<p>Abstract: The aim of this study is to investigate the attitudes towards the labour movement’s strategies, goals and organisational issues in Swedish Miners’ Union’s (Gruvindustriarbetareförbundet, hereafter Gruv) paper, Gruvarbetaren 1917-1925.</p><p>The theoretical starting point is Engels’ view on the class state. This perspective turns the question of socialism and the way to get there into an issue of working class power over the state. Another theoretical perspective is the partition of the labour movement into a trade-unionistic branch, seeing unions as financial organisations of interest, and a pro-state one, considering unions as political organisations.</p><p>During the period investigated Gruvarbetaren was quite radical and advocated a firm class struggle strategy towards employers. Since these were considered unreliable, class struggle was seen as the only way to better the conditions for the working class. The solution to the workers’ problems was by the paper considered to be socialism. In accordance with Engels’ view the working class would have to attain power over the state in order to reach that goal due to the class oppressive nature of the capitalist state. This power should preferably be conquered by way of revolution where the capitalist state was remodelled into a socialist one rather than through reforms. In this process the trade unions should take an active, political, part according to the paper and thus it can be placed in the pro-state branch of the labour movement. Especially during the years around 1920 it was clear that Gruvarbetaren wanted unions to develop into revolutionary organisations.</p>

Abstract: The aim of this study is to investigate the attitudes towards the labour movement’s strategies, goals and organisational issues in Swedish Miners’ Union’s (Gruvindustriarbetareförbundet, hereafter Gruv) paper, Gruvarbetaren 1917-1925. The theoretical starting point is Engels’ view on the class state. This perspective turns the question of socialism and the way to get there into an issue of working class power over the state. Another theoretical perspective is the partition of the labour movement into a trade-unionistic branch, seeing unions as financial organisations of interest, and a pro-state one, considering unions as political organisations. During the period investigated Gruvarbetaren was quite radical and advocated a firm class struggle strategy towards employers. Since these were considered unreliable, class struggle was seen as the only way to better the conditions for the working class. The solution to the workers’ problems was by the paper considered to be socialism. In accordance with Engels’ view the working class would have to attain power over the state in order to reach that goal due to the class oppressive nature of the capitalist state. This power should preferably be conquered by way of revolution where the capitalist state was remodelled into a socialist one rather than through reforms. In this process the trade unions should take an active, political, part according to the paper and thus it can be placed in the pro-state branch of the labour movement. Especially during the years around 1920 it was clear that Gruvarbetaren wanted unions to develop into revolutionary organisations.

This thesis aims an analysis of early Republican state factory settlements, in terms of their concern for workers&amp / #8217 / health and welfare, within Turkish modernization in the largest extent. State factory settlements are evaluated in terms of their architectural program(s), in terms of concern about the physical and mental health requirements of their future workers at the stage of their foundation. Different types of buildings, like workers&amp / #8217 / houses, cafeterias, health centers and clubs, with respect to their organization and architectural function and also areas spared for sports and recreation are examined in EskiSehir Sugar Factory, as an exemplary case of the state factories. The aim has been to reveal and evaluate the role of the social and architectural construction of state factories on workers&amp / #8217 / (and their families) health, as a part of the modernization project of Turkey.

A COMPARATIVE APPROACH TO NATIONAL PROTECTION LAW (1940-1956) Erdemir, &Ouml / mer M.A, Department of History Supervisor: Prof.Dr. Se&ccedil / il Karal Akg&uuml / n December 2004, 130 pages This thesis introduces a comparative history of National Protection Law of 1940 and 1956. It analyzes the two applications of the law, first, by the Republican People&rsquo / s Party governments during World War II, and second, by the Democratic Party Government during the years between 1956 and 1960 in view of the general economic policies followed during both periods. It argues, in reference to the ideological struggle over Turkish economic development during the twentieth century, that the enactments and applications of the first and second National Protection Law address the authoritarian characteristics of both the Republican People&rsquo / s Party and the Democratic Party. It further argues, the enactment and application of National Protection Law by the Democratic Party government contradicted with the party&rsquo / s economic principles whereas the Republican governments had already been on the interventionist path that they inherited from the previous decade of etatism. In addition, the thesis reveals that the first National Protection Law was more widely applied than the second. In both cases, the application of National Protection Law failed to solve economic problems and aroused a public discontent which brought about political losses for its executors.

