[Marxism] Michael Perelman on Andrew Carnegie book (from PEN-L)

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

> I have just finished an interesting new book: Nasaw, David. 2007. Andrew 
> Carnegie
> (New York: Penguin), which caused me a bit of embarrassment.
> 
> In Railroading Economics, I emphasized Andrew Carnegie's role in paying 
> careful
> attention to the production process of steel in contrast to they banker-like
> perspective of the Morgan crew, which took over Carnegie Steel.  This Nasaw's 
> story
> is not entirely different, but the emphasis certainly is.  Nasaw totally 
> explains
> that Carnegie ignored any concern with the minutia of the production process, 
> but
> merely demanded reductions in cost.
> 
> The most important cost for Carnegie was labor.  He plowed back about 75% of 
> the
> company's earnings into reinvestment, often in labor saving technologies.  
> But even
> more important was the crushing of labor, especially the Homestead strike, 
> which
> allowed him to increase the working day to 12 hours.  This victory probably 
> also
> greased the skids for the acceptance of new technology.
> 
> The book is a magnificent production.  Nasaw had access to material that 
> nobody else
> did.
> 
> Nasaw shows how important influence was in accumulating for Carnegie fortune.
> Carnegie reminds me of Balzac, who wrote:
> 
> "At the bottom of every great fortune... , there's always some crime -- a 
> crime
> overlooked because it's been carried out respectably."
> 
> In the case of Carnegie, no great crime seems to have been responsible.  
> Instead,
> Carnegie left a trail of innumerable crimes.  Homestead was the most notable, 
> but it
> had a number of less bloody precedents in his own company.  In his earlier 
> career as
> a bond salesman, Carnegie engaged in an almost habitual dishonesty along with
> continual shady dealings, such as kickbacks.
> 
> Carnegie was a master of accumulating political influence in the US and in 
> Britain.
> 
> The most fascinating part of the book was Carnegie's philosophy.  An early 
> age, he
> anticipated the basic idea of Herbert Spencer, who later became his idol.  He 
> decided
> he would accumulate great wealth, then rather than hoarding it, he would 
> distribute
> it for noble causes.
> 
> Smashing the workers at Homestead was a moral act for him.  The workers would 
> not
> know what to do with any extra money they earned.  He wrote:
> 
> "... there are higher uses for surplus wealth than adding  petty sums to the 
> earnings
> of the masses.  Trifling sums given to each every week or month -- and the 
> sums would
> be trifling indeed -- would be frittered away, nine times out of 10, in 
> things which
> pertain to the body and not to the spirit; upon richer food and  drink, better
> clothing, more extravagant living, which are beneficial neither too rich or 
> poor."
> 
> Libraries, museums, and concert halls would contribute more to human welfare.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Michael Perelman
> Economics Department
> California State University
> Chico, CA 95929
> 
> Tel. 530-898-5321
> E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
> michaelperelman.wordpress.com

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism