People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria
Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research
Larbi Ben M’hidi University-Oum El Bouaghi
Faculty of Letters and Languages Department of English
The Robber Barons Between Praise and Condemnation: A Modernist View
A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Anglo-American Studies
By: HAMLA Mohamed El Hadi
Supervisor: Filali Billel
Examiner: DALICHAOUCHE Abd Erahman
2016-2017 i
Dedication
To my endearing parents, brother and sisters
ii
Acknowledgments
I would first like to thank my supervisor Mr. Billel Filali. He consistently allowed this paper to be my own work, but steered me in the right direction whenever he thought I needed it.
I would also like to thank the experts who were involved in the validation survey for this research project.
I would also like to acknowledge our great teacher Mr. Dalichaouch, as the second reader of this dissertation, and I am gratefully indebted to him for his very valuable comments on this work.
I owe a big Thanks You for those who gave me the inspiration to work through the different stages and charge ahead to the finish, “my beloved teachers”, especially Dr.
Maamri Fatima for her valuable guidance and assistance during the whole year, Ms. Achiri
Samia, Mrs. Zerrouki Zina, Mrs.Ghennam Fatima and finally my beloved teacher and sister Mrs. Haddad Mordjana
iii
Abstract
The present inquiry is undertaken through modernist view to hand a comprehensible depiction of The Gilded Age. Therefore, an analysis is scoped on two major figures; namely, John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie, both of whom controversial views were held against, and shall be seen as Captains of Industry as revealed throughout the study. This is achieved via analyzing major standpoints: Social Darwinism, Individualism and Laissez-Faire. Accordingly, the study proves the claim already stated. This issue is particularly notable in addressing the application of the three main doctrines during The
Gilded Age, and the transformation of the U.S. Thus, the status of nowadays America is economically tuned to serve the whole, as the individual celebrates criterions that serve them, and all such matter is meeting success of exemplification once Rockefeller and
Carnegie are brought into the scene.
Keywords: Gilded Age, Captains of Industry, Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller,
Social Darwinism, Individualism, Laissez-Faire.
iv
Résumé
La présente enquête s'effectue à travers une vision moderniste pour donner une vue compréhensible sur Le Gilded Age. Ainsi, une analyse est portée sur deux grandes figures;
John D. Rockefeller et Andrew Carnegie, dont les opinions controversées ont été retenues et doivent être considérées comme Capitaines d'Industrie comme révélées tout au long de l'étude. Ceci est réalisé en analysant les principaux points de vue: le Darwinisme Social, l'Individualisme et le Laissez-Faire. En conséquence, l'étude prouve la demande déjà
énoncée. Ce problème est remarquable pour aborder en particulier l'application des trois principales doctrines au cours de l'âge doré et la transformation des États-Unis. Ainsi, le statut de l'économie Américaine aujourd'hui est accordé pour servir l'ensemble, car l'individu célèbre des critères qui servent eux-mêmes, et Toute cette question se heurte à un succès exemplaire une fois que Rockefeller et Carnegie sont introduits dans la scène.
Mots-clés: Le Gilded Age, Capitaines de L'industrie, Andrew Carnegie, John D.
Rockefeller, Darwinisme Social, Individualisme, Laissez-Faire.
v
الملخص
تتناول هذه المذكرة بحثا مفصال عن العصر الذهبي في الواليات المتحدة األمريكية، بحيث أنها تقدم وصفا مدققا لثالثة
فلسفات ونظريات تبلورت في ذلك الحين، وهي الداروينية االجتماعية، الفردانية و (laissez faire) دعه يعمل، أتركه
يمر. وكان لهذه النظريات أثرا بالغا في تطور الفكر األمريكي علي المستوي االجتماعي والذي أدى بدوره كتحصيل
حاصل إلي تطور كبير عرفته الواليات المتحدة األمريكية علي مختلف األصعدة خاصة االقتصادية والسياسية، كذلك
تتناول تحليل السيرة الذاتية لشخصيتين رئيسيتين هما : جون د. روكفلر John D. Rockefeller و أندرو كارنيجي
Andrew Carnegie و اللذين أثير حولهما الكثير من الجدل، حيث كانا يلقبان من طرف معارضيهما برجلي األعمال
الفاسدين أخالقيا. تبعا لذلك ومن خالل ما أثبتته الدراسة، نجد أنه كان لهما دورا فعاال في ذلك االزدهار من خالل
تبنيهما للنظريات السالف ذكرها، وتطبيقها بطريقة فعالة أدت إلى بروز أمريكا كأكبر قوة اقتصادية أنذلك، وأكثر من
ذلك دوام التطور الذي عرفته وصوال إلي شكلها الحالي . ومنه من خالل دراسة هذه اإلشكالية من وجهة نظر حداثية
وخرق الصور النمطية الخاطئة، وجدنا أن الشخصيتين هما مثال حي لرواد صناعيين أفادوا بالدهم في مختلف
المجاالت ونجاحاتهم تجاوزت المستوي المحلي بالغة أبعادا عالمية.
الكلمات المفتاحية: العصر الذهبي، رواد الصناعة جون دافيسون روكفلر، أندرو كارنييكي، الداروينية االجتماعية،
الفر دانية، دعه يعمل أتركه يمر Laissez Faire.
vi
Table of Contents
Dedication…………………………………………………………………..…………i
Acknowledgments……………………………………………………….…………...ii
Abstract………………………………………………………….……………..…….iii
Table of Content………………………………………………………………..…….iv
General Introduction………………………………………………………………….1
CHAPTER ONE: Framing the Gilded Age in USA
Introduction………………………………………………...…………………………4
I. Historical, Political and Economic Account……………………………..4
II. Ideological Theories into Play During The Gilded Age……….…….….10
1. Social Darwinism………………………………………………………..10
A. The Dimensions of the Notion……………………………………....10
B. The Importance of Social Darwinism During The Gilded Age……..18
2. Individualism………………………………………………….….………20
A. The Dimensions of the Notion…………………………………...….20
B. The Importance of Individualism during The Gilded Age…...……..23
3. Laissez- faire………………………………………………………...…..24
A. The Dimensions of the Notion……………………..………………..24
B. The Importance of Laissez-faire during The Gilded Age ………….28
Conclusion...... …...30
vii
CHAPTER TWO: Captains of Industry under Modernist Scope
Introduction………………………………………………..………………………….31
I. John Davidson Rockefeller………………………………..……………..…. 31
1. Pre-Standard Oil Career……………………………………………….... 33
1.1. Bookkeeper……………………………………………….…...…….. 33
2. Oil Business……………………………………………………………... 34
3. Early Development……………………………………………………… 34
4. Standard Oil Trust Certificate 1896…………………………………….. 37
5. Imposing Business Model………………………………………………. 37
6. Religious Perspectives and Orientations………………………………... 38
7. Philanthropy…………………………………………………………….. 40
8. Sicknesses and Death……………………………………………………. 41
II. Andrew Carnegie……,,…………………………….……………………….. 42
1. Railways…………………………………………………………..…….. 43
2. Keystone Bridge Company…………………………………………..….. 44
3. Steel Empire…………………………………………………………….. 45
4. United States Steel Corporation……………………………………..….. 46
5. Scholar and Activist…………………………………………………….. 47
6. Philanthropy and Educational Interest……………………………..……..48
7. Scholarly influences………………………………………………………50
8. Death and writings………………………………………………………..52
III. Deconstruction Perspective……………………………………..………..52
1. Doctrines……………………………………………………………….…52
2. Figures and Application…………………………………………………..54
Conclusion…………………….……………………………………………………. 58 viii
General Conclusion………………………………….………………………………... 61
Works Cited ……………………………………………………………………………62
1
General Introduction
The Gilded Age, took place around 1870 and the end of 1900, is of a crucial sensitivity and utmost significance, in the sense that much ink is spilled on researches about, noting rather the issue insufficiently, grounding the claims upon ethics, manners, and ideologies. Conversely, the present research is forming a new approach in dealing with the flow of many events during that period, stressing on the key elements in opting for miscellaneous ideologies, in the process of cultivating the Americans.
Henceforth, the result was the launching of cultural and industrial revolution with notions at center as Social Darwinism, Individualism, and Laissez-faire. Additionally, this research tends to redirect the traditional view toward an opposite façade, rather than rewriting an already detailed period in U.S. history. Contextually, two figures of those known as the Captains of Industry are taken as samples for the study: Andrew Carnegie and Rockefeller. Entrepreneurs whose intellectual and innovative insights, proved the idea of “from zero to hero”, likewise, creating job opportunities for the unemployed Americans and supplied a better technological tools.
Overall, the careers of figures of interest are carefully portrayed once the present research is embarked on. What is more of a sense, is analyzing the policies they made use of, as well as their outcomes, giving credit to the Captains of Industry since many historians and scholars discredited those men and denied any contribution in the building of the nation.
The purpose of the research is conducting a historical survey about the doctrines and theories that characterized The Gilded Age namely, Individualism, Social Darwinism and Laissez-faire. One is to positively picture the stimulating attitude of the Americans toward work and the belief of natural selection, as a result of the above mentioned doctrines; investigating the careers of the two figures. Andrew Carnegie, the founder of 2
Carnegie Steel Company. The second figure under scrutiny is Rockefeller, the founder of
Standard Oil Company. This research attempts to emphasize on the way they adopted and were influenced by the doctrines of interest and how success is met in industry dominance; moreover, their great role in the reinforcement of the U.S. economy and the creation of numerous employments positions. Final note is raised in favor of the philanthropic attitudes as they stand as Captains of Industry and national heroes with international dimensions.
The research considers Individualism, Social Darwinism, and Laissez-faire of value in polarizing the American ambitious personality; hence, believing in the American dream.
Furthermore, how they had to do with work dedication as they broke the ground of the
United States as a world power is of value. The cultural and social awareness increased due to the great charities of both figures who took over many aspects. It is noteworthy to mention that this research is an attempt to catapult the stereotypical views against ‘Robber
Barons’ and contemplate the stance given by virtue of ethics, and hereby be rewarded as
Captains of Industry.
Structurally, this research is divided into two main chapters. The first one provides a historical background of The Gilded Age as a corner stone of the American industrial revolution. It scans the three main doctrines under investigation: Individualism, Social
Darwinism and Laisser-faire and their contribution to the American identity as far as work ideologies are concerned by framing one of each into The Gilded Age.
The second chapter dutifully hands biographies of both figures, Rockefeller and
Carnegie, as well as focusing their careers, looking Carnegie’s Gospel of Wealth, Nevin’s
John D Rockefeller: The heroic Age of American Enterprise, Herbert Spencer’s A Theory of Population. 3
Methodologically, this research opts for mixed approaches. The historical
(descriptive) one is used in grounding the characteristics of the era’s circumstances as well as investigating the era itself. The second one is the analytical approach. Analysis is the core of this research since many historical events, ideologies, theories are fully examined.
Moreover, quantitative and qualitative approaches are used for the sake of selecting a score of important and relevant materials to serve the aim of the research. All these approaches are pursued under the MLA format (7th edition).
4
CHAPTER ONE
Framing the Gilded Age in USA
Introduction
Throughout the American history, The Gilded Age is of a vital impact on U.S., in which one may note emerging figures and grounded theories and ideologies. More, the explosion -if one may say- at all levels, be it political, social, historical, industrial and technological advancements. Events during that period stressed on two major trends; transformation and progression. These two events contributed in creating a revolution in the American history. Notions and ideologies such as Social Darwinism, Individualism, and Laissez-faire served as a watershed in the course of human history.
The first chapter (considered as the theoretical part) encompasses two main sections.
The first is deemed as a loop-in, covering the all-about(s) of The Gilded Age from the historical as well as the political perspectives as the title suggests. In fact, certain dichotomies are given, in which a part is devoted to grounding the age on axioms of historical, political and economic (industrial) sort. The second part, however, accentuates on three major lanes: Social Darwinism, Individualism, and Laissez-faire. It examines the notions and their contribution in The Gilded Age.
I. Historical, Political and Economic Account
The Gilded Age in the U.S. is traced back to the period 1870s to 1900. It started as the U.S. Reconstruction Period that finished in 1877, and it was trailed by the Progressive
Era that started in the 1890s. The early half of The Gilded Age generally coincided with the Victorian period in England, and La belle Époque in France (Upchurch 82). It is significant to state that such expression is ascribed to this period in the 1930s with 5
reference to Mark Twain's novel The Gilded Age: A tale of Today in 1873, which captures a time of social issues concealed by a thin gold overlaying.
Despite the fact that The Gilded Age was a time of degraded destitution and
imbalance, as a huge number of migrants—numerous from devastated European
countries—filled the United States, and the high centralization of riches turned out to be
more noticeable and litigious. The South after the Civil War remained financially
crushed; its economy turned out to be progressively attached to cotton and tobacco
which experienced, at one time in history, low costs. With the end of the Reconstruction
period in 1877, African-American individuals in the South were stripped of political
power and voting rights, and left financially burdened (Stigilitz n.pag).
North and West in The Gilded Age witnessed a quick financial development,
provided that American wages were considerably higher than those in Europe, especially
for gifted specialists, the period was conceived as a great opportunity for many European
workers. The industrialization prompted genuine wage development of 60% in the
period between 1860 and 1890. The normal yearly wage per modern specialist (counting
men, ladies and kids) ascended from $380 in 1880 to $564 in 1890, a pickup of 48%
(Robert n.pag).
Likewise, railways were a significant industrial development, with the industrial
facility framework, mining, and back expanding in significance. Migration from Europe
and the eastern states prompted the quick development of the West, in light of
cultivating, farming and mining. Worker's guilds wound up markedly vital in the quickly
developing modern urban areas. Two noteworthy across the country discouragements—
the Panic of 1873 and the Panic of 1893—interfered with development and created
social and political changes (Lapolla 193-194). 6
By the same token, the United States hopped to the lead in industrialization in front of Britain. The country was quickly extending its economy into new regions, particularly overwhelming industry like manufacturing plants, railways, and coal mining.
