Progressive Era

Both authors(Maureen A. Flannigan and Shelton Stromquist) concerning reformation during the progressive area gives insight to two different perspectives. One author, Stromquist, focus on the cases that took place during Cleveland, including the carstrike of 1899 and the derailing of the democratic party. The other author, Flannigan takes the perspective of women by demonstrating the different roles of both men and women during the Progressive era in Chicago. Flannigan uses the examples of the City Club which was male and the Women's City Club which was female. Presenting these articles, it would not make much sense to point who is directly “wrong” or “right”, because they both give evidence to the argument that there is more than one answer to the Progressive Era on the concern of municipal concerns. 
Shelton Stromquist points out that it is his argument, “that progressive reform at the municipal level congealed in a crucible class polarization and conflict” (1) His primary example, Cleveland. Cleveland in the late nineteenth century was essentially dominated by the republican party, but it would be both the republican and democratic party that would suffer in the hands of reform after the campaign of 1899. After suffering from two main events, Streetcar strike of 1899 and the successful campaign of “Samuel ‘Golden Rule’ Jones”, the political web of Cleveland would change dramatically. (2) The Streetcar strike of 1899 did two main things. The first would be that streetcar men enjoyed widespread support among Cleveland’s working class. The second would be the support across the diverse ethnic working-class communties of the city. (3) Jones would run as nonpartisan campaign, finishing the race, Jones had 56% of Cleveland’s votes. (4)
Flannigan’s argument included Women’s City Cubs (women) and the City Club (men) of Chicago. (5) These clubs uses took different approaches on how the solve the municipal debates that were taking place in Chicago.Unlike that of Stromquist, Flannigan debates the role of women during the Progressrive Era.  One example would be sanitation. One group leaned toward municipal ownership instead of contracting out while some others wish to keep the same system but tighten up on regulations. (6) The City Club voted to support to keep the system in private hands for financial reasons. (7) The Women’s Club took a different approach to handling the sanitation issue. They favored both the municipal control over garbage if it would maximize the healthiness of the enviorment. (8)
     Flannigan's argues that the Women played a vital role in the Progressive Era such as their idea of issue of sanitation in Chicago while Shelton focuses more on the transformation of a political and social Cleveland. Therefore, both arguments take credit for describing the changes and reformation during the early nineteenth century of America. 

1.Stromquist, Shelton. The Crucible of Class : Cleveland Politics and the Origins of Municipal Reform in the Progressive Era. Journal of Urban History 1997 23:192.(Sage, Urban History Association 1997.)  http://juh.sagepub.com/content/23/2/192.citation. (Accessed April 14, 2012) 194
2. Ibid., 200
3. Ibid., 202
4. Ibid., 206
5. Flannigan, A. Maureen. Maureen A. Flanagan. Gender and Urban Political Reform: The City Club and the Woman's City Club of Chicago in the Progressive Era The American Historical ReviewVol. 95, No. 4 (Oct., 1990), (University of Chicago) 1032-1050. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2163477 (Accessed April 14, 2012) 10336. Ibid., 10367. Ibid., 10378. Ibid., 1038

Every Dog (No Distiction of Color) has its Day

I chose cartoon B which after researching from Harper’s weekly website found the title to be called “Every Dog (No distinction of Color) has its day”, by Thomas Nast in 1879. The cartoon features three characters, two main and the other one is in the background. The first character to the right of the image appears to be Chinese because of his facial features and because of his clothing. The man looking over his shoulder, to the left of the image is obviously an American Indian. His head dress, clothing and the weapon in his hand is a dead give away. The third character is sitting in the background with a sign to his left stating, “My day is coming”. He is shaded black, in farmer type of clothing and hat. The dark shading makes him appear he is a negro.(1)

The date of this cartoon became a big help in research because I was able to find that Nast’ cartoon could be a response to the events that took place in 1875 where Congress announced, “regulating immigration were unconstitutional because they were inconsistent with the exclusive power of the U.S. Congress to regulate foreign commerce.” (2) Which would explain the, “The Chinese must Go” sign hanging in the cartoon above the Chinese character. As well as the writings, “Go East” while the “Go West” writings is a response of Americans moving West and taking over Native Indian lands. During this time period, Americans feared immigration, thinking that Asians could effect the American society. Nast’s cartoon is a sarcastic reminder of Americans that they themselves were immigrants or descendants of immigrants. (3.) One obvious symbol is the text written, “The Chinese Problem” and the mentioning of the “Naturalization Laws” and the large print of “Laws providing for their Banishment”. The title, “Every dog(No distinction of color) has its day” is also a clue to the meaning of this cartoon. The “no distinction of color” refers to the fact, it doesn’t matter whether they are black, yellow or red. 

Nast intentions were possibly a sarcastic twist of faith that while the United States was proposing eliminating immigration, it was in fact immigration that we were founded upon. Promoting the idea that African Americans would be next, “My day is coming” when they would find a freedom. 

1. Thomas, Nast. "Every Dog (No Distinction of Color) has its day." Haper's Weekly. Journal of Civilization. Feburary 8, 1879 (Accessed April 5, 2012). http://ecollege.asu.edu/re/DotNextLaunch.asp?courseid=6535434&userid=9107239&sessionid=45bedeea73&tabid=2UhQFWSFEF9qFx7um1jw12DlsCMm6Gzg9YIQwTYfq2UYH4rKHaZBWNMbl3IfKr7t&sessionFirstAuthStore=true&macid=qWI4bMshOpJeHO9zqnlym/1x38YxiKnZhUBZaciOKCyyXoV5mOWlMA6mjaE19P33OcHgRu2dG0vHZg5MtdGaO9Z+TY5eYonRiyEfTyAibwqpu/iVdUed80pTKKUA3HEpKpehkfGAom9UFGI+fQY4FWUNSRf4mUh8vxKlpk57n3Yv/RVftOTiN7axR03SI2MsjrOOmJjdJ4PqXl0my0Ppz9kHxNKRC5x0VC2DpZY4qeM=

2.Bankston, Carl. "History of US Immigration, 1783-1891":In encyclopedia of American Immigration. March 2010. Salem Press. (Accessed April 5, 2012). 

.http://salempress.com/store/samples/american_immigration/american_immigration_history.htm

3..Ohio History, "What's so Funny?": In Using Cartoons in the Classroom. (Accessed April 6 2012)http://ohiossrc.org/ode-focus-on-social-studies/whats-so-funny/materials/11.htm