It also gives us context on the pushcarts, describing a thriving community with history and leadership and specific cultural knowledge.
Chapter 4 continues the contextualization, giving a sense of the power of the trucks, and includes the 100% boss move of several pages LITERALLY COPIED FROM THE TELEPHONE BOOK LISTINGS
Which, by the way, is a kid favorite.
Chapter 5 continues the ominous context. Chapter 6 gets to the politics. A mayoral candidate promises to reduce trucks, and this is a popular policy! And then the incumbent makes a speech reframing that policy and turns the race around.
The speech is a demonstration of political rhetoric and reframing. It starts by referencing the city pride mentioned earlier, then draws a chain of connections from the source of that pride - the size of the city - to big businesses, and from big businesses to big trucks, then sets up the opponent as being against rucks and therefore against progress (and peanut butter)
You can find variations on this same speech being given in the present by replacing key terms.
Chapter 7 is the skewering of experts, influencers, and the TV programs that enable both. It also has the crucial insight that while an influential person stating the situation plainly and publicly may have started the war, without that the oppression would have gone on unchallenged "until it was too late"
Chapter 8 uses an imagined primary source, a trucker's diary, simultaneouslly to humanize some truckers, show how seriously awful others are, give us yet more understanding of the catastrophic traffic conditions, and, through the description of a secret trucker meeting, to show us the strategy of the oppressors.
The leader of one of the big trucking company says "why pick on the poor trucks?", appropriating the role of victim - and doing it internally, as a leadership tactic/signal to all the truckers under him.
Then we have a diversion of blame onto the pushcarts - more on that soon. There's a neat aside about stereotypes of truckers, which sets up the really dangerous baddie, who gives us another example of tricky rhetoric.
First he says that he and the other leaders of the company "hear" about the problems with pushcarts from the truckers, who are out in the streets, that they wouldn't know themselves, but they get the facts from their employees - populism- and then it's clear what they have to do.
Look at this predating
#Infomocracy by more than 50 years: "Louie explains that what we have got to do is to educate the public. 'When people complain about the traffic [...] we have got to tell the people who is to blame. Otherwise, they will be blaming the trucks.'"
Seizing the narrative, disinformation. Followed by a "'I know these people'" - dehumanizing a group- and then a bit of personal history he's not proud of: this CEO's father was a pushcart peddler. Class shame, probably immigrant shame as well although that's not explicit.
Then he mentions a "Master Plan" that will make everything better once these turbulent pushcarts are dealt with. The diatry writer asks other drivers about the plan and "they say it is probably the usual thing - to make things better for the truckers in the streets and maybe more money for the drivers."
Vague promises about a plan that followers interpret without evidence as benefit for them.
This is taking longer than I expected and I'm realizing I probably should have made it into an essay I could get paid for but anyway I'm going to take a break and I'll continue later because I love this book and have so much to say about it.
Ok but just a little more because this next bit's really good. Chapter 9 starts by telling us how the trucks have "an enormous advantage", because although the diary tells us they had already targeted the pushcarts, at the time no one knew: the attacks pretended to be accidents. Isolated, rather than coordinated. Sound familiar?
Then it describes in some detail the disinformation campaign. First we learn that people are talking, saying "'I hear it is the pushcarts that are to blame.' [...] Where they had heard nobody was sure." But the intrepid researcher of the book has an idea:
There's a weekly newspaper "published as a community service" by the baddie's trucking company. It's free to groceries stores to give customers and sent to city council members, etc. So here we have information pretending to be of the community and not-for-profit and in fact using the resources of a large company to spread propaganda by undercutting news sources that need to profit to function.
There's an anonymous columnist calling himself (pronoun as in book) "The Community Reporter" <- again, appropriation of community identity - and writing about "The Pushcart Menace" - a phrase with particular resonance in 1964.
The Community Reporter writes about what "people" want. It's presented pretty broadly here, won't be hard even for kids to pick up on the game - hopefully they continue to recognize it, because it's everywhere, and not always much subtler.
Now, maybe not many people read this propaganda "(Some grocers said that they had trouble giving it away"), but - WAIT FOR IT- "enough people did [...] for one of the more respectable daily papers to announce a series entitled "'Pushcarts-Are They A Menace to Our Streets?'"
