In 1959, the Swedish Social Democratic Party prevailed over the bourgeois parties in the great battle for supplementary pensions (ATP). In the 1990’s, however, the party leadership decided to abolish the ATP in close cooperation with the bourgeois parties. The thesis poses the following question: “What prospects did the Social Democratic leadership have to gain support for the ATP-reform in the 1950’s, and then for the quite dissimilar pension reform in the 1990’s, and how can differences between these prospects be explained?” In order to explain the kind of party change pointed out in the problem statement, this thesis proposes a theoretical perspective that focuses on the tension between different roles played by the party leadership on different arenas. The hypothesis, that is tested in the thesis, is that early decisions create different constrains for future decisions on different arenas. The thesis has two main conclusions. The first conclusion is that the decision to implement the generous ATP-system in the 1950’s in practice laid the ground for the subsequent abolishment of that same system in the 1990’s. The second conclusion is that the pragmatism, always displayed on the parliamentary arena, has not been visible on the electoral arena or on the party arena. The party leadership plays different roles on different arenas, and over time these different roles have become hard, if not impossible, to combine. The result of this was that decisions on the parliamentary arena were decoupled from messages and rhetoric about these decisions on the party arena, and on the electoral arena. The pension reform in the 1990’s was quite a different decision compared to the popular introduction of the ATP-system. Both of these decisions, however, were attempts by the party leadership to maximize support on each arena. The possibilities for succeeding in this venture were greatly reduced in the 1990’s. Instead of one party striving for one goal, Swedish Social Democracy in the 1990’s appeared as two or three parties, with different objectives and goals.

A memoir that focuses on the complications of growing as the only daughter of a mother from Okinawa and a father from the United States. They met at a nightclub, where her mother worked as a waitress, outside an Army base, where her father was stationed during U.S. Military occupation of the island. These marriages between Okinawan women and U.S. Servicemen have been quite common since 1945, after the Battle of Okinawa, when a massive complex of bases was first established. Okinawan women must leave their homes and their families to follow their husbands to the United States, where they are faced with challenges of racism, language barriers and isolation. Their children often grow up rejecting and resenting their Okinawan identities, causing further alienation.

In a multi-stage contest known as a two-player race, players display two fundamental behaviors: (1) The laggard will make a last stand in order to avoid the cost of losing; and (2) the player who is ahead will defend his lead if it is threatened. Last stand behavior, in particular, contrasts with previous research where the underdog simply gives up. The distinctive results are achieved by introducing losing penalties and discounting into the racing environment. This framework permits the momentum effect, typically ascribed to the winner of early stages, to be more thoroughly examined. I study the likelihood that the underdog will catch up. I find that neck-and-neck races are common when the losing penalty is large relative to the winning prize, while landslide victories occur when the prize is relatively large. Closed-form solutions are given for the case where players have a common winning prize and losing penalty. Chapter 2 then experimentally examines the prediction of last stand behavior in a multi-battle contest with a winning prize and losing penalty, as well as the contrasting prediction of surrendering in the corresponding contest with no penalty. We find varied evidence in support of these hypotheses in the aggregated data, but more conclusive evidence when scrutinizing individual player behavior. Players tend to adopt one of several strategies. We develop a taxonomy to classify player types and study how the different strategies interact. The last stand and surrendering behaviors have implications for winning margins and the likelihood of an upset, which we investigate. Behaviorally, players are typically more aggressive when they reach a state in the contest by winning rather than by losing. The third and final chapter is a distinct departure from the study of multi-battle contests. Using comprehensive census data for Cornwall County, England, I create a panel dataset that spans six censuses (1841--1891)—possibly the largest panel dataset for Victorian England at present. I present the methodology for linking individuals and families across these censuses. This methodology incorporates recent advances in census linking (including the use of machine learning) and introduces new methods for tracking migration and changes in household composition. I achieve a forward matching rate of 43%. The additional inclusion of marriage and death records could allow for well over 60% of the population to be accounted for from one census to the next. Using this new panel, I investigate the frequency with which sons pursue the same occupations that they observed their fathers doing while growing up. For sons that did not follow in their father's footsteps, I identify some correlates that may have contributed to the change.