In 1869, the First Transcontinental Railroad opened up the far-west mining and farming areas, set out from New York to San Francisco now took six days rather than six months.
Railroad track mileage tripled in the vicinity of 1860 and 1880, and after that multiplied again by 1920 (Ambrose n.pag.). The new track connected once in the past secluded zones with bigger markets, and took into account the ascent of business cultivating, farming and mining, making a really national commercial center. American steel generation rose to outperform the joined sums of Britain, Germany, and France
(Kennedy 242-244).
Thus, London and Paris emptied venture cash into the railways through the
American economic market focused in Wall Street. By 1900, the procedure of financial fixation had stretched out into most branches of industry—a couple of vast organizations, called "puts stock in", overwhelmed in steel, oil, sugar, meat and ranch apparatus. Through vertical integration, these trusts could control every part of the generation of a particular decent, guaranteeing that the benefits made on the completed products were expanded, and by controlling access to the crude materials, kept adversaries from entering the commercial center. This practice would prompt a sole maker of a specific made great and implied no opposition in the commercial center to bring down prices (Clark 397).
Indeed, the political scene was also striking in the sense that in spite of some debasement, the turnout was high and national decisions saw two equitably coordinated gatherings. The predominant issues were social (particularly with respect to disallowance, sports and ethnic or racial gatherings), and financial (duties and cash 7
supply). With the quick development of urban communities, political machines
progressively took control of urban governmental issues. In business, enormous,
effective and rich trusts framed. Unions waged holy war for the 8-hours working day,
and the nullification of youngster work; white collar class reformers requested common
administration change, denial, and ladies' suffrage (Jackson n.pag.)
Nearby governments over the North and West fabricated state funded schools
predominantly at the basic level; open secondary schools began to rise. The various
religious sections were developing in enrollment and riches the Catholics moving to the
biggest sums. They all extended their missionary activity to the world arena. Catholics
and Lutherans set up parochial schools, and the bigger groups set up various universities,
clinics and philanthropies. A considerable load of the issues confronted by society,
particularly poor people, amid The Gilded Age, offered ascend to endeavored changes in
the resulting Progressive Era (Leary, Arthur n.pag.)
Following the same pattern, expanded automation of industry is a characteristic of The Gilded Age's look for less expensive methods to make more products. Frederick
Winslow Taylor watched that laborer effectiveness in steel could be enhanced; using close perceptions with a stop watch to dispose of squandered exertion. Motorization made a few production lines, a gathering of incompetent workers performing basic and dreary assignments, under the course of gifted foremen and specialists (Calhoun n.pag.)
Machine shops developed quickly, and they included very talented specialists and designers. Both the quantity of untalented and gifted specialists expanded, as their wage rates grew.
Designing schools were set up to encourage the colossal interest for skill.
Railways developed present day administration, with clear levels of leadership, factual 8
detailing, and complex bureaucratic systems. They systematized the parts of center chiefs, and set up unequivocal profession tracks. They contracted young fellows (18–21), and advanced them inside until a man achieved the status of train architect, conductor or station operator at age of 40 years old or thereabouts (Chandler n.pag.). Profession tracks were created for gifted industrial employments and for cubicle chiefs, beginning in railways and venturing into fund, assembling and exchange. Together with fast development of independent company, another white collar class was quickly developing, particularly in northern cities (Licht n.pag.).
The then United States pioneered the world in transport and telecommunication innovations. From 1860 to 1890, about 500,000 licenses were issued for new developments —more than ten times the number issued in the past seventy years. George
Westinghouse imagined compressed air brakes for trains (making them both more secure and speedier). Theodore Vail set up the American Telephone and Telegraph Company and fabricated an incredible interchanges network (John n.pag.).
Thomas Edison, notwithstanding concocting many gadgets, set up the principal electrical lighting utility, constructing it with respect to direct present and a brilliant light.
Electric power conveyance spread quickly crosswise over the Gilded Age’s urban communities. The lanes were lit during the evening, and electric streetcars considered speedier driving to work, and less demanding shopping (Hunter, Lynwood n.pag.).
Moreover, oil propelled another industry starting with the Pennsylvania oil fields in the
1860s. The U.S. overwhelmed the worldwide business into the 1950s. Lamp oil substituted whale oil, and candles for lighting homes. Rockefeller established Standard Oil
Company and cornered the oil business; which for the most part delivered lamp oil before the car made an interest for gas in the twentieth century (Williamson n.pag.). 9
Amid the 1880s, the U.S. economy ascended at the quickest rate in its history, with genuine wages, riches, GDP (Gross Domestic Product), and capital development all expanding rapidly. For instance, in the vicinity of 1865 and 1898, the yield of wheat expanded by 256%, corn by 222%, coal by 800% and miles of railroad track by 567%
(Kirkland 400-405). Thick national systems for transportation and correspondence were made. The company turned into the predominant type of business association, and a logical administration transformation changed business operations. By the start of the twentieth century, GDP and mechanical generation in the United States drove the world.
Kennedy reports that "U.S. national salary, in outright figures in per capita, was so far above every other person's by 1914." Per capita pay in the United States was $377 in 1914 contrasted with Britain in second place at $244, Germany at $184, France at $153 while
Russia and Japan trailed a long ways behind at $41 and $36 (Mosler 44).
Though, Europe, particularly Britain, remained the budgetary focal point of the world until 1914, the United States development was surprising at all levels, as British inventor W. T. Stead wrote in 1901 What is the mystery of American success?. The representatives of the Second Industrial Revolution made modern towns and urban areas in the Northeast, with new manufacturing plants, and enlisted an ethnically assorted mechanical regular workers, a considerable number of new settlers from Europe (Stead
381), rich industrialists and agents, for example, John D. Rockefeller, Jay Gould, Henry
Clay Frick, Andrew W. Mellon, Andrew Carnegie, Henry Flagler, Henry H. Rogers, J. P.
Morgan, Leland Stanford, Meyer Guggenheim, Jacob Schiff, Charles Crocker and
Cornelius Vanderbilt, would some of the time be marked "Robber Barons" by their commentators, who contend their fortunes were made to the detriment of the average workers, by chicanery and a treachery of democracy (Zinn 253-295). 10
However, their admirers contended that they were "Captains of Industry", who assembled the central American industrial economy, and the non-benefit part through demonstrations of philanthropy. In any case, numerous business pioneers were affected by
Herbert Spencer's hypothesis of Social Darwinism, which defended free enterprise, private enterprise, merciless rivalry and social stratification (Cashman 42).
Thus, this developing modern economy immediately extended to meet the new market requests. From 1869 to 1879, the U.S. economy developed at a rate of 6.8% for
NNP (Net National Product) and 4.5% for NNP per capita (U.S. Bureau of the
Census, n.pag.). The economy rehashed this time of development in the 1880s, in which the abundance of the country developed at a yearly rate of 3.8%, while the GDP was likewise doubled. Economist Milton Friedman expresses that for the 1880s, "The most noteworthy decadal rate (of development of genuine reproducible, unmistakable riches per head from 1805 to 1950) for times of around ten years was evidently come to in the eighties with roughly 3.8 percent." (Friedman, Schwartz 93).
II. Ideological Theories into Play During The Gilded Age
1. Social Darwinism
A. The Dimensions of the Notion
Social Darwinism is a name given to different marvels, developing in the second half of the nineteenth century, and attempting to apply the transformative idea of common determination to human culture. The term itself rose in the 1880s and increased across the board when utilized after 1944 by advocators of these prior ideas. The dominant part of the individuals who have been classified as social Darwinists rejected the reference of being recognized by such a label (Hodgson 428-430). 11
Researchers talk about the degree to which the different social Darwinist belief system reflects Charles Darwin's own perspectives on human social and economic issues.
His works have sections that can be translated as restricting forceful independence, while different entries seem to advance it. Some researchers contend that Darwin's views bit by bit changed and came to consolidate sees from different scholars, for example, Herbert
Spencer (Bowler 300-301) published his Lamarckian developmental thoughts, regarding society before Darwin; initially, distributed his hypothesis in 1859, both Spencer and
Darwin advanced their own originations of good values (Gregory 223-240). Spencer upheld free enterprise and private enterprise on the premise of his Lamarckian conviction; that battle for survival impelled self-improvement which could be inherited (Spencer
468-501). An essential defender in Germany was Ernst Haeckel, who advanced Darwin's idea (and individual translation of it) and utilized it also to add to another statement of faith, the Monist development.
The term Darwinism was initiated by Thomas Henry Huxley in his April 1860 survey of On the Origin of Species, and by the 1870s it was utilized to portray a scope of ideas of advancement, with no particular duty to Charles Darwin's hypothesis of natural selection. The primary utilization of the expression "Social Darwinism" was in Joseph
Fisher's 1877 article on The History of Landholding in Ireland; which was distributed in the Transactions of the Royal Historical Society (Fisher 249-250).
Fisher was remarking how a system for obtaining domesticated animal; which had been called "tenure", had prompted the false impression that the early Irish had as of now advanced or created arrive tenure; these plans did not at all influence what we comprehend by the word " tenure", that is, a man's ranch, however they related exclusively to cows, which we consider a property. It has seemed important to commit some space to this subject, see that that generally intense author Sir Henry Maine has acknowledged the word 12
"tenure" in its advanced understanding, and has developed a hypothesis under which the
Irish boss "developed" into a medieval noble.
Can find nothing in the Brehon laws to warrant this theory of
Social Darwinism, and believe further study will show that the
Cain Saerrath and the Cain Aigillue relate solely to what we now
call chattels, and did not in any way affect what we now call the
freehold, the possession of the land. (Fisher 249-250)
In spite of the way that Social Darwinism bears Charles Darwin's name, it is likewise connected today with others; prominently, Herbert Spencer, Thomas Malthus, and Francis Galton, the founder of eugenics. Truth be told, Spencer was not portrayed as a social Darwinist until the 1930s, long after his death. The Social Darwinism term initially showed up in Europe in 1880, the journalist Emilie Gautier had begat the term with reference to a health meeting in Berlin 1877 (Fisher 228-326). Around 1900 it was utilized by sociologists, some being against the concept (Ward 709-710). The term was advanced in the United States in 1944 by the American historian Richard Hofstadter; who utilized it in the ideological war exertion against fascism to indicate a reactionary belief which advanced focused strife, racism and chauvinism (Leonard 37-51).
Hofstadter later additionally perceived (what he saw as) the impact of Darwinist and other developmental thoughts upon those with collectivist perspectives, enough to devise a term for the wonder, "Darwinist Collectivism" Before Hofstadter's work the utilization of the expression "Social Darwinism", in English scholastic diaries it was very rare (Hodgson 445-446). Indeed,
There is considerable evidence that the entire concept of ‘Social
Darwinism’ as we know it today was virtually invented by Richard 13
Hofstadter. Eric Foner, in an introduction to a then-new edition of
Hofstadter's book published in the early 1990s, declines to go quite
that far. ‘Hofstadter did not invent the term Social Darwinism’,
Foner writes, "which originated in Europe in the 1860s and crossed
the Atlantic in the early twentieth century. But before he wrote, it
was used only on rare occasions; he made it standard shorthand for
a complex of late-nineteenth-century ideas, a familiar part of the
lexicon of social thought. (Riggenbach n.pag.)
Evidently, Social Darwinism has numerous definitions, and some of them are contrary with each other. Accordingly, Social Darwinism has been censured for being a conflicting rationality, which does not prompt any reasonable political conclusions. For instance, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics states that:
Part of the difficulty in establishing sensible and consistent
usage is that commitment to the biology of natural selection and
to 'survival of the fittest' entailed nothing uniform either for
sociological method or for political doctrine. A 'social
Darwinist' could just as well be a defender of Laissez-faire as a
defender of state socialism, just as much an imperialist as a
domestic eugenics. (McLean 490)
Indeed the expression "Social Darwinism" has once in a while been utilized by promoters of the assumed belief systems or thoughts; rather it has quite often been utilized deprecatorily by its opponents. The term draws upon the regular utilization of Darwinism, which has been utilized to depict a scope of evolutionary views. Yet, in the late nineteenth century, it was connected more particularly to natural selection as initially progressed by
Charles Darwin, to clarify speciation in populaces of organisms. The procedure 14
incorporates rivalry between people for constrained assets, however, famously and incorrectly portrayed by the expression "Survival of The Fittest", a term instituted by sociologist Herbert Spencer (Hodgson 428-430).
Creationists have regularly kept up that Social Darwinism—prompting arrangements intended to compensate the most aggressive—as a logical consequence of
"Darwinism" (the hypothesis of natural selection in biology). Biologists and historians have expressed this as an appeal to nature, and ought not to be taken to infer that this wonder should be utilized as an ethical guide in human society. While there are authentic connections between the advancement of Darwin's hypothesis and types of Social
Darwinism, Social Darwinism is not an important outcome of the standards of biological evolution (Diane 219-220).
While the term has been connected to the claim that Darwin's hypothesis of evolution by natural selection, it can be utilized to comprehend the social perseverance of a country or nation, Social Darwinism normally alludes to thoughts that originate before
Darwin's distribution of On the Origin of Species. Others, whose thoughts are given the name, incorporate the eighteenth century priest Thomas Malthus, and Darwin's cousin
Francis Galton, who established eugenics towards the finish of the nineteenth century.
As well, the extension of the British Empire fitted in, with the more extensive thought of Social Darwinism used from the 1870s onwards to represent the surprising and all inclusive wonder of "the Anglo-Saxon overflowing his boundaries", as stated by the late-Victorian sociologist Benjamin Kidd in Social Evolution, distributed in 1894. The idea is also demonstrated as helpful to legitimize what was seen by some as the inescapable annihilation of "the weaker races who disappear before the stronger" not so much "through the effects of … our vices upon them" as "what may be called the virtues 15
of our civilization." (Kidd 47). Herbert Spencer's thoughts, similar to those of evolutionary progressivism, originated from his perusing of Thomas Malthus, and his later hypotheses were affected by those of Darwin. Be that as it may, Spencer's significant work, Progress: Its Law and Cause (1857), was discharged two years before the distribution of Darwin's On the Origin of Species, and First Principles was imprinted in
1860.
