(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Anti-Capitalist Meetup: Andrew Carnegie and the Gospel of Wealth [1] ['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.'] Date: 2024-06-09 Few people remember Andrew Carnegie today: he is just the dim presence behind the Carnegie libraries. It is true that he was a philanthropist in his later years, but the money which funded those libraries was brutally extracted from the men who labored for him. The libraries bear his name but it was the blood, sweat, and toil of his workers that paid for them. This was his response to the people agitating for a 8 hour day. Remember that the steel mills he speaks of were his own. "At present, every ton of pig-iron made in the world, except at two establishments, is made by men working in double shifts of twelve hours each, having neither Sunday nor holiday the year round. Every two weeks the day men change to the night shift by working twenty-four hours consecutively. Gasworks, paper-mills, flour-mills, and many other industries, are run by twelve-hour shifts, and breweries exact fifteen hours a day, on an average, from their men. I hold that it is not possible for men working ten hours a day to enlist public sentiment on their side in a demand for the shortening of their task, as long as many of their fellows are compelled to work twelve or more hours a day." In 1881 Carnegie appointed Henry Clay Frick as manager of the Homestead steel mill. In 1892 when the union at the Homestead steel mill prevented the mill from running as efficiently as Frick desired, Frick resolved to break the union. He was given full approval by Carnegie. Frick offered a pay cut of 22%, knowing it would not be approved by the the union. Relations between management and the union worsened, and resulted in the Homestead Strike in July of 1892. An open battle between strikers and Pinkertons resulted in several deaths and numerous injuries on both sides. The strikers won but the result was that the local sheriff called in the state militia. On July 12th 4000 soldiers surrounded the plant and forced the strikers to disarm and withdraw. The end result was a victory for the bosses. The workers would henceforth receive a lower wage even though they were producing more. Carnegie often professed to be in favor of unions, but he allowed Frick to instigate the Battle of Homestead in order to break a union that had the temerity to bargain on equal terms. His deeds at no time matched his words. His "Gospel of Wealth" is an exercise in hypocrisy and the exaltation of the wealthy. It recommends philanthropy, but not paying the workers a living wage. It regards the worker as too stupid to spend his wages wisely and with fake paternalism makes the argument that the poor are better off if the rich man decides how the fruits of their labors will be distributed. "If we consider the results which flow from the Cooper Institute, for instance, to the best portion of the race in New York not possessed of means, and compare these with those which would have ensued for the good of the masses from an equal sum distributed by Mr. Cooper in his lifetime in the form of wages, which is the highest form of distribution, being for work done and not for charity, we can form some estimate of the possibilities for the improvement of the race which lie embedded in the present law of the accumulation of wealth. Much of this sum, if distributed in small quantities among the people, would have been wasted in the indulgence of appetite, some of it in excess, and it may be doubted whether even the part put to the best use, that of adding to the comforts of the home, would have yielded results for the race, as a race, at all comparable to those which are flowing and are to flow from the Cooper Institute from generation to generation. Let the advocate of violent or radical change ponder well this thought." (The "race" of which he speaks is the human race. Unpleasant though Carnegie was, he was not notably racist.) He simply oozes smug superiority in every paragraph. "This, then, is held to be the duty of the man of wealth: To set an example of modest, unostentatious living, shunning display or extravagance; to provide moderately for the legitimate wants of those dependent upon him; and, after doing so, to consider all surplus revenues which come to him simply as trust funds, which he is called upon to administer, and strictly bound as a matter of duty to administer in the manner which, in his judgment, is best calculated to produce the most beneficial results for the community — the man of wealth thus becoming the mere trustee and agent 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." The idea that people should be afforded a decent living and as much education as they can endure, and that they then can decide for themselves how to spend their money is anathema to him. "It were better for mankind that the millions of the rich were thrown into the sea than so spent as to encourage the slothful, the drunken, the unworthy. Of every thousand dollars spent in so-called charity to-day, it is probable that nine hundred and fifty dollars is unwisely spent — so spent, indeed, as to produce the very evils which it hopes to mitigate or cure." And who is to determine who is "worthy"? The rich man or his well-paid subordinates, of course. The intentions of Carnegie are often good, but his denigration of the "unworthy" as "social lepers" is appalling. "Common humanity impels us to provide for the actual wants of human beings — to see, through our poor laws, that none die of starvation, and to provide comfortable shelter, clothing, and instruction, which should, however, always be dependent upon work performed; but in doing this our thoughts should also turn to the benefits that are to accrue to those who are yet sound and industrious and seeking through labor the means of betterment, by removing from their midst and placing under care of the State in workhouses the social lepers. Every drunken vagabond or lazy idler supported by alms bestowed by wealthy people is a source of moral infection to a neighborhood." As much as I dislike Carnegie there is one subject upon which we agree; the undesirability of inherited wealth. "The fundamental idea of the gospel of wealth is that surplus wealth should be considered as a sacred trust to be administered by those into whose hands it falls, during their lives, for the good of the community. It predicts that the day is at hand when he who dies possessed of enormous sums, which were his and free to administer during his life, will die disgraced, and holds that the aim of the millionaire should be to die poor. It likewise pleads for modesty of private expenditure. The most serious obstacle to the spread of such a gospel is undoubtedly the prevailing desire of men to accumulate wealth for the express purpose of bequeathing it to their children, or to spend it in ostentatious living. I have therefore endeavored to prove that at the root of root of the desire to bqueath to children there lay the vanity of the parents, rather than a wise regard for the good of the children. That the parent who leaves his son enormous wealth generally deadens the talents and energies of the son, and tempts him to lead a less useful and less worthy life than he otherwise would, seems to me capable of proof which cannot be gainsaid." It is certainly true that inherited wealth is a curse to society which should be cured by wealth taxes. It is certainly true that giving away your gains is better than hoarding them. But it would be much better to pay decent wages and pensions in the first place. In such a case there would be little need for charity. It should come as no surprise that the more decent millionaires and billionaires have subscribed to the gospel of wealth. From Ford and Rockefeller to Gates and Buffett the rich have assauged their consciences by giving away their excess to "worthy causes." At least in the case of Gates and Buffett their employees were whire-collar workers, not laborers in a steel mill for 12 to 24 hours a day. (The above quotations are from "The Gospel of Wealth" and Other Timely Essays," available from Amazon for 99 cents.) [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/6/9/2236710/-Anti-Capitalist-Meetup-Andrew-Carnegie-and-the-Gospel-of-Wealth?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=more_community&pm_medium=web Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/