For two hundred years the history of the Battle of New Orleans has suffered from the neglected state of the historiography on the War of 1812 and the static state of the Battle's orthodox narrative. This dissertation identifies and deconstructs the central themes of the Battle's orthodox narrative. It reveals how these long standing presumptions surfaced through the Battle's public commemoration in the nineteenth century and have fostered misleading perceptions about Louisiana’s involvement in the war, the defense preparations undertaken in New Orleans prior to Andrew Jackson's arrival, and the so-called unity that was achieved through the victory. By incorporating the actions and experiences of women and the enslaved into the Battle's history, this dissertation exposes the traditional marginalization of these groups in accounts of the Battle and its subsequent memorialization. It shows that the absence of women and the enslaved in the cultivation of the Battle's public memory was a deliberate measure taken by white slaveholding elites to preserve racial and social divisions that were blurred by the Battle's symbolic message of the power of unity. The actions of a third group, free men of color, are examined to illustrate how critical they were to the victory and how dangerous the memory of their service was to white slaveholding elites, especially in the 1850s. These new perspectives on the Battle and its public commemoration challenge the unchanging nature of the Battle's history and indicate that there is far more to the Battle's story than has ever been told. / acase@tulane.edu

The field study examines the effect of the simulation game Battle Squares on the learning of the map reading skill of grid-reference determination by year 7 students. The effect of ability level and sex differences on the acquisition of gridreferencing skills were also examined. The simulation game developed is a modification of the traditional children's game Battleships. The modifications produced the major features of the grid system used on Australian Survey Map sheets without substantially altering the characteristics of the game Battleships. Two treatment groups played the simulation game, one group having experienced both a pre test and a post test and the other group only the post test. A third treatment did the pre test and post test without experiencing the simulation game. Students in both treatment groups which experienced the simulation game showed significant gains in the learning of grid-referencing skills. Students in upper ability level groups gained significantly better scores on the post test than students in lower ability level groups. Both upper and lower ability level groups showed significant gains. Girls performed significantly better than boys on the post test. Both boys and girls showed significant gains as a result of the simulation game experience. Ability level was a more important moderating variable than sex difference in producing variations in performance on the post test of grid-referencing skills. The explicit educational aims of the simulation game were effectively achieved in a short period of time, while maintaining student motivation and interest. The success of the simulation game in producing significant changes in grid referencing skills would appear to have resulted from the frequent practise of these skills the simulation game playing experience offers.

<p>Syftet med denna uppsats är att ge läsaren en förklaring till varför två stridande förband inom Försvarsmakten (FM) nyttjar olika indelning på gruppnivå. Uppsatsen skall dessutom redovisa fördelar och nackdelar som förekommer med respektive indelning. Ämnet till uppsatsen uppstod på grund av en strävan från Försvarsmakten att kunna nyttja behovssammansatta stridsgrupper. FM fastställer order och kommandon, försöker likställa vapensystem och utbud av ammunition och i övrigt använda samma materiel i syfte att förenkla fördelning och logistik av all materiel. Trots denna strävan förekommer det olika indelning på gruppnivå. En likställd utbildningsplan skulle kunna underlätta vid övning av soldater och chefer samt ge FM bättre uthållighet eftersom personalen inte behöver lika mycket utbildningstid för att ingå i ett annat förband. Metoden som har nyttjats för denna uppsats är kvalitativ. Den kvalitativa består av textanalyser och intervjuer. Den omfattar även enkätundersökning med personal som jobbar med strid på daglig basis. Genom definition av de två förbanden på K3 respektive Amf1 och med teori samt de grundläggande förmågorna har en analys skett. Analysen visar att skillnaden ligger i en kombination av arv, ledning och enkelhet.</p> / <p>The purpose of this paper is to give the reader an explanation of why two fighting units within the Armed Forces use different structures at group level. The essay shall further more present advantages and disadvantages that exist with each formation. The subject of the essay occurred because of the quest for the Armed Forces (AF) to be able to use temporary battle units. AF sets orders and commands, trying to equate the supply of weapons and ammunition and otherwise use the same stock in order to simplify the distribution and logistics of all the stock. Despite these efforts, there are different structures at group level. An equivalent education could facilitate the training of soldiers and officers, and provide AF better endurance because staff do not need as much training to be part of another unit. The method that has been used for this study is qualitative. It consists of qualitative textual analysis and interviews. It also includes a survey with staff who works with battle on a daily basis. By definition of the two units at K3 and Amf1 the theory and the basic capabilities have been analyzed. This analysis shows that the difference is in the combination of heritage, management and simplicity.</p>

