« Global Labour » et OIT (1947-1973)

« »Global Labour » et l’OIT (1947-1973) dans une perspective post-guerre froide»

Paris

19 avril 2012, 18h00-20h00

 

Séance du séminaire «Histoire mondiale», organisé par Chloé Maurel. Intervenante : Sandrine Kott, professeur d’histoire contemporaine à l’université de Genève.

À l’image du mouvement des «indignés» qui, après la parution en 2010 du texte Indignez-vous de Stéphane Hessel, s’est développé spontanément dans différents pays d’Europe et du monde, de nombreux phénomènes dépassent les frontières nationales et acquièrent une dimension mondiale. Quel angle d’analyse adopter à l’égard de ces phénomènes transnationaux? Relevant à l’origine des cadres nationaux, mais pour mieux les dépasser, ceux-ci se laissent difficilement appréhender et font jouer des niveaux d’échelle parfois difficiles à maîtriser dans l’analyse.

Une des approches possibles est celle dite «mondiale» ou «globale».  Celle-ci permet d’intégrer les données nationales tout en appréhendant la dimension globale des phénomènes transnationaux. Elle effectue des comparaisons et des rapprochements entre les phénomènes mondiaux, tente d’en révéler les points de convergence ou les différences, de suivre leur diffusion à travers les frontières, ainsi que d’en tracer la généalogie.  Bien implanté aux Etats-Unis depuis plusieurs décennies (comme en témoignent par exemple les travaux de William McNeill ou de Patrick Manning), le courant de la «World History» tend depuis quelques années à se développer en France.

Certains historiens se sont ainsi penchés sur des vecteurs de transnationalité, tels que le livre ou les firmes multinationales. De plus, depuis de longues années, des chercheurs travaillent sur l’histoire des organisations internationales, lieux de synthèse par excellence des mouvements nationaux en un espace commun.

Quels sont les enjeux de l’histoire mondiale/globale? Quels nouveaux chantiers de recherche ouvre-t-elle? Comment les historiens de ce courant abordent-ils leur objet d’étude et que leur apporte cette approche mondiale? Les chercheurs invités à ce séminaire et les discussions tenteront d’apporter des éléments de réponse.

Ce séminaire est ouvert à tous : chercheurs, post-doctorants et doctorants, étudiants de Master et auditeurs libres. A la fin de chaque séance, un pot amical est prévu afin de permettre aux participants d’échanger dans une ambiance conviviale.

Lieu : École normale Supérieure, 45 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris; salle de séminaire de l’IHMC, 3e étage, escalier D

Contact : chmaurel@yahoo.fr

guerre-froide

Le carnet de recherches «Autour du système de guerre froide» accompagne le séminaire du même nom organisé dans le cadre de l'UMR IRICE par Jenny Raflik et Émilia Robin Hivert.

More Posts

Europe’s role in an entangled history of the Atlantic World

More Atlantic Crossings? Europe’s role in an entangled history of the Atlantic World, 1950s-1970s

7-9 June 2012, Washington

Deadline: 1 December 2011

 

Fifteen years ago Daniel Rodgers’ Atlantic Crossings marked a milestone in the transnational history of the twentieth century Atlantic world. It not only put the American Progressive Era within a broader Atlantic framework, but also highlighted a myriad of transnational exchanges and networks among professionals, civil society organizations, policy-makers and intellectuals during the first half of the twentieth century. The study, however, ends during the 1940s, as the increase in U.S. power fundamentally altered the dynamics of transatlantic relations.

This workshop will explore the degree to which we can still trace these reciprocal « Atlantic Crossings » into the postwar decades. In what ways and areas, specifically, did Europeans and European social, economic, and cultural models continue to shape transatlantic debates despite the seemingly overwhelming role played by the United States?

We are interested in taking stock of ongoing research on transnational transatlantic exchanges since the middle of the twentieth century. In a recent essay on the field of transnational history, Ian Tyrell singled out the postwar decades as a period in order to illustrate the impact of asymmetrical power relationships on transnational exchange processes. To him and many others, the era was one of unidirectional transatlantic flows and of « Americanization ». Despite such imbalances, Americans did not cease to look to Europe after World War II in search of alternative solutions, inspirations or challenges. Postwar development was in many areas more entangled than linear narratives of Americanization suggest. While the social question dominated the Atlantic Crossings of the early part of the twentieth century, issues of social modernization and mass consumer affluence were of special significance in the decades under consideration here. These were, to be sure, trademark issues of the « American century », but at the same time, they were subject to competing visions of modernity.

