Lecture Outline: Civil Society Continued: ITU

and Weimar Germany

I. ITU Continued: Occupational characteristics
promoting associationalism
A. Status
B. Working Hours
C. Job Satisfaction
D. Substitution System
II. Darker Side of Civil Society?
A. Civil and Uncivil Associations
B. Polarizing vs. Integrating Associations
C. Berman, Associations, and the Nazis
 Reminder: Exam Rooms
• We will split the class into two because this room is too
small to fit everyone
• Last names starting A through L take exam in normal
class
• Last names starting with M through Z should go to
Stewart Bio room S3/3 for the exam
– It’s very important you go to the right room
– If you’re in the wrong room and we don’t have enough
exams, we will ask those in the wrong room to go to the
other room and you might not have enough time to
complete the exam
• Questions?
 Tips
• (1) Be ready to associate names of authors/theorists
and the ideas they present
– Michels=ILO, Wright Mills=Power Elite, etc.
• (2) Study both readings and lectures
– Most likely to be on exam if in both
– But there will be questions on material only in
lectures or only in the readings
 Class Next Week
• Only class is on Thursday
 Causes of Union Democracy
L, T, and C’s explanation for ITU democracy:

Union Democracy

Two-Party System

Occupational Associations
 Causes of Associationalism
• Occupational/union associations are very rare, almost
non-existent
• Begs the question: Why were ITU members so active
in union associations? And more broadly, what causes
associationalism?
• Hall and Putnam: Offer broad historical/structural
explanation of associationalism
– But state, religion, and economy were largely the
same for all unions in North America in the 1950s
– Doesn’t explain ITU associationalism
 Causes of Associationalism Continued
• Possible Answers: Need to address the freedom and
willingness of people to hang out with one another and
pursue their particular interests together
• Authors find that the particular characteristics of the
type setting occupation affected their ability and
willingness to associate with one another
– 4 important characteristics: status, working hours,
job satisfaction, and the substitution system
– All promoted active participation in union
associations
 Status and Associationalism
• Status: According to Weber, stratification based on
culture
– Opera singers high, janitors low
• Related Meaning: relative social standing and prestige
of an individual, group, or position
– Status system important in secondary schools
• Jocks, nerds, preps, etc.
• Rankings: School example shows relative status
– Sociologists are interested in this, and psychologists
find that humans almost always consider relative
status when interacting with others
• We always consider our status relative to others
 Status Exercise
• Ranked status system requires popular ideas of status rank,
something that might not be the case
• Take a minute to rank in your heads the list below
– Construction worker
– Doctor
– Janitor
– Kindergarten teacher
– Lawyer
– Prime Minister
– Professional hockey player
– Prostitute
 Status and Associationalism Continued
• Question: What factors determine occupational status?
• Legality: Drug dealers lower status because of illegality
• Earnings: CEO status because of wealth
• Celebrity: Actor high status because of celebrity
• Social Value: Doctor high status because helps people
• Power: Prime Minister high status because of power
• Education: Professor higher status because of
education
• Type of Work: Janitor low because of dirty, manual
• Of these, the last two are most important for
understanding union democracy in the ITU
 Status of ITU members
• Print Setters of ITU: Had a strange status
– Educated, which is source of status
– Blue-collar workers, limits status
• A common sociological finding is that people spend
time with people with similar status
• Feel looked down on when around higher status,
superior when around people with lower status
• Secondary school friends usually have similar status,
friendships falter when one gains status relative to
other after graduation
 Relevance of ITU Status
• Putting these two points together helps explain why
ITU members formed associations together
• ITU members had difficulty meeting people with
similar status
– Pushed them to befriend one another, hang out,
participate in associations together
 Job Satisfaction and Associationalism
• ITU job satisfaction also promoted associationalism
• ITU members really liked jobs
– 73% really liked jobs, average for American male workers was
only 27%
• Generally, if you don’t like your jobs, you won’t want to
hang out with your co-workers during your free time
– Want to avoid anything to do with work
• Didn’t bother ITU members because liked their jobs
– 66% of printers who liked job preferred hanging out
with other printers
– Only 40% for those printers who disliked job
 Job Satisfaction and ILO
• Job Satisfaction also played a more direct role in
limiting the Iron Law of Oligarchy
• Michels notes that organizational elites fight tooth
and nail to maintain positions
• Authors note that ITU elites were less concerned
about maintaining position
– Really liked their jobs and colleagues
– Not the end of world if defeated in election
• Would be back doing a job they liked with people they
liked
 Odd-Working Hours and Associationalism
• Odd working hours is the 3rd cause of associationalism
• Historically, the print industry (especially news
papers) had odd working hours
– Production in late evening and throughout the
night to have papers ready by morning
– Heaviest work on Fridays and Saturdays
– Meant that many print-setters were working when
others were socially active
• Effect: Couldn’t easily hang out with non-type setters
– Forced them to hang out with one another
Night or Day Shift and Friendship
with Other Printers

