`Author:` Andrew Carnegie `Availability:` > [!info] > ## Summary In _The Gospel of Wealth_, Andrew Carnegie sets out to justify the vast fortunes generated by industrial [[Capitalism]], yet he also expresses a striking awareness of the system’s harsh inequalities. He opens by acknowledging the stark divide produced by modern industry: > **“The problem of our age is the proper administration of wealth.”** Carnegie insists that the new economic order has brought extraordinary gains in human comfort and technological [[progress]], but he does not deny the violence of its distribution. He notes the **jarring gap** between rich and poor that industrial capitalism has created: > **“The contrast between the palace of the millionaire and the cottage of the labourer with us to-day measures the change which has come with civilization.”** He even concedes that this contrast can appear morally troubling, calling it: > **“not to be deplored, but welcomed,”** > even as he recognises its scale and severity. That line is often cited as evidence of naïveté, but read in context, it shows he is trying to _rescue_ capitalism from its own excesses. Carnegie argues that inequality is an inevitable by-product of industrial organisation, yet he critiques what happens when wealth is simply accumulated without responsibility. When the rich fail to act as stewards, he admits the system becomes dangerously unstable: > **“The man who dies thus rich dies disgraced.”** He also condemns inherited wealth as socially corrosive: > **“The parent who leaves his son enormous wealth generally deadens the talents and energies of the son.”** His critique is not of capitalism itself, but of the **moral vacuum** that can emerge within it. He warns that without conscious correction by the wealthy, inequality becomes intolerable: > **“It is a waste of the worst kind to leave millions to be administered by others after death.”** Thus, while he affirms the economic system, he recognises that its inequalities demand active redress. His solution—elite philanthropy—reveals the limits of his critique. He attacks the _symptoms_ of capitalism’s inequalities, calling for noblesse oblige, while leaving the underlying structures untouched. ## Key Takeaways ## Quotes - ## Notes `Concepts:` `Knowledge Base:`