Wall Street And The City Versus The People: The Same Old Cross Of Gold
In 1896 William Jennings Bryan, a liberal populist, won the Democratic nomination for president. He did it largely on the basis of the rousing speech he made at the party’s nominating convention — his famous “Cross Of Gold” speech.
The specific economic issue that speech addressed, the question of whether bimetalism, using silver as well as gold as the backing for our currency, may seem utterly irrelevant to present day economics. Look a little deeper, though, and an eerie similarity comes through.
This is because what Bryan was actually attacking in a larger sense, were government policies of the era that favored the monied interests in Boston and New York in this county (today’s Wall Street) and the monied interests in the world’s main banking center of the time, London (the UK’s present The City).
With this background, here’s is the last few lines of the Cross of gold speech:
“If they [the 1890 equivalents of Wall Street and The City] dare to come out in the open… we shall fight them to the uttermost, having behind us the producing masses of the nation and the world. Having behind us the commercial interests and the laboring interests and all the toiling masses, we shall answer their demands…by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”
In many parts of the world, most notably Europe and increasingly in this country as well, an updated version of this same battle is being played out daily. Bryan lost the election of 1896 to a Wall Street front man named McKinley. But much of Bryan’s version of populism became government policies in later years during what historians have labeled America’s Progressive Era.
Have today’s voters finally broken the code? Have they figured out that being ruled by some nebulous entity known as “the markets” is neither a good thing nor a necessary and inevitable one? That these “markets” are not an incarnation of honorable and productive capitalism, but a horrible aberration masquerading as one?
We can only hope. This particular cross of gold is getting very, very tiresome.
(For information about this author’s new book of political poems described on Kickstarter, click on this link — This God-Awful Political Season (In Verse).
8 Responses to “Wall Street And The City Versus The People: The Same Old Cross Of Gold”
“Have today’s voters finally broken the code? Have they figured out that being ruled by some nebulous entity known as “the markets” is neither a good thing nor a necessary and inevitable one?”
Problem is the voters my have broken the code, but they have not broken the hold that wall street has on both parties. If they had, then we would not see Wall Strret criminals walking free after committing fraud when signing certifications of their financial statements. We would not find Wall Streeters coming and going within a Presidents administration. What we would see is leadership that would bring to trial anyone that had enough evidence against them for fraud.
RP-
There is enough evidence for fraud already. Problem is fraud is no longer illegal after legislation under the Bush administration.
Sarbanes-Oxley became law in 2002.
http://www.soxlaw.com/index.htm
Please provide your legal evidence that supports legislation overturning Sarbanes Oxley and it requirments on corporate leadership.
“This particular cross of gold is getting very, very tiresome.”
An undeservedly civilized understatement.
Considering where we’ve gone since that speech, a cross of gold doesn’t sound so bad.
@RP:
Not suggesting that fraud can’t be prosecuted but Sarbox is going to be very, very hard to get a conviction on. When the criminals write the laws, laws are no longer useful.
Rcountme..”When the criminals write the laws, laws are no longer useful”
RP@11:39..”Problem is the voters my have broken the code, but they have not broken the hold that wall street has on both parties.”
I think we agree. Question now is how the voters can get rid of the likes of Pelosi and Boehner that made a bundle on insider trading as well as any Presidential administration that will not enforce the laws written. Once that occurs, laws become relevant again.
RP-
Where is the evidence that Pelosi and Boehner made a bundle on insider trading?