Democracy and Social Ethics - Jane Addams

Ok, there's tons of useful stuff in this little book, although perhaps not quite as much as I'd hoped. Some highlights from Anne Firor Scott's introduction: We get the importance of Darwin to Addams on p. xiv, some information about the radicalization of Addams on p. xxxix, a quick rundown of Hull House accomplishments on pp. xxxvi-xxxvii. We also have, on page xxv, the acknowledgment that Dreiser, Norris, and Garland were on the same path as Addams, Henry George, and Emma Goldman: all of them were expressing bitterness about the social conflict taking place in the gilded age.

The biggest thread to follow in the introduction - a thread that is also the biggest thread within the larger work, but is never hit quite so hard as in this intro - is Addams belief that humanity in the industrialized society needs to develop a new form of ethics. In Scott's words: "It was no longer sufficient to fill responsible for the well-being of one's own family, friends, and social equals. A new social ethic would have to evolve which would be based on responsibility to the whole community. This is [sic] essence was the purpose of Hull House..." (xxvi). This is the biggie in the whole book - the idea that an ethical evolution needs to take place, where a newly interconnected world requires a newly expanded ethics (this also sounds alot like Rorty's insistence that to be a liberal is simply to be a bleeding heart).

A few other related notes from the introduction. Addams/Scott diagnoses the problems of capitalism quite succinctly by noting that "an inherently social effort was used for individual gain" (liv). In other words, in true Marxist fashion, Addams doesn't understand why the work of the many enriches the one. She does, however, note (in p. 270 of the text, quoted on p. lvii of the intro) that the boss can be more moral than the reformer, for although he is corrupt he nevertheless is "democratic in method" while the technocratic reformer "believes that people must be made over by 'good citizens' and governed by 'experts.'"

The text itself has plenty of highlights, such as her description of the new ethics as "an affinity for all men" (9), but is most useful for me in two chapters: the chapter on industrial reform and the chapter on political reform.

The industrial reform is chock full of useful stuff about Yerkes/Cowperwood. Addams begins by noting that we are in a new era of association, but committees nevertheless often struggle, and the decisive individual still has the best of it in terms of getting things done (137-138). This seems to backup my idea that Cowperwood's ruthlessness is better for the community in the long run. Addams also mentions the Chicago strike of 1894 (140), something I should be thinking about. Finally, she mentions that the factory owners are not yet aware of this new era of association and are stuck back in the old squid/lobster way of thinking (148).

In the political passage, Addams first attacks wealthy reformers who seek only to fix the political machine so that it is no longer corrupt without trying to actually better the lives of people. For them, politics and life are separate, something that the workingman and the Hull House worker know to be totally untrue (222). She also again mentions, on both p. 224 and p. 240, that a corrupt alderman might do more for the community than a highminded reformer, because the alderman is at least integrated into the praxis of daily life. Although he is stealing a few pennies from the people's pockets in streetcar fares every day (p.252-253), the alderman is a "manifestation of human friendliness," far better received than the reformer who only embodies "honesty of administration" (240). Obviously, Hull House attempts to bridge this gap with both honesty of administration and manifestation of human friendliness.