In The Social Organism (1860), Spencer thinks about society to a living being and states that, similarly as natural life forms advance through natural selection, society develops and increments in intricacy through practically equivalent to processes. From numerous points of views, Spencer's Theory of Cosmic Evolution has a great deal in the same manner as the works of Lamarck and Auguste Comte's Positivism than with
Darwin's. Jeff Riggenbach contends that Spencer's views that culture and education made a kind of Lamarckism possible, and notes that Herbert Spencer was a defender of private charity (Riggenbach n.pag.).
Likewise, Spencer's work served to restore enthusiasm for the work of Malthus.
While Malthus' work does not itself qualify as Social Darwinism, his 1798 work An Essay on the Principle of Population, was fantastically famous and broadly perused by Social
Darwinists. In that book, for instance, the writer contended that as an expanding populace, it would typically exceed its nourishment supply; this would bring about the starvation of the weakest and a Malthusian disaster. As per Michael Ruse, Darwin read Malthus' well known An Essay on a Principle of Population in 1838, four years after Malthus' demise.
Malthus himself expected the Social Darwinists in proposing that philanthropy could compound social issues. 16
Another of these social elucidations of Darwin's biological views, later known as eugenics, was advanced by Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton, in 1865 and 1869. Galton believes that similarly as physical attributes were plainly acquired among eras of individuals, the same could be said for mental qualities (genius and talent). Galton indicates that social ethics expected to change with the goal that heredity was a cognizant choice, keeping in mind the end goal to maintain a strategic distance from both the over breeding by less fit individuals from society, and the under-breeding of the more fit ones.
In Galton's view, social establishments, for example, welfare and crazy refuges were permitting substandard people to survive, and replicate at levels speedier than the more "superior" people in respectable society, and if redresses were not soon taken, society would be flooded with "inferiors". Darwin read his cousin's work with intrigue, and gave segments of Descent of Man to discourse of Galton's speculations. Neither
Galton nor Darwin, however, supported any eugenic arrangements confining generation, due to their Whiggish doubt of government (Diane 230).
Additionally, Friedrich Nietzsche's rationality tended to the topic of artificial selection, yet Nietzsche's standards did not agree with Darwinian hypotheses of natural selection. Nietzsche's perspective on sickness and health, specifically, restricted him to the idea of natural adjustment as fashioned by Spencer's "fitness". Nietzsche censured
Haeckel, Spencer, and Darwin, now and then, under a similar standard, by keeping up that in particular cases, ailment was important and even helpful (Steigler 90). Thus, he composed
Wherever progress is to ensue, deviating natures are of greatest
importance. Every progress of the whole must be preceded by a
partial weakening. The strongest natures retain the type; the 17
weaker ones help to advance it. Something similar also happens in
the individual. There is rarely degeneration, a truncation, or even a
vice or any physical or moral loss without an advantage
somewhere else. In a warlike and restless clan, for example, the
sicklier man may have occasion to be alone, and may therefore
become quieter and wiser; the one-eyed man will have one eye the
stronger; the blind man will see deeper inwardly, and certainly
hear better. To this extent, the famous theory of the survival of the
fittest does not seem to me to be the only viewpoint from which to
explain the progress of strengthening of a man or of a
race.(Nietzsche n.pag.)
The less difficult parts of Social Darwinism took place before Malthusian thoughts that people, particularly males, require rivalry in their lives, with a specific end goal to get by later on. The poor ought to accommodate themselves, and not be given any guide. In any case, in the midst of this atmosphere, most social Darwinists of the mid twentieth century really bolstered better working conditions and pay rates. Such measures would give the poor a superior opportunity to accommodate themselves, yet still recognizes the individuals who are equipped for prevailing from the individuals who are poor out of apathy, shortcoming, or mediocrity.
B. The importance of Social Darwinism During The Gilded Age
Herbert Spencer based his idea of social advancement, famously known as "Social
Darwinism" on individual rivalry. Spencer trusted that opposition was "the law of life" and brought about the "Survival of The Fittest". In Society Advances, Spencer stated "where its fittest members are allowed to assert their fitness with the least hindrance." He went on 18
to argue that the unfit should "not be prevented from dying out." Dissimilar to Darwin,
Spencer trusted that people could hereditarily pass on their scholarly qualities to their youngsters. This was a typical, yet incorrect confidence in the nineteenth century. To
Spencer, the fittest people acquired such qualities as innovation, cheapness, the craving to possess property, and the capacity to amass riches. The unfit acquired sluggishness, ineptitude, and unethical behavior.
As per Spencer, the number of inhabitants in unfit individuals would gradually decrease. They would in the end be plainly wiped out due to their inability. The administration, in his view, mustn’t take any activities to keep this from happening, since this would conflict with the advancement of human progress. Spencer trusted his own
England and other propelled countries were normally advancing into tranquil "modern" social orders. To help this developmental procedure, he contended that administration ought to escape the method for the fittest people. They ought to have the flexibility to do whatever they satisfied in rivaling others the length they did not encroach on the equivalent privileges of different contenders. He censured the English Parliament for
"over-legislation", and characterized this as passing laws that helped the specialists, poor people, and the frail. As he would like to think, such laws unnecessarily deferred the eradication of the unfit.
Thus, he turned out to be a famous figure in the 1880s. Fundamentally, in light of the fact that his utilization of evolution to territories of human attempts advanced an idealistic perspective, without bounds as definitely ending up noticeably better. In the
United States, authors and scholars of The Gilded Age, for example, Edward L. Youmans,
William Graham Sumner, John Fiske, John W. Burgess and others created speculations of social evolution accordingly to introduction to the works of Darwin and Spencer. 19
In 1883, Sumner distributed an exceedingly powerful leaflet entitled What Social
Classes Owe to Each Other, in which he demanded that the social classes owe each other nothing, combining Darwin's discoveries with free endeavor Capitalism for his justification. According to Sumner, the individuals who feel a commitment to give help to those unequipped or under-prepared to go after assets, will prompt a nation in which the frail and sub-par are urged to breed more like them, inevitably dragging the nation down.
Sumner equally trusted that the best prepared to win the battle for existence was the
American businessman, and inferred that duties and controls fill in as perils to his survival.
This handout makes no say of Darwinism, and just alludes to Darwin in an announcement on the importance of freedom, that there never has been any man, from the primitive barbarian up to a Humboldt or a Darwin, who could do as he had a mind to.
However, Sumner never completely grasped Darwinian thoughts, and some contemporary historians do not rely on the fact that Sumner at any point really put stock in
Social Darwinism. The immense greater part of American representatives dismisses the counter, magnanimously ramifications of the hypothesis (Kaye 33). Rather they offered millions to assemble schools, universities, hospitals, art institutions, parks and numerous different organizations. Andrew Carnegie, who respected Spencer, was the main philanthropist on the planet (1890–1920), and a noteworthy pioneer against government and warfare.
By another token, H. G. Wells was vigorously affected by Darwinist thoughts, and writer Jack London composed stories of survival that fused his perspectives on Social
Darwinism, film director, Stanley Kubrick has been portrayed as having held Social
Darwinist opinions (Herr 11).
20
2. Individualism
A. The Dimensions of the Notion
Individualism is an ethical, political or social standpoint that burdens human freedom and the significance of individual confidence (Wood 6). It contradicts most outside impedance with an individual's decisions, regardless of whether by society, the state or some other gathering or establishment (collectivism or state-ism), and it is restricted to the view that convention, religion or some other type of outer good standard ought to be utilized to restrain an individual's selection of activities (Hayek 37-48).
As for the history of the notion, the expression "Individualism" was initially utilized by French and British Proto-Socialists, supporters of Saint-Simon (1760 - 1825) and Robert Owen (1771 - 1858), at first as a disparaging term, and for the most part in the feeling of Political Individualism. The nineteenth century American Henry David Thoreau is frequently referred to, for instance of a conferred Individualist. In famous utilization, the essences of "Individualism" can be positive or negative, contingent upon who is utilizing the term and how.
The principle of Individualism, or Principium Individuationis, portrays the way in which a thing is recognized as distinguished from other things (Reese 251). For Carl
Jung, individuation is a procedure of change, whereby the individual and collective oblivious is brought into awareness (by means of dreams, active imagination or free association) to be acclimatized into the entire identity (Audi 424). It is a totally common process, and essential for the coordination of the mind to take place. Jung viewed individuation as the focal procedure of human development.
Noticeably, A few Individualists are similarly Egoists (the moral position that ethical operators should do whatever is in their own self-intrigue), despite the fact that 21
they ordinarily do not share that self-centeredness is innately great. Or maybe, they would contend that people are not compelled by a solemn obligation to any socially-forced profound quality, and that people ought to be allowed to be selfish or not (Rachels 534).
From an ethical perspective, Ethical Individualism, then, is the position that individual inner voice or reason is the main good lead, and there is no target specialist or standard which it will undoubtedly consider. It can be connected to the profound quality of the Scottish School of Common Sense of the late eighteenth Century, the self-ruling autonomous morality of Immanuel Kant, and even antiquated Greek Hedonism and
Eudemonism (Philosophy Basics).
Additionally, Existentialist ethics is portrayed by an accentuation on good
Individualism, particularly given its emphasis on the subjective, individual existences of individual human beings. Existentialism holds that there is no fundamental and given
"human nature" that is normal to all individuals, thus every individual must characterize independently what mankind intends to them, and what values or reason will dominate in their lives (Macquarrie 18-21).
Also, Gilbert Simondon in L'individuation psychique et collective, built up a hypothesis of individual and collective individuation, in which the individual subject is considered as an impact of individuation instead of a cause. In this way, the individual atom is supplanted by a ceaseless ontological procedure of individuation. Individuation is a constantly inadequate process, continually leaving a "pre-individual" left-over itself, making conceivable future individuations. The theory of Bernard Stiegler adjusts the work of Gilbert Simondon on individuation, and furthermore draws upon comparative thoughts in Friedrich Nietzsche and Sigmund Freud. However, Steigler claimed that: 22
The I […] can only be thought in relationship to we, which is
collective individual. The I is constituted in adopting a collective
tradition, which it inherits and in which a plurality of I 's
acknowledge each other's existence.(Stiegler n.pag.)
Forwardly, Political Individualism is the theory in which the state ought to play an only guarded part, by securing the freedom of every person to go about as he or she wishes, similarly as long he or she does not encroach on a similar freedom of another
(basically the laissez faire position at the heart of classical Liberalism, Libertarianism and modern Capitalism). It sees itself in crucial resistance to ideas, for example, Jean-Jacques
Rousseau's "social contract", which keeps up that every individual is under certain agreement to present his own will to the "general will", and contrary to any collectivist philosophy, for example, Socialism or Communism (Brown n.pag.).
Also, Classical Liberalism is a political philosophy that was created in the nineteenth century in England, Western Europe, and the Americas. It took after before types of liberalism in its dedication to individual opportunity and prominent government (Hudelson n.pag.). However, it is contrasted from prior types of liberalism in its dedication to free markets and classical economics. Classical
Liberalism was resuscitated in the twentieth century by Ludwig von Mises and
Friedrich Hayek, and further created by Milton Friedman, Robert Nozick, Loren
Lomasky and Jan Narveson. The expression of Classical Liberalism is in some cases used to allude to all types of liberalism before the twentieth century (Conway 9).
B. The Importance of Individualism during The Gilded Age
Finally, Individualism was another basic theory amid The Gilded Age. Its main focus was on supporting the freedom, rights, and autonomous activity of every person. 23
The idea of Individualism permitted individualists to go into society with expectations of assisting their own advantages without taking the restrictions of society into thought. This empowered the average workers to increase higher positions in the social status, contingent upon the measure of exertion and work they set forth.
Individualism energized individual flexibility and decision, and set extraordinary values on confidence, self-reliance, privacy, and mutual respect. Supporters of
Individualism trusted that government interference ought to be kept at the very least, subsequently most individualists were supporters of the Laissez-faire policy. One prime promoter of Individualism is Horatio Alger. Alger was a respected liberal writer among working class Americans. His many Rags to Riches books propelled many individuals to attempt to overcome their situation, in spite of how unthinkable it might appear.
Thus, The doctrine of economic Individualism holds that every individual ought to be permitted self-governance in making his or her own particular economic decisions, rather than those choices being made by the state, the community, the corporation and alike, on their behalf.
3. Laissez- faire
A. The Dimensions of the Notion
The expression Laissez-faire is French borrowed expression, essentially means
"Let (it/them) do" However, in the economic setting, it rather intends to mean "Let go"
(Business Dictionary, "Laissez-faire"). Thoroughly, it is a financial system, in which exchanges between private parties are free from government intervention, for example, control, benefits, tariffs, and endowments. This term came to existence as a result of a meeting that took place around 1681 between effective French Comptroller-General of
Finances Jean-Baptiste Colbert and a gathering of French businessmen, headed by a 24
certain M. Le Gendre. At the point when the mercantilist minister asked how the French state could be of administration to the dealers and advance their trade, Le Gendre answered just "Laissez-nous faire" ("Leave it to us" or "Let us do it"). (Argenson 111).
Thus, French minister René de Voyer, Marquis d'Argenson-the main known appearance of the term in print, were first to tell about the term in a 1751 article in the
Journal économique. Argenson himself had utilized the expression before (1736) in his own journals, in a celebrated upheaval:
Leave it to itself has been the proper motto of public powers since
the dawn of civilization… Appalling is the principle of seeking
glory solely by debasing our neighbors! In it are but the malice and
spitefulness of heart typical of fat cats; the public interest lies
elsewhere. Leave it to itself, for the love of God! Leave it!
