People who make themselves wealthy sometimes make others better off as well, and it's possible to view the Morgan, Rockefeller, and Stanford types much more positively than I suggested in lecture. With Andrew Carnegie especially, it's easy to view him more positively than I do. Please read through Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth. How does reading this affect your general impression of Carnegie? Does it make you more sympathetic or not?
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Carnegie: The Gospel of Wealth
People who make themselves wealthy sometimes make others better off as well, and it's possible to view the Morgan, Rockefeller, and Stanford types much more positively than I suggested in lecture. With Andrew Carnegie especially, it's easy to view him more positively than I do. Please read through Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth. How does reading this affect your general impression of Carnegie? Does it make you more sympathetic or not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As I read through Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth, I feel that Carnegie had somewhat noble intentions. In it he makes it clear that one in the position of wealth should use his money to better society. He states that this should be done by oneself, not left to someone else after death. The main problem I have with his ideals is his belief that the wealthy are superior to their poorer human counterparts. In conclusion, I do sympathize with Carnegie in his ideals of supporting the common good with one's wealth, but I do not appreciate the patronizing attitude he carries with the deed. -Zachery Crandall
ReplyDeleteI agree with Zach that Carnegie does seem to have noble intentions, but I wonder if he just does not want to see his money going to the government? I know, if I were rich, I would rather see my money go into something productive. Not that government isn't productive, but if you had the choice of putting up libraries across the country with your name plastered on them verses contributing to the governments spending problem, you would most likely choose the libraries. I know I would. In that case I guess I am not sure how noble his intentions really are, or if he just wanted fame.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading through the article I think that Andrew Carnegie did have good intentions. He talked about there being three ways wealth can be distributed: it can be passed to your family after your death, it can be used for public purposes, or you can use it during your lifetime. The last way was the way Carnegie lived by and thought made the most sense when trying to bring together the rich and the poor. Even though I think Carnegie had great intentions, he he may have helped out the people by spreading out his wealth in small sums, it still went against the peoples rights, by how Carnegie used corruption in the first place to get the money. It reminds me of a parent that may be doing something bad, but tries to bribe off their kids with money so they still like them. I think corruption is corruption, and even if he did use the money for the people, how he acquired his wealth in the first place in my mind is not right.
ReplyDelete