Chants Democratic: New York City and the Rise of the American Working Class, 1788-1850, 20th Anniversary Edition

by Sean Wilentz

Since its publication in 1984, Chants Democratic has endured as a classic narrative on labor and the rise of American democracy. In it, Sean Wilentz explores the dramatic social and intellectual changes that accompanied early industrialization in New York. He provides a panoramic chronicle of New York City's labor strife, social movements, and political turmoil in the eras of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Twenty years after its initial publication, Wilentz has added a new preface that takes stock of his own thinking, then and now, about New York City and the rise of the American working class.

Genres: History, American History, Labor, Nonfiction, New York, 19th Century, Politics

480 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1984

About the author

Sean Wilentz is the George Henry Davis 1886 Professor of American History at Princeton University. His many books include The Politicians and the Egalitarians: The Hidden History of American Politics (2016); Bob Dylan in America (2010); and The Age of Reagan: A History, 1974–2008 (2008). The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln (2005) was awarded the Bancroft Prize, and he has received two Grammy nominations for his writings on music.

Reviews

[Cat · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book functions well as an adjunct to the "age of jackson" by arthury schlesinger jr. it basicaly handles the development of the "working class" in new york city between the end of the american revolution to the period before the civil war.

During this period the economy of new york city industrialized, and that impacted the development of the "american" or more accurately given the subject of this book "new york" working class.

This book might also have a cross over audience with gangs of new york. mike walsh, the oft drunken "shirtless democrat" leader of the 1840s and 1850s comes across similar to the character played by daniel day lewis in scorcese's adaptation of gangs of new york. i was suprised to read of the linkage of the working class movement to nativist sentiment expounded by the whigs as early as the 1830s, but i suppose i should have been suprised at all.

[Martin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book not because I am particularly interested in labor history, although it is a fascinating and important subject with contemporary overtones. I read "Chants Democratic" because I wanted to again share company with one of the best U.S historians alive: Sean Wilentz. His "The Rise of American Democracy" is the best U.S history book I've ever read. "Chants Democratic" was his first book, published in the 1980s. It is also superb.

Many Americans today may take for granted that capitalism is inevitable progress, that its coming was accepted nearly universally, that it produced only wealth. "No" on all counts.

Wilentz studies the dawn of industrialization in New York City from the Jeffersonian through Jacksonian eras, the 1820s to the 1850s, the advent of free labor ideology, the withering away of the old artisan relationship between boss and worker as wages became subject to the vicissitudes of the "free market," and the nascent labor radicalism that followed. You will be introduced to characters like Thomas Skidmore and John Commerford, names all but forgotten to greater figures like Marx and Engels.

You will be introduced to the first radical labor ideologies in U.S history, and taken on a tour of the first strikes, public demonstrations, and labor violence. You will see how the first trade unions formed, what each thought about the new employer-employee order, their many different prescriptions for establishing a more equitable labor system, and why they all inevitably failed: lack of internal cohesion, political co-optation, downturns in the economic cycle, etc.

These early disputes were often about more than wages and work hours; they were a test of what kind of Republic America should become. Both sides (actually, there were many sides and competing/overlapping ideologies among workers and employers) attempted to use the language of American republican virtue and independence to win. Both (many) sides claimed to be the true protectors of the legacy of the American revolution. One need not specialize in labor history to understand that this battle was never completely settled. Even today, unions and their employers tussle over what kind of capitalism we should have.

Wilentz is not only a superb historian, he is an excellent writer. Even though we know how the story ends, his narrative makes the journey fascinating. (The story ends with the failure of the early labor movement but with seeds planted to fuel the later struggles.)

You might be surprised how many strikers won concessions as well as how many different trades formed unions and went on strike; that notwithstanding, conditions in the skilled crafts and unskilled manufactories remained mostly deplorable by modern-day standards.

To peer inside a window to a New York that only exists in paintings, faded newspaper articles, and history books -- pick up Chants Democratic, especially if labor history interests you.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

I got through most of this. Very deceptive...it looks so small! I'll skip through this in nothing flat, one thinks to one's self. And then...tiny type. And the material is not my favorite. I try to like labor history, but I may have to admit that in the end, I just think labor history is boring. Sorry, working class forebears.
Wilentz has interesting things to say here about this artisan republicanism, and how everyone in the early republic claimed the "Inheritance of the Revolution." Journeyman artisans say that the republican spirit comes from independent workers, their bosses say it comes from capitalism, they both agree it has nothing to do with black people or women...the antics and mayhem of the American experience ensue. It was also sort of remarkable to me how limited this story was to New York City proper. I have read a decent amount about what was going on in upstate New York during the time frame of this book, but judging from this you wouldn't think anything that went on upstate had any effect on the city at all. Maybe it didn't. Seems odd though.
Also makes one think- can New York City history illuminate American History? Or is it too special, too different? In an American History survey class, how much time should be spent on a very particular spot like New York? It seems like it would be easy to dismiss..."well, it's New York, it's a special case." And yet it is the biggest city hereabouts, and certainly very influential.

[Tim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Labor history of New York City before 1850. Wilentz chronicles the variety of worker responses to the industrialization process (in NYC at this time it meant more about division of labor and resulting wage decreases, then heavy mechanization). Excellent background and a rich variety of details as Wilentz describes worker's advocacy for a republican identity and communal connections amid the financial pressures of capitalism.

[cheeseblab · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent history of the evolution of American workers from hierachicized guild members to active adversaries of management--and the unfortunate ancillary rise of racism and ethnic strife. Also of the rise of Lincoln's Republican Party and the loss of cap-D Democracy to the South and the dark side for three-quarters of a century.

