Let me jump right in by showing you a photo, getting a little personal here. But that is me when i started this book. You may be can see i dont look quite a young anymore. Im a little harrier. The funny thing is just after i decided to write this book, when i was in graduate school, someone mentioned to me the henry george tree in central park, and i said i did not know that. Five days later and walking through central park, its bigger than monaco, a large piece of land. Eached down to time issue two tie my shoe, and i tied my shoe next to the henry george tree. I dont believe in cosmic signs, but this was a sign of some sort or it. We had a camera with us, which is funny. I have been working on this so long that one of my daughters, who is now 25 years old, used ask me daddy, when are you going to finish that . Have you finished your book on Curious George . Its been a bit of an odyssey, i will not tell you the details except that life is what happens when you make firm plans. My first book is now my fourth book, it is thrilling to have it out. In a strange way, it is a better time for it to have come out. I wouldnt have planned it this way, but its a better time for two of come out because of the relevance of the topic and henry george and these very Big Questions that are dogging our society right now. I mention it, i will get started about this question about living in the second gilded age. I resist the idea that history repeats itself. I think that is too simplistic to i think that mark twain had it right when he said history doesnt repeat itself, but it rhymes. Is not ad gilded age replay of the first, but there is an and go at orion, a reflection of that earlier p[erioeriod. Look at these books that have the new gilded age or second gilded age in the titles were subtitles. They are asking this question about are we in a second gilded age, and what does it mean . Its a depressing thought to think we are back in a second gilded age, but their reasons to be optimistic and talk about in just a moment. Another way i like to talk about henry george, this fastening figure from the 19th century, intimate connection to the present is in a lot of ways, he is the thomas picardy of the late 19th century. He came out with a book for Harvard University press and told 500,000 copies. They would have been pretty psyched if they sold 50,000. Isntually, Thomas Pickett a arguing the same point that henry george did, which is extreme inequality of wealth is harmful growth because it reduces mobility and can lead to political capture by the superrich of our democratic institutions. It isnt just that some people have a lot of stuff that other people have less stuff, it has large applications for our society. Lets talk about who this guy henry george was. He was born in 1839 through middleclass, lower middleclass family, a book manufacturing book salesman. George grew up in a fairly large family, reasonably comfortable. A lot of people because think because he talked about poverty a lot, he must have grown up in poverty. The experienced poverty in his middle years, fairly extreme. Henry george was not a very good student. He left school about the seventhgrade, his parents got fed up with it and steered him into a trade where he would learn the craft of typesetting, which was a great opportunity. So george forged as a typesetter, but he was very ambitious and in the middle agent 50s, he headed out to california. He is a very ambitious guy who hopes to make it big. He is not sure what, but he has this idea that he is destined for something great. California, he is trying things and failing and living hand to mouth and barns. G in barnes on,riencing poverty often he would succeed at something, and then fail. But the printing trade always guaranteed in some kind of work. It also got him in the door in journalism. As he went from the typesetting room to doing a little bit of spot writing and editing, it eventually became a very successful editor in california for a whole bunch of different newspapers. He started his own papers and so forth. His life was very tumultuous. Even that he got married again to have children, he was doing well and writing on top of the world and then crashed, his newspaper would fail. Or he would fail he would sell his newspaper, and then that would fall through. There he is, looking at it in his younger years. At age 25 when he is out on the make in california. The one way i like to encapsulate the bring across this idea is experiencing this kind of rise and fall is emblematic of the boom and bust economy. He has his own boom and bust economy, and he is trying to figure it out. On christmas eve, 1864, he writes in his diary he is acquitted central 19th century man. Quintessential 19th century man. He believes that he tries it enough and makes good decisions, he is guaranteed to succeed. Hes chastising himself being rash, and here is a new years resolution, determined to cultivate habits and determination, industry and energy, feel that im in a bad situation must use my efforts to keep afloat and go ahead. He is saying i just need to work harder. Eventually he will come to the conclusion that people like him or not failing just because a oomph. Little with i spokentry to the landlady and told her im unable to pay the rent. Thats not a good situation to be in. He is shaped by his own personal background, he is also shaped by the troubling duality of the gilded age. The gilded age is a great metaphor, a great term mark twain coins the term. It suggests on the one hand, things look golden, it is a golden age. It is an amazing age of technology and wealth creation, of innovation, of booming cities and so forth. Things look great. On the other hand, if you think about a gilded bracelet, if you scratch off the gold, what is underneath their is a dark piece of iron, not exciting or amory. Ing. Nd enamor it has a golden hue, but beneath the surface is some dan bad, Dangerous Things happening. It is an age of optimism. George will take that duality and capture it in the famous phrase is an age of progress and poverty. Is the great problem of the age. We dont want to get ahead of ourselves. Lets begin with looking at this idea of progress. How optimistic and upbeat people in theing this in late 19th century. Like this. D speeches every president ial address has this kind of talk. Every american citizen wisconsin play with the utmost pride and enthusiasm the growth and expansion of our country, the wonderful thrift and enterprise of our people and the demonstrates of your your your car free government. Saying freeially government, free enterprise, everything is great. A few weeks after he gives us address, the panic sets in, the economy crashes, and it is not so good looking. But his words are really reflective of how people spoke at all kinds of Public Events and president ial addresses and so forth about how great things were in that area. I wont bury you in statistics, but take a look at some of these numbers in the greatest time of american optimization, the gilded age. At the right hand column you can see the bright red numbers of extraordinary expedition growth and manufactured goods output, take steel for example. Its a boutique industry in 1860, by 1900 is the great representative industry for that era. Its really incredible output. Creation, theh United States is going to go from the status as a developing country like brazil is today to the worlds most dominant economy. Thats just in 40 years. Its a pretty astonishing ride. Theres a lot of celebration. The olympic cable atlantic cable is connecting the europe and United States by telegraph. That is a big national celebration, really in some ways equivalent of the landing on the moon. Its an amazing technological breakthrough. It was a huge breakthrough at the time. So was the transcontinental railroad. That was completed in 1869. A tremendous celebration, way out of the middle of nowhere in utah. It is essentially broadcast 19thcentury style by telegraph all across the country. They have a telegraph wire attached to the rail so that when he drives the golden spike, it sends out a signal and people in the public areas in new york and boston, chicago, all erupt in cheers when the continent is spanned. This is the great era of worlds fairs or expeditions, philadelphia centennial is a huge worlds fair with millions and millions of people around the country and around the world. And the showcase event of this and all the other worlds fairs is technology. Theres the generator on the right. The most amazing pieces, powergenerating machinery on the face of the earth. It powered the entire exposition. A big muscle flexing of Americas Technology and ingenuity. And the Brooklyn Bridge, which they would look at the Brooklyn Bridge and its this beautiful bridge with the stone towers and gothic archways. Theres a lot of nostalgia associated with the Brooklyn Bridge. 