This thesis examines how air power has affected navies using the case of the United Kingdom between 1945 and 1957. Air power has given rise to numerous theories about its effect on the use of force, in which its impact on navies has been a particular theme. Many thinkers have interpreted air power as a strategic, operational and tactical challenge to navies, which would render them redundant and obsolete. Such ideas originated between the two World Wars but have continually reappeared since 1945 and were often influential in the British debate. During the period under consideration, the Royal Navy was challenged in a series of defence reviews. Although these serious and repeated attacks were generally motivated by financial considerations, they were justified primarily by claims relating to air power. It was argued that nuclear-armed air power would be sufficient to win wars, while any nuclear war would leave little role for navies. Later, this argument shifted to an emphasis on deterrence of war and it was suggested that naval forces were not vital to this deterrent. Although the Admiralty continued to justify a capability to defend sea communications as both a deterrent to war and vital in it, this case did not find favour with the government. During the mid-1950s, however, an alternative focus for the Navy emerged in the form of policing and limited wars, east of Suez. Conflicts in Korea and the Suez demonstrated that such conflicts could occur and that mobile naval forces, particularly carrier aviation, were well suited to intervention in them. It was also argued that land-based aircraft could take over some of the roles traditionally performed by naval forces, notably that of strike (against warships and shore targets) but also that of protecting shipping. These arguments were successfully defeated by the Admiralty. Land-based aircraft proved a useful complement to warships and naval aviation in protecting shipping but could only replace them in very limited areas. The Royal Navy differed from the US Navy in its conception of power projection against the land. Its capability for this task was thrown increasingly into doubt by growing Soviet submarine and air power and came to be justified by east of Suez commitments.

Submitted by admin tede (tede@pucgoias.edu.br) on 2017-06-13T13:27:29Z No. of bitstreams: 1 PAULO SÉRGIO GOMES FERREIRA.pdf: 5609399 bytes, checksum: ec0da651361bd1515d26f1fe5d72b7b4 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-13T13:27:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 PAULO SÉRGIO GOMES FERREIRA.pdf: 5609399 bytes, checksum: ec0da651361bd1515d26f1fe5d72b7b4 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-03-08 / This study deals with a historiographical investigation on the History of Capoeira in the city of Goiás, between the decades of 1945-2010. For a long time, the history of capoeira in Goiás was thought only from the idea of a continuous ancestry of capoeira as experiences lived by the capoeiristas, masters and groups located in the great hegemonic centers of this manifestation, represented by the masters and capoeiras of the cities of Salvador and Rio de Janeiro. Historians, drawing the history of capoeira in Brazil, are based on a historiography of long duration that did not elaborate on the particularities of capoeira experienced in the peripheries, not dealing with significant themes, such as the relations of power that Permeate the history of capoeira in Brazil, questions that go back to a symbolic field of power relations in a context that shapes the tradition of capoeira in Brazilian territory. Thus, with the purpose of describing the history of this practice and its representatives in the city of Goiás (periphery), this study justifies focusing on capoeira in this territory as part of a broader process, realizing the particularities, adaptations and transformations That have occurred over time and space. Thus, we sought to reflect on those moments of collaboration, contestation, articulation and social positioning of the characters who, through their actions, defined their ideas about the society to which they belonged during the proposed period. / Este estudo trata de uma investigação historiográfica sobre a História da Capoeira na cidade de Goiás, entre as décadas de 1945-2010. Durante muito tempo, a história da capoeira em Goiás foi pensada somente a partir da ideia de uma ancestralidade contínua da capoeira como experiências vividas pelos capoeiristas, mestres e grupos localizados nos grandes centros hegemônicos desta manifestação, representados pelos mestres e capoeiras das cidades de Salvador e Rio de Janeiro. Os historiadores, ao desenharem a história da capoeira no Brasil, alinham-se a partir de uma historiografia de longa duração que pouco aprofundou sobre as particularidades da capoeira experimentadas nas periferias, não tratando de temas significativos, como por exemplo, as relações de poder que permeiam a história da capoeira no Brasil, questões estas que remontam um campo simbólico de relações de poder num contexto que configura a tradição da capoeira no território brasileiro. Assim, objetivando descrever a história desta prática e de seus representantes na Cidade de Goiás (periferia), este estudo, justifica-se ao focalizar e aprofundar sobre a capoeira neste território como parte de um processo mais amplo, percebendo as particularidades, adaptações e transformações performáticas que foram ocorrendo ao longo do tempo e espaço. Sendo assim, buscou-se refletir sobre aqueles momentos de colaboração, contestação, articulação e posicionamento social dos personagens que, através dos seus atos, definiram as suas ideias sobre a sociedade à qual pertenciam, durante o período proposto.

In 1990, the Institute for Historical and Socio-Political Studies of the Central Committee of the Romanian Communist Party was closed, since the Party was dissolved by the Romanian Revolution. Similar institutions had existed in all countries belonging to the Soviet bloc. This Institute was founded in 1951 under the name of the Party History Institute, and modelled on the Marx-Lenin-Engels Institute in Moscow. Since then, it served the Communist Party in producing thousands of books and journals on the history of the Party and of Romania, following Party orders. Previous research has portrayed the Institute as a loyal executioner of the Party’s will, negating the agency of its history-writers in influencing the duties of the Institute. However, the recent opening of the Institute’s archive has shown that a number of internal and previously obscured dynamics impacted on its activities. This book is dedicated to the study of the Party History Institute, of the history-writers employed there, and of the narratives they produced. By studying the history-writers and their host institution, this study re-contextualizes the historiography produced under Communist rule by analysing the actual conditions under which it was written: the interrelation between dynamics of control and the struggle for resources, power and positions play a fundamental role in this history. This is the first scholarly inquiry about a highly controversial institute that struggled in order to follow the constantly shifting Party narrative canon, while competing formaterial resources with rival Party and academic institutions. The main actors in this study are the history-writers: Party veterans, young propagandists and educated historians, in conflicting networks and groups, struggled in order to gain access to the limited resources and positions provided by the Party, and in order to survive the political changes imposed by the leadership. By doing so they succeed, on many occasions, to influence the activities of the Institute.

No description available.