The Progressive Movement

The Progressive Movement that became symbolic of the early twentieth century should be seen as having the elements of a nation without a state. However immature the middle class of the Victorian Age may have been in political, social, and economic control, they held a common value of making their cultural environment better. Progressives were united as a class that was stuck in the middle between the laboring majority and the wealthy few, who were fighting battles over the rightful owner of the tools of commerce. They used the rallying cry of scientific management and education as their language of reform. Indeed, the middle class that stepped out of the conservatism of the Victorian Age and into the Progressive Era ventured forward united in their destination, but divided in their means to the end.

The main tool of the Progressive movement was something that Mann discusses in his book, “The Sources of Social Power.” Mann speaks of nations and classes as having a distinct advantage over formerly dominant political and economic forces, catching them by surprise during periods of relative prosperity. The Progressives, largely middle class educated individuals, used a time of confidence and apparent wealth to gather steam for smaller reforms and gain foothold into Gilded Age culture. When local organizations of reformers took the torch of change to their city and county legislators, they were able to place themselves in a position of being indispensable. Their impassioned discourse, educated reasoning, and logical reform plans took advantage of a stagnant upper class restless to get rid of the onus of political responsibility.

These local reformers were successful in taking this responsibility and translating their scientific approach to reforms in issues of elections, city development, taxation, and education, among the thousands of other local issues. The reason they were able to cast such a wide net over municipalities and change so many areas of minutiae were the army of specialists that the Progressive movement relied upon. These specialists opened the door to a trend in bureaucracies and businesses at all levels, the increasing reliance on specialists for precise data and analysis. No longer were politicians and businessmen to lay their ear to the ground and rely upon public opinion to sway their activities; specialists provided information from the front lines and processed it for their employers. This trend has continued throughout the twentieth century, increasing administration by administration to the thicket of bureaucracy and specialization that we see today.

Women were the leaders of this vanguard of reform. Women’s colleges and co-educational facilities started to become readily available at the end of the nineteenth century, allowing women the opportunity to become more independent and learn about many things outside the domestic sphere. The reason that women like Jane Addams came to the fore during this period was that many were economically better off than in the past, but more importantly, the tedium of home life and of ineffectual husbands combined the empathy and passion of these women with their newfound intellectual freedom.

This being said, it is quite apparent that after women were enfranchised and began to gain positions of moderate power, the meteoric rise of the female reformer was tempered by the realities of politics. After a brief decade of decadence and sexual freedom, economic depression and warfare and pockmarked the American political culture for several decades. The promise of women becoming more active in politics was cooled by the Cold War, Middle East crises, and the machismo of international leaders. As an American public, we still see the effects of this on the role of women in society. While an ever growing quantity of women are gaining positions of power, their power is still checked by dominant male forces using structures that are decades old. Unfortunately, the reforms of Progressivism have not translated to an equality that is proportional to population numbers at present.

Progressive Era reforms still remain with the American political culture, but the spirit of the reforms has left the American public. Similar to Gilded Age politics, a few major corporations have cornered the market in their industries. Politicians are entwined inseparably with special interests and their donors, and the public sees this as a reason to stay away from politics in general and the voting booths specifically. The similarities between the Gilded Age and the Internet Age are telling of what may happen politically and socially in the future. It is possible that the middle class, stuck forever between the chasm of rich and poor, will use their finances and education to change their political environment. Voters may return to the voting booths and to their local governments for answers to ever present questions of responsibility and results. Regardless of what happens, the Progressive Era will not be matched in the intensity of the purpose, the extent of practice, or the confidence in results.