Zinn Compare Contrast Analysis

Compare the perspectives of both Zinn and Pageant on the government 's attempt to curb big businesses’ corruption. In comparing, evaluate the commitment government had on curbing big businesses’ corruption.

After the Civil War, the United State of America underwent an industrial revolution. More and more machines were used in factories; steel production rose significantly and helped build railroads and infrastructure; oil started to light streets and homes; and various other innovations increased efficiency and impacted everyone’s lives. In this process, many multimillionaires emerged and owners of large businesses started exploiting their power and bribed the government for favorable legislation in return. This led to more support for government

Zinn believed that the government legislation was unsuccessful; however, the Pageant argued that the legislation, though somewhat ineffective, was a good attempt to curb big businesses’ corruption. According to Zinn, the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 was intended to supervise the railroads; nonetheless, the act was only used to satisfy the public’s support for government regulation of railroads, but it never actually accomplished anything. It only made railroads more popular because the citizens believed that it was more regulated, when in reality, it was not. Moreover, another government legislation, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, was supposed to protect trade and commerce and make monopolies illegal. However, the Court interpreted the Act in a way that made it harmless, and instead used it go against interstate strikes, since they restricted trade, revealing how unsuccessful the government legislation was at curbing businesses’ corruption. On the other hand, according to the Pageant, the Interstate Commerce Act, though not revolutionary, helped stabilize the businesses. The Pageant felt that the Act was still a significant red-letter law, and it did prove to be a good stepping stone for an effective legislation that curbed corruption. Furthermore, the Pageant believed that even though the Sherman Anti-Trust Act had legal loopholes, it still threatened the power of the monopolistic businesses and introduced a revolutionary principle. Unlike the perspective of Zinn, the Pageant argued that both these acts helped start the transformation from private greed to public need, while Zinn strongly believed that the government legislation was not effective at curbing the corruption, highlighting a difference in perspective. Even though it is true that these acts did set examples for more effective legislation, these acts were still not helpful and did not actually tackle the