1883, itit opened in was the most advanced piece of technology, certainly in the United States and arguably in the world. It was a very complex machine, it was a great example of what steel could do. And so millions of people turned out for this unveiling of the Brooklyn Bridge, the president came, the president came, congress can, world a good terrys came up. The speeches, as you can imagine, when people gave their speeches talking about this glorious event, they use the word progress, progress, progress. There is a lot to celebrate in this time period. If you went to the Brooklyn Bridge ceremonies, you wouldnt have walked very far from the Brooklyn Bridge to find poverty. There is no question that there is poverty during this time. But people who are optimistic and every thing is going great and we dont really need to change anything at various responses to poverty. One was a fairly traditional one, you see my people on the right, and irish couple sitting in the ashanti, not terribly bothered by poverty. This is a famous antipoverty reformer. Your attitude was very traditional. She refers to charity as the problem. Poverty is not the problem. What would beng hardworking people away from their hard work and turning them into idle and beggars. Withhings the problem poverty is that there is too much charity. She creates an organization of Charity Organization society which in truth is actually the charity restriction society. She says there are too many soup kitchens, way too much free coal being given out, way too many free groceries. Down, ando cut this see the virtues of hard work. Is socialsh view darwinism and has tremendous influence. Its the concept of assigning a scientific and divine plan to poverty, it had great credence. You hear the words like this coming out of the mouth of John D Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie and many other people. What a blessing to let the unreformed drunkard and his children die, no ambiguity there. Its the way of the world for the poor and the drunkard and ,he gluttons and others to die and thankfully when they die, they wont have any more babies. What benevolence to let the lawless parish and the prudent survive. This comes from the christian advocate, the number one selling fishing publication in the United States. This is mainstream taught by people who are trying to make sense of things. If you believe this and you do not have to worry about poverty. Its going to take care of itself, the poor you shall always have with you. Optimism, butd, thats also a time of tremendous anxiety. You dont have to look for it, some people were both optimistic and anxious at the same time. They want sure which direction the country was heading in. About whatworried appears to be a rise in poverty. Take a look at this image. When i show this image in public sometimes i dont put any captions. I just say what you see here . And what book would you associate this with . ,nvariably someone says dickens and thats exactly what the artist wanted you to think. Thing ton important think about when you think about the late 19th century. The late 19th century what is the core of the american identity. Things of core american identity is that we are not european. It has nothing to do with ethnicity, it has to do with politics and social arrangements. Throughout American History, were constantly worried, and in the 20th century we are worried about communism. Its arecentury, we becoming european . Sliding towards the europeanstyle society where you have kings and queens and landed aristocracy, fixed classes, statesupported churches, endless war and social turmoil . This is an image that is really exposing the kind of anxiety. Notice it is not in the social advocate, its in the harpers weekly, the nations weekly publication. The bestselling one. It shows a wealthy family in a poor family and raises the question about house and havenots and what direction are we heading in . Its in the middle of the previous terrible discussion, and he mentioned the question of the 1890s. To give you a sense of what people are saying, this is a quotation from one of the most important labor leaders in new york city talking to a Congressional Committee that traveled the country in 1883 trying to figure out what was going on. Why is this incessant clash between labor and capital . While the strikes . He seizes the moment and says look at the city and its long rows of tenant barracks. He goes on the people are living in squalor. The kind of squalor we think of when we think of dickens, manchester, liverpool. We are heading in that direction and we had better do something about it. Or we will no longer have a republic we would recognize. Walt whitman, the great voice of american democracy and certainly a man completely enthusiastic about america and the modern world and so forth in 1879 he gives a speech in which he says if the United States, like countries of the old world he is saying we dont want to be them. If the United States are also to grow fast crops of poor, desperate, dissatisfied, nomadic, miserably waged populations, are republican experiment notwithstanding all of its surface successes is at heart an unhealthy failure. Lots of people giving voice to this kind of anxiety about the way the country is going, but whitman gets it in just a couple of words. We seem to be trending european, we seem to be losing our republic. Ae that phrase republican experiment. That phrase was with us as a country and as a society in a political culture right up to the end of the 19th century. At a certain point when we became a global power, we said the experiment is completed, we dont need to worry about it anymore. But it was a freezer when used, the idea that its fragile and unfolding on you to be careful of the republican make adjustments like any good experiment. We have this idea that was born in the late 18th century and it was good as soon as the constitutions ink was dry, we were set. Its not really possible when one looks at the historical record. Another source of anxiety is the rise of big business. Business bigger than anyone could have conceived of. Wereounding fathers billion people, but they couldnt never conceived of a Large Corporation like carnegie steel or standard oil. This is no way they could imagine a single individual could have this much power unelected, undemocratic power in a democracy. Here is one of my favorites. I have many of these great cartoons, this is called the bosses of the senate. Lets take a moment to think how fortunate we are to live in a society when big business is not any sway at all in congress. [laughter] way back in the battle days, you can see the trusts depicted as money banks. They are coming