The Independent Voter and the Spirit of Reform
- Independent Times News
- 6 days ago
- 6 min read
Updated: 2 days ago
Frederick Burr Opper, Puck magazine, c. 1884 | Image: Shutterstock
A Nation on the Verge of Ruin
In 1892, Ignatius Donnelly, a farmer, reformer, and architect of the Populist Party’s Omaha Platform, stood before a Nebraska convention and delivered a warning that refuses to age. His words painted a grim portrait of a nation on the brink:
"We meet in the midst of a nation brought to the verge of moral, political, and material ruin. Corruption dominates the ballot box, the Legislatures, the Congress…. The people are demoralized... business prostrated, homes covered with mortgages, labor impoverished, and the land concentrating in the hands of capitalists... From the same prolific womb of governmental injustice we breed the two great classes—tramps and millionaires."
Donnelly wasn't writing for a 2026 news cycle, yet his "moral, political, and material ruin" description mirrors our current landscape with startling precision. This modern resonance is reflected in a January 2026 Emerson College National Poll, which finds that 56% of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction. While the Populists of the 1890s fought the railroad and banking monopolies that controlled their livelihoods, today’s voters face a new set of gatekeepers: Big Tech and Big Pharma. The era has transformed, but the suspicion remains the same because the deck still feels stacked against the average American.
While the players and the technologies evolve, the underlying struggle for a fair and representative government remains constant. As the 18th-century philosopher Voltaire observed, “history never repeats itself, but man always does.” This cycle of power and progress is what led to the crisis of the 1890s. The patterns of entrenched influence that Voltaire observed in the Old World, specifically France’s corrupt aristocracy and unequal privileges, had crossed the Atlantic to the New World. This migration of power left late 19th-century Americans facing their own version of systemic inequality during an era that became known as the Gilded Age.
A System Divided by Gold and Greed
The Gilded Age looked shiny on the surface because of its booming industries and the immense wealth of the few, but beneath lay a harsh economic crisis driven by three significant pressures. The first was a currency crunch that occurred while the government sought to modernize the economy by switching from a silver to a gold standard, like in Europe, to back the value of every dollar. The Coinage Act of 1873 achieved this transition by halting the free minting of silver dollars and by refusing to convert silver bullion into legal tender, effectively shrinking the national money supply. That policy change triggered a deflationary crisis that crushed farmers and laborers, forcing them to repay expensive debts with money that was becoming harder to earn and scarcer to find.
The second pressure was a debt trap, created by the shrinking money supply, which directly led to falling crop prices. At the same time, farmers were squeezed by extortionate fees charged by railroad and banking monopolies. While the rural population struggled, the third pressure emerged as labor instability in the cities, where workers endured long hours and low pay, along with the constant threat of unemployment.
These economic tensions all came to a head when the Panic of 1893 hit. The resulting wave of bank failures swept the country, leaving nearly one in five Americans unemployed. At its peak, unemployment soared toward 20 percent. It turned bustling industrial centers into landscapes of soup lines and armies of the unemployed marching on Washington for relief. Trust in government evaporated as both major parties seemed beholden to bankers and corporate titans while ignoring the pleas of the plain people. It was an era of deep division where Southern sharecroppers, Western miners, and Midwestern homesteaders felt abandoned and faced futures as bleak as their dust-choked fields.
The Rise of the People’s Party
Yet a spark of unity ignited in this darkness. This hope began with the Farmers' Alliances, grassroots organizations founded in the 1870s to combat the crop-lien system and its economic stranglehold. What started as local groups of neighbors helping one another eventually evolved into a much broader movement. Visionaries like Henry George and Edward Bellamy inspired diverse groups of rugged farmers, urban laborers, and middle-class reformers. These groups set aside regional and occupational rifts to form the People's Party, also known as the Populist Party, in 1892.
