Class,
Andrew Carnegie's article published, December 1889 in the New York American Review called "The Gospel of Wealth", gave much to be contemplated. The central idea of Carnegie's article was that a man was wealthy for one of two reasons. He was either selected by Gods Will to have such wealth (an idea similar to "the divine rights of kings") or one was wealthy because of ones "natural talents", stemming from the "survival-of-the-fittest…theories of English philosopher Herbert Spencer and Yale professor William Graham Sumner." (The American Pageant, 15th edition, Vol.2) He believed that with this wealth came a moral obligation to spend his money on "public purposes, from which the masses reap benefit." (The Gospel of Wealth, New York Carnegie
…show more content…
However, it is ironic that men professing to have Gods favor conducted business the way they did. For example, Carnegie threatened J.P. Morgan to a ruining if he would not by him out of his business at a hefty amount of "$400 million". (The American Pageant 15th edition, Vol.2) When reading his thoughts there was a great conflict of interest. His following thoughts amplified this.
"The law maybe sometimes hard for the individual, it is best for the race (humankind), because it insures the survival of the fittest in every department."
"…talent for organizations and management is rare among men is proved by the fact that it invariably secures for its possessor enormous rewards, no matter what laws or conditions." (The Gospel of Wealth, New York Carnegie Corporation, New York)
Corruption of wealthy mean was clear at this time. Corruption was found among the railroad promoters such as Jay Gould. These men among the wealthiest called the shots and were able to do so because they took advantage of people. When they were "stock watering" the cattle. The price for cattle and assets went up. The rich were gaining profit and the "public" or poor were being "trampled". "Bought and sold in public life", by these "Railroad Kings". (The American Pageant 15th edition,
Andrew Carnegie, the monopolist of the steel industry, was one of the worst of the Robber Barons. Like the others, he was full of contradictions and tried to bring peace to the world, but only caused conflicts and took away the jobs of many factory workers. Carnegie Steel, his company, was a main supplier of steel to the railroad industry. Working together, Carnegie and Vanderbilt had created an industrial machine so powerful, that nothing stood in its path. This is much similar to how Microsoft has monopolized the computer software
This idea of Social Darwinism gave the robber barons of society the justification for their hostile behavior towards their workers. Andrew Carnegie tried to make the gospel of wealth by arguing that the duty of someone with power and a lot of money was to put advancement into the society such as libraries. John D. Rockefeller also used this idea and gave away some of his wealth to education as well. However, many socialists, promoting fair distribution of wealth, tried to write books, which were very popular and best sellers at the time to address the social development issue of the economy. The factory workers had no opportunity to gain the independence and advancement of their social class.
He explained that they had the responsibility to be philanthropic and donate their wealth to benefit society while they are living. If the wealthy keep their riches until they are dead, then it simply implies that the deceased would have wanted to bring the money with them if it were possible. Carnegie also explained that family members should not leave each other inheritances. By leaving them with a large amount of money, it gives family members no motivation to work hard; becoming lackadaisical. He wrote how one should contribute to society through charity, by donating towards a physical cause; and not by giving money to a homeless person.
Andrew Carnegie, was a strong-minded man who believed in equal distribution and different forms to manage wealth. One of the methods he suggested was to tax revenues to help out the public. He believed in successors enriching society by paying taxes and death taxes. Carnegie’s view did not surprise me because it was the only form people could not unequally distribute their wealth amongst the public, and the mediocre American economy. Therefore, taxations would lead to many more advances in the American economy and for public purposes.
In Andrew Carnegie’s “The Gospel of Wealth” he outlines what the rich man’s responsibilities to the public is regarding his wealth. Andrew Carnegie was one of his times wealthiest men and wrote this in 1889. He states that, “Our duty is with what is practicable now-with the next step possible in our day and generation. It is criminal to waste our energies in endeavoring to uproot, when all we can profitably accomplish is to bend the universal tree of humanity a little in the direction most favorable to the production of the good fruit under existing circumstances (Carnegie 23-24).” In his writing he talks about the best way to dispose of the wealth one has acquired. The remainder of this paper will address the
While Carnegie held the aptitude for greatness regardless of his surroundings, without free enterprise, he would not have even had to option to take a chance or to explore new ideas. In regulated economies, not only is the currency and producer-consumer relationship controlled by the government, many times the media is as well, as not to create a system in which citizens long for something else. In this case Carnegie would not have had the access to the learning resources that he did, and would never have learned how to use a telegraph machine. There would have been no room for lateral growth, and the world as we know it may not exist without Carnegie’s courage and yearning to better himself and the world.
