Response to Progressive Reforms - Essay Example

Response to Progressive Reforms and American Capitalism Drafts Response to Progressive Reforms and American Capitalism Drafts Rough draft 1 The writer of rough draft one notes from the beginning that progressive reform did not restrain the power of American capitalism, but the reform rather altered the strategies that the capitalists used against the Americans. In his argument, the author is of the opinion that the only success that the progressive movement had was that it transformed the working conditions of the working class.

The writer expounds on his point about the Federal Trade Commission Act that was signed by Woodrow Wilson. Rather than outlaw unfair competition in commerce, the Act became a business consolidation agency (59).1 The FTA and Roosevelt’s Square Deal were common in that they showed that the government’s intent was not on reversing the capitalist clock but act as a regulator for business activities in the country. To expound further on the impact that reformers had on American capitalism, the writer should have noted that the efforts by the government to rein in the powers of corporate were not ultimately successful.

The writer assumes that companies such as Standard Oil were only empowered to continue suppressing the working class. Essentially, the government’s effort was just not enough to empower the working class and middle class in ways that the industrialists would not exploit them. The best quote to apply to this draft would be that from Roosevelt’s speech in 1910 where he notes that’ progressivism eased the devastating effects of capitalism on communities and individuals.’2 This quote is essential in noting that progressive reformers may have had an influence on capitalism, but their efforts were not large enough to restrain its power completely.

Rough Draft 2 The writer of rough draft 2 is of the opinion that progressive reformers did restrain the power of American capitalism. According to the writer, the progressive reformers were successful in their quest by demanding better-working conditions, regulating the economy, and fighting for women rights. The writer’s draft captures the socio-economic part of the reform movement but does not expound on the political aspects that the reformers sought to improve. As such, this draft would be improved by noting that progressive reformers had an impact on American politics by changing the policies and principles that the nation was founded on.

Progressive reformers had an impact on domestic policies as they advocated for the protection of the poor and workers from capitalists tendencies through anti-trust laws. Also, progressive reformers called for redistribution of resources and government regulation of commerce and production. Mooney also notes that progressives advocated for government regulation in the employment of women (60).3 The government instituted reforms that enabled poor Americans benefit from the available resources and also regulated aspects regarding commerce and production.

4 As such, the basis of today’s liberalism that permeates in American politics has its roots from progressivism, showing that indeed progressive reformers affected the political sphere as much as the socio-economic aspects. The quote to apply and best answer the question as the writer intended would be that the reforms that the progressives advocated for touched on the social, economic, and political life of Americans. Since capitalism had its effects on these three aspects, progressive reforms had to touch equally on them.

To cap on the writer’s argument, progressive reforms substantively restrained the power of American capitalism. Bibliography Kristen, Swinth. The Square Deal: Theodore Roosevelt and the Themes of Progressive Reform. Accessed September 29, 2015 https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-byera/politics reform /essays /square-deal-Theodore-Roosevelt-and-themes-progressive-reform. Mooney. West, Thomas and William, Schambra. The Progressive movement and the transformations of American politics. The Heritage Foundation, July 2007.