Southern Leviathan: The Development of Central State Authority in the Confederate States of America

1987 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 68-136
Author(s):  
Richard Bensel
Keyword(s):  
Central Government ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Resources ◽  
Confederate States Of America ◽  
Central State ◽  
Military Conflict ◽  
Philosophical Orientation ◽  
State Authority ◽  
Social Controls ◽  
Cultural Origins

War has probably been the single most important influence on the development of central state authority in the United States. Although the state-centered mobilization of economic resources and manpower that accompanies military conflict is commonly conceded to have had this effect throughout American history, the centralizing influence of the Civil War on the southern Confederate government has not been accorded the precedent-setting importance it deserves. The consolidation of economic and social controls within the central government of the Confederacy was in fact so extensive that it calls into question standard interpretations of southern opposition to the expansion of federal power in both the antebellum and post-Reconstruction periods. Southern reluctance to expand federal power in those periods has been attributed variously to regional sympathy for laissez-faire principles, the “precapitalist” cultural origins of the plantation elite, and a general philosophical orientation hostile to state development.

Southern Leviathan: The Development of Central State Authority in the Confederate States of America

1987 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 68-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Bensel
Keyword(s):  
Central Government ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Resources ◽  
Confederate States Of America ◽  
Central State ◽  
Military Conflict ◽  
Philosophical Orientation ◽  
State Authority ◽  
Social Controls ◽  
Cultural Origins

War has probably been the single most important influence on the development of central state authority in the United States. Although the state-centered mobilization of economic resources and manpower that accompanies military conflict is commonly conceded to have had this effect throughout American history, the centralizing influence of the Civil War on the southern Confederate government has not been accorded the precedent-setting importance it deserves. The consolidation of economic and social controls within the central government of the Confederacy was in fact so extensive that it calls into question standard interpretations of southern opposition to the expansion of federal power in both the antebellum and post-Reconstruction periods. Southern reluctance to expand federal power in those periods has been attributed variously to regional sympathy for laissez-faire principles, the “precapitalist” cultural origins of the plantation elite, and a general philosophical orientation hostile to state development.

Genealogies of Extraction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Mikkelsen ◽  
Michael Eilenberg
Keyword(s):  
Central Government ◽  
Special Economic Zone ◽  
Central State ◽  
Development Zone ◽  
State Authority ◽  
Economic Zone

Taking departure from the failure of a planned but never realised special economic zone (SEZ) in the Indonesian borderland city of Tarakan, we argue that this planned SEZ would paradoxically not have been the island of sovereign exception often associated with SEZs, but rather a zone where central government would have had comparably more control than they have in the surrounding borderlands. This leads us to argue that the entire borderland surrounding Tarakan can be considered a de facto development zone in itself. Additionally, the de facto development zone is multigenerational, having been through a number of booms and busts, triggering both migrations and environmental ruination, while central state authority and interest have waxed and waned accordingly.

Russia and the Iraq War: was Putin’s policy a failure?

2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 429-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Galia Golan
Keyword(s):  
Iraq War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Gulf War ◽  
International Crisis ◽  
Military Conflict ◽  
Difficult Time ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Russian President ◽  
Post War ◽  
Vladimir Putin

Although Russian President Vladimir Putin has been faced with numerous crises since coming to office in 2000, most importantly the war in Chechnya, the Iraq War was the first major international crisis with which his administration was confronted. As in the case of Kosovo for Yeltsin, and the Gulf War for Gorbachev, the Russian President had to deal with conflicting domestic pressures and apparently still more conflicting Russian national and international interests. Indeed, one result of such a situation was a post-war accusation that Putin actually had no policy or at least no consistent policy with regard to the Iraq crisis [Golan, G., 1992. Gorbachev’s difficult time in the Gulf. Political Science Quarterly 107 (2), 213–230]. One may remember similar accusations of Gorbachev’s ‘‘zigzaging’’ in the Gulf War and claims that the Yeltsin government failed to forge a Kasovo policy altogether [Levitin, O., 2000. Inside Moscow’s Kosovo muddle. Survival 42 (1), 130]. Yet, a certain pattern did appear to repeat itself in the Iraqi crisis, namely, pre-war efforts to prevent a military conflict from breaking out, then gradual escalation of rhetoric if not actual involvement, and finally gradual but relatively rapid retreat to conciliatory posture toward the United States (in all three crises). Moreover, Putin was indeed consistent throughout the pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis periods in his opposition to the Americans’ use of force against Iraq and in the need to remain within a United Nations framework. Actually, one might ask (and we shall below) why Putin did not abandon the first part of this policy, in order to maintain the second component, when it became certain that the U.S. was going to attack, with or without UN Security Council approval.

