For an excellent and detailed examination of this history, Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States (which provided much of the research for this article) is perhaps the most expansive and detailed examination. I am not attempting to serve it justice here, as there is much left out of this historically examination than there is included.
The purpose of this essay is to examine first of all the rise of class and labour struggle throughout the United States in the 19th century, the rise and dominance of the ‘Robber Baron’ industrialists like J.P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller, their convergence of interests with the state, and finally to examine the radical new philosophies and theories that arose within the radicalized and activated populations, such as Marxism and Anarchism.
I do not attempt to provide exhaustive or comprehensive analyses of these theoretical and philosophical movements, but rather provide a brief glimpse to some of the ideas (particularly those of anarchism), and place them in the historical context of the mass struggles of the 19th century
The 19th century, from roughly the 1830s onwards, was one great long labour struggle in America.
However, as Howard Zinn wrote in A People’s History of the United States:
The attempts at political stability, at economic control, did not quite work. The new industrialism, the crowded cities, the long hours in the factories, the sudden economic crises leading to high prices and lost jobs, the lack of food and water, the freezing winters, the hot tenements in the summer, the epidemics of disease, the deaths of children – these led to sporadic reactions from the poor. Sometimes there were spontaneous, unorganized uprisings against the rich. Sometimes the anger was deflected into racial hatred for blacks, religious warfare against Catholics, nativist fury against immigrants. Sometimes it was organized into demonstrations and strikes. 
Rallies and meetings started taking place in several cities, with one rally numbering 20,000 people in Philadelphia. That same year, New York experienced the Flour Riot. With a third of the working class ~ 50,000 people ~ out of work in New York alone, and nearly half of New York’s 500,000 people living “in utter and hopeless distress,” thousands of protesters rioted, ultimately leading to police and troops being sent in to crush the protesters. 
The aim was not freedom for black slaves, but rather to end a system which had become antiquated and unprofitable.With the Industrial Revolution driving people into cities and mechanizing production, the notion of slavery lost its appeal: it was simply too expensive and time consuming to raise, feed, house, clothe and maintain slaves; it was thought more logical and profitable (in an era obsessed with efficiency) to simply pay people for the time they engage in labour.The Industrial Revolution
brought with it the clock,
and thus time itself
became a commodity.
it simply updated the notions and made more efficient the system of slavery: instead of purchasing people, they would lease them for the time they can be ‘productive’.
Thus, as the Civil War was sold to the public on the notion of liberating the slaves in the South, the workers of the North felt betrayed and hateful that they must be drafted and killed for a war to liberate others when they themselves were struggling for liberation.Here, we see the social control methods and reorganizing of society that can take place through war, a fact that has always existed and remains today, made to be even more prescient with the advances in technology.During the Civil War, the class conflict among the working people of the United States transformed into a system where they were divided against each other, as religious and racial divisions increasingly erupted in violence.
The crisis was built into a system which was chaotic in its nature, in which only the very rich were secure. It was a system of periodic crisis – 1837, 1857, 1873 (and later: 1893, 1907, 1919, 1929) – that wiped out small businesses and brought cold, hunger, and death to working people while the fortunes of the Astors, Vanderbilts, Rockefellers, Morgans, kept growing through war and peace, crisis and recovery. During the 1873 crisis, while Carnegie was capturing the steel market, Rockefeller was wiping out his competitors in oil. 
They would do it with the aid of, and at the expense of, black labor, white labor, Chinese labor, European immigrant labor, and female labor, rewarding them differently by race, sex, national origin, and social class, in such a way as to create separate levels of oppression ~ a skillful terracing to stabilize the pyramid of wealth. 
PHILOSOPHIES OF LIBERATION AND SOCIAL DISLOCATION
Karl Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto (1848) also on the need for a central bank to manage the monetary system.
Anarchism is one of the most misunderstood philosophies in modern historical thought, and with good reason: its revolutionary potential was boundless, as it was an area of thought that was not as rigid, doctrinaire or divisive as other theories, both hegemonic and critical.
