As stated by John Winthrop in the 17th Century, Americans have committed the cardinal sin of putting their own good ahead of the common good of the nation. However, Americans of different races, classes, and genders have experienced a variety of obstacles in maintaining their own good. Over the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, these obstacles caused conflicting and changing meanings of individualism, community, and freedom according to Foner, Plunkitt, Etulain, Buder, Gilfoyle, Bernstein, Leuchtenburg, Degler, Friedan, and Horwitz.
As stated by Eric Foner, in the 1860s after the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation by President Lincoln, Congress ratified multiple new amendments and added them to the Constitution. First, …show more content…
He wanted to build a town for his workers using paternalism, showing his stance on community. The Pullman Company hired many African American and immigrant workers, but they were given menial service work and were segregated from the town and factories. Conflicting views are shown here because Pullman believed he was giving the workers freedom and community by giving them jobs and a place to live, but to some of the workers, they still felt segregated. In addition, the white workers also faced limitations because they were denied the opportunity to own a house and faced increasing expenses on the house they rented. As Pullman kept raising the rent and creating bigger class differences, he became richer while his workers became poorer. This eventually led to the Pullman Strike, which occurred in the 1890s by the American Railway Union, and was founded by Eugene V. Debs. The workers in the town wanted pay raises and better working conditions in order to increase their autonomy and individuality. After the strike, the Supreme Court decision In Re Debs sided with the industry over the laborers. This shows the conflicting viewpoints of Pullman’s idea of community versus his laborers, and how the laborers refused to follow Pullman’s paternalistic views of community any …show more content…
He claims that he helped struggling working class immigrants for their benefit, but this was a stretch, as his purpose for aiding the poor was so they would vote for him on Election Day. This represents how Plunkittt used “honest graft”, which meant that he acted in his own best interest by taking advantage of political opportunities, but also benefitted the common people. This is different than dishonest graft, which Plunkitt defined as stealing from public treasury. Plunkitt’s use of honest graft in the reading showed how his views were different from the poor. Many poor people supported Plunkitt, and he thought that the working class immigrants were exercising their own independence by voting for him on Election Day, but in reality the immigrants felt obligated to not forget what he had done for them and ultimately vote for him. The poor immigrants did not have a strong tie to their new American community and more easily gave in to vote for Plunkitt, as he clearly had strong views of community by participating in Tammany Hall. Plunkitt considers politics to be a business that should benefit the governors, and that only a few elite should be in charge. In total, his faulty views reject the duty and purpose of the American