In the early twentieth century, new forms of commercial entertainment—dance halls, movie theaters, amusement halls and parks, saloons and the like—emerged in urban areas, providing new ways for young Americans to amuse themselves. This essay explores the distinctive Mormon response to these new forms of amusement. Mormon leaders took up other progressive reformers’ concerns about early twentieth-century amusements, but refracted them through a distinctively Mormon lens that was at once gendered and uniquely religious. Mormons rejected the progressive double standard that sought to constrain women's, more than men's, participation in these new entertainments, focusing on restraining both genders equally. While many progressives held women more responsible for the sexual transgressions they worried resulted from these new forms of entertainment, Mormons held men and women equally accountable. Moreover, while other progressives sought (and largely failed) to provide alternative, more wholesome, entertainment for American youth, Mormons successfully provided family and Church amusements that kept their youth safely ensconced within the Church community. By the end of the 1910s, Church leaders had officially institutionalized the provision of amusement for its members and the Church formally became a social as well as religious organization.

Though John Dewey had considered education and democracy separately in his early career, he came to understand them as essentially linked concepts during his nearly ten-year collaboration with Ella Flagg Young at the University of Chicago. This intellectually gifted women, who eventually became superintendent of Chicago’s schools, connected education and democracy as well as theory and practice, essentially showing Dewey how democratic schools might work. This article briefly traces Dewey’s developing ideas of education and democracy in the context of his relationship with Young.

As the scope and power of public school systems across the United States grew during the Progressive Era, so too did a popular belief that mass education could solve the major social and political problems of the day. This in part owes to school reformers’ efforts to frame public education as an inherently patriotic institution that if properly supported could move the nation forward while preserving its history and traditions. Their efforts centered on the Columbian School Celebration, a nationwide school parade corresponding with the four-hundredth anniversary of Columbus's arrival in the Americas. A case study focusing on a key place and time in this movement's history––Brooklyn, New York, in the early 1890s––this article explores how progressive educators in Brooklyn both used patriotism as a rhetorical device to excite popular support and proclaimed it the cornerstone of the modern urban schools they hoped to build. In so doing, it helps explain both the rise of large urban school systems and growing salience of educational matters in twentieth-century politics.

This essay addresses the question of how the idea of liberalism and antireligious sentiment became associated during the Gilded Age. The subject of this essay—the New York Liberal Club, a debate and lecture group in New York City (1869–1877)—sheds light on the process in which liberalism, as an idea, outgrew its religious origins in early nineteenth-century America and more than ever became linked with antireligious sentiment. In the case of the New York Liberal Club, this development owed to the club's connection to social science and members' participation in the contentious debate over science and religion during the 1870s. In addition, it partly owed to club members' conception of liberalism as tolerance, open-mindedness, and a commitment to the free exchange of ideas. Because of this conception of liberalism, many club members saw liberalism and social science as a common cause, since both reflected a dedication to improving the world through free inquiry. Ultimately, these conceptions, as well as discourse at the club, led many observers in the public to incorrectly view all Liberal Club members (and liberalism itself) as in opposition to faith and religious belief.

While the Progressive Era in U.S. history featured varied examples of individuals and organizations turning to the federal government for reform and support, major narratives have mainly left American Indian tribal communities out of the story. This essay argues that Native people actually were quite active in their reservation communities during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Among other things, they held their own political councils, sent petitions to federal officials to promote their own agendas, and supported delegations to make their case in Washington, DC. This case study of activism on the Crow Creek Reservation in central South Dakota reveals numerous similarities and distinctions between Indian and non-Indian people in terms of progressive activism, while reinforcing the idea of American Indian political adaptations and cultural persistence during the Progressive Era.

In the last decades of the nineteenth century, American mining engineers fanned out around the globe to potential or existing mines in China, Mexico, Siberia, South Africa, and beyond. This article examines the rise and work of mining engineer John Hays Hammond and the mining engineers, geologists, and capitalists with whom he worked. The paper reveals ways that a segment of the investor class depended upon members of the emerging professional middle class of university-trained mining experts for collaboration—and even inspiration—regarding possible sources of remunerative investment. The search for raw materials abroad opens up a chapter in the history of U.S. capitalism in which mining engineers like Hammond encouraged and facilitated a new phase of export of redundant U.S. capital and manufactured goods in a direction where investment would be secure, labor recruitable, and profits attractive and subject to repatriation. Filling in this vital narrative makes an essential contribution to the ongoing recovery of the history of the U.S. and world capitalism in the era of rapid industrialization.

