• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Labor militancy and the neo-mercantilist development experience: South Korea and Taiwan in comparison (China).
【24h】

Labor militancy and the neo-mercantilist development experience: South Korea and Taiwan in comparison (China).

机译：劳动好战和新商业主义的发展经验：比较韩国和台湾（中国）。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In most works on East Asian development, South Korea and Taiwan were either explicitly or implicitly categorized as having gone through the same or similar development experience. This project is to explain why, given all the similarities between these two countries, South Korean workers have been consistently better organized and more militant than their Taiwanese counterparts.; Using a sectoral variation argument derived from the existing literature, I argued that the difference of labor militancy could only be explained when placing the neo-mercantilist development experience within the political context of these two countries. Taiwanese workers have been more acquiescent because in both the protected and the competitive sectors, an institutional factor had helped curtail labor militancy. In the protected sector, it is the strong presence of the state, either through state enterprises or through the so-called party enterprises. In the competitive sector, it is the local political establishment. Neither factor is what the state originally intended for labor control, but both exist because of the state's overall political concern.; In contrast, the South Korean state largely relied on repression to prevent labor militancy. Its attempt to implement a corporatist policy in the 1960s failed after Park Chung Hee decided to tighten labor control. No other institutional factors emerge to help curtail militancy either. The structurally advantageous position allowed workers in the protected sector to have more power defying employers and the state. The politically conscious church and student activists made the supposedly fragmented workers in the competitive sector into an organized force. Both factors led South Korean workers to be more militant.; By examining the labor militancy difference between South Korea and Taiwan, this project not only questioned the usual depiction of the East Asian development experience but also directed attention to the relation between labor militancy and the mercantilist development experience.
机译：在大多数有关东亚发展的著作中，韩国和台湾被明示或暗示地归类为经历了相同或相似的发展经历。这个项目是为了解释为什么鉴于这两个国家之间的所有相似之处，韩国工人始终比台湾工人具有更好的组织和更加激进的战斗力。我使用从现有文献中得出的行业差异论证，认为只有将新重商主义的发展经验放在这两个国家的政治背景下，才能解释劳动好战的差异。台湾工人更加默契，因为在保护部门和竞争部门中，制度因素都有助于减少工人的好战情绪。在受保护部门，这是国家的强大存在，无论是通过国有企业还是通过所谓的党派企业。在竞争领域，这是当地的政治机构。这两个因素都不是国家最初打算进行劳动控制的目的，而是由于国家的整体政治关注而存在。相比之下，韩国政府很大程度上依靠镇压来防止劳工激进。在朴正熙决定加强劳动控制之后，它在1960年代实施社团主义政策的尝试失败了。也没有其他体制因素可以帮助减少武装冲突。结构上有利的地位使受保护部门的工人拥有更多的权力来挑战雇主和国家。具有政治意识的教会和学生激进主义者将竞争领域中零散的工人组织成一支有组织的力量。这两个因素使韩国工人变得更加好战。通过考察韩国和台湾之间的劳动激进差异，该项目不仅质疑通常对东亚发展经验的描述，而且也将注意力转向了劳动激进与重商主义发展经验之间的关系。

著录项

  • 作者

    Huang, Chang-Ling.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of Chicago.;

  • 授予单位 The University of Chicago.;
  • 学科 Political Science General.; Sociology Industrial and Labor Relations.; Economics Labor.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1999
  • 页码 238 p.
  • 总页数 238
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 政治理论;社会学;劳动经济;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号