“怕数字?”"德意志帝国的劳工运动和社会调查

IF 0.7 4区 管理学 Q1 HISTORY Labor History Pub Date : 2023-07-02 DOI:10.1080/0023656X.2023.2230905
P. Reick
{"title":"“怕数字?”\"德意志帝国的劳工运动和社会调查","authors":"P. Reick","doi":"10.1080/0023656X.2023.2230905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Historians have long studied how statistical offices and parliamentary bodies made use of surveys to explore the lives of workers, and, in so doing, how they produced new social categories and strategies for political intervention in the process. Less attention has been paid to the role that surveys played in the history of the early labour movement. Drawing on extensive discussions in socialist and trade-union periodicals, this article explores how the labour movement in the German Empire perceived, responded to, and used social surveys. The article is divided into three parts. The first part discusses labour’s critical response to the growing number of surveys on working-class life by middle-class reformers, social researchers, and the state. The second part studies what appeared to be the only logical consequence of their critique, namely the independent gathering and analysis of data. The third part finally analyses why, despite the large number of independent surveys launched by party functionaries and local trade unions, participation among ordinary workers remained strikingly low. In the conclusion, the article shows that this might have stemmed not only from disinterest and inertia but also from how the labour leadership conceived of and presented the benefits of social surveys.","PeriodicalId":45777,"journal":{"name":"Labor History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“A phobia of numbers?” the labour movement and social surveys in the German Empire\",\"authors\":\"P. Reick\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0023656X.2023.2230905\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Historians have long studied how statistical offices and parliamentary bodies made use of surveys to explore the lives of workers, and, in so doing, how they produced new social categories and strategies for political intervention in the process. Less attention has been paid to the role that surveys played in the history of the early labour movement. Drawing on extensive discussions in socialist and trade-union periodicals, this article explores how the labour movement in the German Empire perceived, responded to, and used social surveys. The article is divided into three parts. The first part discusses labour’s critical response to the growing number of surveys on working-class life by middle-class reformers, social researchers, and the state. The second part studies what appeared to be the only logical consequence of their critique, namely the independent gathering and analysis of data. The third part finally analyses why, despite the large number of independent surveys launched by party functionaries and local trade unions, participation among ordinary workers remained strikingly low. In the conclusion, the article shows that this might have stemmed not only from disinterest and inertia but also from how the labour leadership conceived of and presented the benefits of social surveys.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45777,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Labor History\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Labor History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0023656X.2023.2230905\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Labor History","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0023656X.2023.2230905","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

历史学家长期以来一直在研究统计部门和议会机构如何利用调查来探索工人的生活,以及在此过程中,他们如何产生新的社会类别和政治干预策略。很少有人注意到调查在早期劳工运动的历史中所起的作用。借鉴社会主义和工会期刊上的广泛讨论,本文探讨了德意志帝国的工人运动如何感知、回应和使用社会调查。本文分为三个部分。第一部分讨论了工党对中产阶级改革者、社会研究人员和国家对工人阶级生活的越来越多的调查的批判性回应。第二部分研究了他们批判的唯一逻辑结果,即对数据的独立收集和分析。第三部分最后分析了为什么尽管中共官员和地方工会开展了大量独立调查,普通工人的参与率仍然低得惊人。在结论中,文章表明,这可能不仅源于不感兴趣和惰性,还源于工党领导层如何构思和呈现社会调查的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“A phobia of numbers?” the labour movement and social surveys in the German Empire
ABSTRACT Historians have long studied how statistical offices and parliamentary bodies made use of surveys to explore the lives of workers, and, in so doing, how they produced new social categories and strategies for political intervention in the process. Less attention has been paid to the role that surveys played in the history of the early labour movement. Drawing on extensive discussions in socialist and trade-union periodicals, this article explores how the labour movement in the German Empire perceived, responded to, and used social surveys. The article is divided into three parts. The first part discusses labour’s critical response to the growing number of surveys on working-class life by middle-class reformers, social researchers, and the state. The second part studies what appeared to be the only logical consequence of their critique, namely the independent gathering and analysis of data. The third part finally analyses why, despite the large number of independent surveys launched by party functionaries and local trade unions, participation among ordinary workers remained strikingly low. In the conclusion, the article shows that this might have stemmed not only from disinterest and inertia but also from how the labour leadership conceived of and presented the benefits of social surveys.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Labor History
Labor History Multiple-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
28.60%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Labor History is the pre-eminent journal for historical scholarship on labor. It is thoroughly ecumenical in its approach and showcases the work of labor historians, industrial relations scholars, labor economists, political scientists, sociologists, social movement theorists, business scholars and all others who write about labor issues. Labor History is also committed to geographical and chronological breadth. It publishes work on labor in the US and all other areas of the world. It is concerned with questions of labor in every time period, from the eighteenth century to contemporary events. Labor History provides a forum for all labor scholars, thus helping to bind together a large but fragmented area of study. By embracing all disciplines, time frames and locales, Labor History is the flagship journal of the entire field. All research articles published in the journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and refereeing by at least two anonymous referees.
期刊最新文献
The governance architecture of transnational labor regulation Private welfare for workers. Corporate welfare at Fiat in the era of Vittorio Valletta (1946-1966) 1 Revisiting the effect of height on wages in a historical context: the case of the city of Zaragoza (Spain), 1924 The current social protection discourse, gig economy within the advent of COVID-19: some emerging legal arguments Struggle and mutual aid. The age of worker solidarity Struggle and mutual aid. The age of worker solidarity , by Nicolas Delalande, translated by Anthony Roberts, New York, Other Press, 2023, 432 pp., $29.99 (hardcover), ISBN: 978-1-63542-010-4
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1