各种政治和经济发展。当然,这并不是主张不使用这一概念,而是主张谨慎使用这一概念。 克拉拉-马泰(Clara Mattei)将 "紧缩 "一词用于第一次世界大战后,即战后初期繁荣之后,从 1920-21 年开始制定的限制性经济政策。马泰围绕 "紧缩 "对英国和意大利进行了比较研究,将其视为统治阶级镇压工人阶级反抗的一种经常性策略。她的论述存在缺陷,夸大了英国和意大利战后工人起义的规模,也没有评估世界资本主义秩序的相互关联性对两国政府的制约。她还大大高估了经济学家在制定紧缩政策中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
‘The Limits of Austerity’
One of the challenges of historical work is the way in which concepts that have a powerful but limited traction in understanding episodes in the past are then used promiscuously and therefore unhelpfully. A recent example is ‘neoliberalism’, a term productively used to understand and analyse an important post-1940 intellectual movement, but commonly deployed to characterize all kinds of political and economic developments across the West since the 1970s. This is not, of course, an argument for not using the concept, but rather for its careful deployment. A similar problem can occur with ‘austerity’, which Clara Mattei applies to the years after the First World War when, following the initial post-war boom, restrictive economic policies were developed from 1920–21. Mattei offers a comparative account of Britain and Italy organized around ‘austerity,’ framed as a recurrent ruling-class strategy to suppress workingclass revolt. Her account is flawed by an exaggeration of the scale of the post-war labour insurgency in both Britain and Italy, and by the failure to assess the constraints imposed on their governments by the interconnectedness of the world capitalist order. She also greatly overestimates the role of economists in shaping the policy of austerity.
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
Historical Studies in Industrial Relations
Historical Studies in Industrial Relations Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.50
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