16 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2020
    1. I now ask those who read this circular to help us at once in this work of giving life and happiness to our people — not a starvation dole upon which someone may live in misery from week to week. Before this miserable system of wreckage has destroyed the life germ of respect and culture in our American people let us save what was here, merely by having none too poor and none too rich. The theory of the Share Our Wealth Society is to have enough for all, but not to have one with so much that less than enough remains for the balance of the people.

      I can understand Long's approach to trying to provide a solution to the proposed problem. I can also understand some American's point of view about establishing wealth for yourself for families. It is hard to balance both, but long makes a good point. Citizens should not live in misery from week to week while others are too rich to notice or care.

    2. Here is the whole sum and substance of the share-our-wealth movement: Every family to be furnished by the Government a homestead allowance, free of debt, of not less than one-third the average family wealth of the country, which means, at the lowest, that every family shall have the reasonable comforts of life up to a value of from $5,000 to $6,000. No person to have a fortune of more than 100 to 300 times the average family fortune, which means that the limit to fortunes is between $1,500,000 and $5,000,000, with annual capital levy taxes imposed on all above $1,000,000. The yearly income of every family shall be not less than one-third of the average family income, which means that, according to the estimates of the statisticians of the United States Government and Wall Street, no family’s annual income would be less than from $2,000 to $2,500. No yearly income shall be allowed to any person larger than from 100 to 300 times the size of the average family income, which means; that no person would be allowed to earn in any year more than from $600,000 to $1,800,000, all to be subject to present income-tax laws. To limit or regulate the hours of work to such an extent as to prevent overproduction; the most modern and efficient machinery would be encouraged, so that as much would be produced as possible so as to satisfy all demands of the people, but to also allow the maximum time to the workers for recreation, convenience, education, and luxuries of life. An old-age pension to the persons of 60. To balance agricultural production with what can be consumed according to the laws of

      Provides an action plan for citizens to share the wealth in America.

    3. It is impossible for the United States to preserve itself as a republic or as a democracy when 600 families own more of this Nation’s wealth—in fact, twice as much—as all the balance of the people put together. Ninety-six percent of our people live below the poverty line, while 4 percent own 87 percent of the wealth. America can have enough for all to live in comfort and still permit millionaires to own more than they can ever spend and to have more than they can ever use; but America cannot allow the multimillionaires and the billionaires, a mere handful of them, to own everything unless we are willing to inflict starvation upon 125,000,000 people.

      Provides humanitarians aspect of the imbalance of wealth. States how can America keep its integrity and allow billionaires to exist with hungry men.

    4. Now, we have organized a society, and we call it “Share Our Wealth Society,” a society with the motto “Every Man a King.” Every man a king, so there would be no such thing as a man or woman who did not have the necessities of life, who would not be dependent upon the whims and caprices and ipsi dixit [unproved assertion] of the financial barons for a living. What do we propose by this society? We propose to limit the wealth of big men in the country. There is an average of $15,000 in wealth to every family in America. That is right here today. We do not propose to divide it up equally. We do not propose a division of wealth, but we propose to limit poverty that we will allow to be inflicted upon any man’s family. We will not say we are going to try to guarantee any equality, or $15,000 to a family. No; but we do say that one third of the average is low enough for any one family to hold, that there should be a guarantee of a family wealth of around $5,000; enough for a home, an automobile, a radio, and the ordinary conveniences, and the opportunity to educate their children; a fair share of the income of this land thereafter to that family so there will be no such thing as merely the select to have those things, and so there will be no such thing as a family living in poverty and distress. We have to limit fortunes. Our present plan is that we will allow no one man to own more that $50,000,000. We think that with that limit we will be able to carry out the balance of the program. It may be necessary that we limit it to less than $50,000,000. It may be necessary, in working out of the plans that no man’s fortune would be more than $10,000,000 or $15,000,000. But be that as it may, it will still be more than any one man, or any one man and his children and their children, will be able to spend in their lifetimes; and it is not necessary or reasonable to have wealth piled up beyond that point where we cannot prevent poverty among the masses.

      Provides a response to the proposed issues mentioned in previous paragraph. Agrees that every man should be a king and not long for basic human needs. Proposes made fortunes made should be capped to allows equal playing field for generations to come. This appeals to his listeners and may establish support.

    5. Those are the things we propose to do. “Every Man a King.” Every man to eat when there is something to eat; all to wear something when there is something to wear. That makes us all a sovereign.

      Provides point of view.

    6. Now, what did they mean by that? Did they mean, my friends, to say that all men are created equal and that that meant that any one man was born to inherit $10,000,000,000 and that another child was to be born to inherit nothing? Did that mean, my friends, that someone would come into this world without having had an opportunity, of course, to have hit one lick of work, should be born with more than it and all of its children and children’s children could ever dispose of, but that another one would have to be born into a life of starvation?

      Huey is providing examples that would again, appeal to his audience. Most were impoverished and usually jobless. The first paragraph mentioned that the people Long represented resented the inequality of the American economy. His examples are relatable. I believe he wants to fire up his crowd!

