The progressive era lasted from the 1890s to the 1920s. The idea of the progressive movement was to purify government. Much of the work done during the progressive movement was considered Progressive Reform. Also during this era was the idea of achieving greater efficiency in the work place. There are two strong opinions on who sparked and fueled the movements during this era. Maureen Flanagan believed it to be the women, and Shelton Stromquist thought it to be the working labor force.
From Gender and Urban Political Reform: The City Club and the Women’s City Club of Chicago in the Progressive Era, by Maureen Flanagan you can see that gender played a role in the movement. According to Flanagan men and women “took opposing positions on several current municipal issues”. Men tended to focus on the idea of business improvement and expansion, whereas women focused on the interests of the people. Flanagan believed that it was groups such as the Women’s Club in Chicago, which truly pushed the movement. The women’s clubs attacked problems in sanitation and education. They also pushed for more assistance from the government with these issues. 1
Although women may have had an impact in politics I don’t believe their impact was as great as it could have been. Women lacked the right to vote until the 1920s so their influence was limited, although women did play a big role through back door politics, by influencing and persuading the votes of their husbands.
It’s evident that Stromquist doesn’t feel it was the women that influenced the era. In The Crucible of Class: Cleveland Politics and the Origins of Municipal Reform in the Progressive Era by Shelton Stromquist, he writes about the labor force being the drive of the Progressive movement. The work force of immigrants and unions were the ones that had the real power, according to Stromquist. Through strikes and revolts the working class demanded reform in the work place and better representation. The rise of the labor union gave the common worker a stronger voice to be heard by the government. 2
I feel that it took both groups to truly push for the progressive movement to get anything done. Although the women didn’t have the power they needed through the right to vote, they united and voiced their opinions. The work force as well came together forming unions and began to strike in demand of better work conditions. It took both groups to spark the fire of change in the United States.
[1] Maureen A. Flanagan, “Gender and Urban Political Reform: The City Club and the Woman’s City Club of Chicago in the Progressive Era,” The American Historical Review 95 (1990): 1048, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2163477.
[2] Shelton Stromquist, “The Crucible of Class: Cleveland Politics and the Origins of Municipal Reform in the Progressive Era,” Journal of Urban History 23 (1997): 194, http://juh.sagepub.com/content/23/2/192.citation.
Hi Timothy,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that both the working class and the women's middle class had a role to play in the Progressive Movement.Although he was arguing the case for the working class being responsible, I think Stromquist summed it up best, "Strikes… Prompted the formation of cross class alliances…"[1] The actions of the working class caused concern for the middle class, not just worry of revolution, but also a genuine concern for their fellow "man." This prompted a lot of the City Clubs to work towards solutions at the political level.Good work on your post.
Thanks,
Jaime
[1]Sheldon Stromquist, “The Crucible of Class: Cleveland Politics and the Origins of Municipal Reform in the Progressive Era.” Journal of Urban History 23, no 2. (1997):194
I agree that both authors present groups who were effective in their own ways, but I think that with these examples, the women’s groups made more real change. Stromquist said that the class conflicts and polarization created an environment for change(1), as opposed to the women’s groups who were actually making changes(2). The improvements were not always due to legislation needing a vote, so I do not agree with the idea that they were ineffectual because they could not vote. They did become more effective when they could vote for municipal leadership that would support their causes, but their grass-roots approach, like the settlement houses, showed they were motivated to make change happen rather than just protest that someone should improve things.
ReplyDelete1. Shelton Stromquist, “The Crucible of Class: Cleveland Politics and the Origins of Municipal Reform in the Progressive Era,” Journal of Urban History 23 (1997): 196, http: http://juh.sagepub.com/ (accessed February 9, 2012).
2. Maureen A. Flanagan, “Gender and Urban Political Reform: The City Club and Women’s City Club of Chicago in the Progressive Era,” The American Historical Review 95, no. 4 (1990): 1034, http://www.jstor.org/ (accessed February 9, 2012).