"There's an honest graft, and I'm an example of how it works. I might sum up the whole thing by sayin': "I seen my opportunities and I took 'em."
Just let me explain by examples. My party's in power in the city, and it's goin' to undertake a lot of public improvements. Well, I'm tipped off, say, that they're going to lay out a new park at a certain place.
I see my opportunity and I take it. I go to that place and I buy up all the land I can in the neighborhood. Then the board of this or that makes its plan public, and there is a rush to get my land, which nobody cared particular for before.
Ain't it perfectly honest to charge a good price and make a profit on my investment and foresight? Of course, it is. Well, that's honest graft.
Or, supposin' it's a new bridge they're goin' to build. I get tipped off and I buy as much property as I can that has to be taken for approaches. I sell at my own price later on and drop some more money in the bank.
Wouldn't you? It's just like lookin' ahead in Wall Street or in the coffee or cotton market. It's honest graft, and I'm lookin' for it every day in the year. I will tell you frankly that I've got a good lot of it, too.
I'll tell you of one case. They were goin' to fix up a big park, no matter where. I got on to it, and went lookin' about for land in that neighborhood.
I could get nothin' at a bargain but a big piece of swamp, but I took it fast enough and held on to it. What turned out was just what I counted on. They couldn't make the park complete without Plunkitt's swamp, and they had to pay a good price for it. Anything dishonest in that?
Up in the watershed I made some money, too. I bought up several bits of land there some years ago and made a pretty good guess that they would be bought up for water purposes later by the city.
Somehow, I always guessed about right, and shouldn' I enjoy the profit of my foresight? It was rather amusin' when the condemnation commissioners came along and found piece after piece of the land in the name of George Plunkitt of the Fifteenth Assembly District, New York City. They wondered how I knew just what to buy. The answer is--I seen my opportunity and I took it. I haven't confined myself to land; anything that pays is in my line. "
- George Washington Plunkit
Consider machine politics in American cities. Why did they come about and for what reasons did they become extinct? Were they overall a good or bad thing?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think they were overall a good thing because it provided utilities for the people and gave them a good reason to buy land because it's useful. They came about in order to make profit and benefit the public, but it wasn't for solely one's own interests, but for the interests of the state. Practicing "honest graft" is kind of like displaying patriotism towards the area you invest in.
ReplyDeleteMachine Politics came to be successful from votes of various immigrant populations as they provided jobs, welfare benefits, and other social benefits. They were overall beneficial because they provided reform and social welfare where in some cases was impossible via the government and society. They eventually became extinct I believe because of better social reform nationwide, varying demographics from immigrant workers, and some corruption in some aspects.
ReplyDeleteLike Billy said, machine politics came to be successful because of the multitude of immigrants seeking help and support in settling in America. This system was beneficial to both the immigrants and the political leaders. The immigrants gained jobs, welfare, and decent housing, while the political "bosses" gained votes. However, this method of gaining votes was viewed as unfair and corrupt by many Americans. The muckrakers of this time sought to uncover corruptions in government and made this machine system known to the public. After that, the system slowly declined as more and more people started to become informed and dissaproved of it. Overall, I think the system was corrupt and wrong and it's a good thing it became extinct.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to what Catherine and Billy said, machine politics were created to mainly aid the poor factory workers and immigrants. Machine politicians were beneficial to the cities and the poor by building parks, providing food and money, helping them secure jobs, etc. However, like what Priyanka said, the political bosses did all of this to gain support and votes from the poor so that they could stay in power. They eventually became extinct when the the political bosses were busted by presidents such as Roosevelt and were exposed by the muckrakers. The most infamous political boss was William M. "Boss" Tweed who controlled Tammany Hall for some time. Overall, despite the positive actions of political machines, they were corrupt forms of dictatorships that eventually only benefited the political bosses themselves.
ReplyDelete- Stephanie Chiu
Like the previous posts, machine politics arose due to the increase in immigrants seeking support in America. I agree with Priyanka that the method of votes created a corrupt system. I believe that the political machines were ultimately bad for American politics as it destroyed the concept of a fair and free election, a cornerstone in democratic ideals, because of the corruption that took place in politics.
ReplyDelete-David Wu
I meant to mention this in my previous post but I accidentally forgot.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there were some benefits of machine politics, such as motivating people to turn out for election day, the negative effects or machine politics are far worse. This is because people were no longer voting based on their own autonomy but based on someone else's opinion. The long term impact is that politics becomes unrepresentative of people, and divides people into even more factions. For example, the republican party split into the Stalwarts and Half-breeds. In addition, the Crédit Mobilier scandal shows how political machines were able to control government polices. This corruption ultimately is worse than the increased votes because it didn't matter what the people truly voted about because political machines were still able to control how the government acted
-David Wu