Exploring John Dewey's hopes for play reveals much about the key role he thought it played in education in a democratic society. Placing Democracy and Education in the context of Progressive Era controversies over play in the kindergarten movement and preschool education illustrates Dewey's view that teacher-guided free play could reconcile the dilemma of the need for individual agency and social discipline. Dewey built upon and critiqued the scripted play pedagogy of kindergarten founder Friedrich Froebel. Drawing in part from progressive kindergarten teachers, Dewey constructed his own notion of play that he argued fostered experiential learning, voluntary participation, and social order. For Dewey, play and work were naturally linked in ways in which the needs of the child and society coalesced. Analysis of sources from the kindergarten movement and the Sub-primary Department at the University of Chicago Laboratory School provide background for interpreting some of Dewey's writings on play, which influenced modern contests over how young children learn and should be taught.

Scholars of women's suffrage have long debated credit, a meditation on which leaders won the campaign to enfranchise American women. Many argue that victory came because of Alice Paul's militancy in picketing the White House. Others insist it was Carrie Chapman Catt's pragmatism in winning state victories. Still others note that both were needed, a political “one-two punch” of strategic effectiveness. This article suggests that one contingent often excluded from this narrative is men. Male suffragists are often portrayed as driven more by a hunger for quixotic political or sexual adventure, or by a chivalrous posture toward women. Examining the records of the New York Men's League for Woman Suffrage and the archival footprints male suffragists left behind, this article argues that whatever their motives, male suffragists made palatable to other men the once radical notion that women could join the coarse, corrupt, and cigar-filled world of politics without losing their femininity—or robbing men of their virility. By their very activism, they conditioned the public to see women—and men—beyond the gendered construct of the domestic sphere and in the light of the interest politics that dominated the Progressive Era.

In one of the most significant debates in U.S. intellectual history, John Dewey and Randolph Bourne attempted to redefine the relationship between democracy and war in the midst of World War I. This essay argues that the Dewey-Bourne debate is not just a vital dispute over the United States’ role in the war and the world, but that it also must be seen as a crucial moment for understanding fractures in progressive politics and debates over projects that presume to cultivate an educated citizenry. Focusing on Dewey and Bourne's developing ideas from 1914 through 1918, with an emphasis on concepts evolving in and from Dewey's Democracy and Education and Bourne's cultural criticism, the essay explores their core disagreements about the relationship between education and progressive reform, the role of intellectuals in the state, the consequences of intervention in the war and the use of force, and democratic citizenship in national and international contexts. This essay provides insights into the boundaries and pitfalls of liberal politics in the early twentieth century; it argues that this debate reveals a central ambiguity in Dewey's thought, and shows how wartime expediency and potential for progressive influence derailed aspects of the Deweyan project of democratic education.

As 2016 is the centennial of Dewey's most famous work, Democracy and Education (1916), it is imperative to consider Dewey's role as a public intellectual. In reflection of how he framed his most famous work—as an instrument for helping people think about democratic reform—the authors examined John Dewey's beliefs about the importance of peace as applied to the American view. This essay journals Dewey as an important contributor to the American peace movement in terms of both thought and activity, especially in the post-World War I period. Dewey argued that the responsibility of schools in a democratic society is to teach cooperation and understanding and not simply rely on notions of patriotism and allegiance as often presented in schools. His World War I experience alerted him to the need for transforming schools as seminaries of patriotism into instruments for global understanding. The authors also offered specific examples as to how his instrumentalist philosophy, including his involvement in the Outlawry of War campaign in the 1920s, has been a cornerstone of peace education efforts in the United States over the past one hundred years and what has been their effectiveness.

Democracy and Education was Dewey's magnum opus on education, the work in which he pulled together decades of research and thinking on schooling in a democratic society. It was also the work in which Dewey explicitly and implicitly affirmed his theories on race and cultural development. In this intellectual history, the author argues that Democracy and Education represented a transition in Dewey's thinking on race and culture, away from his previous concerns with psychological-sociological stage theory toward his expanded focus on cultural pluralism as an essential component of democratic life. As a result, Dewey presented a contradictory perspective on race and culture that both depicted nonwhite societies as previous steps in the universal stages of development, but also valued racial and cultural diversity as necessary elements of his theory of cultural pluralism. The juxtaposition of Dewey's pre-1916 concern with genetic stage theories and his post-1916 concern for cultural pluralism created a paradox in his views on race and culture, one with which educators are still struggling today.