Syftet med denna uppsats är att ge läsaren en förklaring till varför två stridande förband inom Försvarsmakten (FM) nyttjar olika indelning på gruppnivå. Uppsatsen skall dessutom redovisa fördelar och nackdelar som förekommer med respektive indelning. Ämnet till uppsatsen uppstod på grund av en strävan från Försvarsmakten att kunna nyttja behovssammansatta stridsgrupper. FM fastställer order och kommandon, försöker likställa vapensystem och utbud av ammunition och i övrigt använda samma materiel i syfte att förenkla fördelning och logistik av all materiel. Trots denna strävan förekommer det olika indelning på gruppnivå. En likställd utbildningsplan skulle kunna underlätta vid övning av soldater och chefer samt ge FM bättre uthållighet eftersom personalen inte behöver lika mycket utbildningstid för att ingå i ett annat förband. Metoden som har nyttjats för denna uppsats är kvalitativ. Den kvalitativa består av textanalyser och intervjuer. Den omfattar även enkätundersökning med personal som jobbar med strid på daglig basis. Genom definition av de två förbanden på K3 respektive Amf1 och med teori samt de grundläggande förmågorna har en analys skett. Analysen visar att skillnaden ligger i en kombination av arv, ledning och enkelhet. / The purpose of this paper is to give the reader an explanation of why two fighting units within the Armed Forces use different structures at group level. The essay shall further more present advantages and disadvantages that exist with each formation. The subject of the essay occurred because of the quest for the Armed Forces (AF) to be able to use temporary battle units. AF sets orders and commands, trying to equate the supply of weapons and ammunition and otherwise use the same stock in order to simplify the distribution and logistics of all the stock. Despite these efforts, there are different structures at group level. An equivalent education could facilitate the training of soldiers and officers, and provide AF better endurance because staff do not need as much training to be part of another unit. The method that has been used for this study is qualitative. It consists of qualitative textual analysis and interviews. It also includes a survey with staff who works with battle on a daily basis. By definition of the two units at K3 and Amf1 the theory and the basic capabilities have been analyzed. This analysis shows that the difference is in the combination of heritage, management and simplicity.

