Andrew Carnegie A Robber Baron Analysis

Andrew Carnegie was a “robber baron”, in his personal relationships and the way he treated his workers, who did beneficial things under the guise of being a “captain of industry” to try to overshadow the awful things he did. He was conflicted his entire life between the two great influences of his childhood. His father and grandmother represented the true ideals of democracy, of the rights of the people while his mother was materialistic and determined to reach the top economically through whatever means necessary. This internal conflict is apparent throughout Carnegie’s entire life although he leans further towards the views of his mother. His mentor, Thomas Scott, taught him the skills he would later use to become the undisputed king of …show more content…
The empathy that he had shown to his workers was destroyed once his business was threatened. Pinkerton guards were called to end the strike without any objection from Carnegie and three detectives and nine workers were dead or dying. Carnegie’s facade as an ally of the common man was demolished as his factories returned back to their former states. With his victory, the unions were effectively destroyed and the workers were powerless to bargain for increased wages, allowing his costs to remain low and have the potential to go even lower. Driving his costs lower and lower, Carnegie astonished his competitors and by 1900, Carnegie Steel was producing more steel than the entire steel industry of Great Britain. Productivity had tripled in the 20 years since the end of the unions, but without the ability to bargain for increased wages, the unskilled workers’ wages were stagnant with little hope for an increase. By spying on his workers, a practice he learned from Scott, he was able to remain well-informed on his workers and more specifically on any troublesome workers who would be organizers of resistance to his