Who wrote:
Document 1
Mary Elizabeth Lease
Document 2
Ignatius Donnelly
Document 3
Lorenzo Lewelling
Audience:
WCTU, People's Party Convention, Inaugural Address
Represent:
The farmers, workmen and laborers who were sinking under the strain of unfair politics and a poor economy.
What is being said, argued/and or requested:
In document 1 Mary Elizabeth Lease is recounting the earlier days of America. The days before mortgages and credit. She is saying that we went from having hope and optimism to despair and loss because of the unfair monopoly of our financial system.
In document 2 Ignatius Donnelly is speaking on the rise of the rich and ever sinking status of the poor. The unbalance of these two economic groups was a great injustice. Bribery and corruption were ruining the plight of the laborers, farmers and workmen at the hands of capitalists.
In document 3 Lorenzo Lewelling address was on the plight of the farmers of America. He attacked social Darwinism with a empathetic intimacy. He spoke on the governments lack of protection for the hardworking farmer. The government was failing in it's duties to protect and help the American people, it was time for a change.
How it's being said:
In short the Populist movement was a movement against a government that was catering to the wealthy. These voices of protest were an important start in the "little" people having a voice. They were speaking out against the banking systems which were believed to be working in the favor of the wealthy few; as well as the corruption and bribery in politics. They were hoping for a new political party, one that placed importance on insuring an active role of economic equity.
What Proof:
The proof that was cited per the documents consisted more of what was perceived and gathered from extensive research of America's dwindling economy, and the farmers, working poor, and laborers.
Historic Significance/relevance:
The forming of a "Populist Party" was an important step in the highlighting of future banking issues, as well as currency and electoral reforms.
How does this document’s premise or theme fit into the historical context you are reading about in your textbook?
These documents were a very important part of this historical context. We have 3 people who recognized the seriousness of the unbalanced plight of hard-working American men and women. Their passions joined with others encouraged a change in American politics that reaches far into today.
Mary Elizabeth Lease completely puts me off with everything she said here. She makes foreclosure sound like a crime committed by banks upon the heads of the innocent. It's the same thing that's going on today, and it drives me insane. I would have liked to have thought that people took more responsibility back then, but I can see from reading this that they did not. It's heart-wrenching when you can't pay your mortgage, but anyone who thought, even back then, that borrowing money from someone else meant that you could pay it back on your own terms or just not pay it at all after promising you would, is wrong. People fall on hard times and need help from time to time, but that's not the bank's fault. If they were warn and compassionate about defaulters, they wouldn't make any money, and if they don't make money... then they can't offer mortgages to other people.
ReplyDeleteWhat I love about Lewelling's speech is his talk about unions. Though I'm not a fan of most modern-day unions (they're entirely too political, huge, powerful, and corrupt), at the time they were a fantastic necessity that truly had the ability to put power back in the hands of the "little guys", without the government having to be dragged in to things. They flexed their dignity and power as group, and I love it.
However, when Lorenzo Lewelling states that "it is the province of the government to protect the weak," he's sorely mistaken. There is nothing in the constitution about helping the poor become richer or more powerful as he's claiming. We're given "Life, Liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness", but results may vary.
I think these three documents work well together, although I would have liked to see one from one of the rich wealthy people who these three were so angry at, just to see how they felt about what was beginning to happen. I think that these three aided in the start to a very important change. The working class needed someone to begin a change to help them and they were off to a good start. I think its funny that Lewelling attacked social darwinism because those who thought they were using social darwinism didn't really seem to understand it, so it wasn't really social darwinism that he was attacking.
ReplyDeleteIt is very interesting that even though these three different documents were written, they all have the same main point. The same point that every author seems to have is that the Government is messed up and needs to change. The men at this time saw that even though they were working themselves to death they were still just barely making it. And women were finding that even though all these things had been done to reach equal rights, things seemed like they never really took place. The middle class person or the every day worker at this time seemed to be barely making whether they were a man or a woman. It is interesting that all these articles are from the middle or working class. It would have been interesting to here what the rich class or poor class thought.
ReplyDelete