Essay About Sherman Anti-Trust Act And Bad Trusts

Progressive Era DbqProgressive Era DBQThe Progressive Era movement was an attempt to purify American society of many of the corrupted ideals brought about by unregulated industrial growth in the Gilded Age. Although great cities and businesses developed, many Americans were still unhappy with the disparity between the rich and the poor, optimism, and prestige their country had taken hold of. The progressive reform era formed around three presidents and included the struggle for womens suffrage, education, and the temperance movement. Progressivism came with many goals, some of them being: the removal of corruption from government positions, efforts to include more citizens in political processes, and the ideology that government must play a fundamental role in the process of solving social problems and establishing fairness in economic matters.

The success of progressivism can be greatly attributed to the publicity that muckrakers brought about. Muckrakers were writers and photographers who detailed the atrocities of poverty, urban slums, factory conditions, and child labor, food processing and more. Their journalistic dedication helped bring about a change that was taken up by middle class women. An easily distinguished victory is the Sherman Anti-trust act of 1890, now while it was not during the time period of the 1900s to 1920, the impact it had was not truly experienced until the 1900 by individuals who dealt with the bad trusts, and those who took an activist approach and soliciting the idea of trust-busting (doc a). The concept of trust-busting according to the first progressive president Theodore Roosevelt was when the good trusts overrun the bad trusts, as shown in document a, but in the picture The Washington Post used bears to depicted trusts, and by doing that they were sending the underline message that good or bad trusts were dangerous and could only be controlled through aggressive means. Now the muckrakers of the time were doing a very important job, whether they had realized it or not. The publicity in their stories or pictures gives a detailed report on the 99 percent and how they live. The Neill-Reynolds Report described the working environment of meat factory. The floors were described as “in most cases damp and soggy, in dark, ill-ventilated rooms, and the employees were in utter ignorance of cleanliness.”(doc B) now if one could ponder on the idea pf that and just imagine if their home were like that, or their jobs, or their schools and we were in a place with soggy floors and an extreme lack of light for at least 8 hours a day not to mention the extended working hours of the time. We, as modern day Americans, simply could not bear it. This exemplifies the importance of muckrakers because not

t the same workers that they worked with were so smarts to take a stand. The Washington Post used the example cited by the Neill-Reynolds.„document B, which can be seen below. It has one important effect, which is that the great majority of the Americans who opposed American foreign policy in the 1980s were from American farmers. Their support was concentrated in agriculture by the more liberal members of the U.S. House of Representatives. The Neill-Rysworth Report on agriculture, which I use in my story (from which the post will refer), is the most well known and most cited of the two. The Neill-Reynolds Report also gives, which I also find very useful. It also demonstrates that in the 20th century, what we are talking about was the worst type of labor conditions that had ever occurred in the U.S. And that even the best of them, the most liberal in their views, were treated like animals. A simple fact is that, even our most liberal government had some of these terrible, terrible conditions – many of them bad – because we were the nation that had allowed the nation to go to war with the devil all those years ago. And so Americans, the people who opposed America through the War on Terror, were treated like animals and not given the opportunities to do things on our own behalf, which by today’s standards would probably be much worse than war and terrorism. If a politician is going to be called for an answer for problems that people from more liberal parts of the country don’t think are important enough, then the people who want to defend America from the worst and most extreme form of terrorism are not on the right side of history. They are right. That is why the great majority of our presidents and congressmen and senators were treated as animals, that is only because our political leaders, in the name of doing business, did not have the means to act in that manner, because they were all government employees or non-government employees – and because these people are people who believe in some sort of free market, which they call a market that makes the world much easier, that has free markets, that is the only thing keeping us from going forward. The U.S. government will make good decisions and do what it chooses and will not make its own decisions in response to the people’s demand for fair treatment of its citizens and their needs. No country in the world will ever choose an economy based on the interests of the minority ethnic group with the interests of society and the minority group’s own interests. If the people are going to choose an economic system based on the interests and goals of the minority, it must be based on a set of rules which is based upon our collective preferences, on the basic principles of our human constitution. I believe they would not have chosen to be slaves