Document M gives us quotes from Andrew Carnegie’s, “Wealth” in the North American Review, June 1889. He states that he wanted more than just the wealthy to prosper: “The man who dies rich is a disgrace.” He was one of those men who would leave their wealth for public use on his deathbed. He never spent too much of his money because he wanted to “set an example of modest... living…; and… to consider all surplus revenues… as trust funds;” he’s a little bit of a hypocrite. Carnegie’s ideas are criticised for the mistakes along the way, but when his ideas came to be, they made big impacts all around the
In the documents titled, William Graham Sumner on Social Darwinism and Andrew Carnegie Explains the Gospel of Wealth, Sumner and Carnegie both analyze their perspective on the idea on “social darwinism.” To begin with, both documents argue differently about wealth, poverty and their consequences. Sumner is a supporter of social darwinism. In the aspects of wealth and poverty he believes that the wealthy are those with more capital and rewards from nature, while the poor are “those who have inherited disease and depraved appetites, or have been brought up in vice and ignorance, or have themselves yielded to vice, extravagance, idleness, and imprudence” (Sumner, 36). The consequences of Sumner’s views on wealth and poverty is that they both contribute
On face value, the Gospel of Wealth seems like a simple suggestion to the problem of improper administration of wealth from the massively successful Andrew Carnegie to fellow rich and successful men. However, on a deeper level, the thesis and underlying structures of the revolutionary Gospel of Wealth are almost all conceived from Darwinian ideologies. Throughout the writing, there are suggestions of certain humans being favored over others in varying situations, adapting to society and its conditions, and the inevitability of competition. In many aspects, Social Darwinism has logical arguments, but in many aspects it doesn’t make sense because of the distinct difference between biological adaptation and societal socio-economic adaptation.
Even though these men attempted to build a stable foundation for America to grow on, their negative aspects dramatically outweighed the positive. Even though Andrew Carnegie donated his fortunes to charity, he only acquired the money through unjustifiable actions. As these industrialists continued to monopolize companies through illegal actions, plutocracy- government controlled by the wealthy, took control of the Constitution. Sequentially, they used their power to prevent controls by state legislatures. These circumstances effect the way one
Carnegie did not believe in spending his money on frivolous things, instead he gave most of his fortune back to special projects that helped the public, such as libraries, schools and recreation. Carnegie believes that industries have helped both the rich and the poor. He supports Social Darwinism. The talented and smart businessmen rose to the top. He acknowledges the large gap between the rich and the poor and offers a solution. In Gospel of Wealth by Andrew Carnegie, he states, “the man of wealth thus becoming the mere agent and trustee for his poorer brethren, bringing to their service his superior wisdom, experience and ability to administer, doing for them better than they would or could do for themselves” (25). He believes the rich should not spend money foolishly or pass it down to their sons, but they should put it back into society. They should provide supervised opportunities for the poor to improve themselves. The rich man should know “the best means of benefiting the community is to place within its reach the ladders upon which the aspiring can rise- free libraries, parks, and means of recreation, by which men are helped in body and mind” (Carnegie p. 28). Also, Carnegie does not agree they should turn to Communism to redistribute wealth. Individuals should have the right to their earnings. Corporations should be allowed to act as it please with little to no government
A penny saved may be a penny earned, just as a penny spent may begin to better the world. Andrew Carnegie, a man known for his wealth, certainly knew the value of a dollar. His successful business ventures in the railroad industry, steel business, and in communications earned him his multimillion-dollar fortune. Much the opposite of greedy, Carnegie made sure he had what he needed to live a comfortable life, and put what remained of his fortune toward assistance for the general public and the betterment of their communities. He stressed the idea that generosity is superior to arrogance. Carnegie believes that for the wealthy to be generous to their community, rather than live an ostentatious lifestyle proves that they are truly rich in wealth and in heart. He also emphasized that money is most powerful in the hands of the earner, and not anyone else. In his retirement, Carnegie not only spent a great deal of time enriching his life by giving back; but also often wrote about business, money, and his stance on the importance of world peace. His essay “Wealth” presents what he believes are three common ways in which the wealthy typically distribute their money throughout their life and after death. Throughout his essay “Wealth”, Andrew Carnegie appeals to logos as he defines “rich” as having a great deal of wealth not only in materialistic terms, but also in leading an active philanthropic lifestyle. He solidifies this definition in his appeals to ethos and pathos with an emphasis on the rewards of philanthropy to the mind and body.
A wealthy person, with the desire to do well with their fortune, could benefit society in a number of ways. Carnegie has verbally laid a blueprint for the wealthy to build from. His message is simple: Work hard and you will have results; educate yourself, live a meaningful life, and bestow upon others the magnificent jewels life has to offer. He stresses the importance of doing charity during one’s lifetime, and states “…the man who dies leaving behind him millions of available wealth, which was his to administer during life, will pass away ‘unwept, unhonored, and unsung’…” (401). He is saying a wealthy person, with millions at their disposal, should spend their money on the betterment of society, during their lifetime, because it will benefit us all as a race.
Imagine being one of the richest men in the history of the United States. Think about having the most money out of everyone else in the nation. Only a few men have lived to be in that position. One of those men happened to be Andrew Carnegie. Andrew Carnegie was the richest man in the United States at one point. When you think of rich people, you imagine the type of people who are very selfish, rude, full of greed, and ungrateful. You probably think of people who became rich through heritage or luck and never did anything for the rest of the community. Andrew Carnegie does not fall in that category. He was more of a Captain of Industry than a Robber Baron. He did not play the robber baron role as he did as a captain of industry. Carnegie did
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2008).Organizational Management and Leadership. Baltimore: Author. "Foundations of Management," with Matthew Joseph and David Osborne