Dimensions of Public Sector Pay Policies in the United States and Sweden

1988 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 61-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lois Recascino Wise
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Sector ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Central Government ◽  
The United States ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Social Orientation ◽  
Social Equality ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Dimension

Three dimensions for analyzing public sector pay administration are used to examine central government pay administration in Sweden and the United States of America. On the first dimension, market posture, both countries are found to fall short of their espoused policy, comparability. Greater consistency is found on the second dimension, social orientation, where both countries have pursued the goal of social equality. The equilization of salary levels across society is far greater in Sweden in keeping with the socialist objectives of wage solidarity. The third dimension, reward structure, shows the greatest distance between the two countries with the struggle to implement performance-contingent pay underway in the U.S. while Swedes continue to rely on longevity for pay increases.

«Nuclear Alarms» at Korean Peninsula

2013 ◽  
pp. 3-16
Author(s):  
A. Fenenko
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Korean Peninsula ◽  
North Korea ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear Facilities ◽  
Military Conflict ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Plutonium Production

During the last twenty years Washington has used the “counter-proliferation strategy” in Korean Peninsula. The Americans demanded that North Korea eliminate its nuclear arsenals and plutonium production facilities under the watchful eye of the “five powers’ commission” or the IAEA. Pyongyang's recent military provocation may now raise the specter of the United States or even South Korea delivering non-nuclear strikes against its nuclear facilities. That would give the USA an opportunity to raise the question of whether certain regimes should be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons or even to develop nuclear fuel cycle capacity. The last crises demonstrated that under certain circumstances North Korea could also initiate a military conflict in East Asia.

Mahjong

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annelise Heinz
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
American Culture ◽  
The United States ◽  
Jewish American ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
Women's Culture ◽  
History Of ◽  
American Heritage ◽  
Cultural Origins ◽  
Definition Of

Mahjong: A Chinese Game and the Making of Modern American Culture illustrates how the spaces between tiles and the moments between games have fostered distinct social cultures in the United States. When this mass-produced game crossed the Pacific it created waves of popularity over the twentieth century. Mahjong narrates the history of this game to show how it has created a variety of meanings, among them American modernity, Chinese American heritage, and Jewish American women’s culture. As it traveled from China to the United States and caught on with Hollywood starlets, high society, middle-class housewives, and immigrants alike, mahjong became a quintessentially American pastime. This book also reveals the ways in which women leveraged a game for a variety of economic and cultural purposes, including entrepreneurship, self-expression, philanthropy, and ethnic community building. One result was the forging of friendships within mahjong groups that lasted decades. This study unfolds in two parts. The first half is focused on mahjong’s history as related to consumerism, with a close examination of its economic and cultural origins. The second half explores how mahjong interwove with the experiences of racial inclusion and exclusion in the evolving definition of what it means to be American. Mahjong players, promoters, entrepreneurs, and critics tell a broad story of American modernity. The apparent contradictions of the game—as both American and foreign, modern and supposedly ancient, domestic and disruptive of domesticity—reveal the tensions that lie at the heart of modern American culture.

