Who Is Buster A Robber Baron

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.

After the end of the Civil War, industrialization and urbanization blossomed and changed the nation. Instead of presidential power, men were aiming to be industrial tycoons for their wealth and power. To the people, these capitalists were regarded as either admirable “captains of industry” or corrupt “robber barons”. Even though to some people they may seem like “captains of industry”, but they were actually corrupt “robber barons” for several reasons regarding corruption, employee issues, and matters of the social classes.

James Buchanan Duke was a tobacco and electric power industrialist in the mid-1800s and early 1900s. Duke would not be considered a robber baron due to the fact that he took advantage of the opportunity to sell his own tobacco after the Civil War was over and the tobacco business wasn’t thriving. He also did so without being evil or dishonest.

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

Like any other “Robber Baron” during the late 1800’s, J.P. Morgan was no different. He controlled finance and industrial consolidation and was well-known for being a banker. Credited for being one of the few to shape the U.S., Morgan did have a lust of power and greed, but that doesn’t stop him from being America’s leading businessman. His impact goes as far as the present with the many companies he created.

The Myth of Robber Barons discusses some of the major entrepreneurs in of the United States from 1850 to 1910. Burton Folsom also discusses these entrepreneur’s key role in their fields and the whole economy of the United States. The entrepreneurs discussed are Commodore Vanderbilt, James J. Hill, The Scranton’s Group, Charles Schwab, John D. Rockefeller, and Andrew Mellon. We know these men as “Robber Barons,” but Folsom argues that these entrepreneurs succeeded by producing quality product and service at a competitive price. He compares so called “Robber Barons” to the political entrepreneurs who rely heavily on government subsidy and make no improvement.

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.

His elite group of democrats were important political figures, most of whom controlled New York City's finances. With their help, Tweed spent anywhere between 30 to 200 million on bribes and payoffs. In return, Tweed controlled the District Attorney, the entire police force, the courts and almost every newspaper. Tweed became the most powerful man in New York, and no one could stop him. Every political position in New York was filled with one of Tweed's men, so Tweed could basically do and pass whatever he wanted. In the late 1850s, people started to get suspicious. The New York Times did some creative investigating and soon uncovered Tweed's elaborate matrix of connections and bribes. General Samuel J. Tilden convicted tweed to 12 years of prison, but Tweed managed to get out in only one year. He soon fled to Cuba and eventually Spain. In the end, he was exported back to America and died in a New York jail

Carnegie, Rockefeller, and JP Morgan really are Robber barons because of what they have done to their workers including the conditions they were kept in. More evidence is that Andrew Carnegie is a Robber baron because he decreased his workers salary by 33% because his workers wanted coal and food in the winter. They asked for these things because they were starving and close to freezing to death, they needed help but they were too greedy to help them, but when they did help their workers they decreased salary or made them work longer to get the money back that they “wasted” on the workers who cared enough to help them in the beginning. But I have a couple extra examples to support my claim. J. P. Morgan is also a Robber Baron because of the

What is a robber baron? Webster’s New Dictionary defines it as an American capitalist of the late 19th century who became wealthy through exploitation (As of natural resources, governmental influence, or low wage scales) or a person who satisfies himself by depriving another. In America we had a lot of these kind of people. For this report I am going to tell you about the ones that I found most interesting to me. I would first like to tell you about Cornelius Vanderbilt.

A "robber baron" was someone who employed any means necessary to enrich themselves at the expense of their competitors. Did John D. Rockefeller fall into that category or was he one of the "captains of industry", whose shrewd and innovative leadership brought order out of industrial chaos and generated great fortunes that enriched the public welfare through the workings of various philanthropic agencies that these leaders established? In the early 1860s Rockefeller was the founder of the Standard Oil Company, who came to epitomize both the success and excess of corporate capitalism. His company was based in northwestern Pennsylvania.

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.