Journal Article
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Journal Article (934) (remove)
Keywords
- Auftragsforschung (2)
- Behördenforschung (2)
- NS-Aufarbeitung (2)
- 1950s (1)
- 1960s (1)
- GEMA (1)
- Germany (West Germany) (1)
- copyright (1)
- record player (1)
- records (1)
In this issue
(2006)
In this Issue
(2004)
In this Issue
(2004)
In this Issue
(2008)
In this issue
(2008)
In this Issue
(2020)
In this issue
(2021)
Questions about the performance of democratic governance, about trust in democratic institutions and their representatives, about the system’s inherent ability to self-correct and to respond to unforeseen situations are now once again being raised with particular urgency. ›Which copes better with the virus – totalitarian states or democracies?‹ was the question a reporting team from the weekly newspaper DIE ZEIT wanted to answer at the beginning of 2021, investigating the strategies and practices of pandemic control in Germany and China, the USA and Iran. The answer certainly depends on how one weights different indicators and which time horizon one chooses for consideration. It also depends on the value one wishes to place on democratic procedures, especially in the face of acute decision-making pressure. Quite apart from the Covid pandemic, democratic systems, even those of the ›West‹ with a long tradition, are increasingly undergoing a crisis of legitimacy, are exposed to hostility, are disparaged or even violently opposed. Against this backdrop, the Gerda Henkel Foundation announced a ›Funding Programme Democracy‹ in 2019, and various Berlin research institutions opened the Cluster of Excellence ›Contestations of the Liberal Script‹ in 2020.
In this Issue
(2014)
In this issue
(2013)
In this Issue
(2012)
In this Issue
(2011)
In this Issue
(2015)
In this issue
(2016)
In this issue
(2018)
In this issue
(2017)
In this issue
(2023)
The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, now in its second year, has many historical connections and implications – including some which may not immediately spring to mind. The German War Graves Commission estimates that the human remains of more than 800 Wehrmacht soldiers have been uncovered so far over the course of this war, some of them surfacing as new trenches were being dug. Helmets and boots have also been found. Historian Reinhart Koselleck’s (1923–2006) metaphor of Zeitschichten, or temporal layers, acquires here a different meaning and a very concrete materiality. (Koselleck had himself served as a soldier in Ukraine.) In her acceptance speech for the Leipzig Book Award for European Understanding in April 2023, the Russian author Maria Stepanova, who currently lives in Berlin, said: ›Are we condemned to keep reliving the twentieth century with its prisons, concentration camps and propaganda machines, its trench warfare and area bombardments? What can we do when the fabric of language, its texture, suddenly becomes transparent, revealing all the hidden layers of latent and overt violence percolating to the surface?‹
In this issue
(2022)
In 2020/21 it was first and foremost the Covid pandemic that many experienced as a major turning point; now the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine since 24 February 2022 has added a whole new set of events of existential significance, whose medium- and long-term consequences we can only partly foresee. The title of a book published in the spring of 2022, Der 11. September 2001 – (k)eine Zeitenwende? (11 September 2001 – A Historical Turning Point?), has come to sound like something from a bygone age. The question ›Is this the beginning of a new era?‹ is now posed under altered circumstances, and a ›historical turning point‹ and the ›end of globalisation‹ are proclaimed in equally adamant fashion. An academic – in the best sense of the word – conference on ›New Eras and Epochal Change‹ in April 2022 acquired an unanticipated immediacy. The organising team wrote: ›We have been outrun and perhaps even rendered irrelevant by events.‹ But humanities scholarship also entails a certain scepticism towards hasty diagnoses of the times and proclamations of turning points, as scholars including the Indian-born political scientist Parag Khanna have underscored: ›We should avoid grandiloquent proclamations that seek to encapsulate our times. Such characterisations can only capture the moment that has just passed and are guaranteed to quickly be outdated.‹ Of course even such a ›guarantee‹ that any statements can only be provisional may seem questionable when there are ›unmistakable symptoms of upheaval, of profound rupture‹, as the historian Jörn Leonhard has emphasised. With reference to Reinhart Koselleck, he underscores the fundamentally close link between ›rupture and repetition‹, between the ›singularity of history‹ and its ›recurrence‹.
In this issue (1/2019)
(2019)
Das NS-Regime und seine Repräsentanten erwiesen sich im Hinblick auf die industrielle Frauenerwerbstätigkeit als „Modernisierer wider Willen". Der vielbenutzte und meist wenig aussagekräftige Terminus „Modernisierung" wird dabei im folgenden auf die einfache Formel reduziert: Entwicklung der vorgefundenen Wirtschafts- und Gesellschaftsverhältnisse hin zur entfalteten kapitalistischen Industriegesellschaft, wie wir sie heute z. B. in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland vorfinden. Das „Dritte Reich" wird in diesem Zusammenhang als eine Art „Übergangsgesellschaft" verstanden, in der in der Weimarer Republik in Ansätzen zwar vorhandene, jedoch noch nicht voll entfaltete Formen entwickelter industriekapitalistischer Produktion und Rollenzuweisungen in innerbetrieblicher und überbetrieblicher Hinsicht entfesselt sowie vor- bzw. frühkapitalistische Mentalitäten aufgebrochen und durch uns heute geläufige „moderne" Wertorientierungen ersetzt wurden.
'Rationalisierung' war als - meist höchst unbestimmtes - Schlagwort zwar keineswegs auf den industriellen Betrieb beschränkt, sondern fungierte besonders in der zweiten Hälfte der zwanziger Jahre als eine Art Zauberformel, die auch politisch-gesellschaftliche Probleme zu lösen vorgab. Materieller Kern (oder zumindest Ausgangspunkt) der Rationalisierungsdebatten der zwanziger und dreißiger Jahre waren jedoch zumeist spezifische Aspekte der innerbetrieblichen 'Modernisierung', namentlich die verschiedenen Formen und die spezifischen deutschen Probleme der Fließfertigung sowie - damit unmittelbar verknüpft - die (gleichfalls) aus den USA importierten 'wissenschaftlichen' Arbeits- und Zeitstudien, außerdem die verschiedenen Arbeitsbewertungssysteme. 'Fordismus' und 'Taylorismus' zielten in ihren verschiedenen Varianten nicht nur auf fertigungstechnische und arbeitsorganisatorische Veränderungen. Ihnen parallel lief eine neue Personalpolitik, spezifische Ausformungen der betrieblichen Sozialpolitik und (weitere) 'moderne Sozialtechniken'. Diese drei Problemkreise - fertigungstechnische, arbeitsorganisatorische und soziale 'Rationalisierung' - stehen deshalb nicht zufällig im Zentrum neuerer Untersuchungen.