The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.
University of DurhamThis article examines the views of those who regarded the unemployment of the 1930s not solely as a disaster, but as a liberating new form of leisure for workers, provided that they could make the 'right use' of this leisure. This was an urgent challenge for more and more workers would soon be faced by 'a vast surplus of leisure time' made possible by technological change. The solution was to use the voluntary adult education movement to guide workers towards this 'right use'. The problem was that the grants which the government and charitable trusts made available to the voluntary sector were too small for the task and, more fundamentally, the analysis was misconceived and contradictory. But these opinions did serve to reinforce the case against public works, and legitimised a continuing desire to supervise working-class life on the part of the state and its partners in the voluntary sector.
. (2005) 'Liberal anti-fascism in the 1930s : the case of Sir Ernest Barker.', Albion., 36 (4). pp.
636-660.Further information on publisher's website:http://www.albion.appstate.edu/ Publisher's copyright statement:Additional information:
Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.
This chapter starts from the premise that royal history is not yet properly a part of political history, but ought to be. It first examines who has written about monarchy and how they have done so, suggesting that this work has been distinctive and defective in several respects. It next evaluates how much of the research agenda outlined first by David Cannadine in 2004 has been addressed. The chapter then identifies the area—the study of monarchists and ‘monarchism’—which political (alongside social) historians might most urgently examine. It concludes by presenting preliminary research which indicates how the inclusion of monarchists and monarchism might alter thinking about both the monarchy and its subjects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.