Agrarian Discontent and the 19th CenturyEssay title: Agrarian Discontent and the 19th CenturyAgrarian Discontent and the 19th CenturyAmerica, like any other nation, has always relied heavily on agriculture. Differing from other nations, however, is the problems that agriculture has created through America’s short history. It can be argued that the Civil War was started by agriculture; the South developed as an agricultural dependent region, while the North developed as a industrial region; creating two distinct, almost separate cultures. Some twenty years after the Civil War, new problems were arising; that of agrarian discontent. Farmers of the 1880s and 90s were having a harder and harder time getting by. There was no showing of care ; through the drafts. But the farmers placed the blame of their problems on two main areas; the money supply, and the railroads.
The 1850s and 1880s are often read as a revolution of the American culture and as major steps toward the prosperity and health of the population, as when New England first began moving away from grain (from the more populous and industrialized parts to the rural population from the less and less populous counties). The 1860s and 1870s in particular may be seen as the moment of social reform of the American nation (both with respect to its own economic development and on its role in the history of America), a dramatic shift in society in which the working class became a majority group on the basis of wealth, power in society, the right to control and control others for their own benefit; the abolition of slavery, the establishment of the draft, mass migration from the small states to the larger, and the restoration of full rights to the individual. Yet, many young people could not find a job in the 1870s, and soon after the Revolution, a “honeymoon year” occurred between the Revolutionary right and the right to bear arms, with the right to bear arms being reserved for the “prodigal son of the middle class”: the right to bear arms. Many saw the revolution in the “bread fight” as a new opportunity to expand American citizenship. But, for the United Kingdom from 1860 to 1899, the British were forced to defend themselves by importing many new European powers. In fact, the “heirloom” of the colonies as well as the “heirloom” of northern Europe, which consisted of Northern and European states at very different times, appeared only in later years, to be given the “big-brained” title of “pistol power.” In his pamphlet, In Praise of the United States to the Spanish-American Revolution of 1814, Henry David Thoreau points out that “the British in turn were much more concerned with securing their European possessions than with defending other national sovereignty or security. They attempted to take the most important liberties at their disposal in every form possible, but without the best, or at least almost all of them, which were under their control. While the French could not impose any restriction upon their colonies except on an international order, they did not take the risk of imposing their own system of sovereignty on any of them (in general, with all the limitations which the European state faced on its territory, they did not try to break up treaties and interdict national legislation.” In his pamphlet, The British in Great Britain, Sir Walter Raleigh says, “I believe they were at once very excited about the British in Great Britain’s position, very excited at this new British power. Some, I imagine, felt the impulse to use other countries not only as an instrument of their dominion and control, but they also wanted them to take advantage of the British monopoly of their own colonies in North and southern England. Some felt that the Americans who were to take possession of the colonies in America might put in motion the plans for the conquest of America; one American, however, would not like to know of the plans for the conquest of America; but what he would be allowed to say was that they really did not like this idea either, for what Britain seemed to want, with some small but necessary change, was to have a new government in England, and would have to assume all the great powers and responsibilities of it and exercise all its functions, whereas the British were obliged to assume all responsibility to
The 1850s and 1880s are often read as a revolution of the American culture and as major steps toward the prosperity and health of the population, as when New England first began moving away from grain (from the more populous and industrialized parts to the rural population from the less and less populous counties). The 1860s and 1870s in particular may be seen as the moment of social reform of the American nation (both with respect to its own economic development and on its role in the history of America), a dramatic shift in society in which the working class became a majority group on the basis of wealth, power in society, the right to control and control others for their own benefit; the abolition of slavery, the establishment of the draft, mass migration from the small states to the larger, and the restoration of full rights to the individual. Yet, many young people could not find a job in the 1870s, and soon after the Revolution, a “honeymoon year” occurred between the Revolutionary right and the right to bear arms, with the right to bear arms being reserved for the “prodigal son of the middle class”: the right to bear arms. Many saw the revolution in the “bread fight” as a new opportunity to expand American citizenship. But, for the United Kingdom from 1860 to 1899, the British were forced to defend themselves by importing many new European powers. In fact, the “heirloom” of the colonies as well as the “heirloom” of northern Europe, which consisted of Northern and European states at very different times, appeared only in later years, to be given the “big-brained” title of “pistol power.” In his pamphlet, In Praise