theatrical ceremonies of initiation and execration that Linehan documents in such intricate detail were, on one level, exercises in demarcating the boundaries between the sacred and the profane, or of invoking the magical aura of clerical or judicial authority. On another level, however, they were quite prosaic tactics designed to impress working-class initiates with the importance of keeping faith with collective decision-making, and of the perils attendant upon revealing union secrets or of succumbing to temptations to break unity within the ranks. Correspondingly, the shaming rituals designed to isolate ‘scabs’ and ‘traitors’, which Linehan considers primarily as symbolic exorcisms, were – first and foremost – pragmatic strategies of deterrence, intended to make such outsiders think twice before engaging strike-breaking, or of getting rid of them when such warnings went unheeded. Perhaps then, the ‘grand narrative’ of conventional trade union history, which Linehan opposes, is not so much erroneous, as incomplete. While it failed to give due consideration to the disabilities under which trade unions operated during their period of doubtful legality, it did not err in interpreting the overall trajectory of union strategy through the lens of rational response. Once unions were treated as legitimate organizations, it made sense for unionists to eschew violent tactics, and to abandon the ritual practices that Linehan delineates. However, during the period before the 1850s, the unionists did not have this luxury. Thus, they had to shore up the bulwarks of internal solidarity through more unconventional means. Viewed today, from the perspective of the twenty-first century, when the very legitimacy of trade unions has once again been called into doubt, we should not be surprised to see working-class organizations resort to creative, unconventional methods in their efforts to defend their members and ensure that their grievances will be heard. Linehan’s book gives us a perceptive window into the world of early nineteenth-century trade union customs and practices. It is a world that, for all its cultural remoteness, confronted working people with formidable challenges not dissimilar to the ones that they are facing again today.

中文翻译：

---

颜色线和装配线：管理福特帝国的种族

莱恩汉以如此复杂的细节记录的入会和处决的戏剧性仪式，一方面是为了划定神圣与世俗之间的界限，或者是唤起神职人员或司法权威的神奇光环。然而，在另一个层面上，它们是相当平淡无奇的策略，旨在让工人阶级新人知道在集体决策中保持信念的重要性，以及揭露工会秘密或屈服于破坏工会内部团结的诱惑所带来的危险. 相应地，旨在隔离“工贼”和“叛徒”的羞辱仪式，莱恩汉认为主要是象征性的驱魔，首先是实用的威慑策略，旨在让这些局外人在进行罢工之前三思而后行，或者在此类警告无人理会时摆脱它们。或许，莱恩汉反对的传统工会历史的“宏大叙事”与其说是错误的，不如说是不完整的。虽然它没有对工会在合法性存疑期间运作的残疾给予应有的考虑，但从理性反应的角度解释工会战略的总体轨迹并没有错误。一旦工会被视为合法组织，工会主义者就应该避开暴力策略，并放弃 Linehan 所描述的仪式做法。然而，在 1850 年代之前的时期，工会主义者并没有这种奢侈。因此，他们不得不通过更加非常规的手段来支撑内部团结的堡垒。今天看过，从二十一世纪的角度来看，当工会的合法性再次受到质疑时，我们不应惊讶地看到工人阶级组织采取创造性的、非常规的方法来保护其成员和确保听到他们的不满。Linehan 的书为我们提供了一个洞察 19 世纪早期工会习俗和实践世界的敏锐窗口。在这个世界上，尽管文化偏远，但劳动人民面临着与他们今天再次面临的挑战并无不​​同的艰巨挑战。他们努力为成员辩护并确保听取他们的不满的非常规方法。Linehan 的书为我们提供了一个洞察 19 世纪早期工会习俗和实践世界的敏锐窗口。在这个世界上，尽管文化偏远，但劳动人民面临着与他们今天再次面临的挑战并无不​​同的艰巨挑战。他们努力为成员辩护并确保听取他们的不满的非常规方法。Linehan 的书为我们提供了一个洞察 19 世纪早期工会习俗和实践世界的敏锐窗口。在这个世界上，尽管文化偏远，但劳动人民面临着与他们今天再次面临的挑战并无不​​同的艰巨挑战。