Digital List Price: | CDN$ 21.99 |
Kindle Price: | CDN$ 13.19 Save CDN$ 8.80 (40%) |
includes free international wireless delivery via Amazon Whispernet |

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet or computer – no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera, scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
The Robber Barons: The Classic Account of the Influential Capitalists Who Transformed America's Future (Harvest Book) Kindle Edition
Customers reported quality issues in this eBook. This eBook has: Typos
. The publisher has been notified to correct these issues. Quality issues reported |
Amazon Price | New from | Used from |
“The best, the liveliest and most illuminating” account of Rockefeller, Morgan, and the other men who seized American economic power after the Civil War (The New Republic).
John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, Cornelius Vanderbilt, Andrew Carnegie, E. H. Harriman, Jay Gould, Henry Clay Frick . . . their names carry a powerful historical ring, still echoing today in the countless institutions that are part of their legacy, from universities to museums to banks. But who were the people behind the legends, and how did they rise to their positions of vast wealth and influence in the latter half of the nineteenth century?
The Robber Barons is a classic work on the financiers and industrialists of the Gilded Age, who shaped their own era as well as the future of the United States—“not a mere series of biographies but a genuine history” (The New York Times Book Review).
John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, Cornelius Vanderbilt, Andrew Carnegie, E. H. Harriman, Jay Gould, Henry Clay Frick . . . their names carry a powerful historical ring, still echoing today in the countless institutions that are part of their legacy, from universities to museums to banks. But who were the people behind the legends, and how did they rise to their positions of vast wealth and influence in the latter half of the nineteenth century?
The Robber Barons is a classic work on the financiers and industrialists of the Gilded Age, who shaped their own era as well as the future of the United States—“not a mere series of biographies but a genuine history” (The New York Times Book Review).
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherMariner Books
- Publication dateOct. 27 2015
- File size2242 KB
Product description
About the Author
Matthew Josephson (1899-1978) was an American journalist known for his work in American economic history and French literature. In addition to being a regular contributor to The New Republic, The New Yorker, and The Nation, he is the author of numerous books, including The Money Lords, The Great Finance Capitalists, 1925-1950, and Life Among the Surrealists.
--This text refers to the paperback edition.Product details
- ASIN : B016HC1H3S
- Publisher : Mariner Books; 1st edition (Oct. 27 2015)
- Language : English
- File size : 2242 KB
- Text-to-Speech : Enabled
- Screen Reader : Supported
- Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
- X-Ray : Enabled
- Word Wise : Enabled
- Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
- Print length : 486 pages
- Best Sellers Rank: #148,860 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Customer reviews
4.3 out of 5 stars
4.3 out of 5
195 global ratings
How are ratings calculated?
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzes reviews to verify trustworthiness.
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from Canada
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Reviewed in Canada 🇨🇦 on February 4, 2020
Report abuse
Verified Purchase
Originally published in the early 1930s, this book remains a classic account of the period; it is also a very fine read, and still relevant to today's Wall Street. That said, I should perhaps have deducted one star for the plethora of typos.
One person found this helpful
Helpful
Reviewed in Canada 🇨🇦 on January 29, 2002
If you're going to write history, the best thing to do is be objective and balanced. But if you can't do that, the second best thing is to broadcast your bias loud and clear.
By going the second route, this book provides not only a historical account of the robber barons, but a pretty clear picture of the Marxist perspective on them in 1934.
It's interesting at times to watch Josephson struggle for balance. On the one hand, he seems to almost admire the big capitalists when they're creating collectives by crushing the little capitalists. On the other hand, when they start tromping on the workers, they're clearly Very Naughty. And he addresses the rampant religious fervor of most of the barons, but never really figures out how to make it fit the picture other than by suggesting they're just enormously hypocritical.
The story of railroad, steel and banking essentially taking over the country is here, nicely organized so that we can follow relevant threads without getting to caught up in chronology. Josephson sometimes lets his billowing prose and sweeping characterizations overwhelm detail and fact; his style is definitely not for all tastes.
Ultimately it's a double history, not only of the Robber Barons themselves, but of the singular vantage point of the mid-thirties. Yes, Josephson is not the most objective of chroniclers, but his bias is so clearly stated and in evidence that it is easy to filter out, and his point of view becomes an interesting subject of this study in its own right.
By going the second route, this book provides not only a historical account of the robber barons, but a pretty clear picture of the Marxist perspective on them in 1934.
It's interesting at times to watch Josephson struggle for balance. On the one hand, he seems to almost admire the big capitalists when they're creating collectives by crushing the little capitalists. On the other hand, when they start tromping on the workers, they're clearly Very Naughty. And he addresses the rampant religious fervor of most of the barons, but never really figures out how to make it fit the picture other than by suggesting they're just enormously hypocritical.
The story of railroad, steel and banking essentially taking over the country is here, nicely organized so that we can follow relevant threads without getting to caught up in chronology. Josephson sometimes lets his billowing prose and sweeping characterizations overwhelm detail and fact; his style is definitely not for all tastes.
Ultimately it's a double history, not only of the Robber Barons themselves, but of the singular vantage point of the mid-thirties. Yes, Josephson is not the most objective of chroniclers, but his bias is so clearly stated and in evidence that it is easy to filter out, and his point of view becomes an interesting subject of this study in its own right.
2 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Reviewed in Canada 🇨🇦 on September 25, 2002
Originally published at the height of the Depression, Matthew Josephson's "The Robber Barons" marks the climax of academic and popular hostility toward the early industrialists. The fact that it still remains in print is testament to its profound influence and popularity. Indeed, the title of the book resurrected what was then an old and rather obscure term and elevated it into the mainstream American lexicon.