Abstract The use of standard agreements can hardly be overestimated in the society of today. The amount of standard agreements should barely decrease. One of the standard agreement’s main purposes, to make the concluding of the contract more effective, strongly agrees with the companies will to accomplish fast concluding of agreements using as small resources as possible A dispute that can arise in these contexts is that dissimilar standard agreements collide. Between nations this is called Battle of Forms. It is a situation of practice which is difficult to solve through the basic rules of contract law. The aim of the essay is to bring clarity into how the legal problems concerning Battle of Forms is solved in Sweden respectively Germany. Also CISG, Unidroit and PECL’s solutions of the same problem is going to be mentioned. A critical examining of the different solutions that the system of rules has in disposal will also be done. In the context of the situation an examination will show if there is any resistance towards these. If that is the case some parts of the critic will be presented. To be able to answer my questions at issue a traditional method of legal-dogmatism has been used together with comparative strains. Sweden lacks a direct law-prescribed solution of Battle of Forms, nor is there a direct legal usage. Sweden has tried to apply the directions of 6 § AvtL on the problem, but this one suits the context badly. Besides the directions in AvtL some solution models are found which can build the foundation for a settlement. Consequently the problem remains unsolved in the Swedish legal system. Neither does Germany have a legal rule which is directly applicable. Some guidance is however given from the German law. According to the German law the settlement should be settled with The knock-out doctrine as its foundation. When harmonising is not possible one should fall back on The Last shot or optional law, it depends on the occurrence of abwehrklauseln (protection clauses). Neither has CISG directly pointed on how to solve the problem. CISG’s legal usage also advocates that The knock-out doctrine should build the foundation. What tool that should be used to fill the holes that the harmonising leaves behind is somewhat indistinct. It should be The last shot, optional law or an interpretation of article 7 about “good faith”. Unidroit and PECL state that agreed terms shall be applied. Consequently the person applying the law should practise the Knock-out doctrine. However the rules give no guidance about how the arising holes should be filled after the harmonising. Above all Swedish literature directs strong criticism towards the different solutions. The criticism is especially pointed at the lack of predictability and also at the risk of making arbitrary settlements. This of course depends on what kind of solution model that is discussed. In Germany there has been, and still is, a solution which the person applying the law can use. In Germany protection clauses has an important role of the settlement. Even in these cases criticism is directed towards the solution. However the criticism is not as hardly directed towards the lack of predictability. Instead the criticism is pointed at the unsuitability of applying the optional law in some commercial relationships. And also that the applicability of the last shot results in a “ping pong” similar situation of passing terms back and force. Also in the international world of law some criticism has been delivered that agrees with both the Swedish and the German criticism. / Sammanfattning Användningen av standardavtal kan knappast överskattas i dagens samhälle. Mängden standardavtal torde knappast avta. Ett av standardavtalets huvudsyftesyften, att effektivisera avtalsslutet, stämmer väl överens med företagens vilja att genomföra snabba avtalsslut med så liten resursåtgång som möjligt. En tvist som kan uppkomma i detta sammanhang är att olikartade standardavtal kolliderar. Detta kallas, internationellt sett, Battle of Forms. Det är en praktisk situation som med de grundläggande avtalsrättsliga reglerna är svårlöst. Syftet med uppsatsen är att bringa klarhet i hur den rättsliga problematiken kring Battle of Forms löses i Sverige respektive Tyskland. Även CISG, Unidroit och PECL’s lösningar på samma problem kommer att beröras. Det ska även göras en kritisk granskning av de olika lösningar som regelsystemen tillhandahåller. I sammanhanget ska det undersökas om det finns motstånd till dessa och om så är fallet ska delar av kritiken presenteras. För att kunna besvara mina frågeställningar, har det huvudsakligen, använts en traditionell rättsdogmatisk metod med komparativa inslag. Sverige saknar en direkt lagstadgad lösning på Battle of Forms, inte heller finns någon direkt rättpraxis. Sverige har försökt applicera bestämmelserna i 6 § AvtL på problemet, men denna passar illa i sammanhanget. Utöver bestämmelsen i AvtL återfinns det ett antal lösningsmodeller som kan läggas till grund för ett avgörande. Problemet är således fortfarande olöst i svensk rätt. Inte heller Tyskland har en rättsregel som är direkt tillämplig. Den tyska lagen ger dock viss vägledning. Avgörandet enligt tysk rätt ska ske med The knock-out doctrine som grund. När harmonisering inte är möjlig ska rättstillämparen falla tillbaka på The Last shot eller dispositiv rätt, det beror på förekomsten av abwehrklauseln (skyddsklausuler). Inte heller CISG har direkt reglerat hur problemet ska lösas. Även rättspraxis i CISG förespråkar att The knock-out doctrine ska ligga till grund. Vilket redskap som ska hjälpa till att fylla de luckor som harmoniseringen efterlämnar är något oklart. Det torde vara The last shot, dipositiv rätt eller en tolkning av artikel 7 om ”good faith”. Unidroit och PECL anger att överrensstämmande villkor ska tillämpas. Således ska rättstillämparen praktisera The knock-out doctrine. Reglerna ger dock ingen vägledning om hur luckorna som uppstår efter harmoniseringen ska fyllas. Det finns speciellt i den svenska litteraturen en stark kritik mot de olika lösningarna. Framförallt riktas kritiken mot bristande förutsebarhet och även mot risken för godtyckliga avgöranden. Det beror givetvis på vilken lösningsmodell som diskuteras. I Tyskland har det funnits och finns en lösning som rättstillämparen har att tillämpa. Skyddsklausuler har i Tyskland stor betydelse för avgörandet. Det finns även i dessa fall en kritik mot lösningen. Den riktar dock inte lika hård kritik mot bristande förutsebarhet. Kritiken riktas istället mot att tillämpningen av dispositiv rätt i vissa kommersiella förhållanden kan passa väldigt illa, samt att tillämpningen av The last shot leder till ett ”ping-pong” liknande översändande av villkor. Även i den internationella rättsvetenskapliga världen har viss kritik framkommit som stämmer överens med den svenska och tyska kritiken