Industry propaganda disguised as community paper and pushed by industry funds -> mainstream news covering an entirely invented "menace."
Sound familiar?
In the series, the reporter interviews the head of a trucking company - not the one with the plan, the one with the victim complex. Again he uses the word "poor" about the trucks (anthropomorphizing a truck); claims that the facts are speaking for themselves; and cites the number of accidents involving pushcarts as proof that the pushcarts are a menace. (the "accidents" are deliberately caused by the truckers).
SOUND FAMILIAR?
The chapter ends with pushcart peddler Old Anna, incensed because the Community Reporter said pushcarts were unsanitary, saying "'You ask me what is the menace [...] And I will tell you. It is *plastic bags*!"
and on that prophetic note, I really am going to take a break. Tbc.
I should be working on the final edits for The Imposition of Unnecessary Obstacles but *rubs hands together* let's talk about the Pushcart Model of Collective Action instead! We're on Chapter 10 which is subtitled "The Pushcarts Decide to Fight"
At this point we've come back to when we started; that is, to just after the act of violence that we saw committed in Chapter 1. That's right, Chapters 3-9 showed how the roots of violence start way before the violence happens.
The pushcarts decide to fight in a meeting which somewhat parallels the truckers meeting earlier, although we see it directly, not through diary entries. Notably, the meeting was called to crowdfund or, as we used to call it, take up a collection for the peddler whose cart was destroyed in Chapter 1. In other words, we see this community first in an act of mutual aid.
(it's also a wonderful lesson in introducing a large ensemble cast and quickly "tagging" each with memorable characteristics, in this case usually what they sell on their pushcarts)
The peddlers move pretty quickly through chipping in for the new pushcart, to commenting on increased violence, to sharing information that makes clear the bigger picture of malicious rumors (disinformation) and violence framed as accidents.
Then the Pushcart King, Maxie Hammerman, says he will explain based on a lot of thinking. He is demonstrating the leadership role of taking a big-picture view of the situation and considering the opposing interests and strategies at work, then synthesizing and communicating.
He explains the strategy against them: the trucks are making the city unlivable, so "they have to find somebody else to blame". They chose pushcarts because pushcarts are few and *seem fewer than they are*
Sound familiar?
The pushcarts seem fewer than they are because they stick to their own neighborhoods, we can think of parallels with minority groups that seem fewer than they are to the majority because they stay in their own neighborhoods (where the majority don't go) but also of groups that seem fewer than they are because it's dangerous to be who they are.
One peddler points out that even if the trucks kill all the pushcarts, that won't solve the traffic problem that is making people angry at the trucks.
Maxie Hammerman responds: "So then they will have to find someone else to blame."
Sound familiar?
Okay, but the pushcart peddlers do not want to all be killed. So they decide to fight. Notably (and despite the title of "Pushcart King") they decide this by a vote - a contrast to the trucker meeting, where the bosses claim to be acting on input from the employees but do not ask for it publicly, and announce plans that they do not explain in detail.
The pushcarts have decided to fight, now they have to figure out how. Some are fine with causing physical harm to the truck drivers, but there are challenges and risks to every method they think of, and others don't want to hurt any people at all, including truck drivers.
The idea of how to fight comes from Carlos, who almost never speaks up in meetings. In Ch 11, we learn that Carlos is a great carton-flattener, and what that means; only after learning about his job, we learn that the reason he doesn't speak up much is that he only speaks Spanish.
A lot of the pushcart peddlers have Eastern European and particularly Jewish-associated names, and the illustrations reflect this (recall that the illustrator was the author's partner). And now there's Carlos, who only speaks Spanish. The Pushcart King translates for him, because "Maxie Hammerman spoke Spanish and twelve other languages. He had to, being the Pushcart King."
"Maxie Hammerman spoke Spanish and twelve other languages. He had to, being the Pushcart King."
So this is a fairly diverse community, at least linguistically. But it is important to note here that there are no characters identified as Black or Asian in this book.
Carlos, in translation, says something important. While other peddlers have been focused on "fighting", Carlos points out "that the problem is to make people see who *is* blocking the streets." This is absolutely a physical war, but it is also a battle of perception & narrative.