In the article, The Gospel of Wealth, written by Andrew Carnegie, he discusses the importance of the new self-made millionaires to practice the philanthropy of improvement. The philanthropy of improvement encompasses advancing an aspect of society by providing opportunities to climb the ladder of opportunity. Carnegie noted the gap between the worker and employer had grown exponentially due to the industrial revolution and believed that it was up to the wealthy to develop methods of improvement. The gap between the worker and employer resulted in no sympathy for each other between the master and apprentice as well as people beginning to lose hope in the ladder of opportunity. Carnegie realized that there was inequality in America and he did not want to fundamentally change it; Carnegie valued the gap of the rich and poor. But, it was the prosperous’ responsibility through the philanthropy of improvement to help the impoverished maximize their human potential because of “the ties of brotherhood” (Carnegie 198) that bound the poor and rich. Carnegie felt the affluent should dedicate time and their surplus wealth while alive to invest in the community. He was against fortune “left to …show more content…
the families of the decedents, [and revenue] bequeathed for public purposes” (98) as ways to distribute capital. Carnegie observed from British aristocracy that an inherited estate leads to wasteful spending and charitable donations made after death were not always used appropriately. On the surface, it may seem that philanthropy of improvement proposed by Carnegie barely benefits the community as a whole. The truth of the matter is by simply building public libraries, Carnegie engaged in the philanthropy of social reform. The philanthropy of social reform seeks to solve an underlying problem in society.
For example, Carnegie invested his money in public institutions such as libraries. He aimed to fix the problem keeping people from books with libraries. During a time of severe discrimination against minorities like African Americans, it was hard to find a safe place to learn and grow as an individual. The libraries provided a safe haven for people to sit down and learn about themselves and the society around them. The philanthropy of improvement does work for highly motivated members of a community that wish to pull themselves up the social ladder resulting in social reform. Therefore improving a community can lead to better opportunities which can change the view of people in a poverty-stricken
community. Libraries are the pinnacle of self-help for the penniless and “essential for the progress of the race” (201). An example of community improvement leading to the social change of a marginalized group, African Americans, can be seen in the life of Malcolm X. Malcolm X was a minority born into low social and economic status yet he rose to greatness in part to his use of libraries and his desire to improve his life. Carnegie promoted the idea that it was the successful individual's responsibility to use community improvement to promote the advancement of society. Through the gradual integration of public institutions, learning would occur. While Malcolm X was in jail, he began reading books in an effort to educate himself. He was successful in bettering his life with the use of self-motivation and a library. Malcolm X’s knowledge helped him develop an “understanding of what confronts [him and]... create a program” (X) that could better the African American community. Malcolm X is evidence that Carnegie’s philanthropy of improvement leads to social reform. Carnegie would support the philanthropy of social reform because he did encourage it with his push for libraries. He aimed to solve social problems and the structural inequalities that keep people from books which is the definition of social reform. Carnegie provided libraries that had books. The books allowed people to gain knowledge that they did not have access to before. The knowledge enabled people to better themselves. Therefore, improving their social and economic status. Through, Malcolm X’s life he spread the message of freedom. A message he could not spread without his “alma mater books [and] a good library” (X). The knowledge obtained from books not only benefited Malcolm X but the larger African American community. I conclude that Carnegie may have pioneered the philosophy of improvement while calling for social reform.