The impact of European impulses on the American social landscape has not yet received systematic consideration from historians of the postwar period. As Americans recognized the limitations of the American Dream, what elements of European social policy did they consider? As the death of the American city became an issue of debate, how did American perspectives on European cities change? While Europeans were discussing the « American challenge », how did American society react to the increasing global competitiveness of European economies? As American commercial culture became ubiquitous, did European notions of culture and style disappear completely from the transatlantic scene? In many areas, European social or economic models failed to gain traction and cases of outright imports are far and few between. Still, such exchanges should be considered a vital element of the entangled history of the postwar Atlantic world, complementing our increasingly refined understanding of European reflections about and adaptations of American models.

This workshop will focus on concrete exchanges and actors; and it will investigate the relative importance of transatlantic networks of policy makers and professionals, of civil society organizations and of business managers, artists, intellectuals, and cultural entrepreneurs. Their world was often one that transcended binary oppositions between Europe and America. It was, however, also shaped by larger dynamics of the era – most importantly Cold War divisions, perceptions of crisis during the 1970s, and a new era of globalization. Thus, understanding the entangled history of the postwar Atlantic world also means considering its place within a broader global framework.

To explore postwar American perspectives on Europe, as well as the degree of and limitations to postwar « Transatlantic Crossings », we are soliciting submissions from historians and scholars in related fields working on post World-War II transatlantic exchanges in (among others) the following areas:

  • Public policy
  • Social movements (environmentalism, feminism, peace movement) and ideology
  • Urban planning and architecture
  • Management studies, labor relations and human resources
  • Science and technology
  • Arts and popular culture
  • Gender and the family
  • Transatlantic networks and elite migrants

Please send a paper title, a 500 word abstract, and a CV to Jan Logemann (logemann@ghi-dc.org) by December 1, 2011. Expenses for travel (economy class) and accommodation will be covered, though you may defray organizing costs by soliciting funds from your home institution.

Conveners: Jan Logemann (GHI), Mary Nolan (NYU), Daniel Rodgers (Princeton)

guerre-froide

Le carnet de recherches «Autour du système de guerre froide» accompagne le séminaire du même nom organisé dans le cadre de l'UMR IRICE par Jenny Raflik et Émilia Robin Hivert.

More Posts

The Dilemmas of International Humanitarian Aid in the Twentieth Century

The Dilemmas of International Humanitarian Aid in the Twentieth Century

Londres

12-14 May 2011

The German Historical Institute and the Department of International History at the London School of Economics are organizing a conference on the history of humanitarian aid in the twentieth century. The proceedings form part of the Gerda Henkel Visiting Professorship established at LSE and GHIL.

The conference encompasses the history of international humanitarian aid from the end of the nineteenth century to our times. It focuses on the dilemmas, contradictions and ambiguities of humanitarian commitment. In a historical perspective, humanitarian assistance covered a broad range of measures. These included emergency relief delivered to people struck by natural or man-made disasters; longer term efforts to prevent suffering from famine, ill health or poverty; or schemes such as international adoption, specific campaigns against human rights abuses, and humanitarian intervention by armed forces. Indeed, identifying the evolving connections and differentiations between the different forms of humanitarian aid will be one of the topics for discussion.

The conference investigates cross-border aid in a European and global frame. Donors and recipients as well as their interactions will be analysed. Non-governmental, governmental, religious and secular organisations and individuals were active in the field throughout the twentieth century. They were national, multinational or international in character, and their activities were determined, to various degrees, by moral issues, politics, and organizational or personal interests. The intended or real effects of international humanitarian aid have been a subject of contemporary discussions on many occasions. Less attention has been paid to the equally important agency of the ‘recipients’. Their role needs to be assessed in the context of colonial rule, decolonization, economic dependency, international politics and global governance.