[June · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was required reading and so it was so dry I just did speed reading to get it done. That said, even while only speed reading, I did notice this book has so many run on sentences and comma splices. It's awful. But hey, I got it done. If you are interested in labor history, I suppose this book is good, but that's not me.

[Kate · Rating 2 out of 5]

Might have been a pretty good book if not for the implicit racism. There’s some hopeful stuff about a moment of American commitment to labor unity. Except, you know, not for black people. Which Wilentz isn't particularly concerned about, or perhaps, doesn't even notice.

[Jennie · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found it very interesting to learn about not only labor history but New York City history, all rolled up in one. It was an enjoyable read, although the author assumes more historical knowledge than I have; I would have appreciated more background information. But all in all a valuable book.

[Mark Bowles · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sean Wilentz, Chants Democratic; New York City and the Rise of the American Working Class (1984)
1. Discusses "metropolitan industrialization": process in which labor becomes a commodity
2. Excellent discuss of labor in Jacksonian New York
3. Integrates labor, capital, and political history

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

What a neat book! It's heavy sloggin at times, but well worth the trouble.

[James Wilcox · Rating 3 out of 5]

Difficult to read but a fascinating look into the development of the working class and the labor movement.

[Connor · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was such an awesome read. Prior to this I had thought of the beginning of American labor history as coinciding roughly with the Gilded Age, a response to the era of robber barons and extreme inequality. Wilentz here shows that early labor unrest resembling “strikes” goes back as far as the 1760s, with full fledged trade unions and labor-based political parties appearing by the Jacksonian era.

For some, industrialization was welcomed as an expansion of their freedoms and economic opportunities. But for a large strata of American society, Wilentz argues that the rise of capitalism was felt rather as a loss of control over one’s life, as something disempowering. Many Americans were forced to reinterpret the founding ideals of their young country, those promises of personal liberty and independence, in light of the new system of commodified wage labor they were working under. How could the idealized image of the Jeffersonian yeoman farmer or the small independent producer as the model American citizen be squared with the rise of industrial society?

It was in response to anxieties and questions such as these that we see some of the earliest expressions of a class conscious viewpoint in our country’s history. What I found most fascinating was that virtually every single articulation of this viewpoint was made using the language of the Republic in attempt to fulfill its original promises. The Americans of these early labor movements were obsessed with the political egalitarianism of Thomas Paine and touted classical notions of virtue and the good of the commonwealth. This plus a dash of Ricardian labor theory created an intellectual scene in NYC in which people began to suggest that pure self interest, material gain, and greed were not compatible with the ideals of the Republic.

Wilentz consistently highlights that this emerging viewpoint was an attempt to fulfill the founding purpose of this country, to find a way to hold on to the promise of a dignified and free life for all. He refrains also from an overtly Marxist interpretation of this scene or from “proletarienizing” these folks in his analysis, which I appreciated. What matters is not to be able to say these people were proto-socialists or something, that’s beside the point. These were people who embraced liberalism but were taking issue and grappling with the clearly emerging class relations around them, which I found fascinating. Contrary to what some modern pundits would suggest, to be conscious of class and critical of exorbitant concentrations of wealth and capital did not make these people un-American.

Rather, we see here in the earliest dawn of the Republic, men and women simply making the case for a fairer, more just society through the lens of class. They did so out of love for their country and what it had the potential to be. As Wilentz reminds us, these were Americans who wanted to see our nation become a Republic not merely in name, but in fact. I think this is a beautiful perspective to keep in mind today and one that certainly moved me throughout the course of this book.

[Vincent Fong · Rating 4 out of 5]

For academics only? Overly detailed for me.

[Simon · Rating 2 out of 5]

I did it. It was a long slog. The one thing I learned was that US history is quite different than is promulgated.

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excerpted as "The Bastardization of Craft" in Gary Kornblith, ed., The Industrial Revolution in America (1998)

Written from the critic's (artisan's) perspective, Wilentz's account argues that changes in craft production in New York City "undermined artisanal pride, lowered earning power, and reduced workers' independence" even if the trade was not mechanized in any major way." (p. 80) Wilentz avoids the pitfalls of oversimplifying the world of work in antebellum NYC, while at the same time identifying changing patterns of craft production.

New York city witnessed tremendous growth in the first half of the 19th C, becoming a major trade and finance city. With the growth of industry in NYC, there were also growth of inequity between rich and poor. "Laissez nous faire" housing policy ensured that the poorest residents lived in squalid conditions. But there were limits to the rate of growth of large manufacturing concerns, the lack of major water works being one example. While there were new heavy industries like gas production and fine tool making in the City prior to 1850, these only made up about 5% of the city's manufacturing workers. "As in the Jeffersonian period, the typical manufacturing worker in antebellum New York was not an iron molder or a brewery worker, but a tailor (or tailoress), a carpenter, a shoemaker, a baker -- to name only the largest occupations." (p. 83)

The major change that happened in the antebellum period was the subdivision of labor into sub-components. The "bastardization of craft" refers to the tendency of a business to only retain artisans to do small parts of the work that were needed to finish a product, hence allowing the business owner to hire less expensive workers for more repetitive and lower skilled work. The "headquarters" of the bastard system was the "manufactories" or "outwork manufactories" in which perhaps 20 workers performed strictly sub-divided tasks, which as a whole had represented what a single journeyman would have done. The natural outcome of the sub-division of labor was the advent of piece work. With piece work being done in garret workshops or even at home, this deskilling of labor reached even into people's homes where entire families labored in the putting out system.

The major irony here is that the bastardization of craft was accomplished by the master craftsmen who took advantage of the new economic order to enrich themselves, and in so doing they destroyed their own trades and debased their own journeymen. As credit became harder and harder to get, the elusive dream of starting one's own shop became more difficult to realize. Class lines were drawn more firmly and more permanently.