As the United States became a major industrial power, conflict between workers and factory owners intensified. Read about the Homestead Strike and the Pullman Strike, two of the most famous labor battles in American history.
Log in ryanarrowsmith23 8 years agoPosted 8 years ago. Direct link to ryanarrowsmith23's post “In paragraph three, why w...” In paragraph three, why would the state side with the owners? • (3 votes) Matthew Dowell 8 years agoPosted 8 years ago. Direct link to Matthew Dowell's post “Keeping in mind that it's...” Keeping in mind that it's 1892, most businesses were self-employed artisans or farms, when business was bad, you could make a decision as to what to do about it. Working at a large industrial business for a wage is still a relatively new concept. Companies are now employing so many people that a single decision can affect a large number of people who are used to making their own decisions. No really knows at this time what you do when a whole factory goes on strike and people start shooting. So when you don't know what to do, and you've got a lot of angry people, the military gets called. Also if you are a wealthy industrialist factory owner with powerful influence, you might have connections to officials in government that you can personally contact by telegraph. And they will listen to your side of the story first. Labor problems due to industrialisation are becoming big problems and it will take some time for strategies to be developed to resolve these disputes peacefully between industrialists, workers, and the government around them. (38 votes) stazioorion 8 years agoPosted 8 years ago. Direct link to stazioorion's post “After reading about the T...” After reading about the Taft-Hartley Act, I saw that Democrats of the 20th Century were the ones trying to repeal the act. Has there been any recent movements to repeal this act? How do current politicians feel about this act? • (9 votes) Hamilton Hardy 5 years agoPosted 5 years ago. Direct link to Hamilton Hardy's post “Could workers attain econ...” Could workers attain economic justice without violence during the Gilded Age? • (3 votes) Sam 5 years agoPosted 5 years ago. Direct link to Sam's post “It would have been possib...” It would have been possible, but extraordinarily difficult. The role of the federal government was far smaller than today, and local governments were often corrupted by the urban political machine. Owners had far too much power to create change in reasonable time frame, and since the government largely supported owners over workers, forcing the government to change the rules against their and the most powerful people's opinions would not have worked. Even the public didn't exactly love strikes after Haymarket, so workers didn't have anything going for them politically. (11 votes) Joshua a year agoPosted a year ago. Direct link to Joshua's post “Didn't Eugene V. Debs bec...” Didn't Eugene V. Debs become a politician at some point while he was in a prison for his union activities? • (4 votes) David Alexander a year agoPosted a year ago. Direct link to David Alexander's post “He ran for president whil...” He ran for president while behind bars, and got a LOT of votes. (8 votes) Tiara Forbes 8 months agoPosted 8 months ago. Direct link to Tiara Forbes's post “Would anyone happen to kn...” Would anyone happen to know if Henry Clay Frick was named after the Great Compromiser himself? • (4 votes) Alexis Williard 2 years agoPosted 2 years ago. Direct link to Alexis Williard's post “What was the result of th...” What was the result of the lack if public and legal support for union activities in the United States during the 19th century? • (2 votes) David Alexander 2 years agoPosted 2 years ago. Direct link to David Alexander's post “A lot of union members go...” A lot of union members got their heads bashed by the goons hired by industrialists and their stooges. (4 votes) A+Student ;DDDDD 8 years agoPosted 8 years ago. Direct link to A+Student ;DDDDD's post “I don´t quiet get the who...” I don´t quiet get the whole thing behide the steel workers. • (0 votes) Buck Masters 8 years agoPosted 8 years ago. Direct link to Buck Masters's post “Perhaps we would be bette...” Perhaps we would be better able to understand if we actually worked in a steel mill at the time. For that matter, any heavy industrial company often requires men to do hard work (i.e., lifting) in hot, dirty, noisy conditions. When demands for greater output required extra hours (overtime), perhaps the workers at that time didn't get paid 1.5 X their normal rate.? Or, if you've ever worked long, hard hours, you might relate to being so tired that you can't maintain the pace of work that is required. Over many years, unions and companies have developed better "standards" for work so that there is a better balance of work vs. reward. Of course, we haven't yet achieved perfection, but companies and workers are both a lot better off than they were in the late 1800's. Remember that those in the late 1800's had relatively few years of organized labor vs. management history to learn from, yet the U.S. was the leading country in the world for manufacturing output. I think conflicts were inevitable and necessary considering all factors. Failure to achieve gradual improvements over time may have otherwise resulted in something like the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, where the aristocracy of the time had lost touch with the people. We are lucky to have had "manageable" conflicts, as disastrous as they may seem by today's standards. (10 votes) chhuon.menglin a year agoPosted a year ago. Direct link to chhuon.menglin's post “From my point of view, th...” From my point of view, the Pullman and Homestead strikes did have a big impact on American culture and society nowadays. To my surprise, Americans have a propensity towards strike when something does not fulfill their purposes. For example, Once there is a change of amendment or something relating to societal norms, they are highly likely to make a protest along the roads. During the unionized strikes, the government intervened to decrease the tumult caused by the unionized workers by deploying soldiers to make social unrest to be a better one. As a matter of fact, the government plays an important role in increasingly reducing turbulence, for instance, they had better establish new laws and regulations for the labor workers.In addition to that, not only does the government make laws for unionized workers, but they also need made rules for factory owners about the sufficient provision for labor workers because the dispute is incurred to the fact that, owners of factories take so many advantages at the expense of the workers. If those owners break rules, they are given a warning or can not authorize the factories. • (3 votes) Neha 4 months agoPosted 4 months ago. Direct link to Neha's post “Was there any political f...” Was there any political factors that caused labor unions? Or was it just social/economical factors only? • (1 vote) David Alexander 4 months agoPosted 4 months ago. Direct link to David Alexander's post “Politics is the science o...” Politics is the science of the distribution of power. (1 vote) Tovonn Smith 7 years agoPosted 7 years ago. Direct link to Tovonn Smith's post “Labor battles coming from...” Labor battles coming from the title. Does Labor battles allude to the dangerous, powerful, and sad realities of war? Is the title stating that the Homestead and Pullman strikes were so intense, that they brought about similarities of that of which encased humans' minds of the topic of war? • (1 vote)Want to join the conversation?
When working people (a social and economic phenomenon) banded together, they sensed that they had power. The joint exercise of that power was a political phenomenon. Had they not worked together, or declined to exercise their power, there would not have been anything political. Is that what you were asking?
