Document généré le 30 sept. 2021 17:58 Urban History Review Revue d'histoire urbaine Distress, Dissent and Alienation Hamilton Workers in the Great Depression W. Peter Archibald Volume 21, numéro 1, october 1992 Résumé de l'article Contrairement à la plupart des comptes rendus portant sur les réactions des URI : https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1019244ar travailleurs canadiens à la Crise des années 1930, le portrait que nous trace DOI : https://doi.org/10.7202/1019244ar celui-ci de la majorité des travailleurs de Hamilton nous les montre ni profondément affligés, ni particulièrement enclins à la dissidence même si, Aller au sommaire du numéro bien sûr, il y avait effectivement de l’affliction et de la dissidence. On peut en grande partie attribuer l’absence relative de dissidence à l’impuissance ressentie par les travailleurs face aux très mauvaises conditions du marché, Éditeur(s) mais on ne doit pas considérer leur passivité comme une simple stratégie de classe temporaire. Au contraire, pour beaucoup de travailleurs, et peut-être Urban History Review / Revue d'histoire urbaine même pour la plupart, la dissidence était illégitime au départ et (ou), tenant compte des conditions du marché de l’emploi et d’autres facteurs, ils mettaient ISSN en veilleuse leurs aspirations à un travail assuré et sur lequel ils pourraient exercer un certain contrôle. Autrement dit, ils étaient devenus psychiquement 0703-0428 (imprimé) « aliénés ». Ces conclusions viennent fortement ébranler la plupart des théories 1918-5138 (numérique) élaborées sur ces questions, théories fondées implicitement sur un modèle « frustration-agression » ; elles ébranlent également les idées généralement Découvrir la revue admises selon lesquelles les travailleurs avaient une conscience de classe très forte et étaient de véritables héros et elles nous donnent des indications sur la syndicalisation des travailleurs pendant la plupart des crises économiques. Citer cet article Archibald, W. P. (1992). Distress, Dissent and Alienation: Hamilton Workers in the Great Depression. Urban History Review / Revue d'histoire urbaine, 21(1), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.7202/1019244ar All Rights Reserved © Urban History Review / Revue d'histoire urbaine, 1992 Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d’auteur. L’utilisation des services d’Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d’utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit. Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l’Université de Montréal, l’Université Laval et l’Université du Québec à Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. https://www.erudit.org/fr/ Distress, Dissent and Alienation: Hamilton Workers in the Great Depression W. Peter Archibald Abstract Like popular perceptions, most current unusual, circumstances intervened. academic analysis of the Great Depres• These circumstances were (a) poor lab• Contrary to most accounts of sion of the 1930s has been based our market conditions which gave work• Canadian workers' responses to the upon the following assumptions. First, ers little choice but to stick with, and not Great Depression of the 1930s, this these were times of great deprivation publicly complain about, their jobs;8 (b) article portrays the majority of and distress for North American work• sectarianism and timidity on the part of Hamilton workers as neither ers; that is, they were "hungry", "lean", craft unions and traditional labour parties;9 severely distressed nor especially 1 "hard" and "dirty". Second, there was and/or (c) excessive, direct repression by prone to dissent. Much of the 10 much labour militancy and political pro• employers and the state. Finally, relative absence of dissent can be test, or dissent; hence the epithets "bit• although the latter may have prevented attributed to workers'powerlessness ter", "turbulent times" and "decades of workers from doing what their deprived in very poor market conditions, but 2 workers' quiescence should not be discord". Third, distress was one of needs and political beliefs inclined them to seen simply as a temporary, the most important, if not the most do, they did not alter these inclinations class-conscious strategy. Rather, important, sources of dissent. Thus themselves. Rather than becoming discour• many, perhaps most, workers either strikes, industrial unionism and new, aged and altering their aspirations, workers regarded dissent as illegitimate to left-wing political parties were more or simply kept their individual and collective begin with, or/and lowered their less a direct result of workers' pecu• fires burning and bided their time until aspirations for secure and liarly high distress in the 30s.3 For objective circumstances were more favour• self-controlled work in the prevailing some analysts, dissent was mainly a able.11 labour market and other conditions. rational strategy to