[A]narchism has never been and has never aspired to be a fixed, comprehensive, self-contained, and internally consistent system of ideas, set of doctrines, or body of theory. On the contrary, anarchism from its earliest days has been an evolving set of attitudes and ideas that can apply to a wide range of social, economic, and political theories, practices, movements, and traditions. 
“Anarchist political philosophy is by no means a unified movement.” 
[C]oercive authority includes all centralized and hierarchical forms of government (e.g., monarchy, representative democracy, state socialism, etc.), economic class systems (e.g., capitalism, Bolshevism, feudalism, slavery, etc.), autocratic religions (e.g., fundamentalist Islam, Roman Catholicism, etc.), patriarchy, heterosexism, white supremacy, and imperialism. 
The first theorist to describe himself as anarchist was Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, a French philosopher and socialist who understood
“equality not just as an abstract feature of human nature but as an ideal state of affairs that is both desirable and realizable.” 
“true anarchist equality implies freedom, not quantity. It does not mean that everyone must eat, drink, or wear the same things, do the same work, or live in the same manner. Far from it: the very reverse in fact,” as “individual needs and tastes differ, as appetites differ. It is equal opportunity to satisfy them that constitutes true equality.” 
My freedom... is the freedom of all since I am not truly free in thought and in fact, except when my freedom and my rights are confirmed and approved in the freedom and rights of all men and women who are my equals. 
In the political realm, representation involves divesting individuals and groups of their vitality ~ their power to create, transform, and change themselves. To be sure, domination often involves the literal destruction of vitality through violence and other forms of physical coercion. As a social-physical phenomenon, however, domination is not reducible to aggression of this sort. On the contrary, domination operates chiefly by “speaking for others” or “representing others to themselves”—that is, by manufacturing images of, or constructing identities for, individuals and groups. 
“Only individuals, united through mutual aid and voluntary association, are entitled to decide who they are, what they shall be, how they shall live.”Thus, with any hierarchical or coercive institutions, the natural result is oppression and domination, or in other words, spiritual death. 
“the essence of Christian morality is the rejection of force, compromise, and the very institution of government itself.”
The only legitimate form of social control is self-discipline which the individual must impose upon himself without the aid of government.”
Tucker viewed anarchism as “a rejection of all formalism, authority, and force in the interest of liberating the creative capacities of the individual,” and that, “the anarchist must remove himself from the arena of politics, refusing to implicate himself in groups or associations which have as their end the control or manipulation of political power.”
Anarchism has widely been viewed as a violent philosophy, and while that may be the case for some theorists and adherents, many anarchist theorists and philosophies rejected the notion of violence altogether.After all, its first adherents in America were driven to anarchist theory simply as a result of their uncompromising pacifism.
“A TRUE REVOLUTION
CAN ONLY TAKE PLACE
AS MANKIND BECOMES ENLIGHTENED.”
The one thing that is certain is that revolution takes place not by a concerted uprising of the masses but through a process of individual social reformation or awakening.Proudhon, like Tucker and the Native American anarchists, believed that the function of anarchism is essentially educational...The state will be abolished at the point at which people in general have become convinced of its un-social nature...When enough people resist it to the point of ignoring it altogether, the state will have been destroyed as completely as a scrap of paper is when it is tossed into a roaring fire. 
The state, in her opinion, sows the seeds of violence when it lends it authority and force to the retardation of social change, thereby creating deep-seated feelings of injustice and desperation in the collective unconscious. “I do not advocate violence, government does this, and force begets force.” 
Social violence, she argued, will naturally disappear at the point at which men have learned to understand and accommodate themselves to one another within a dynamic society which truly values human freedom. Until then we can expect to see pent up hostility and frustration of certain individuals and groups explode from time to time with the spontaneity and violence of a volcano. 
They were not ideologically or methodologically unified, specifically in terms of the objectives and ends; yet, their enemies were the same. It was a struggle among the people against the prevailing and growing sources of power: the state and Capitalist industrialization.
Andrew Gavin Marshall is a Research Associate with the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is co-editor, with Michel Chossudovsky, of the recent book, "The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century," available to order at Globalresearch.ca. He is currently working on a forthcoming book on 'Global Government'.
Find more photos like this on 12160