The Master of Steel: Andrew Carnegie
Questions:
- Describe Carnegie’s personal “gospel of wealth.” Did he live up to his own ideals? Why do you think he was attracted to the teachings of his “master,” evolutionist Herbert Spencer?
- All his life, Carnegie insisted upon his hatred of aristocratic privilege, yet he lived a life of magnificence in his Scottish castle, and he courted the acquaintance of famous politicians, scholars, and royal personages. How did he justify his actions? Did he see himself as a different sort of aristocrat? Why did he go back to Britain to live?
The Master of Steel: Andrew Carnegie
The paper aims to describe Carnegie’s personal “gospel of wealth,” and whether he lived up to his ideas. It will give reasons why Carnegie was attracted to the teaching of his “master” evolutionist Herbert Spenser. The paper will also will discuss how Carnegie justified his actions of living a magnificence life in his Scottish castle. Why courted the acquaintance of famous politicians, scholars and royal personages, even though all his life he insisted upon his hatred of aristocratic privilege. It will explain whether Carnegie was a different type of aristocrat and why he went back to live in Britain?
Carnegie had his philosophy known as “gospel of wealth” in which he believed in, that the millionaire had a duty to distribute wealth while still alive. He lived up to his idea that wealthy people should give away their well in their life time for he gave away all his money in his lifetime. Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Carnie in his gospel of wealth, he also believed that although the man must have an idol, the accumulation of wealth is the worst kind of worship. He says “no wealth is debasing than the worship of money.” (Heilbroner, 1960) His views about wealth were elaborately expressed in his article he wrote for the North American Review, which had the phrase “The man who dies thus rich dies disgraced.” (Heilbroner, 1960) All his writing portrayed concerns for wealth accumulation. Though in his life he did contrary to the memorandum he wrote at the age of 33 years, later in his life he gave away ninety per cent of his wealth and that action was a gesture of living up to his idea of wealth.
Carnegie was attracted to the teaching of his “master” Herbert Spenser because of his interest and sincere admiration for the power of thought to pursue solutions for queries that never even occurred to them. His concerns to solve social issues of poverty and education came from his family background. In his younger age, his family was involved in activist movements that advocated for the right of working-class, and even his uncle was imprisoned for holding unauthorized meetings. In recollection to the events that took place he wrote “I remember as if it were yesterday, being awakened during the night by a tap at the back window…” (Heilbroner, The Master of Steel: Andrew Carnegie, 2012). He explained the reasons for him being a strong republican were the traumatic events of that night that the news of his uncle’s jailing came. Carnegie’s attraction to Spenser was also due to his love for poetry that also addressed the social issue of the time. He always had the urge to solve social problems.
Carnegie justified his actions of living a magnificent life in his Scottish castle even though hated aristocratic privilege by counting them as freedoms that he was enjoying. When he did philanthropic work such as establishing libraries, he viewed the privileges he earned in return as gestures of gratitude and hope from the cities. He felt entitled to the fame and honours given to him by famous politicians, scholar and royal personages. He boasted (Heilbroner, 1960), “I have fifty-two and Gladstone has only seventeen.”
While comparing himself with aristocrats, Carnegie saw himself as a different sort of aristocrat. He continuously fought privileges as he perceived them as aristocratic vestments that were fading. He viewed himself to be different because even though he lives a lavishing lifestyle, he gave most of his money to philanthropic courses. However, he was no different from the people he criticized because he belonged to the new hierarchies of wealth and power. He told the king of England that democracy was better than monarchy, while on the other hand, he persuaded people to vote his favoured policies after giving them donations. In the foundations he established when calling out for votes he said, “Now everybody vote Aye,” (Heilbroner, The Master of Steel: Andrew Carnegie, 2012) this was an example aristocratic privilege he had.
Carnegie went back to Britain because of the growing desire he had of getting out. Since the beginning of his career, he had his struggles with amassing wealth and so on one side of his character, he wanted out of the wealthy world. Another reason why he went back was that it was his original family home. Even though his father had to move in search of luck in America, his roots were in Scotland. He remembered the reason for their move and the despair of his father, “Andy, I can get nae mair work,” (Heilbroner, The Master of Steel: Andrew Carnegie, 2012) his father told him. Moving to Britain was one of the dreams he had at the age of thirty-three. In his memorandum, he wrote (Heilbroner, 1960), “settle in London and purchase a controlling interest in some newspaper.” Living in Britain was his view of ultimate success.
References
Heilbroner, R. L. (1960, August). Epitaph For The Steel Master. Retrieved from americanheritage.com: https://www.americanheritage.com/epitaph-steel-master
Heilbroner, R. L. (2012, September). The Master of Steel: Andrew Carnegie. Retrieved from wordpress.com: https://staush.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/heilbroner-the-master-of-steel-andrew-carnegie.pdf