    7. We have a marvelous love for this Government of ours; in fact, it is almost a religion, and it is well that it should be, because we have a splendid form of government and we have a splendid set of laws. We have everything here that we need, except that we have neglected the fundamentals upon which the American Government was principally predicated

      Religion is very popular in the United States. Some laws are heavily influenced by religion. Using the comparison between religion and law speaks to readers and listeners. As mentioned in the earlier, Huey appeals to impoverished citizens of Louisiana. Being a southern state, religion is well versed and the comparison can be understood.

    8. How many of you remember the first thing that the Declaration of Independence said? It said: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that there are certain inalienable rights for the people, and among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;” and it said further, “We hold the view that all men are created equal.”

      Using the excerpt from the Declaration of Independence, was a great way to connect reasoning with his point in the first paragraph. He reflects on how we love out government, but fail to actually follow the laws of the government as written. Providing the actual passage leaves listeners and readers no room for misinterpretation.

    1. This policy has been courageously and insistently advocated for over fifteen years, and has been triumphant for perhaps ten years. As a result of this tender of the palm-beach, what has been the return? In these years there have occurred: The disfranchisement of the Negro The legal creation of a distinct status of civil inferiority for the Negro. The steady withdrawal of aid from institutions for the higher training of the Negro. These movements are not, to be sure, direct results of Mr. Washington’s teachings; but his propaganda has, without a shadow of doubt, helped their speedier accomplishment

      DuBois tries to provide evidence of Washington's plan and policies. He states that within 15 years of following Booker the listed events have taken place. He then states the changes are not all based on the success of Washington, but rather he policies helped speed results along.

    2. In answer to this, it has been claimed that the Negro can survive only through submission. Mr. Washington distinctly asks that black people give up, at least for the present, three things, — First, political power, Second, insistence on civil rights, Third, higher education of Negro youth,– and concentrate all of their energies on industrial education, the accumulation of wealth, and the conciliation of the South.

      DuBois reflects on Washington's request for his race to be patient for social quality and invest their time in industrial education, accumulation of wealth, and decreasing the tension of the south.

    3. W.E.B. DuBois, a leading black intellectual and co-founder of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), agitated against discrimination and authored several noteworthy pieces on the black experience in the United States.

      Statement helps establish DuBois tone and point of view as well.

    4. The wisest among my race understand that the agitation of questions of social equality is the extremest folly, and that progress in the enjoyment of all the privileges that will come to us must be the result of severe and constant struggle rather than of artificial forcing. No race that has anything to contribute to the markets of the world is long in any degree ostracized [sic]. It is important and right that all privileges of the law be ours, but it is vastly more important that we be prepared for the exercises of these privileges.

      Booker understands that change will not come quickly and that his people should just prepare when the time does come.

    5. To those of the white race who look to the incoming of those of foreign birth and strange tongue and habits of the prosperity of the South, were I permitted I would repeat what I say to my own race: “Cast down your bucket where you are.” Cast it down among the eight millions of Negroes whose habits you know, whose fidelity and love you have tested in days when to have proved treacherous meant the ruin of your firesides. Cast down your bucket among these people who have, without strikes and labour wars, tilled your fields, cleared your forests, builded [sic] your railroads and cities, and brought forth treasures from the bowels of the earth, and helped make possible this magnificent representation of the progress of the South.

      Booker also uses the excerpt from his story to influence Caucasians to also "Cast their buckets down to the fellow Negros who has supported them unwillingly with out strikes or wars. He also reminds them that Negros help build the land that flourish and make the south great.

    6. “Cast down your bucket where you are” — cast it down in making friends in every manly way of the people of all races by whom we are surrounded. Cast it down in agriculture, mechanics, in commerce, in domestic service, and in the professions. And in this connection it is well to bear in mind that whatever other sins the South may be called to bear, when it comes to business, pure and simple, it is in the South that the Negro is given a man’s chance in the commercial world, and in nothing is this Exposition more eloquent than in emphasizing this chance.

      Booker uses excerpts from previous story. He request that his race cast down their buckets to make friends in agriculture, mechanics, commerce, domestic service, and other professional services. He explains that the south provides chances for Negros and Negros should use the opportunity regardless.

    7. A ship lost at sea for many days suddenly sighted a friendly vessel. From the mast of the unfortunate vessel was seen a signal, “Water, water; we die of thirst!” The answer from the friendly vessel at once came back, “Cast down your bucket where you are.” A second time the signal, “Water, water; send us water!” ran up from the distressed vessel, and was answered, “Cast down your bucket where you are.” And a third and fourth signal for water was answered, “Cast down your bucket where you are.” The captain of the distressed vessel, at last heading the injunction, cast down his bucket, and it came up full of fresh, sparkling water from the mouth of the Amazon River.

      This short story is an example for Booker. The story outlines how distressed individuals continuous ask for help while help is being offered with each request. Finally, the distressed receives the help and temporarily free of the noted distress. He provides this story to help assist prove point noted in passage.

    8. Booker T. Washington, born enslaved in Virginia in 1856, founded the Tuskegee Institute in Alabama in 1881 and became a leading advocate of African American progress.

      Important fact to understand the tone and influence of passage. Booker was born a slave a became an influential individual for African Americans. The sentence helps readers understand his history and focus in the passage.