in through the entrance for monopolists. If you look at the far end, you can see the people entering the peoples entry is nailed shut. Who has access . The corporations. Who has no access . Ice. The people. The size differential is important. To show the leaders of the republic, the senators are little kids cowering in front of the power and menace of these great corporations. The knights of labor monthly, this is the mainstream isclass publication that expressed that it is landing on the doorsteps of middleclass and upperclass americans. It is a wideranging anxiety about the nature of the problem in the gilded age. Showing theer one duel thatr dual is taking place. Notice the symbols in. Big businesses depicted as a royalty,knight, european, aristocracy, and it is a golden night. It is also a locomotive, combination of the new technology. If you look really closely, the says the night has subsidize press, meaning they own the newspapers, they own the media. The shield he has his corruption of the legislature. And the little scrawny workingmen has a hammer in his hand that says a strike, meaning the only weapon you have. That is why we have so many strikes. We will like to avoid them. The only way labor gets any attention or relief is to call a strike and most of them end up ailing. The horse he is writing on his label poverty. On the lefthand side you have big business tycoons. If you are alive at the time, you recognizes faces like vanderbilt, jay gould, the titan of wall street. On the righthand side you see us, skinny, emaciated peasants looking like the figures out of a dickens novel. Theres a lot of anxiety here, it is not just poor working people that are making a dollar a day, its widespread anxiety about the direction in which the republic is heading. Rising increased inequality becomes an important theme here. Not just the rise in poverty, but a huge gap between rich and poor that seems to beginning worse. No one is making this up, the data shows its true. The 1 , to use a phrase from today, on 51 of all wealth. , less than half the country owns only 1. 2 . So tremendous skewing of warmth of wealth in the United States. Raises the question about sure, its a free market. What is it sustainable . People ask how does it compare to today. In 2010, this is the latest 35 of all owned wealth, that is rising rapidly, up from 20 in 1979. In the century from the late 19th century to the late 20th century, wealth disparity decreased. After world war ii especially, after the new deal, we were never more equal and we were never were wealthy were never more wealthy. Another aspect on this european theme we have superrich people, a growing mass of poor people, but what are the rich doing . People are not imagining the europeanization of america, because they are actually putting on the heirs of european aristocracy. The woman on the right is the wife of a very powerful businessman, dressed up for costume ball. As marie antoinette. There are people who are going to dress up as the we the 14th and many other members of the european royalty. To say that this is an thinkable to do just 40 years earlier. It was socially unacceptable to mimic european royalty. In a kind of admiring way. It tells you that something has shifted in the gilded age, that the nouveau riche are acting differently, the idea of republican simplicity. Which if you want to see in new york, you can see the fifth avenue mansions. The woman on the right is mrs. Vanderbilt. Her husband has built her a stupendous not a mansion, a palace. There are a whole bunch of palaces like it on fifth avenue. That is how the rich express their wealth. They are eventually going to be called conspicuous consumption. ,f you go down to Gramercy Park that is where the super rich lived in the 1830s and 1840s. Those houses are nice, but they are very plain. Brownstones, ad be a nice wroughtiron fence. The republican simplicity, we dont flaunt it. 50 years later, you flaunt it as much as possible. Costvanderbilt ball would billions of dollars in todays money, it would be covered by the press and touch off a whole competition about who could throw the biggest and most expensive am outrageous display of conspicuous consumption. Just to let you know, if i show you the image on the right, that interior image, many of you would not have thought america, you would have thought versailles, the opulent room furnished with all of the finest things in gold leaf and so forth. That is fifth avenue in new york, the House Warming Party that she threw in march of 1883. Another source of anxiety is rising labor capital conflict. Its not imagination, actually happening on a scale never seen before in American History. Heres the famous haymarket incident or may 4, 1886. One of the most famous incidents. Take a look at some of these numbers. Between 1881 in 1900, there were 37,000 strikes. Up to of American History 1881, i bet there was no more than 3000 strikes. Growth inmonumental strikes. Some of these are the biggest strikes in American History. Strikes in which 100 people are killed in clashes with police and militia and so forth. Strikes in which the entire National Railroad system is shut down. These are big strikes and small strikes. Neighborhood strikes as well. It has people saying what society do we associate with this class clashing violence . Europe. It seemed to be another source of evans that we are losing our republican soul. Why is labor day founded here in new york city in 1882 . Its founded by workers. In 1882, it feels that they are slipping. They are the heart and soul of the republic, these workers and their wages are declining, theres power in the workplace is declining, their position in society seems to be slipping. They say lets have a day. 1882,ick september 5, they stage a parade in a big picnic, about 5000 people show up. Years it happens all across the country, within 10 years is a national holiday. That tells you a lot, this invention of a holiday that something appalling to attention a social problem. Henry george, how to see figure into all of this. Hes a newspaper editor that increasingly identifies as a reformist editor. He is taking on questions of land reform, regulating the railroads, Big Questions out there in california. On the rights of workers and so forth. He is, like a lot of people, really troubled by the dual qualities, so much great stuff is happening with industrial capitalism, but also so many problems seem to be associated with it. Is there a way we can keep the good stuff and get rid of the other stuff . Can we keep the progress and not have so much poverty and so much turmoil . Other people were proposing solutions. Our socialist, big in the birth of the socialist movement. George will make a conscious decision to position himself is not a socialist. He will sally he will say their laissezfaire capitalists that do nothing, let the poor rot and let us run our businesses the way they want to. That is an extremely odd to avoid. He also says socialism is an extremely need to avoid. , he more complicated defined socialism in a couple of different ways. He talks about revolutionary socialism as opposed to gradual socialism. He actually likes gradual socialism. Only has a seven great education, but he reads like mad, he reads economics, he reads adam smith and all the important political economist and they all got it wrong. Hes going to sort this thing out and come up with a diagnosis and a prescription. Writer for arful guy with a marginal education. And this in some ways indicates to us why he become so popular. Are veryhas parts that complicated economic sections, but a lot of it is very beautifully written, almost poetic, very biblical and he cites the bible all the time and other figures. Great vivid examples. Heres the crux of the problem. It is as though an