Class and Gender Politics in Progressive-Era Seattle

Chapter 2: Citizens and Workers

In the summer of 1909, the eyes of much of the nation were fixed on Seattle . To celebrate the decade of prosperity that the Klondike and Nome gold strikes had brought to the city, local leaders organized the Alaska-YukonPacific Exposition (aype). The exposition showcased the beauty and possibilities of Alaska as well as Seattle’s place as the jewel of the Pacific Northwest . Behind the glimmer of the fair’s magnificent white buildings and fountains, the festering wounds of organized labor lay exposed. Long gone by the opening of the aype was the pride in the city’s accomplishments and future potential that workers and the business elite once shared. In the latter part of the first decade of the twentieth century, Seattle’s working class butted heads with local businessmen over the employers’ mounting recalcitrance to union demands, the rising tide of Japanese immigration, and the distribution of the economic windfall the exposition produced. The politics of class, however, were significantly more complex than labor leaders had realized. While unable to forge a true working-class party, they were willing to form political coalitions with like-minded citizens when chapter 2 Citizens and Workers 27 28 c l a s s a n d g e n d e r p o l i t i c s these proved advantageous. Whether it be alliances with Populists in the 1890s or middle-class progressives a decade later, Seattle’s workers continued to search for respect and security in the new industrial world. The lessons learned in these undertakings would serve them well in the years preceding World War I. Rather than dismiss opportunistic political efforts as a sign of the weakness of American labor in the age of industrialization, scholars might approach Seattle’s experience during the early twentieth century as an opportunity to explore the changing nature of working-class political activity, the causes that compelled labor to choose sometimes paradoxical actions, the methods and political styles they employed, and the larger meaning of both their victories and losses. Perhaps the first step in this process is recognition that workers had myriad strategies available to them and that they often exercised more than one of these options at a time. American labor, in short, spoke not with one but many voices during the Progressive Era. Some labor leaders urged workers to make their stand at the point of production; others used the power of the pocketbook by organizing consumption-oriented protests like boycotts and label leagues. By the early twentieth century, a growing number of union officials set their eyes on the ballot box to confront an ever powerful employing class. The strategies workers opted for, however, reflected particular social, cultural, economic, and political forces. Only when we investigate these forces and the choices made by workers can we better understand this crucial period in the history of American labor. Seattle’s working class likewise chose different strategies to combat the growing power of local employers and to assert its voice in city matters . At the dawn of the century workers focused on rebuilding a labor movement left in shambles following the 1890s depression. The economic boom sparked by a gold rush in the Yukon Territory of Canada accelerated the rebirth of organized labor in Seattle. Organizing at the point of production brought a growing part of the city’s working class under the umbrella of the wclu, save African American and Asian workers who found the union door closed. Emboldened by such growth, union officials tried third-party politics to tip the balance of power away from local employers. Trade unions, however, did not have the stage to themselves. Some Seattle workers looked to more radical solutions proffered by Social- c i t i z e n s a n d w o r k e r s 29 ist organizations and the Industrial Workers of the World. Pulled in different directions, the city’s working class struggled to find the best strategy to champion its cause in an increasingly competitive economic and political marketplace. Unlike most eastern labor struggles, class conflict out west was more localized. The lack of large-scale national industrial firms meant that Seattle workers had to battle locally entrenched economic and political elites rather than national corporate leaders.1 Moreover, the Progressive Era provided a particularly dynamic moment for labor organizing, as the relationship between the state and society...