Henry George and the Labor Movement, Essay Example

The historical issue the author (Weir) addresses in the article is that the society needed a person who was able to compromise and negotiate between two opposing groups and solve the labor disputes. Henry George’s election as a labor created a hope that the labor movement can be unified (Sosner 71). Weir (422) examines the disputes among major labor organizations and the methods how a third-party candidate was able to negotiate views and give the movement a central direction.

Henry George proposed a single-tax idea in the labor market, and even though he supported Irish causes, he was unable to come to terms with the partisan approach of the Knights of Labor (KOL). While the KOL was not a political organization, Henry George found the solution in political intervention. While George offered a political position to Powerdly (Weir 427), the organization always distanced itself from party politics. The group remained a partisanship, while George thought that the solution was in policies.

The free trade beliefs was one of the areas where the ideas of George and the majority of KOL crashed. George wrote the article: “Protection of Free Trade?” which created disagreement from Powerdly later, even though it was on the reading list of the Knights of Labor initially.  The two players: Knights and George finally crashed on protectionism. KOL did not agree with free trade ideas of George.

Free trade and protectionism were in the focus of the debate between KOL and George. KOL and Powerdly proposed graduated income tax to benefit low earners and they wanted to protect the American workers’ interest from competition created by imported cheap labor. George, on the other hand, proposed free trade and promoted equality, not excluding immigrant workers from the masses he represented. Indeed, according to Sosner (75), he became immigrant workers’ spokesman.

Henry George was able to unify the labor movement, according to Weir (422). Repression was created through the movement that George was able to appeal to various audiences in the labor movement, according to Sosner (75). Likewise, Weir (422) states that looking for consensus, serving all people and the larger society, instead of only workers has created a ground for reform policies. Weir focuses on George’s actions to seek approval instead of confrontation, while other authors state that he oppressed other views.

While in the eyes of New York Knights, George was attributed the characteristics of a traitor, according to Weir (425), there was a disagreement but also exchange of ideas between Powerdly and George. While eventually they parted ways (425), they were both playing an important part in the Great Upheaval (436), and George was able to keep the movement adhere democratic principles. While the Knights of Labor focused on protecting one class; the low-earning workers, George focused on improving justice for all. This is one of the main statements of Weir, and he supports the argument with several examples when the two leaders agreed or came to a consensus before mutually agreeing to follow different political directions.

The author argues that while there were disagreements between the Knights of Labor and Henry George, the two parties had several issues in common, therefore, without the attempt to create a consensus, the Great Upheaval would not have succeeded and brought a change to the U.S. society.

Works Cited

Sosner, E. “Henry George, the Labor Movement and the Mayoral Election of 1886: A Lost Opportunity” Historian. 2011. p. 71-76.

Weir, R. “A Fragile Alliance: Henry George and the Labor Movement” American Journal of Economics and Sociology. p. 422-436.