COMMUNICATIONS.

The article presents the usefulness of secondary literature to a researcher in the field of labor history and advocates the wrong picturization of Daniel De Leon, a Marxist in the journal labor history. The article points out that, anyone familiar with the secondary literature can say that all of th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Labor History Vol. 16; no. 2; pp. 309 - 319
Autores principales: Seretan, L. Glen, Rich, Jacob C.
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Taylor & Francis Ltd Spring75
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=4556479&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 4556479
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        0023656X
        LAH
      jtl: Labor History
      issn: 0023656X
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Spring75
      vid: 16
      iid: 2
      pid: 377
      pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd
    artinfo:
      ui:
        4556479
        10.1080/00236567508584339
      ppf: 309
      ppct: 10
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: COMMUNICATIONS.
      aug:
        au:
          Seretan, L. Glen
          Rich, Jacob C.
        affil: Lecturer, Department of History, University of Toronto.
      su:
        Socialism
        Labor movement
        Writing
        De Leon, Daniel, 1852-1914
        Working class
        Political philosophy
        Capitalism
        United States
      sug:
        subj:
          United States
          Socialism
          Labor movement
          Writing
          De Leon, Daniel, 1852-1914
          Working class
          Political philosophy
          Capitalism
      ab: The article presents the usefulness of secondary literature to a researcher in the field of labor history and advocates the wrong picturization of Daniel De Leon, a Marxist in the journal labor history. The article points out that, anyone familiar with the secondary literature can say that all of the sources mentioned in the piece are well-known and have been utilized widely by researchers for a number of years. Historians have not shown sufficient appreciation of Mr. Daniel De Leon's services to the labor movement and have given too much credence to his critics and opponents. The charge that De Leon was a strikebreaker is a serious one and should have definite documentary verification. The testimony by De Leon's bitter opponents that he was a strikebreaker is not sufficient, for denunciatory epithets were common in cases of jurisdictional labor rivalry. De Leon stressed the futility of political action alone, leaving the capitalist class in control of the economy, by which it could lock out the working class from its means of livelihood.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 1975
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N