Demokratie und Wirtschaftspolitik in der Weimarer Republik

Müller, Tim B.

doi:10.1515/vfzg-2014-0027

Cited by 24 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An interesting fact is that the UK legislator also concluded that there is no need to conclude a written contract, but employers often follow traditions, because otherwise, it is obliged to notify the employee in writing about the terms of employment (https://base.garant.ru). US legislation also lacks a mandatory requirement for a written form of an employment contract (with the exception of the employment of seafarers), however, there are three possible forms of it: written, oral and implied (MULLER, 2014). In turn, the conclusion of an oral contract naturally does not imply the observance of guarantees (even about the time of commencement of work and their payment).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal regulation of service and labor relations in various legal systems

Gusakova

Adrianovskaya

Chuksina

et al. 2021

Laplage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article provides a comparative characteristic of the concepts of labor relations in some foreign countries. The article analyzes the legal regulation of labor relations, dividing states into two groups. The first includes Russia, France, Germany and a number of other European states. In the second - the USA, Great Britain, Australia and other countries of the Anglo-Saxon legal system. The author denotes the similarities and differences in choosing one of the two models, namely: European (continental) and Anglo-Saxon (Anglo-American). The conclusion is drawn that the borrowing of the experience of the countries adhering to the Anglo-Saxon model is unacceptable for the Russian state, since in them the labor contract is presented not as a tool capable of guaranteeing the rights of workers, but as a legal way to create conditions that can infringe on their interests. In turn, at the moment these countries are moving towards the socialization of labor relations.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal regulation of service and labor relations in various legal systems

Gusakova

Adrianovskaya

Chuksina

et al. 2021

Laplage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As is shown by Müller's (2014) analysis of the Ministry of Economics, not all ministries were opposed to socialist or Keynesian policies. Nonetheless, even the labor ministry, dominated by socialists and trade unions, was taken over by conservative bureaucrats from 1924 (Liu 1997: 363).…”

Section: The Formation Of Bureaucratic Quality In Prussia and Germanymentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Meritocracy Lead to Bureaucratic Quality? Revisiting the Experience of Prussia and Imperial and Weimar Germany

Andersen¹

2018

Soc. sci. hist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do state bureaucracies become high-quality organizations? Leading comparative politics studies assume that bureaucratic quality is forged by the introduction of meritocratic personnel systems because meritocracies, in contrast to politicized bureaucracies, select the most competent applicants for the jobs at hand. However, in line with principal-agent theory I propose that without a certain level of responsiveness of bureaucrats to the government in place and its policies, the positive consequences of meritocracy for bureaucratic quality are drastically reduced. Meritocracy is likewise essential to bureaucratic quality but, given that it demands some bureaucratic autonomy, meritocracy also creates a control problem. To study the consequences of meritocracy for bureaucratic quality, I revisit bureaucratic developments in the paradigmatically important historical cases of Prussia as well as Imperial and Weimar Germany. Based on extant scholarship of Prussian and German bureaucratic history, the analysis shows that bureaucratic quality varies over time with responsiveness even when meritocraticness is constant at high and low levels, and that governments knowing this hesitate to adopt meritocratic systems despite their advantages if they believe the bureaucracy will be unresponsive. Studying Prussia and Germany historically helps distinguish between the consequences for bureaucratic quality of meritocracy from those of responsiveness. On this basis, I identify where comparative politics studies may benefit from adding, in a comparative historical perspective, responsiveness to the explanation of bureaucratic quality.

show abstract

“Bad” Politics and “Good” Culture: New Approaches to the History of the Weimar Republic

Hung

2016

Cent Eur Hist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

More than thirty years ago, Eberhard Kolb commented that the vast wealth of research on the history of the Weimar Republic made it “difficult even for a specialist to give a full account of the relevant literature.” Since then, the flood of studies on Weimar Germany has not waned, and by now it is hard even to keep track of all the review articles meant to cut a swath through this abundance. Yet the prevailing historical image of the era has remained surprisingly stable: most historians have accepted the master narrative of the Weimar Republic as the sharp juxtaposition of “bad” politics and “good” culture, epitomized in the often-used image of “a dance on the edge of a volcano.” Kolb, for example, described “the sharp contrast between the gloomy political and economic conditions … and the unique wealth of artistic and intellectual achievement” as “typical of the Weimar era.” Detlev Peukert, arguably the most innovative scholar of Weimar history, criticized this historical image but, at the same time, declared this dichotomy “an integral feature of the era.” The latest example can be found in the work of Eric D. Weitz, who summarizes the fate of Weimar Germany as “the striving for something new and wonderful encountering absolute evil,” juxtaposing the “sparkling brilliance” of modernist masters like Bertolt Brecht, Thomas Mann, and Bruno Taut with “the plain hatred of democracy” of Weimar's right-wing extremists. This contrasting of politics and culture is a narrative device that only makes sense, however, from our contemporary vantage point of Western liberal democracy and from our understanding of progressive art. This retrospective interpretation is not in itself the problem—after all, historians can never really escape their own historical contexts. It becomes problematic, however, when it is treated not as an interpretation but as historical fact. Weimar Germans certainly would not have shared this narrative wholeheartedly: many would not have subscribed to the depiction of their time as a never-ending parade of political breakdowns and economic disasters. Even more would have rejected the view of the Berlin-based avant-garde as a sign of progressive achievement—if they had ever had the chance to see its representative works in the first place. The sharp distinction between “bad” Weimar politics and “good” Weimar culture not only fails to do justice to the way many of these Germans perceived their time but also keeps us from understanding how closely intertwined these two spheres were in the Weimar Republic. Thus, rather than giving an overview of the latest additions to Weimar historiography, this review essay looks at how recent publications have questioned—or conformed to—this dominant narrative.

show abstract

Demokratie und Wirtschaftspolitik in der Weimarer Republik

Cited by 24 publications

References 0 publications

Legal regulation of service and labor relations in various legal systems

Legal regulation of service and labor relations in various legal systems

Does Meritocracy Lead to Bureaucratic Quality? Revisiting the Experience of Prussia and Imperial and Weimar Germany

“Bad” Politics and “Good” Culture: New Approaches to the History of the Weimar Republic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About