Joseph Makhluf

Professor Devine

History 573

28 August 2008

Postel, Charles. The Populist Vision. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.

The late nineteenth century saw sweeping changes in industry, science, and religion, and the Populist movement that emerged provided a means of responding to new challenges and opportunities. Those that made up the Populist coalition – “farmers, wage earners, and middle-class activists” – worked diligently to challenge the status quo (4). Contrary to popular opinion, the Populists did not seek the overthrow of the existing government but advocated sweeping changes to the political and economic landscape in order to make the newly emerging order more inclusive. Charles Postel’s The Populist Vision is divided into nine chapters and seeks to revise Populist historiography by portraying Populists as proponents of the logic of modernity while attempting “to fashion and alternative modernity suitable to their own interests” (4). Postel disagrees with historians such as Richard Hofstadter and Lawrence Goodwyn, who, in the wake of World War II, described the movement as a revolt against “progress and commercial change” (7). Rather, he argues, the Populists embraced the idea of progress and sought to harness emerging developments in science and technology for their own benefit (4).

In Chapter 1: Push and Energy, Postel describes the founding of the Farmers Alliance which made up one of the largest groups within the Populist movement. Frederick Jackson Turner’s “Frontier Thesis” stated that American civilization had its beginnings in the Western frontier. The Farmers’ Alliance originated in Texas during the 1870s as white settlers moved into the region in increasing numbers. In Texas, the alliances in Cross Timbers were in a “‘fence cutting war’” as corporate ranchers fenced off grazing land which closed access to water and farmsteads (27). The conflict centered on claims to private property rights. Meanwhile, the expansion of railroads increased settlement in much of the south and beyond. By 1886, the Texas Alliance found itself in shambles, and Charles W. Macune took steps to build the Alliance into a “formidable business organization, national in scope and claiming a pivotal position within American commerce” (33). Macune believed that farmers needed organization because they represented a commercial interest like any other. The new Alliance would be founded on business principles, which included the exclusion of African Americans.

Chapter 2: Knowledge and Power explores the importance Populists placed in education as a necessary tool for the advancement of progress in rural America. Low cost freight rates and postage allowed an “influx” of books, magazines, and newspapers that allowed farmers to be exposed to “the latest in social thought” (47). The Populists held that if they could close the gap in education in the rural areas, they could then be placed on an equal footing in “commerce, technology, and social standing” (49). Leonidas Polk, President of the Farmers’ Alliance, emphasized science-based education. In North Carolina, Polk campaigned for an agricultural college in order to educate farmers on “scientific farming.”Meanwhile, the rural reform press provided a means of exposing farmers to the latest in science and technology (54). The Farmers Alliance also looked toward institutions of higher education to include programs that would educate future agriculturalists (54).

Chapter 3: A Better Woman describes the debate within the Farmers’ Alliance on the status of women, and what their proper role in modern society would be. In the rural areas of America, unlike in the cities, there was less “separation of work and home”(71). Postel argues that rural reformers believed that political equality was essential for women’s progress. The subject of suffrage was only one component of a much broader discussion of women’s rights, as economic issues took a much more prominent role (71). Rural reformers focused in particular on women’s “capacity for gainful employment,” which would allow them to escape the fields (71). Postel further argues that new ideas regarding evolution and racial theory allowed them to believe that a more independent woman would provide equally “bright and strong” offspring (72). Women such as Marion Todd and Bettie Gay held important roles within the Farmers’ Alliance, where they exemplified the modern women and advocated for suffrage and other issues important to women of their times.

Chapter 4: A Farmers’ Trust discusses how members of the Farmers’ Alliance responded to the new commercial system. Farmers blamed the hard times they experienced on middleman and the increasing influence of the railroads, banks, and other monopolies (103). In order for farmers to build a trust, they had to be able to hold product off the markets to stimulate a rise in prices. In California, the idea of controlling the agricultural market looked promising “where fruit and other products were shielded from global competition.” Meanwhile, the Farmers’ Alliance looked towards corporate models of how they could build a trust that would provide a means of controlling the market. In places like North Carolina and Georgia, farmers sought to plant crops that would yield higher profit and found ways to “bring order to the fruit and vegetable industry” (107). In California, Marion Cannon sought to turn the state into an agricultural empire by harnessing new technologies. Cooperative growers formed the leadership of both the Farmers’ Alliance and the People’s Party in the state (111). California growers looked for new ways to control the entire market, forming cooperatives such as the California Fruit Growers’ Exchange in 1893.

