Historiography by Liam, 2016 - 2017
Question 1)
Based on this week’s readings, was the Progressive Era an overall collective movement towards reform, or a collection of causes with little that united them? Please provide specific examples to support your conclusion. Answer 1) Although the Progressive Era was certainly host to groups, parties, and individuals that comprised a full or nearly full collection of Progressive ideals, Peter G. Filene's An Obituary for "The Progressive Movement" demonstrated the relative autonomy of each progressive issue from another. All of these issues were alike in their push for some form of change, regulation, or reform in the face of a rapidly industrializing and changing nation. Each of these issues however, was primarily an issue of importance to only a selective group of citizens, with many other progressives either not concerned or simply not in support of the issues of their fellow reformists. In the case of Theodore Roosevelt, arguably one of the most recognizable faces of progressivism, he felt as though he and his fellow progressives were being "hampered" by their colleagues that were by his definition, not truly progressives. Roosevelt specifically called out rural citizens who supported breaking up large businesses rather than restricting them through constraints implemented by the government. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 also revealed major divides amongst progressives showing a clear fault between social and political progressives. The struggle for women's suffrage is a key crack in progressive unity, as many took issue with the expansion of female rights in conflict with their colleagues, hence the late implementation of these reforms. The temperance movement and the later resulting prohibition of alcohol were also extremely controversial amongst many progressives, primarily only receiving significant support from women and heavily religious sects. The examples of a lack of a coherent and united message from progressives are plenty, and although they ultimately were all similar in the underlying impetus of their reform, the multiple plans of adapting to change were fiercely different between such a heterogeneous group of citizens. Question 2) What were some specific successes of the reformers of the Progressive Movement? What were some specific failures? Answer 2) Progressives, after a long struggle finally achieved an expansion of women's rights under the ratification of the 19th amendment in 1920, granting suffrage to females. Progressives also managed to expand restrictions on monopolies and lessen corrupt relationships between the government and businesses. The expansion of labor rights were also significant, including protection from neglectful child labor practices. Although the temperance movement was ultimately successful in the late prohibition of alcohol through the ratification of the 18th amendment in 1920, it would prove to be an utter failure, creating great controversy and bringing rise to major organized crime. The 18th amendment would ultimately be repealed through the ratification of the 21st amendment. The Progressive Era also did little to address the rights and issues of minority groups such as African Americans who continued to see mounting segregation. Question 3) In the US today, the debate continues about the modernity and humaneness of the death penalty. Most of the world, including almost all industrialized democracies, have fully abolished or do not practice it (click here to see map). Over time, a number of US states have also abolished or are working to abolish the death penalty (click here to see map). Oddly enough, many US states abolished the death penalty in the mid to late 1800s, but later reinstated it. What specific reasons do the authors of “Abolition and Reinstatement of Capital Punishment During the Progressive Era & Early 20th Century” give for the reinstatement of the death penalty in many states in the early 1900s, even though it had previously been abolished? Answer 3) Between the years 1897 and 1917 ten states abolished the death penalty until most reinstated it in the 1930s. The reinstatement of capital punishment came on the tail of the emergence of radical political sects, notably communists, as well as the growing influence and fear of foreigners and minorities following the end of the First World War. In 1907 Governor Hoch of Kansas wrote following the repeal of the death sentence in his state that he would have rather resigned than see the continuation of the practice, arguing that it was relic of "barbarism". This represents the clear moral argument of an era known for its forward thinking. Many supporters of abolition also pointed to the obvious risk of human error in the conviction of those on trial, leading to the killing of innocent men by the state. In many cases juries could have a seeded bias against certain defendants due to their ethnic, cultural, or political qualities. Many of the calls for abolition came at the hand of trials in which this was clear. Notably in 1920, Sacco and Venzetti were executed, despite little compelling evidence due in large part to their Italian heritage and roots in anarchism. Growing lynchings of minorities, through which murder was common became a major issue. Many states felt as though they had sacrificed their power over violent punishment, presenting the idea to some citizens that the only means of true punishment was by the hands of the populus, unfortunately culminating into these acts of public violence without trial. In an attempt to preserve the right to a trial and stop this violence many states resumed the practice of capital punishment. The growth of mass organized crime and its increased violence (due in large part to prohibition) also pushed many citizens to sponsor the reinstatement of the death penalty.
13 Comments
Anna Sexauer: Question1
4/2/2017 08:20:30 pm
I agree with the ideas expressed in Peter G. Filene's An Obituary for "The Progressive Movement". The progressive reformers all had reform in common, but as a whole, they did not support a unified movement. An example of this would be the lack of attention given to Civil Rights during this movement. Many people fought for improving the quality of immigrant life in the overcrowded suburbs but turned a blind eye to the struggling African Americans. The women fighting for the right to vote and pushing for temperance didn’t necessarily support other movements like reforming political corruption. People inspired by The Jungle fighting for higher safety in the meat industry didn’t spread their attention to the push for national parks and other environmental reforms. Although everyone fighting for their own separate issue did get some legislation passed, it is not difficult to believe that if everyone supported the Progressive Movement as a whole, things would have changed quicker.
