California’s flirtation with socialism in 1934

In 1934, an avowed Socialist named Upton Sinclair was running for California governor in what has been called “The most controversial election in California’s history.”|

It was the depths of the Great Depression.

Unemployment in America was, unbelievably, at 22%, with 4.7 million Americans and 1/5 of Californians dependent upon public funds. The “Dust Bowl,” in the Central Plains, had wiped out more than 35 million acres of farmland, mainly in Oklahoma and Texas, sending 400,000 “Oakies” to the “Promised Land” of California.

But get this. Three-quarters of all farm jobs here were already held by Mexican immigrants, and forced deportations had begun.

Sound familiar?

Hundreds of thousands of Americans had lost their homes. Fear was rampant, and as a result, the rise of Socialism and Communism was seen across the country, both in American labor and government.

Worldwide that year, fascism was spreading, too, as a Nazi named Adolph Hitler became “Fuhrer” in Germany, Joseph Stalin solidified his position in the U.S.S.R. and Mao Tse Tung became “Chairman” in China. Persia became Iran that year, and Japan began re-arming after pledging not to. The winds of war were swirling and Franklin Roosevelt, then in the second year of his presidency, famously said, “The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself.”

Most Americans, however, believed there was a lot more to fear than just that.

And so, in our state in 1934, an avowed Socialist named Upton Sinclair was running for governor in what has been called “The most controversial election in California’s history.”

Novelist Sinclair had written many dozens of books and articles espousing Socialist ideas. He had been labeled a “muckraker” for his investigative style of journalism, with a mission of exposing unfair labor practices by large companies in their daily manner of working under what he called “The evils of Capitalism!” Sinclair was a Californian and his mission was to start here, and work across the nation.

He was our first “Democratic-?Socialist.”

Could it really happen here?

Keep reading.

Sinclair’s radical campaign was sagely labeled, “End Poverty In California” (or “EPIC,” for short). His proposals included massive public works, sweeping tax reforms and guaranteed pensions for all. He advocated state seizure of factories and farmland, planning to then operate them as worker-run co-ops. He insisted that a 6-hour work day was viable. To pay for it, he advocated vastly higher income taxes, with the wealthiest to pay the most. He also wanted higher inheritance taxes. Sinclair well knew he couldn’t win here as a “Socialist,” so guess what he did? He joined the Democratic Party.

As you may surmise, the Republicans blew a gasket.

Past President Teddy Roosevelt called him a “hysterical crackpot,” and FDR would not endorse his candidacy.

As examples of the very desperate times we were engaged in as this was happening, in Petaluma, you could rent a two-room apartment at the corner of Kentucky and Prospect for $4 a week. At Asherman’s Market, bread was 8 cents a loaf and five pounds of potatoes were 10 cents. At the U.S. Bakery (141 Main), you could buy an entire pumpkin pie for just 20 cents, and if you were fortunate enough to own a car, the Hill Plaza Garage would lube and wash it, plus change the oil for just $2.50, then fill up the tank for 10 cents a gallon.

The Argus-Courier, then headed by Republicans John and Emmett Olmsted, warned that Sinclair’s plans would destroy the institution of private property.

“He will tax wealth so severely that owners will be glad to get rid of it,” they wrote, adding, “That he intends to destroy private property is beyond question. He has no experience in business or industry. He is one who believes that private industry is doomed. The more unemployed he puts to work under government-operated factories, the more private enterprise will be handicapped in the progress.”

It was also claimed that Sinclair was anti-religion, pointing out that he had stated, in one of his books, “There are a score of great religions in the world. Each is a mighty fortress of graft.”

Upton Sinclair’s opponent in the run for California governor was incumbent Republican Frank Merriam, and Hollywood was all-in on Governor Merriam’s campaign. The studios had even threatened to move the movie industry to Florida if Sinclair were to win. Merriam, a middle-of-the-road Republican, had been a firm friend of labor in his first term, constructing roads, schools, hospitals, bridges and public buildings. He would be difficult to unseat.

On Nov. 5, on Santa Rosa’s KFRC radio station, Sinclair asked, “Are you going to vote for public welfare, or for organized greed?”

Well, as you may have guessed, his campaign didn’t fly.

On Nov. 7, Gov. Merriam won with 1,339,000 votes to Sinclair’s 880,000. Sonoma County voted 15,000 for Merriam and just 8,000 for Sinclair.

In Petaluma, voter turnout was labeled “the largest in history.”

Two days later, the Oakland Tribune summed it up.

“California has answered to the world, that it is not to become experimental ground for State Socialism.” And the San Francisco News declared, “Hundreds of thousands of good Americans had become so desperate as to tie their fortunes to a Fabian Socialist with a fantastic dream.”

In legacy, however, Sinclair’s ideas were somewhat influential in shaping President Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal” to “End poverty in America,” which was a bit more conservative in detail compared to Sinclair‘s “EPIC” proposal.

There were no “seizures” of factories or lands, for one thing.

Sinclair kept writing books and in 1943, he won the Pulitzer Prize for his novel “Dragon’s Teeth,” about a Socialist arms dealer.

(Skip Sommer’s column, ‘Petaluma’s Past,’ runs every other week in the Argus-Courier. He is an honorary life member of the Petaluma History Museum and Heritage Homes. Contact him at skipsommer@hotmail.com)

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.