Review: Pivotal Decade <i>How the United States Traded Factories for Finance in the Seventies</i> , Stayin' Alive <i>The 1970s and the Last Days of the Working Class</i>
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PIVOTAL DECADE How the United States Traded Factories for Finance in the Seventies Judith Stein New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2010. 367PP, $37.50 cloth ISBN 978-0-300-11818-6STAYIN' ALIVE The 1970s and the Last Days of the Working Class Jefferson Cowie New York and London: The New Press, 2010. 464PP, $36.50 cloth ISBN: 978-1-56584-875-7A striking feature of the American scene is the tendency of economic or geopolitical difficulties to initiate heated arguments over whether the United States is in decline as a world power. The 1987 WaU Street crash, for example, helped ensure a bull market for Paul Kennedy's The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. For months thereafter, op-ed pages and letters columns were dominated by the debate over whether America was succumbing to the same cycle of overextension and contraction that, in Kennedy's version of world history, had struck down past hegemons. The timing was less propitious for the two books under consideration here, which were published when the recovery from the 2008 recession, albeit fitful, had begun and the United States had begun to extricate itself from at least one of its two protracted military commitments. The authors of both works differ in emphasis but agree in dating the origins of the long-term weakening of American power to the 1970s, a decade that is now attracting overdue reconsideration from historians. Judith Stein looks in detail at the impact of economic challenges, particularly oil shocks, stagflation, and the downsizing of heavy industry, on the United States' morale and prosperity. Jefferson Cowie pays more attention to cultural changes and the weakening of organized labour as a force in American politics. Each has something to say about the passing of America's postwar economic and geopolitical primacy and the domestic political alignments it reinforced. But each also either ignores or misconstrues important aspects of the topic.Stein differs with many other historians in seeing globalization not as an American triumph but as the gravest of self-inflicted injuries. According to her interpretation, the unprecedented wealth and productivity of the quarter century after 1945 was undone by unreciprocated generosity. In constructing a liberal international trade order, she writes, America not only gave direct aid to future competitors (via the MarshaU plan and the rebuilding of Japan's industrial base through American military production for the Korean War), but it also granted unprecedented access to its own markets. To guarantee its aUies' prosperity and political stability, the United States encouraged a European Community from which high-value American exports would be shut out, adopted legislation enabling successive presidents of both parties to remove old tariffs and obstruct the imposition of new ones, and foUowed tax policies that promoted the export of American capital and technology. Despite a deteriorating balance of trade, the elite consensus behind free trade largely held firm until nemesis arrived in the 1970s. By 1973, domestic supplies could no longer satisfy American demand for oil, and OPEC was able not only to raise world prices but to cut off exports to the US altogether in retaliation for American aid to Israel in the Yom Kippur War. At the same time, supplies of other raw materials vital to American industry were at the disposal of neutral or hostile regimes.The villains in this account of recent history are the affluent Democratic liberals who sympathized with the antiwar and social liberation movements of the 1960s and disdained organized labour for its materialism, social conservatism, and support for the Vietnam War. Stein attacks these liberals intemperately and distractingly because of their origins in the professional classes and their preference - growing out of their own economic interests - for free trade rather than buying American. This line of attack smacks of reverse snobbery. She describes Michael Dukakis, for example, as marinat[ing] in a soup of self-regard fostered by degrees from Swarthmore and Harvard Law School (274). …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».