9780367311377 - the soviet agrarian deba: a controversy in social science 1923-1929 von gross solomon, susan (4 Ergebnisse)
- Softcover
Anbieter: Majestic Books, Hounslow, Vereinigtes KönigreichMajestic Books
Verkäufer/-in kontaktierenVerkäufer/-in mit 4 SternenZustand: Neu
EUR 54,14
EUR 7,61 VersandVersand von Vereinigtes Königreich nach USAAnzahl: 3 verfügbar
Zustand: New.
- Softcover
Anbieter: Revaluation Books, Exeter, Vereinigtes KönigreichRevaluation Books
Verkäufer/-in kontaktierenVerkäufer/-in mit 5 SternenZustand: Neu
EUR 79,51
EUR 14,63 VersandVersand von Vereinigtes Königreich nach USAAnzahl: 1 verfügbar
Paperback. Zustand: Brand New. 326 pages. 9.00x5.31x0.83 inches. In Stock.
- Softcover
Anbieter: moluna, Greven, Deutschlandmoluna
Verkäufer/-in kontaktierenVerkäufer/-in mit 5 SternenZustand: Neu
EUR 57,54
EUR 48,99 VersandVersand von Deutschland nach USAAnzahl: Mehr als 20 verfügbar
Zustand: New. Susan Gross Solomon received a doctorate in political science from Columbia University and is now associate professor in the Department of Political Economy at the University of Toronto. Dr. Solomon studied at Moscow University in 1968-1969.The first de.
- Softcover
Anbieter: AHA-BUCH GmbH, Einbeck, DeutschlandAHA-BUCH GmbH
Verkäufer/-in kontaktierenVerkäufer/-in mit 5 SternenZustand: Neu
EUR 69,67
EUR 62,10 VersandVersand von Deutschland nach USAAnzahl: 2 verfügbar
Taschenbuch. Zustand: Neu. Neuware - The first decade of Soviet cultural life was marked by a pluralism unmatched in the subsequent history of the USSR. In many fields of art and science, Party and non-Party 'proletarian' and 'bourgeois' intellectuals worked side by side, vigorously debating questions of substance and method. In… this first major study of a Soviet field of social science in the post-Revolution period, Dr. Solomon examines the controversy that divided social scientists studying the economy and society of the Soviet peasant during the 1920s. The intellectual disagreements in post-Revolution Soviet rural studies were exacerbated by social, political, and professional differences among the contending scholars. The infighting between the groups was bitter. Yet in contrast to recent studies of other Soviet professions in the 1920s, the author finds that in rural studies Marxists and non-Marxists had much in common. Her findings suggest that the coexistence of the 'old' and the 'new' in Soviet rural studies might have lasted for some time had not external political forces intervened in late 1928, acting as a pressure on the field and eventually causing its demise.
