Ray Ginger put it in two absolutely brilliant books–Altgeld’s America and The Age of Excess–even the Republicans thought that they wanted to live in Abe Lincoln’s America, where when you are young you split wood into fence rails and go to law school at night and when you are middle-aged you become a lawyer and get rich and when you are old you enter politics and save the union and free the slaves. They wanted to live in that kind of world, of upward mobility, in which opportunity is wide open even to the son of a penniless and not very successful rural farmer.
By 1890 they discovered that they weren’t living in Abe Lincoln’s America at all.
As a result in the First Gilded Age you had two political movements. The Democratic, left, farmer, labor, semi-socialist, Populist Movement on the one hand. The mixed bipartisan Democratic and Republican, urban, Progressive Movement on the other. Both of them were desperately eager to change America, to repair the flaws of the Gilded Age, to reduce inequality, to make the economy work for everybody–or at least for every white guy–and even to grant women the vote.
They wanted this so much so that someone like Republican President Theodore Roosevelt–as aggressively a partisan an animal as you would ever see–would place his loyalty to the Republican cause second to his loyalty to his progressive principles for American reform. He was happy denouncing Democrats as communist anarchists, but equally happy denouncing rich republicans as “malefactors of great wealth” who desperately needed to be controlled.
Theodore Roosevelt wove his political career out of being head of the Republican party and head of the Progressive Movement. And at the end non-Progressive Republican President Taft simply offended him one time too many, and Roosevelt decided to blow up the Republican Party and hand the presidency to Woodrow Wilson from 1912-1920.
That was the history of America from 1880-1920 or so. After 1920 you do get a Republican Gilded Age resurgence under Harding, Coolidge, Hoover–very corrupt, especially under Harding. But by the late 1920s Progressivism is rising again–even Hoover is running as a Progressive. Then when the Great Depression comes Franklin Roosevelt comes in and he takes the entire progressive agenda off the shelf and promptly begins to implement it.
We haven’t had anything like that over the past thirty years.
And here I’m simply going to throw up my hands and say that I don’t know why.
It’s in a great mystery to me. As an economic historian I like to look at political economic patterns from the past and to say we should learn from these and generalize them and take them as providing some insight into the present and the future. In general, we economic historians are extraordinarily successful. There are lots of lessons to be drawn from the first age of globalization for the second. There are lots of lessons to be drawn from the high school-ization of America for the college-ization of America and for education elsewhere in the world. There are lots and lots of lessons to be drawn from the Great Depression for today.
But the political economy of Gilded Ages? Why the first Gilded age produces a Populist and a Progressive reaction and the second, so far, does not? There I throw up my hands and say that my economic historian training betrays me. I have no clue as to what is going on here.
I'm an Economics Ph.D. student at UC Berkeley focusing on public finance topics at the intersection of labor economics and macroeconomics. My current research focus is on the interaction of corporate taxation, firm location decisions, and the location and scale of economic activity. You can follow me on twitter @omzidar.
Tags2012 Alan Auerbach Baumol's cost Brad Delong College Corporate Taxes debt Dylan Matthews Economic Policy Education Emmanuel Saez Enrico Moretti Europe Finance Fiscal Cliff Fiscal Policy Government Government Spending Great Recession Growth Hamilton Project Healthcare Healthcare Costs Housing inequality Investment Jobs Labor larry summers Laura Tyson Local Labor Markets Middle Class Monetary Policy NYTimes Paul Krugman Politics Productivity Raj Chetty Spending States Stimulus Tax Cuts for Whom Taxes Tax Reform Wages
- Taxation and the Allocation of Talent
- On Keeping Your Powder Dry: Fiscal Foundations of Financial and Price Stability
- Why Politicians Love Getting on TV: Words Rewarded Just as Much as Results
- One thing I learned in Hanover this weekend – UK Housing Subsidies Edition
- Intergenerational Occupational Mobility in Great Britain and the United States since 1850
- Burying Supply-Side Once and for All by Neera Tanden
- Will Housing Save the U.S. Economy? by Amir Sufi
- Betsey Stevenson appointed to CEA
- RT @JaminSpeer: @omzidar @WSJ I saw Jesse present this paper a few weeks ago at NBER. This goes against my prior. Very interesting. 3 hours ago
- Taxation and the Allocation of Talent wp.me/p2otxR-o1 6 hours ago
- RT @ryanavent: Important to remember that fiscal effects of immigration are basically meaningless next to massive welfare gain to migrants … 12 hours ago
- On Keeping Your Powder Dry: Fiscal Foundations of Financial and Price Stability wp.me/p2otxR-nZ 13 hours ago
- RT @qz: A startup’s plan to make US health care cheaper: Tell people what it costs qz.com/95516 1 day ago