Reply
Jazmine Evans, Question 1
4/3/2017 05:10:25 pm
I agree with Peter G. Filene in the sense that the Progressive Movement was not one united movement. If reform groups had better means of communications and united to achieve more of their goals as a whole, I believe much more could have been accomplished. ALthough not every group supported causes outside the direct realm of what they were advocating for, some did. An example of this is the support for the black suffrage movement from leaders of women's rights campaigns. Some women did this, because they felt that it was the morally correct decision, but that was not the only motive. Women who advocated for women's suffrage assumed that if they helped African Americans in their fight for suffrage, they would help women once they were granted voting rights. Unfortunately, this assumption was for the most part wrong. This is an example of an effort by Progressive era reformers to work together for their separate causes.
Reply
Rose
4/3/2017 05:51:58 pm
I agree with the idea expressed by Peter G. Filene that the Progressive Movement was not a single movement, rather it was a collection of movements. Most Progressive Era reformers focused their efforts on a single area of reform. I do not think that that was the most effective way of accomplishing the goals of the Progressive Era, however. If all of the Progressive Era reformers had supported each other the Progressive Movement, as a whole, would likely have accomplished more with the greater political clout that comes with a larger support base. That said, I believe that Progressive Era politicians that supported the Progressive movement were more likely to be concerned with a wider range of Progressive Era reforms, as that would have allowed them to gain more votes than they would have by only focusing on one area of reform. I also think that since the Progressive Era reformers sought such diverse goals, it would have been difficult to convince such a large and varied group of people to work towards a single cause.
Reply
Katie
4/3/2017 07:15:17 pm
I agree with “Answer 1” that the Progressive Movement was a collection of similar minded people all looking for reform or change but all motivated by something different. Although all progressives sought change, they didn't always agree with each other on what should be changed. This is because, although all reformists, different groups of progressives all had different backgrounds and beliefs. To answer question 2, some specific accomplishments from the Progressive Movement include laws being passed to protect the public’s health and welfare, anti-trust legislation was passed to prohibit monopolies, and laws were passed to protect the environment and address pollution. The 17th amendment was also ratified during this time which countered senate corruption. The 19th amendment was also passed which gave women the right to vote-finally. Even thought the Progressive Movement reformed a lot of issues, it didn't stop wages from being too low and hours from being too long. It also didn't fix the issue of immigration and population growth which led to shortages of jobs and homes.
Reply
Samantha, Question 2
4/3/2017 07:22:31 pm
Overall, the Progressive Movement led to positive social changes that we still feel the effects of today. Obviously, the passing of the 19th amendment can probably be considered one of the biggest successes of the Progressive Movement, as it was the first step to bringing equality to women. Sadly, some of the important Progressive reforms had to result from tragedy. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire in 1911, which caused the deaths of 146 workers, was caused by the negligence of the owners of the factory. As a result of this tragedy, a committee on fire safety was formed to look into better working conditions for factory workers and the American Society of Safety Engineers was founded. Another success that came out of despicable working conditions at that time, was the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. These were a direct result of the undercover investigation in a meat factory by Upton Sinclair. We can thank many of these Progressive Movements for leading the United States to many things in society that we take for granted today.
Reply
Kevin Willis
4/3/2017 07:40:36 pm
I agree with the authors of “Abolition and Reinstatement of Capital Punishment During the Progressive Era & Early 20th Century” when they tie together the rise of the fear of communism and overall antiforeignism in America, with the reinstatement of the death penalty. With the end of the progressive movement during World War One, the American people’s concerns on rights and reform were sedated. This return to the old ways, combined with the rise of the Soviet Union and the Red Scare, gave way to a government that was scared enough to reenact the death penalty. An example of prejudice and fear resulting in the death penalty was the Rosenberg trials, where a man and his wife were sentenced to death for the supposedly leaking the plans for the atomic bomb to the Russians. There was, in modern day’s opinion, not enough evidence to convict them to the death penalty, yet the country was prejudice against the foreign family and found them guilty.
Reply
Olivia Kellam, Question 3
4/3/2017 07:59:05 pm
I agree that the death penalty could be a risky technique used if a person is seen guilty. There is always the potential chance that someone innocent could be found guilty, but still sentenced to death. Like the Sacco and Venzetti case, people saw some sentenced as a way to degrade certain ethnic groups. Another example of this case would be the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg case. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted of espionage in 1951. Some thought that the couple were victims of an anti communist rush in the United States. However, most Americans still believed that they were guilty and believed that the punishment they were bound to receive was fair. After years past, it was found out that Julius Rosenberg was indeed guilty of espionage, but his wife, Ethel Rosenberg, was not. This is a prime example that the death penalty can end up killing an innocent person. However, as the crime rate increased over time, I agree that it is acceptable for the death sentence to be used, just as long as the evidence presented gives absolutely no doubt that the person is guilty.
