With The Divided Path, Allan Mitchell completes his superb trilogy on the German influence in France between the wars of 1870 and 1914. Mitchell's focus here is on the French response to the pathbreaking social legislation passed during the 1880s in imperial Germany under Otto von Bismarck. Operating under a liberal republican regime, France tended to reject the interventionist policies of its imposing neighbor and to seek a distinctly French solution to the many social problems that became more pressing as the nineteenth century reached its climax in the First World War. Mitchell's carefully researched study investigates a number of specific issues that remain of direct relevance today, such as gender relationships, health care (including the treatments and prevention of infectious disease), labor conflicts, taxation policy, social security measures, and international tensions on the eve of a major war. He shows that certain key problems of public health and welfare found different solutions in France and Germany, and he explains why the differences emerged and how they defined the two major competitors of continental Europe. The nineteenth-century epidemic of tuberculosis provides a case in point: the German state intervened to combat the dreaded disease with vigorous measures of public hygiene and popular sanatoria, but the French republic moved more cautiously to limit interference in the private sphere, even though laissez faire often meant laissez mourir. Mitchell's book is the first full-scale study of French social reform after 1870 that is based on documentation in both France and Germany. The first hesitant steps of the French welfare state are thrown into sharp relief by comparison with developments in Germany. No other work on modern France presents such a broad panorama of social reform, and none draws together such a rich tableau of telling detail about the development of the French health and welfare system after 1870. In a lucid conclusion, Mitchell places this story in the general context of his three volumes, thereby offering a summary of the Franco-German encounter that has come to dominate the history of Europe in the twentieth century. Originally published in 1991. A UNC Press Enduring Edition -- UNC Press Enduring Editions use the latest in digital technology to make available again books from our distinguished backlist that were previously out of print. These editions are published unaltered from the original, and are presented in affordable paperback formats, bringing readers both historical and cultural value.

The US trade union movement finds itself on a global battlefield filled with landmines and littered with the bodies of various social movements and struggles. Candid, incisive, and accessible, this text is a critical examination of labour's crisis and a plan for a bold way forward into the 21st century.

Publisher Description

In the early 1900s, Mary Matthews and Lella Gaddis forged trails for women at Purdue University and throughout Indiana. Mary was the first dean of the School of Home Economics. Lella was Indiana's first state leader of Home Demonstration. In 1914, Mary hired Lella to organize Purdue's new Home Economics Extension Service. According to those who knew them, Lella was a "sparkler" who traveled the state instructing rural women about nutrition, hygiene, safe water, childcare, and more. "Reserved" Mary established Purdue's School of Home Economics, created Indiana's first nursery school, and authored a popular textbook. Both women used their natural talents and connections to achieve their goals in spite of a male-dominated society. As a land grant institution, Purdue University has always been very connected to the American countryside. Based on extensive oral history and archival research, this book sheds new light on the important role female staff and faculty played in improving the quality of life for rural women during the first half of the twentieth century. It is also a fascinating story, engagingly told, of two very different personalities united in a common goal.

The larger our governments, the greater the competition for their spoils—therefore our divisions. “There simply is so much at stake today. As a result, our governments that benefit so many, employ so many, and tax so widely—in short our governments that pick so many winners and losers—are understandably subject to an intense competition for their control.” So writes author Thomas Del Beccaro in this fascinating study of the history of political unity and division in the US, from the Revolution to the adoption of the Constitution, the Civil War through Reconstruction, The Gilded Age to our present Divided Era. While we have had our conflicts over large issues and the role of government in the past, and still do today, an emerging cause of the partisanship and division we now know today did not exist at our nation’s founding. Our governments were smaller, levied minimal taxes, and thus held out fewer spoils for citizens to fight over. Can the US find its way back to being a less divided country? Yes, says Del Beccaro, but only if citizens understand the growing source of our divisions: ever larger governments. Americans must demand that government shrink back to a less divisive size and scope and support leaders capable of setting unifying goals—for which Del Beccaro offers five key strategies. In fact, the consequences of not slimming the behemoth governments—federal, state, and local—will only lead to an ever widening divide, and more acrimonious and harmful partisanship. The Divided Era lays out the case for smaller government, more responsive political leadership, and ultimately a more cohesive citizenry.