(Original Translation)
Also, on the basis of François Quesnay's works on China, Vincent de Gournay, a
French Physiocrat and intendant of business in the 1750s, advanced the term Laissez-faire
(MCcabe 271-272). Quesnay begat the adage "Laissez-faire, laissez-passer" being an interpretation of the Chinese expression (wu wei) (Clarke 50). Gournay bolstered the expulsion of confinements on exchange and the deregulation of industry in France. He fashioned a bigger saying all on his own: "Laissez-faire et laissez-passer" (Let do and let pass) resulted by being introduced to the Colbert-Le Gendre anecdote. Additionally, his maxim has been distinguished as "Laissez-faire et laissez-passer, le monde va de lui même!" ("Let do and let pass, the world goes ahead by itself!") (Turgot 288).
In spite of the fact that Gournay left no true threads on his financial arrangement thoughts, but he had colossal personal impact on his contemporaries, strikingly his kindred 25
Physiocrats, who celebrated both the Laissez-faire trademark and the principle to Gournay.
Yet, it can be said that P. S. de Boisguilbert brought to plate the notion of "On laisse faire la nature" (let nature run its course) before d'Argenson or Gournay, who gave such notion its distinction when using Laissaiz-Faire (Doisguillbert, n.pag.). Even D'Argenson, was better known for the comparable however less-commended maxim "Pas trop gouverner"
(Govern not excessively much) (Dupont de Nemours 136-137).
The Physicrats declared Laissez-faire in eighteenth-century France, putting it at the center of economic standards, and acclaimed financial analysts, starting with Adam Smith, built up the idea. "It is with the Physiocrats and the traditional political economy that the expression "laissez faire" is conventionally associated." (Macgregor 54-67).
The physiocrats, reacting against the excessive mercantilist regulations
of the France of their day, expressed a belief in a ‘natural order’ or
liberty under which individuals in following their selfish interests
contributed to the general good. Since, in their view, this natural order
functioned successfully without the aid of government, they advised the
state to restrict itself to upholding the rights of private property and
individual liberty, to removing all artificial barriers to trade, and to
abolishing all useless. (Sidney n.pag.)
In England, the French expression Laissez-faire gained currency in English-talking nations with the spread of Physiocratic writing in the late eighteenth century though various "free trade" and "non-interference" slogans had been coined as ahead of schedule as the seventeenth century. George Whatley's 1774 Principles of Trade (co-wrote with
Benjamin Franklin) re-told the Colbert-LeGendre anecdote. 26
Accordingly, Laissez-faire was "considered as the best approach to unleash human potential through the rebuilding of a characteristic framework, a framework unhindered by the limitations of government." (Gaspard n.pag.). It is a result of the Enlightenment, as
Adam Smith saw the economy as a natural system and the market as a natural piece of that system. Smith saw Laissez-faire as an ethical program and the market its instrument to guarantee men the privileges of natural law. Following similar pattern, free markets turn into an impression of the natural system of liberty. Gaspard also goes on by stating that
"For Smith, laissez faire was a program for the abrogation of laws compelling the market, a program for the restoration of order and for the initiation of potential growth."
Be that as it may, Adam Smith and the business experts, for example, Thomas
Malthus and David Ricardo, did not utilize the expression. Jeremy Bentham utilized the term, yet it was probably James Mill's reference to the "laissez faire" proverb (together with "pas trop gouverner") in a 1824 passage for the Encyclopedia Britannica that truly brought the term into more extensive English use (Smith 13-14). The term got a lot of its
(English) meaning with the approach of the Anti-Corn Law League (established 1838)
(Abbott 3-10).
Additionally, Adam Smith initially utilized the metaphor of an "invisible hand" in his book The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) to depict the unexpected impacts of economic self-organization from economic self-interest (Marroquin 123). The idea lying behind the "invisible hand" as some have described the invisible hand metaphor is one for
Laissez-faire, though Smith never really utilized the term himself (Eatwell n.pag.). Yet, not simply the metaphor rather has a relation with Bernard de Mandeville and his Fable of the Bees (1705). In Third Millennium Capitalism (2000), Wyatt M. Rogers, Jr. takes note of a pattern whereby as of late "conservative politicians and economists have picked the term "free-market capitalism" in lieu of "Laissez-faire". 27
Gaspard in A Political Economy of Lebanon 1948–2002: The Limits of Laissez-
faire, lays Laissez-faire on the accompanying axioms: (1) The individual is the
fundamental unit in the public arena. (2) The individual has a natural right to opportunity.
(3) The physical order of nature is a concordant and automatic system. (4) Companies are
institutions of the State and along these lines must be observed nearly by the citizenry
because of their penchant to disrupt the Smithian unconstrained order.
B. The Importance of Laissez-faire during The Gilded Age
According to Shmoop Editorial Team in Gilded Age, the importance of such
culture can be summarized into two focal points;
1. Laissez-faire belief system contradicted government impedance in the economy.
2. Courts struck down laws that included government in economic control.
Other financial antiquarians, in any case, demand that this kind of investigation disregards similarly basic ideological supporters of Gilded Age development. For one thing, financial improvement was encouraged by a strong culture—one which put trusts in industrialists and representatives and declined to allow government to meddle in their endeavors. Most Americans grasped the standards of Laissez-faire financial matters, which contended that economic strengths ought to be permitted to work themselves out with greatest flexibility and insignificant government interference.
Some portion of the rationale was absolutely financial—it was trusted that administration contribution had a tendency to interfere, or even anticipate, economic improvement. In any case, some portion of the contention was moral. Laissez-faire advocates contended that administration obstruction twisted the characteristic and impartial strengths of financial advancement. Government intercession was viewed as commensurate 28
to "class legislation"— a low and fake reallocation of financial assets and power starting with one group then onto the next.
Laissez-faire standards empowered industrialists and businessmen to work with
open support and without government interference. Also, the rationality was made an
interpretation of by the courts into an arrangement of useful guidelines that empowered
organizations to work with much more prominent self-governance. For instance, amid the
most recent many years of the nineteenth century, the court fortified standards expanding
the holiness of the agreement. State laws that endeavored to control the working
environment, for example, limitations on work hours and health prerequisites, were more
than once struck around state courts with the contention that they disregarded the
privileges of bosses and employees to go into contracts uninhibitedly.
Courts progressively connected the "fellow servant" control, which assuaged
managers of duty regarding work environment damage if a contributing cause was the
carelessness of another employee. Also, the courts debilitated unions by demanding that
employers had a privilege to supplant striking laborers while in the meantime denying that
strikers had a privilege to sort out boycotts.
For some historians, America's economic history amid The Gilded Age can't be
disclosed without reference to this philosophical and legal culture, which was so strong of
unregulated financial development. However still others demand that recognizing the
significance of this culture does not finish the story. These researchers demand that a
modest bunch of key players were basic to the specific way that America's economy
unfurled. They contend that the abilities and strategies of a handful of individual industrial
giants were fundamental to America's unprecedented economic development.
29
Conclusion
Most modern historians are not fully agreeable to recognize the period's fatalities quite so philosophically, but many have concluded that the economic forces unleashed during these years were crucial to the development of American society. While these historians concede that many suffered through this transitional period, while they acknowledge that wages were low, farmers' status was precarious, and urban conditions were deplorable, American entrepreneurs, large and small, were building a national economy that would deliver better goods, improved lifestyles, and eventually higher wages for the vast majority of Americans, so were ideologies adopted.
30
CHAPTER TWO
Captains of Industry a Modernist View
Introduction
The Gilded Age has revealed as stated above a great transformation and progression, in which great figures emerged on the lounge USA industry; namely, John D.
Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie, both who stepped up the American industry into claiming the current stance it has nowadays. Yet, both have been conceived from controversy standpoints, either as Robber Barons or Captains of Industry.
Terminologically and from one token, "Robber Baron" is a critical expression ascribed to dominant nineteenth-century American businessmen, who were seen as having used dubious practices to broaden their wealth, including the offer of low prices products, and poorly pay their workers and buying the competitors that couldn't stand a chance against them. By another token, "Captains of Industry" refers to those with philanthropic traits which contribute to the overall economy of the country through increased productivity, expansion of markets, providing more jobs.
Thus, this chapter puts under modernist scope those nineteenth-century industrialists: John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie, by highlighting their "journey" in the American economy. Furthermore, a section of analysis is provided with indicative criticism, in the lane of opting for the Captains of Industry standpoint.
I. John Davidson Rockefeller
John Davison Rockefeller Sr. (July 8, 1839 – May 23, 1937) was an American oil industry businessman and philanthropist. His earliest career started as his family settled in 31
Cleveland, Ohio. Rockefeller turned into an assistant bookkeeper at 16 years old, and went into a business organization with Maurice B. Clark and his siblings at 20 years old. In the wake of getting them out, he and his sibling William established Rockefeller and Andrews with Samuel Andrews. He shifted his attention to refining rather than drilling for oil. In
1867, Henry Flagler entered the organization. Rockefeller formally established the
Standard Oil Company, Inc. in 1870 as an Ohio association with his sibling, Henry Flagler,
Jabez A. Bostwick, Samuel Andrews, and Stephen V. Harkness. He ran it until 1897. He is generally viewed as the wealthiest American of all time (Fortune n.pag.) and the wealthiest person in modern history.
Principally, Rockefeller's riches taken off and he turned into the wealthiest person in the nation, controlling 90% of all oil in the United States at his peak, as kerosene and gasoline developed in significance. Moreover, he increased huge impact over the railroad business, which transported his oil around the nation. Standard Oil was the principal incredible business confide in the United States. Oil was utilized through the nation as a light source, until the presentation of electricity and as a fuel after the creation of the vehicle. Rockefeller upset the oil business, and alongside other key contemporary industrialists, for example, steel tycoon Andrew Carnegie, characterized the structure of present day philanthropy (Gross n.pag).
Yet, The U.S. supreme court decided in 1911 that Standard Oil must be disassembled for infringement of government hostile to antitrust laws; it was separated into
34 isolate substances that included organizations which would move toward becoming
ExxonMobil, Chevron, and others; some of regardless them having the biggest income.
Singular bits of the organization were worth more than the entire, and as shares of these multiplied and tripled in an incentive in their initial years, Rockefeller turned into the nation's initial tycoon with a fortune worth about 2% of the national economy (Hanson 32
39). His pinnacle total assets were evaluated at $336 billion (in 2007 USD; swelling balanced) in 1913. Rockefeller put over the most recent 40 years of his life in retirement at his domain in Westchester County, New York. His fortune was predominantly used to make the current efficient approach of focused philanthropy through the making of foundations that majorly affected scientific research and education at all levels (Fosdick n.pag.). His establishments spearheaded the improvement of medical research and were instrumental in the destruction of hookworm and yellow fever.
Additionally, Rockefeller was likewise the originator of both the University of
Chicago and Rockefeller University, and subsidized the foundation of Central Philippine
University in the Philippines. He was a faithful Northern Baptist, and bolstered many church-based establishments. Rockefeller clung to aggregate restraint from liquor and tobacco all through his life (Albro 23). He was an unwavering attendee of the Erie Street
Baptist Mission Church, where he attended Sunday school, and filled in as a trustee, agent, and periodic janitor. Religion was a directing power for the duration of his life, and
Rockefeller trusted it to be the wellspring of his prosperity (Chernow 32). Rockefeller was likewise viewed as a supporter of free enterprise laissez faire and Individualism in view of a point of view of Social Darwinism, and was cited regularly as saying "The development of an extensive business is simply a survival of the fittest". (Hofstadter 45).
1. Pre-Standard Oil Career
1.1. Bookkeeper
In September 1855, when Rockefeller was sixteen, he landed his initially position as an assistant bookkeeper, working for a little deliver commission firm called Hewitt and
Tuttle. He worked extended periods, as he later reviewed, in "all the methods and systems of the office." (Chernow 46). He was especially capable at figuring transportation costs, 33
which served him well later in his profession. Making 50 cents a day, the full pay for his first three months' work was $50 (equal to $1 thousand in 2016 dollars) (Chernow 47). As an adolescent, Rockefeller apparently said that his extraordinary desire was to make
$100,000 (equal to $3 million in 2016 dollars) and to live 100 years. (Stevens 135).
2. Oil Business
In 1866, William Rockefeller Jr., John's sibling, assembled another refinery in
Cleveland and brought John into the association. In 1867, Henry M. Flagler turned into a partner, and the firm of Rockefeller, Andrews and Flagler was set up. By 1868, with
Rockefeller proceeding with practices of acquiring and reinvesting benefits, controlling expenses, and utilizing refineries' waste, the organization claimed two Cleveland refineries and an advertising backup in New York; it was the biggest oil refinery in the world.
Rockefeller, Andrews and Flagler were the ancestors of the Standard Oil Company
(ExxonMobil "Our History").
3. Early Development
Before the finish of the American Civil War, Cleveland was one of the five principle refining regions in the U.S. (other than Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, New York, and the area in northwestern Pennsylvania where the vast majority of the oil began). By 1869, there was three times more kerosene refining limit than expected to supply to the market, and the limit stayed in abundance for some years (Yergin n.pag.).
On 10 January 1870, Rockefeller nullified the organization of Rockefeller,
Andrews and Flagler (Chernow 132), shaping Standard Oil of Ohio. Proceeding to apply his hard working attitude and productivity, Rockefeller immediately extended the organization to be the most gainful refiner in Ohio. Moreover, it wound up plainly one of 34
the biggest shippers of oil and kerosene in the nation. The railways contended furiously for movement, and trying to make a cartel to control cargo rates, shaped the South
Improvement Company offering extraordinary arrangements to mass clients like Standard oil, outside the primary oil focuses. The cartel offered special treatment as a high-volume shipper, which included not simply steep discounts/rebates of up to half for their item, but also refunds for the shipment of competing products (Segall 42).
Some portion of this plan was the declaration of strongly expanded cargo charges.
This touched off a firestorm of challenges from free oil proprietors, including blacklists and vandalism, which prompted the disclosure of Standard Oil's part in the arrangement. A noteworthy New York refiner, Charles Pratt’s Company, headed by Charles Pratt and
Henry H. Rogers, drove the resistance to this arrangement, and railways soon upheld off.
