Urban Regimes and the Policing of Strikes in Two Gilded Age Cities: New York and Chicago

IF 0.5 3区 社会学 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE Studies in American Political Development Pub Date : 2019-10-01 DOI:10.1017/S0898588X19000117
R. Schneirov
{"title":"Urban Regimes and the Policing of Strikes in Two Gilded Age Cities: New York and Chicago","authors":"R. Schneirov","doi":"10.1017/S0898588X19000117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the 1980s, scholars have argued that during the Gilded Age urban party machines incorporated working people through the use of patronage, informal provision of personal welfare, and limited concessions, thereby eliminating sustained labor and Socialist Party alternatives and keeping workers’ militancy and assertiveness confined to the workplace. That view is challenged by a historical comparison of the policing of labor disputes in New York and Chicago. In New York, organized workers were eliminated from the governing coalition of the Swallowtail-Kelly regime that succeeded the Tweed Ring, and police routinely used coercion to defeat strikes and intimidate Socialists. In Chicago, however, labor and Socialists were part of the governing coalition of the Carter Harrison regime, and the police took a hands-off stance in many strikes. This article explores the contrast in policing and the balance of social forces in the two cities and seeks to explain the differences by examining the political settlements that concluded Reconstruction, the ethnic makeup of each city's working classes, the different characteristics of each city's labor movement, and labor's ability to mount third-party challenges—all in the context of regional variations. It concludes that historians cannot assume that workers were incorporated into machines in this period.","PeriodicalId":45195,"journal":{"name":"Studies in American Political Development","volume":"33 1","pages":"258 - 274"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0898588X19000117","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in American Political Development","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898588X19000117","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the 1980s, scholars have argued that during the Gilded Age urban party machines incorporated working people through the use of patronage, informal provision of personal welfare, and limited concessions, thereby eliminating sustained labor and Socialist Party alternatives and keeping workers’ militancy and assertiveness confined to the workplace. That view is challenged by a historical comparison of the policing of labor disputes in New York and Chicago. In New York, organized workers were eliminated from the governing coalition of the Swallowtail-Kelly regime that succeeded the Tweed Ring, and police routinely used coercion to defeat strikes and intimidate Socialists. In Chicago, however, labor and Socialists were part of the governing coalition of the Carter Harrison regime, and the police took a hands-off stance in many strikes. This article explores the contrast in policing and the balance of social forces in the two cities and seeks to explain the differences by examining the political settlements that concluded Reconstruction, the ethnic makeup of each city's working classes, the different characteristics of each city's labor movement, and labor's ability to mount third-party challenges—all in the context of regional variations. It concludes that historians cannot assume that workers were incorporated into machines in this period.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
两个镀金时代城市:纽约和芝加哥的城市政权和罢工的治安
自20世纪80年代以来,学者们一直认为,在镀金时代,城市政党机器通过赞助、非正式提供个人福利和有限的让步将劳动人民纳入其中,从而消除了持续的劳工和社会党替代方案,并将工人的战斗力和自信局限于工作场所。这一观点受到了纽约和芝加哥劳资纠纷监管的历史比较的挑战。在纽约,有组织的工人被从燕尾凯利政权的执政联盟中清除,该政权继承了特威德集团,警方经常使用胁迫手段来挫败罢工和恐吓社会党人。然而,在芝加哥,劳工和社会党是卡特·哈里森政权执政联盟的一部分,警方在许多罢工中采取了袖手旁观的立场。本文探讨了这两个城市在治安和社会力量平衡方面的对比,并试图通过考察重建结束时的政治解决方案、每个城市工人阶级的种族构成、每个城市劳工运动的不同特征来解释这种差异,以及劳工发起第三方挑战的能力——所有这些都是在地区差异的背景下进行的。它的结论是,历史学家不能假设工人在这一时期被纳入机器。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Studies in American Political Development (SAPD) publishes scholarship on political change and institutional development in the United States from a variety of theoretical viewpoints. Articles focus on governmental institutions over time and on their social, economic and cultural setting. In-depth presentation in a longer format allows contributors to elaborate on the complex patterns of state-society relations. SAPD encourages an interdisciplinary approach and recognizes the value of comparative perspectives.
期刊最新文献
The March on Washington Movement, the Fair Employment Practices Committee, and the Long Quest for Racial Justice Immigration Clashes, Party Polarization, and Republican Radicalization: Tracking Shifts in State and National Party Platforms since 1980 SAP volume 37 issue 2 Front matter Capitalism and the Creation of the U.S. Constitution The Strange Career of Federal Indian Policy: Rural Politics, Native Nations, and the Path Away from Assimilation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1