Reading the book today, the reader will discover that many of Josephson's observations - such as his favorable comments on the then contemporary economic programs of Stalinist Russia - are risible in hindsight. But he does provide a broad overview of the major players and thoroughly chronicles the great evils attributed to them and their practices - at least from the perspective of a 1930s socialist.
In short, this book, if it must be read at all, should be read to gain insight into the early twentieth century liberal bias toward capitalism and its embrace of a socialist future, rather than a legitimate economic history of the United States in the post bellum period, which it most definitely is not.
Reading the book today, the reader will discover that many of Josephson's observations - such as his favorable comments on the then contemporary economic programs of Stalinist Russia - are risible in hindsight. But he does provide a broad overview of the major players and thoroughly chronicles the great evils attributed to them and their practices - at least from the perspective of a 1930s socialist.
In short, this book, if it must be read at all, should be read to gain insight into the early twentieth century liberal bias toward capitalism and its embrace of a socialist future, rather than a legitimate economic history of the United States in the post bellum period, which it most definitely is not.
3 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Reviewed in Canada 🇨🇦 on June 19, 2004
I disagree entirely with John G. Pitts' review.
The great trusts of the turn of the twentieth century were not the result of successful competition. Indeed, as Gabriel Kolko demonstrated in The Triumph of Conservatism, the trusts were getting their butts kicked by smaller and more competitive firms. It was only the anti-competitive regulations of the so-called "Progressive" Era that enabled most industries to stabilize on an oligopoly pattern.
But the trusts, unsuccessful as they were, would not have been feasible even to attempt, without the massive state capitalist intervention of the Gilded Age. Without railroad subsidies and other "internal improvements" of the nineteenth century, which enabled the largest producers to externalize their distribution costs on the public, production on a national scale would not have even been cost-effective. According to Borsodi's law, productive economies of scale (which themselves peak at relatively modest levels) are offset by increased distribution costs at relatively low levels of output. And these national-scale firms could not have themselves formed trusts without the cartelizing effects of patents and tariffs (the mother of trusts). The fact that the combined effects of railroads, tariffs and patents were still insufficient to stabilize oligopoly markets without further regulatory intervention speaks volumes on the massive scale of government intervention that is necessary for big business as we know it to exist.
As Mr. Pitts acknowledges, with a tip of the hat, a central theme of Josephson's account is the role of the state in the formation of the trusts. But having thus tipped his hat, he attempts to contrast the concentrated industry of today, as "good guys," with its counterparts in the Gilded Age.
But is this a valid contrast? Let's take Microsoft as a case study. First of all, consider the essential role of patent control in the consolidation of the Bell systems into AT&T, and of government collusion in AT&T's growth, in creating a centralized telecommunications system. Second, consider the role of government subsidized electronic R&D during the Cold War (including government's role as the main early purchaser of large computer mainframes, without which the industry might never have been able to lower its costs sufficient to produce for the private sector). Third, consider the role of DARPA in creating the infrastructure for the worldwide web. And finally, consider the role of the government's "intellectual property" monopolies in the success of Windows. Without the ability to piggyback on all these things, it is doubtful Bill Gates would have had a fortune approaching even $100 million, let alone $100 billion.
The great trusts of the turn of the twentieth century were not the result of successful competition. Indeed, as Gabriel Kolko demonstrated in The Triumph of Conservatism, the trusts were getting their butts kicked by smaller and more competitive firms. It was only the anti-competitive regulations of the so-called "Progressive" Era that enabled most industries to stabilize on an oligopoly pattern.
But the trusts, unsuccessful as they were, would not have been feasible even to attempt, without the massive state capitalist intervention of the Gilded Age. Without railroad subsidies and other "internal improvements" of the nineteenth century, which enabled the largest producers to externalize their distribution costs on the public, production on a national scale would not have even been cost-effective. According to Borsodi's law, productive economies of scale (which themselves peak at relatively modest levels) are offset by increased distribution costs at relatively low levels of output. And these national-scale firms could not have themselves formed trusts without the cartelizing effects of patents and tariffs (the mother of trusts). The fact that the combined effects of railroads, tariffs and patents were still insufficient to stabilize oligopoly markets without further regulatory intervention speaks volumes on the massive scale of government intervention that is necessary for big business as we know it to exist.
As Mr. Pitts acknowledges, with a tip of the hat, a central theme of Josephson's account is the role of the state in the formation of the trusts. But having thus tipped his hat, he attempts to contrast the concentrated industry of today, as "good guys," with its counterparts in the Gilded Age.
But is this a valid contrast? Let's take Microsoft as a case study. First of all, consider the essential role of patent control in the consolidation of the Bell systems into AT&T, and of government collusion in AT&T's growth, in creating a centralized telecommunications system. Second, consider the role of government subsidized electronic R&D during the Cold War (including government's role as the main early purchaser of large computer mainframes, without which the industry might never have been able to lower its costs sufficient to produce for the private sector). Third, consider the role of DARPA in creating the infrastructure for the worldwide web. And finally, consider the role of the government's "intellectual property" monopolies in the success of Windows. Without the ability to piggyback on all these things, it is doubtful Bill Gates would have had a fortune approaching even $100 million, let alone $100 billion.
One person found this helpful
Report abuse
Top reviews from other countries

