Belief in using experts played a role in shaping Roosevelt reforms

Subject : History

Question:

A) In what ways do you think the progressive belief in using experts played a role in shaping Roosevelt’s reforms?

B) Research the coal strike of 1902. Do you think Roosevelt’s intervention was in favor of the strikers or the mine operators?

C) Why did W.E.B. Du Bois oppose Booker T. Washington’s views on racial discrimination?

Expert Verified Solution:

1. The Role of the Progressive Belief in Using Experts in Shaping Roosevelt’s Reforms

Progressives in the early 20th century believed in the importance of using experts and scientific principles to address social, economic, and political issues. This belief played a significant role in shaping President Theodore Roosevelt’s reforms in several ways:

Expertise in Regulatory Reforms: Roosevelt utilized experts to craft policies that were informed by scientific and economic research. For instance, during his administration, experts played a key role in developing the Pure Food and Drug Act (1906) and the Meat Inspection Act (1906). These acts aimed to ensure the safety and quality of consumer products, relying on scientific expertise to establish regulations and standards.

Conservation Efforts: Roosevelt’s conservation policies were heavily influenced by experts like Gifford Pinchot, the first Chief of the United States Forest Service. Pinchot and other experts advocated for the sustainable use of natural resources, leading to the establishment of national parks, forests, and wildlife refuges. This reliance on expert advice helped to shape policies that balanced environmental preservation with economic development.

Labor and Economic Reforms: Roosevelt’s use of experts also extended to economic and labor reforms. For example, he supported the Elkins Act (1903) and the Hepburn Act (1906), which aimed to regulate railroads and prevent monopolistic practices. These reforms were based on thorough research and analysis by economic experts who understood the complexities of the American economy.

By relying on experts, Roosevelt was able to create more informed and effective policies that addressed the needs of a rapidly changing nation. His approach reflected a broader Progressive commitment to using science and expertise to solve social problems.

2. The Coal Strike of 1902: Was Roosevelt’s Intervention in Favor of the Strikers or the Mine Operators?

The Coal Strike of 1902 was a major labor dispute in the United States that highlighted Roosevelt’s balanced approach to industrial relations. During this strike, 150,000 anthracite coal miners in Pennsylvania, organized by the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA), demanded higher wages, shorter working hours, and recognition of their union.

Roosevelt’s intervention was significant because it marked the first time a sitting president took a direct role in mediating a labor dispute:

Neutral Intervention: Roosevelt did not overtly favor either the strikers or the mine operators. Instead, he aimed to mediate a compromise that would prevent a severe coal shortage as winter approached, which would have had devastating effects on the American public.

Establishment of a Commission: Roosevelt called both sides to the White House and pressured them to reach an agreement. He proposed the formation of an independent commission to investigate the miners’ demands and the operators’ grievances. This was a unique approach, as it acknowledged the legitimacy of the workers’ concerns while also respecting the mine owners’ rights.

Outcome: The commission eventually awarded the miners a 10% wage increase and reduced their working hours from 10 to 9 per day but did not grant union recognition. This result demonstrated Roosevelt’s commitment to a balanced and pragmatic resolution, rather than outright support for either side.

Overall, Roosevelt’s intervention can be seen as favoring neither the strikers nor the mine operators exclusively, but rather focusing on the public interest and maintaining order and stability.

3. Why Did W.E.B. Du Bois Oppose Booker T. Washington’s Views on Racial Discrimination?

W.E.B. Du Bois and Booker T. Washington were two prominent African American leaders with differing views on how to address racial discrimination in the United States:

Washington’s Views: Booker T. Washington advocated for a more gradual approach to racial equality. His philosophy, often called the “Atlanta Compromise,” suggested that African Americans should focus on vocational education and economic self-improvement rather than directly challenging segregation and disenfranchisement. Washington believed that by proving their economic value, African Americans would eventually gain the respect and rights they deserved.

Du Bois’s Opposition: W.E.B. Du Bois vehemently opposed Washington’s approach, arguing that it was too accommodating to the existing racial order. Du Bois believed that political rights, civil rights, and higher education were essential for African Americans to achieve true equality. He criticized Washington for encouraging African Americans to accept second-class status and for not demanding immediate and full civil rights.

Advocacy for Immediate Rights: Du Bois argued for the importance of a “Talented Tenth”—a leadership class of educated African Americans who would lead the fight for civil rights and uplift the race. He believed that without access to higher education and political power, African Americans would be unable to achieve true equality. Du Bois’s approach was more confrontational, advocating for direct action and legal challenges to segregation and discrimination.

Du Bois opposed Washington’s views because he felt they were too conciliatory and failed to directly address the systemic nature of racial discrimination. He believed in a more immediate and assertive struggle for civil rights and political power, which he saw as crucial to ending racial inequality.