As Darrow gained more self-confidence and looked at his prospects in Ashtabula, he began to see that there were limits on what he could achieve by staying where he was at. Somewhat impulsively, he decided that he and his family should move to Chicago, which they did in 1887. He believed that although the competition among lawyers was going to be fiercer in Chicago, so too were the opportunities. And, so, too, was the corruption in politics. What he saw was far different from he experienced in a small city in northern Ohio. But, he also recognized that this was a way of life in Chicago, and he came to accept that graft and corruption was an aspect of doing political business, although it was morally indistinguishable from the kind of ordinary
Both works provide valuable insight into the political atmosphere of American society, but vary greatly in their intended message, usage of persuasive method, projected audience, and choice of tone. One can see resemblance, however, in the fact that the authors of both articles strive to spark a reaction in their readers and encourage change. In that regard, while Hedges’
Pagan writes a captivating story mingled with the challenges of the Eastern Shore legal system. This book gives a complete explanation backed up by research and similar cases as evidence of the ever-changing legal system. It should be a required reading for a history or law student.
The reform movement is typically framed as a progressive achievement in improving corrupt governments that were commonplace in many cities during the time period covered in this chapter, but it ...
Political differences are a main subject throughout this entire book. “The political temperature had certainly been raised along sectional fault lines.” (Silbey 128) The different views on how political issues should be handle was what ended up hurting our state the most. There was more argument over how to deal with issues, rather than actually finding a solution to the problem. Silbey does an outstanding job explaining the how the Wilmot Proviso
Everybody is talkin' these days about Tammany men growin' rich on graft, but nobody thinks of drawin' the distinction between honest graft and dishonest graft." With this sentence in the first chapter Plunkitt sets the tone for his short treatise on New York City politics while Tammany Hall ran the show. George Washington Plunkitt was a senator in New York during the turn of the 19th Century to the 20th Century. He was very successful in politics, and at one time he held four offices at once and collected salaries from three of them. G. W. Plunkitt held any one (or more offices) in Tammany Hall for over forty years. He was a shady politician who took care of his constituents and his bank account. Plunkitt was never shy about becoming rich in politics because he did nothing illegal by the standards of the time. Moreover, Plunkitt never broke the penal code and therefore never spent a day in jail. However, Plunkitt had to defend himself against reformers by distinguishing between honest graft and dishonest graft. He would explain this difference as well as his wealth by saying, "I seen my opportunities and I took 'em." In Plunkitt's own mind, as seen through his writings, he did not regret his actions because he did so much to help the Tammany supporters. Plunkitt's main complaint was against civil service examinations, but in his talks he also instructed young men how to be successful in politics by examining human nature and doing as e had done.
Weicker was raised in a highly educated, prominent family. He was the first of four children born to intelligent, powerful parents named Mary Hastings Weicker, and Lowell Palmer Weicker Sr., in Paris, France on May 6, 1931. His mother, Mary, was “a daughter of an English general and niece of an archbishop of Canterbury” (Weicker and Sussman 122). Weicker’s father was powerful and influential, du...
Gerald Benjamin and Stephen P. Rappaport, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science Vol. 31, No. 3, Governing New York State: The Rockefeller Years (May, 1974), pp. 200-213
Roark, James L. et al., eds. The American Promise: A Compact, Vol. I: To 1877. 3rd edition. Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2007.
For all Annawadians except Asha, corruption ingrained in society prevents the impoverished citizens of a Mumbai slum from being able to become successful in life. Despite working hard, saving money, and only wanting to better the life of their family, the Husains’s story is demonstrative of the fact that an unintentional entanglement in the “great web of corruption” “in which the most wretched tried to punish the slightly less wretched” could easily lead to near ruin (Boo 115). Over the course of her narrative, Boo shows that Annawadians recognize the issues of corruption present in their society, and the fact that they lack the power to change the system. For Annawadians, the courage and aspiration to become more successful in life meant taking a gamble, and Boo shows that their gamble could only be made in a system where the odds were forced against their
...neth M. Goldstein, and William G. Howell. "Chapter 20 The Social and Economic Milieu of Texas Poltics." Understanding American Politics and Government. Texas ed. New York: Longman, 2010. 690-93. Print.
Known as a period of political scandal, many politicians engaged in bribes, lies, and abuse of power to further a political, social, and often personal agenda. The typical corrupt leader "will sell his vote for a dollar [...] turns with indifference from the voice of honesty and reason [...] his unalienable right may be valuable to him for the bribe he gets out of it" (166). Such politicians are an injustice to society because as they are elected by the people, they must act towards the betterment of the people, rather than for themselves. Furthermore, those who elect this politician to office merely underestimate their political and social responsibility because they "want the feeling that their own interests are connected with those of the community, and in the weakness or absence of moral and political duty" (167). Thus, under the control of the ruthless politician and the reckless voter, the true essence of democracy is
The article discusses the need for these early Chicago saloons as a neighborhood commune for those men who labor long hours only to come home to poverty and despair of a desolate household. Melendy focuses on the mental, physiological, and moral nature of these workingmen. He points out that this saloon culture allows it’s patrons to develop these traits by interacting with their peers—others facing the same despair. These establishments are described as the “workingman’s school. He is both scholar and teacher” (Melendy pg. 78). Patrons gather at the bar, around tables and in the next room amongst games of pool, cards, and darts to discuss political and social problems, sporting news, and other neighborhood gossip. Here men, native and immigrant, exchange opinions and views of patriotism, brotherhood, and lessons in civil government. Melendy describes this atmosphere as cosmopolitan, and articulates that these businesses advertise this issue in their names. For example one of the downtown saloons was entitled “Everybody’s Exchange.” The saloon’s customers experienced a buffet of nationalities upon which was not so for those of poverty in previous decades. Saloons also served as disguises of corruption as Melendy illustrates by declaring “...
Taylor, Alan. “From Fathers to Friends of the People: Political Personas in the Early Republic.” In The Journal of the Early Republic 11, no. 4. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991.
Foner, Eric and John A. Garraty. The Reader’s Companion to American History. (New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1991).
Tierney, John. "The Gentry, Misjudged as Neighbors." New York Times 26 Mar. 2002, sec. B: 1.