Part 3: A Look Back and Homeward

My time here in 1886 is coming to an end at last. After all the snags and distractions, we are going home. My roommate has finally stumbled upon a way to open a stable vortex with our newly reconstructed time machine, and we are going home. The one thing I won’t miss is having to work while I’ve been in this place, especially after wading through filth as a trash collector. It’s one of those reality checks about the 19th century that I was aware of but not prepared for. In the last few days since I’ve been waiting to get home, I’ve been thinking about the legacies of the Haymarket incident…
There have been many legacies that have developed in the one hundred-twenty years since the Haymarket riot. To this time-traveler, two of the biggest legacies of the Haymarket incident have got to be the “Red Scare” that gripped the nation, as well as the miscarriage of justice that came as a result of the ensuing hysteria. Immediately after the riot occurred, a wave of fear-tinged speculation held large sections of the US population enthralled for the months following the incident. “The fear of an anarchist conspiracy gripped not only capitalists and the authorities but public opinion in general. For a large segment of the population the anarchists ceased to be human beings. (Avrich, 177)” Most of this hysteria was reinforced by newspaper articles that focused on anarchism’s advocacy of self-defense, as well as the foreignness of their ideas, which in turn fed the public desire to see justice done. The stereotyping of anarchists as murderous, bearded terrorists in turn led to a climate of anti-German feeling, as Germans were partially responsible for the spread of radical ideology. This climate of fear also allowed a police dragnet to comb through Chicago without any warrants, arresting any anarchist or radical with connections to the local labor movement. This anti-red witch hunt was coordinated by Inspector Bonfield, who had ordered the police to move on the rally that preceded the so-called riot, and his superior, Captain Schaak, who saw the Haymarket as a chance to clean up Chicago and make an example of the movement’s leaders. Besides warrantless searches and arrests, Schaak and Bonfield openly tried to create witness testimony, along with shutting down any radical papers connected to the anarchists. Anarchists on the other hand, used the same dehumanizing tactics against those perceived to be their enemies. Police, for example, were referred to as “bloodhounds” just as the moniker “pig” developed during the Vietnam era protest culture (Avrich, 215-35). Essentially, both sides became embroiled in their own hatred and propaganda, perhaps making the entire Haymarket incident inevitable. In other words, something was going to happen, but no one knew when. To be sure, anarchists wanted to start a revolution, but they were righting for a ripe moment that could be used as propaganda. In this way, the riot furnished an example, but it was not the right one, as those on the chopping block allegedly were the best and brightest of the Chicago movement. The riot was overblown, and details aside, both parties must share equal parts of the blame for its occurrence. It is just that the wrong people were blamed for the actual crime. “Both sides were prisoners of conspiracy theories… Bonfield, to be sure, defended business interests and had resolved to rid the city of radicals. But it is doubtful that he had any well-conceived plan at the Haymarket. He saw his chance and took it. The same perhaps was true for the bomb-thrower. (Avrich, 214)”
Given the public outcry for blood, the resulting guilty verdict of the Haymarket Eight could be seen as inevitable. “The conviction of men for murder who had not even been present when the bomb was thrown, the packed jury, the perjured testimony, the twisted interpretation of the law by a judge plainly determined to hang the defendants, the open avowal of the prosecution that the men were being tried for their opinions rather than deeds… as time passed… a growing number of observers, most of whom abhorred anarchism and had no sympathy with radical propaganda of any sort, concluded that the condemned men had not received impartial justice. (Avrich, 300-1)” In this way, the trial itself was the high-water mark of the 1886 Red Scare. Another facet of the public scare was its effect on the labor movement itself, prompting union leaders and agitators to tone down their activities in the face of a backlash from the business classes who, like the police, took their opportunity to try and silence the outcry of the unions and organizers. To this end, “law and order leagues” were created to upset any further union activity, and for a time, it had appeared as if Chicago’s capitalist classes had defeated the radical factions almost completely and the end of an era had come. In a way, this view was true, as anarchism as an ideology essentially ended in this time, allowing more moderate union leaders to take the forefront in the struggle for better conditions (Avrich, 428-30). After the remaining anarchists were hung in November of 1887, public opinion turned to other things, and Chicago gradually settled into the status quo, with labor activists and business interests clashing over conditions. As time went on, the public forgot how angry they had been, which allowed an opportunity for the miscarriage of justice to be fixed after a fashion. In 1893, while Chicagoans were occupied by the Columbian Exposition, Governor John Altgeldt, who had a reputation for liberalism and being on fair terms with the labor factions, issued a pardon for the final three anarchists in jail, effectively bringing the incident to a close. Altgeldt’s reasoning for his actions was that the trial was a sham across the board, and that justice was not meted out according to constitutional protocol, blaming Judge Gary and Prosecutor Grinnell on this count, as well as the Chicago Tribune for tampering with the jury pool. It was not a popular decision, but over time, it came to be seen as an act political courage in later years (Avrich, 417-26).
In the 21st Century, Haymarket’s effects still linger in our society, namely in terms of an out of control media that arbitrarily creates “others” for the mainstream population to oppose, which could lead some to believe that this tendency developed during the Haymarket period. In times of fear and uncertainty, people turn to the media for assurance and information, and as technology changes our ability to access media sources, but the media’s aims have not changed. Basically, if the media magnates can keep our attention with fear-mongering (and the occasional scandal), then they can continue to generate profit at the public’s expense. This fear-mongering phenomenon in turn has repeatedly been used to relax the humanitarian impulse of the public, allowing witch hunts to periodically set Americans against one another. Meddling by the media also contributes to the continuing miscarriages of justice in this country, with the full publication of criminal case details, which inevitably tampers with any potential jury pool. The development of the media as an invisible branch of government that shapes American opinion has got to be Haymarket’s most salient legacy. Even today, Americans can still be easily distracted by scary stories that do not really provide any useful information, but instead feed a blood-lust that allows enough leeway for government authorities to act more freely in their own objectives. The search for bin Laden, and wider scare campaign surrounding the “war on terror” strikes me as a good example of this media-government partnership. In 1886, articles about the search for the mysterious bomber kept the public’s mind on a continuing and imminent threat. It was good that the bomber was never caught because then a sense of finality could be had, and the public would not be as docile. The hunt for bin Laden is similar in this way; as long as there is a popular enemy on the loose, than the rationale for crushing their ideology and its support still tacitly exists. It does not matter if bin Laden is ever captured, or if he is still even alive, as long as he is a symbol, the media can use his image and name to incite and/or reaffirm fear in the public.
And on that happy note, I’m leaving this place and not thinking about it ever again. I had some close calls, and I was tempted to change history… maybe beat the media at its own game somehow, but I’m not sure I could have done any good. In the end, I’m just glad that the media was so focused on this event that no one of consequence noticed the piece of the 21st Century that was dropped onto the outskirts of 19th Century Chicago.


Bibliography
Avrich, Paul. The Haymarket Tragedy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984.