National Association of Manufacturers - Revision history

Eveline at 11:47, 4 April 2013

2013-04-04T11:47:50Z

David at 16:58, 4 March 2006

2006-03-04T16:58:57Z

David at 16:56, 4 March 2006

2006-03-04T16:56:30Z

David at 12:04, 3 March 2006

2006-03-03T12:04:10Z

David: /* Excerpt from G. William Domhoff, (1967) Who Rules America, Spectrum Books, pp. 76-7 */

2006-03-03T12:04:01Z

Excerpt from G. William Domhoff, (1967) Who Rules America, Spectrum Books, pp. 76-7

David at 15:10, 2 December 2005

2005-12-02T15:10:02Z

David at 15:50, 29 November 2005

2005-11-29T15:50:51Z

New page

:There is one association conspicuous by its absence from our list which should be mentioned at this pointâ€”the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). This organization was at one time a leading spokesman for the dominant interests within the American upper class. Its early successes in lobbying were notorious. However, it now represents interests within the upper class which have failed to come to terms with the New Deal and the governmental needs of internationally oriented corporations. The battles over foreign policy between the NAM and the CFRâ€”CED--BAC coalition, which the NAM usually loses, according to a decision-making study by David McLellan and Charles Woodhouse, are another piece of evidence for the division within the upper class between Millsâ€™s â€œbusiness liberalsâ€? and â€œpractical conservatives.â€? 20 However, a detailed study of the NAM by Richard Gable showed that it continues to be dominated by very large corporations, and that it was notably successful in its campaign to amend the National Labor Relations Act: â€œThere is a startling similarity between the numerous NAM labor proposals since 1937 and the final version of the Taft-Hartley Act.â€? 21 Indeed, Gerald D. Morgan (SR, NY), the lawyer hired by Fred A. Hartley to serve as special counsel to the majority members of the House committee, sought advice at one point from the NAMâ€™s general counsel.*

:It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these organizaÂ¬tions are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, 4 April 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:

−	William Domhoff ~~writes~~:	+	William Domhoff wrote, back in 1967:

	:There is one association conspicuous by its absence from our list which should be mentioned at this point - the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). This organization was at one time a leading spokesman for the dominant interests within the American upper class. Its early successes in lobbying were notorious. However, it now represents interests within the upper class which have failed to come to terms with the New Deal and the governmental needs of internationally oriented corporations. The battles over foreign policy between the NAM and the [[CFR]]-[[CED]]-[[BAC]] coalition, which the NAM usually loses, according to a decision-making study by [[David McLellan]] and [[Charles Woodhouse]], are another piece of evidence for the division within the upper class between Mills's 'business liberals' and 'practical conservatives.' 20 However, a detailed study of the NAM by [[Richard Gable]] showed that it continues to be dominated by very large corporations, and that it was notably successful in its campaign to amend the National Labor Relations Act: 'There is a startling similarity between the numerous NAM labor proposals since 1937 and the final version of the Taft-Hartley Act.' {{ref\|21}} Indeed, [[Gerald D. Morgan]] (SR, NY), the lawyer hired by Fred A. Hartley to serve as special counsel to the majority members of the House committee, sought advice at one point from the NAM's general counsel.*		:There is one association conspicuous by its absence from our list which should be mentioned at this point - the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). This organization was at one time a leading spokesman for the dominant interests within the American upper class. Its early successes in lobbying were notorious. However, it now represents interests within the upper class which have failed to come to terms with the New Deal and the governmental needs of internationally oriented corporations. The battles over foreign policy between the NAM and the [[CFR]]-[[CED]]-[[BAC]] coalition, which the NAM usually loses, according to a decision-making study by [[David McLellan]] and [[Charles Woodhouse]], are another piece of evidence for the division within the upper class between Mills's 'business liberals' and 'practical conservatives.' 20 However, a detailed study of the NAM by [[Richard Gable]] showed that it continues to be dominated by very large corporations, and that it was notably successful in its campaign to amend the National Labor Relations Act: 'There is a startling similarity between the numerous NAM labor proposals since 1937 and the final version of the Taft-Hartley Act.' {{ref\|21}} Indeed, [[Gerald D. Morgan]] (SR, NY), the lawyer hired by Fred A. Hartley to serve as special counsel to the majority members of the House committee, sought advice at one point from the NAM's general counsel.*

