And if there is some structural bias or basic orientation in contemporary economics that is intrinsically skewed towards neoliberalism or versus a progressive agenda, I have not found it. The work of the three economists reviewed in this article suggests that, in actuality, it may perhaps not exist.
Footnotes 1 D Kennedy, A Entire world of Battle: How Power, Legislation, and Knowledge Form Worldwide Political Overall economy (Princeton UP, 2016) seven. Review Essay: The Armenian Issue and#304stanbul: and#304letiand#351im Yayand#305nlarand#305, 2008, third printing. essaylab review it’s a perfect destination to buy customized documents War I but an attempt to solve the Armenian question by radical means. According to Taner Akçam, this was part of a general population policy on the part of Ottoman leaders that aimed at deporting and exterminating the empire’s Christian minorities and assimilating its non-Turkish Muslim minorities. Moreover, Akçam argues, Ottoman archival materials support these contentions (pp.
With some justice, Taner Akçam is highly critical of conventional Turkish interpretations of the Armenian massacres during WWI. In this sense, the book is a welcome source of differing views. Nevertheless, while the entrenched nationalist interpretations of the catastrophic events of 1915-16 are admittedly inadequate for understanding and explaining the tragedy that took place, the logical consequence of this state of affairs should not lead one to conclude that any alteative to this simplistic approach would necessarily be accurate and honest. The book contains an introduction, seven chapters, and a conclusion.
ESSAY WRITING SERVICES Critiques
The first chapter discusses relevant Ottoman archival sources and other materials. The second attempts to describe “the plan to homogenize Anatolia. ” The third and fourth chapters talk about Ottoman policies toward the empire’s Greek population before and during World War I. The fifth, sixth and seventh chapters deal with the Armenian deportations and the massacres during the war.
The contents of some chapters are quite similar to those of Akçam’s earlier works. However, in this book Akçam attempts to substantiate his arguments by also using Ottoman archival materials. According to Akçam, after the Balkan Wars of 1912-13, the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), the ruling faction in the Ottoman govement, devised plans to homogenize Anatolia on an ethno-religious basis.
With this goal in mind, they conducted several studies of the population structure, dealing with various groups’ ethnic, social and economic characteristics. By 1913, they began to implement these policies through “a dual mechanism” whereby the govement could ostensibly remain within a legal framework while, in fact, resorting to violent activities through secret channels (p. The studies to which Akçam refers include the preparation of ethnicity-based census data, maps and information about the economic situation of the Christian minorities (pp. Akçam’s argument about war-time population engineering is worthy of serious consideration however, his insistence that these policies were already mapped out before the war remains problematic on a number of levels.
Here, he relies too much on hindsight and fails to establish any concrete link between these studies and subsequent implemented policies. He reads backwards from subsequent to earlier events.
In addition, some of the studies (or inquiries) to which he refers were actually made during the war. Therefore, it is questionable to interpret all of this data as evidence for the existence of a pre-war “plan” to homogenize Anatolia. According to Akçam, economic dimensions in particular held an important place in these population policies. In order to realize homogenization, the CUP-controlled Ottoman govement instructed local authorities to conduct inquiries and keep records on the property of non-Muslim minorities.