Cooperative motherhood and democratic civic culture in postwar suburbia, 1940-1965

Journal of Social History, Winter, 2004 by Robyn Muncy

Participatory democracy was another cornerstone of cooperative motherhood. Cooperative nursery schools intended to be democratic institutions for mothers as well as to mold children into democratic subjects. Participants in the Silver Spring Co-op claimed in their handbooks "that the cooperative school has vitality because it is an expression of our democratic way of living." (72) In this regard, Montgomery County's cooperating mothers echoed others across the country. The credo of a school in suburban New York, for instance, insisted, "we believe in freedom of expression and the necessity for democratic control of both children and parents." (73) Another participant, this one in Connecticut, claimed that in running a co-op "there is, for all concerned, the thrill of democracy in action." (74) The Long Beach Council of Cooperative Nursery Schools maintained that co-ops provided both parents and children "a joyful meaningful experience in learning to share and cooperate in a democratic way of life." (75) A study of coops in the late 1950s concluded that co-op nurseries were important for "adult education in the processes of democratic living." (76)

The democracy practiced at the cooperative nurseries was the participatory version, later touted in the Port Huron Statement but rarely associated with postwar suburbia. It did not require consensus as later women's liberation groups often did but rather sought to involve every member in discussion of each issue and then to honor the majority opinion. (77) Every mother had an equal say in the decisions affecting the operations of her co-op, from selecting teachers and determining their salaries to choosing a vendor for juice and crackers. Monthly meetings went on so long precisely because the general membership discussed and voted on virtually every issue facing the school. Although members did elect officers to provide leadership and perform administrative duties, these officials served only one-year terms; their meetings were open to all members; and final decisions were made by the entire membership. Discussions--whether about tuition increases, civil defense measures, race relations, or educational philosophy--were often passionate, and motions were routinely defeated entirely or passed by small majorities. (78) In other words, members did not rubberstamp decisions already made by their elected officers; they did not squash disagreements in an effort to create congenial sociability. They deliberated on and made contentious decisions as a group. The Montgomery County Council of Co-operative Nurseries in fact emphasized that co-ops were for people who "like to talk things over." (79)

In this regard, the Montgomery County co-ops typified nationwide practices. Operating procedures and committee structures across the country mirrored those in Maryland. (80) These other co-ops also insisted on the importance of participation by every member. One claimed that the value of membership meetings was "the regular opportunity to discuss and ask." (81) Another handbook explored the responsibilities of each member, one of which was "to express any question she may have. It is an important part of membership to become articulate." (82)