In dieser Studie werden Einstellungen zu sozialer Ungleichheit bzw. Gerechtigkeitseinstellungen und die Wahrnehmung von Einkommensungerechtigkeit durch die Bevölkerung in postkommunistischen und westlich-kapitalistischen Ländern zu verschiedenen Zeitpunkten untersucht. Im Zentrum stehen vor allem die Determinanten dieser subjektiven Bewertungen und Wahrnehmungen auf der Makro-Ebene. Wie lassen sich Unterschiede in den Einstellungen und Wahrnehmungen zwischen Ländern erklären? Für westliche Länder wird davon ausgegangen, dass im Wesentlichen der Wohlfahrtsstaat als zentrales Verteilungsarrangement jeweils prägend wirkt. Um den Einfluss des Wohlfahrtsstaates zu überprüfen, wird einerseits eine Typologie wohlfahrtsstaatlicher Regime herangezogen. Andererseits wird auch der Einfluss wohlfahrtsstaatsbezogener Makroindikatoren als nähere Charakterisierung der ausgewählten Länder getestet, was in der international vergleichenden Einstellungsforschung bislang vernachlässigt wurde. In postkommunistischen Ländern, die seit dem Systemwechsel im Vergleich zu westlichen Ländern nicht durch lange wohlfahrtsstaatliche Traditionen geprägt wurden, stehen eher die unterschiedlichen Transformationsverläufe als Erklärungshintergrund von Einstellungs- und Wahrnehmungsunterschieden auf Makro-Ebene zur Verfügung. Da die objektiven Strukturen, Institutionen und individuellen Lagen in postkommunistischen Ländern einem stärkeren sozialen Wandel unterlagen, ist hier im Gegensatz zu westlichen Ländern auch mit einem entsprechend stärkeren Wandel der Gerechtigkeitseinstellungen und Bewertungen zu rechnen. Die Daten für diese Studie stammen aus zwei internationalen Umfrageprojekten, dem ''International Social Justice Project'' (ISJP) von 1991, 1996 und 2000 sowie dem ''International Social Survey Programme'' (ISSP) von 1987, 1992 und 1999. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass sich Gerechtigkeitseinstellungen, die als normative Grundhaltungen von Menschen eher prinzipieller Art sind, besser durch wohlfahrtsstaatliche Regimes erklären lassen, die diese Grundhaltungen institutionell inkorporieren und strukturell transportieren, während subjektive Wahrnehmungen von Einkommensungerechtigkeit besser durch konkretere wohlfahrtsstaatliche Makroindikatoren beeinflusst werden. / This study analyzes attitudes towards social inequality, justice ideologies and the perceived amount of injustice with respect to the distribution of income in post-communist and western-capitalist countries at different times, with a specific focus on the macro level determinants of subjective judgements and perceptions. How can country differences with respect to subjective judgements and perceptions be explained? One can assume that, for western countries, the welfare state is the main distribution arrangement shaping these subjective aspects. In order to analyze the influence of the welfare state, a typology of welfare state regimes is developed. In addition, the effects of macro indicators of the welfare state, conceptualized as more specific characteristics of the selected countries, are tested, which has been previously neglected in cross-national attitude research. In post-communist countries, which were not shaped by long national welfare state traditions as much as in western countries, the different transformation processes and their success are more suitable for explaining divergent macro-level attitudes and perceptions. As objective structures, institutions and the individual situations in post-communist countries have gone through a stronger process of social change than in western countries, a stronger change in justice attitudes, evaluations and perceptions can be accounted here accordingly. Data for this study come from two international survey projects, the ''International Social Justice Project'' (ISJP) 1991, 1996 and 2000 and the ''International Social Survey Programme'' (ISSP) 1987, 1992 and 1999. The results demonstrate that justice attitudes, which are rather basic normative attitudes, can be better explained by welfare state regimes which incorporate these basic attitudes institutionally and transport them structurally, whereas subjective perceptions, such as the perception of social injustice with respect to the income distribution, are affected by more concrete welfare related macro indicators.