The Gilded Age
Chapter 7
I. The Gilded Age
How did Industrialization Mark the Gilded Age?
Panoramic view of the Main Building and grounds at the Southern Exposition at Louisville, Kentucky, 1883. Library of Congress.
Cartoon shows corporate titans seated on bags of "millions," on large raft carried by working class. Bernhard Gilliam, "The Protectors of Our Industries," N.Y.: Published by Keppler & Schwarzmann, 1883.
Black and white portrait of Mark Twain, Library of Congress, 1899.
During Reconstruction, the southern states industrialized at unprecedented rates to reintegrate itself into the nation after the collapse of slavery. The region came to embody what journalist and orator, Henry Grady envisioned, “a diversified industry that meets the complex needs of this complex age.” Additionally, new developments prompted Northern states to rejuvenate its industries as they grappled with the post-Civil War economy. The Gilded Age marked this rapid industrialization and commercial surge during the period.
Railroads were among the most influential industries that dominated the era. This came after an 1862 charter from the Pacific Railroad Act. The charter prompted railroad entrepreneurs to build a transcontinental railroad that would link the United States from east to west, which was finished on May 10, 1869. The steel industry fed much of the material needs of the railways but also contributed to the rise of urban skyscrapers, as reinforced concrete steel allowed urban planners to build vertically after the horizontal limits of a city were exhausted. Further, advances in shipping, communication, and production also gave way to massive growth. The stretch of industry and trade across the nation was one of the reasons for the standardization of time during this period. Together, the industry helped to facilitate the unification of the nation.
A significant development that contributed to the rise of industrial capitalism during this period was the rise in corporations. Having grown 60% from the end of the Civil War to the 1900s, corporations multiplied ownership of a business through a plurality of shareholders. While the partnerships helped limit liability, offered various avenues for raising capital through stocks and bonds, and provided opportunities for expansion through vertical and horizontal integration of other businesses, they also accelerated a growing disconnect between business owners and workers, deepening the divide between the two classes. A rising managerial class helped very little in mending the two groups, as they mirrored the sentiments of the upper class.
When viewed from the perspective of commercial advancement, corporate titans such as Cornelius Vanderbilt (railroad), John D. Rockefeller (oil), Andrew Carnegie (steel), and J.P. Morgan (banking) were dubbed as “captains of industry” for their corporate prowess. However, the same figures were also criticized for their ruthless business practices, monopolistic tendencies, and labor exploitation. For this reason, the group was simultaneously labeled “Robber Barons.” Harsh working conditions, low wages, and long hours were among the chief concerns for factory workers, who found themselves in rapidly expanding urban areas. Immigration from Europe, particularly from Southern and Eastern Europe, reached record levels as immigrants flocked to the U.S. for upward mobility.
Mark Twain helped popularize the term "Gilded Age," which refers to a thin layer of gold coating that symbolizes the superficial wealth and prosperity of the era, masking underlying social and economic problems. Twain’s keen observations and satirical commentary on the excesses, corruption, and inequalities of the period resonated with many Americans and the term, “Gilded Age,” thus became synonymous with the era of rapid industrialization, conspicuous consumption, and social upheaval in the late 19th century America. [1]
II. Social Darwinism
How did Industrial Elites Justify Inequalities?
Samuel Ehrhardt, "History Repeats Itself: The Robber Barons of the Middle Ages and the Robber Barons of Today, Puck magazine, November 6, 1889 issue.
.jpg)
William Graham Sumner, 1907. Wikimedia Commons.
Even as Americans like Mark Twain criticized the prevalent inequalities of the period, certain segments of the intellectual and political elite justified the existing social hierarchies and inequalities. Social Darwinism advocated that wealth, power, and success indicated superior fitness and intelligence, while poverty, weakness, and failure signified inferiority. While not explicitly racial in its original formulation , the idea justified and reinforced racial hierarchies and prejudices during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
As the name suggests, Social Darwinists borrowed ideas from Charles Darwin’s work on evolutionary theory, which proposed the theory of evolution by natural selection. Darwin’s ideas suggested that species evolve through adaptation to their environments, with only the most well-adapted able to survive and reproduce, thereby sustaining superior qualities.