Pennsylvania renounced the cartel's contract, and non-special rates were reestablished for the time being. While competitors may have been troubled, Rockefeller's endeavors brought American buyers less expensive kerosene and other oil by-items. Before 1870, oil light was just for the well off, given costly by whale oil (Segall 43). Be that as it may, amid the following decade, lamp oil turned out to be ordinarily accessible to the working and middle classes (Nevins 197-198).
However, attacked surprisingly by the press, Rockefeller proceeded with his self- strengthening cycle of purchasing the slightest proficient competing refiners, enhancing the productivity of his operations, squeezing for rebates on oil shipments, undermining his opposition, making secret bargains, raising speculation pools, and purchasing rivals out.
Under four months in 1872, in what was later known as "The Cleveland Conquest" or "The
Cleveland Massacre", Standard Oil ingested 22 of its 26 Cleveland competitors.
Eventually, even his previous foes, Pratt and Rogers, saw the uselessness of proceeding to 35
go up against Standard Oil. In 1874, they made a secret agreement with Rockefeller to be procured (Segall 44).
Twistingly, Pratt and Rogers turned into Rockefeller's partners. Rogers, specifically, ended up plainly one of Rockefeller's key men in the arrangement of the
Standard Oil Trust. Pratt's child, Charles Millard Pratt, moved toward becoming Secretary of Standard Oil. For a hefty portion of his rivals, Rockefeller had only to demonstrate them in his books, so they could perceive what they were up against and make them a decent offer. He revealed that he would run them into insolvency, and after economically purchased up their advantages at auction. Be that as it may, this was not planned to take out rivalry altogether. Truth be told, his partner Pratt said of that allegation "Competitors we must have...if we absorb them, it surely will bring up another." (Nevins 197-198)
Rather than needing to dispense with them, Rockefeller considered himself to be the business friend in need, "an angel of mercy" engrossing the powerless and making the business all in all more grounded, more proficient, and more competitive. Standard Oil was developing on horizontally and vertically levels. It included its own pipelines, tank autos, and home delivery network (Segall 46). It kept oil costs low to fight off competitors, made its items moderate to the normal family. Also, to expand advertise entrance, now and then, sold underneath cost. It created more than 300 oil-based items from tar to paint to petroleum. Before the finish of the 1870s, Standard Oil was refining more than 90% of the oil in the U.S. Rockefeller had turn into a millionaire ($1 million is equal to $25 million in
2016 dollars) (Segall 52).
He instinctively realized that orderliness would only proceed from
centralized control of large aggregations of plant and capital, with
the one aim of an orderly flow of products from the producer to the 36
consumer. That orderly, economic, efficient flow is what we now,
many years later, call 'vertical integration' I do not know whether
Mr. Rockefeller ever used the word 'integration'. I only know he
conceived the idea. (Yergin n.pag.)
4. Standard Oil Trust Certificate 1896
Standard Oil countered and kept down its shipments; with the assistance of different railways, began a price war that drastically lessened freight payments and created work distress. Rockefeller won, and the railroad sold its oil advantages to Standard Oil. In any case, in the fallout of that fight, in 1879, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania arraigned
Rockefeller on charges of hoarding the oil exchange, beginning a torrential slide of comparable court procedures in different states, and making a national issue of Standard
Oil's business practices. Rockefeller was under strain amid the 1880s, when he was completing his arrangement of combination and joining, and being assaulted by the press
(Segall 57), He made a point that he couldn't stay unconscious generally in the evenings.
Rockefeller later commented: "All the fortune that I have made has not served to compensate me for the anxiety of that period." (Yergin n.pag.).
5. Imposing Business Model
Despite the fact that it generally had many competitors, Standard Oil, step by step, picked up predominance of oil refining and deals making, as piece of the overall industry in the United States through horizontal integration, ending up with around 90% of the US market. In kerosene industry, the organization supplanted the old circulation framework with its own vertical system (Folsom, n.pag.). It provided kerosene by tank autos that conveyed the fuel to local markets, and tank wagons conveyed to retail clients, in this way, bypassing the current system of discount jobbers. Despite enhancing the quality and 37
accessibility of kerosene products, while diminishing their cost to people in general (the cost of kerosene dropped by about 80% over the life of the company) (Chernow 253),
Standard Oil's business hones made extreme discussion. Standard's most powerful weapons against competitors were underselling, differential pricing (Chernow 258).
In the 1890s, Rockefeller went on a gigantic purchasing binge gaining leases for crude oil in Ohio, Indiana, and West Virginia, as the first Pennsylvania oil fields started to play out (Segall 77). Amid the excited extension, Rockefeller started to consider retirement (Chernow 287). The everyday administration of the trust was swung over to
John Dustin Archbold, and Rockefeller purchased another estate, Pocantico Hills, north of
New York City, turning more opportunity to recreation exercises, including the new games of bicycling and golf (Segall 79-80). As it is well familiar, Rockefeller ventured into iron ore and ore transportation.
6. Religious Perspectives and Orientations
Credit is given to an incident that took place in church, as a Baptist preacher once urged him to profit as he could, and afterward gave away as much as he could. Later in his life, Rockefeller reviewed: "It was at this moment, that the financial plan of my life was formed". Money making was considered to him a God-given gift. Also, his mom was profoundly religious and affected him in matters alike. Amid chapel service, his mom would ask him to contribute his couple of pennies to the assembly. He came to connect the congregation with philanthropy (Rockefeller Documentary).
Overall, John D. Rockefeller was conceived in Richford, New York, piece of the
Burned-over region — a New York state territory being the site of an evangelical revival known as the Second Great Awakening; it attracted masses to different Protestant houses of worship—particularly Baptist ones—asking adherents to take after such beliefs as 38
diligent work, petition and great deeds to establish "the Kingdom of God on Earth". From the very beginnings of his life, he consistently ran with his brothers and mom to the neighborhood Baptist church — the Erie Street Baptist Church (later the Euclid Avenue
Baptist Church) — a free Baptist church which in the end came to connect with the
Northern Baptist Convention (1907-1950; modern American Baptist Churches USA).
Additionally, Rockefeller while venturing to every part of the South, he would give vast entireties of cash to churches having a place with the Southern Baptist Convention, different Black temples, and in addition other Christian sections. One time, he paid for a slave's freedom and given to a Roman Catholic shelter. As he developed rich, his gifts turned out to be more generous, particularly to his church in Cleveland. He would bolster
Baptist preacher activities, subsidize universities, and intensely take part in religious exercises at his Cleveland, Ohio church (Rockefeller Documentary).
As a recapitulation note, Rockefeller was a faithful Northern Baptist who reads the
Bible every day, goes to petition gatherings twice per week and even drove his own particular Bible review with his wife. Burton Folsom Jr. has noted, he now and then gave a respectable number of money to Christian gatherings, while, in the meantime, he was attempting to get over a million dollar to extend his business. His rationality of giving was established upon biblical standards. He genuinely trusted in the biblical rule found in Luke
6:38,"Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." (Rockefeller Documentary)
7. philanthropy
Rockefeller's beneficent giving started with his initially work as an assistant at age
16, when he gave six percent of his income to philanthropy, as recorded in his own record. 39
His philanthropy surpassed 10% of his pay when he was twenty. A lot of his giving was for the church. As Rockefeller's riches developed, so did his giving (Chernow 50, 235). He was impacted by a meeting with Swami Vivekananda, who encouraged him to use a greater amount of his generosity to help poor people. (Vivekanada 172) (Kohn n.pag.).
Rockefeller had confidence in the Efficiency Movement, contending that:
To help an inefficient, ill-located, unnecessary school is a waste
... it is highly probable that enough money has been squandered
on unwise educational projects to have built up a national
system of higher education adequate to our needs, if the money
had been properly directed to that end. (Rockefeller 6)
As well, Rockefeller and his guides designed the conditional grant, which required the beneficiary to
root the organization in the affections of whatever number
individuals as could be allowed who, as patrons, turn out to be by
and by concerned, and from that point might be depended on to
provide for the establishment their careful intrigue and
cooperation. (Rockefeller 183)
In 1884, Rockefeller gave real subsidizing to Atlanta Baptist Female Seminary for
African-American ladies, which progressed toward becoming Spellman College. His wife
Laura Rockefeller, was devoted to social liberties and equalities for women (Weir 713).
John and Laura gave cash and upheld the Atlanta Baptist Female Seminary whose mission was in accordance with their religious convictions (Laughlin n.pag.). Today known as
Spellman College, an all ladies Historical Black College or University in Atlanta, GA., named after Laura's family. The Spellman Family, Rockefeller's in-laws, alongside John 40
Rockefeller was an enthusiastic abolitionist before the Civil War, and was committed to supporting the Underground Railroad. John Rockefeller was inspired by the vision of the school and expelled the obligation from the school (Miller Bernal 235). The most established existing expanding on Spellman’s grounds, Rockefeller Hall, is named after him. Likewise, he gave significant gifts to Denison University (Fosdick 88) and other
Baptist schools.
By 1900, Rockefeller gave $80 million to the University of Chicago under William
Rainey Harper, transforming a little Baptist school into a world-class establishment. He as well gave a donation to the American Baptist Missionaries remote mission board, the
American Baptist Foreign Mission Society in building up Central Philippine University, the primary Baptist and second American university in Asia, and in 1905 in the heavily
Catholic Philippines (Dobell 475).
Moreover, Rockefeller's General Education Board, established in 1903, was built up to advance education at all levels wherever in the country (Brison 27, 31, 62). With regards to the notable missions of the Baptists, it was particularly dynamic in supporting black schools in the South. Rockefeller additionally gave budgetary support to such settled eastern organizations as Yale, Harvard, Columbia, Brown, Bryn Mawr, Wellesley and
Vassar (Jones, Childress 184).
On the basis of Gates' recommendation, Rockefeller wound up plainly one of the primary outstanding promoters of medicine. In 1901, he established the Rockefeller
Institute for Medical Research in New York City (Brison 27, 31, 62), which its name changed to become Rockefeller University in 1965, in the wake of extending its central goal to incorporate graduate education. It asserts an association with 23 Nobel laureates
(Unger 949). He established the Rockefeller Sanitary Commission (Beaver 334) in 41
1909, an association that in the end erased the hookworm disease, which had since a long time ago tormented provincial zones of the American South (Hotez 20). His General
Education Board had an emotional effect by subsidizing the proposals of the Flexner
Report of 1910. The review had been embraced by the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching.
Rockefeller made the Rockefeller Foundation in 1913 proceed and extend the scope of the work of the Sanitary Commission (Klein 143), which was closed in 1915. He gave about $250 million to the foundation (Sealander 58), which concentrated on health medicine and different arts (Weir 713). It enriched Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and
Public Health, the first of its kind (Freeman 20). It additionally constructed the Peking
Union Medical College in China into an eminent institution (Schneider 11).The establishment helped in WWI relief.
In the 1920s, the Rockefeller Foundation sponsored a hookworm annihilation campaign through the International Health Division. This battle depended on a mix of strategies and science, alongside coordinated effort between medicinal services laborers and government officials to achieve its goals. Rockefeller's fourth prominent charity, the
Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Foundation, was made in 1918 (Birn, Solorzano
1197-1213). Through this, he bolstered the work in the social studies; this was later retained into the Rockefeller Foundation. In all out, Rockefeller gave about $550 million.
He turned out to be exceptional in his later life for the act of offering dimes to grown-ups and nickels to youngsters wherever he went (Chernow 613-614).
8. Sicknesses and Death
Rockefeller's grave is situated in Lake View Cemetery, Cleveland. In his 50s
Rockefeller experienced depression and digestive troubles; amid an unpleasant period in 42
the 1890s, he suffered from alopecia, the loss of a few or all body hair
(HistoryAcccess.com). By 1901, he started wearing toupees. His hair never been retained, yet other health protestations died down as he helped his workload. Rockefeller passed away of arteriosclerosis on May 23, 1937, under two months short of his 98th birthday, at
"The Casements", his home in Ormond Beach, Florida. He was buried in Lake View
Cemetery in Cleveland (Ivancer n.pag.).
II. Andrew Carnegie
Andrew Carnegie was born in Dunfermline, Scotland. However, the family moved to a bigger house in Edgar Street (opposite Reid's Park) in 1836 (MacKay 23-24). He was educated at the Free School in Dunfermline, which had been a charity to the town by the philanthropist Adam Rolland of Gask. (The Edinburgh Magazine and Literary Review)
Being acquainted with works of Robert the Bruce, William Wallace, and Rob Roy and other historical Scottish figures, Carnegie was profoundly affected by his uncle,
George Lauder Sr., a Scottish politician. Additionally, Lauder's child, George, grew up with Andrew to be his business partner. With the nation in starvation by the 1840s, when
Carnegie was thirteen, his father faced difficult circumstances as a handloom weaver, which gave turn to his mother to fund the family by helping her cobbler sibling, and selling pruned meats at her "Sweetie Shop" (Nasaw 54–59, 64–65). To make a decent living, the
Carnegies then chosen to move to Allegheny, Pennsylvania, in the United States in 1848 for the possibility of a superior life (MacKay 37–38).
He initially worked at the age of 13 in 1848; he was as a bobbin boy, changing spools of thread in a cotton mill 12 hours a day, 6 days in a Pittsburgh cotton factory. His beginning wage was $1.20 every week (McKee n.pag.). Andrew's father, William 43
Carnegie, started his career as a worker in a cotton mill. However, he would then win money by weaving and peddling linens. His mother earned cash by binding shoes.
