How Did Historians Use Robber Barons Dbq

From 1870-1900 was named the Gilded Age. Mark Twain named this period this in light of how the organizations developed so expansive in numbers, size, and the impact the people(American) reactions had on it. When he named this period the Gilded Age, he was alluding to how it sparkled and shinned on the outside yet was degenerate, or as I put it untrustworthy and screwy, underneath. This paper is going to take a gander at the effect of huge business on the economy, the political perspective, furthermore the reaction of Americans In the political perspective, Robber Barons came to overwhelm the administration, specific in the senate as record 4 indicates us.

Arguably one of the most pivotal points in American history, the industrialization of the 19th century brought about a new way of life, and with that came intense competition and crucial outcomes. Cornelius Vanderbilt, Andrew Carnegie and John D Rockefeller are just a few examples of industrialists that made lasting impacts on society. I believe that these 19th century industrialists did not always play fair, but it was their motivation and intuition behind their choices that credit them as the “Captains of Industry” and helped shape American business. To earn this title, these men had to do whatever it took to stay on top. Being the front runners, they were constantly being targeted and had to fight back to ensure the prosper of their own

Cornelius was someone who was very good at what he did but he didn’t give any pity for anything he did. If you were to work for Vanderbilt you wouldn’t get much money for the hours you were to do. Vanderbilt was one of the first robber barons. His reputation is what got him so rich, and

Carnegie clearly has a conflict of interest here, and he chose wealth over

united states the world power in oil, finance and communication. Robber Barons know what they are doing is wrong but they do not care for the society, they care only for money. These people had made a huge decision and changed America forever. When many workers suffered a poor standard of living and in terrible housing, Robber Barons were living a luxurious life and enjoyed their life. They made their workers work Christmas and holidays.

When Cornelius Vanderbilt died he left his $100 million fortune to his son William Vanderbilt and they both had the same attitude. During the Gilded Age these big business and their owners were thought of as being Robber Barons or Captains of Industry. The poor working conditions that were provided, the corruption they led in government, and their use of child labor shows that they were Robber Barons. Children were used in labor to work a lot and most days of the week. Kids as young as 5 often worked as much as 12 to 14 hours a day for barely any pay.

“Much of the blame heaped on the captains of industry in the late 19th century is unwarranted.” (Document F). The Gilded Age was a time where the U.S. economy grew very quickly and rapidly, due to the inventive minds and entrepreneurs of that time; but it has different perspectives of opinions in history today. This era led the U.S. to its state and place in the present world, thanks to its important contributors, (who are involved in the main debate of whether they were robber barons, unethical men who yearn for money, or captains of industry, leaders who add positive ideas and methods to benefit their country.) The industrial leaders of the Gilded Age are captains of industry, worthy of some gratitude and credit for how our society’s structure

Robber Barons and Captains of Industry Some might believe that the businessmen of the Gilded age are robber barons because of how some of them treated their workers and spent their money. The businessmen of the Gilded Age were captains of industry because of the impact that they made on the country. Carnegie, Rockefeller, Morgan, and Vanderbilt all have done things that can identify them as captains of industry. These businessmen gave their time and effort to help the economy grow.

Was John D. Rockefeller a robber baron? I’d say so. Through ruthless business tactics and exploitation of workers, he made a fortune in his lifetime. In this paper, I’m going to be talking about said business tactics and exploitation. If you believe Rockefeller was just a good business man who donated to the poor, I hope your view will be changed by the end.

Justification of this is seen in Document 3, as Andrew Carnegie writes, “The problem of our age is the proper administration of wealth so that the ties of brotherhood may still bind together the rich and poor in harmony.” Surely, a manipulative man would not believe in such fair distribution of wealth. Carnegie is also famous for large charitable donations, meaning his business methods were not enacted solely for his own benefit. This statement highlights Carnegie’s compassionate side and proves that he is not completely a “robber baron.” Similarly to Carnegie, Rockefeller’s compassionate side is also portrayed in Document 7.

Part of a captain of industries duty were to make sure that whatever he does whether it is “trust funds in which he administered”, it would have to benefit the community (DOC 2). Andrew Carnegie believed in Social Darwinism. Social Darwinism is the belief of the “survival of the fittest.” You are rich because God is rewarding and you are poor because you aren’t working hard

Was Cornelius Vanderbilt a Robber Baron or Captain of Industry? A cruel businessman or an industrious leader? Henry J. Raymond believed that Vanderbilt was “a monopolist that crushed other competitors”(T.J Stiles). While he is also deemed one of America’s leading businessmen, and is also credited for helping shape the United States. His fortunes were made unfairly in some cases but his million dollar contribution to the Navy was very generous.

The Robber Barons believed in a “hands off” government also known as the Laissez-faire. Some people might argue that some Robber Barons would want a government that was involved in the economic matters of the nation, because they could receive subsidies from the government, but what these people fail to see is some of the most successful Robber Barons, such as Cornelius Vanderbilt, were denied subsidies from the government. In Bankrupt Myth of the Robber Barons, Sean Grindlay states that the successful James J Hill, “received no such subsidy yet built a railroad stretching from St. Paul to Seattle” (Grindlay) He also mentions that “the line operated more efficiently than its subsidized counterparts and

His work, The Tycoons: How Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, Jay Gould, and J. P. Morgan Invented the American Supereconomy, allows readers to see a more picture perfect outlook on what the lives of these men entitled. Morris’s book was published in 2005, which allows readers to get a perspective from a long period of time and closer to reality rather than other historians writing on this era. The last author that allows readers to view the Robber Barons in a different manor is James Nuechterlein in his journal article Gifts of the “Robber Barons.” Nuechterlein wrote this article in 2007 allowing readers to view the men through historical resources that he uncovered. His stance shows a more balanced approach to the Robber Barons rather than saying one or the other was a better man than the other.

Robber barons, specifically Andrew Carnegie, an industrialist and John D. Rockefeller, a philanthropist, were the chosen, elite members of society according to the doctrine of Social Darwinism. Darwinism is when evolution occurs and the strongest organisms of an ecosystem survive and reproduce to outnumber the weaker, less fit organisms of an ecosystem. Similarly Social Darwinism follows the same concept, but in a capitalist sense of thought. Those who were able to exploit the Gilded Age’s laissez faire economy to their own benefit, like the robber barons Andrew Carnegie of Carnegie Steel and J. D. Rockefeller of Standard Oil, were the fittest members of society because they were able to survive in the grueling and ruthless free economy. By usurping all of the fresh yet unfit immigrants that were flowing into the States due to the rise of urbanization, these two men integrated these easily-manipulated people into their factories to augment their profits.