The purpose of this master thesis is to study and compare conservative, fascist and nationalist youth movements active in Sweden during the 1930s and 40s. The political youth movements at the centre of this study are the Young Swedes (Ungsvenskarna), Swedish Rural Youth League (Svenska Landsbygdens Ungdomsförbund), Nordic Youth (Nordisk Ungdom) and National Youth League of Sweden/National League of Sweden (Sveriges nationella ungdomsförbund/Sveriges nationella förbund). During the early 1900s, youth was often described as both the reviver of society and the future of the nation. Regardless of different ideological and political alignments, the youth movements were all invested in shaping and educating young people to prepare them for the future. In this study, the focal point has been the question why these youth movements wanted the role as educators of young people, as well as what was expected of the young after this education. The main task of the political youth movements seems to have been to give young people ideals to fight for through physical and spiritual education. Through this education the young would realize what was expected of them and finally transform into an ideal youth that could inherit the responsibility as caretakers of the nation as well as the future. The view on the ideal youth varied between the studied youth movements. The Young Swedes wanted to create a conservative youth, actively engaged with the main political party of the movement, the Right (Högern). The ideal youth of the Swedish Rural Youth League were aware of their responsibilities towards the rights of the rural areas and agriculture. The ideal youth of Nordic Youth and National Youth League would have very similar personalities and would be ready to fight and sacrifice for the future rebirth of the nation into similar, yet different, fascistic utopias.