1. Railways
In 1849, Carnegie became a telegraph messenger in the Pittsburgh Office of the
Ohio Telegraph Company (Edge 21-22). His uncle was the source of advice. Thus, He was a diligent employee and would remember the greater part of the areas of Pittsburgh's businesses and the important businessmen, whom he made important acquaintance with
(Murray n.pag.). Additionally, he was very conscious about his work, and immediately figured out how to recognize the differing sounds of the incoming telegraph signals delivered. He built up the capacity to translate motions by ear, without utilizing the paper slip, and after a year was promoted to an operator. Carnegie's education was given an incredible lift by Colonel James Anderson, who opened his own library of 400 volumes to working young men every Saturday night. Carnegie an extensive reader and an independent man financially, intellectually and socially.
In 1853, Thomas A. Scott of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company employed
Carnegie as a secretary/telegraph operator. Carnegie favored this occupation with the railroad as he saw more prospects for profession development and involvement with the railroad than with the telegraph company. At age 24, Scott inquired as to whether he could deal with being administrator of the Western Division of the Pennsylvania Railroad
(Nasaw 54–59, 64–65).On December 1, 1859, Carnegie authoritatively moved toward becoming director of the Western Division (Edge 35).
Then, Carnegie enlisted his sixteen-year-old sibling, Tom, to be his own secretary and telegraph operator. Did Carnegie recruit his sibling, as well as hired his cousin, Maria
Hogan, the first female telegraph operator in USA. As a director, Carnegie made fifteen 44
hundred dollars a year (or $47,000 in 2017) (Edge 37). His work by the Pennsylvania
Railroad Company would be essential to his later achievements and success. The railways were the principal businesses in America, and the Pennsylvania was one of central ones.
Carnegie gain knowledge much about administration and cost control from Scott (Nasaw
54–59, 64–65).
2. keystone Bridge Company
In 1864, Carnegie put $40,000 in Story Farm on Oil Creek in Venango County,
Pennsylvania. In one year, the farm made over $1,000,000 in money profits in a year, and petroleum from oil wells on the property was a bargain of success. The need for iron and mechanical items, for example, reinforcement for gunboats, guns, and shells, made
Pittsburgh a focal point of wartime. He worked with others in building up a steel rolling factory, and steel creation and control of industry turned into the source of his fortune
(Nasaw 104–105).
After the civil war, He shifted his attention from the railways to focus more on the ironworks exchange. Moreover, he attempted to build up a multiple iron works, in the long run framing the Keystone Bridge Works and the Union Ironworks, in Pittsburg. In spite of the fact that he had left the Pennsylvania Railroad Company as its best client, he remained firmly associated with its administration, specifically Thomas A. Scott and J. Edgar
Thomson. He used his association with the two men to procure contracts for his Keystone
Bridge Company and the rails delivered by his ironworks. He likewise offered stock to
Scott and Thomson in his organizations. When he manufactured his first steel plant, he named it after Thomson, proving good business relations (Nasaw 105-107).
45
3. Steel Empire
Carnegie made his fortune in the steel business, controlling the most broad incorporated iron and steel operations at any point claimed by a person in the United
States. One of his two extraordinary developments was in the shabby and proficient large scale manufacturing of steel, by receiving and adjusting the Bessemer procedure for steel making. Sir Henry Bessemer had developed the heater which permitted the high carbon substance of pig iron to be consumed with extreme heat in a controlled and quick way. The steel cost dropped as an immediate outcome, and Bessemer steel was quickly received for rails (Rosenburg 90).
The second was in his vertical integration of all providers of raw materials. In the late 1880s, Carnegie’s Steel Company was ranked the first in making pig iron, steel rails, and coke on the planet, with an ability to create roughly 2,000 tons of pig metal every day.
In 1883, He purchased the rival Homestead Steel Works, which incorporated a broad plant served by tributary coal and iron fields, a 425-mile (685 km) long railroad, and a line of lake steamships. Carnegie joined his benefits and those of his partners in 1892 with the starting of the Carnegie Steel Company (Autobiography).
By 1889, the U.S. yield of steel surpassed that of the UK, and Carnegie claimed an extensive part of it. Carnegie's realm developed to incorporate with J. Edgar Thomson
Steel Works in Braddock, Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Works, Lucy Furnaces, Union Iron
Mills, Union Mill (Wilson, Walker and County), the Keystone Bridge Works, the Hartman
Steel Works, the Frick Coke Company, and the Scotia ore mines. Through Keystone, He provided the steel and claimed a share in Eads Bridge which extended over the Mississippi
River at St. Louis, Missouri (finished 1874). This venture was a critical evidence of-idea for steel innovation, which denoted the opening of another steel market (history.com.) 46
4. United States Steel Corporation
In 1901, Carnegie opted for retirement at the age of 66 years old, as he improved his ventures into regular joint stock partnerships. Yet, John Pierpont Morgan was a financier and maybe America's most vital money related arrangement producer. He had watched how proficiently Carnegie created benefit. He thought of incorporated steel industry that would cut costs, bring down costs to customers, create in more noteworthy amounts and raise wages to laborers. To this end, he expected to purchase out Carnegie and a few other significant makers and join them into one company, in this manner wiping out duplication and waste. He finished up transactions on March 2, 1901, and framed the
United States Steel Corporation. It was the primary company on the planet with a market capitalization over $1 billion.
Thus, the buyout, covertly consulted by Charles M. Schwab, was the biggest industrial takeover in the United States history. The possessions were joined in the United
States Steel Corporation, a trust sorted out by Morgan, and Carnegie resigned from business. His steel endeavors were purchased out at a figure identical to 12 times their yearly income—$480 million (history.com).
Carnegie's share of this added up to $225,639,000, which was paid to Carnegie as
5%, 50-year gold bonds. The letter consenting to offer his share was marked on February
26, 1901. On March 2, the roundabout formally documenting the association and capitalization (at $1,400,000,000—4% of U.S. national riches at the time) of the United
States Steel Corporation really finished the agreement. The bonds were to be conveyed inside two weeks to the Hudson Trust Company of Hoboken, New Jersey, in trust to
Robert A. Franks, Carnegie's business secretary. There, an exceptional vault was worked to house the physical bulk of about $230,000,000 worth of bonds (Carnegie n.pag.). 47
5. Scholar and Activist
As Carnegie proceeded with his business career; some of his literary goals were satisfied. He got to know English poet Matthew Arnold, English philosopher Herbert
Spencer, and American humorist novelist Mark Twain, and also being in correspondence and colleague with a large portion of the U.S. Presidents, statesmen, and prominent writers
(Winkler 13, 172). Also, he developed large swimming-showers for the general population of the place where he grew up in Dunfermline in 1879. In the next year,
Carnegie gave £8,000 for the foundation of a Dunfermline Carnegie Library in Scotland. In
1884, he offered $50,000 to Bellevue Hospital Medical College to establish a histological lab, now called the Carnegie Laboratory.
Maintaining his numerous businesses, He had turned into a consistent advocator of various magazines, most outstandingly, The Nineteenth Century, under the editorship of
James Knowles, and the compelling North American Review, driven by Editor Lloyd
Bryce. In 1886, Carnegie composed Triumphant Democracy. Liberal in its utilization of measurements to make its contentions, the book contended his view that the American republican system of government was better than the British monarchical system. It gave an exceedingly good and golden image of American advance and reprimanded the British royal family. The cover portrayed an overturned royal crown and a broken scepter. The book made extensive controversy in the UK (Carnegie n.pag.). .
The book, noticeably, made hundreds of Americans value their nation's economic advance and sold more than 40,000 copies, for the most part in the US. In 1889, He introduced Riches in the June issue of the North American Review. After understanding it,
Gladstone asked for its publication in England, where it showed up as The Gospel of
Wealth in the Pall Mall Gazette. Carnegie contended that the life of a rich industrialist 48
includes two sections. The initial was the gathering of wealth. The second part was for the ensuing distribution of these riches to generous humanitarian causes (Carnegie n.pag.).
6. Philanthropy and Educational Interest
Carnegie spent his last years as a humanitarian philanthropist, in which he committed himself to use his wealth on philanthropic practices. He had expounded on his perspectives on social issues, and the duties of the rich men in Triumphant Democracy
(1886) and Gospel of Wealth (1889). He then gave his life to offering money for a myriad of goals of public interest social and educational progression (Dolkart 51,175). He was a remarkable advocator of the development for spelling reform as a method for advancing the spread of the English language worldwide. His association, the Simplified Spelling
Board, made the Handbook of Simplified Spelling, which was composed entirely of improved spelling (Scott n.pag.).
In 1900, Carnegie gave $2 million to begin the Carnegie Institute of Technology
(CIT) at Pittsburgh, presently known as Carnegie Mellon University, and a similar sum was given in 1902 to establish the Carnegie Institution at Washington, D.C. Later, more foundation were given to these and different schools. Additionally, he served on the Board of Cornell University.
Likewise, in 1911, Carnegie turned into a thoughtful advocate to George Ellery
Hale, who was attempting to construct the 100 inches (2.5 m) Hooker Telescope at Mount
Wilson, and gave an extra ten million dollars to the Carnegie Institution with the accompanying proposal to speed up the development of the telescope:
I hope the work at Mount Wilson will be vigorously pushed,
because I am so anxious to hear the expected results from it. I 49
should like to be satisfied before I depart, that we are going to
repay to the old land some part of the debt we owe them by
revealing more clearly than ever to them the new
heavens.(Simmons n.pag.)
Additionally, in 1901, in Scotland, he gave $10 million to set up the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland. It was made by a deed which he marked on June 7, 1901, and it was fused by Royal Charter on August 21, 1902. The setting up endowment of $10 million was, then, an exceptional amount: at the time, add up to government help to all of the four Scottish universities was about £50,000 a year. The point of the Trust was to enhance and develop the scientific research in the Scottish universities, and to empower the meriting and qualified youth of Scotland to go to a university. He additionally gave large cash to Dunfermline, established a library, and purchased the private estate, which moved toward becoming Pittencrieff Park, and opened it to all individuals from the general population, building up the Carnegie Dunfermline Trust. He gave further $10 million in
1913 to bless the Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, a grant- making foundation. (Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator,)
In the same year, He settled large pension funds for his previous workers at
Homestead, and in 1905, for American school teachers. The last fund developed into
TIAA-CREF. Moreover, his enthusiasm for music drove him to sponsor the construction of
7,000 church organs. He manufactured and owned Carnegie Hall in New York City. He was a sponsor of the Tuskegee Institute for African-American education under Booker T.
Washington. He helped Washington make the National Negro Business League.
In 1904, he established the Carnegie Hero Fund for the United States and Canada (a couple of years after additionally settled in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Norway, 50
Sweden, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, and Germany) for the acknowledgment of deeds of heroism. Carnegie contributed $1,500,000 in 1903 for the erection of the Peace Palace at The Hague; and he gave $150,000 for a Pan-American
Palace in Washington as a home for the International Bureau of American Republics
(Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator).
Overall, He was respected for his generosity and support of arts, by starting as a privileged member from Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia Fraternity on October 14, 1917, at the
New England Conservatory of Music in Boston, Massachusetts. The clique's main goal mirrors Carnegie's qualities, by creating young fellows to share their gifts to spread peace worldwide. To people, Carnegie represents a symbol of the American dream. He was a migrant from Scotland who came to America and changed his fate. He is referred to for his victories as well as his tremendous philanthropist works, also a defender of democracy and freedom for colonized countries.
7. Scholarly influences
Carnegie asserted to be a defender of developmental thought, especially the work of
Herbert Spencer, affirming Spencer his teacher (Carnegie 165). The evolution which stood for individual rights and against government interference, seeing that governmental authority as obtained from the general population to play out the brief points of setting up social harmony, protection of rights, and security. Moreover, it held that those unfit to improve themselves are to be dismissed. 'Survival of the fittest' singles out the powerless, defiled, and disabled (Spencer n.pag.).
However, Carnegie's political and economic concentration amid the late nineteenth and mid twentieth century was defending laissez faire economic system. He earnestly opposed government interference in trade, and also government-sponsored foundations. He 51
trusted that the centralization of capital was basic for societal advance and ought to be encouraged, with enthusiasm of business "survival of the fittest" and tried to accomplish insusceptibility from business challenges, by overwhelming all periods of the steel fabricating procedure (Carnegie n.pag.). Carnegie's assurance to lower costs included cutting work costs as well (Nasaw 4762-4676). In a remarkably Spencerian way, He contended that unions hindered the characteristic diminishment of prices by pushing up costs, which blocked transformative progress. He thought that unions were in favor of the few while his activities profited the whole community (Carnegie n.pag.).
At first glance, Andrew Carnegie has all the earmarks of being a strict Laissez Faire capitalist and supporter of Herbert Spencer, frequently alluding to himself as a follower of
Spencer. Conversely, Carnegie a titan of industry appears to epitomize the greater part of the characteristics of Spencerian survival of the fittest. The two men appreciated a common regard for each other and kept up correspondence until Spencer's passing in 1903. There are be that as it may, some real errors between Spencer's capitalist evolutionary perspectives and Andrew Carnegie's capitalist practices. Spencer claimed that underway the upsides of the unrivaled individual are similarly minor, and therefore worthy, yet the advantage that strength gives the individuals who control a vast set (Carnegie 747-748).
Carnegie held that societal advance depended on people who kept up good commitments to themselves and to society. Furthermore, he trusted that philanthropy provided the methods for the individuals who wish to enhance themselves to accomplish their goals, and encouraged other affluent individuals to add to society as parks, show- stoppers, libraries and attempts that add to the "lasting good" (Nasaw 11529–11536).
Additionally, a solid assessment against inherited wealth was held, trusted that the children of prosperous businesspersons were once approximately never as gifted as their 52
fathers. By leaving large amount of cash to their youngsters, rich business pioneers were squandering assets that could be utilized to profit society. Most remarkably, he trusted that the future pioneers of society would ascend from the positions of the poor. He firmly had confidence regarding his matter, since he had ascended from that base. He trusted the poor had favorable position over the affluent since they get more prominent consideration from their families and are taught better work ethics (Carnegie n.pag.).
8. Death and writings
Carnegie died in August 11, 1919, in Lenox, Massachusetts at his Shadow Brook home, of bronchial pneumonia. He had given away $350,695,653 (around $76.9 billion, changed in accordance with 2015 share of GDP figures) of his total wealth (Krass n.pag.).