The conference convenes historians as well as political and social scientists, anthropologists and scholars from other disciplines with an interest in the contemporary history of humanitarian aid.

Thursday 12 May


10:30-11:00 Registration at the German Historical Institute London

11:00-11:30 Welcome and Introduction by Johannes Paulmann (University of Mannheim/ Magdalen College, Oxford)

11:30-13:00 — Session 1: Multiple Foundations of International Humanitarianism

  • Matthias Schulz (Université de Genève): Dilemmas of humanitarian internationalisms from the Geneva Convention to World War I and its aftermath
  • Vincent Viaene (Brasenose College, Oxford): « Soft power » and hard realities: Reflections on internationalism and imperialism in the Congo 1876-1914

14:00-16:45 — Session 2: International Humanitarianism in the Shadow of Two World Wars and Colonialism

  • Daniel Maul (University of Giessen/University of Oslo): The Society of Friends and American international relief 1890-1920
  • Jennifer Polk (University of Toronto): « The best kind of propaganda »: American Red Cross child welfare projects in Petrograd and Arkhangel’sk, 1918-19
  • Davide Rodongo (Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva): Foreign humanitarian actors in Greece 1918-1931
  • Francisco Javier Martínez-Antonio (CSIC Madrid): Nationalism as source and bound of humanitarian aid: The case of the Rif war (1921-1926)

18:00-19:15 — Keynote I

Heide Fehrenbach (Northern Illinois University): From aid to intimacy: The humanitarian origins and visual culture of international adoption

Friday 13 May

09:00-09:45 — Caroline Reeves (Emmanuel College, Boston): Red Cross, « Blue Express »: Chinese local relief capabilities in an age of Humanitarian Imperialism, Shandong 1923

09:45-10.30 — Maria Framke (Jacobs University Bremen): Colonial humanitarianism: Debates and activities in India during the 1930s

11.00-11.45 — Joelle Droux (European Institute of Geneva University): Life during wartime: The Save the Children international union facing the dilemmas of international warfare relief (1938-1945)

11.45-12:30 — Irène Hermann and Daniel Palmieri (University of Fribourg/University of Geneva and IRCRC): Two crosses for the same aim? Switzerland and Sweden charitable activities during World War II

14:00-14:45 — Silvia Salvatici (Università di Teramo): A « gigantic humanitarian crusade ». The relief of displaced European persons in the aftermath of World War II

14:45-15:30 — Shobana Shankar (Georgetown University): Haunted markets: Child migration, postwar demobilization and the construction of humanitarian crisis in colonial Africa

16:00-17:00 — Session 3: Cold War and Post-Colonial Humanitarianism

  • Young-Sun Hong (Harvard University): (Post)Colonial states of emergency and humanitarian crisis: Afro-Asian wars of national liberation and the international humanitarian regime, 1945-1965
  • Konrad J. Kuhn (University of Zürich): « The credibility of our humanitarian effort is at risk »: Solidarity, liberation struggle and humanitarian aid in the late 1960s

18:30-19:45 — Keynote II

To be held in the Wolfson Theatre of the London School of Economics

Eytan Gilboa (Bar-Ilan University/University of Southern California): Media coverage of international humanitarian aid: Historical and theoretical perspectives

Saturday 14 May


09:00-09:45 — Florian Hannig (Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg): Negotiating humanitarianism and politics: Operation Omega’s border breaching missions during the East Pakistan crisis 1971

09:45-10.30 — Michael Vössing (University of Mannheim): Conflicting strategies of relief: German aid for Vietnam in the 1960s and ’70s

11:00-12:30 — Session 4: Dilemmas of Global Humanitarianism

  • Monika Krause (University of Kent): The logic of relief: Humanitarian NGOs and global power
  • 11:45-12:30 Michal Givoni (University of California Berkeley):
  • Humanitarian dilemmas and ethical cultivation: The case of Médecins sans
  • Frontières

13:30-15:45 — Session 4: Dilemmas of Global Humanitarianism (continued)

  • Eva Spies (Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz): Dilemmas of participation: Development aid workers in Niger and the problem of doing « the right thing »
  • Anicée van Engeland (University of Exeter): Islam, culture and tradition and foreign humanitarian aid: A clash of civilizations
  • Alan Guilloux (City University of Hong Kong): Asia and modern humanitarianism

