The Iron Heel

The Foreword is narrated by Anthony Meredith, a scholar who lives 700 years in the future in a utopian society called the Brotherhood of Man. Meredith explains that the Everhard Manuscript, a journal found hidden in an oak tree, was written by Avis Everhard, the devoted wife of socialist revolutionary Ernest Everhard. The manuscript is the central narrative of the novel and describes events from 1912 to 1932. Avis’s narrative ends shortly before the start of the Second Revolt, a movement to overthrow the authoritarian regime known as the Oligarchy. Meredith believes that Avis intended to publish the manuscript after the revolt to honor her husband who recently died, but she was likely captured and executed. The rebellion was violently crushed, and multiple and equally bloody revolts followed. Meredith puzzles over how humanity could have allowed capitalism to spawn the Oligarchy, or “the Iron Heel,” a term coined by Ernest. Meredith considers Avis’s perspective biased due to her love for her husband, but he nevertheless values how the manuscript captures the feelings of the time and can evoke sympathy. He compares the revolutionaries to actors in a world drama.

The manuscript begins in 1932, the day before the Second Revolt. Avis Everhard contrasts the peace of her natural surroundings with the impending violence. To ease her restlessness, she recounts how she first met Ernest Everhard, her revolutionist husband who died two months earlier. 

In 1912, Avis’s father, physics professor John Cunningham, invites Ernest to join a dinner he is hosting at his home in Berkeley, California, for clergymen in the hope of a lively exchange. Avis is initially unimpressed with Ernest but grows to admire his physical strength, confidence, and political passion. During the dinner, Ernest debates with the ministers and declares that they know nothing about reality, facts, and the working class. He argues that metaphysics is opposed to science and brings no material benefits to humankind. He asserts that despite their sincere intentions, the clergymen work for the capitalist class, and that their positions are secure insofar as they do not challenge those in power. He concludes by claiming that the working class is better off without them. 

Interspersed in the narrative are footnotes added by Meredith that provide both fictional and real-world historical context to the narrated events. He also comments that Avis’s perspective exaggerates her husband’s centrality to the Revolution.

After the dinner, Avis learns that her father invited Ernest after seeing him speak from a soapbox in the street. Ernest was a leader in the Socialist Party and had worked as a horseshoer and translator of German and French texts on philosophy and science. Aroused by Ernest’s boldness and uniqueness from the men of her bourgeois class, Avis fantasizes about becoming his lover and wife and begins to read his books. 

Dr. Cunningham invites Ernest to his home again to meet with Bishop Morehouse, the only clergyman from the dinner who was impressed with the young man. Ernest expounds on his ideas that men are selfish and that the capitalist system exploits the average man’s labor. He clarifies that he does not advocate hate, but he does oppose the injustices of class struggle. He points out the hypocrisy of the Church for maintaining the status quo. Bishop Morehouse at first objects but concedes that the Church has been ignorant of the proletariat’s sufferings. Morehouse agrees to protest against class exploitation and believes that the capitalists are also ignorant and can be taught to right their wrongs. Ernest laughs, and Avis interjects that not all wealthy people are cruel. Ernest explains that her father’s investments in Sierra Mills and the very gown she wears drip with the blood of laborers. Avis bursts into tears, and Ernest points out a peddler on the street named Jackson who was once employed at the mills. The man had lost an arm in an attempt to retrieve a stray flint that would have damaged the machines. Ernest asserts that the company and its powerful lawyers made sure that Jackson received no compensation. Morehouse contends that Jackson should find work rather than peddle, and Avis assumes that the man was insolent. Ernest challenges them to research Jackson’s case, and they accept. 

Interspersed in the narrative are Meredith’s footnotes citing real-world examples in history where the Church supported slavery and how foreign-born people were poorly treated.

Avis meets Jackson in his dilapidated home where he struggles to survive with his wife and three children. Jackson had worked at the mills for 17 years before losing his arm. He contends that most accidents happen at the end of the day when the men are overworked and tired. The testimony of the superintendent and foreman convinced the courts that Jackson was negligent and that no damages should be awarded. Jackson comments that they could have given him a job as a watchman. 

Avis then interviews Jackson’s lawyer, who explains that he didn’t have a chance against Colonel Ingram, a powerful and corrupt corporate lawyer who was a personal friend of the judge. Jackson’s lawyer argues that what is right and what is the law are rarely the same thing. He admits that had he won the case, he would have overcharged Jackson to help support his own struggling family. Avis learns from the men who testified that they feared retaliation if they spoke against their employers and that they were instructed by Ingram on what to say. The company would rather spend thousands of dollars on lawyers and pay dividends to their stockholders than give workers their fair share. Avis realizes that her father is one of those investors, and she admits to Ernest that he was correct to accuse her of benefiting from class exploitation. Ernest tells her that no one is free from the capitalist machinery and that even the insurance companies and press work on the side of the capitalists. He argues that the workers who are trapped by the industrial machinery have few options and are driven by their love to raise and protect their children. He advises her to interview the wives of two Sierra Mills stockholders to see how the rich thrive on the oppression of workers. 

Meredith’s footnotes discuss high rents in dilapidated housing, corporate corruption, and the ways that the wealthy legalized their stealing while the poor’s stealing was considered illegal during Ernest’s time.

Avis awakens to the reality of class conflict and regards Jackson’s arm as material evidence of the brutal exploitation of the working class. She compares Ernest’s work uplifting the oppressed to the work of angels and Jesus Christ. Avis questions Colonel Ingram, and the lawyer squirms when she mentions Jackson. Ingram admits that Jackson should have been compensated but concludes that the law is not about justice or morality but about might. Avis writes an account of Jackson’s accident for the press, but the newspapers reject her story. Her journalist friend explains that the editors won’t jeopardize their ad revenue and ties to the corporate world. Avis also interviews two stockholders of Sierra Mills, Mr. Wickson and Mr. Pertonwaithe, and their wives. The wealthy couples regard themselves as saviors and unquestioningly believe that they are superior to the working class. Avis compares all the forces against the working class to an implicit conspiracy. Ernest explains that capitalists will use any school of thought to rationalize their actions as right, even appropriating the doctrine of the divine right of kings. He declares that capitalists know only about business and nothing about humanity and are therefore stupid. 

In his footnotes, Meredith references John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty and discusses how the ruling class determines morality according to their own interests.

Avis and Ernest fall passionately in love. She contrasts the physical intensity of his lovemaking to his gentle demeanor and loves him for possessing both qualities. Avis credits Ernest for exposing her to the harsh but true reality of social injustice. She recalls an evening at the Philomath Club, an organization that hosts lectures in the private homes of the rich and powerful. Ernest had given the hostess, Miss Brentwood, a false impression that he was harmless. Now, Miss Brentwood has invited him to give a lecture and anticipates that his political views are likely to be attacked. 

At the club meeting, Ernest delivers a scathing critique of the upper class and attacks their materialism, selfishness, immorality, and stupidity. He announces that the socialist revolutionaries will take away their riches and demands that they answer for the millions suffering in poverty and child labor. Ernest dares the audience to address how the capitalist class has “mismanaged” society with their greed and hypocrisy (89). Colonel Van Gilbert, a powerful corporate lawyer, accuses Ernest of being an irrational demagogue as the men in the room begin to grumble and growl. Mr. Wickson, another member of the ruling class, scoffs that Ernest is utopian and declares that the powerful will crush the revolutionaries under their heels. Wickson threatens that his class will deny elections and use military force to hold onto their power. Ernest retorts that the revolutionaries are prepared to fight violence with violence.