| Line 16: |
Line 16: |
| | | | |
| | ==Historians look at Populism== | | ==Historians look at Populism== |
| − | Since the 1890s historians have vigorously debated the nature of Populism; most scholars have been liberals who admired the Populists for their attacks on banks and railroads. Some claim that some Populist ideas were adopted--but those were ideas the Populists had picked up from other parties, such as the direct election of Senators. Some historians see a close link between the Populists of the 1890s and the [[Progressivism|progressives]] of 1900-1912, but most of the leading progressives (expect Bryan) fiercely opposed Populism. It is debated whether any Populist ideas made their way into the Democratic party during the New Deal era. The New Deal farm programs were designed by experts (like Henry Wallace) who had nothing to do with Populism.<ref> For a summary or how historians approach the topic see Worth Robert Miller, "A Centennial Historiography of American Populism." ''Kansas History'' 1993 16(1): 54-69.</ref> | + | Since the 1890s historians have vigorously debated the nature of Populism; most scholars have been liberals who admired the Populists for their attacks on banks and railroads. Some claim that some Populist ideas were adopted—but those were ideas the Populists had picked up from other parties, such as the direct election of Senators. Some historians see a close link between the Populists of the 1890s and the [[Progressivism|progressives]] of 1900-1912, but most of the leading progressives (expect Bryan) fiercely opposed Populism. It is debated whether any Populist ideas made their way into the Democratic party during the New Deal era. The New Deal farm programs were designed by experts (like Henry Wallace) who had nothing to do with Populism.<ref>For a summary or how historians approach the topic see Worth Robert Miller, "A Centennial Historiography of American Populism." ''Kansas History'' 1993 16(1): 54-69.</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | Some historians see the populists as forward-looking liberal reformers. Others view them as reactionaries trying to recapture an idyllic and utopian past. For some they are radicals out to restructure American life, and for others they are economically hard-pressed agrarians seeking government relief. Much recent scholarship emphasizes Populism's debt to early American [[Republicanism, U.S.|republicanism]].<ref> See Worth Robert Miller, "The Republican Tradition," in Miller, ''Oklahoma Populism: A History of the People's Party in the Oklahoma Territory'' (1987) [http://history.missouristate.edu/wrmiller/Populism/texts/republican_tradition.htm online edition]</ref> Clanton (1991) stresses that Populism was "the last significant expression of an old radical tradition that derived from Enlightenment sources that had been filtered through a political tradition that bore the distinct imprint of Jeffersonian, Jacksonian, and Lincolnian democracy." This tradition emphasized human rights over the cash nexus of the Gilded Age's dominant ideology.<ref> Gene Clanton, ''Populism: The Humane Preference in America, 1890-1900'' (1991) p, xv</ref> | + | Some historians see the populists as forward-looking liberal reformers. Others view them as reactionaries trying to recapture an idyllic and utopian past. For some they are radicals out to restructure American life, and for others they are economically hard-pressed agrarians seeking government relief. Much recent scholarship emphasizes Populism's debt to early American [[Republicanism, U.S.|republicanism]].<ref>See Worth Robert Miller, "The Republican Tradition," in Miller, ''Oklahoma Populism: A History of the People's Party in the Oklahoma Territory'' (1987) [http://history.missouristate.edu/wrmiller/Populism/texts/republican_tradition.htm online edition]</ref> Clanton (1991) stresses that Populism was "the last significant expression of an old radical tradition that derived from Enlightenment sources that had been filtered through a political tradition that bore the distinct imprint of Jeffersonian, Jacksonian, and Lincolnian democracy." This tradition emphasized human rights over the cash nexus of the Gilded Age's dominant ideology.<ref>Gene Clanton, ''Populism: The Humane Preference in America, 1890-1900'' (1991) p, xv</ref> |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | [[Frederick Jackson Turner]] and a succession of western historians depicted the Populist as responding to the closure of the frontier. Turner explained: | | [[Frederick Jackson Turner]] and a succession of western historians depicted the Populist as responding to the closure of the frontier. Turner explained: |
| − | :The Farmers' Alliance and the Populist demand for government ownership of the railroad is a phase of the same effort of the pioneer farmer, on his latest frontier. The proposals have taken increasing proportions in each region of Western Advance. Taken as a whole, Populism is a manifestation of the old pioneer ideals of the native American, with the added element of increasing readiness to utilize the national government to effect its ends.<ref> Frederick Jackson Turner, ''The Frontier in American History,'' (1920) p. 148; [http://www.gutenberg.org/files/22994/22994-h/22994-h.htm online edition]</ref> | + | :The Farmers' Alliance and the Populist demand for government ownership of the railroad is a phase of the same effort of the pioneer farmer, on his latest frontier. The proposals have taken increasing proportions in each region of Western Advance. Taken as a whole, Populism is a manifestation of the old pioneer ideals of the native American, with the added element of increasing readiness to utilize the national government to effect its ends.<ref>Frederick Jackson Turner, ''The Frontier in American History,'' (1920) p. 148; [http://www.gutenberg.org/files/22994/22994-h/22994-h.htm online edition]</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | The most influential Turner student of Populism was John D. Hicks, who emphasized economic pragmatism over ideals, presenting Populism as interest group politics, with have‑nots demanding their fair share of America's wealth which was being leeched off by nonproductive speculators. Hicks emphasized the drought that ruined so many Kansas farmers, but also pointed to financial manipulations, deflation in prices caused by the gold standard, high interest rates, mortgage foreclosures, and high railroad rates. Corruption accounted for such outrages and Populists presented popular control of government as the solution, a point that later students of republicanism emphasized.