Labor and the War: Definitions of Success in Early 20th Century America

"I ask you women, are you going to be content to become servants of the two old parties in our country...? Put a high price on your freedom! Keep away from the Democratic and Republican Parties...Don't vote! By this refusal to consort with admitted evils, you will get new strength."
-Alva Belment

In the America of the early 20th century, there was a changing tide that swept through the American psyche. The Progressive movement, consisting of mostly middle class Americans, had brought many issues front and center regarding local and state governmental policy, the economy, and women's suffrage. This movement was truncated by the First World War, which tore apart the momentum created by the Progressive and shifting America back to societal trends of the past. These trends included the devolution of government to the local level, as well as personal trends such as individualism and the decadent fulfillment of desires. Overall, the little amount of good that was created during the Progressive Era was either reversed or transformed into a different forms in the 1920s. Success, or the ascension from one level to the next, was not possible for the greater public. This glass ceiling was caused by two general themes: the constant strife of labor and the First World War.

The constant problem of labor issues in America created differing levels of angst for the two parties involved, while businessmen could create policies that would be adverse to even the strongest of labor movements, the masses were helpless to the brutalities of strikebreakers and "detective" agencies. The more subtle and perhaps dubious culprit of perpetual labor mediocrity was the creation of welfare capitalism. Waged by packinghouse firms in the 1920s, welfare capitalism consisted of long range benefits for workers who stayed loyal to the company instead of searching for higher short term benefits and possibly striking. This nefarious plan consisted of providing higher pensions and bonuses for longevity and extended periods of employ. Included with this form of labor placation was in-house union representation, which was meant to represent the best needs of the worker. In reality, there was an excess of "company men" in said unions, which discouraged many from joining or putting much credence into the union. The common working person was not represented and was spoon-fed a preponderance of company propaganda and labor plans that were weak even in appearance, much less substance. This created a roadblock to even the possibility of advancement for factory workers.

The issue of women in the labor force was no different except for the severity of the injustice. Many women living at the time of the Progressive Era felt that they had some sort of handle on what was needed in order to gain equality with men: join the labor union, be active in your party, do not pander to your husband's every wish. Certainly these were noble and idealistic ideas and were worthy of extensive promulgation. However, in practice many of these notions were impractical due to the overwhelming force of male society and the tight structure of business and labor movements.

Alice Kessler-Harris' article, "The Uneasy Relationship between Labor and Women," explains in depth the struggle of women in the labor movement. In general, it seems that there was merely superficial interest by the labor unions to incorporate women into the growing labor movement. As explained in the article, the union leaders were not merely in their positions in order to help their fellow worker, but some were in their positions because they wanted to advance their own agendas. The idea of "dual closure" became popular amongst the labor unions. In essence, the labor unions wished to usurp power from those above them while providing for their comrades. A labor union, obviously could not be what it was without the workers, but likewise the workers were in no position to complain with the union's assistance at hand. The unions would open their doors when it was necessary to have manpower to make pushes for increased union power and decreased their memberships when they were not in positions to increase their power. The unions, like businesses, were streamlining operations in order to remain efficient. Efficiency, once a noble idea of the Progressives, was now a tool of oppression against the general public.

A more pressing national and international concern existed when the First World War came to fruition. Beyond the chaos and mass destruction caused by such a war, the ripple effects it had upon the economy and society in America seems to be evident upon studying the lifestyles of Americans in the 20th century. Coming off of the Progressive Era and a fresh wound from world combat, Americans seemed to be tired of helping others ahead of themselves, especially when tangible benefits were difficult to come by. A perfect, albeit satirical, illustration of this idea of self-indulgence is contained in Sinclair Lewis' Babbitt.

Lewis' Babbitt weaves the tale of a seemingly average American male: moderate success, capable of supporting his wife and children, and an upstanding and involved citizen. Seething underneath this facade of suburban docility lies discontent and many social issues not addressed appropriately by the characters involved. Lewis created the "model" town, Zenith, in hopes of illustrating the inherent stupidity of American consumerism. When George Babbitt goes on vacation with his family or buys a new accessory for his car, he seems content with himself because he is keeping up with the new trends and, more likely, fads of the time. But in Babbitt we see a shallow happiness supported by confusion over times past and uncertainty ahead. Babbitt, for the latter portion of the book, seems to find himself in the decadence that was common in 1920s youth. Babbitt accepted the positions of his former foes, the labor movements, and frequented with many different ladies. Babbitt, like America, was confused about where to go with his life and where the nation would go depended on the unity (or would falter with the disunity) of its people.

Besides the consumerism and shallow lifestyles portrayed in Lewis' satire, there was more discontent abound with the Red Scare of the 1920s. Following the American involvement in the World War, there as a focus on a new ideological weapon: communism and the radical left. Russia's tumult into Leninist communism caused great distress by American political conservatives and the average American. Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer spoke to these issues in his case against the "Reds" by saying that "...by a literature that promises the wildest dreams of such low aspirations, that can occur to only the criminal minds, communism distorts our social law..." Palmer, like many, did not see stopping communism, or what was deemed communism by observers, as against the tenets of democracy. Rather, such conservative observers would say that stopping communism would say democracy in that insurgent movements would be cut off at the pass. In reality (or from the perspective of the historical view) such actions as blacklists and ostracization from professions deterred the creative ferment in film, art, and literature. In this, perhaps Palmer's statement and similar discussions were the biggest danger to the success of individuals in America during this period, as creative license and fruition were never allowed to be attainable.

Many during the early 20th century felt the labor movement's woes and the massive effects of the First World War, but not so much as the common man felt these effects. Economically, any potential advancement for a factory worker was cut off by the creation of loyalty pacts that bound a man to his machine for life if he ever wanted to see his due pay. Labor unions became bastions of well meaning, albeit somewhat self aggrandizing individuals who wanted to advance their agendas as the obvious cost of their colleague's futures. The effects of the war were far reaching and much more subtle, but can be seen as obvious now that there is critical distance. Lewis' satire was meant to provoke feelings of disgust with the lifestyle that all wanted to achieve in the 1920s: middle class, white collar suburban. It is shown that even those with the "dream" lifestyle are yearning for more or for better. Finally, but most importantly, clear breaches of the democratic ethos of free speech and thought were prevalent following the war. The scared (and ignorant) American public sought a scapegoat for many of their problems as well as justifying their lifestyle as correct by subverting another. The Red Scare, and the subsequent witch-hunts for suspected communists, tore at the very seams of what being American was. The 1920s saw the reversal of the intents of the Progressives: instead of the ability of more to participate in government and to have a satisfying life, their ability to achieve such lofty goals was hindered by business and Americanization interests. The common man was no better off at the end of the 1920s than they were in the Progressive Era.