After his passing, his last $30,000,000 was given to establishments, foundations, and to pensioners. He was buried at the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery in North Tarrytown, New York
W (The New York Times). Carnegie was a continuous contributor of periodicals on work issues: Triumphant Democracy (1886), and The Gospel of Wealth (1889), he likewise wrote Our Coaching Trip, Brighton to Inverness (1882), An American Four-in-hand in
Britain (1883), Round the World (1884), The Empire of Business (1902), The Secret of
Business is the Management of Men (1903), James Watt (1905) in the Famous Scots
Series, Problems of Today (1907), and his after death distributed Autobiography of Andrew
Carnegie.
III. Deconstruction Perspective
1. Doctrines
The Gilded Age is inferred as age of distortion and imbalance due to paradoxical features that was detected to signify the American society. Yet, one easily is to notice the 53
social, political, and economic prosper of the U.S., this is closely related to the extent of application done with regard to Social Darwinism, Individualism and Laissez-faire.
Though their existence long before the Gilded Age, they are still marked as being put more into frame in young America and its transformation, rather in Europe. The full awareness of how to take charge of all criterions in U.S. has been primarily invested into the well establishment of these doctrines (See chapter one). Such success is devoted to industrialists, and intellectual businessmen who assured the "American dream" to be achievable.
The adoption of such theories generated a social mobility for immigrants as well as opportunities for all, creating competition and hindering the interference of political axioms, of whatever sort it maybe be. Closely looking, and within the social class, there was enlightenment that took place. Thus, the fittest acclaimed the triumphant of better opportunities of success, and such rise of people's consciousness lead them to call for more rights, using common sense, and to end nationalism and patriotism. Likewise, the need for the abolishment of racial and ethnical discriminations is crucial. Most importantly, the focus was put on enhancing education all over the nation by initiating college programs, and crediting achievements done in fields of technology and science in particular.
Starting with Social Darwinism, the weight it has on the Gilded Age is assigned to the fact that it advocated Laissez-faire freedom, and the battle for self improvement. It shaped a revitalized sense of ethics and morals due to the latter relativity. It is quite noticeable that Charles Darwin's work acceded beyond biology, in order to comprehend the social perseverance of a country, or a nation by natural selection. Social Darwinism focuses on logic and rationality, emphasizing on being practical, rather than ideal. 54
As for Individualism, it burdens similar concepts as above. It believes only in the individual, as the citizen's mind is given the freedom and the opportunity to create. This increases as a result of competition, in the favor of the whole nation economically. During the Gilded Age as it is mentioned in the first chapter. Individualism as a philosophy recognizes the individual's uniqueness as distinguished from the others. Thus, appreciation of ego reinforces self-dependence. In here, it is essential to note ethical Individualism, which by means creates the innate humanitarian side of individuals, as to generate the philanthropic atmosphere found by Gilded Age leaders.
Finally, Laissez-faire economically celebrates creativity in economical pursues.
Therefore, his or her work with any interference limits being inventive. It enhances competition qualities in all the domains, as the fittest merits the benefits. Overall, these doctrines have celebrated a stance during the Gilded Age, and acceded to nowadays
America, as the decision maker with regard to the world direction.
2. Figures and Application
Rockefeller and Carnegie are intellectual businessmen who believed in the effective roles of these ideologies. Their biographies highlight their intelligence to make use of them; for instance, Rockefeller adopted Individualism, Laissez-faire and Social Darwinism ideologies throughout the Horizontal Integration Policy.
Two men have been supreme in creating the modern world:
Rockefeller and Bismarck. One in economics, the other in politics,
refuted the liberal dream of universal happiness through individual
competition, substituting monopoly and the corporate state, or at
least movements toward them. (Bertrand Russell n.pag.) 55
However, they kept their religious beliefs and values, emphasizing the humanitarian philanthropic work for educational progress of their "burden of the rich men". They were seen by radical Communists, Socialists, Marxists and those who had personal issues or ulterior motives against them as Robber Barons.
Something in the nature of J.D. Rockefeller had to occur in
America, and it is all to the good of the world that he was tight-
lipped, consistent and amazingly free from vulgar vanity, sensuality
and quarrelsomeness .His cold persistence and ruthlessness may
arouse something like horror, but for all that he was a forward-
moving force, a constructive power.(Wells n.pag.)
Robber Barons were subjects of newspapers and magazines, which worked to expose corruption in business and politics, and drawing attention to the difficulties and problems of working conditions faced by people. As an illustration, it is important to mention Ida Tarbell, a famous journalist at that time, the daughter of Franklin Tarbell, an oil refiner; the Tarbell family lived during the prosperous days of the Pennsylvania oil region. However, Rockefeller's vision put an end to their success shortly after he wanted to purchase their business, similar to what Rockefeller was doing with other competitors during the Cleveland massacre history. Yet, Franklin Tarbell retained ownership of his refinery, taking a stand against Rockefeller and his growing business empire.
However, he failed to compete with the Captain of Industry; quickly his cash reserves went dry. Her father became bitter and was later driven to suicide. Ida Tarbell was the only one at that time who observed the damage Rockefeller had done to her family. Her brother added more fuel to his sister's fury, she had her personal reasons for taking on the king of Standard Oil, dismissing the warnings of her journalistic endeavor, and with 56
supporters like Theodore Roosevelt, Tarbell knew she was doing what she believed necessary, she wanted to ruin his image, and presented him as a Robber Baron to the public opinion in order to get revenge for her father (Donway n.pag.).
As history progresses, the story of Robber Barons seem to have more layers to reveal, as it falls into two opposite deviations; one of which regards them as 'Guardians of
America' if one may infer such term. Historians and America's greatest revolutionists celebrates their deed despite the claims against them.
When history passes its final verdict on John D. Rockefeller, it may
well be that his endowment of research will be recognized as a
milestone in the progress of the race…. Science today owes as
much to the rich men of generosity and discernment as the art of
the Renaissance owes to the patronage of Popes and Princes of
these rich men, John D. Rockefeller is the supreme type. (Churchill
n.pag.)
Rockefeller was subject to recommendations in William James's letter to Henry
James, accentuating on his goodness, and taking the indications of him as a villain of the century. Rockefeller has been investing on economics and humanity, not having self-credit, endorsing his own mind into setting things up for the nation.
Rockefeller, you know, is reputed the richest man in the world, and
he certainly is the most powerfully suggestive personality I have
ever seen. A man 10 stories deep, and to me quite unfathomable.
Physiognomies de Perrot (not a spear of hair on head or face)
flexible, cunning, quakerish, superficially suggestive of naught but
goodness and conscientiousness, yet accused of being the greatest 57
villain in business whom our country has produced. (William
James in a letter to Henry James)
Nonetheless, Carnegie was an intimate friend of Herbert Spencer; he even saw himself a student of Spencer and believed in his ideas. However, contradicted him in others, which might harm the humanity, also he was an anti imperialist. At an early age, his efforts in pursuit of world peace he established institutions of international ethics called for peace. History proves that most heirs use their inheritance imprudently, not investing for the sake of all nation. He initiated the Carnegie Foundation in 1903, and began to donate his money to libraries and other public institutions. His Gospel of Wealth, proved his uniqueness in philanthropic work. Today, Andrew Carnegie’s Gospel of Wealth stands out as a revolutionary theory of humanity.
And here is the prime condition of success, the great secret:
concentrate your energy, thought, and capital exclusively upon the
business in which you are engaged. Having begun in one line,
resolve to fight it out on that line, to lead in it; adopt every
improvement, have the best machinery, and know the most about
it.(Carnegie n.pag.)
Carnegie has been an example of not only a philanthropic works, but also intelligence and the well establishment of businesses across the nation, This start-to-finish strategy Carnegie made him the dominant force in the industry, It also made him known as one of America's builders, as his business helped to fuel the economy and shape the nation into what it is today. The work of his Corporation and its grantees has helped shape public discourse and policy for more than one hundred years. Millions of people have benefited from Carnegie’s foresighted generosity — a legacy of real and permanent good. We invite 58
you to learn more about this remarkable man’s life through an interactive timeline, historical documents, photographs, audio, and more.
The average person puts only 25% of his energy and ability into his
work. The world takes off its hat to those who put in more than
50% of their capacity, and stands on its head for those few and far
between souls who devote 100%. (Carnegie n.pag.)
Conclusion
Carnegie and Rockefeller are marked in the history as two of the greatest industry names that have built their empires in the young United States of the 20th century. At the end of the Civil War, with just 50 years later, the United States emerged as the greatest power in the world. This landmark transition was due business innovation of these young men as constructed a bold vision for a modern America, and transformed the greatest industries of our time, including oil, rail, steel, shipping, automobiles and finance; they are unequivocally America's first Captains of Industry.
59
General Conclusion
As a final say, one is not to defy the level of revolutionary transformation of the
U.S. ran by the two main figures, Rockefeller and Carnegie, as they made it, ran it, gave it!
The present study is a vital attempt to answer the question long been posed: Robber Barons or Captains of Industry? Since their reputation is defined by the economical rise and philanthropy they provided. More or less, it is quite evident that they are Captains of
Industry, they supplied the public with goods and job opportunities, and serving the nation was the target aim.
Additionally, while both figures, Rockefeller and Carnegie, were subject to criticism and disapproval, they were still growing their empires of philanthropy: more colleges, medical institutions, libraries and alike were built. Through the merging of the doctrines of Social Darwinism, Individualism and Laissez-faire, creativity was embraced, and technological advancement was at its peak. These individuals are ought to be offered a positive impression, for their achievements as men of inventiveness whose hard work and ingenious strategies transformed the American economy of the post-Reconstruction era and the early 20th century. These men are to also be privileged for their charitable activities.
Throughout this work, it comes to certainty that these doctrines are indicative of the key to success of these men in the rise of the U.S. economy. In the course of time, these doctrines were held in application within the American society by extracting the mere best of them, and most importantly, they were applied at optimum by men of widest visions and sharpness. Overall, the question of ethics were the non-peripheral standard for the measurement of these two men' value. Yet, the analysis and results pose far dimensional question: does relativity of ethics truly overweigh the deeds of these philanthropists?
Obviously, ethics are naturally relative and from a rational standing point being ethical is 60
doing your work punctually and rightly. Therefore, ethics have never been the basic question of a nation’s progress since every single action, attitude, and policy were allowed at that time. The latter was latter was related to the ignorance that America suffered from during that decades. More, the Americans were eye blinded by the unmatched and tremendous growth of the nation industrially, agriculturally, and politically. Finally, this research opens different doors for other researches to review and revise history and rewrite it taking into consideration that breaking many taboos and, constructing and deconstructing events is not as horrible as historically conveyed.
61
Works Cited
"10 Things You May Not Know about John D. Rockefeller".history.com. Web. March 21, 2017.
"Carnegie's Estate, at Time of Death, About $30,000,000". The New York Times, August 29,
1919. Web. March 29, 2017.
"Laissez-faire", businessdictionary. businessdictionary.com. 2017. Web, April 2017.
"Social Darwinism." Oxforddictionnaries.com. Oxforddictionnaries, 2017. Web, April, 2017.
Abbott. Usher, et al. "Economic History – The Decline of Laissez Faire." American Economic
Review (1931) 3–10. Kindle Edition.
Albro, Martin. "John D. Rockefeller." Encyclopedia Americana (1999) 23.1: Kindle Edition
Audi, Robert. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1999. Kindle Edition.
Autobiography of Andrew Carnegie. Boston: Houghton and Mifflin, 1920. Kindle Edition
Beaver, Robyn. KlingStubbins: palimpsest. New York: Images Publishing, 2008. Web, March
23, 2017.
Benjamin Kidd. Social Evolution. Montana: Kissinger Publishing, 2007. Kindle Edition.
Russell, Bertrand. Freedom versus Organization, 1814 to 1914. New York: Norton and
Company, 1962. Kindle Edition. 62
Birn, Anne-Emanuelle; Solorzano, Armando. "Public health policy paradoxes: science and
politics in the Rockefeller Foundation's hookworm campaign in Mexico in the
1920s."Social Science & Medicine (1999) 1197–1213. Kindle Edition
Boisguilbert, Pierre L. Dissertation de la nature des richesses, de l'argent et des tributs, 1707.
Web. Google Books.
Bowler, Peter J. Evolution: The History of an Idea. California: University of California Press,
2003. Kindle Edition.
Brison, Jeffrey. Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Canada: American Philanthropy and the Arts and
the Arts and Letters in Canada. Quebec: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2005. Kindle
Edition.
Brown, Susan. The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism, and Anarchism.
Quebec: Black Rose Books Ltd, 1993. Kindle Edition.
Carnegie, Andrew. Gospel of Wealth. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,
1962. Kindle Edition.
Cashman, Sean. America in the Gilded Age. New York: New York University Press, 1993.
Kindle Edition.
Chandler, Alfred D., Jr. "The Railroads: Pioneers in Modern Corporate Management." Business
History Review (1965):16–40. Kindle Edition.
Chernow, Ron . Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. New York: Random House, 1998.
Kindle Edition. 63
Claeys, Gregory. "The 'Survival of the Fittest' and the Origins of Social Darwinism." Journal of
the History of Ideas (2000) 223–40. Kindle Edition.
Clark, Cynthia L. The American Economy: A Historical Encyclopedia. New York: Greenwood
Publishing Group, 2011. Kindle Edition.
Clarke, J.J. Oriental Enlightenment: The Encounter between Asian and Western Thought. New
York: Routledge, 1997. Kindle Edition.
Conway, David. Classical Liberalism: The Unvanquished Ideal. Bedford: Palgrave Macmillan.
1998. Kindle Edition.
Daniel Hovey Calhoun, The American Civil Engineer: Origins and Conflicts. United States:
Harvard UP, 1960. Kindle Edition.
