William Bryan and the left?

[TommyC1776]

Did William Jennings Bryan start to bring the Democratic Party on the left on some issues?  I think I might've asked this before but I forgot what you all said... but idk if I did.

[PBrunsel]

On the issue on monetary policy he did. Being a silverite was a "left-wing" position then, as McKinley and the "right-wing" supported a Gold-based monetary policy.

Also he took the Democrats to the left on foreign policy. Bryan in 1900 opposed the U.S. “occupation” of the Philippines, Cuba, and Puerto Rico. He wanted all three of those  territories to be independent and paid reparations for damages incurred. This was a very unpopular stand in 1900, so Bryan even lost his home state of Nebraska.

[Dr. Cynic]

Today, I think Bryan's contribution to history was that of the catalyst that forced the Democrats to take more liberal stances to seperate them from the Republicans.

Bryan was also ahead of the curve in his attempt to unite farmers and laborers... Something not done successfully until the New Deal.

Although his record is tainted by almost constant defeat, and his final battle was a victorious embarrassment, Bryan is still an important figure in political history and should be remembered for the sheer force of his personality, which gave mainstream Democrats a new identity.

[pragmatic liberal]

Kind of. Before 1896, the Democrats were just a collection of business and landowning interests that opposed the Republican coalition of business and landowning interests.

Bryan's nomination was the one who first made the party more attentive to the needs of labor and the working classes. Remember that in many respects, the Republicans were the party of the left when they first formed, although they had become much more status quo conservative by the turn of the century. At that point, either party could have become the party of the American left; Bryan's nomination probably had something to do with it becoming the Democrats.

Even so, it's not an easy question to answer with Bryan. His monetarist policies were opposed by large numbers of Democrats and were never implemented. Moreover, while he did push the party towards a more favorable position towards labor, his base of support was radically different than the people who later supported Democrats. He was extremely strong in farming states, the West, among Christians, prohibitionists and rural voters. The Republicans were stronger in the more developed states of the Midwest and the Northeast and in urban areas. In other words, much of Bryan's base was what is now considered the Republicans' base.

Because of that, I think it's easier to point to Wilson, Al Smith, and FDR as really moving the Democratic Party leftward.

[Dr. Cynic]

But remember it was Bryan that was considered "radically liberal" at the time. He was the Democrat that first tried to make it the "Working man's" party.

[Colin]

But remember it was Bryan that was considered "radically liberal" at the time. He was the Democrat that first tried to make it the "Working man's" party.

Well if by "working man's party" you mean the party of farmers in the Great Plains who had a large influence on the Democratic party then yes. However if you mean working man in its normal context Bryan really wasn't that different from the norm of the late 19th century. His main idea was the silver standard which would help farmers in the west since they were usually constantly in debt and the higher inflation of silver would help reduce their debt. However for anyone who is not connected to the farming industry, everyone from factory workers to JP Morgan, would be even worse off from a silver standard than they were under the gold standard.

You really don't get what we see as American liberalism in its modern form until the progressive movement of the early 20th century and the Socialist and labour movements of the late 19th and early 20th century. Even then most of these were concentrated in the Republican Party until the New Deal in the Progressive and late LaFollette wing of the party. It wasn't until Roosevelt's New Deal that the Democrats really become the party of the left though with the laissez-faire policies of Coolidge this somewhat happened during the 20's, when LaFollette was marginalized within the party. However Hoover was a Republican cut much more from the old progressive mold, though not as far left as LaFollette, but you know what happened to him. So basically the New Deal was the first time when the eocnomic positions of the parties shift into their modern form.