From Mutual Aid to the Welfare State: Fraternal Societies and Social Services, 1890-1967

Rating:
Summary: Milestone in Fraternal History
Review: David Beito has made a major contribution in the study of fraternalism with From Mutual Aid to the Welfare State: Fraternal Societies and Social Services, 1890-1967, David T. Beito (University of North Carolina Press, 2000).

Mr. Beito's research succeeds in casting light on the seemingly impenetrable area of fraternal history, an area that proves difficult to research due to many so-called secret societies failure to leave evidence of their history. His marshalling of facts is truly impressive. His style of writing is fluid and enjoyable to read. While there was not much information about non-insurance orders such as Freemasonry, Independent Order of Odd Fellows, or the Knights of Pythias, the book provides a wealth of information on the more obscure orders, many of which have passed into history.

Portions of his book dealing with the effects of the depression and New Deal legislation on mutual benefit societies has led me to revise my own postulates formulated in: Toward a Fraternal History of Marin County: A Survey of Secret Societies being a General History of Various Fraternities and Their Specific Impact in Marin

Rating:
Summary: Milestone in Fraternal History
Review: I've always had a feeling that Americans prior to the New Deal were highly cooperative and public-spirited, accomplishing their private and collective goals by voluntary, non-governmental means. Beito's book supports this view in a very powerful way, in a major area of social action. His detailed scholarship proves that people fulfilled their needs and desires for community and security by organizing voluntary systems of insurance and group enterprise. The book represents a compelling chapter in the history and character of American society, as well as a lesson in the fertility of non-governmental civic action. He proves that Paine and Tocqueville were right.

Rating:
Summary: Beito Rediscovers Tocquevillian America
Review: I've always had a feeling that Americans prior to the New Deal were highly cooperative and public-spirited, accomplishing their private and collective goals by voluntary, non-governmental means. Beito's book supports this view in a very powerful way, in a major area of social action. His detailed scholarship proves that people fulfilled their needs and desires for community and security by organizing voluntary systems of insurance and group enterprise. The book represents a compelling chapter in the history and character of American society, as well as a lesson in the fertility of non-governmental civic action. He proves that Paine and Tocqueville were right.

Rating:
Summary: rediscovering a lost institution
Review: This book is about something that was once a central par of working class American life but has now almost vanished from sight. That something is "mutual aid" or "fraternalism", the way ordinary people, often poor, organised and acted collectively for mutual help and benefit. The book looks at the history of this phenomenon, its extent (enormous), the kind of services provided (very wide ranging - literally cradle to grave), and the institutions it created, the so-called "fraternal societies" such as Elks, Moose, Knights of Tabor etc. Some chapters look at particular examples such as "Mooseheart", (the orphanage of the Loyal order of Moose) or the creation of a hospital in the Delta by poor rural blacks via the Knights and Daughters of Tabor. Today we tend to believe that these kind of services can only be provided by government or (perhaps) by commercial enterprise. This shows that for most of the last two hundred years (and not only in America) they have been provided by the free co-operation of ordinary people. As Beito points out the benefits provided by mutual aid institutions were rights, not handouts, on a reciprocal basis, rather than one of hierarchy and dependency, and tied to a strict and elevated moral code. He also shows that women were heavily involved via their own orders (often feminist), and that blacks and immigrants were disproportionately likely to be involved. The book is based on detailed empirical research, with a huge array of illustrations and examples. One obvious question is where have all these institutions gone. The title says it - mutual aid has been replaced by the welfare state, partly because of intellectual shifts, partly due to the impact of the Great Depression. On reading this you may well ask, Has this been a gain?

Rating:
Summary: rediscovering a lost institution
Review: This book is about something that was once a central par of working class American life but has now almost vanished from sight. That something is "mutual aid" or "fraternalism", the way ordinary people, often poor, organised and acted collectively for mutual help and benefit. The book looks at the history of this phenomenon, its extent (enormous), the kind of services provided (very wide ranging - literally cradle to grave), and the institutions it created, the so-called "fraternal societies" such as Elks, Moose, Knights of Tabor etc. Some chapters look at particular examples such as "Mooseheart", (the orphanage of the Loyal order of Moose) or the creation of a hospital in the Delta by poor rural blacks via the Knights and Daughters of Tabor. Today we tend to believe that these kind of services can only be provided by government or (perhaps) by commercial enterprise. This shows that for most of the last two hundred years (and not only in America) they have been provided by the free co-operation of ordinary people. As Beito points out the benefits provided by mutual aid institutions were rights, not handouts, on a reciprocal basis, rather than one of hierarchy and dependency, and tied to a strict and elevated moral code. He also shows that women were heavily involved via their own orders (often feminist), and that blacks and immigrants were disproportionately likely to be involved. The book is based on detailed empirical research, with a huge array of illustrations and examples. One obvious question is where have all these institutions gone. The title says it - mutual aid has been replaced by the welfare state, partly because of intellectual shifts, partly due to the impact of the Great Depression. On reading this you may well ask, Has this been a gain?