D'Argenson, M. "Lettre au sujet de la dissertation sur le commerce du marquis de
Belloni." Journale Economique, 1751. Kindle Edition.
Darwin, Charles. Descent of Man. London: John Murray, 1871. Kindle Edition.
Diane, Paul. Darwin, Social Darwinism, and Eugenics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2006. Kindle Edition.
Gregory Radick. The Cambridge Companion to Darwin. Cambridge: Cambridge ــــــــــــــــــــــ
University Press, 2009. Kindle Edition.
Dobell, Byron. A Sense of History: the Best Writing from the Pages of American Heritage.
American Heritage Press, 1985. Kindle Edition.
64
Donway, Roger. "Rockefeller and the Muckrakers." The Atlas Society, 18 Aug, 2010.Web.
March 11, 2017.
Dupont, de Nemours. Des Mémoires Sur Turgot, n.p. Web.
Eatwell, John. The Invisible Hand. New York: Norton & Company, 1989. Kindle Edition.
Edge, Laura. Andrew Carnegie: Industrial Philanthropist. New York: Lerner Publishing Group,
2004. Kindle Edition.
Evancar, Michael. "The Richest Man in History: Rockefeller is Born". Web. March 29, 2017.
ExxonMobil. "Our History". ExxonMobil.com. Web. April 04, 2017.
Fine, Sidney. Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State. United States: Michigan UP, 1964.
Print.
Fisher, Joseph. "The History of Landholding in Ireland." Transactions of the Royal Historical
Society (1877) 5: 228–237. Pdf
Folsom, Burton W. The Myth of the Robber Barons: A New Look at the Rise of Big Business in
America. New York: Young America's Foundation, 1991. Kindle Edition. .
Fortune. "The Richest Americans." CNN. Web. March 25, 2017.
Fosdick, Raymond Blaine. The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation. New York: Transaction
Publishers, 1989. Kindle Edition.
Freeman, A.W. The Rotarian.1922. Web. March 21, 2017. 65
Friedman, Milton, and Schwartz Anna. A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960.
New York: Princeton UP, 1971. Kindle Edition.
Gaspard, Toufick. A Political Economy of Lebanon 1948–2002: The Limits of Laissez-faire.
Boston: Brill, 2004. Kindle Edition.
Gross, Daniel. "Giving It Away, Then and Now". New York Times. Nytimes.com. Web. March
08, 2017
Hanson, Elizabeth Achievements: A Century of Science for the Benefit of Humankind 1901-2001.
New York: Rockefeller University Press, 2000. Web. April 02, 2017
Hanson, Elizabeth. Achievements: A Century of Science for the Benefit of Humankind 1901-
2001. New York: Rockefeller University Press, 2000. Kindle Edition.
Harris, Neil. "The Gilded Age Revisited: Boston and the Museum Movement." American
Quarterly (1962) 545–566. Kindle Edition.
Hayek, F.A. The Road to Serfdom. Chicago Chicago UP. 1994. Kindle Edition.
Herr, Michael. Kubrick. New York: Grove Press. 2001. Kindle Edition.
HistoryAccess. "John D. Rockefeller: Infinitely Ruthless, Profoundly Charitable".
HistoryAccess.com. Web. March 20, 2017
Hodgson, Geoffrey. The Evolution of Institutional Economics: Agency, Structure and Darwinism
in American Institutionalism, London: Rutledge, 2004. Kindle Edition.
Hofstadter, Richard. Social Darwinism in American Thought 1860–1915. Philadelphia:
Pennsylvania UP, 1992. Kindle Edition. 66
Hotez, Peter. Forgotten People, Forgotten Diseases: the Neglected Tropical Diseases and Their
Impact on Global Health and Development. New York: ASM Press, 2008. Kindle Edition.
Hudelson, Richard. Modern Political Philosophy. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 1999. Web. March
02, 2017
Hunter, Louis C., and Bryant, Lynwood. A History of Industrial Power in the United States,
1730–1930, London: MIT Press, 1991. Kindle Edition.
Jacques. Turgot. "Eloge de Vincent de Gournay." Mercure (1759)1.1: n.p. Kindle Edition.
James, William. William James in a letter to Henry James January 29, 1904. Harvard: Harvard
UP. Kindle Edition.
Jackson, Joy. New Orleans in the Gilded Age: Politics and Urban Progress, 1880–1896. Baton
Rouge: Louisiana Historical Association, 1997. Kindle Edition.
Jung, C. G. Symbols of Transformation: An Analysis of the Prelude to a Case of Schizophrenia.
New York: Harper & Brothers, 1962. Kindle Edition.
Kaye, Howard L. The Social Meaning of Modern Biology: From Social Darwinism to
Sociobiology. London: Rutledge, 1997. Kindle Edition.
Kennedy, Paul. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. New York: Random House, 1987.
Kindle Edition.
The rise and fall of the great powers: economic change and military conflict from .ــــــــــــــــــــــ
1500 to 2000. London: Unwin Hyman Limited, 1989. Kindle Edition.
Keynes, J. M. The End of Laissez Faire. Berlin: Hogarth, 1926. Kindle Books. 67
Kirkland, Edward C. "Industry Comes of Age: Business, Labor, and Public Policy, 1860–1897."
Journal of Economic History (1962) 400–05. Kindle Edition.
Klein, Henry. Dynastic America and Those Who Own it. Cosimo, 2005. Web. February 20, 2017
Kohn, Rachael 2013. "The 19th Century Swami who Influenced Rockefeller, Tesla and J.D.
Salinger". Australian Broadcasting Corp, 2013. Kindle Edition.
Krass, Peter. The Carnegie Legacy. New York: John Whiley and Sons, 2012. Kindle Edition.
Lapolla, Jordan. "Thoughts on Periodizing the Gilded Age: Capital Accumulation, Society, and
Politics, 1873–1898." Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 4.2 (2006): 193–94.
Kindle Edition.
Laughlin, Rosemary. John D. Rockefeller: Oil Baron and Philanthropist. Biography Reference
Center, 2001. EBSCO.
Leary, William and Link, Arthur S. Progressive Era and the Great War, 1896–1920. Illinois:
Harlan Davidson, 1978. Kindle Edition.
Leonard, Thomas C. "Origins of the Myth of Social Darwinism: The Ambiguous Legacy of
Richard Hofstadter's Social Darwinism in American Thought." Journal of Economic
Behavior & Organization (2009) 37–51. Kindle Edition.
Licht, Walter. Working for the Railroad: The Organization of Work in the Nineteenth Century.
New York: Princeton Legacy Library, 1983. Kindle Edition.
Link, William, and Link, Susannah. The Gilded Age and Progressive Era: A Documentary
Reader. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. Kindle Edition. 68
Macgregor, D. Economic Thought and Policy. London: The Economic Journal, 1949. Kindle
Edition.
Macgregor, D.H. Economic Thought and Policy. London: Oxford University Press, 1949. Kindle
Edition.
MacKay, J. A. Little Boss: A life of Andrew Carnegie. New York: Mainstream Publishing, 1997.
Kindle Edition.
Macquarrie, John. Existentialism. New York: Penguin Books, 1972. Kindle Edition.
Marcus, Robert. Grand Old Party: Political Structure in the Gilded Age, 1880–1896. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1971. Kindle Edition.
Andres. Invisible Hand: The Wealth of Adam Smith. New York: The Minerva ,ــــــــــــــــــــــ
Group, Inc., 2002. Kindle Edition.
McCabe, Ina. Orientalism in Early Modern France: Eurasian Trade Exoticism and the Ancien
Regime. Oxford: Berg Publishers, 2008. Kindle Edition.
McKee, Jack. The North Side Story, in North Side Directory Chamber of Commerce Members
1960–61. Pittersburg: The Chamber, 1961. Kindle Edition.
McLean, Iain. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. Oxford University: Oxford University
Press, 2009. Kindle Edition.
Miller-Bernal, Leslie. Challenged by Coeducation: Women's Colleges since the 1960s.
Tennessee: Vanderbilt UP, 2006. Kindle Edition. 69
Mosler, David, and Catley, Robert. Global America: Imposing Liberalism on a Recalcitrant
World. West Porter: Praeger, 2000. Kindle Edition.
Murray, Stuart. The Library: An Illustrated History. New York, NY: Skyhorse Pub, 2009. Kindle
Edition.
Nasaw, David. Andrew Carnegie. New York: The Penguin Press, 2006. Kindle Edition.
Nevins, Allan. John D. Rockefeller: The Heroic Age of American Enterprise. New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons, 1940. Kindle Edition.
Nevins, Allan. Study in Power: John D. Rockefeller, Industrialist and Philanthropist.. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1953. Kindle Edition.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Human, All Too Human. Trans. Hollingdale. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, ,
1996. Kindle Edition.
Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator. Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, Registered Charity
no. SC012799".
Parry, Richard. The Bonnet Gang. London: Rebel Press, 1987. Kindle Edition.
PBS. "The Rockefellers". PBS. March 05, 2017.
Reese, William L. Dictionary of Philosophy and Religion. Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey:
Humanities Press, 1980. Kindle Edition.
Richard R. John, Network Nation: Inventing American Telecommunications. New York: Harvard
UP, 2010. Kindle Edition. 70
Riggenbach, Jeff. The Real William Graham Sumner. Alabama: Mises Institute, 2011. Kindle
Edition.
Rockefeller, John D. Random Reminiscences of Men and Events. New York: Sleepy Hollow
Press and Rockefeller Archive Center, 1909. Kindle Edition.
Ron Chernow. Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller Sr.. New York: Random House, 1998.
Rosenberg, Nathan. Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics. Cambridge. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1982. Kindle Edition.
Schmidt, Oscar. "Science and Socialism." Popular Science Monthly (1879) 577–91. Kindle
Edition.
Schneider, William. Rockefeller philanthropy and modern biomedicine: international initiatives
from World War I to Cold War. Indiana: Indiana UP, 1922. Kindle Edition.
Scott, Gilbert. Ernst Haeckel and the Biogenetic Law. London: Developmental Biology, 2006.
Web, April 23, 2017.
Scott, Tom. Ghoti and the Ministry of Health: Spelling Reform. 2013. YouTube.
Sealander, Judith. Private Wealth & Public Life: Foundation Philanthropy and the Reshaping of
American Social Policy from the Progressive Era to the New Deal. New York: The Johns
Hopkins UP, 1997
Segall, Grant. John D. Rockefeller: Anointed With Oil. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001. Kindle
Edition. 71
Shmoop Editorial Team. "Economy in the Gilded Age." Shmoop. Shmoop University, Inc., 11
Nov. 2008. Web. 23 Apr. 2017
Simmons, Mike. "History of Mount Wilson Observatory –Building the 100- Inch
Telescope". Mount Wilson Observatory Association (MWOA), 1984. Web. 23 Apr. 2017
Simondon, Gilbert. L'individuation psychique et collective. Paris: Aubier, 1989. Kindle Edition.
Smith, Roy C. Adam Smith and the Origins of American Enterprise: How the Founding Fathers
Turned to a Great Economist's Writings and Created the American Economy. London:
Macmillan, 2004. Kindle Edition.
Spencer, Herbert. "A Theory of Population, Deduced from the General Law of Human Fertility."
Westminster Review (1852) 468–501. Kindle Edition.
.Social Statistics. London: John Chapman, 1851. Kindle Edition .ــــــــــــــــــــــ
,The Social Organism. London and New York: Scientific, Political and Speculative .ــــــــــــــــــــــ
1860. Kindle Edition.
Stevens, Mark. Rich is a Religion: Breaking the Timeless Code to Wealth. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, 2008. Kindle Edition.
Stiegler, Bernard. Culture and Technology. 13 May 2004. Web. 20 March 2017.
.Barbara. Nietzsche et la Biologie. France: Presses Universités de France, 2001 ,ــــــــــــــــــــــ
Kindle Edition.
Stiglitz, Joseph E. The Price of Inequality: How Today's Divided Society Endangers Our Future.
New York : W.W. Norton & Co., 2012. Kindle Edition. 72
The Edinburgh Magazine and Literary Review, Sept 1819. Web
The French minister of finance. Paris: Journal Oeconomique, 1751. Kindle Edition.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. Historical Statistics of the United States. Series F1–F5. 1976. Kindle
Edition.
Unger, Harlow . Encyclopedia of American Education: A to E. New York: InfoBase Publishing.
Kindle Edition, 2007. Kindle Edition.
Upchurch, T. Adams. Historical Dictionary of the Gilded Age. United States: Scarecrow Press,
2009. Kindle Edition.
Vivekananda, Swami. My India: the India eternal .Calcutta: Ramakrishna Mission Institute of
Culture, 1996. Kindle Edition
Ward, Lester F. "Social Darwinism." American Journal of Sociology Chicago (1907) 709–10.
Kindle Edition.
Weir, Robert. Class in America: Q-Z. New York: Greenwood Press, 2007. Kindle Edition.
Wells, Collin. "Social Darwinism." American Journal of Sociology. (1907) 695–716. Kindle
Edition.
Wells, G, H. The work, Wealth and Happiness of Mankind. New York: Doubleday, Doran & Co,
1931. Kindle Edition.
Williamson, Harold F et al. The American Petroleum Industry 1859–1899 The Age of
Illumination, U.S: Northwestern University Press, 1959. Kindle Edition. 73
Wilson, J, and Childress, Faustine. Encyclopedia of African-American education. New York:
Greenwood Press, 1996. Kindle Edition.
Winkler, John K. Incredible Carnegie. New York: Read Books, 2006. Kindle Edition.
Winstone, Churchill. "An Appraisal to John D. Rockefeller." St. Louis Post- Dispatch, July 8,
1936. Google Books.
Wood, Ellen. Mind and Politics: An Approach to the Meaning of Liberal and Socialist
Individualism. California: University of California Press, 1972. Kindle Edition.
Yergin, Daniel. The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power. Free Press, 1992. Kindle
Edition.
Zinn, Howard. A People's History of the United States. New York: Harper Perennial Modern
Classics, 2005. kindle Edition.