Suchergebnisse

Berlin was the location in which most of the intelligence operations in Europe have taken place in the first twenty years of the conquest and the Cold War. In November 27, 1958, Khrushchev issued a formal letter to the Allies, demanding that the western Allies evacuate Berlin and enable the establishment of an independent political unit, a free city. He threatened that if the West would not comply with this, the soviets would hand over to the East Germany's government the control over the roads to Berlin. In the coming months Moscow conducted a war of nerves as the last date of the end of the ultimatum, May 27, 1959, came close. Finally the Soviets retreated as a result of the determination of the West. This event reconfirmed the claims of the West that "the US, Britain and France have legal rights to stay in Berlin." According to Halle: "These rights derive from the fact that Germany surrendered as a result of our common struggle against Nazi Germany." (Note 2) The Russians have done many attempts to change Berlin's status. In 1961 Berlin Wall was constructed, almost without response on the part of the West, and by so doing, the Soviets perpetuated the status quo that had been since 1948. In July 25, 1961 Kennedy addressed the Americans on television, saying that "West Berlin is not as it had ever been, the location of the biggest test of the courage and the will power of the West." (Note 3) On June 26, 1963, Kennedy went out to Berlin, which was divided by the wall, torn between east and west, in order to announce his message. In his speech outside the city council of West Berlin, Kennedy won the hearts of the Berliners as well as those of the world when he said: "Ich bin ein Berliner", I'm a Berliner. The sixties were years of heating of the conflict with the Soviet Block. In 1961 the Berlin Wall was constructed. Then Kennedy came into power, there was the movement for human rights and the political tension between whites and blacks in America. The conflict increase as the Korean War started, and afterwards when America intervened in Vietnam. There was also the crisis in the Bay of Pigs in Cuba, which almost pushed the whole world into a nuclear war and catastrophe. During the 28 years of the Berlin Wall, 13.8.61-9.11.89, this was notorious as an example of a political border that marked the seclusion and freezing more than freedom of movement, communication and change. At the same time there was the most obvious sign of the division of Germany after WWII and the division of Europe to East and West by the Iron Curtain. The wall was the background of stories by writers from east and west. The writers of espionage thrillers were fascinated by the global conflict between east and west and the Cold War with Berlin as the setting of the divided city. Berlin presented a permanent conflict that was perceived as endless, or as Mews defined it: "Berlin is perfect, a romantic past, tragic present, secluded in the heart of East Germany." (Note 4) The city presented the writers with a situation that demanded a reassessment of the genres and the ideological and aesthetic perceptions of this type of writing. This was the reason that the genre of espionage books blossomed in the sixties, mainly those with the wall. The wall was not just a symbol of a political failure, as East Germany could not stop the flow of people escaping from it. The city was ugly, dirty, and full of wires and lit by a yellow light, like a concentration camp. A West German policeman says: "If the Allies were not here, there would not have been a wall. He expressed the acknowledgment that the Western powers had also an interest in the wall as a tool for preventing the unification of Germany. But his colleague answers: If they were not here, the wall would not have been, but the same applies for Berlin. (Note 5) Berlin was the world capital of the Cold War. The wall threatened and created risks and was known as one of the big justifications for the mentality of the Cold War. The construction of the wall in August 1961 strengthened Berlin's status as the frontline of the Cold War and as a political microcosmos, which reflected topographical as well as the ideological global struggle between east and west. It made Berlin a focus of interest, and this focus in turn caused an incentive for the espionage literature with the rise of neorealism with the anti-hero, as it also ended the era of romanticism. (Note 6) The works of le Carré and Deighton are the best examples of this change in literature. Both of them use the wall as the arena of events and a symbol in their works. Only at the end of the fifties, upon the final withdrawal of McCarthyism and the relative weakening of the Cold War, there started have to appear films with new images about the position and nature of the Germans and the representations of Nazism in the new history. The films of the Cold War presented the communists as enemies or saboteurs. Together with this view about the Soviets, developed the rehabilitation of the German image. Each part of the German society was rehabilitated and become a victim instead of an assistant of the Nazis. The critic Dwight MacDonald was impressed by the way in which the German population" has changed from a fearful assistant of one totalitarian regime to the hero opponent of another totalitarian regime". (Note 7) This approach has to be examined, and how it influenced the development of the German representation, since many films I have investigated demonstrate a different approach of the German representation.