<ref>Martin Ridge, "Populism Revolt: John D. Hicks and The Populist Revolt," ''Reviews in American History'' 13 (March 1985): 142-54. </ref> | + | The most influential Turner student of Populism was John D. Hicks, who emphasized economic pragmatism over ideals, presenting Populism as interest group politics, with have‑nots demanding their fair share of America's wealth which was being leeched off by nonproductive speculators. Hicks emphasized the drought that ruined so many Kansas farmers, but also pointed to financial manipulations, deflation in prices caused by the gold standard, high interest rates, mortgage foreclosures, and high railroad rates. Corruption accounted for such outrages and Populists presented popular control of government as the solution, a point that later students of republicanism emphasized.<ref>Martin Ridge, "Populism Revolt: John D. Hicks and The Populist Revolt," ''Reviews in American History'' 13 (March 1985): 142-54.</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | In the 1930s [[C. Vann Woodward]] stressed the southern base, seeing the possibility of a black-and-white coalition of poor against the overbearing rich. Georgia politician Tom Watson served as Woodward's hero.<ref> C. Vann Woodward, '' Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel'' (1938); Woodward, "Tom Watson and the Negro in Agrarian Politics," ''The Journal of Southern History,'' Vol. 4, No. 1 (Feb., 1938), pp. 14-33 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-4642(193802)4%3A1%3C14%3ATWATNI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A in JSTOR]</ref> In the 1950s, however, scholars such as [[Richard Hofstadter]] portrayed the Populist movement as an irrational response of backward-looking farmers to the challenges of modernity. He discounted third party links to Progressivism and argued that Populists were provincial, conspiracy-minded, and had a tendency toward scapegoatism that manifested itself as nativism, anti-Semitism, anti-intellectualism, and Anglophobia. The antithesis of anti-modern Populism was modernizing [[Progressivism]] in this model, with such leading progressives as [[Theodore Roosevelt]], [[Robert LaFollette]], [[George Norris]] and [[Woodrow Wilson]] had been vehement enemies of Populism, though [[William Jennings Bryan]] did cooperate with them and accepted the Populist nomination in 1896.<ref>Richard Hofstadter, '' The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R.'' (1955</ref> | + | In the 1930s [[C. Vann Woodward]] stressed the southern base, seeing the possibility of a black-and-white coalition of poor against the overbearing rich. Georgia politician Tom Watson served as Woodward's hero.<ref>C. Vann Woodward, '' Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel'' (1938); Woodward, "Tom Watson and the Negro in Agrarian Politics," ''The Journal of Southern History,'' Vol. 4, No. 1 (Feb., 1938), pp. 14-33 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-4642(193802)4%3A1%3C14%3ATWATNI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A in JSTOR]</ref> In the 1950s, however, scholars such as [[Richard Hofstadter]] portrayed the Populist movement as an irrational response of backward-looking farmers to the challenges of modernity. He discounted third party links to Progressivism and argued that Populists were provincial, conspiracy-minded, and had a tendency toward scapegoatism that manifested itself as nativism, anti-Semitism, anti-intellectualism, and Anglophobia. The antithesis of anti-modern Populism was modernizing [[Progressivism]] in this model, with such leading progressives as [[Theodore Roosevelt]], [[Robert LaFollette]], [[George Norris]] and [[Woodrow Wilson]] had been vehement enemies of Populism, though [[William Jennings Bryan]] did cooperate with them and accepted the Populist nomination in 1896.<ref>Richard Hofstadter, '' The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R.'' (1955</ref> |
| | | | |
| | Michael Kazin's ''The Populist Persuasion'' (1995) argued that Populism reflected a rhetorical style that manifested itself in spokesmen like Father [[Charles Coughlin]] in the 1930s and Governor [[George Wallace]] in the 1960s. | | Michael Kazin's ''The Populist Persuasion'' (1995) argued that Populism reflected a rhetorical style that manifested itself in spokesmen like Father [[Charles Coughlin]] in the 1930s and Governor [[George Wallace]] in the 1960s. |
| | | | |
| − | Postel (2007) rejects the notion that the Populists were traditionalistic and anti-modern. Quite the reverse, he argued, the Populists aggressively sought self-consciously progressive goals. They sought diffusion of scientific and technical knowledge, formed highly centralized organizations, launched large-scale incorporated businesses, and pressed for an array of state-centered reforms. Hundreds of thousands of women committed to Populism seeking a more modern life, education, and employment in schools and offices. A large section of the labor movement looked to Populism for answers, forging a political coalition with farmers that gave impetus to the regulatory state. Progress, however, was also menacing and inhumane, Postel notes. White Populists, embraced social-Darwinist notions of racial improvement, Chinese exclusion and the humiliation and brutality of separate-but-equal.<ref> Charles Postel, ''The Populist Vision'' (2007) </ref> | + | Postel (2007) rejects the notion that the Populists were traditionalistic and anti-modern. Quite the reverse, he argued, the Populists aggressively sought self-consciously progressive goals. They sought diffusion of scientific and technical knowledge, formed highly centralized organizations, launched large-scale incorporated businesses, and pressed for an array of state-centered reforms. Hundreds of thousands of women committed to Populism seeking a more modern life, education, and employment in schools and offices. A large section of the labor movement looked to Populism for answers, forging a political coalition with farmers that gave impetus to the regulatory state. Progress, however, was also menacing and inhumane, Postel notes. White Populists, embraced social-Darwinist notions of racial improvement, Chinese exclusion and the humiliation and brutality of separate-but-equal.<ref>Charles Postel, ''The Populist Vision'' (2007)</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ==1990s== | | ==1990s== |