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 William Domhoff writes:
-:There is one association conspicuous by its absence from our list which should be mentioned at this pointâ€”the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). This organization was at one time a leading spokesman for the dominant interests within the American upper class. Its early successes in lobbying were notorious. However, it now represents interests within the upper class which have failed to come to terms with the New Deal and the governmental needs of internationally oriented corporations. The battles over foreign policy between the NAM and the [[CFR]]â€”[[CED]]-[[BAC]] coalition, which the NAM usually loses, according to a decision-making study by [[David McLellan]] and [[Charles Woodhouse]], are another piece of evidence for the division within the upper class between Millsâ€™s â€œbusiness liberalsâ€? and â€œpractical conservatives.â€? 20 However, a detailed study of the NAM by [[Richard Gable]] showed that it continues to be dominated by very large corporations, and that it was notably successful in its campaign to amend the National Labor Relations Act: â€œThere is a startling similarity between the numerous NAM labor proposals since 1937 and the final version of the Taft-Hartley Act.â€? {{ref|21}} Indeed, [[Gerald D. Morgan]] (SR, NY), the lawyer hired by Fred A. Hartley to serve as special counsel to the majority members of the House committee, sought advice at one point from the NAMâ€™s general counsel.*
+:There is one association conspicuous by its absence from our list which should be mentioned at this point - the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). This organization was at one time a leading spokesman for the dominant interests within the American upper class. Its early successes in lobbying were notorious. However, it now represents interests within the upper class which have failed to come to terms with the New Deal and the governmental needs of internationally oriented corporations. The battles over foreign policy between the NAM and the [[CFR]]-[[CED]]-[[BAC]] coalition, which the NAM usually loses, according to a decision-making study by [[David McLellan]] and [[Charles Woodhouse]], are another piece of evidence for the division within the upper class between Mills&#39;s &#39;business liberals&#39; and &#39;practical conservatives.&#39; 20 However, a detailed study of the NAM by [[Richard Gable]] showed that it continues to be dominated by very large corporations, and that it was notably successful in its campaign to amend the National Labor Relations Act: &#39;There is a startling similarity between the numerous NAM labor proposals since 1937 and the final version of the Taft-Hartley Act.&#39; {{ref|21}} Indeed, [[Gerald D. Morgan]] (SR, NY), the lawyer hired by Fred A. Hartley to serve as special counsel to the majority members of the House committee, sought advice at one point from the NAM&#39;s general counsel.*
 :It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these organizations are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.{{ref|domhoff}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:56, 4 March 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~==Excerpt from G. William Domhoff, (1967) Who Rules America, Spectrum Books, pp. 76-7==~~

−	:There is one association conspicuous by its absence from our list which should be mentioned at this pointâ€”the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). This organization was at one time a leading spokesman for the dominant interests within the American upper class. Its early successes in lobbying were notorious. However, it now represents interests within the upper class which have failed to come to terms with the New Deal and the governmental needs of internationally oriented corporations. The battles over foreign policy between the NAM and the CFRâ€”CED--BAC coalition, which the NAM usually loses, according to a decision-making study by David McLellan and Charles Woodhouse, are another piece of evidence for the division within the upper class between Millsâ€™s â€œbusiness liberalsâ€? and â€œpractical conservatives.â€? 20 However, a detailed study of the NAM by Richard Gable showed that it continues to be dominated by very large corporations, and that it was notably successful in its campaign to amend the National Labor Relations Act: â€œThere is a startling similarity between the numerous NAM labor proposals since 1937 and the final version of the Taft-Hartley Act.â€? 21 Indeed, Gerald D. Morgan (SR, NY), the lawyer hired by Fred A. Hartley to serve as special counsel to the majority members of the House committee, sought advice at one point from the NAMâ€™s general counsel.*