Volume I -- 1 Cambridge, That Was: The Crucible of Heterodox Economics -- 1.1 The Narrative -- 1.2 Evolutions and Revolutions -- 1.2.1 The Great Banyan of Heterodox Traditions -- 1.2.2 Cohorts -- 1.2.3 The Cambridge Habitat -- 1.2.4 Which Cambridge? -- 1.3 Regime Change -- 1.3.1 The World of Cambridge: Stories Within -- 1.3.2 Worlds Beyond Cambridge: Neoliberalism at the Gates -- 1.4 The Dialectic of Competing Paradigms -- 1.4.1 Laissez-Faire: "Receding at last into the distance" -- 1.4.2 The Force of Ideas -- 1.4.3 Opposition Brewing -- 1.4.4 Evolutions and Hegemonic Incorporation -- 1.4.5 Ideological: Not the Techniques but the Purposes of Economics -- 1.4.6 Sociological: Mathematical Whiz-Kids and Ageing Dinosaurs -- 1.4.7 Beyond Kuhnian Reductionism -- 1.4.8 Mankiw's Pendulum -- 1.4.9 Solow's À La Carte Approach -- 1.4.10 Silos and Trenches -- 1.4.11 Joan Versus Hahn—History Versus Equilibrium -- 1.5 Semantics and Pedantics -- References -- 2 The Warring Tribes -- 2.1 A Sanctuary of Sages -- 2.1.1 Class to Community: The Cement of War -- 2.1.2 Community to Conflict: Cement to Sand -- 2.1.3 A Pride of Savage Prima Donnas -- 2.2 Faculty Wars -- 2.2.1 Paradise Lost -- 2.2.2 Fault Lines Within -- Wynne Godley: No Legacy No Synthesis, No Textbooks—The Samuelson Factor -- Shifting Student Preferences? -- "Irrelevance" and Irreverence: Joan and K-Theory -- Inbred Insularity, Complacency -- Simultaneities in the Demographic Lifecycle -- Lack of Internal Group Coherence -- The Heterodox Camp: No Chairs—Sorry, Standing Room Only -- A Break in Intergenerational Transmission, in the Reproduction of Traditions -- 2.3 Godfathers, Uncles and Nephews: The Gathering Foe -- 2.3.1 The Trojan Horse: By the Pricking of My Thumbs -- 2.3.2 Forming the Academy -- Meanwhile, at the Orthodox Party—A Merry Game of Musical Chairs -- 2.3.3 The Chess Master -- 2.4 The Campaign: How the War Was Lost and Won -- 2.4.1 The Orthodox Gambit: Capture the External Commanding Heights -- 2.4.2 Carrots and Commanders -- 2.4.3 Modus Operandi: Masters, Mandarins and Interlocking Committees -- References -- 3 Worlds Beyond Cambridge: The Global Web of the 'Neoliberal Thought Collective' -- 3.1 Conjunctures -- 3.1.1 1930s, The Prelude -- LSE Versus Cambridge -- Émigré Economists: The Benefactions of Lenin and Hitler -- 3.1.2 1940s, The Cascade -- 3.1.3 Keynesianism: Divergent Receptions -- Post-war Affinity in the UK -- Post-New Deal Hostility in the USA -- 3.2 Spreading the Word: Messiahs, Messages, Methods -- 3.2.1 Ideas and Ideologies: Manufacturers and Retailers -- 3.2.2 USA: Early Ideological Entrepreneurs of Libertarianism -- Harold Luhnow: The Volker Fund and its Dollars -- Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) and its Facilitators -- 3.2.3 Europe: Friedrich Hayek and the Mont Pelerin Society -- Antecedents -- Pilgrims Atop a Mountain, Mont Pelerin, Switzerland, April 1947 -- Financial Sponsors -- The First Meeting of Minds -- Sarcastic Schumpeter, Sceptical Solow, Scathing Samuelson -- 3.2.4 UK: Antony Fisher, Global Venture Capitalist of Think Tanks -- 3.3 Branding the Message: The 'Nobel' Prize -- 3.3.1 The Stockholm Connection: Ideological Entrepreneurs -- 3.3.2 Some Early Awards: Setting the Direction -- Jan Tinbergen—Ragnar