Judging from the article I read I see the term Robber Barons as a perfectly used term. Before the Civil War people were more of a locally relying group. In the process of the Civil war taking place you start having these men that see an opportunity to making small businesses into big corporations. Now, I did say that the term Robber Baron was over used, but I do believe there was a rise of Robber Baron’s in that time period. Also, if you look at today’s society there is no over using that term the people in the 19th century were not use to people having great wealth and being over these big corporations, well we are. Robber Barons were seen as the portrayal of these big businessmen, as a warlike bandits, cheating and plundering their way to millions. It was any man with wealth over a big corporation that was considered a Robber Baron. But, that is not was a Robber Baron is! A Robber Baron is a ruthlessly powerful U.S. capitalist or industrialist considered to have become wealthy by exploiting natural resources, corrupting legislators, or other unethical means. In the 19th Century many men took the plunge in what they …show more content…
The only thought they had was making more money and paying less to others. Big businessmen had a destructive effect of the large corporation upon free competition and equal opportunity. An example though that the term Robber Baron may was probably over used is as soon as Carnegie and Rockefeller stepped down to become private citizens they were no longer seen as Robber Barons. An even the article states that anyone over what was considered an actively successful corporation was a Robber Baron. So in other words it does not matter if his intention were of no evil he was still considered a selfish liar that cheated his way to the top. But, I can say that they did a see lot of unfairness and their little family owned businesses were closed due to these over powering