Comparative Review of History Articles

The late 19th century is one of the most important phases of the modern history. It brought all those changes, on the basis of which the modern society is formed. One of the most important aspects of the late 19th century is the emergence of the industrialization in the North America. Industrialization though was brought in the European continent earlier, but in North America it a little later. As industrialization firmed its hold, the people of North America were forced to deal with the changes it brought in the society. These changes were both unexpected and harsh, for all whose way of life was forcefully changed with it. This paper compares and contrasts three articles, which illustrates the struggle of the people of Canada in the wake of industrialization and the development of modern western society. These articles include John Lutz illustrating the participation of the aboriginals of British Colombia in the industrial and economical development of the province, Peter DeLottinvilles article working class culture and the role of taverns in Montreal during the late 19th century, and Gregory Kealeys article struggle of Torontos skilled workers and their respective unions with the employers to gain control on the workplace.

Subject and Main arguments of the articles
Lutz articles primary emphasis is on the role of the aboriginals of British Colombia in its economic and industrial development. He rejected the popular notion among most historians that the aboriginal population was relatively irrelevant to the economic development of the province. He argued that contrary to the popular belief the aboriginals were the primary labor force in the early days of the settlement and development of the colony, which later became the province of British Colombia. He asserted that if it were not the aboriginals, British Colombia would never have become, what is today.
   
Lutz argued that the natives were the natural source of labor in the early days of the settlement because they were the only source of labor available in the region at that time. He provided the figures, which clearly illustrates the fact that before the gold rush, British Colombia was entirely an aboriginal province with the two-third of the population comprising of the natives. Thus the early settlers were forced to rely on them, though grudgingly, for the next few decades. The eagerness of the Indians to work for wages was also a participating factor, which further enhanced the level of involvement of the natives in the development process.

Lutz provides the proof that even with the establishment of the colony in Victoria a mass migration of the natives towards the capital began. This migration for work soon became so intense that the entire villages started to leave during the summers for work. The tribal chiefs started to work as laborers and made contracts with the companies, which wanted the services and labor of their people. The author further argues that even the flocking of European people in the gold rush and the rapid emergence of Chinese labor did not prevented the natives in getting involved. In the end though they were no more the dominant people in the region but their participation continued. The author finally depicts the primary motive and incentive of these activities in the natives as to get respect among their people by holding potlatch ceremonies, which they must give generous gifts to the guests. This requires an extensive amount of money, which was the primary incentive for most ambitious natives to engage in labor with the white man in order to raise their social status.

Delottinvilles article primary emphasis was on the working conditions of the unskilled labor of the city of Montreal and what important role did taverns played at that time. Contrary to the popular belief the taverns helped in making the sufferings and inadequate living conditions of these poor workers like longshoremen public, in order to catch attention of the reformers and help change the deteriorating situation of the poor working class of the city. The taverns, particularly Joe Beef of Montreal also played an important role in providing shelter, health and other services to the poor. Joe Beef was one of the most important voices on the behalf of the poor at that time and he even motivated the labors to act for their rights and strike against their unjust employers. One of the famous strikes during which Joe Beef played an active role was the canal labor strike. He helped the labor class to be a man and fight for their rights like a man.

The author argues that most middleclass people despised the unskilled labors particularly because of their belief on being the righteous and most importantly because of their lack of understanding of the working classs culture, which prevailed during the 19th century Montreal. Most of the middle class people and reformers accused the taverns of being the core of all the dirt and filth in the city and the center of everything going wrong to the unskilled labors and poor of the city. These polished middleclass people often neglect the fact that it is the doings of the corporate leaders or Big Bugs as often called by Joe Beef, who were consistently exploiting the poor workers and were never ready to yield more wages to the workers.
Finally the author asserted that as soon the proper caretakers of the labor class came forward like the Knights of Labor came forward the taverns fell back in the shadow and lost their importance as a focal point of labor activities and forum.

Kealey primary focus on his article is the role played by trade unions of different crafts in their struggle against the employers in the war of getting hold of the workplace of the craft during the late 19th. The author used three trade unions of Toronto to exemplify, the coopers union, the molders union and the typographic union. The author then gave a detail account of the struggle of all these three unions and provided the facts that why the coopers union rise and fall was so drastic, on the contrary why the molders and the typographic unions were successful in their respective struggles and their adversaries have to succumb to their demands.
   
The author argued that the sudden rise and fall of the coopers union was the successful implementation of the machinery in the 19th century and the inability of the union to mold their tactics and strategies accordingly. On the contrary the molders and the compositors and printers were far more organized and, in the case of molders the machinery was not successfully implemented during that time so that they were able to carry on their traditions in the 20th century. In the case of printers and compositors, the machinery was introduced at that time, but the clever strategies devised by the union gave them upper hand even with the presence of machinery and the employers were forced use the machinery according to the unions demands.

Comparison
The most visible similarities between the three articles is that all of the speak about a specific era, which brought radical changes in the economy and society of that time. Though all three speak of different classes of the same country, but they all speak about the way different people responded to the changes brought by the industrialist European people in the continent. Lutz rejected the notion that the natives have no role in the economic development in the region. DeLottinville rejected the notion that the taverns in the Montreal were everything but good the unskilled working class. He proved the services and help provided by the taverns during that time. Kealey illustrated the struggle of the skilled labor on the wake of industrialization, which threatened their customs, traditions and way of life and how some of them failed to keep them up with the emerging industrialization, while others succeeded.
   
Thus this is the only similarity between all these articles that they speak about the same time, roughly the same region or country and speak about how people dealt with the rapid and radical changes in the new industrial era.
   
The similarities end here, because now the subject of all three articles is very much different. Three articles speak about entirely different people who were facing entirely different situations and their responses to the new situation were also entirely different. This is the primary reason that it is difficult to comparison the three articles more thoroughly and profoundly.
   
Thus it could be justly concluded that the articles deal with entirely different people in different situations though were in the same time and region and were part of a very large piece of work taking place in the entire region and changing the face of society.