Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-qks25 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-07T04:28:13.159Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The 1920s—Consolation or Warning?: A Response to David Montgomery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Charles S. Maier
Affiliation:
Harvard University

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Scholarly Controversies
Copyright
Copyright © International Labor and Working-Class History, Inc. 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1. Hall, Jacqueline Dowd, Korstad, Robert, and Leloudis, James, “Cotton Mill People: Work, Community, and Protest in the Textile South, 1880–1940,” American Historical Review 91 (1986): 245–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Of course, Montgomery recognizes that the workers in these conflicts “marched to a different drummer than the AFL provided.”

2. Especially by Montgomery, , “The ‘New Unionism’ and the Transformation of Workers' Consciousness in America, 1909–1923,” Journal of Social History 7 (1974): 509–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar On this theme see also Managerial Strategies and Industrial Relations in Historical and Comparative Study, ed. Gospel, Howard F. and Littler, Craig R. (London, 1983).Google Scholar

3. See Maier, Charles S., Recasting Bourgeois Europe: Stabilization in France, Germany, and Italy in the Decade after World War I (Princeton, N.J., 1975)Google Scholar; and his “The Two Postwar Eras and the Conditions for Stability in Twentieth-century Western Europe,” American Historical Review 86(1981): 327–52Google Scholar; and the essays collected in In Search of Stability: Explorations in Historical Political Economy (New York, forthcoming).Google Scholar

4. European employers entered collaborative talks and structures with labor only when they could no longer count on company unions. The price of trade-union cooperation in the German revolution under the auspices of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft was employer renunciation of “yellow” unions. In Britain and France, later efforts at collaboration required recognition of nationally based union federations—and one can argue that the same held true even for fascist Italy, when Mussolini imposed the Palazzo Vidoni and Palazzo Chigi agreements of 1923 and 1925. Mackenzie King would have come too late to Europe.

5. For this argument and bibliographic references, see Maier, Charles S., “The Factory as Society: Ideologies of Industrial Management in the Twentieth Century,” in Ideas into Politics: Festschrift for James Joll, ed. Bullen, R. J., Pogge, H.Strandemann, v., and Polonsky, A. (London, 1984), 147–63.Google Scholar

6. Keyssar, Alexander, Out of Work: The First Century of Unemployment in Massachusetts (Cambridge, 1986).Google Scholar