Reply
Madison Wessells
4/3/2017 08:22:46 pm
I agree with the theme expressed in Peter G. Filene's An Obituary for “The Progressive Movement" - that the Progressive Movement was focused on one cause or issue but fought for many issues. The movements within the Progressive Movement dealt with worker’s compensation and safety, alcohol, women’s suffrage, along with African Americans’ suffrage. The Movement also wanted to limit companies’ control of the markets and included passage of legislation to block trusts from forming. Journalists of the time came to be known as “muckrakers” because they sought to uncover the problems being hidden by companies. Jacob Riis was a well-known muckraker who used photography to show the living conditions of the immigrants who had come to the United States. Riis published his book How the Other Half Lives in 1890 about the poor state of the tenements in New York City and within Hell’s Kitchen. As a result of his work, the cities were pressured to improve the living conditions of these immigrants by cleaning up the streets and building parks.
Reply
Robby Parker
4/3/2017 09:03:11 pm
I agree with the answer to question number two in regards to the fact that the Progressive Movement did little to address the rights and issues of minorities, especially the African Americans. The problems of this movement pertain to the fact that little to nothing to help with the segregation African Americans were facing during this period. Another issue was that African Americans continued to face discrimination and oppression throughout the entirety of the Progressive Era. Issues of this movement became highlighted in the birth of legal segregation that came about due to the Plessy V. Ferguson Supreme Court case, where the court's decision was to make it constitutional to have state laws that require racial segregation in public facilities. The Plessy V. Ferguson decision was backed by the "separate but equal" doctrine. In conclusion, I believe that the Progressive reformers put in minimal effort to help on improving the lives of African Americans and other minorities during the Progressive Era.
Reply
Jackson Rose
4/3/2017 09:12:10 pm
Peter G. Filene’s An Obituary for “The Progressive Movement” showed how the Progressive Movement was really many different movements all put under the umbrella of reform. People of all different groups were working towards reform, and people within each group often were not in favor of every progressive movement that was pushing for reform. For example, certain people who were pushing for civil rights may not have supported the idea of women’s rights. Women’s rights is one of the branches of the Progressive Movement that showed how the Progressive Movement was really a lot of different movements supported by different people. However, the temperance movement did garner a lot of support from women, as did the civil rights movement. Basically, all the Progressive movements were connected by the one main goal of reform, although each individual movement’s goals might have hindered another movement’s goals. Some people felt that if they supported too many reform causes, they might not have as much of an impact as they would if they wholeheartedly supported just one personally important cause.
Reply
Palmer Smith
4/3/2017 10:41:31 pm
I agree with the answer to question 2 that significant advances were made against monopolies/corporations and for women’s rights but not much was done for the minority groups like the African Americans. Because they saw they were being overlooked for the most part, many influential African Americans and organizations became famous and advanced equality during the Progressive Era. W.E.B DuBois and Booker T. Washington were among the people that agreed African Americans should learn trades to advance in the progressive societies. Ida B. Wells was a muckraker journalist that shed light on lynching in the south which led to the development of the Anti-Lynching Campaign. The National Association of Colored Women was made up of a group of women that advocated for economic, moral, religious, and social welfare for women and children. The Niagara Movement, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and the National Urban League all worked towards ending racial discrimination during this time. Although there were hardly any immediate changes, due to these people and organizations changes were made that impacted the lives of African Americans later down the road.
Reply
Courtney Floyd
4/3/2017 11:07:12 pm
I agree with the answer given for question 2 because the Progressive Era could have either been a very successful or be considered a failure, depending on which cause one would focus on. I definitely agree with the suffragist movement being a success because an amendment was ratified that granted the suffragettes just what the were fighting for, the right for women to vote. Another goal during this time was to weaken or break apart monopolies and this was successful because of acts passed such as the Elkins and Hepburn Acts. More successes in the Progressive Era were the passing Child Labor Act of 1916 and the laws enacted because of muckrakers, such as Upton Sinclair whose novel on the food industry helped push Congress to enact the Pure Food and Drug Act and the Meat Inspection Act. The Temperance movement however should not be considered a success at all. Even when the goal was achieved 18th amendment was passed prohibiting alcohol, a large quantity of speakeasies arose, where people could easily obtain alcohol illegally. Another cause that was ultimately a failure was the equality of rights for minority groups because they continued to face racism and segregation in not only this time period, but past the Progressive Era.
Reply
Emma Booker
4/3/2017 11:40:41 pm
As stated by Peter G. Filene, I agree that the Progressive Movement, rather than one uniform movement, was multiple, smaller groups, each fighting for their own cause with the occasional overlap. Much of the focus for some reformers was based politically rather than morally. Throughout the era, politicians or voters might support one cause while strongly disliking another one, no matter if they were similar or not. Therefore, it was more efficient for reform to occur if protestors focus on one specific cause that they are passionate about rather than run the risk of supporting both and facing the consequences of no change happening because of an unknown prejudice by a politician passing assistive laws. Following this, the reform movements were able to create extremely influential laws that affect people to this day. From the 19th Amendment allowing women to vote, to the Pure Food And Drug Act which simply required expiration dates and ingredients on foods, to many, many more that are pivotal parts of the society inhabited today, yet not even recognized because of their simplicity.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWelcome to Liam's Blog. Liam is participating in an independent study of history this year part of which requires him to interpret historical arguments. Archives
April 2017
Categories |