new-economics

Germany Enacts the Hindenburg Program

Marshal Hindenburg in 1916.

December 5 1916–Debate over Hindenburg & Ludendorff’s proposed new economic plan continued in the Reichstag throughout November, with many politicians opposed to some of its more extreme aspects.  Conservatives opposed the drafting of women into the war economy, while liberals opposed the proposed shuttering of universities.  Ultimately, in order to get the bill passed swiftly, Hindenburg & Ludendorff dropped those proposals.  Despite this, the resulting act, passed on December 5, was still quite a shift in Germany’s economic policy.

All men between the ages of 18 and 60 were liable to be called up for service in the war economy, if they did not already serve in it or in the armed forces.  The military and the government would determine whether particular employers had enough labor to serve the war effort, and if they had an excess, would begin to forcibly transfer people to other jobs.  Workers in the war economy could not leave their jobs without the permission of their employer, or by appeal to the government.  Workers’ rights within the war economy were strongly curtailed, although workers in firms employing more than fifty people could form Workers’ Councils for the purposes of collective bargaining.  However, if a dispute arose between an employer and their Workers’ Council, the government would have final say in arbitration.

Chancellor Bethmann was extremely wary of the act, thinking it amounted to a takeover of the domestic economy by the military.  However, the civilian government would also have expanded authority, and there were elements of the law of which the conservative Bethmann did approve.

Today in 1915: British Indian Force Prepares to Be Besieged at Kut
Today in 1914: Russians Evacuate Lodz

Sources include: Robert B. Asprey, The German High Command at War.

2

(13/30) a photo of your textbook(s)

of 30 day studyblr challenge by @hayley-studies

here’s a photo of my economics textbook (since i’m studying it right now for my exam tomorrow). this is the study method that i use when i only have a day to study - summarize each points or paragraphs in a sticky note, using your own words as much as possible. in addition, write important informations in another color to differentiate it from the rest.

good luck to any of you guys who are having exams soon! xx

Although Trump likes to portray himself as a successful entrepreneur who created a vastly profitable business, many people in the business world have long regarded him as a self-promoting huckster who emblazons his name on properties that don’t belong to him and habitually overstates his net worth.

We were lied to. The women of my generation were told that we could ‘have it all’, as long as ‘it all’ was marriage, babies and a career in finance, a cupboard full of beautiful shoes and terminal exhaustion – and even that is only an option if we’re rich, white, straight and well behaved. These perfect lives would necessarily rely on an army of nannies and care-workers, and nobody has yet bothered to ask whether they can have it all.

We can have everything we want as long as what we want is a life spent searching for exhausting work that doesn’t pay enough, shopping for things we don’t need and sticking to a set of social and sexual rules that turn out, once you plough through the layers of trash and adverts, to be as rigid as ever.

As for young men, they were told they lived in a brave new world of economic and sexual opportunity, and if they felt angry or afraid, if they felt constrained or bewildered by contradictory expectations, by the pressure to act masculine, make money, demonstrate dominance and fuck a lot of pretty women while remaining a decent human being, then their distress was the fault of women and minorities. It was these grasping women, these homosexuals and people of colour who had taken away the power and satisfaction that was once their birthright as men. We were taught, all of us, that if we were dissatisfied, it was our fault, or the fault of those closest to us. We were built wrong, somehow. We had failed to adjust. If we showed any sort of distress, we probably needed to be medicated or incarcerated, depending on our social status. There are supposed to be no structural problems, just individual maladaption.

3 Ways To End Chinatown’s Gentrification

What’s been happening in Chinatown has hardly been silent, even if outsiders have been quiet about it. While neighborhoods like Williamsburg, Crown Heights, and Harlem have all become synonymous with encroaching gentrification, Chinatown probably elicits little more than an acknowledged existence in most New Yorker’s minds. We know something has been changing there, we may have even seen a headline once talking about it, but the large neighborhood covering parts of the Lower East Side and Two Bridges hardly gets its deserved attention.

Many are failing to recognize that if the gentrification happening in Chinatown can be stopped, and neighborhood development managed in a way that benefits all community members, the same can probably be done elsewhere…

Think journalism like this is hard to find? Well, supporting it starts with seeing the whole story.

The November Edition of the Monkerai Review looks at Degrowth.

“Is degrowth essential for just transition?”

Degrowth (décroissance, decrecimiento, decrescita) is a critical interrogation of growth-based economics.

Degrowth thinkers and activists advocate for the sustainable contraction of economies as the core means of addressing long term environmental issues and social inequalities.

While degrowth can frame discussions on the failures of and alternatives to the status quo, its advocates recognise there is no theory of contraction equivalent to the growth theories of economics. Whether or not a theoretical foundation is necessary is an ongoing point of creative tension within its social-grassroots movement, at least within minority, wealthy countries. Its key advocates, such as Professor Serge Latouche and Peter Victor promote it as a wide-ranging economic solution,  others are more sceptical of its co-existence with continuing capitalism and its tendency towards personal-community scale change as opposed to systemic transformation.