A Critique of Democracy in Seattle
A visiting labor expert suggests that even the best reform movements are destined to repeat the failures of those they replace.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The series of lectures arranged by the Norwegian Workingmen's Society was begun last evening in the home of the organization, on Seventh street, between Pike and Pine, by John Lamb, ex-labor commissioner of Minnesota. Mr. Lamb's subject was 'The Strength and Weakness of Republican Institutions,' and the lecture, which was read from a carefully prepared manuscript, was a treatise on the nature of the human mind. By showing the weaknesses of humanity, the lecturer showed that democratic rule was not infallible and that any set of reformers, after obtaining authority, would in a decade become as bad as those whom they had replaced. Some of the strong points of this government were that while the citizens did not require a high standard of character in their officers, they would not accept the worst, and that the method of choosing officers enabled localities to conduct their own affairs.
“Any set of reformers, after obtaining authority, would in a decade become as bad as those whom they had replaced.”
This 1891 lecture captures a persistent anxiety in Pacific Northwest politics: the cycle of reform and disillusionment. Even as Seattle grew into a hub for labor organizing, activists were already debating whether institutional power inherently corrupts the idealist.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.