Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Series Title
      Series Title
      Clear All
      Series Title
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Content Type
    • Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
122 result(s) for "Edele, Mark"
Sort by:
Fighting Russia's History Wars: Vladimir Putin and the Codification of World War II
Vladimir Putin shows remarkable interest in history in general and World War II in particular. This article explores this historian-president's attempts to codify the memory of this war in an open attempt to transmit a useful past to the younger generation. It argues that top-down models of historical memory are of little explanatory value in the Russian situation. The president rides a wave of historical revisionism that he shapes at the same time. Putin's government successfully uses it to mobilize Russian society against critical minorities within and perceived enemies without. The far-reaching consequences of this politicization for the history of World War II are sketched in the final section of the article.
The Politics of Veteran Benefits in the Twentieth Century
What happened to veterans of the nations involved in the world wars? How did they fare when they returned home and needed benefits? How were they recognized-or not-by their governments and fellow citizens? Where and under what circumstances did they obtain an elevated postwar status? In this sophisticated comparative history of government policies regarding veterans, Martin Crotty, Neil J. Diamant, and Mark Edele examine veterans' struggles for entitlements and benefits in the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Taiwan, the Soviet Union, China, Germany, and Australia after both global conflicts. They illuminate how veterans' success or failure in winning benefits were affected by a range of factors that shaped their ability to exert political influence. Some veterans' groups fought politicians for improvements to their postwar lives; this lobbying, the authors show, could set the foundation for beneficial veteran treatment regimes or weaken the political forces proposing unfavorable policies. The authors highlight cases of veterans who secured (and in some cases failed to secure) benefits and status after wars both won and lost; within both democratic and authoritarian polities; under liberal, conservative, and even Leninist governments; after wars fought by volunteers or conscripts, at home or abroad, and for legitimate or subsequently discredited causes. Veterans who succeeded did so, for the most part, by forcing their agendas through lobbying, protesting, and mobilizing public support. The Politics of Veteran Benefits in the Twentieth Century provides a large-scale map for a research field with a future: comparative veteran studies.
The Politics of Veteran Benefits in the Twentieth Century
What happened to veterans of the nations involved in the world wars? How did they fare when they returned home and needed benefits? How were they recognized-or not-by their governments and fellow citizens? Where and under what circumstances did they obtain an elevated postwar status? In this sophisticated comparative history of government policies regarding veterans, Martin Crotty, Neil J. Diamant, and Mark Edele examine veterans' struggles for entitlements and benefits in the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Taiwan, the Soviet Union, China, Germany, and Australia after both global conflicts. They illuminate how veterans' success or failure in winning benefits were affected by a range of factors that shaped their ability to exert political influence. Some veterans' groups fought politicians for improvements to their postwar lives; this lobbying, the authors show, could set the foundation for beneficial veteran treatment regimes or weaken the political forces proposing unfavorable policies. The authors highlight cases of veterans who secured (and in some cases failed to secure) benefits and status after wars both won and lost; within both democratic and authoritarian polities; under liberal, conservative, and even Leninist governments; after wars fought by volunteers or conscripts, at home or abroad, and for legitimate or subsequently discredited causes. Veterans who succeeded did so, for the most part, by forcing their agendas through lobbying, protesting, and mobilizing public support. The Politics of Veteran Benefits in the Twentieth Century provides a large-scale map for a research field with a future: comparative veteran studies.
Toward a General Theory of Action in Total War and Genocide: Evgeny Finkel on Choice and Survival during the Holocaust
The experience of National Socialism and the Holocaust prompted a controversial set of psychological experiments about deference to authority.4 Their results have been used by historians to explain perpetrator choices,5 while providing a case study to others, who contextualized the “Milgram experiment” itself and provided an incisive, even scathing critique of its presuppositions.6 Such interdisciplinarity thus has the potential to turn acrimonious, as it did in one of the most recent clashes between political scientists and historians.7 Mostly, however, the exchange of ideas, concepts, and approaches has been fruitful and served to drive along both historical and social scientific research.[...]the test for Finkel’s conceptual apparatus will be its wider applicability.Survival depended on coping, cooperation, and compliance with the (Soviet) authorities.16 Elsewhere, the food situation was less catastrophic, but still severe enough to enforce conformity or cooperation, flanked by various coping strategies.17 Threats of violence and state attempts to control the movement of the population were such that one historian has described the wartime Soviet Union, only somewhat hyperbolically, as “a single forced labor camp.”18 And of course there was the actual labor camp universe, too, where histories of death and survival could also draw on Finkel’s typology in order to make sense of what people did and did not do.19 The resonances of Finkel’s work with the attempts of historians to understand the wide range of behaviors of Soviet citizens during World War II are indeed striking.