Frisch 1969 -- Samuelson 1970 -- Gunnar Myrdal—Friedrich von Hayek 1974 -- Milton Friedman 1976 -- 3.3.3 Mont Pelerin Society and the 'Nobel'—A Golden Embrace -- 3.3.4 Cambridge Heterodoxy? -- 3.3.5 'An Ideological Coup' -- 3.4 Reaching Politics: Weaponising the Message -- 3.4.1 Santiago de Chile: Pinochet the Pioneer -- Chicago and its Cowboys -- Thatcher: Romancing Pinochet's Chile -- 3.4.2 The White House: Reagan, a Disciple -- 3.4.3 10 Downing Street: Thatcher, a Devotee -- More than its Weight in Gold—The Market Price of Symbolic Capital -- 3.4.4 Pulling Together -- 3.5 Besieging Cambridge: The Chicago–MIT–LSE Trinity -- 3.5.1 A Cross-Atlantic Triangle -- 3.5.2 Diversity of Practice -- 3.5.3 Unity of Purpose -- References -- 4 Camp Skirmishes Over Interstitial Spaces: Journals, Seminars, Textbooks -- 4.1 The Battle of Teruel—The Day before -- 4.2 Journals -- 4.2.1 EJ Leaves 'Home'—The Loss of a Flagship -- 4.2.2 CJE Arrives—A Forum of One's Own -- 4.2.3 Cambridge Economic Policy Review: One Crowded Hour of Glorious Life -- 4.3 Seminars -- 4.3.1 Cambridge Economic Club—A Marshallian Precursor: 1884–1890, 1896–? -- 4.3.2 Political Economy Club: From Keynes to Robertson to Kahn—Dazzling to Dour -- 4.3.3 The Marshall Society: A Socialisation into Economics and Its Purposes -- 4.3.4 Piero Sraffa's Research Students Seminar: A Precocious Nursery -- 4.3.5 In Retrospect, Austin Robinson on the Cambridge Circus: The Engine Room of The General Theory -- 4.3.6 Cambridge–LSE Joint Seminar: Jousting Juniors -- 4.3.7 Kahn's 'Secret' Seminar at King's: Fires in the Kitchen -- 4.3.8 The Richard Stone Common Room: Typhoo and Typhoons -- 4.3.9 Ajit Singh's Political Economy Seminar at Queens': Young Turks -- 4.3.10 Arestis and Kitson Political Economy Seminar at St. Catherine's College -- 4.3.11 Hahn's Churchill Seminar: Only Maths and Neoclassicals, Others Beware -- 4.3.12 Cambridge Growth Project Seminar at DAE -- 4.3.13 Hahn's 'Quaker' Risk Seminar: The Rising Tide -- 4.3.14 Matthews's CLARE Group: The Master's Lodge of Moderate Practitioners -- 4.3.15 Lawson—Realism and Social Ontology: Ways of Seeing and Framing -- 4.4 Textbooks -- 4.4.1 Distant Thunder: Keynes and McCarthy, Tarshis and Samuelson -- 4.4.2 Lawrence Klein and the Paradox of The Keynesian Revolution -- Puzzle -- Ph.D.—At Samuelson's Feet -- Cowles Commission—The New Dealers -- The Keynesian Revolution: The Extra Chapter— Klein, Then a Closet Marxist? -- Beyond Keynes -- UMich and McCarthyism -- Policy to Forecasting -- Resolution -- 4.4.3 'Death of a Revolutionary Textbook': Robinson and Eatwell -- 4.4.4 An 'Applied Economics' Textbook That Wasn't: Joan and Young Friends -- 4.5 The Battle of Teruel—The Day After -- Appendix 4.1: First off the Blocks: Mabel Timlin's Keynesian Economics, 1942 -- References -- 5 The DAE Trilogy -- 5.1 Origins and Evolution -- 5.1.1 Origins -- 5.1.2 Evolution: Substance and Styles -- 5.1.3 Foundations of Stone -- 5.1.4 Reddaway's Method: Eclectic Development -- 5.1.5 Godley: Turbulent Times -- 5.2 End of the Golden Age: The Decade of Discontent -- 5.3 The Trilogy: Discrete Episodes or a Serial Campaign? -- Appendix 5.1: DAE—Finding a Good Home -- References -- 6 Cambridge Economic Policy Group: Beheading a Turbulent Priest -- 6.1 