Gilded Age Vs Progressive Era

The Gilded Age and the Progressive Era were 50 years in which a large wealth gap between the rich and poor increased dramatically and needed a solution, similar to our nation’s situation today. Big corporations in major cities were able to take advantage of a surplus of those in the working class and technological advancements, leading to a select few holding the majority of fortune. There were many resolutions to this gap in wealth coming from powerful people, like Andrew Carnegie, William Sumner, and progressive reformers like Alva Belmont, yet even with successes by the progressive trade unionists and socialists, the end result was inadequate. Due to corruption within the political system and disconnect between those trying to help and those
They believed that improving the wealth gap required better working conditions, higher incomes, and respect for the workers. They made “key tactical interventions in the strike of 1909 by adding middle class reformers to the picket line so that scabs and the police could not use violent tactics to prevent the strike due to the publicity that would arouse the public’s sympathy for the cause.” This was a turning point in the strike, showing that the bosses of big business not only had to deal with its workers, but also those with money who had the power to make change happen. These women also tried to make the middle-class feel guilty for what was happening to them. When the factory girls were striking, women with money like Alva Belmont also “seized the chance to turn the labor uprising into a broader feminist revolt.” She believed that if women had the right to vote, women would not be mistreated and income equality could help this gap in wealth. With the necessary money to keep strikes afloat, these wealthy women were able to improve the effectiveness of strikes. “The sudden flowering of support from progressive women allowed the strikers to resist extraordinary pressures that began to build against them.” These middle- and upper-class women felt they owed those in the working class by directly
The socialist newspaper Call labeled their paper: “HOW LONG WILL THE WORKERS PERMIT THEMSELVES TO BE BURNED AS WELL AS ENSLAVED IN THEIR SHOPS?” in their discontent in the lack of development following the fire. Fraud in the political system was a big cause of this problem, with the political machine known as Tammany Hall controlling New York. While Charles Murphy allowed for new fire safety laws in the two years following the tragedy, he “continued to court the ‘money interests.’” This made it hard for reformers like Frances Perkins to pass the fifty-four-hour bill in 1912. Although reform was happening, it was not happening at the rate that the unionists and socialists wanted. The hope of prosecuting those responsible for the fire was muted by those associated with Tammany Hall. Judge Crain, the magistrate in the case to prosecute the Triangle factory owners, “was ‘one of the aristocratic stalwarts of Tammany Hall.’” The justice made important decisions on what he allowed in the case in favor of the owners and “issued jury instructions that essentially made it impossible to convict the owners.” The fact that the owners weren’t convicted shows others in charge of factories that they can get away with unsafe conditions as long as they have the political machine on their side. The unsettling control of government by those in Tammany Hall meant that reform