The populist vision

412 Pages·2007·29.534 MB·English

by  Postel, Charles

THE POPULIST VISION
This page intentionally left blank
THE POPULIST
VISION
CHARLES POSTEL
OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS
2007
OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS
Oxford University Press, Inc., publishes works that further
Oxford University's objective of excellence
in research, scholarship, and education.
Oxford New York
Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi
New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
With offices in
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
Copyright © 2007 by Oxford University Press, Inc.
Published by Oxford University Press, Inc.
198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016
www.oup.com
Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior permission of Oxford University Press.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Postel, Charles.
The populist vision / Charles Postel.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-19-517650-6
1. United States—Politics and government—1865-1900. 2. Populism—United States—History—
19th century. 3. Social movements—United States—History—19th century. 4. Farmers—United
States—Political activity—History—19th century. 5. Working class—United States—Political
activity—History—19th century. 6. Middle class—United States—Political activity—History—
19th century. 7. United States—Social conditions—1865-1918. 8. Capitalism—United States—
History—19th century. 9. United States—Economic conditions—1865-1918. I. Title
E661.P67 2007
973.8-dc22 2006051396
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 21
Printed in the United States of America
on acid-free paper
FOR MICHAEL
This page intentionally left blank
PREFACE
The global economy of the early twenty-first century has brought specula-
tive booms, spectacular busts, and much questioning about what it all means.
One thing is certain: the wrenching changes of the "new" economy bear a
striking resemblance to changes Americans have experienced in the past.
This is a book about how Americans responded to the traumas of tech-
nological innovation, expansion of corporate power, and commercial and
cultural globalization in the 1880s and 1890s. The advent of the telegraph
meant that information that had taken weeks or months to cross continents
and oceans now traveled at the speed of electric current. The telecommuni-
cations revolution and steam power made America, and the world, a much
smaller place, facilitating large-scale organization and centralization. Cor-
porations grew exponentially amid traumatic spasms of global capitalist
development. Mark Twain called it the "Gilded Age." The rich amassed great
fortunes, a prosperous section of the middle class grew more comfortable,
and hard times pressed on most everyone else.
How did those on the short end respond to these changes? They organized
protest movements the likes of which the country had never seen before.
Populism—made up mostly of farmers but also of wage workers and middle-
class activists—provided one of the most intense challenges to corporate
power in American history. This book explores how the men and women of
the Populist movement perceived and acted on the fast-moving changes of
their modern world.
The conclusions drawn provide a cautionary tale about stereotypes of who
is modern and who is not. During the Gilded Age, the corporate elite made
exclusive claims on modernity. Captains of finance and industry, supported
by economists and political scientists from the universities, held that the
particular corporate model that they pursued conformed to unalterable laws
viii PREFACE
of progress and development. They derided those who questioned corpo-
rate prerogatives as helplessly opposed to progress, bound by tradition, and
intractably antimodern.
But were they? This work of historical excavation suggests otherwise. And
that is what makes the experience of the Populists so relevant. The Populists
challenged the corporate frameworks. They protested the inequitable dis-
tribution of wealth. They demanded more responsive government. But they,
too, were modern. They embraced the Enlightenment notions of progress
as firmly as their opponents did, and this allowed them to shape the weap-
ons of protest out of the modern materials of technological, organizational,
and ideological innovation. It gave the Populists confidence to act.
No attempt has been made here to resuscitate dead Populism for a living
present. The movement's flaws should be a warning against any attempt at
revival. The commitment of white Populists to white supremacy attests to
the severity of those flaws. What does seem in order, however, is to seek a
better understanding of the ways in which the Populists were influenced by
modernity and sought to make America modern.
At the dawn of the twenty-first century, new structures of corporate pre-
rogatives and control are being presented as the inevitable outcomes of new
technologies and the new realities of a global economy. The Populist expe-
rience puts into question such claims of inevitability. The conclusion drawn
in these pages is that the Populist revolt reflected a conflict over divergent
paths of modern capitalist development. Such a conclusion is pregnant with
possibilities. It suggests that modern society is not a given but is shaped by
men and women who pursue alternative visions of what the modern world
should be.
The Populists believed that the challenges facing their farms and home-
steads required national solutions. In that populistic spirit, this book covers
a wide territory. It looks at Populism as a national movement, focusing on
farmers but also including wage earners and bohemian urbanites. It exam-
ines topics from education, technology, women's rights, and business, to
government, race, religion, and science. Each of these topics deserves fur-
ther scrutiny. Looking at the Populists with a wide lens points to the need
for a many-sided reevaluation of what Populism meant. Hopefully, this book
will contribute to such an effort.
A note to the reader: Populist men and women often lacked formal edu-
cation. Except in those places where the meaning was unclear, quotes with
unusual spellings and constructions have been left as in the original.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
In the course of this exploration I had the assistance of too many people to
adequately thank. I would like to express my appreciation for the librarians
who helped me navigate the archives and pointed me in unexpected direc-
tions. I am especially grateful to the diligent and generous people at the
Center for American History at the University of Texas, the Chicago His-
torical Society, the Houghton Library, the Kansas State Historical Society,
and the Bancroft Library. The overworked staff in the interlibrary loan of-
fice at the Berkeley Libraries deserves special thanks. I am also appreciative
of a dissertation fellowship from the Mellon Foundation and a research and
creativity award from California State University at Sacramento that allowed
me to complete the project.
I am especially indebted to my teachers and colleagues. I had the won-
derful good fortune of having Leon Litwack as my dissertation adviser. He
encouraged me to take unbeaten paths, while his friendship and generous
assistance and the example of his own scholarship and humanity sustained
me along the way. Robin Einhorn also showed extraordinary generosity in
terms of intellectual and moral support. Her sharp insights and her insis-
tence on clarity of ideas proved invaluable. Michael Rogin, with his insatiable
curiosity and formidable mind, helped me examine the big questions and
spurred my thinking. I miss him. Henry Brady, David Brody, Eric Foner,
David Hollinger, Laura Lovett, Mary Ryan, Seth Rockman, and Kim Voss
provided sage advice and timely assistance. Jessica Tiesch and Wendy Wolford
helped to brainstorm over early drafts. Joshua Howard, with his expertise in
Chinese history, made me think broadly. Barbara Keys, Brian Schoen, and Lee
Simpson provided helpful critiques of chapters. Peter Argersinger, Edward
Ayers, James Hunt, Robert Johnston, and Glenna Matthews read the entire
manuscript and provided invaluable suggestions, for which I am truly grateful.