Chapter 5: Business Politics, describes the role that Populists thought the government should have in modern society. The Populists were suspicious of the party politics that dominated both the Democrats and Republicans. Charles Macune held that “government functions ‘should be reduced to business terms, placed upon a business basis and attended to by business agents” (139-140). Others such as William Peffer argued that government was an agent of the people and the Populists must “project political power” (140). Once farmers realized the importance of holding political power, the People’s Party was born out of the industrial conferences in Cincinnati in 1891 and St. Louis in 1892. The national post office provided “a model for the Populist vision of government as business,” and provided a means of communication with rural districts (143). According to Postel, the post office also provided an important example for Populists who looked towards nationalizing monopolies such as the railroad (147). The Populists also sought to reform the banking and monetary system which they argued were “premodern obstacles to progress” (151).

Chapter 6: Race Progress recounts the Populist views on issues of race and notes that many Populists believed that segregation actually encouraged progress for both blacks and whites. The People’s Party faced the problem of having to “attract” the black vote while not “undermining its support among white farmers” (173). John B. Rayner of Texas, an African American reformer, sought “racial improvement” by looking towards discoveries in social hygiene (173-174). Black members of the Populist movement focused on immediate issues of concern while white Populists advocated for more long-term political and economic reforms (174). As Postel concludes, “separation of the races formed an essential part of the New South doctrine of progressive development”(175). Postel goes on to argue that the Farmers’ Alliance proved instrumental in the creation of Jim Crow laws in the 1890s.

Chapter 7: Confederation discusses the fusion of the labor movements with the rural Populists, as the People’s Party increasingly looked towards urban areas for support. Samuel Gompers of the AFL warned against Populism, arguing that farmers had different interests than the wage laborer (207-208). Still, both laborers and farmers sought ways to challenge the “corporate organizational power” (209). The Knights of Labor “looked to the business politics of the farmer as the path to reform” (219). In the wake of the Pullman strike of 1894, Eugene Debs proved a “martyr” for the reform movement (221). Though Debs “distrusted” the Populist movement, he supported “cooperation” with the Farmers’ Alliance (222). The Omaha Platform declared its support for a union of the labor forces within the United States (223).

Chapter 8: Shrine of Science explores how progress in science led many to wonder what role religion would play in modern society. Postel maintains that Darwinian theory and the harnessing of electricity led to the “‘scientific age’” (245). He notes that Populists sought to adapt their religious thinking to the “modern scientific age” (245). The Scopes-Monkey Trial of 1925 provides an example of how during this period emerging scientific thought ran in conflict with traditional religious views. The idea of Social Christianity stated that through political and economic reform, Populists sought to advance “God’s evolutionary law for the progress of humanity” (249). Populists such as Thomas Nugent believed that Christ’s efforts at “human betterment had inspired the ideals of a Christian socialism” (254). Populists also criticized the churches for ignoring the plight of the poor as well as for not taking a more active role in the betterment of society. Meanwhile, Populists such as Robert Ingersoll, preached the religion of science to audiences throughout rural America. Spiritualists within the Populist rank advocated a “scientific outlook” (261). Spiritualism won support among women who found the churches to be obstacles to women’s progress. According to Postel, science shaped Populists’ “religious understanding where they could use new “physical and biological principles” to respond to the challenges of modern society.

Finally, Chapter 9: Conclusion suggests the reasons why Populism failed and describes the adoption of Populist ideals in the Progressivism of the early twentieth century. Postel argues that Populism’s failure at the level of presidential politics is a major reason for the movement’s decline. Though Populist goals were not unrealistic, Postel argues that, “the Populists were outdone in this respect by academic and corporate elites who convinced themselves of numerous absurdities” (271). Populist victories in state and national elections too often depended on fusion with the two major political parties, and the movement failed to capture support in the Northeast. Middle-of-the-road Populists held that fusion would “rob the People’s party of its purpose” which undoubtedly led to disagreement within the Populist movement on how to achieve political victories. Even after Populism’s decline, however, there was a tremendous wave of reform in the United States as seen in the passage of women’s suffrage and prohibition. Most importantly, with the demise of the Populists, “urban and academic elites claimed the mantle of leadership in rural modernization” (280).