−	:It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these ~~organizaÂ¬tions~~ are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.	+	William Domhoff writes:
		+
		+	:There is one association conspicuous by its absence from our list which should be mentioned at this pointâ€”the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). This organization was at one time a leading spokesman for the dominant interests within the American upper class. Its early successes in lobbying were notorious. However, it now represents interests within the upper class which have failed to come to terms with the New Deal and the governmental needs of internationally oriented corporations. The battles over foreign policy between the NAM and the [[CFR]]â€”[[CED]]-[[BAC]] coalition, which the NAM usually loses, according to a decision-making study by [[David McLellan]] and [[Charles Woodhouse]], are another piece of evidence for the division within the upper class between Millsâ€™s â€œbusiness liberalsâ€? and â€œpractical conservatives.â€? 20 However, a detailed study of the NAM by [[Richard Gable]] showed that it continues to be dominated by very large corporations, and that it was notably successful in its campaign to amend the National Labor Relations Act: â€œThere is a startling similarity between the numerous NAM labor proposals since 1937 and the final version of the Taft-Hartley Act.â€? {{ref\|21}} Indeed, [[Gerald D. Morgan]] (SR, NY), the lawyer hired by Fred A. Hartley to serve as special counsel to the majority members of the House committee, sought advice at one point from the NAMâ€™s general counsel.*
		+
		+	:It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these organizations are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.{{ref\|domhoff}}
		+
		+
		+	==References==
		+
		+	*{{note\|domhoff}} G. William Domhoff, (1967) ''Who Rules America'', Spectrum Books, pp. 76-7==

	[[Category:Who Rules America]]		[[Category:Who Rules America]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:04, 3 March 2006
Line 5:		Line 5:
	:It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these organizaÂ¬tions are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.		:It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these organizaÂ¬tions are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.

−	[Category:Who Rules America]	+	[[Category:Who Rules America]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:04, 3 March 2006
Line 4:		Line 4:

	:It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these organizaÂ¬tions are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.		:It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these organizaÂ¬tions are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.
		+
		+	[Category:Who Rules America]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:10, 2 December 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	==Excerpt from G. William Domhoff, (1967) Who Rules America, Spectrum Books, pp. 76-7==

	:There is one association conspicuous by its absence from our list which should be mentioned at this pointâ€”the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). This organization was at one time a leading spokesman for the dominant interests within the American upper class. Its early successes in lobbying were notorious. However, it now represents interests within the upper class which have failed to come to terms with the New Deal and the governmental needs of internationally oriented corporations. The battles over foreign policy between the NAM and the CFRâ€”CED--BAC coalition, which the NAM usually loses, according to a decision-making study by David McLellan and Charles Woodhouse, are another piece of evidence for the division within the upper class between Millsâ€™s â€œbusiness liberalsâ€? and â€œpractical conservatives.â€? 20 However, a detailed study of the NAM by Richard Gable showed that it continues to be dominated by very large corporations, and that it was notably successful in its campaign to amend the National Labor Relations Act: â€œThere is a startling similarity between the numerous NAM labor proposals since 1937 and the final version of the Taft-Hartley Act.â€? 21 Indeed, Gerald D. Morgan (SR, NY), the lawyer hired by Fred A. Hartley to serve as special counsel to the majority members of the House committee, sought advice at one point from the NAMâ€™s general counsel.*		:There is one association conspicuous by its absence from our list which should be mentioned at this pointâ€”the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). This organization was at one time a leading spokesman for the dominant interests within the American upper class. Its early successes in lobbying were notorious. However, it now represents interests within the upper class which have failed to come to terms with the New Deal and the governmental needs of internationally oriented corporations. The battles over foreign policy between the NAM and the CFRâ€”CED--BAC coalition, which the NAM usually loses, according to a decision-making study by David McLellan and Charles Woodhouse, are another piece of evidence for the division within the upper class between Millsâ€™s â€œbusiness liberalsâ€? and â€œpractical conservatives.â€? 20 However, a detailed study of the NAM by Richard Gable showed that it continues to be dominated by very large corporations, and that it was notably successful in its campaign to amend the National Labor Relations Act: â€œThere is a startling similarity between the numerous NAM labor proposals since 1937 and the final version of the Taft-Hartley Act.â€? 21 Indeed, Gerald D. Morgan (SR, NY), the lawyer hired by Fred A. Hartley to serve as special counsel to the majority members of the House committee, sought advice at one point from the NAMâ€™s general counsel.*

	:It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these organizaÂ¬tions are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.		:It is difficult to determine how successful these groups are in attaining their objectives. However, it is incontrovertible that they attempt to be influential within the government and in shaping public opinion on a wide variety of issues. It is also incontrovertible, we believe, that these organizaÂ¬tions are arms of the power elite which have the function of attempting to influence the framework of the American polity.