Kevin Moxon
Hist 147
Wealth against Commonwealth
1. What is the author arguing?
The author is arguing against the trend in American economic
development that has put all the resources, means of production and transport,
and financing in the hands of the few.
2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional
quality), and ethos (the writer’s
perceived character) with their argument?
Mr. Lloyd argues that technical developments have achieved a
state where all of mankind could be easily fed, clothed, and cared for, but
that the fruits of all this progress are being gathered up by a very few,
extremely wealthy individuals. He points out that “liberty produces wealth, and
wealth destroys us” and that Capitalism, as it is, is an unsustainable as well
as a grossly inequitable system.
Mr. Lloyd appeals his audience’s emotions by talking of the
so-called ‘Robber Barons’ as “Corporate Caesars”. He paints a lurid picture of
barbarians “come from above. Our great money-makers have sprung in one
generation in to seats of power kings do not know”. He finally invokes the name
of the Pharaohs “bred in counting rooms as they were in palaces”.
Mr. Lloyd seems to have read something of Karl Marx. His
argument bears many hallmarks of communism. His references to guilds and
slavery say much of his opinion of contemporary socioeconomic trends. He argues
that much of what goes on out of sight of public scrutiny is against the law,
implying a need for organic change to the systems regulating industry and finance.
3. What is the historical
significance/relevance of this document?
This document came out at a time (1894) when the industrial
build up around the Civil War had so altered the American way of life, from the
pre-war mostly agrarian society to a fast growing industrial one. The
self-sufficiency of the small farmer was giving way to the dependency
relationship of industrial labor. As Mr. Lloyd saw it, the process was out of
control and unfair to the vast majority of American’s who must do the labor that
sustained the few who controlled the country’s wealth.
4. Do you find the author’s argument
convincing? Why or why not?
Considering the fact that many of the issues Mr. Lloyd was
addressing are still being debated, sometimes with great heat today, I find the
author’s argument very compelling. While common Americans have many more
protections from predatory employment practices, environmental degradation, and
work place safety, the erosion of things like collective bargaining rights
shows how delicate the balance between ‘wealth and commonwealth’ is.