immense wedge were being forced not underneath society, which would lift everybody, that through society. Those who are above the point of separation are elevated, the few. Those who are below are crushed down. He says that is the problem. We have to figure out where the wages coming from and how we can redirect it. The book is 535 pages. It would take is a couple of days to read through it. Evident that is this tendency to any quality cannot go much further without carrying our civilization into the downward path which is so easy to enter and so hard to abandon. He cites history and says what happened to rome . Rome was prosperous and mighty and full of science and learning an incredible progress. And then rome just slid off the cliff. What happened . What happened was people began to monopolized land of the rich got richer and the poor got for in the hit a certain tipping point, where there is no going back. Society just starts to slide, and slide inevitably into the dustbin of history. He says we are on that path, its not too late yet, but we have to be very careful. We cant wait, we have to act immediately. Think about the relevance of this quotation to our times in some ways. It increasesdge and invention marches on, and city still expand, civilization has begun to wane, when in proportion to population, we must build more and more prisons, and more all houses, more and more insane asylum here it. We are building more jails and more poorhouses. Something is clearly not right. He diagnoses the problem in 535 pages as saying that what happens is that people unfortunate positions, lucky people, crafty people are gaining monopolization of not just land, but all key resources. Out and walling off opportunity for the masses and creating a spiral of destructive inequality that the rich literally will get richer, the poor will get for and we lose our republican soul. The solution he comes up with, which is not as important as his diagnosis people loves his diagnosis. It was very vivid, very powerful, very alarming to hear what he had to say about where we were going. But not necessarily so enamored with his single tax. His notion that we need to establish a single tax on land and that will solve everything. The point i made before that is that laissezfaire and small government has been great up to this point. But the Founding Fathers could never imagine an economy like this. He couldnt imagine a National Railroad system, a Steel Company the size of carnegie steel or Petroleum Company the size of standard oil. And that we need to make some small steps towards curbing certain aspects of the economy. His idea is a single tax. Some people liked what henry george had to say in a general way, theyre not necessarily signing on to the single tax but there are a lot of people who like the idea of a single tax. One of the groups we talk about in a moment who like it were workers. The landless people who paid huge amounts of money and rent for these tenants they lived in. This message has resonated on Different Levels for different people. So progress and poverty ridden by a guy with a seven great education who self publish that to start. He cant get anybody to buy it, none of the big publishers will buy it. But he is a printer. And so he says ok, i will borrow money from friends and print an authors edition, self publish it, and then i will send it back to those publishers. And it works. He sends one to appletons come a huge publisher and they say now that you have accepted the plates, lets do it and it will cause a stir. George moved to new york city, because he knows, the San Francisco editor, the chances of having an impact are much smaller. Come to new york where things are happening. Where i is the gateway american ideas go to europe and european ideas come to america. This will be a global phenomenon. And it works out vertically. He gets to new york city at just the right moment when things are beginning to happen. One of those things is the Irish Nationalist Movement is exploding. He is not irish, but his message has great resonance with Irish Catholics who are one of the largest ethnic groups in america. He finds this is a great way to get noticed and get speaking takes and to find his real first audience. He also becomes wellknown in Great Britain as a result. So why does he appeal to workers . When he writes his book, hes thinking of just going to wow everybody. It turns out his first real core group on american workers. One of the main reasons is that he challenges that fundamental or traditional understanding of poverty, the one we saw lowell touching on. The traditional interpretation was its inevitable. You really cant do anything about it. And those who are poor just need to endure it. Just need to grin and bear it and their reward in heaven will be great. That is the oldfashioned way of dealing with it. Nots easy to say that, its easy to hear that when you were the poor person. Here is what one of the workers who became a big henry george follower and a key figure in his rise to influence and also his eventual run for mayor of new york city. He describes it very simply. Reversal of poverty talk about poverty being inevitable and natural. Teaching that poverty is an artificial condition of mans invention. I love this last part. Working men and women learning all this commenced to wrestle with their change. This is why there is so much tumult in the 1880s, especially here in new york city. 1895, 1886, 1887 is often known by historians as the greater people because theres a huge spike in strikes, a lot of labor mobilization, and in 86 and 87, a Huge Campaign of labor party formed all across the country in protest to the big crackdown on labor and labor activism. In new york city in 1886, in the summer of 86, in the wake of strikes and boycotts and sort of in the National Atmosphere after the haymarket bombing in chicago in may of 86, 100 labor activists are arrested. Many of them giving long risen terms. Prison terms. It was easy to do then, they were accused of and tried and convicted of conspiracy. You called a strike or boycott against an employer, in the eyes of the law, you are guilty of conspiring with your fellow workers to destroy the business of another person. You could be put away. This is one of the big strikes that takes place, the streetcars in new york city. Streetcars, the subway system are privately owned and given franchises. They make millions of dollars a year, they bribe theres a great graphic shows the new York City Council had 24 members in 1884. There is a frontpage article in the New York Times that shows the scandal broke out to show that one of the largest recur owners bribed nearly every one of them. 22 of the 24 City Council Members took a bribe from a huge bribe, 25,000, which in 1884 was a lot of money. It says thomas clancy, their district, fled the country. In jail, in jail come out on bail. An incredible list of people. The anger at the streetcar companies, they were terrible employers. There are three big streetcar strikes in the spring of 1886 and a lot of boycotts and other labor action. The results in this big crackdown on labor, a lot of workers are arrested and unions prosecuted. T sort of step is to stage that sort of sets the stage for the liberal response. To reform a Labor Party Like they are doing in europe . Or should we influence the democratic party. And withhold our support from one candidate or another, its called balance of power strategy. Of the reasons they resisted labor partys is they always failed miserably. There were labor parties before this at a labor Party Candidate for mayor would get like 309 votes. Thats it. Wastetes, just a symbolic of time and waste of money, deeply embarrassing. It also divided the Labor Movements. People say this is why we shouldnt do this. Stop