Organizer: Prof. Dr. Johannes Paulmann (Universität Manheim/ Magdalen College Oxford); German Historical Institute London; International History Department der London School of Economics, London

Venue: German Historical Institute London, 17 Bloomsbury Square, London, WC1A 2NJ

Contact: Johannes Paulmann (j.paulmann@uni-mannheim.de), Universität Mannheim / Magdalen College, Oxford

Website: http://www.ghil.ac.uk/events_and_conferences/conferences_and_workshops.html

guerre-froide

Le carnet de recherches «Autour du système de guerre froide» accompagne le séminaire du même nom organisé dans le cadre de l'UMR IRICE par Jenny Raflik et Émilia Robin Hivert.

More Posts

International Organizations, Non-Governmental Actors and the Rise of Global Governance, 1945-1990

Shifting Visions of Development: International Organizations, Non-Governmental Actors and the Rise of Global Governance, 1945-1990

Brême, 29-30 septembre 2011

Date limite de réponse : 15 mars 2011

Conveners: Marc Frey, Soenke Kunkel, and Corinna R. Unger (all Jacobs University Bremen)

Sponsored by the German Historical Institute Washington, DC, the Bremen International Graduate School of Social Sciences, and the Research Group TEAMS at Jacobs University Bremen

International Organizations and INGOs have played a leading role in the making of global development policies during the last fifty years.  Powerful engines of globalization as much as global transmitters of ideas and knowledge, specifically organizations such as the World Bank, the United Nations and private foundations have left their footprints in fields like health, human rights, agriculture, labor, development aid, gender, demography, and ecology. Today, they manage and regulate large sectors of social activity across the globe, functioning as influential clearing houses of global governance.

Historians have only recently rediscovered the history of those organizations. While most of them agree with social scientists that the postwar era marked the high point of international and non-state organizations in a global setting, much research remains to be done to better understand the role of those institutions with regard to policy-making and politics not only in the metropoles but also on the « periphery ». How did they shape relations between North and South, East and West? What kinds of practices did they establish on the ground?  Which difference did they make?

The time seems ripe to take a more systematic look at the various fields of development and to bring together leading scholars to assess where we stand and what remains to be done. To that end, the conference will combine case studies with conceptual debates. We are particularly looking for contributions that deal with either one of the following aspects in relation to one or different international organizations and/or non-state actors:

  • Development policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund: Concepts, projects, people, and problems
  • Environmental concerns and development: Norms, North-South conflicts and cooperation, institutional arrangements, specific policies
  • Gender and development: Discourses and normative concepts, local policies, global conferences, and activists
  • Human rights: history of organizations or particular activists, campaigns, policies, specific cases
  • Local perspectives: Histories covering experiences with development aid from the recipients’ perspective

The conference will take place on the campus of Jacobs University Bremen, Germany. Participants will be reimbursed for travel expenses and accommodation. We are planning to publish select conference proceedings with a well-established university press.

Scholars interested in participating in the conference are asked to send an abstract (200 to 400 words, in English) and a short curriculum vitae to visions@jacobs-university.de before March 15, 2011.

In order to facilitate scholarly interchange, participants will circulate their papers before the conference, and will give only very brief oral summaries. Final papers (7000 to 8000 words, fully footnoted) are due September 1 and will be available to conference participants only.

Inquiries can be made to the conveners via the conference e-mail address: visions@jacobs-university.de

guerre-froide

Le carnet de recherches «Autour du système de guerre froide» accompagne le séminaire du même nom organisé dans le cadre de l'UMR IRICE par Jenny Raflik et Émilia Robin Hivert.

