The Populist Response to Industrial America: Midwestern Populist Thought

by Norman Pollack

Populism―progressive or retrogressive force? Posing this question, Norman Pollack draws on Populist manuscripts and newspapers, the best evidence for the movement's response to industrialism. In the words of farmers and workers, Populism springs to life, ceasing to be an abstraction. The author concludes that the movement, while primarily agrarian, had significant intellectual and labor support; accepting industrialization, it opposed capitalistic industrialism as alienating and degrading the individual. In this intellectual history―based on data most of which has been ignored―the author takes a first step toward a more comprehensive analysis of industrial America.

Genres: History

176 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1962

Reviews

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good extension of Hicks' work, pushing back on the protofascist nonsense cooked up by Hofstadter and the Consensus School (unfortunately achieved by both authors largely ignoring the herrenvolk nature of American liberalism writ large). Conveniently sidesteps the racist nature of parts of the Populist Party, though, by focusing on the Midwest over the South, but the same mistake is made by radical historians when chronicling the Socialist Party itself. The section on the SLP and De Leon's views on Populism and the People's Party is telling: De Leon, alongside the Populist Marxist Demarest, clearly saw the radical potential within Populism, but in typical De Leon fashion he excoriated it rather than attempting to harness it.

[William Kirk · Rating 2 out of 5]

Really didn’t like this book. Pollack is so arrogant and intellectually snobby in his writing and dismissal of other historians, while contributing very little of his own. He is also a very boring writer!

He is so preoccupied with “evidence” that he essentially regurgitates the mess of primary source material from the 1890s that is completely divorced from historical context, often confidently misinterpreting things and at times even arguing the opposite of what the evidence is presenting! Like his rejection that the Pops believed in an economic and political conspiracy, he would quote the most conspiratorial snippet of a speech or newspaper, and then just deny it!

I reckon he was trying to make a name for himself by rejecting the likes of Richard Hofstader’s claims (whose work I think he has also misunderstood)

The only positive I could see were his comparisons between Marxism and Populism, which helped consolidate my understanding of the Pops as an anticapitalist, but not necessarily socialist or Marxist movement.

So glad I’m finally finished this one, was a real slog.

[Kyra]

don't mind me - updating with the honors books. Norman Pollack is so so silly! Read the Hicks/Salutos if you want an actually good book on the topic.