trying to form a labor party. All the crackdown and turmoil in the summer of 86 leaves even the most jaded person to say, lets do it. United labor party is formed. They dont just grab any old carpenter bricklayer to run for mayor, they have to have someone who is got some credibility and henry george is perfect. He has a long record of being an advocate of workers rights, of reform. He is also a carling member of the knights of labor, and a member of the typographers union. Sony has this kind of credibility that goes a long way to get people to nominate him. He is nominated in august of 1886 to run for mayor. The odds are, to say the least, pretty stacked against them. Tammany hall is a huge powerful machine, the Republican Party is equally formidable. They have money, and have experience in the workers have none of those things. View ofn optimistic things. Henry george detected as hercules, grabbing the great a symbol ofl monopoly, and octopus showing george grabbing the serpent and the servant is labeled monopoly and trust and so forth. George is ideally going to do in the serpent. That is city hall, New York City Hall in the background. To do that he has to defeat to people. Abraham hewitt, congressman with a great deal of credibility, and actually relatively speaking, he can actually claim to be a friend of the working man. He authored some minor prolabor legislation, he was at least considered a pretty Good Employer in his artworks. He had the ability to claim he was a prolabor candidate. And then theres this guy that people just order to learn about, and man named Theodore Roosevelt who had left new york when his wife and mother died, tragically. He went out into the ranching thing. He had just come back to the city and was looking to get back into politics. The Republican Party grabbed him and made him their candidate. The re member the image of that saidthe horse subsidize press, and the press is 100 on the side or against henry george. This is from puck, capable of publishing prolabor cartoons and antilabor cartoons week after week. But notice this is not necessarily antilabor. Here you have the devil standing behind a worker and saying dont george has these great ideas with this cornucopia in the back dumping out free land and money, hes going to give these things away. The way the powers that be in the late 19th century tried to derail george, you couldnt say workers are stupid, they needed workers votes. They said workers, you are being diluted. Dont be fooled by this wolf in sheeps clothing. There is a lot of this imagery. Heres an image of the statue of liberty, which was unveiled that fall. The statue of liberty is unveiled late october of 86 and the election of 86 takes place a couple of days later. Is a great new symbol. You cant really tell, around the statue of liberty are forces of communism and socialism, forces of anarchism and forces of georges him. They are lumping him in and tarring him with that idea that he is right up there with the anarchists and the violent insurrectionists. Heres another tactic they used, the georges going to mobilize the tramp vote, the poor, and that we will have social chaos. A trap is barging into a middleclass familys house to take food. They are blaming this on henry george. Theressidea is that no more waiting outside for coldly jules, theyre going to barge on in and we will have anarchy. If guys like george are put in power. Heres another cartoon showing abram hewitt, he is the locomotive and Teddy Roosevelt is hanging on their with his lasso, they are about to run over henry george. Prevente is how to progress by henry george. Theres a big media mobilization against him, consistently characterizing george as either moreaded dreamer, or and more as the election approached, and agents of insurrection, of anarchy, if he is elected, blood will flow in the streets of new york and all across the country. This is whatd, but mainline candidates were saying. George has a lot to contend with, as do his supporters. They do what has never been done, they stage an incredible grassroots campaign. He would even campaign. He goes to five dinners of friends, the chamber of commerce types and gives five little speeches. Most of which denounced henry george is a redheaded communist. Giving 5, 10, 8 speeches in front of factories and in front of streetcar stops and so forth. It is called the tail board campaign. It has never been done before, its a real grassroots mobilization because they have nothing to lose. They realize that they can get people to vote, they might not win the direction when the election, but make a difference. George gets 68,000 votes. Its a close finish, and the threeway race, so we will never know if george had run straight up against hewitt, how that might have turned out. But george outpolled the republican, Theodore Roosevelt. The big question about whether george lost the election because of tammany hall ballot box shenanigans. Theres allegations that they stole ballots, that they stuffed ballot boxes. The fact is, we will never know. Hallow that tammany positively could have done it, that they had done it in the past and they were really good at it. But we just dont know if that in fact happened. But it certainly makes a big impression. Of all the labour Party Candidates across the country, george is the one that people are watching. Its the one that Frederick Engels and karl marx are watching and writing letters back and forth saying what is going on, who is this guy george . They dont agree with him, but he seems to be pushing forward our agenda for the overthrow capitalism. Heres a great cartoon in the defeats, but as pretty impressive defeats, looking pretty mighty there. The quotation is basically saying we nearly one against a slivered opposition, they are going to be united against us and we had better have a bigger hammer. Theres a real optimism coming out of the selection among george supporters, among the Labor Movement, not only locally but nationally read there is something happening here. We could easily see a thirdparty go national in a couple of years and run like in europe, a true third party that would be an alternative to the mainstream parties that are in the hands of big business. His is george on even concession speech, and he basically says the future is ours. This is bumper hill. The continentals were driven back, but they symbolically won a victory that resounded around the world. They won a victory that made this republican reality, and think god would live in new york. We want to victory that makes the true victory of the republic certain of our time. I wanted to name the book the true republic of the future, its a recognition that georges saying you have to adjust. Republics are just born in the 1780s and they are done. Its an evolution of the need to get back on track to adjust this modern world of industry and so forth and technology. It, we can have a republic that will endure into the future. You can see that the attitude of the powers that be, republican and democratic parties are terrified by this result. Again, couldnt announce workers because they vote in such huge numbers. You see the same kind of patronizing tone here. Nice job, very impressive, but you have to get rid of that friend of yours. The friend is the classic symbol of anarchy in the background. Meaning henry george, socialism, anarchism, communism, you need to come back to the mainstream. And the mainstream parties do make big adjustments in the wake of the george election. They author prolabor legislation, and many other things that are aimed at bringing the working class back in the democratic party, a little bit in the Republican Party but mostly into the democratic party. So what is the legacy of henry george . At the moment of the election, everybody is