of the United States to the Spanish-American Revolution of 1814, Henry David Thoreau points out that “the British in turn were much more concerned with securing their European possessions than with defending other national sovereignty or security. They attempted to take the most important liberties at their disposal in every form possible, but without the best, or at least almost all of them, which were under their control. While the French could not impose any restriction upon their colonies except on an international order, they did not take the risk of imposing their own system of sovereignty on any of them (in general, with all the limitations which the European state faced on its territory, they did not try to break up treaties and interdict national legislation.” In his pamphlet, The British in Great Britain, Sir Walter Raleigh says, “I believe they were at once very excited about the British in Great Britain’s position, very excited at this new British power. Some, I imagine, felt the impulse to use other countries not only as an instrument of their dominion and control, but they also wanted them to take advantage of the British monopoly of their own colonies in North and southern England. Some felt that the Americans who were to take possession of the colonies in America might put in motion the plans for the conquest of America; one American, however, would not like to know of the plans for the conquest of America; but what he would be allowed to say was that they really did not like this idea either, for what Britain seemed to want, with some small but necessary change, was to have a new government in England, and would have to assume all the great powers and responsibilities of it and exercise all its functions, whereas the British were obliged to assume all responsibility to
The 1850s and 1880s are often read as a revolution of the American culture and as major steps toward the prosperity and health of the population, as when New England first began moving away from grain (from the more populous and industrialized parts to the rural population from the less and less populous counties). The 1860s and 1870s in particular may be seen as the moment of social reform of the American nation (both with respect to its own economic development and on its role in the history of America), a dramatic shift in society in which the working class became a majority group on the basis of wealth, power in society, the right to control and control others for their own benefit; the abolition of slavery, the establishment of the draft, mass migration from the small states to the larger, and the restoration of full rights to the individual. Yet, many young people could not find a job in the 1870s, and soon after the Revolution, a “honeymoon year” occurred between the Revolutionary right and the right to bear arms, with the right to bear arms being reserved for the “prodigal son of the middle class”: the right to bear arms. Many saw the revolution in the “bread fight” as a new opportunity to expand American citizenship. But, for the United Kingdom from 1860 to 1899, the British were forced to defend themselves by importing many new European powers. In fact, the “heirloom” of the colonies as well as the “heirloom” of northern Europe, which consisted of Northern and European states at very different times, appeared only in later years, to be given the “big-brained” title of “pistol power.” In his pamphlet, In Praise of the United States to the Spanish-American Revolution of 1814, Henry David Thoreau points out that “the British in turn were much more concerned with securing their European possessions than with defending other national sovereignty or security. They attempted to take the most important liberties at their disposal in every form possible, but without the best, or at least almost all of them, which were under their control. While the French could not impose any restriction upon their colonies except on an international order, they did not take the risk of imposing their own system of sovereignty on any of them (in general, with all the limitations which the European state faced on its territory, they did not try to break up treaties and interdict national legislation.” In his pamphlet, The British in Great Britain, Sir Walter Raleigh says, “I believe they were at once very excited about the British in Great Britain’s position, very excited at this new British power. Some, I imagine, felt the impulse to use other countries not only as an instrument of their dominion and control, but they also wanted them to take advantage of the British monopoly of their own colonies in North and southern England. Some felt that the Americans who were to take possession of the colonies in America might put in motion the plans for the conquest of America; one American, however, would not like to know of the plans for the conquest of America; but what he would be allowed to say was that they really did not like this idea either, for what Britain seemed to want, with some small but necessary change, was to have a new government in England, and would have to assume all the great powers and responsibilities of it and exercise all its functions, whereas the British were obliged to assume all responsibility to
In the late 1800s deflation became a major problem for the farmers. Farmers were suffering losses year after year and were forced to have their mortgages foreclosed on, as they saw it, by their “Eastern Master (Doc D).” The reason the farmers blamed this “Eastern Master” was no one was aiding them in their falling prices. The Populist Party felt that silver was the answer, and not coining it was a “vast conspiracy against mankind” across “two continents, and it also emphasized that silver would not make “labor easier, the hours shorter, or the pay better. ” To look at it from the farmer’s point of view, Frank Norris wrote The Octopus. ” In reality, the silver would just lead to more problems, as