More Posts

Legacies of the Cold War

Legacies of the Cold War. Eighth international conference in the series « Between ‘Total War’ and ‘Small Wars’: Studies in the Societal History of the Cold War »

Hambourg, 24-26 août 2011

Date limite : 15 janvier 2011

Since it began in 2003, the conference series « Between ‘Total War’ and ‘Small Wars’: Studies in the Societal History of the Cold War » has successfully re-charted the historical coordinates of the Cold War, surveyed recent international research, and introduced new approaches and issues in Cold War studies to German discussions. This eighth and final conference will bring together retrospective and prospective analysis of the political, social, economic, and cultural continuities that persist after the end of the Cold War, the legacies and aftereffects that continue to shape the world of the twenty-first century, whether directly or in a different guise. Which of these aftereffects are genuine products of the Cold War; which are related to longer-term continuities but were altered or reconstituted in decisive ways during the Cold War? Our aim is, first, to identify significant legacies of the Cold War at the level of a « holistic » societal history and, second, pay equal attention to examining such phenomena in the West, the East, and the Third World.

We would like to suggest the following questions and conjectures as a basis for investigating the societal history of the legacies of the Cold War.

1. Political cultures

a. Has a key characteristic of the Cold War, namely, the global polarization of political models, simply disappeared? What has become of the ideological energies of the period? Is global capitalism now the dominant political model; that is, is the West the undisputed « victor »?  Or can we retrace the transformation of Cold War ideological energies into a variety of ideological concepts-the « end of history » and « democratic peace », the « battle of cultures », Islamo-fascism and « rogue states », or political concepts promoted by the anti-globalization movement or by political forces rooted in protest movements denouncing the Cold War order (such as opposition to nuclear testing and weapons, to the Vietnam War, the Soviet invasion of Prague, or NATO missile deployment in Europe in the 1980s)?

b. The culture of security: The discourses and rhetoric of security became the centerpiece of political debate during the Cold War. Security was a promise that extended far beyond the realm of the military. In an age marked by the greatest military threat in history, the aim was to use planning and regulation to ensure the highest possible degree of security. A variety of different processes converged in the context of the Cold War: responses to the economic crisis and the Great Depression of the 1920s and 1930s and to National Socialism; the projects pursued by technocratic elites; the widespread conviction, in the East as well as the West and the Third World, that unharnessed capitalism was failing; and finally and most importantly, the competition between the two systems and their rival paths to achieving modernization and social security. The Cold War fused these processes to form a comprehensive (military, societal, political, and economic) culture of security and allocate huge resources to create and maintain it. What remains of this culture of security, which, according to Eric Hobsbawm, coincided with a « golden age »? Was this a historic « state of emergency »? Or did it constitute the most successful framework for modern political action ever created, as demonstrated most clearly in times of crisis? Are state interventions and state regulation now, after the end of the Cold War, delegitimated, or do security regimes continue to prove their usefulness? How did the promise of security influence mentalities and political cultures that have emerged since the end of the Cold War? How did the concept of security change during and after the Cold War? How is security functionalized politically? These questions reveal the ambivalent aspects of the culture of security: to what extent did this culture have a lasting effect on political modalities, especially by confirming the logic of inherent necessity and the dominant position of technocratic elites? Does the legacy of the security mindset mean that perceived threats to security are still confronted within the conceptual framework of the Cold War? Is the logic of suspicion that has shaped policy-making in diverse societies and contexts after 9/11 in fact a legacy of this promise of security?

c. Security institutions: The culture of security has also left its mark on political institutions. Among the most conspicuous legacies are the creation of huge security bureaucracies; the concept of national security; the « national security state »; the « politics of secrecy », the linkage of party apparatuses, intelligence services, and the armament complex; and a psychology of power that is underpinned by the mass media. What are the ongoing effects of these institutional structures, and what transformations are they subject to? Have they caused long-term changes in policymaking and political practices? Have they promoted or impeded learning processes in society, for example, in dealing with new threats? Does the institutional framework contribute to creating monolithic concepts of the enemy that proved to be an inadequate basis for policy making? How are security institutions influenced by the public and by domestic controversies, and to what extent can they avoid these pressures and develop schemes for managing threat scenarios professionally?

d. Autocratic tendencies within the executive branches of government are one result of the politics of security during and after the Cold War; an important examples is the imperial presidency in the U.S., which was generally legitimated by security discourses and determined structurally by the inner dynamics of security institutions. Did the Cold War conserve and revitalize preexisting traditions of autocracy and extra-legality or did it contribute significantly to creating such tendencies? Are these specific answers to challenges that did not surface until after the end of the Cold War but drew on ways of thinking and political styles typical of that era? Did the global East-West confrontation delay political and social liberalization processes or accelerate them?