somebloke
5.0 out of 5 stars
excellent
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on December 15, 2015Verified Purchase
excellent
2 people found this helpful
Report abuse

Ed
5.0 out of 5 stars
Five Stars
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on October 24, 2014Verified Purchase
Very pleased.
3 people found this helpful
Report abuse

Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars
but no doubt it will provide a useful insight into the financial activities that were the order ...
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on April 29, 2016Verified Purchase
As yet unread, but no doubt it will provide a useful insight into the financial activities that were the order of the day.
2 people found this helpful
Report abuse

Deb
1.0 out of 5 stars
Preachy and obtuse. Could not finish it.
Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on October 6, 2020Verified Purchase
I found it unreadable. I’m a voracious reader and usually finish books I start even if they aren’t good. I gave up on this. It was too preachy and seemed intent on painting each of the subjects as evil. He is disdainful of those who weren’t “educated” and sniffs at the sometimes creative ways they found to be successful. Preachy and obtuse. The author was so busy making sure you know he hates his subjects that he lost the story.
59 people found this helpful
Report abuse

Kindle Customer
3.0 out of 5 stars
Book
Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on July 23, 2020Verified Purchase
While the information is revealing, the number of typographical and word errors is appalling. Proof reading and corrections seem to have become thing of the past .
26 people found this helpful
Report abuse