Contradictions About Carnegie example essay topic

Andrew Carnegie was a man of contradiction. Throughout his life his actions and beliefs were often contradictory. A lot of this contradiction had to do with his economic and social philosophy which was that the rich were meant to be rich and the poor were meant to be poor. This was what he believed as an adult and it was how he ran his business empire.

However, he had been the poorest of the poor when he was a kid, but then he became the richest man in the world at one point. So Carnegie contradicts himself because he was both poor and rich. Other contradictions were when he treated the poor somewhat equally to the rich, like building libraries where they could learn. However, these contradictions about Carnegie can be explained somewhat by focusing on and understanding some of the contradictory influences that Carnegie had throughout his life. Carnegie grew up in Dunfermline, Scotland during the industrial revolution. Both his father and his uncle were leaders who pushed for the rights of ordinary people and they gave speeches and held private meetings.

Another influence was the family's religion, Calvinism. Calvinism says that there should be justice for everyone and that everyone should essentially be equal in terms of what they have and their status. So his family and his religion influenced him that people should be equal. Heilbroner also explains that Carnegie was influenced a lot by poetry, especially the poet Burns.

A lot of his poetry is about egalitarianism, so similar to Calvinism and his father's political ideas. But Carnegie also saw that the industrial revolution put both his parents out of jobs and threw his family into terrible poverty. He experienced and probably became sensitive to the miseries of the world. But in contrast, his family's poverty and what he began to learn about some of the new technology of the industrial revolution also became the driving force behind his overpowering urge to accumulate wealth. Then later, people like Herbert Spencer told him that people should not be equal, the separation between rich and poor was natural, and so was the pursuit of wealth. Because of his contradictory influences Carnegie did a lot of contradictory things.

For example, he gave his money away at the same time he was trying to make more from his businesses, or he would criticize the way other wealthy people lived their lives. It seems that Carnegie sometimes felt guilty about his own wealth. Carnegie liked Herbert Spencer because Spencer justified Carnegie's pursuit of wealth. He said that there was nothing wrong with competing and getting to the top. It was the natural way. It was also good for all society because the progress that the rich made was also making it better for everyone.

But Carnegie hated most rich people because of what they did with their money and he let people know about it. He once wrote an article entitled "The Gospel of Wealth" in which he preached that the rich had to live modestly and give away all of their money. He said, "the man who dies thus rich dies disgraced". This article was Carnegie sounding off against the wealthy for their selfishness. But it is also ironic that he would say this because we see later in his life that he becomes the epitome of what he despised because he lived very lavishly.

He contradicted this ideal. He was a hypocrite and even people during his time viewed him this way. However, he did give away most of his money, so he lived up to the second ideal. Carnegie thought he was a different kind of aristocrat because he had made the money himself in America through democracy as opposed to the King of England who was just given it.

But he still lived like an aristocrat by moving back to a castle in Britain and having everyone do everything for him like a king. So this was another contradiction. He was the aristocrat he hated. He probably moved back to Britain because there were already a lot of people there living like aristocrats and he could blend in. In America he would stick out more. He tried to justify his extravagant lifestyle by giving away 90 percent of his fortune before he died.

This seems hypocritical because maybe he was just giving the money away to overcoat his greed. Donating the libraries was maybe just done so people would not criticize his extravagant lifestyle. He also liked it when people made a big deal about his giving money away and gave him awards. He did not do it just for the people, he wanted praise. But again, he did at least give away all his money and it did help people. This is another contradiction about Carnegie's actions.

Carnegie was like a lot of wealthy people of his time and also like a lot of people today in failing to see the contrast between the good money could do and the way it was made. The urge to accumulate wealth became more important and powerful then anything and the rich either did not see or did not care about the negative impact it had on other people. But those who saw the negative impact of how it was made, including Carnegie, tried to justified it by saying that the rich were meant to be rich and the poor were meant to be poor. The wealthy people of the Gilded Age saw the poor as pawns in their own lives.

The poor to them had no stature and were meant to be poor. Since they were meant to be poor then their poor working conditions and having no money were natural. The wealthy of the Gilded Age also felt that economic progress was more important than the condition of the poor. The failure of Carnegie reflects the failure of America in the Gilded Age because Carnegie was a normal American of his time. Many people put in his position at that time would have made the same decisions as Carnegie. Nearly all rich people of his time were guilty of the same things.

The major flaw of men like Carnegie in the Gilded Age was greed. Everyone wanted to be something bigger and wanted more money. But there were also contributing factors outside of their control. The industrial revolution provided the ability for some people to make a lot of money quickly. The way people manufactured and did business completely changed quickly giving people the opportunity to make money. In addition, the government had little controls over business.

The business owners could do what they wanted including treating the workers bad. The failure of Carnegie was that they could not control the urge to accumulate wealth even when they saw a lot of people being hurt. But maybe it was too much to expect. There were a lot of riches available, an urge for wealth (greed), plus no controls on what could be done.

With those factors the same thing would probably happen at any time. If Carnegie had not done it someone else would have. The consequences of the "Gospel of Wealth" philosophy was that economically, the wealth of America was concentrated with a few people. A very few people had significant influence over the American economy. Also, not only did the few wealthy control the economy but they also used this power to also get control of government and the laws. Andrew Carnegie is an interesting individual to study because of the contradictions in his actions and beliefs.

It is interesting to identify and understand the contradictory influences throughout his life that caused these actions and beliefs. He was sometimes able to balance them successfully, but sometimes he was not.