<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Roosevelt&#8217;s The New Nationalism Speech &#8211; Christian Cherau</title>
	<atom:link href="http://benschmidt.org/HIST1234/?feed=rss2&#038;p=454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://benschmidt.org/HIST1234/?p=454</link>
	<description>HIST 1234 at Northeastern University, Fall 2014</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 04:26:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.18</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick O'Neil</title>
		<link>http://benschmidt.org/HIST1234/?p=454#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Patrick O'Neil]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:38:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benschmidt.org/HIST1234/?p=454#comment-27</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Identifying TR as A&amp;B in Sumner&#039;s essay is a great analogy. TR spends a lot of the speech talking about the welfare of all Americans, but that doesn&#039;t happen in a vacuum. C needs to give something to D, but he won&#039;t do so without being coerced. 

I&#039;m not sure that TR&#039;s rhetoric about capital and labor would have been better-received if it came two decades earlier. The early 1900&#039;s were still an era of widespread union fervor and power,  and as capital became more important, union membership was even more advantageous, and in some cases necessary, for workers. By 1910, labor would have been seen as a necessary counterbalance to the established power of capital, and TR&#039;s point would be even more powerful.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Identifying TR as A&amp;B in Sumner&#8217;s essay is a great analogy. TR spends a lot of the speech talking about the welfare of all Americans, but that doesn&#8217;t happen in a vacuum. C needs to give something to D, but he won&#8217;t do so without being coerced. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure that TR&#8217;s rhetoric about capital and labor would have been better-received if it came two decades earlier. The early 1900&#8217;s were still an era of widespread union fervor and power,  and as capital became more important, union membership was even more advantageous, and in some cases necessary, for workers. By 1910, labor would have been seen as a necessary counterbalance to the established power of capital, and TR&#8217;s point would be even more powerful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