Meeting in Omaha, Nebraska, they crafted the revolutionary Omaha Platform with bold demands that aimed directly at the existing systems of power. Their plan for financial reform addressed the Coinage Act of 1873 because the switch to the gold standard had left money in short supply and caused farmers to suffer the most. To fix this, they called for the free silver movement to expand the money supply and put more currency into the hands of the commoner.
They also demanded government regulation of railroads to stop price gouging. They fought for political empowerment through a graduated income tax, the direct election of senators, and an eight-hour workday for laborers. The Omaha Platform was more than just a list of policies because it represented a coalition of independents breaking free from the two-party stranglehold. It was built on mutual trust in a shared struggle against corruption. Leaders like Ignatius Donnelly and Mary Elizabeth Lease urged farmers to raise less corn and more hell, forging a grassroots bond that the major parties could no longer ignore.
From Third-Party Defiance to Lasting Reform
During this era, Theodore Roosevelt was a young New York politician rising through the Republican ranks, and he remained mainly on the sidelines of the Populist surge. He viewed radical agrarian demands such as free silver and government ownership of railroads with skepticism because he saw them as potentially destabilizing or overly anti-business. Many leading Progressives, including Roosevelt, were vocal critics of Populism’s more extreme elements, preferring measured reform over revolutionary upheaval. Yet the Populists’ third-party challenge in 1892 laid crucial groundwork when James B. Weaver garnered over a million votes and won in four states.
Despite setbacks, the Populists pressed on, and their ideas refused to die. By the early 1900s, Roosevelt ascended to the presidency after McKinley’s assassination in 1901, and he eventually embraced many of the same core reforms the Populists had championed. He advanced trust-busting to curb corporate monopolies along with railroad regulation and consumer protections. His Square Deal promised fairness for workers, farmers, and the public against entrenched power.
While Roosevelt never ran as a pure third-party candidate until his 1912 Progressive Bull Moose bid, his administration helped institutionalize the changes the 1890s independents had fought for. This foreshadowed constitutional amendments, such as the direct election of senators and the income tax, as well as the regulatory framework that shaped the 20th century.
However, there is a cautionary tale in this history. In 1896, the Populists fused with the Democratic Party behind William Jennings Bryan. While their ideas eventually became law, the People’s Party itself vanished, swallowed by the very two-party system it sought to disrupt. For the independents of 2026, the lesson is clear. Shifting the conversation is a victory, but maintaining a distinct identity is the only way to keep the pressure on.
President Roosevelt at Lincoln's Tomb, Springfield, Ill, 1903
Image Courtesy of The Library of Congress
The Power of the Persistent Outsider
The arc from 1892 to the reforms of the 20th century reveals a vital truth because the success of a third-party movement is not measured by winning the White House. Its true power lies in the ability to shift the national conversation and force a stagnant system to evolve. In the 1890s, the People’s Party forced the hand of political giants. Today in 2026, a rising tide of independent voters refuses to accept a broken status quo.
By refusing to surrender, those 19th-century trailblazers proved that trust rebuilt through shared purpose and persistent action can challenge the powerful and heal deep divisions. Just as the Populists paved the way for a new era, today’s independent movement represents the new coalition required to propel America toward a fairer future. As Mark Twain often said, history does not repeat itself but it often rhymes. We have been through difficult times in America before and each time a new coalition has emerged to move the nation forward.
Today that answer comes from the independent voter bloc rising amid eroded faith in media, government, and the digital gatekeepers that seek to define our democracy. By refusing to surrender to the two-party stranglehold, you are not simply politically homeless. You are the New Reformers and the modern heirs to a legacy that has forced a stagnant system to evolve for over 130 years. To every independent voter standing firm, your refusal to fall in line is the most powerful statement you can make.
Thank you for being the spark that demands a fairer future with our declaration of what we know for sure. WE CAN DO BETTER AMERICA!
Thank you for joining us!
These are not the best of times, nor the worst, but these are undoubtedly independent times. Join us at Independent Times News!
Follow: @IndTimesNews
Newsletter: www.IndependentTimes.news
Podcast: Independent Times News, available on all platforms.