thinking this is just the first step. This is going to be a big thing, not just for us, but also for george. There are many people saying he is going to be president of the United States and a couple of years. It just seems like thats the way the world is moving. In 1887, the United Labor Party decides to conduct elections. And it just falls apart. George breaks with them, theres a term in this internal schism, fights with socialists, fights with the workers and so forth. It is something i detail in the latter chapters of the book and try and explain why george seems to have changed his mind about being allied with the Labor Movement so closely as he was in 1886 and in the years before that. A lot of it has to do with that red scare tactics. The writing on the wall was clear that if you want to have any influence in this country your the great upheaval, could not be associated with socialism, con is in, anarchism. I think he basically gives the Labor Movement the heisman. He says im sorry, i cant be associated with this anymore. Its tragedy, because it ends track,ent on that certainly its over. He continues to be influential and write books, his books are still in print to this day. But that aspect of george as leading a social movement, that is over. But his influence is remarkable. He sort of fans from the scene, but the number of people i list this all of the back of the book. There are dozens of people you know very well, jacob rees and ofe adams, a whos who list reformers say in their memoirs and letters to their friends you know what really opened my eyes . Somebody gave me a copy of progress in poverty. Theres an incredible number of people who found this book to be a great eyeopener and it set them on their path in the next generation, the progressive era. Biggestways, thats the aspect of georges legacy, thats why he is worth knowing. I should also point out that the game of monopoly comes from henry george. Not him directly, but one of his followers worked up a game she called the landlords game to demonstrate how easy it is and how pernicious it is for people to monopolize resources. And to squeeze everybody out and put everybody out of business. To make a long story short, the game kicked around for a while and in the 1930s, a guide to again, changed some of the words in the game, sold it to Parker Brothers a bit of an irony that he sells it to big business and Parker Brothers makes it the most famous board game in the world. A great book came out the details that story. Very few people know if you remember in the 1970s, it was an antimonopoly game that came out. The original game was essentially antimonopoly. What else about henry george . Why is important then n. Y. C. Important now why was the important then, and why is he important now . He was clear, understandable, and irrefutable evidence that extreme inequality threatens democracy. Americans, we love terms and ideas, what are our great republican ideals . Freedom, individualism, justice, equality, but we are leery about equality. Its the one that makes us the most nervous. We like the idea, but we dont like some of the things that it tends to suggest. George says extreme inequality will destroy democracy. We need to find ways to limit extreme inequality in order to preserve our democracy. It is that simple. It is an irreversible loss if we lose our democracy, its not going to come back. Point that has term and today. In the wake of Citizens United and the fact that you really need to be a multimultimillionaire if not a billionaire to run for president now, or for congress for that matter, is a real signature problem. The second point about the common good. George essentially reminds us that we live in an age where im brand is on the best seller lists and more americans are calling themselves libertarians that i can or member. As the libertarianism, individualism, is the american way. The fact is part of the american way. Going way, way back. No question that individualism is really central to our political culture and political identity. But so too is the common good. The idea that were all in this together and that we need to and act policies, and do things that attend to the common good. You can be selfish about it. Thecan say as people did in 1830s, there is nothing in the constitution about education. In the 1830s, we began as a country to say you know, Public Education is both a good thing to do, to provide people with room entry education, its also a really smart thing to do, because you have less murderers, less social turmoil and so forth and georges reminding people in the gilded age that individualism is not the only ideal. In it has always existed tension with common conflict with individualism as the common good. We need to remember that. I think that is a really powerful idea that needs to come back into our National Conversation about everything. About health care, but education, about the environment. We get caught up in these other ideas of ideological extremes and we forget that some of these Core Principles are right there in front of us, one of them being the common good. Thirdly, the idea that the governments, dare i say, the government that everybody seems to despise, but as soon as you start to take away the government for people, people get very upset. They like driving on roads, they like having stoplights and they like having Public Schools and Police Officers and so forth keeping public order. But the fact is that the idea that the governments, not simply the free market, is part of the solution is an idea that henry george plays a key role in convincing large numbers of americans that this is in fact the case. That laissezfaire made total sense in 1800. It made total sense in the land of farmers and small shops, it no longer makes sense. If the Founding Fathers were alive, they would agree. He starts the book by saying imagine if we could bring Benjamin Franklin into the late 1870s. What would he think . He would be amazed by the technology, but he would be aghast at the kind of poverty that was there. And he would be in favor of some kind of radical solution. He says strong societies make adjustments. They need to make adjustments. , asof those adjustments is a people, to empower the government to do certain things, to enact certain policies in the name of the common good and in the name of democracy. In some ways i think those three things are the key to understanding what mattered in the 19th century in a fragile moment in the nations history, and why george metals now matters now. Thank you. [applause] edward we do have time for questions. This evening is being filmed by cspan, and so they have asked that if anyone has questions, so this can be part of the program, to come down to the microphone at the end of the walkway. Please, if anybody has any questions, please jump right up, we would love to hear them. Thank you. That was a really good talk. What does henry george have to say, if anything, about immigration . It was a big issue at this time as well. Edward the parallels of the gilded age or not just about the economy and poverty and corporations. It is an era of terminus wrangling about immigration, its also an era in which theres a big movement to deprive poor people of the vote. There are a lot of parallels there. Georges complicated when it comes to immigration. His early days as a reformer and as a writer in california, he wrote some pretty blistering racist things about chinese immigration. But as anyone would tell you, that was mainstream thinking at the time, not to let him off the hook. Historian, of the but he wrote that progressivism stopped with the chinese. You could be progressive and openminded about everything, but you draw the line and say the chinese are accepted. He was pretty harsh about chinese immigration, my