帝制中國的士人菁英與政府組織，其對民間商業活動的觀感究竟如何？關於這個大問題一個簡單的答覆，是學界使用了很久的「重農抑商」（或稱「重本抑末」）一詞。它由於散見於官員言論、政府詔令，因此說官員「有重農抑商的觀念」是一種很安全的講法，但卻也含糊不清，究竟這類詞彙想要表達的是什麼意思？具體的特徵為何？它和我們習慣上說的以農為本、農本主義（本文統稱為「農本商末」）又有什麼不同？學界一般不會去區別古時的「重農抑商」和「農本商末」觀念有什麼不同，或者認為，「重農抑商」根源於以農為本、以工商為末的偏頗思維，是比「農本商末」更為激進、視商業更負面的態度。但筆者以為不是如此，透過考察一個筆者心目中的關鍵環節──對於客觀上農業依賴商業的情形，官員有多少認識，我希望能說服讀者能重新考慮一些不同的可能性。 學界對古代「抑商」觀念的想像並不一致，彼此間對史料上的「抑末類用詞」想要表達的意涵為何，也缺乏有效的標準，至於這類用語本身在古文中的使用，亦不夠統一、明確。然而這些用語卻成了古人「抑商」、「輕商」的主要證據。首先，如果古人只是把「本末」的思維套到農商關係上，則並無輕視商業的意涵；此外，宋代官員認為商業不如農業重要，同時卻也十分在乎商業的好壞。這兩點先確認之後，筆者想釐清「抑末類用詞」的宋代語意，以及新法「抑末」的性質，勾勒出一個和今天重商觀念全然不同的重視商業模式，並解釋它的原因。 論文內容可以分作兩個層次。就古人對現實的認知情形進行評估，構成了本文的第一層內容。希望對於這些評估的討論，能讓我們對宋人的商業觀念有較「抑商」、「輕商」、「重商」這類概括性用語更為細膩的理解。此外，綜合這些討論，筆者也發展了一個推論，構成本文較為激進的第二層內容：「農本商末」的思維方式，它自身已是宋代重商傾向充分必要的原因（necessary and sufficient condition），雖然還可能有其他因素促成了對商業的重視，但這些解釋策略在知識上都是多餘的。 / What was the perspective of the government and the elite on commercial activities in imperial china? An simple answer to this big question is the term “Chung nung I shang”(重農抑商)(literal translation “emphasize agriculture and restrain commerce”), or “Chung Pen I Mo”(重本抑末)(“emphasize the root and restrain the branches”). Due to the widespread use of such terms in edicts or statesmen’s discourses, it is safe to assume that the statesmen held the belief of “Chung nung I shang”. However, the saying itself is an ambiguous statement—what is the precise meaning of this linguistic practice? What are its concrete traits? What is the difference between “Chung nung I shang” and the more commonly used “Agricultural Foundation” ideology(以農為本、農本主義)? In general, the two terms are not distinguished within academia. Some scholars that perceive the two as different believe the former to have originated from the latter. The latter views agriculture as root and industry or commerce as branches, whereas the former is a more radical idea that discriminates against commerce. The author would like to offer a different interpretation by examining a crucial question—how did those statesmen understand the dependence of agriculture on the commodity economy—one may realize the possibility of a different interpretation. In academia, the term “I-Shang”(抑商) can be interpreted quite differently. The actual meaning of “I-Mo(抑末) type terms” in historical materials is also very ambiguous in academic texts as there lacks an effective standard to examine the word’s usage. Nevertheless, such historical linguistic practice constitutes the main evidence that the ancient Chinese believed in “I-Shang”(抑商) or “Ching-Shang”(輕商)( literal translation “disdain commerce”). First, if the ancient Chinese simply applied the “root and branch” analogy to agriculture and commerce, there is no implication of a negative connotation. Secondly, even though statesmen in Song China thought commerce was less important than agriculture, they took the health of commerce seriously. Once these two points are established, the author intend to clarify the meaning of “I-Mo(抑末) type terms” in Song Dynasty and the characteristic of “I-Mo(抑末)” idea in Wang An-shi’s political reform and then depict and explain the pattern to emphasize commerce at that time. This study constitutes two layers. The first estimates the statesmen’s understanding of the economic reality in Song China. Discussions brought forth in this estimate aim to further understanding of their perception towards commerce beyond literal translation of the previously mentioned terms. Furthermore, discussions in the first layer leads to the argument in the second layer—“Agricultural Foundation” ideology(農本主義) itself was a necessary and sufficient condition that prompted the emphasis on commerce in Song china. There may be other factors that resulted in such perspective, but they are redundant explanations. / 謝辭 i 摘要 iii Abstract iv 目錄 vi 緒論 1 第一節、問題意識 1 一、「抑商」爭論產生的背景 1 二、客觀的經濟結構 3 三、「重農抑商」與「農本商末」兩個概念 5 四、本文的論證形式 9 第二節、研究取徑 11 一、定義本文的用詞 11 二、語言造成的問題 13 三、政治語境 14 四、章節架構 14 第三節、文獻回顧 16 一、中國經濟思想史 16 二、大陸其他領域 25 三、大陸以外的學術界 28 第一章 宋代以前人們對商業活動的觀感 32 第一節、先秦 33 一、戰國中期以前 33 二、法家的「抑商」觀念 34 三、儒家 39 四、戰國後期的儒家 40 五、先秦的趨向 44 第二節、西漢的轉折 46 一、對於語詞使用的懷疑論 46 二、漢初的狀態為何 48 三、輕重思想的形成 54 第三節、儒家重農抑商教條的形成 61 一、「抑商教條」的說法 61 二、儒家為何轉變 62 三、鹽鐵會議之後到魏晉 67 四、魏晉到唐代 69 第四節、唐代的變化 71 一、唐代原本的經濟觀念 71 二、中唐官員對商業的重視 72 三、輕重觀念的變化──新輕重論 73 第五節、對開頭問題的回答 76 第二章 宋代官員商業觀感的幾個特徵 78 第一節、「農本商末」的思維是否改變了 78 第二節、宋代官員是否重視商業 83 一、通商惠工之旨 83 二、政策爭辯中的政治語言 84 第三節、抑商說與輕商說的根據為何 89 一、抑商政策的存在 89 二、「抑末類用詞」的存在 94 三、對棄農從工商的反感──「理由A」的探討 108 第四節、宋代輕重政策與新法「抑末」的性質為何 118 一、背景簡述 119 二、新法的「抑末」是否針對的是大商人 121 三、新法與傳統輕重論有何差別──對漢代的歷史記憶 127 四、新法與新輕重論有何差別 131 第五節、「重農抑商」的觀念是否改變了 133 第三章 現實經濟結構對官員價值觀的影響 136 第一節、農業依賴商業的情形為何 136 第二節、官員有何農依賴商的言論 141 第三節、官員對農依賴商的各面向有多少體認 147 一、薄征商稅論 147 二、農村對糧食交易的依賴性 153 三、農村對貨幣交易的依賴性 154 四、政府對農民的購買制度、散錢制度 157 第四節、官員看待市場自由的態度為何 162 一、市場自由的爭議 162 二、商業的平抑價格功能 165 三、對阻礙、壟斷、操弄的觀感 169 四、空間上商品流通的自由度與效率 171 五、「農本商末」與市場自由化的關係 177 第五節、官員重視商業的模式與程度為何 180 一、模式 180 二、程度 182 第六節、一個關於農本主義的推論 187 徵引書目 191

No description available.

By the early 20th century, in 1920, Black farmers owned 14% of US farmland. Today, in the 21st century, Black farmers own less than 2% of US farmland. The demise of Black farmers and Black farmland in US Agriculture is a direct result of social, political, and racial weaponization against their foodways, culture, and livelihoods. The history concerning the plight of Black farmers goes beyond USDA's historical discrimination but enters a position where racism is embedded and perpetuated within the structure of US agriculture. In effect, Black small-scale farmers have reaped the downfall of this system, enduring racial biases and a complex relationship to the land for future generations. This dissertation examines and investigates the contemporary challenges associated with Mississippi’s small-scale Black farmers and their strategies that resist these challenges to create a self-sufficient agricultural system. Employing a qualitative approach using 31 semi-structured interviews and 4 focus groups discussions, in total of 87 persons, this research studies barriers and resilience strategies by amplifying the voices of small-scale Black farmers across Mississippi. This work draws from previous scholarship in institutional racism, colorblind racism, Black agrarianism, community based organizations, food sovereignty, and Black geographies. Findings indicate that racism still undermines Black farmers in agriculture. Still, they resist and combat these barriers by becoming powerful agents that bring catalyst change in the form of community togetherness and self-sufficiency.

No description available.

No description available.