Robber Barons versus Captains of Industry

American business was completely altered, becoming an economic powerhouse after the Civil War ended, with the help of major corporations, and the leaders who founded and led them.  Although some of the ways in which these leaders went about expanding and continuing to grow their businesses are frowned upon by today's standards which we hold ourselves to, it is certain that they were extremely successful in running these corporations. In class this week, we learned about the changes in the American economy as a whole, as well as focusing on specific people who pioneered these businesses. We watched a video about the American economy as a whole and how much American business changed and improved after the Civil War ended, each group taking notes on different aspects of it: main idea, key people, essential terms, and important events.  Each group then read biographies about John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie, some of the most important leaders of American businesses, and took notes from the biographies pertaining to our topics.  Finally, we decided on the group essential question: should Carnegie and Rockefeller be classified as robber barons or captains of industry?

     I believe that Carnegie and Rockefeller were captains of industry, but that they could have also been considered robber barons.  Looking back on it with a more objective perspective now, able to assess the facts with emotions aside, both for the most part went about their ventures in business in legal and honest ways, although there were some situations in which they bent the rules.  Rockefeller was themoving force between the Standard Oil Company, and truly helped to shape and create the American petroleum industry.  Rockefeller was able to buy out every single one of his competitors except for Samuel Andrews, because he always managed to keep production costs down which not only was good for him as the leader of the company, but also used this to put other companies out of business.  Rockefeller is widely considered one of the richest, if not the richest, men in America's history as he gained complete monopoly over the oil business through the creation of the Standard Oil Company.  Rockefeller's use of vertical integration was key in his gaining of a monopoly over the entire American oil business.  However, once the Standard Oil Company became extremely successful, an issue was encountered, which formed Rockefeller's reputation as a possible robber baron.  Rockefeller decided to make the Standard Oil Company a trust, ultimately ending in the Antitrust Legislation by Congress and the Ohio Supreme Court's decision to make Rockefeller disband the trust in 1892.  This creation and disbanding of the trust, as well as his ventures into the global export market as well ruined his relationship with the public, contributing to his reputation as being a robber baron.  However, although the public criticized him, he continued to give away much of his money to charities, local education, and the Baptist church.

     Carnegie also used many of the tactics which Rockefeller used in order to attain his success in the steel business.  Carnegie's implementation of vertical integration allowed him to control raw materials, transportation, manufacturing, and sales.  He also took the same point of view as Rockefeller, believing in the "Gospel of Wealth," that every rich man was made by God and has a duty to use his wealth for the good of the people.  Based on this belief, he also invested lots of money to advanced education, including establishing Carnegie Mellon University.  However, Carnegie's perception by some as a robber baron also comes into play because of poor public relations.  After the Homestead strike at one of his steel plants in Homestead, Pennsylvania, his relationship with the public was ruined. 

Video explaining the Homestead Strike:

     I believe that although Carnegie and Rockefeller made a few mistakes along the way, even if they ran their businesses perfectly, people would still find an issue somehow with what they were doing.  The nature of some people being in power while others are not, is that some of the people not in power will respond negatively to the people in power's decisions either because of jealousy or for valid reasons.  Power can corrupt people easily, and even some of the best people can make wrong decisions if they abuse the power that they are given.