Thursday, May 28, 2015

Carnegie's 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?
Posted by at

5 comments:

  1. UnknownMay 28, 2015 at 8:36 AM

    Upon reading his publication, I have a bit more respect for Carnegie than previously. However, I find it hard to keep that respect, because he basically stole his competitors work. Sort of like Apple taking the original Windows tablet design and "improving" it. He speaks of the few holding the power, and he is correct, but even with the charities he helped, he is more than a little bit a hypocrite in his statements. He says it is wrong to simply rely on inheritance and families. I agree, and that to give back and to "share the wealth" so to speak is essential. Money corrupts, and being able to part with it shows true humbleness and character. I respect him for that. Still, the hypocrisy is hard to overcome, and I am left wondering if this publication is his own insight, or perhaps something he was expected to say by society and as thus, constructed to appeal.

    He was not a bad man, by any means. Money corrupts, and the promise of such riches would tempt even the greatest of hearts and minds. If Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had been offered great fortunes for discontinuing his works, you can be sure that although he would have almost certainly declined, the lust for such riches would be at least a brief struggle.

    While not the worst, I still do not support Carnegie's methods. I have respect for how he treated the riches, but as an individual I cannot hold too high of respect for him, due to the hypocrisy and dishonesty he portrays.

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownJune 1, 2015 at 8:08 AM

    I have to agree with Carnegie on some information on wealth, like how if one waits until they die before sharing their wealth, than is it anything more than an object to possess and prize. In this, I respect his giving to charities and the like, and I do have empathy towards Carnegie. I do not, however, approve of some of the ways he obtained his wealth. Lying to the railroads about the safety of his competitor's products to convince the railway company not to buy from his competitors isn't just. He could have used some good competition and go about it entirely different ways.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousJune 1, 2015 at 8:46 AM

    After reading this I have more respect for Carnegie. Even though he corrupted many people, him giving his money to charities gives me a reason to not show disappointment. Yes, Carnegie did give back to many people after receiving his wealth, but the process of becoming rich is what I do not approve of. Him lying to the railroads about his competitors supplies, then overruling the company and selling the same supplies is not a decent way to make money. Using good businessman skills and competition would have more than likely given him the same result. But the way he did it made him lose many followers in the process.

    Samantha Chastain

    ReplyDelete
  4. Trevor LarsonJune 25, 2015 at 10:24 AM

    Carnegie was a very corrupt person. He ruined many peoples lives with his scams. He rose to wealth in a very immoral way. At the same time I respect him as a business man for being able to gain so much wealth so fast

    ReplyDelete
  5. Trevor LarsonJune 25, 2015 at 10:24 AM

    Carnegie was a very corrupt person. He ruined many peoples lives with his scams. He rose to wealth in a very immoral way. At the same time I respect him as a business man for being able to gain so much wealth so fast

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)