Charged Conjuncture -- 6.1.1 Imbroglios of 1974: Old Versus New Cambridge Versus the Establishment -- 6.1.2 The Enigma of Kahn -- 6.1.3 Kaldor: On Radical Policy Implications of New Cambridge, 1976 -- 6.1.4 Cambridge Squabbles: Spillover into Whitehall? -- 6.1.5 Triggering Crisis: The Pivot of the OPEC Price Hikes -- 6.1.6 1979: Enter Margaret Thatcher, Right-Wing, Upfront -- 6.1.7 The Case of the Odd Consensus: The Letter by 364 Economists, 1981 -- 6.1.8 Thatcher in the Garage of the Federal Reserve -- 6.1.9 1981: Brixton Riots, Toxteth Fires: "A Concentration of Hopelessness" -- 6.1.10 The CEPG: A Thorn in the Thatcher Hide -- 6.1.11 The Bogey of Import Controls and the Spectre of Bennism -- 6.2 SSRC and CEPG: Dispensing Instant Injustice -- 6.2.1 Posner's Parlour -- 6.2.2 Posner's Process -- 6.3 Epilogue -- 6.3.1 Vengeance -- 6.3.2 The Team Scattered -- 6.3.3 The Model Reincarnated -- 6.3.4 The Rehabilitation of Wynne -- 6.3.5 Wynne Godley: 'My Credo' … -- 6.3.6 The Pacification of the CEPG -- Appendix 6.1: Old Cambridge, New Cambridge, 1974: and All the King's Men -- 1. Letter WG to RFK 23 May 1974. JVR/ vii/228/3/3 -- 2. Letter NK to RFK 20 May 1974. JVR/ vii/228/3/14-16 -- 3. Letter from RFK and MP to NK 24 May 1974. JVR/vii/228/3/17-20 -- 4. Letter from RFK and MP to NK 28 May 1974. JVR/vii/228/3/24 -- 5. Letter from FC to RFK 29 May 1974. JVR/7/228/3/25 -- 6. Reply from RFK to FC 6 June 1974. JVR/7/228/3/24 -- 7. In the interim, NK replied to RFK and MP. JVR/7/228/3/26 -- 8. Letter from NK to RFK. RFK/12/2/132/3 -- References -- 7 'Unintended' Collateral Damage? The Cambridge Economic Policy Group and the Joseph-Rothschild-Posner SSRC Enquiry, 1982 -- 7.1 Joseph—Rothschild—Posner—Godley -- 7.2 The Posner-the-Saviour Narrative -- 7.3 Setting Up the Enquiry -- 7.4 Who Proposed Rothschild? -- 7.5 Rothschild Report Writing Process -- 7.6 The Judgement of Rothschild -- 7.7 Between Draft and Release and Response: Handshakes and Cigars -- 7.8 Did Posner Get Away with Just a Change of Name? -- 7.9 CEPG—Collateral Damage? Or, Traded Down the River? -- 7.10 The Rothschild Report: Gleanings on Macroeconomic Modelling -- 7.11 Lord Kaldor—Off the Record, Off the Cuff, Off the Mark? -- 7.12 Lord Harris' Vitriol -- 7.13 Catholicity and Independence -- 7.14 Rothschild's Last Word -- 7.15 Joseph's Last Laugh -- References -- 8 Cambridge Growth Project: Running the Gauntlet -- 8.1 Background and Conjuncture -- 8.1.1 The Decision -- 8.2 Substantive Issues -- 8.2.1 No Innovation? -- 8.2.2 Catholicity, Turnover and the Value of Disaggregation -- 8.2.3 Use of Input-Output Tables -- 8.2.4 CGP Presence in Policy Debates -- 8.2.5 Insularity -- 8.2.6 On Exploiting the Cheap Labour of Graduate Students -- 8.3 Issues of Procedural Probity -- 8.3.1 Shifting Goalposts Across Evaluations -- 8.3.2 Unequal Application of Criterion of Commercial Funding -- 8.3.3 Public Good or Private Resource? -- 8.3.4 ESRC Ignored CGP Model Performance: Why? -- 8.3.5 Compromised 'Independent' Evidence -- 8.4 Other Concerns -- 8.4.1 'Reds'? -- 8.4.2 Crowding Out Competitors? -- 8.4.3 Deadweight Loss of Built-up Intellectual Capital -- 8.4.4 Gratuitously Offensive: Up Close and Out of Order -- 8.4.5 The Consortium: 'Revived Talk of Conspiracy Theory' -- 8.4.6 I.