e. These tendencies correspond to political rituals, old and new forms of ruler cults. Among the phenomena that may deserve further attention in this context are the position of the Communist Party in China and the heritage of Stalin in Russia.

f. The ambivalence of the relationship between violence and politics as a legacy of the Cold War also warrants study. Did the Cold War pave the way to a pacification of politics in Europe? While war has been discredited in parts of the Western world, in many areas of the Third World-now often called the Global South-violence is an accepted and established means of political confrontation. This is best understood as the result of a shift promoted by the Cold War, in which specific forms of violence that were not only tolerated in the geostrategic wake of the bloc confrontation, from Indonesia to Colombia, but indeed fueled by the East and the West, to the point where they could escalate almost unchecked. Have autochthonal potentials for violence been ignited and multiplied by Cold War energies? In what ways do societies continue to suffer from the Cold War’s dynamic of violence, and what are the political consequences of these phenomena?

2. Military Resources

a. Prominent legacies of the Cold War are the economies of armament and the political, military, and academic complexes to which they are linked. The « militarization of the economy » with its structures, self-mobilization, internal dynamics, and self-interests played a significant role in perpetuating the Cold War and, in particular, the nuclear stand-off as the unique manifestation of the bloc confrontation.  Do these structures continue to exist under changing geostrategic conditions? Why has the « peace dividend » never been cashed in?

b. Is there a link between today’s global arms trade and the armament economy generated by the Cold War? Other factors to be considered are global terrorism and how states are dealing with the existing nuclear weapons arsenal, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the risk of nuclear terrorism.

c. Armed forces and strategies: Has a military revolution that has overcome the Cold War really occurred? Or do Cold War concepts continue to determine the military’s strategic horizon as well as, for all practical purposes, its practices and armament priorities ? Is there evidence of a disarmament process that goes beyond the logic of the Cold War? Has the doctrine of « permanent preparedness » ever really been abandoned?

d. Are there indications of a shift in images of the military marked by enhanced recognition of what was formerly deprecated? What images of soldiers, of masculinity, and of the war of the future predominate in the military itself and in the mass media? Do these images reflect concepts that perpetuate Cold War military traditions-clandestine commando operations and « counterinsurgency », which occur within a framework marked by a minimum of institutional legitimacy or democratic control?

e. Military rituals: Can we enhance our understanding of the aftereffects of the Cold War-as opposed to and at the same time drawing on pre-dated traditions of military symbolism-by investigating rituals such as memorial services for soldiers killed in action or military salutes? What do such practices reveal about how a specific society relates to the military? What lines of continuity and discontinuity, what transformations and reconfigurations emerge?

3. Ecology and economy

a. Some of the most enduring effects of the Cold War can be discerned in the environmental realm. To what extent are environmental disasters, famine, the destruction of people’s livelihood, or the impacts of climate change consequences of the Cold War? What are the social and economic effects of the dissemination of weapons such as land mines?

b. How is the ongoing proliferation of poverty connected to the dynamics of the East-West conflict, either directly or indirectly, by virtue of the way it shapes public perception and thus, for example, marginalizes problems like poverty or the environment? And what are the long-term demographic effects of the Cold War in the Third World?

c. Is the emergence of elites in the Third World connected to the Cold War? To what extent did new patterns in the formation of elites appear after the Cold War ended? What are the structural impacts on societies when Cold War armament aid is discontinued?

d. In what ways is the Cold War linked to the emergence of transnational advocacy networks that bridged the East-West and North-South divides of the Cold War? What is their legacy for the post-Cold War world? Has it resulted in the formation of a global civil society?