Syftet med uppsatsen är att pröva om Jominis principer om militärteori har någon inverkan på dagens slagfält, genom att de påverkar amerikanska doktriner, och därmed strategiskt och operativt tänkande. Dagens högteknologiska stridsfält är betydligt mer komplext och består av fler dimensioner, än det fanns när Jomini verkade. Det blir då viktigt att förstå de klassiska strategiska tankegångarna som ligger till grund för de operativa men även taktiska besluten. Det blir intressant att forska om och hur Jominis teorier verkligen har haft påverkan på de amerikanska doktriner som utvecklats efter 1976, speciellt då väst europeiska, även svenska, doktriner främst anses vara påverkade utav Clausewitz och dennes syn på krig. Inte minst då svensk militär personal interagerar med amerikansk militär personal på den internationella arenan, vilket sker i stort sett dagligen under internationell tjänstgöring. Uppsatsen kommer fram till slutsatsen att Jominis principer fortfarande påverkar amerikanska doktriner. Detta i sig ger en förståelse för hur amerikanskt strategiskt och operativt tänkande, och hur Jomini har påverkat utformningen av dem. Det ger även en insyn i hur samtidens högteknologiska stridsfält som består av flera dimensioner påverkas av klassiska militärteoretiska och strategiska tankegångar som i slutänden även påverkar de taktiska beslut som tas på slagfältet. Det ger även en förståelse för vilken militärteoretisk och strategisk bakgrund amerikansk militär personal har, vilket blir viktigt att ha förståelse för när svensk militär personal ska agera med dem på den internationella arenan, särskilt på de högre ledningsplanen. / The purpose of the essay is to examine whether Jominis principles of military theory has bearing on today's battlefields, by affecting American doctrine, and thus strategic and operational thinking. For even if today's high tech battlefield is far more complex and consists of more dimensions, than there were when Jomini composed his theories. It is important to understand the classical strategic thinking that makes up the basis for the operational as well as tactical decisions made.It is interesting to investigate whether and how Jominis theories really have an impact on the American doctrine developed since 1976. Especially so as in Western Europe, includingSweden, doctrine is primarily considered to be borne out of Clausewitz theoretical vision of war.It becomes important to have an understanding of this as Swedish military personnel interact with American military personnel in the international arena, which occurs nearly on a daily basis. The essay concludes that Jominis principles continue to hold sway of U.S.doctrine. This in itself provides a new understanding of howU.S.strategic and operational thinking works. And how Jomini has influenced the design of them, it also gives an insight into how contemporary high-tech battlefields, which consists of several dimensions is influenced by classic military theory and strategic thinking. This in turn also affects the tactical decisions taken on the battlefield.This also provides an understanding of the military theory and strategic view that affects American military personnel, which is important to understand when Swedish military personnel interact with them in the international arena, particularly at the higher levels of the command structure.

För att mycket snabbt kunna komma på plats vid en kris, har Europa inom ramen för EU börjat upprättasnabbinsatsstyrkor, såkallade EU Battle Groups. En EU Battle Group kommer att ha en mycket kort tid på sig frånbeslut till insats. I samband med att Sverige engagerat sig i EU militära samarbete tog Sverige huvudansvaret för enav de Battle Groups som skall upprättas, den såkallade Nordic Battle Group. Sverige har vid tidigare insatser visatatt det är mycket svårt att snabbt få förband på plats i ett insatsområde. Materielen är ofta det som varitgränssättande för när förbandet skall bli operativt vid en insats.Uppsatsens syfte är att ge ett svar på hur stridsfordon till svenska snabbinsatsförband som står i beredskap börförvaras för att skapa de bästa förutsättningarna vid en insats.Metoden för uppsatsen är ett antal frågeställningar, där svar söks genom en fallstudie med två olikaförvaringsprinciper. Kvalitativa intervjuer, studiebesök, litteratur- och dokumentstudier samt entillförlitlighetsförstärkande enkät har använts. Teoriansatsen som ligger till grund är, Förvarsmaktens riktlinjer förförvaring av förnödenheter och den israeliske militärlogistikern Moshe Kress, hur status på förnödenheterupprätthålls.Resultatet visar att svenska snabbinsatsförband bör ha stridsfordon förrådställda under beredskap. Men att hastridsfordonen ute vid förbandet är också en fullt möjlig förvaringsprincip.Det vetenskapliga bidraget i uppsatsen är att modellen kan ligga till grund för att jämföra förvaringsprinciper förannan typ av materiel till snabbinsatsförband. / In order to be rapidly in place in crises, Europe has within the framework of EU, started toestablish rapid reaction units, so-called EU Battle Groups. An EU Battle Group will have avery short time from decision to mission. As Sweden has become more involved in EUmilitary cooperation, it has assumed main responsibility for one of the Battle Groups to beestablished, the so-called Nordic Battle Group. Sweden has in earlier missions, shown that itis very hard to get units quickly in place in an area of responsibility. Equipment is often thecrucial factor in getting the unit operational in a mission.The purpose of this essay is to find an answer to how the combat vehicles for Swedish unitsshould be stored to get the best conditions for a mission when in the state of alert.The method for the essay is a number of questions, where the answers will be found thru acase study of two different principles of storage. Also, qualitative interviews, educationalvisits, literature and document studies have been used including a reliability reinforcementquestionnaire. The basis for the theoretical approach is the Swedish Armed Forces’ guidingprinciples for storage of supplies, and the Israeli military logistician Moshe Kress’s theory onhow to maintain the status of supplies.The result shows that Swedish units should have their combat vehicles kept in storage duringa state of alert. However, having combat vehicles within the units is also a possible principleof storage.The scientific contribution in the essay is that the model described can be used to compareprinciples of storage for other types of equipment for rapid reaction units. / Avdelning: ALB - Slutet Mag 3 C-upps.Hylla: Upps. ChP 04-06