denimbro Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Denimbro > Denim/workwear research
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 1876 Chinese impact report
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

1876 Chinese impact report

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
Message
Sansome View Drop Down
ADMIN
ADMIN
Avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2012
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 8818
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sansome Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Nov 2019 at 1:20am
Originally posted by Duke Duke wrote:

What is it you want to achieve from this thread? To somehow prove Levi’s (especially) and other businesses used ‘slave’ labour?

I don’t think there’s an awful lot more to say about this unless the discussion is about the entire American economy of shady business practice, racial persecution and corruption throughout government ... then you’d need to identify a decade and a century starting from today and choosing literally anytime right back to when Americans were British (or German, Swedish, Russian et al)

... and for that you’ll need a bigger internet 


I never intended to rehash old news, as you already know, we talked about this years ago.
It’s early days, and answering a few questions questions about Chinese labor and Levi. ( why not)
Seems harmless.

What do I want to achieve? Nothing much

I see this as a clash, of night and day cultures ( what’s not interesting about that)

I’m not looking to change the world with this thread.

I think you and many others, might enjoy it.

Edited by Sansome - 10 Nov 2019 at 10:28am
Back to Top
Foxy View Drop Down
whiskered
whiskered

anonymous

Joined: 10 Jun 2012
Location: Berlin/Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 2030
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Foxy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Nov 2019 at 5:26am
It might be worth to check which of the early garment worker unions were active in this area as their efforts & history is often well documented.
By 1890 there were already a few unions established.
Back to Top
Foxy View Drop Down
whiskered
whiskered

anonymous

Joined: 10 Jun 2012
Location: Berlin/Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 2030
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Foxy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Nov 2019 at 5:12am
Given the status of Chinese Coolies in the US around that time, it would be surprising if Chinese seamstresses were regarded as anything but property...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coolie
Back to Top
Foxy View Drop Down
whiskered
whiskered

anonymous

Joined: 10 Jun 2012
Location: Berlin/Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 2030
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Foxy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Nov 2019 at 5:32am
“... in 1854 that the Chinese were not allowed to testify as witnesses before the court in California against white citizens, including those accused of murder.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Chinese_Americans

I would also take into consideration that this impact report may be linked to efforts in anti-Chinese propaganda around that time.
Back to Top
Foxy View Drop Down
whiskered
whiskered

anonymous

Joined: 10 Jun 2012
Location: Berlin/Moscow
Status: Offline
Points: 2030
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Foxy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Nov 2019 at 5:43am
Same source:

“...
A notable incident occurred in 1870, when 75 young men from China were hired to replace striking shoe workers in North Adams, Massachusetts.[62] Nevertheless, these young men had no idea that they had been brought from San Francisco by the superintendent of the shoe factory to act as strikebreakers at their destination. This incident provided the trade unions with propaganda, later repeatedly cited, calling for the immediate and total exclusion of the Chinese. This particular controversy slackened somewhat as attention focused on the economic crises in 1875 when the majority of cigar and boots manufacturing companies went under. Mainly, just the textile industry still employed Chinese workers in large numbers.
...”

No words about female Chinese workers, though.
Back to Top
Duke View Drop Down
whiskered
whiskered
Avatar

Joined: 24 Oct 2018
Location: On the cludgie
Status: Offline
Points: 5473
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Duke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Nov 2019 at 11:14am
Originally posted by Sansome Sansome wrote:

Originally posted by Duke Duke wrote:

What is it you want to achieve from this thread? To somehow prove Levi’s (especially) and other businesses used ‘slave’ labour?

I don’t think there’s an awful lot more to say about this unless the discussion is about the entire American economy of shady business practice, racial persecution and corruption throughout government ... then you’d need to identify a decade and a century starting from today and choosing literally anytime right back to when Americans were British (or German, Swedish, Russian et al)

... and for that you’ll need a bigger internet 


I never intended to rehash old news, as you already know, we talked about this years ago.
It’s early days, and answering a few questions questions about Chinese labor and Levi. ( why not)
Seems harmless.

What do I want to achieve? Nothing much

I see this as a clash, of night and day cultures ( what’s not interesting about that)

I’m not looking to change the world with this thread.

I think you and many others, might enjoy it.
I’m not challenging your discussion, I was interested to know why this couldn’t continue on the original discussions (which I appreciate weren’t specifically about Chinese labour)

There’s no doubt Levi’s, and many other businesses, used Chinese labour - let’s not take the obvious in mining and railroad. 

I think what’s important to recognise here is context.

Around the time of the ‘immigration legislation’ there were around 100k Chinese in the U.S. - and as I noted around 7000 of those were female. The total number of employed women was approaching 5 million - i.e. Chinese women represented about 0.15% of that labour force. 

What these reports and legislation actually did was describe the overwhelming attitude of 19th century Americans towards the Chinese people. This was a response to public demands to halt the potential of cheapening labour conflated with testimonies of ‘dignitaries’ who helpfully noted the poor immigrants to be, variously, “not to be of the class of people we would like to have in our country”, “... very immoral, mean, mendacious, dishonest, thieving people”, or would “think no more of taking an oath than eating rice”.

The point here is that any potential ‘impact’ was summarily dealt with before it became the imagined problem - and whatever Levi’s did in employing some Chinese, it looks like they were thoroughly effective in cleansing that situation in a very short time, as did nearly every other business.

I don't swim. I can swim. I just don't have much cause to do so in the normal run of things.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.