Okay, so Hollywood takes a little license in it's productions--nothing new there. As we discussed in class, the slippers were silver in the original story, related to the demand to reintroduce silver into the economy's money supply. The link below is the full story by economic historian Hugh Rockoff regarding the allegory of the Wizard of Oz and its historic cast of characters. From your reading of chapter 15 and the article, how might history have been different if the "Cowardly Lion", William Jennings Bryan had been elected, or had they expanded the money supply as the farmers wanted?
Since this is a "what if" question, have some fun and be creative! You may also want to comment on any aspect that was either interesting, new or surprising in light of any childhood experience you had with the Wizard of Oz.
http://cactus.dixie.edu/green/B_Readings/Hugh%20Rockoff%20%20Wizard%20of%20Oz.pdf
I think the net effect would have been minimal, if anything at all. Some farmers and silver miners would have been happy for a while and some fat cats' feathers would have been ruffled (is that a mixed metaphor?), but, as always happens, the fat cats' interests would have won out and Bryan would have been ousted at the next election, if not sooner, and things would have progressed much as they did. Money = power.
ReplyDeleteCurtis Russell
I dont think a whole ton would have been effected by such a small change, its still about the same basics of the story, regardless of minor details. Money is all it seems to be really about.
ReplyDeleteI think nothing would’ve really changed, if Bryan had been elected, because wealthier individual’s interests would have eventually forced Bryan out of office.
ReplyDelete-Jessica Gruendell
I think if Bryan had won the election. Silver would be the new standard for money. He would try to get rid of the gold. I was very interested that the characters in the Wizard of Oz represent the people and businesses of this time period. I think there will be a struggle of money on which way to go to back the money up with gold or silver or even both anymore. There would be a struggle a power for money control.
ReplyDeleteIf William Jennings Bryan or the "cowardly lion" would have won, the nation would have been drastically changed. Silver would have been a larger impact on today’s economy. Gold would have been still a large factor in the economy but significantly less than it is today. Bryan would not have had the amount of courage to change anything in the government. Therefore rendering his presidency as what is referred to as a lame duck presidency. As money inflated a depression would have insured. The farmers simply could not have produced the amount food required for the hunger stricken people. The dollar amount would inflate so much people would have been in real trouble. That is just the beginning of what I think could have happened.
ReplyDelete-Trevor Smith
I think we would have seen more radical measures. In that the free silver supporters would have pushed for greenbacks or a commodity-backed currency. I think that if Bryan won that; instead of seeing ads featuring Glenn Beck asking me to invest and to send in old unwanted gold to Goldline International. I think we would be seeing silver commercials!
ReplyDeleteI think that for the most part nothing would have been affected too much by that change, except for I think we would be using a little more silver in our currency and exchanges. IT all is just about one thing in that money gets power!
ReplyDeleteI don't think it would have made that much of a difference if Bryan had been elected. Silver might have been used a bit more but not enough to have any drastic effect on our economy.
ReplyDeleteShort term effects would have seemed benefical but I think that rather quickly Bryanomics would have lost credibililty and gold would dominate by the end of the term. It was intersting to see the authors political interpertation of a childrens book. I think I will read it again for more perspective.
ReplyDeleteJohn
I think if Bryan would have one the election, the value of the dollar was going to be higher because the supply of silver was higher than the gold.
ReplyDeleteI think Bryan would have won the election. But the outcome of silver would not have had an effect on the economy in my opinion. And it was a good comparison to the Wizard of Oz.
ReplyDeleteSteven Hanna
Wow! This gives this story an entirely new meaning for me! I am so intrigued by how Baum put this together! Quite clever indeed! I especially enjoyed the character symbolism's. So I get the Scarecrow being the farmer, the Tin Man being the industrialist-working man, but the Cowardly Lion exclusively representing Williams Jennings Bryan? It is my opinion that the rise of the: *The Grangers
ReplyDelete*The Greenback Movement
*The Alliances
*the Populists
fueled the character, the Cowardly Lion. It's somewhat of a contradiction. Today we see a great deal of "Cowardly Lions" rising up amongst us. I'm not trying to say that movements such as the one's listed are necessarily bad; but they do give way to Lions & Cowards. It's my opinion that in one sense you could find both among conservative, independent, republican, or democratic circles. In the end, it is the "working-man" that can get shuffled in the political mire. It seems to have taken place during The Panic of 1893. I believe they were on the right track when seeking monetary diversification. But why go completely to gold or silver? Or to the bimetallic standard? I would like to visit with Professor Andrus on the Table (pages 4-6) in order to gain a greater understanding of the push to support one monetary standard over the other. Thank you for this interesting and enjoyable look at a childhood story! I had no idea all that was hidden inside!
Sandra Maki
In my opinion the net effect wouldn't have been significant. It could of been beneficial and satisfying for some for a short period of time but not long. Bryan would of probably been removed of power. The currency would of changed and silver would of been in bigger use but as I said, no matter if you shift the equation to Bryan being elected, the end result would be the same , money equals power.
ReplyDeleteVeronika Dimitrova
In the short term going to a bimetallic standard may have helped things, but in the long tern I really doubt that it would have much of an effect in the long term. The power that to US wielded may have been able to stabilize the ration in the world but as soon as Bryan left office and somebody who supported the gold standard came back in the bimetallic standard would probably be over.
ReplyDeleteFor what I remember from the book, the descriptions do make sense.
If the cowardly lion would have been in charge, I'm pretty sure they would never have even moved forward on the path. Most if not all leaders of our country have taken some chances to make a success for the U.S.A. It's difficult to predict someones actions, I think he would have done nothing great and would have been removed ASAP.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that he was referred to as a 'cowardly lion' or that he didn't win the election have nothing to do with how he would have done as the President. In section VI the writer discusses the fact that Jennings had read the writings and arguements of his competitors and was far more knowledgeable than many, including the other men running for office. This shows that he would have been willing to listen to any point of view, regardless of his particular stand on the matter. This is a quality that makes leaders great. It is something that King Solomon had. He lived thousands of years ago, and because he utilized this trait, and listened to others, we still talk about him, regardless of how long ago he lived.
ReplyDeleteThe Founding fathers were well read, just as Jennings was, and they created a nation that knew no equal, and still is influential in the world.
Jennings could have been a great president, who would have helped our nation stay strong on all fronts, particularly in the economic field.
-Joseph Barnes
Well, according to the article or at least some comments in the article, the increase in the money supply due to new gold strikes in South Africa made the silver or bimetalic monetary standard obsolete or irrelevant. Bryan himself was apparently moving away from the silver issue after 1896 and in the last quote by him in the article recognized that silver may not be absolutely necessary if circumstances changed. So I don't think that the election of Bryan would have had a big effect on our economy and it's money supply. He may have changed to a bimetalic system which many modern economists would say is OK as long as he did not advocate a 16 to 1 ratio. Maybe 20 or 25 to 1 could have been effective.
ReplyDeleteGary
If Jennings had gotten elected things might have changed in the beginning, but in the end given the status and the money base in the east he would have been defeated in the next election.
ReplyDeletePeople of that time where to entrenched in the gold standard, they were adverse to change especially if it meant that their wealth could be diminished in it's value.
Kudos to Jennings for fighting a good fight but I think in the long run he even started to believe what the oter side had been saying all the long.