At this time, Vanderbilt had emerged as a top leader in the railroad industry during the 19th century and eventually became the richest man in America. Vanderbilt is making it abundantly clear to Americans that his only objective is to acquire as much wealth as possible even if it is at the expense of every day citizens. Another man who echoed such sentiments is Andrew Carnegie. In an excerpt from the North American Review, Carnegie takes Vanderbilt’s ideas even further and advocates for the concentration of business and wealth into the hands of a few (Document 3). Carnegie suggests that such a separation between the rich and the poor “insures survival of the fittest in every department” and encourages competition, thus, benefiting society as a whole. Carnegie, a steel tycoon and one of the wealthiest businessmen to date, continuously voiced his approval of an ideology known as Social Darwinism which essentially models the “survival of the fittest” sentiment expressed by Carnegie and others. In essence, he believed in widening inequalities in society for the sole purpose of placing power in the hands of only the most wealthy and most
On the other hand, Carnegie understands that there exists inequality, but he believes that the superior can cooperate with the inferior to gain equality. In fact, it the document he clarifies, “There remains…only one mode of using great fortunes…in this we have the true antidote for the temporary unequal distribution of wealth, the reconciliation of the rich and the poor−a reign of harmony” (Carnegie, 54). Carnegie does not particularly consider inequality a problem. He understands that in order for wealthy to facilitate the lives of the poor, there must be inequality to establish status, but he also discerns that by helping the poor they are given a chance to reach equality. In fact, Carnegie says, “Individualism will
A penny saved may be a penny earned, just as a penny spent may begin to better the world. Andrew Carnegie, a man known for his wealth, certainly knew the value of a dollar. His successful business ventures in the railroad industry, steel business, and in communications earned him his multimillion-dollar fortune. Much the opposite of greedy, Carnegie made sure he had what he needed to live a comfortable life, and put what remained of his fortune toward assistance for the general public and the betterment of their communities. He stressed the idea that generosity is superior to arrogance. Carnegie believes that for the wealthy to be generous to their community, rather than live an ostentatious lifestyle proves that they are truly rich in wealth and in heart. He also emphasized that money is most powerful in the hands of the earner, and not anyone else. In his retirement, Carnegie not only spent a great deal of time enriching his life by giving back; but also often wrote about business, money, and his stance on the importance of world peace. His essay “Wealth” presents what he believes are three common ways in which the wealthy typically distribute their money throughout their life and after death. Throughout his essay “Wealth”, Andrew Carnegie appeals to logos as he defines “rich” as having a great deal of wealth not only in materialistic terms, but also in leading an active philanthropic lifestyle. He solidifies this definition in his appeals to ethos and pathos with an emphasis on the rewards of philanthropy to the mind and body.
The era that marked the end of civil war and the beginning of the twentieth century in the united states of America was coupled with enormous economic and industrial developments that attracted diverse views and different arguments on what exactly acquisition of wealth implied on the social classes in the society. It was during this time that the Marxist and those who embraced his ideologies came out strongly to argue their position on what industrial revolution should imply in an economic world like America. In fact, there was a rapid rise in the gross national product of the United States between 1874 and 1883. This actually sparked remarkable consequences on the political, social and economic impacts. In fact, the social rejoinder to industrialization had extensive consequences on the American society. This led to the emergence of social reform movements to discourse on the needs of the industrialized society. Various theories were developed to rationalize the widening gap between the rich and the poor. Various reformers like Andrew Carnegie, Henry George and William Graham Sumner perceived the view on the obligation of the wealthy differently. This paper seeks to address on the different views held by these prominent people during this time of historical transformations.
In Andrew Carnegie’s “The Gospel of Wealth” he outlines what the rich man’s responsibilities to the public is regarding his wealth. Andrew Carnegie was one of his times wealthiest men and wrote this in 1889. He states that, “Our duty is with what is practicable now-with the next step possible in our day and generation. It is criminal to waste our energies in endeavoring to uproot, when all we can profitably accomplish is to bend the universal tree of humanity a little in the direction most favorable to the production of the good fruit under existing circumstances (Carnegie 23-24).” In his writing he talks about the best way to dispose of the wealth one has acquired. The remainder of this paper will address the
Charity handouts did not necessarily help feed a poor family, but aimed to “... produce most beneficial results to [the] community” (Shi 60). This meant that the wealthy didn’t directly give citizens money, but built free public utilities. Among these free services were libraries and and centers for scientific research. Without a doubt, these buildings do not help put food on the table. They do, however, create a sense of hope for educational and social improvement for the working class.