e. Can we find evidence of the ongoing existence of dominant developmental models that are adhered to by various actors? Does the Cold War still have an impact on today’s relations between Third World countries and the states of the former Western and Eastern blocs? Are new cooperative relations or new strategic rivalries (such as the role of China on the African continent) manifestations of such continuities?  Has the end of the Cold War brought a loss of self-regulation among economic actors, because capitalism’s opponent has disappeared? Does global market liberalism now believe that it must no longer fear the consequences of excesses and crises, because it does not have to take the political limits into account that were once set by its global competitor? Despite the deregulation tendencies that surfaced in the 1970s and 1980s, risk-adverse economic behavior remained a key characteristic of the Cold War. If the radical abandonment of economic restraint was therefore only possible after the bloc confrontation ended, what does this imply for our understanding of the relationship between economic activities and the competition between the two political systems? If it is true that the combination of « consumer capitalism », « welfare democracy », and « socially-committed markets »-and not the radical market model-was the winning formula in the Cold War, as Melvyn Leffler, a leading historian of the Cold War has argued, then what are the global consequences if the « victor » forgets that formula and loses his allure?

The conference language is English. The Hamburg Institute for Social Research will reimburse travel expenses (second-class train fare or economy-class air fare for long-distance travel) and provide accommodations during the conference for all invited participants.

Please send proposals (one to two pages) and a brief c.v. by 15 January 2011 to the Hamburg Institute for Social Research at coldwar@his-online.de

Organizer: Hamburger Institut für Sozialforschung, Bernd Greiner, Tim B.  Müller, Dierk Walter, Claudia Weber, Hamburg

guerre-froide

Le carnet de recherches «Autour du système de guerre froide» accompagne le séminaire du même nom organisé dans le cadre de l'UMR IRICE par Jenny Raflik et Émilia Robin Hivert.

More Posts

The Political Economy of the Cold War

« The political economy of the Cold War »

Londres, 18 octobre 2010, 18h30-20h00

Speaker: Professor Niall Ferguson
Chair: Professor Arne Westad

«At its heart the Cold War was a competition between two economic systems. Despite having in common a « military-industrial complex », they were profoundly different in the degree of freedom they offered their citizens, the living standards they were able to achieve and the pace of technological innovation they could sustain. In this first lecture, Niall Ferguson compares and contrasts the United States and the Soviet Union in the Cold War and asks how far the outcome of the Cold War was economically determined from the outset. In particular, what role did commercial and financial globalisation play in enhancing U.S. power in the world? And how serious a threat did inflation pose to the United States in the 1970s?»

Professor Niall Ferguson is the Philippe Roman Chair in History and International Affairs for the 2010-2011 academic year. Born in Glasgow in 1964, he was a Demy at Magdalen College and graduated with First Class Honours in 1985. After two years as a Hanseatic Scholar in Hamburg and Berlin, he took up a Research Fellowship at Christ’s College, Cambridge, in 1989, subsequently moving to a Lectureship at Peterhouse. He returned to Oxford in 1992 to become Fellow and Tutor in Modern History at Jesus College, a post he held until 2000, when he was appointed Professor of Political and Financial History at Oxford. Two years later he left for the United States to take up the Herzog Chair in Financial History at the Stern Business School, New York University, before moving to Harvard in 2004.

He is a regular contributor to television and radio on both sides of the Atlantic. In 2003 he wrote and presented a six-part history of the British Empire for Channel 4. The accompanying book, Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power (Basic), was a bestseller in both Britain and the United States. The sequel, Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire, was published in 2004 by Penguin. Two years later he published The War of the World: Twentieth Century Conflict and the Descent of the West, which was also a PBS series. His most recent books are the best-selling Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World and High Financier: The Lives and Time of Siegmund Warburg. He is now working on the life of Henry Kissinger.

A prolific commentator on contemporary politics and economics, Niall Ferguson writes and reviews regularly for the British and American press. He is a contributing editor for the Financial Times and a regular contributor to Newsweek. In 2004 Time magazine named him as one of the world’s hundred most influential people.

Lieu : Old Theatre, Old Building

Pour en savoir plus : http://www2.lse.ac.uk/publicEvents/events/2010/20101018t1830vOT.aspx

ADDENDUM DU 5 NOVEMBRE 2010. La conférence a été enregistrée, elle est disponible à l’adresse suivante : http://www2.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/events/events/2010/101018ferguson.aspx#withVideo

guerre-froide

Le carnet de recherches «Autour du système de guerre froide» accompagne le séminaire du même nom organisé dans le cadre de l'UMR IRICE par Jenny Raflik et Émilia Robin Hivert.

More Posts