Peculiarities” versus “Exceptions”

The Shaping of the American Federation of Labor's Politics during the 1890s and 1900s

Datos Bibliográficos

ID9969737
AutoresN Kirk (0009-0000-5966-2998, autor de correspondencia)
Año2000
Volumen45
Número1
Páginas25-50
Fecha de publicación2000-04-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaInternational Review of Social History (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0020-8590 • E-ISSN: 1469-512X
EditorialCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s002085900000002x
OpenAlexW2043029804
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas2
Referencias citadas3

The purpose of this article is to question the notion of US labour's “exceptionalism” – of its “conservatism” and “closure” and difference from “class-conscious” and “socialist” British and European labour – with specific reference to the politics of the American Federation of Labour during the 1890s and 1900s. An approach rooted in the assumption of “norms” and “exceptions” is rejected in favour of one exploring differences and similarities. In terms of similarities, the article demonstrates the ways in which the AF of L consciously sought to model its “independent” (i.e. nonpartisan–party) politics upon the practice of the late-Victorian British TUC. With respect to differences, the article then proceeds to chart the challenges posed to the AF of L by the growing identification within British labour of political independence with independent partyism , as manifested especially in the TUC's official endorsement of the Labour Representation Committee (1900) and the Labour Party (1906). Resistant to the adoption of the new “British road”, the AF of L nevertheless defended its “traditional” form of political independence far more in terms of experiential US “peculiarities” than “exceptionalist” structural determinations

Conservatism · Exceptionalism · Independence (probability theory · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Representation (politics · Sociology · Labor Movements and Unions · Law