Does the late 1800s-early 20th century feel a little "quaint" to anyone else?

[Higgins]

I don't mean quaint in a pleasant sense, but the fact that such (what seems to me today to be) trivial matters such as "free silver" and issues of currency and tarriffs and such were of such importance in the 1890s through early 1900s makes the time period seem so quaint and simple and primitive compared to today. I'm no economist, so I don't know what the whole free silver crap even means, but the fact that how we printed our currency was of such great debate at that time, makes the era seem so distant and alien to me.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

"Quaint" is exactly the wrong word: during that time period the United States was going through one the most rapid economic and demographic expansions in history.

[Higgins]

"Quaint" is exactly the wrong word: during that time period the United States was going through one the most rapid economic and demographic expansions in history.

Well, primitive would be another word I would use. Like I said, the fact that free silver, coinage, and such things were pressing issues seems very alien to me. Also, the very imperialist nature of the States, and Manifest Destiny still being the driving force in foreign policy of those times, makes the America of that time seem very foreign to me. Also, the relatively weak Presidency (at least in comparison to the post FDR idea of the office) is another thing which makes the era seem alien to me.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Currency was strongly tied to issues of both region and class, and surely affected the economic fate of the entire nation from time to time. Silver--as well as fiat currency--was, or was seen as, inflationary, benefitting primarily debt-ridden Western farmers. Gold, a deflationary currency, was valued by Eastern business, which desires a strong dollar. These issues were likewise tied to tariffs--another "quaint" issue, I assume--which again divided the nation by region and class.

And of course the time period is foreign to you--things were different! Do we need this type of question asked for every era reasonably removed by both time and attitudes from our own?

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Yeah, debates over currency and the tariff were by no means "trivial;" they arguably had a much more direct and significant impact on the lives of a majority of Americans than some of the things we bicker about today. Cathcon sums up the reasons for this very nicely. In any event, the era of the Homestead Strike, the Panic of 1893, the Haymarket Square Riot, the Pullman Strike, and the Spanish-American War was far from "quaint" or "primitive;" the class tensions and economic upheave of the last two decades of the nineteenth century are perhaps more relevant today than any other period of American history.

Also, Manifest Destiny is an idea of the 1840s, not the 1890s.

[Beet]

Anything before 1945 seems very distant; the invention of the atom bomb created our world.

[Higgins]

Currency was strongly tied to issues of both region and class, and surely affected the economic fate of the entire nation from time to time. Silver--as well as fiat currency--was, or was seen as, inflationary, benefitting primarily debt-ridden Western farmers. Gold, a deflationary currency, was valued by Eastern business, which desires a strong dollar. These issues were likewise tied to tariffs--another "quaint" issue, I assume--which again divided the nation by region and class.

And of course the time period is foreign to you--things were different! Do we need this type of question asked for every era reasonably removed by both time and attitudes from our own?

The 1920s was nearly 100 years ago yet I feel if time traveled back to the '20s, I could understand it rather easily from a socio-political perspective. But just 20 years prior to that feels like truly ancient history.

[Higgins]

Yeah, debates over currency and the tariff were by no means "trivial;" they arguably had a much more direct and significant impact on the lives of a majority of Americans than some of the things we bicker about today. Cathcon sums up the reasons for this very nicely. In any event, the era of the Homestead Strike, the Panic of 1893, the Haymarket Square Riot, the Pullman Strike, and the Spanish-American War was far from "quaint" or "primitive;" the class tensions and economic upheave of the last two decades of the nineteenth century are perhaps more relevant today than any other period of American history.

Also, Manifest Destiny is an idea of the 1840s, not the 1890s.

McKinley called the Spanish-American War's outcome part of our Manifest Destiny, so at the very least, that way of thinking was still within our foreign policy as late as 1900.

[Unapologetic Chinaperson]

No. As others mentioned, the issues of this period still resonate with us today. Not everything was about "free silver."

You had some of the worst inequality the US had yet to see, only it for such inequality to be replicated in the 21st century. As such, that time period saw the birth of American progressivism and American socialism, both of which are going through a revival today. Immigration from Europe and Asia then was a big issue, just like immigration from Latin America and Asia is now. Whether the US should pursue imperialism then presaged the debate on whether the US should pursue neo-imperialism now.

"Quaint" is exactly the wrong word: during that time period the United States was going through one the most rapid economic and demographic expansions in history.

True. If you want to see America of 1900, just see China of 2017. Dirty and developing, but with a rise that shocked the world and a dream of changing that world.

[This is Eharding, guys]

The silver v. gold issue was one of wealth redistribution from the cities to the wheatfields. The cities tended to win that battle, except under Wilson's administration. Tariffs were a crucial regional economic issue until the Eisenhower era. There were other issues (e.g., immigration, the income tax, antitrust, lynching, the budget deficit, the military) as well. It's very interesting to read McKinley's first inaugural address today.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/mckin1.asp

[darklordoftech]

I've always found it fascinating how vicious the culture war between Catholics and puritanical, xenophobic Protestants was from 1850-1928. Prohibition was as divisive as abortion and guns today. It's interesting how specific issues change, but they have parallels to current issues.