{"title":"民主计划及其陷阱:e·h·卡尔、哈罗德·b·巴特勒和两次世界大战之间的危机","authors":"Tommaso Milani","doi":"10.1177/00220094231199878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article investigates competing arguments in favour of democratic planning by comparing and contrasting the writings of E. H. Carr (1892–1982) and Harold B. Butler (1883–1951). As British civil servants and distinguished commentators on public affairs, Carr and Butler were deeply struck by the magnitude of the Great Depression and its political repercussions around the world. Despite having a similar background and being critical of laissez-faire economics, Carr and Butler came to express two conflicting visions of the implications of planning for democracy, informed by their respective fascination with the Soviet experience and the New Deal. Ultimately, they took opposite stances on Britain's post-1945 nationalizations, a development that highlights the extreme suppleness of the democratic planning discourse blossoming during the interwar years.","PeriodicalId":51640,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Democratic Planning and its Pitfalls: E. H. Carr, Harold B. Butler, and the Interwar Crisis\",\"authors\":\"Tommaso Milani\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00220094231199878\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article investigates competing arguments in favour of democratic planning by comparing and contrasting the writings of E. H. Carr (1892–1982) and Harold B. Butler (1883–1951). As British civil servants and distinguished commentators on public affairs, Carr and Butler were deeply struck by the magnitude of the Great Depression and its political repercussions around the world. Despite having a similar background and being critical of laissez-faire economics, Carr and Butler came to express two conflicting visions of the implications of planning for democracy, informed by their respective fascination with the Soviet experience and the New Deal. Ultimately, they took opposite stances on Britain's post-1945 nationalizations, a development that highlights the extreme suppleness of the democratic planning discourse blossoming during the interwar years.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51640,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contemporary History\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contemporary History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220094231199878\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220094231199878","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文通过比较和对比E. H. Carr(1892-1982)和Harold B. Butler(1883-1951)的著作,调查了支持民主计划的相互竞争的论点。作为英国公务员和杰出的公共事务评论员,卡尔和巴特勒对大萧条的规模及其在世界各地的政治影响深感震惊。尽管有着相似的背景,并且对自由放任经济持批评态度,卡尔和巴特勒对计划民主的含义表达了两种相互矛盾的看法,这是由于他们各自对苏联经验和新政的迷恋。最终,他们在英国1945年后的国有化问题上采取了相反的立场,这一发展凸显了两次世界大战期间民主计划话语的极端灵活性。
Democratic Planning and its Pitfalls: E. H. Carr, Harold B. Butler, and the Interwar Crisis
The article investigates competing arguments in favour of democratic planning by comparing and contrasting the writings of E. H. Carr (1892–1982) and Harold B. Butler (1883–1951). As British civil servants and distinguished commentators on public affairs, Carr and Butler were deeply struck by the magnitude of the Great Depression and its political repercussions around the world. Despite having a similar background and being critical of laissez-faire economics, Carr and Butler came to express two conflicting visions of the implications of planning for democracy, informed by their respective fascination with the Soviet experience and the New Deal. Ultimately, they took opposite stances on Britain's post-1945 nationalizations, a development that highlights the extreme suppleness of the democratic planning discourse blossoming during the interwar years.