Gilded Age vs. Progressivism; Now and Then

The number of billionaires and other extremely affluent people in the United States is growing at an extremely rapid rate. It appears as though a large amount of America is experiencing good fortune. But is this a true Golden Age, or more of a FeS2 Period? Back in the time of Rockefeller or Carnegie, it was viewed as most as being the best of times and also the worst of times.

Perpendicularly, the Progressives of the time saw this era as a time of corruption, evil, and deliberate deceptiveness. They attempted, with limited success, to bring into public knowledge the fact that these rich snobs were just so, rich snobs, and when giving, were nothing more than filthy philanthropic phonies. The Progressives aimed to destroy the residing system of classicist oligarchy posing as a democracy and to create a more fair society through major political/governmental reform. In short they tried to turn the hourglass of power upside-umop.

One of the best indicators of a new political eras lies in the country's economic standing. We can see, as was in the time of the infamous business moguls making millions every week, most citizens are having trouble with their employment. During the Industrial Revolution, it was not uncommon for people to have to choose between fighting against pay cuts and risk unemployment and passively taking it from 'the man.'

Likewise, people now have to figure out how they will deal with the issue of unemployment; should they actively fight for their job or attempt to hop from job to job until one remains open? Last year, the top hedge fund managers made (on average) about $500 million and received more compensation in 2009. In both economic situations, although people at the top of the heap were becoming more and more wealthy, the vast majority of the population was suffering. Based on this, I would conclude that the two periods in time are very much alike in terms of how the rich became even richer and the others experienced much misfortune.

Meanwhile, as the glamorous lives of the rich and successful went on smoothly, the others slaved away while only receiving infinitesimally small compensation. Following the natural order of things, where there is a thesis and an antithesis contained within it, a group of working class individuals joined together in what was called the Progressivist movement. The Progressivists held Marx's theory in high regard and believed that the only way to create an equal society is to let the people take control of their own government and create a communist society (Pure Communism, not Bolshevism or Marxism-Leninism) , therefore any action made by the government would have already been approved by the people. Excuse me for using such a cliched phrase, but they were a group "Of the people, by the people, and for the people" (Without no gov't nonsense!)

I believe that there exists a modern day Progressive movement. My decision is based off of principle. If the government is not stepping in enough to help the people in need, then the people will tend to vote for the Democrats. If the vox populi think that government is spending too much and interfering with their personal lives, then they will vote Republican. However, eventually, they tire from choosing between the two extremes and aspire to take the government into their own hands, starting a new Progressive movement.

To synopsize (<- a real word) this blog entry, there still exists a Gilded Age and a Progressivist movement.