A wealthy person, with the desire to do well with their fortune, could benefit society in a number of ways. Carnegie has verbally laid a blueprint for the wealthy to build from. His message is simple: Work hard and you will have results; educate yourself, live a meaningful life, and bestow upon others the magnificent jewels life has to offer. He stresses the importance of doing charity during one’s lifetime, and states “…the man who dies leaving behind him millions of available wealth, which was his to administer during life, will pass away ‘unwept, unhonored, and unsung’…” (401). He is saying a wealthy person, with millions at their disposal, should spend their money on the betterment of society, during their lifetime, because it will benefit us all as a race.
...ve up the fortunes they have built themselves. It is an admirable idea to give your money to help promote a thriving community. Carnegie states that he is against charity and believes that those in need should be taught how to improve their own lives. To fund these institutes and corporations a form of charity must be given. Wealthy citizens give their excess money to a few to disperse of in a way they see fit to help the race. Most Americans are not willing to give up such a large sum of money as noble and respectable of an idea as it is. I think that Carnegie’s plan, in theory, would work and would be best for the race. I do not think it is practical because most would rather spoil their own family with inheritance than give it away to help people unknown to them. Carnegie’s idea of fair is equal opportunities for everyone to help themselves and the race.
Social Darwinist William Graham Sumner believed that helping the poor was unwise because it interfered with the law of nature and would weaken the evolution of the human race by preserving those unfit. His ideas gave some during this period a scientific reason for their racial intolerance. Andrew Carnegie believed the complete opposite. In his article “Wealth,” he argued that the wealthy had a responsibility given to them by God to carry out projects of civic philanthropy for the benefit of society as a whole. In other words, he believed that the rich should help the poor for the good of society. He himself practiced this belief by distributing $350 million of his fortune to support the building of libraries, universities, and various public institutions. So,
By handing out money to a beggar, you are “only saving yourself from annoyance…” (Pg. 15) Carnegie states that nobody improves by almsgiving for you will only aid the person’s addiction. As an advocate of Social Darwinism, Carnegie believed in competitive natures within his workers. He believed in a definite separation of classes and it was not only needed, but also
In the mid-to-late 1800s there were many social ideas being tossed around. A lot of them were justifications made by people in wealthy positions in what they could do with their extreme wealth while the majority lived in poverty. Darwinism was on the premise that only the fittest should survive. Others were a reaction to needed change. The theory known as the Gospel of Wealth does not give money directly to the poor but gives them the resources to become educated if they work for it. The Second Declaration of Independence worked to give workers some free time and decent wages. The Social Gospel worked to give better housing and unite laborers. Social Darwinism was the least American theory during the Gilded Age and gave an excuse to those with
In the world today there is a lot of poverty. There is a great divide
earn less than 70p a day, and many people rely on farming and cattle -
Income inequality continues to increase in today’s world, especially in the United States. Income inequality means the unequal distribution between individuals’ assets, wealth, or income. In the Twilight of the Elites, Christopher Hayes, a liberal journalist, states the inequality gap between the rich and the poor are increasing widening, and there need to have things done - tax the rich, provide better education - in order to shortening the inequality gap. America is a meritocratic country, which means that everybody has equal opportunity to be successful regardless of their class privileges or wealth. However, equality of opportunity does not equal equality of outcomes. People are having more opportunities to find a better job, but their incomes are a lot less compared to the top ten percent rich people. In this way, the poor people will never climb up the ladder to high status and become millionaires. Therefore, the government needs to increase all the tax rates on rich people in order to reduce income inequality.
Philanthropy, or the act of private and voluntary giving, has been a familiar term since it first entered the English language in the seventeenth century. Translated from the Latin term “philanthropia” or “love of mankind,” philanthropy permeates many social spheres and serves several social purposes including charity, humanitarianism, religious morality and even manipulation for social control.