Proportion of career on Night Work

 Substitution System, Labour Market, and
Associationalism
• Two additional characteristics of the type setter
profession interacted to promote associationalism
• Substitute System of ITU: Employee controlled his
(her?) position, able to choose who would fill in
– Remnant from pre-capitalist craft guilds where
workers had greater control over position
• Structure of Labor Market: Two types of position
– Permanent: Individual works full-time
– Part-time: Individual works only during peak periods
• Would show up daily to see if needed
• Didn’t get many hours, required substitute work
 Substitute System Continued
• Both combined to promote associationalism in 2 ways
• (1) Part-timers would hang out together if they didn’t
get work for the day
– Promoted associational participation
– Especially given weird working hours
• (2) One was better able to gain permanence if active in
associations
– Made friends who were permanent employees at
associations, and these friends gave you work
– You were able to make it through the temp period
because of the work you got from friends
Printer Unemployment and
Associational Membership
 But Why Associations?
• L, T, and C’s answer considers why ITU members hung
out with each other when not working
• Somethings Missing: This doesn’t really answer why
they formed many associations instead of just hanging
out informally to do other things
– Authors really don’t address this issue
– Seem to assume that assocationalism was natural
• Major job of sociologists is coming up with hypotheses
• Question: What might explain why the ITU workers
were particularly prone to form associations?
 Summary
• Lipset, Trow, and Coleman provide evidence that active
associationalism can limit the ILO
• Agree that the ILO is the norm, but show how it can
be overcome
• More broadly, provide a strong empirical analysis
highlighting mechanisms through which
associationalism promotes democracy
• Participation, knowledge, accountability, civility
• Don’t mention civil society but deal directly with it in
ways that address some of Tocqueville’s concerns
• Considers how associations were counterweight of
union oligarchy
 Is the Glass Half Full or Half Empty?
• The work has both pessimistic and optimistic
implications on the possibility of democracy
• Pessimistic: Unique characteristics promoted democ.
• It’s no longer in existence, and there are no more
examples of union democracy in North America
• Optimistic:
• Two-party system vital for democracy and makes the
ILO less important
– Difficult in organizations, common in society
– Suggests Michels pessimism was unwarranted
– Final questions or comments about Union Democracy?
Universal Benefits of Associationalism?
• Our readings so far have considered how active
associationalism is a boon for democracy
– Promotes civility, counterweight to the state
• While accepting that associations can have these
effects, a growing number of scholars question whether
associations always promote democracy
• Our reading by Sheri Berman is part of this more critical
perspective
 Associations and (in)Civility
• Lockean View: Focuses on “civil” norms and values that
promote democracy
• Tocquevillian View: Suggests that associations promote
civil norms and values (but focuses on power)
• Incivility: Yet it is clear that some associations are
intolerant, not civil
– La Muete, Nazi associations, male chauvinist groups
• Protecting the In-Group: These intolerant groups are
very concerned about the well-being of their in-group
– Intolerance/discrimination toward others as means
of benefiting the in-group
– Goal is commonly subordination/removal of “other”
 Inclusive or Exclusive Associations
• While some associations are founded on uncivil
principles, scholars note that the extent to which they
are inclusive or exclusive is also important
• Inclusive: People from all walks of life and with
different political perspectives interact in associations
– Similar to ITU
– Promotes civility, respect for difference, compromise
– Common view of civil society and associations in
Tocquevillian perspective
– Common assumption associations are all like this
– Putnam calls “bridging” ties
 Associations and Exclusion
• Exclusion: Associational membership can be
exclusive/discriminatory
– Racial, ethnic, political segregation extends to
associational membership
• Competing groups have their own associations
• Putnam calls “bonding” ties
• Polarization: Can promote extremism
– Increases intolerance, prevents compromise,
promotes competition and extremism
• Our readings by Sunstein in a couple of weeks will
consider this issue in a different way
 Civil Society and the Rise of the Nazis
• Berman argues that associations were polarizing in
Weimar Germany, the period preceding Nazi rule
• Notes that there was very active associationalism in
Germany from the late 19th century to the rise of the
Nazis
• Claims that robust associationalism assisted the rise of
Hitler
• Therefore not very Tocquevillian
 Explaining Incivility
• Berman focuses on two related factors that made
German associationalism uncivil
• (1) Polarizing/Exclusive Associations: She notes that
German society was very polarized and that
associations were organized to represent competing
groups
– Associations were therefore promoting separation
and antagonism instead of integration and
compromise
– Putnam: Bonding instead of bridging
 Explaining Incivility Continued
• (2) Ineffective Government: Berman claims this uncivil
society was promoted by ineffective government
– Middle class felt alienated from government
– Organized associations to disengage from politics
– Destabilized government and became extremist out
of resentment, desire for change
– Bred distrust of Weinmar government
• Hall: Government and associations didn’t collaborate
but instead competed
 Associationalism and the Nazis
• Berman notes three main ways through which Hitler
was empowered by the associations
• (1) Initial Support: Able to get many associations to
actively support Nazis
– Middle class were receptive of Hitler, their
associations supported him
• (2) Skilled Organizational Activists: Nazis used
associational leaders to organize their support base
• (3) Infiltration of Associations: Nazis infiltrated
associations, coopted them, used them
 Conclusion
• As is commonly the case in the social sciences, the
relationship between associations and democracy is
complicated
• Tocquevillian view clearly shows that it can be a boon
for democracy
– As do Lipset, Trow, and Coleman
• At the same time, can be very undemocratic
• Context and character matters, no universal effect
• Questions or comments?
• Enjoy the Thanksgiving break!