ameliorate distress; In other words, they became for others, it was instead, or also, a "vol• This paradigm has been so pervasive psychically "alienated". These canic eruption", the building up of that even most of its apparent critics findings have important implications deprivation and frustration to the point have failed to escape it totally. Numerous for most theorizing on these issues, where aggression "spilled over" into writers have pointed instead to the fact which implicitly employs a overt activity.4 Fourth, the primary that a clear majority of workers not only "frustration-aggression " model; for effect of employers' and governments' retained their jobs, but, because the popular conceptions of workers as repression of strikes and extra-parlia• prices of many consumer goods and ser• highly class-conscious and epically mentary political protest was to delegiti- vices dropped, probably experienced an heroic; and for organizing workers mate the ruling class and drive workers during most economic crises. increase in their material standard of liv• and other members of the "public" to ing.12 Others have argued that times the left.5 were indeed tough in the 30s, but they had also been tough for workers in the True, many analysts have qualified these 20s, so that in relative terms, the 30s claims in various ways. Deprivation is must have seemed little different.13 Still sometimes said to have been more relative others have tried to put the dissent of the than absolute. For example, the problem decade in context, by noting that partici• was more that workers had to give up "luxu• pants constituted a small minority of work• ries" rather than starve. Sometimes these ers, and that their immediate and long- luxuries were job security and freedom and term gains were few and far between.14 dignity, rather than material goods.6 Simi• Historians with unimpeachable radical larly, it may have been a "decade of dis• credentials, such as David Brody, have cord" more in the sense that workers were argued that the "good guys" of the 30s, more militant and politically progressive in the industrial unionists of the CIO, were the 30s than they had been in the 20s, than in fact not much different from the craft that they were actually flocking to the Com• unionists of the AFL.15 A few others have munist Party and demanding that it orga• even suggested that some employers 7 nize a revolution. Furthermore, if distress and bourgeois politicians used carrots did not always result in dissent, it was not as well as sticks in their dealings with because one does not naturally and usu• workers, and may have been somewhat ally lead to the other, but that other, often unfairly portrayed in most accounts.16 3 Urban History Review/Revue d'histoire urbaine Vol XXI, No. 1 (October, 1992) Distress, Dissent and Alienation Résumé However, in most of these cases the criti• employed workers held onto their jobs, cism is only of the claim for the existence even if they only got to work a day or two Contrairement à la plupart des of the "initial condition" of distress, which a week. They organized and struck only comptes rendus portant sur les is supposed to initiate dissent, and/or of when they suffered actual losses, and réactions des travailleurs canadiens the intervening circumstances which then only when they felt they could get à la Crise des années 1930, le adherents of the dominant paradigm away with it. Most unemployed workers portrait que nous trace celui-ci de la claim prevented workers from dissenting. spent most of their time trying to find, majorité des travailleurs de There has been little recognition, let and worrying about, work. Most of those Hamilton nous les montre ni alone reconsideration, of the assumption who received relief were grateful for it, profondément affligés, ni despite its minimal nature and the insult• particulièrement enclins à la that distress leads to dissent in the first ing manner in which it was dispensed dissidence même si, bien sûr, il y place, or that workers remain inclined to avait effectivement de l'affliction et fight even in the face of poor economic and policed. They were also reluctant to de la dissidence. On peut en grande conditions, an unfavourable balance of risk this means of subsistence, and pro• partie attribuer l'absence relative de power, and actual repression by the rul• tested publicly only when relief was 21 dissidence à l'impuissance ressentie ing class. reduced. Most strikes and political pro• par les traveilleurs face aux très tests, and certainly any beyond the local mauvaises conditions du marché, Nevertheless, a more truly alternative par• level, occurred not in the early 30s, when mais on ne doit pas considérer leur adigm can be constructed from the exist• the Depression was at its worst, but in passivité comme une simple ing literature, a paradigm whose argu• the middle years when the labour market stratégie de classe temporaire.