Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Progressive experts needed a base from which to act and infl uence their
intended audience, so that groups who needed education and guidance
could learn from these authorities and, in a sense, become converted to
the Progressives' preferred standard of morality and behavior. This base
within the state also points to another key feature of Progressive thought:
a distaste for class politics and confl ict. Progressives were not the only
group fi ghting for change in a rapidly industrializing nation. Labor unions
were also striving for change, and the early years of the Progressive move-
ment, the 1890s, were a period of economic depression in the United
States, fi lled with a great deal of class-based antagonism between capital-
ists and unions. Progressives aspired to rise above this confl ict, and
basing expert intervention within the state provided a convenient middle
ground from which to intervene in the myriad social problems created
by industrialization. Despite this stance of class disinterest, Progressives
came mainly from middle- and upper-class backgrounds, and though
their social policies and programs were often meant to alleviate the effects
of poverty and poor working conditions for the working class, Progres-
sives' concerns were often more closely aligned with the interests of
corporate America.
7
Thus, while Progressivism is often considered a
reform movement, Progressives' commitment to transformative change
was suspect, and there are many indications that their proposed reforms
were based on a desire to instead maintain longstanding social and eco-
nomic boundaries.
These basic characteristics of Progressive thought, including some inter-
nal contradictions, are evident in the Country Life movement, an effort
by mostly urban politicians, business interests, and agricultural educators
to improve the quality of country life in the United States during the fi rst
two decades of the twentieth century. The Country Life movement was
closely allied with Progressive ideals and policy agendas of the time, but
it also drew from the long-simmering sense that U.S. agriculture was not
all it could be. Country Life advocates stressed the importance of healthy
farm communities and struck a very progressive, interventionist tone about
possible solutions. In addition, the urban business interests represented in
the movement were concerned about U.S. agriculture's lagging production
and possible cost-of-living increases associated with higher food prices
(Bowers 1974; Danbom 1979).
