1K - Political tensions and divisions: the reaction against Big Business at national and state level
Learn why opposition to corporate power grew between 1890 and 1920, and why critics proposed different remedies. Compare farmers, workers and Progressive reformers, then assess how state initiatives and federal regulation changed the relationship between business and government.
Different reactions to Big Business
Large corporations supplied useful products and employed many Americans, but their scale created anxieties about economic and political power. Small firms feared being forced out; farmers resented freight charges and credit costs; workers wanted safer conditions and greater bargaining power; consumers could not easily check the quality of nationally marketed goods.
Opposition was consequently broader than a single anti-business movement. Some critics wanted to restore competition among private producers. Others accepted large enterprises but wanted public supervision. Socialists sought a more fundamental change in ownership. An agreement that abuses existed did not settle which remedy should follow.
Progressivism
A diverse reform movement seeking to address problems associated with industrialisation, urban growth and political corruption through more accountable government, expertise and public action. Its supporters did not share a single programme or a universal commitment to racial equality.
The Panic of 1893 intensified grievances by exposing insecurity in employment, banking and agriculture. Corporate resources and government help could appear to protect investors while ordinary households bore unemployment and debt. Political tension concerned both who received the gains from growth and who should possess authority to correct abuses.
Reform crossed party lines. Insurgent Republicans, Democratic reformers, third-party activists and non-party organisations all participated. Distinguishing these groups makes it possible to explain why some measures passed while others divided their own supporters.
Farmers and Populist politics
Farmers' organisations initially sought practical solutions through cooperative purchasing, storage and marketing. Cooperation aimed to improve bargaining power against merchants and transport companies. These efforts faced shortages of capital and the difficulty of competing with well-established private interests, encouraging a turn towards political action.
The People's Party, commonly called the Populists, adopted the Omaha platform in 1892. Its programme included government ownership of railways and communication networks, a graduated income tax and currency reform. It also supported political changes such as direct election of senators. These proposals linked economic reform to the belief that corporate influence had compromised representative government. Library of Congress: contemporary reporting of the Omaha platform.
A proposed subtreasury system would let farmers store crops in government warehouses and obtain loans against them, allowing sale later rather than immediately after harvest. It aimed to ease credit dependence and the pressure to sell when prices were low. Free silver sought an enlarged money supply; the mechanism and Bryan's use of the issue are developed in the next lesson.
Populism appealed strongly in parts of the West and South but struggled to build a durable national coalition. Industrial workers did not automatically accept farmers' monetary priorities, while racial hostility disrupted attempts to unite poor black and white southerners. Democratic endorsement of William Jennings Bryan in 1896 created a strategic dilemma: support a major-party candidate sharing some objectives or maintain an independent party. Electoral defeat weakened Populist organisation, but some demands later entered mainstream reform.
Workers, radicals and state power
Workers challenged business power through unions, strikes and politics. The American Federation of Labor, associated with Samuel Gompers, concentrated on practical gains such as wages, hours and working conditions, especially through skilled unions. This approach differed from socialism's challenge to private ownership and from wider industrial unionism seeking to organise across occupational boundaries.
The Pullman strike of 1894 exposed the power of national labour action and its limits. Wage cuts without equivalent reductions in company-town rents prompted protest. Eugene V. Debs's American Railway Union supported a boycott of Pullman cars, disrupting rail traffic. President Cleveland's administration used federal troops and an injunction, citing the mails and interstate commerce. The boycott failed and Debs was imprisoned for defying the injunction. NPS: Pullman strike.
The result illustrated that a law directed against restraints on trade could be used against organised labour as well as business. Federal power was active; the issue was the purposes for which it was used. It also encouraged Debs's later socialist politics. The Socialist Party, founded in 1901, offered electoral opposition to capitalism, while the Industrial Workers of the World, founded in 1905, promoted industrial organisation and a more radical challenge to employers.
These groups did not represent all workers. Skill, race, immigration status and ideology divided labour, and many unions excluded or marginalised particular groups. Employer resources, replacement workers, hostile courts and fear of disorder made sustained collective action difficult. Reformers who wanted regulation often distinguished their goals from revolution to win a broader electorate.
State and local reform
States and cities were important laboratories of reform because they controlled many aspects of policing, public health, labour protection and business incorporation. Reform did not begin only when a president adopted a national programme.
In Wisconsin, Governor Robert La Follette challenged railway and machine influence. Direct primaries transferred the selection of candidates from party organisations towards voters. A railway commission established in 1905 strengthened public supervision of rates. Cooperation with university experts became known as the Wisconsin Idea: policy should use investigated evidence rather than depend entirely on party bargains. Later Wisconsin reforms included workers' compensation, factory protection and a state income tax. Wisconsin Historical Society: Progressive reforms.
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account