Benjamin Page – författare

It is widely believed that most Americans not only distrust but also despise China. Considering the country's violent political history, unprecedented economic rise, and growing military capabilities, China has become America's strongest market competitor and arguably the most challenging global threat to the United States. Nevertheless, a full consideration of American opinion proves the opposite to be true. Carefully analyzing all available polls and surveys, Benjamin I. Page and Tao Xie find most Americans favor peaceful engagement with China. The public view has been surprisingly coherent and consistent, changing only in response to major events and new information. While a majority of Americans are not happy that China's economy is projected to become as large as that of the United States, they are prepared to live with it. "Unfair" Chinese trade practices and their impact on American jobs and wages are a concern, along with the quality and safety of Chinese-made goods. However, Americans favor free trade with China, provided it is tempered with environmental and workplace protections.They also believe that the United States should "balance" Chinese power through alliances with neighboring countries, such as Japan. Yet they oppose military action to defend Taiwan. Page and Xie examine these opinions in relation to facts about China and in light of current U.S. debates on diplomacy and policy.

This work resulted from a conference held in 2003 that was jointly sponsored by the Rockefeller Archive Center and Quinnipiac University. Drawing upon perspectives from history, philosophy, and the social sciences, as well as public health and medicine, the authors in this volume examine and critique the role of Foundations, most prominently the Rockefeller Foundation, in promoting and expanding the development of Western medicine around the world during the 20th century. The first half of the book examines the historical involvement of philanthropic foundations in public heath, basic medical research, and related social and political issues. These studies range from an examination of the Rockefeller's Foundation's anti-malaria campaigns to the involvement of Foundations in promoting eugenic ideology and population control. The second half of the book considers current situations in which philanthropic foundations are active in promoting public health and westernized medicine, including consideration of the fight against AIDS in Africa, the resurgence of tuberculosis as a major public health threat, and the ongoing war against malaria. Finally, the book concludes with thoughts on the future of health, disease, and public health by Peter C. Goldmark, Jr., a former president of the Rockefeller Foundation. By considering issues of public health and health policy from a wide range of perspectives, this book seeks to contribute both to our understanding of the past successes and failures of growing dominance of Westernized medicine over global health, and to consider present and future possibilities for improving the delivery of health services to the population of the world.

This much needed perspective represents a first step in the exploration of a long-ignored dimension of Marxist thought. Contributors, both Marxist and non-Marxist, from various countries reflect on such concerns as: the spiritual implications of Marxism and its critiques of economic determinism, alienation, and religion; what Marxism has to say to the more urgent spiritual issues of our time; and legacy of Marxism in a post-Soviet world.Spirituality here refers less to religion than to questions of moral and esthetic value; issues of freedom, creativity, transcendence, and community; the meaning of life and of the struggle to create a better world. This book begins with a brief section from Trotsky and Che Guevara, and Vivian Gornick's work on American Communism, and with overviews of questions of spirituality in pre- and early Soviet Russian thought and in Western Marxism. It then presents the views of several contemporary Marxists, and concludes with contributions on spiritual issues in Marxism's dialogues with Christianity in both East Europe and Latin America, and with Buddhism.

Benjamin Page untersucht anhand der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik jene Faktoren, die für den Erhalt bzw. den Niedergang von Autokratien in Krisenzeiten ursächlich sind. Dies geschieht aus der Perspektive der zentralen Akteure aufseiten des Staates – den Regimeeliten. Dabei beschränkt er sich nicht auf die „heiße Phase“ des Umbruchs, sondern blickt auf Zerfallserscheinungen, die sich im Laufe der Zeit entwickeln. Im ersten Fall (Volksaufstand 1953) standen die Regimeeliten vor den Herausforderungen einer gerade von außen implementierten Autokratie, während sie sich im zweiten Fall (Friedliche Revolution 1989) mit den Ermüdungs- und Abnutzungserscheinungen einer vier Jahrzehnte bestehenden Diktatur auseinandersetzen mussten. In beiden Fällen weist die finale Krisenphase, trotz aller Divergenzen, Berührungspunkte auf. Der „Neue Kurs“ 1953 und die „Wendepolitik“ im Herbst 1989 sollten das autokratische System stabilisieren, erfüllten diesen Zweck jedoch nicht.

Benjamin Page untersucht anhand der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik jene Faktoren, die für den Erhalt bzw. den Niedergang von Autokratien in Krisenzeiten ursächlich sind. Dies geschieht aus der Perspektive der zentralen Akteure aufseiten des Staates – den Regimeeliten. Dabei beschränkt er sich nicht auf die „heiße Phase“ des Umbruchs, sondern blickt auf Zerfallserscheinungen, die sich im Laufe der Zeit entwickeln. Im ersten Fall (Volksaufstand 1953) standen die Regimeeliten vor den Herausforderungen einer gerade von außen implementierten Autokratie, während sie sich im zweiten Fall (Friedliche Revolution 1989) mit den Ermüdungs- und Abnutzungserscheinungen einer vier Jahrzehnte bestehenden Diktatur auseinandersetzen mussten. In beiden Fällen weist die finale Krisenphase, trotz aller Divergenzen, Berührungspunkte auf. Der „Neue Kurs“ 1953 und die „Wendepolitik“ im Herbst 1989 sollten das autokratische System stabilisieren, erfüllten diesen Zweck jedoch nicht.