not immigration or general. He moved away from that pretty exquisitely. Is ays immigration reflection of the problem of monopoly and the problem of inequality. In some ways, we need to address that both here and abroad. He was a very tolerant person as far as immigration goes. If he wrote anything critical about immigration, it was mostly the fact that people were being forced to migrate as opposed to it being necessarily a social problem for the United States. A twopart question. First is could you explain his point about taxing the land, and essentially, principal . Book, he argues that the American Government is so decentralized that it works against progress of any kind. Think thate seem to there was a moral principle at work here. Structurally, our political contributes to centralization to the wealthy having a significant edge in how the constitution was designed, it makes reform and longstanding inform reform almost impossible. Edward i usually preface my conversations with people by saying im in a story and not an economist. I am i am a historian, not an economist. George never got into the details. It made perfect sense, it didnt need a great explanation. Landid land, especially derives its value not because it is in and of itself valuable, as it is socially greeted wealth. If you own a piece of land, we see this all around in new york city. I was down on wall street this its 55 broad st, and indeed hole in the ground and the person i was walking with i said i have always wondered how much that piece of land is worth. Valuablee, it just as as someplace in the middle of north dakota. They it is socially greeted wealth. Its probably worth 1 billion. Its not generated by the person who owns the land, us, our energy, our creativity, we put into the market and what we take out of the market. That value needs to be taxed for the common good. That was essential principle. If a piece of property is worth 500, you can use it as though it is private property. But at the end of the year, you owe 500. You dont want to pay it, fine, walk away, that farm, workshop will be sold he doesnt say sell. Handed over to another person who is the willing to work and pay that fee. The broad ideas he is talking about here, the specifics of that reform that really matter to most people. Two, our political system. We have a wonderful political system. You got to really important point, which is we do have a system that is very different from much of western europe. One of the great eternal questions of American History is why dont we when are so different from other industrialized societies . Everywhere you look there is a socialist party, a labour party, they are powerful and win elections. Why not in america . Suddenly they are part of a coalition. That doesnt happen in the United States. There are virtues to our system. Laboratories where new ideas can be tried and go national. In terms of structural change, it makes it difficult. I said the alternating im addressing some of your ofcussion, longterm study henry george, which i do not think you addressed adequately. I think your pictures and history were lovely. You did not address the science of political economy, probably the best book on political economy ever written. Of land, labor, to capital, and the returns interests areand really groundbreaking and have not been duplicated. , because it requires everybody jumps on single tax and populism and the basic material that makes henry george important. I think a reinforces on that would be desirable. Edward i think i will take your point that i did not talk about his second book, actually third book. Book,alk about it in my because he has all the nightmare that writers fear. He writes the book and moves to brooklyn and loses the whole manuscript. He has to write the entire book from memory. In our day, we would be worried about a file disappearing from our hard drive or something. The reason i did not talk too much about that particular book on henrycus of my work where the book comes becomes an and important part of the canon. Its not the one that creates is momentum and international profile. , he has awith george lot to say about a lot of different things. What we would call economics today, political economy lost its way. It is in the service of power. It should be and the service of humanity. To say about that in the book and other writings. He secretly wanted to be a professor, but he was never going to get it because he was critical of them. A lot of people that henry george influenced have different critiques of capitalism and inequality. When you look at the welfare state, their justifications, but the actual understanding of inequality and the source of it that henry george developed, im not sure how much that survived, at least from what i understand. Im curious how his ideas about inequality may be influenced reformers in terms of trying to set up specific policies, his attitudes towards welfare and the welfare state in general. Edward he spoke both ways. I would say a couple of things , thate did, brought ideas the state needs to be an instrument of reform. That shes nots the only one but he is the first one, citizenship and republic is not confined to election day. We always thought that we are all equal, right . We are evil because each of us has one vote. George says that is great, but the longer we develop as a society, we are coming to realize that there isnt economic dimension, a material dimension, to citizenship, and without it, your vote is useless. If youre starving and living hand to mouth and not able to feed your family, your vote is worthless. That is a concept that influences broadly a lot of reformers in the progressive era. I have a collection of fdr outes and when he comes in 1941 with the four freedoms, specifying our core freedoms and that tumultuous. , one of them is freedom from want, and that was controversial. He said the exact same thing people that dont have basic material needs met are the stuff of what dictatorships are made. The 1940s,is in when we know what dictatorships are all about. Citizenship in a modern republic a material and economic dimension you can ignore. Regarding his contemporary relevance, there is an argument that there isnt much we can do in the current era of economic quality, globalization of trade, therefore Neither Party has a practical program, therefore we equality, and on injured instead try to build strong public institutions, but not focus so much on economic equality because we cant do anything about it. What do you think george would say about that . Good point. Is a i know exactly what george would say, the simple facts will bring those two things and with george, he is very utopian in the last part of his book, the true republic of the future and he says it explicitly in his writings we will have a socialist society. We will not have a revolutionary socialist society where the landowners have their throats slit, but he sketches this out, in the near future, everybody will have a society where they have full employment and everybody does not have to work that hard. Libraries, parks, reduced learning economic inequality, and social institutions that would benefit everybody. He was a dreamer in that regard. Would you think about that . Believe that that is a rather utopian vision, but keep as a society, as the Founding Fathers did, think about the common good, what do we really care about . Are the fundamental problems and who is to blame . Immigrants, people on welfare are being blamed, when there are other people who could be pointed to. These inequality specifics come from . To very moments in our political history starting in the late 1970s. You can see what the tax rates was in 1955, when we enjoyed reduceble prosperity and , and you canuality see what it was in