At a time when wealth inequalities were excessively high, Social Darwinism gained traction in the West. Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), a British philosopher, applied Darwin’s ideas to society. Spencer popularized the term “survival of the fittest,” which he used to describe the process by which societies and individuals compete for survival and dominance. Spencer and his fellow social Darwinists applied these principles to various aspects of society, including economics politics, and ethics. The idea ultimately justified existing social hierarchies, inequalities, and policies by resorting to a laissez-faire approach to capitalism. As social Darwinists argued that wealth, power, and success were indicators of superior fitness and intelligence, they viewed poverty, weakness, and failure as signs of inferiority. Further, any philanthropic or regulatory principles proposed to ameliorate inequalities threatened to undermine the progress of civilization. [2]
William Graham Sumner (1840-1910), a Yale University sociologist, supported the ideas of social Darwinism and even warned of the pitfalls for those who would disregard its merits. He wrote, “We can take from the better and give to the worse. We can deflect the penalties of those who have done ill and throw them on those who have done better. We can take the rewards from those who have done better and give them to those who have done worse. We shall thus lessen the inequalities. We shall favor the survival of the unfittest, and we shall accomplish this by destroying liberty. Let it be understood that we cannot go outside of this alternative; liberty, inequality, survival of the fittest; not-liberty, equality, survival of the unfittest. The former carries society forward and favors all its best members; the latter carries society downwards and favors all its worst members.” [3]
Social Darwinism faced criticism from various quarters. Many argued that it justified exploitation, oppression, and discrimination against marginalized groups, such as the poor, immigrants, minorities and the disabled. They also questioned the scientific validity of applying biological principles to human societies, pointing out the role of social, cultural and historical factors in shaping human behavior and institutions.
III. Mexican Americans
How did Mexican Americans fair in El Norte?
John Disturnell, "Mapa de los Estados Unidos de Méjico : segun lo organizado y definido por las varias actas del congreso de dicha républica y construido por las mejores autoridades," New York: J. Disturnell, 1847. Library of Cngress.
Las Gorras Blancas, Juan José, Pablo, and Nicanor Herrera (from left to right), 1889. Wikimedia Commons.
Mexican Americans have had a diverse and dynamic history in the United States. Their origins began with Spanish colonization in the 16th century and their cultural identities trace back to the nation of Mexico. After the Mexican-American War ended with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, Mexico ceded lands that eventually made up a bulk of the United States’ southwest region. The Treaty granted former Mexican nationals American citizenship if they chose to remain on their land. It also promised to recognize existing land grants. Thus, about 75,000 remained and sought the privileges of American citizenship.
Despite their contributions to agriculture, ranching, and mining industries, Mexican Americans faced discrimination, most notably in land dispossessions that marred their identity and legacy in the new nation. The presence of white Americans in the California and Texas regions increasingly outnumbered Mexican Americans during this period and displaced historic communities through violence and land dispossession. However, minorities maintained a strong proportion of their population in New Mexico and thus were able to maintain some stability in the years following the Civil War.
After 1878, additional white Americans traveled through New Mexico due to the reach of the railroad. Over time, many took up ranching and settled on territory previously held common by the community. Small farmers and ranchers had utilized these common grounds to graze their stock. However, once white settlers privatized common lands and fenced off the perimeters with barbed wire, locals struggled to maintain their businesses. Multiple land seizures and dispossessions displaced Mexican Americans from their homes and their status as U.S. citizens provided very little recourse in the legal battles.
In response, some Mexican Americans took up formal resistance to white aggression. Three brothers, Juan José, Pablo, and Nicanor Herrera, organized the Las Gorras Blancas in February 1889 to protect what remained under Mexican American possession, roughly half a million acres. Dubbed as the “white caps,” the group wore white hoods to hide their identity as they tore up railroad tracks, burned buildings, and cut barbed wire all to reclaim common lands and defend the long-standing land grants promised under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.
In a handbill distributed in March 1890, the members declared, “Our platform…our purpose is to protect the rights and interests of the people in general and especially of the helpless classes…Be fair and just and we are with you, do otherwise and take the consequences.” The group claimed to have had a membership of over 1,500 and placed several of its members, including Juan José Herrera, in el Partido del Pueblo Unido (or the People’s Party). By the late 1890s, the group disbanded fearing reprisal against family members. Despite its destructive methods, however, Las Gorras Blancas was significant in the sociopolitical history of Mexican Americans in northern New Mexico.[4]
Notes
-
Mark Twain and Charles Dudley, The Gilded Age: A Tale of To-day (Hartford, Conn: The American Publishing Company, 1902).
-
Hebert Spencer, The Principles of Biology (London: Williams and Northgate, 1864).
-
William Graham Sumner, The Challenge of Facts and Other Essays, edited by Albert Galloway Keller (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1914).
-
Proclamation of Las Gorras Blancas, Las Vegas Daily Optic, March 12, 1890. See also Daniel Aragón y Ulibarrí, Devil's Hatband. Santa Fe, N.Mex.: Sunstone Press, 1999.