It would appear to be the case that rhetoric in New England communities often didn’t translate into action. Most of the demonstrations to bring about true reform were mounted by the Mill Girls themselves. Sadly, in a Mill town located near me, there was only one significant strike among the Mill workers that received any community support – and it was started by several young boys working in the Brunswick, Maine Mill. Sometimes it seems that we only listen to our children (if anyone at all), and it is a child who leads us by doing something rather than just talking. Perhaps, as many religious leaders suggest, children are born with Worth. Or some children may acquire an idealistic Worth through their youthful courageous actions. However, this Worth might be traded away when acquiring the “realistic” perspectives of adulthood.
Emphasis is placed on experience-based action within the community: New England pragmatism also appears prominently in De Tocqueville’s sixth criterion. Informed action is based on experience, not theory. The following dictum might be appropriate: “Show me what you have learned by enacting it.” In this seventh criterion, we find perhaps the deepest and most irony-laden betrayal of De Tocqueville’s habits when we turn to the work of Mill Girls. Clearly, these women were knowledgeable about not only the process of producing cloth but also maximizing productivity and motivation. Long before the Hawthorne Studies were done in which productivity was increased simply by someone listening to the women working in the Hawthorne Plant, there might have been a major breakthrough in the productivity of the Mills in New England if someone had asked the Mill Girls to offer their advice.
At the very least, something could have been learned by reading the commentaries offered by the Mill Girls in the Voice of Industry and Lowell Offering. Were strikes and protests (often met with violence) the only settings in which the concerns and ideas of Mill Girls were heard? And was anyone listening in these anxiety-filled and contentious settings? Ironically, the first recruits to the Lowell mills were offered the opportunity to receive an education and thereby improve their social status (leaving the farm to find work in “modern” industry). Earned Worth was possible via education. Yet, the education they received never allowed them to share (give voice to) the insights they had acquired from coupling this education with their on-the-job experiences. Earned Worth was not to be found through the acquisition of unused education. This appears to still be the case today in American culture.
Soon, the offering of education was withdrawn, as the recruits came not for an education but for escape from horrible conditions in another country (Ireland and then French-Canada). Survival took precedence over any hope of elevated social status or any prospect of Earned Worth. Today, there seems to be a parallel turning away from education as a stepping stone to upward social mobility. Training in a technical skill may yield a higher income than a liberal arts degree is likely to produce. If Worth is linked directly to wealth, then perhaps the financially secure plumber is “worthier” than the cab driver with a master’s degree in literature. There might even be an emergent criterion of Worth that relates to craftsmanship and artistry. Worth might be assigned to the plumber not because of this person’s financial status, but because of their skills in repairing leaking pipes.