the 1980s, 1990s, and to thousands, and also demonizing the government as if it were this horrible institution. Is painful, but its the price we pay for living on this earth. I dont know how we change that conversation. It seems a most impossible. I would want to be germanic and say its the difference between success and failure, but if were back in aut ourselves prosperous and generous and successful track as republic, then that is really what needs to take place. It will not happen if we just argue about who is to blame and do nothing or do only the wrong things. My question regards henry george is view of imperialism and empire building . Good question. Let me think on that one for a second. One of the places where he started to get attention was when he joined the irish nationalists movement. Ireland was not an independent country at the time. In many ways, he has harsh things to say about colonialism in. , imperialism, the have and havenots on the global scale. Historically, he talks rather glowingly about the heyday of the Roman Republic and imperialism of that order. There are probably passages in some of his writings, but social problems, a collection of essays i dont know. I thinkt it this way, he saw a host of other programs socialequality, the turmoil, strife, and things of that nature as far more dangerous and immoral men imperialism. Im thinking my way through this answer right in front of you but i think part of it is that his time of the 1870s, 1880s, the United States is acquiring alaska, getting into the imperialist game in a small way, its not until the spanishamerican war that we go all in, so maybe that accounts why he didnt talk about it in u. S. Terms. Thank you so much. Parallels between what you have spoken about and our current time, and i happen to be Bernie Sanders tshirt. Edward Bernie Sanders is certainly in the news. What do you think about, not the media, but the computer, the conversation we are having and his progress to the common people. Edward in terms of Bernie Sanders . As a candidate, and future president of the United States. Edward it is an interesting question. I dont know how to answer. I think his addition to the very healthy, forcing conversations on inequality, that people would rather talk about undocumented immigrants in crazy terms than talking about inequality. And Bernie Sanders certainly fits into a long tradition of this populist tradition that helps move the conversation in up to good direction. I dont know if Bernie Sanders will get nominated or elected, but another interesting thing is he is brave enough to call himself openly a democratic socialist. Its due to our poverty of political imagination that people dont understand exactly what that is. Way before henry george, isricans decided socialism an unadulterated evil and unamerican, yet we have many aspects of socialism that we would not want to live without, so i dont know. Im following Bernie Sanders with great interest, let me put it that way. A near the beginning you made comment about history not repeating, but rhyming. Most your conclusions were about this time and the golden age. Can you talk about the differences between the gilded age and this time . Edward lets see, horses. Lots of things. Im thinking what it was like to live in new york in the 1870s as. 1880s, different erro technology, recreation, politics, so fundamentally different than from what was taking place in the 19th century. In the gilded age, if you wanted to communicate, you published in a newspaper or magazine or gave a lecture, and that was it. Now, its so fragmented. To me, born in 1963, typewriters, rotary phones. I have one foot firmly planted in that world, and yet i have an iphone and use social media and Computer Technology all the time. So i would say that that is one of the greatest differences, and what it means, i dont know, but it is one of the greatest differences. Whereeople say that is the great reform will take place, grassroots reform through peoples iphones and social media. We get people to the polls, thats how we get the hands of big business i dont know. Other people say that people are just too busy looking at their screens, playing games and watching videos that they are not paying attention. They are upset and anger, but not paying attention. I would say that that is ,robably the biggest difference economy, position in the world, until i was fascinated to learn this. Theof the things that founders of the constitution were in agreement with was the military, their bones terry. Military. There were five ways to go to war, declare war, we dont have a military, third step, build a military, when the war, dismantle the military. Its only after world war ii, when we dismantled our military and immediately build it back up with the cold war. Thats another thing, when you look at where our resources go and how we talk about that, another massive difference between then and now. Inequalityritings on during the gilded age, he reconstruction and disenfranchisement of African Americans . Edward he did. George did not have a lot to say about racial inequality, but he spoke and racial inequality terms. When he talked about reconstruction, he talked about it in one way, you want to see why evidence of land is so important, giving People Freedom , citizenship requires material wellbeing, and economic dimension, so when displaced people are granted freedom and no land, guess what happens . Put intogoing to be not slavery, but something close to it, subordination, powerlessness for a long time. Why he said there was a textbook example right under our nose about this very thing. That is the primary thing that he spoke about. Did henry george in any of his books address the role of warfare or war in the political economy of the United States . Edward thats a good question. I need to think on that a little bit. I recall, he talks about warfare anng one of the options of undemocratic government, what governments do to avoid doing with social problems, declare war. He talks about warfare, but i anticipated that. Book79, when he writes his progress and poverty, the American Military is tiny, and the only place it is big is in the west completing the suppression of native americans, and even then not many people relatively speaking. Start to loom large around the 1880s, when we expand our navy and start to build up our maturity military in that regard, emerging as a global power. Thatld say george argued the real sources of power that we have to be worried about are these Large Business tycoons, corporations, because this is not just power, it is unelected, untouchable our, unless we do something in the name of the common good and the name of democracy that we need to rein the power in, not eliminated, nazis control, but set up boundaries and parameters for the behavior. It, not seizete control, but set up boundaries of parameters for the behavior. Thank you. [applause] i think everything in the white house should be the best, the entertainment here. It is good in a world where theres quite enough to divide people that we should cherish the language and emotion that unite us all. Jacqueline kennedys 1000 days his first lady were defined as images of political spouse, young mother, fashion icon, and advocate for the arts. It was ultimately the tragic images of president kennedys assassination and funeral that cemented her in the public mind. Jacqueline kennedy, this sunday night at a clock p. M. Eastern on cspans original series, first ladies of influence and image, examining the public and private lives of the women who fill the position of first lady and their influence on the presidency, from what washington to michelle obama, said it had 00 p. M. Eastern on American History tv on cspan3
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.