Diplomacy of the Concil of Lithuania in Entente powers

2021 ◽  
pp. 55-64
Author(s):  
Sandra Grigaravičiūté
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Primary Sources ◽  
Peace Treaty ◽  
National Council ◽  
Central State ◽  
Direct Indication ◽  
Soviet Russia ◽  
State Archives ◽  
The Right ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

The research reveals appointment, competence and type of activities of the authorized representatives of the Council of Lithuania delegated to represent the Council of Lithuania, Lithuania’s interests or affairs abroad (in neutral and “belligerent countries”) from 22 October 1917 to 11 November 1918. The Entente Powers include the United States, Great Britain, France and also Italy in some cases. Russia, which also belonged to the Entente, is left outside the scope of the research, because after Soviet Russia signed the Peace Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (3 March 1918), it did no longer fight on the side of the Entente. The research on the diplomacy of the Council of Lithuania in the Entente Powers was carried out on the basis of published (press, memoirs, published documents) and unpublished sources (from the Lithuanian Central State Archives, Manuscripts Department of the Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences). The study employed the methods of analysis and comparison, the descriptive method, and the comparison of sources and literature. While processing the primary sources, in particular in French and German languages, the logistic-analytical method was applied (the notional content and information analysis was carried out). The research consists of two parts. In the first part of investigation the author analyzes the appointment and competence of the authorized representatives of the Council of Lithuania in neutral and “belligerent countries” and concludes, that the analysis of the circumstances of appointment and chronology of the authorized representatives of the Council of Lithuania in neutral and “belligerent countries” as well as the content of their authorizations made it clear that permanent authorized representatives, Juozas Purickis and Vladas Daumanatas-Dzimidavičius, who were appointed on 22 October 1917, had their residence in Lausanne and constituted a part of the collegial body of Lithuanian National Council, were authorized to represent the Council of Lithuania; however, only Purickis’ authorization included the phrase “to represent Lithuania’s interests abroad”; there was no indication as to what countries were meant. An equivalent wording – “to represent Lithuania’s interests abroad” – was also included in the texts of authorizations of non-permanent authorized representatives – Augustinas Voldemaras and Konstantinas Olšauskas. The material contained in the minutes of the meetings of the Council of Lithuania entails that “representation in belligerent countries” also meant representation in the Entente Powers, though no direct indication was included. In the second part of the study the author reveals the specific type of activities of the authorized representatives of the Council of Lithuania (October 1917 – November 1918) and states, that Permanent representatives of the Council of Lithuania, who were based in Lausanne and formed a part of the collegial Lithuanian National Council, did not always coordinate their diplomatic steps in the Entente Powers or in their embassies in Bern; hence, the Council of Lithuania had to deny or dissociate itself from certain statements made by the Lithuanian National Council (in Lausanne) (the declaration of separation from Russia of 25 December 1917; the protest telegram of June 1918). Both permanent and non-permanent representatives of the Council of Lithuania authorized to represent Lithuania’s interests abroad shared the same goal of seeking “the recognition of the right to self-determination for the Lithuanian nation” and the recognition of independence declared by the Council of Lithuania (on the basis of Part I of the Act of 11 December 1917 and the Act of 16 February 1918).

Afghanistan: Martial Society Without Military Rule

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amin Tarzi
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Central Government ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Military Campaigns ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
The Military

Since its inception as a separate political entity in 1747, Afghanistan has been embroiled in almost perpetual warfare, but it has never been ruled directly by the military. From initial expansionist military campaigns to involvement in defensive, civil, and internal consolidation campaigns, the Afghan military until the mid-19th century remained mainly a combination of tribal forces and smaller organized units. The central government, however, could only gain tenuous monopoly over the use of violence throughout the country by the end of the 19th century. The military as well as Afghan society remained largely illiterate and generally isolated from the prevailing global political and ideological trends until the middle of the 20th century. Politicization of Afghanistan’s military began in very small numbers after World War II with Soviet-inspired communism gaining the largest foothold. Officers associated with the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan were instrumental in two successful coup d’états in the country. In 1979, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, ending the country’s sovereignty and ushering a period of conflict that continues to the second decade of the 21st century in varying degrees. In 2001, the United States led an international invasion of the country, catalyzing efforts at reorganization of the smaller professional Afghan national defense forces that have remained largely apolitical and also the country’s most effective and trusted governmental institution.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document