Pros And Cons Of Robber Barons

A Review of The Myth of the Robber Barons a book by Burton Folsom JR.

During the post Civil War period many capitalists took over and ramped up industry. There were also individuals who took industries and monopolized them. Many historians who look back at these capitalists who shaped the post Civil War industry argue about whether they should be viewed as captains of industry who developed large industry, or as robber barons who used industry and monopolies to achieve wealth and take advantage of the working class. This essay will show why they were captains of industry.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, during the climax of the American Industrial Revolution, there was a small group of men who owned the major businesses and were leaders of their industries. They owned factories, railroads, banks, and even created company towns for the sole purpose of housing their workers. Due to the efforts of these few men, the U.S. economy became the envy of the world, and America became a leading world power. They provided the public with products that were in high demand for reasonable prices, and opened their markets to countries overseas. Although many people believe the early industrialists were Robber Barons who exploited the poor, these great men were truly Captains of Industry who created new ways of doing

Capitalism can be defined as “when monetary wealth was enabled to buy labor power” (Wolf et al. 77). By the time that “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” was written, Capitalism was the dominant mode of production, and capitalist markets were spreading rapidly. This became especially true in the United States of America, which was heavily influenced by the British in matters of economy. Since capitalism was born in England, the influence of capitalism bled over into America while they were still under British rule (Wolf et al. 2670). However, by 1820, the year that “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” was published, the United States fully adopted the capitalist mode of production, along with the technological advances of the Industrial Revolution. This embrace of the new economic system changed the ways of life for people in both New England and New York, along with the entirety of the country.

While they were only getting richer with their corrupt methods, the poorer classes were getting poorer because of the money they spent on the capitalists’ goods. In “The Robber Barons of Today, 1889”, the robber barons are seen with their “knightly” attire while the poor pay “tribute” to them. (Doc D) It represents the poor paying the “amazing” capitalists and being subservient for the goods they need. Also, in Henry George’s Progress and Poverty, 1879, it said that the gulf between the classes is getting wider and wider. Because of the industrial tycoons taking the poor’s money, they are getting richer. They are also providing fewer jobs since the industries usually have one major company for a particular manufacturing, and so “the poorer class is becoming more dependent” on the capitalists to provide jobs and goods. (Doc A) The robber barons took the poor’s money to become wealthier and to feed their greed while worsening the gap between the social

During the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century, both robber barons and captains of industry were terms used to place businessmen into a good or bad category. The term robber baron is a representation of industrialist who used manipulative methods in order to reach enormous quantities of wealth. Some characteristics of robber barons were: they depleted America of its valuable resources, forced authority to pass laws that would work in there favor, make opponents in the industry go out of business, and force laborers to work in hazardous circumstances with little pay. The term captains of industry meant the exact opposite, these businessmen did positive things in order to reach enormous quantities of wealth. Some characteristics of captains of industry were: they constructed factories to make the accessibility of goods rise, increased production, developed markets, gave to charity, and created more jobs with generous pay. While many historians believe that the industrialist of the 19th century were captains of industry there are others that would object and say that they were indeed robber barons. Would you consider the great industrialist of the 19th century to be robber barons or would you consider them as captains of the industry?

In a book published in 1991 by Burt Folsom, The Myth of the Robber Barons is essentially a book about two theories competing against one another, which is the political versus the market entrepreneurs. The book adamantly persuades the reader into believing market entrepreneurship has provided Americans with greater results versus political entrepreneurs featuring from real life scenarios to back up Mr. Folsom claims. He pointed out several market entrepreneurs in his book such as J.D. Rockefeller, Cornelius Vanderbilt, James Hill and Charles Schwab as ones who helped changed the economic climate for Americans by providing superior and lower-cost products and/or services than its competitors. Mr. Folsom continued to shine light on several political

     True, Andrew Carnegie and John D Rockefeller may have been the most influential businessmen of the 19th century, but was the way they conducted business proper? To fully answer this question, we must look at the following: First understand how Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller changed the market of their industries. Second, look at the similarities and differences in how both men achieved domination. Third and lastly, Look at how both men treated their workers and customers in order achieve the most possible profit for their company.

On February 9th, 1859, editor of the New York Times, Henry Raymond, pronounced something unusual about Cornelius Vanderbilt. Raymond disliked Vanderbilt, a steamship magnate with such an extensive convoy that he was commonly known as the Commodore, the highest position in the US Navy. In the article “Your Money of Your Line,” Raymond attacked Vanderbilt for stealing a substantial monthly payment from the Pacific Mail Steamship Company which was in exchange for Vanderbilt’s preceding antagonism on the sea lanes to California. Carnegie, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, and Morgan fit into the concept of the Gilded Age because they all embody the ideas of robber barons or captains of industry. These individuals all helped to create the huge corporation

From 1865 to 1900, a surge in industry and business began to come into effect. Railroads, oil, steel, and various inventions enabled the rise of these businesses. As time went on, the leaders of the businesses would become more eager to achieve wealth. Some historians have described these people as ‘robber barons’ or people who use extreme methods to control and maintain their wealth and power. Others would chastise that belief, declaring that it is an unjust conclusion to draw. Despite the oppositions fervent belief, the undeniable evidence supports the belief that many of the businessmen in the late 19th century were ‘robber barons’. These men had a blatant disregard for human lives and an unquenchable urge to assume control over citizens’ lives that instilled corruption and greed in them.

businesses to employ many people and create new jobs as well as change America through

Accurately established by many historians, the capitalists who shaped post-Civil War industrial America were regarded as corrupt “robber barons”. In a society in which there was a severe imbalance in the dynamics of the economy, these selfish individuals viewed this as an opportunity to advance in their financial status. Thus, they acquired fortunes for themselves while purposely overseeing the struggles of the people around them. Presented in Document A, “as liveried carriage appear; so do barefooted children”, proved to be a true description of life during the 19th century. In hopes of rebuilding America, the capitalists’ hunger for wealth only widened the gap between the rich and poor.

When the names Carnagie, Rockefeller, and Pullman come to mind, most of us automatically think of what we saw or read in our history books: "These men were kind and generous and through hard work and perseverance, any one of you could become a success story like them," right? Wrong. I am sick of these people being remembered for the two or three "good deeds" they have done. Publicity and media have exaggerated the generosity of these men, the government has spoiled these names with false lies, and people have been blind to see that these men were ruthless, sly businessmen who were motivated by your money and their struggle for power.

Write a coherent essay that integrates your interpretation of Documents A–H and your knowledge of the period to answer the following question:

Throughout American industrialization, large industries were run by some of the richest men in history. These men got the nickname “robber barons” due to their creation of large monopolies by making questionable business and government activities, and by taking advantage of their workers to succeed. But in The Myth of the Robber Barons by Burton W. Folsom, he argues against these claims, and he takes a deeper look into some of America’s richest and most successful men. By specifically looking at Cornelius Vanderbilt, John D. Rockefeller, James J. Hill, the Scranton family and many more, Folsom believed that these so-called robber barons were actually entrepreneurs with a drive to succeed, leading to an improvement in American lives.