Latest news with #ProgressiveEra
Business Insider
9 hours ago
- Business
- Business Insider
Vintage photos show Gilded Age mansions on 'Millionaires' Row' that have since been demolished
During the Gilded Age, wealthy families built extravagant mansions in New York City. Fifth Avenue was known as "Millionaires' Row" with homes belonging to the Astors and Vanderbilts. Most Gilded Age mansions in New York City were torn down to make way for new developments. Business tycoons in the Gilded Age lived in style, but it came at a cost. New York City's Fifth Avenue was once home to "Millionaires' Row," where the wealthiest magnates of the Gilded Age built palatial homes as symbols of their success. At the same time, the Gilded Age was a period marked by staggering income inequality. A 2021 article in The Journal of Economic Inequality found that in 1913, the richest 0.01% of Americans held 9% of the country's wealth. The article also estimated that the modern imbalance is even higher than the Gilded Age, with 10% of US wealth controlled by the top 0.01%. As the lopsided extravagance of the Gilded Age began to give way to the social and political reforms of the Progressive Era, the gargantuan mansions began to fall out of fashion. Not to mention, the cost of employing enough staff to manage them made the homes difficult to maintain. Most of the Gilded Age mansions in New York City were demolished to make way for commercial or apartment buildings, but many still stand in Newport, Rhode Island, where families like the Vanderbilts and the Astors spent their summers in similar luxury. Take a look at just some of the houses that once lined "Millionaires' Row." William H. Vanderbilt's Gilded Age residence on Fifth Avenue in New York City was known as the Triple Palace. William H. Vanderbilt was heir to Cornelius Vanderbilt 's railroad and steamship fortune as his oldest son. Built in 1882, the Triple Palace housed the Vanderbilts and two of their daughters in separate but connected sections. Located at 640 and 642 Fifth Avenue, the Triple Palace was torn down by 1949 and replaced with office buildings. Designed by architects John B. Snook and Charles B. Atwood, the Triple Palace featured stained-glass windows, a shared courtyard, and an art gallery spanning three stories with 207 paintings sourced from Europe, Untapped New York reported. William H. Vanderbilt's son, William K. Vanderbilt, built a mansion nearby at 660 Fifth Avenue. William K. Vanderbilt and his wife, Alva Vanderbilt, enlisted architect Richard Morris Hunt to build them a French chateau-inspired home out of white limestone in order to cement their place in high society. They spent $3 million to construct the mansion in 1882, which would cost around $98 million today, Vogue reported. Since the Vanderbilts' fortune consisted of "new money," their "Petit Chateau" was considered tasteless by elite "old money" families like the Astors. The 60-room, three-story mansion was demolished in 1926. William K. Vanderbilt's brother, Cornelius Vanderbilt II, built a French chateau-style mansion so large it took up an entire New York City block. Located on Fifth Avenue between 57th and 58th Streets, architect George B. Post designed the original mansion in 1883, and Richard Morris Hunt designed an expansion in 1893. At the time, it was thought to be the largest single-family home in New York City, Untapped New York reported. In 1928, it was replaced with a Bergdorf-Goodman department store. Braisted Realty Corporation purchased the Vanderbilt home in 1926, and it was demolished soon after. Bergdorf-Goodman's flagship store, which is still open today, was erected on the site in 1928. The mansion's gilded Louis XVI-style parlor didn't last, but other parts of the Vanderbilts' mansion remain in New York City. Its grand wrought-iron gates were installed outside Central Park's Conservatory Garden. Sculptural reliefs from its covered entrance now decorate the lobby of the Sherry-Netherland Hotel. The marble and mosaic mantlepiece from the entrance hall is on display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Copper magnate William S. Clark built a 121-room mansion so excessive that it earned the nickname "Clark's Folly" before it was torn down in 1927. The mansion took 14 years to build and included four art galleries, a swimming pool, and its own private rail line to transport the coal needed to heat the enormous home, according to the Museum of the City of New York. It cost around $6 million to build when it was finished in 1911, or around $203 million today. It was demolished in 1927 and replaced by a luxury co-op building. Richard Morris Hunt designed a double mansion for the Astor family at 840 and 841 Fifth Avenue in 1896. After her husband, William B. Astor, died, Caroline Schermerhorn Astor lived in one section of the mansion, and her son, John Jacob Astor IV, lived in the other. Caroline Schermerhorn Astor was known for curating "the Four Hundred," a list of high-society families who came from "old money" and shunned those with newer fortunes. She hosted many high-profile events in her Fifth Avenue mansion, where the ballroom could hold 1,200 people, DuJour reported. John Jacob Astor IV, The mansion was demolished in 1926. In 1926, the American Art Association auctioned off the contents of the Astor mansion before its demolition, including its paintings, furniture, and architectural elements like decorative ceilings. The Temple Emanu-El synagogue now stands in its place on Fifth Avenue. Brokaw House at 1 East 79th Street belonged to Isaac Vail Brokaw, who made his millions as a clothing manufacturer. It took three years to build Brokaw House, which was completed in 1890 by the architectural firm Rose and Stone, according to the New York Preservation Archive Project. Modeled after a French chateau, the four-story mansion featured an Italian marble entrance hall, stained-glass windows, ornate wood carvings, and a full staff. After Brokaw's death, the mansion was used as office space before it was torn down in 1965. Completed in 1905, steel magnate Charles M. Schwab's house measured 50,000 square feet. Schwab opted to build his mansion further west, on Riverside Drive, where it covered an entire city block between 73rd and 74th Streets. The mansion included a pool and bowling alley, The New York Times reported. In 1936, Schwab offered to sell the home to the city of New York to serve as its mayoral residence, but the city declined.
Ammon
4 days ago
- Business
- Ammon
The United States at crossroads: Between proactive renewal and historic decline
In April 2024, the American RAND Corporation published an extensive analytical report titled "Sources of Renewable National Dynamics." The researchers addressed the structural challenges facing the United States, warning of the risks of decline and loss of global standing if proactive national renewal is not undertaken. This report represents a significant shift in the approach of American think tanks to the issue of the rise and decline of major powers, not only in terms of implicit recognition of the decline phase, but also in presenting a historical and forward-looking model for studying how to restore effective national power. The report reflects growing concern in American decision-making circles that the United States' competitiveness is no longer guaranteed considering domestic and international changes. The report is based on the premise that the rise and fall of major powers is not a historical exception, but rather part of recurring cycles subject to multiple factors, most importantly structural adaptation and the ability to renew during moments of transition. Considering this hypothesis, the RAND team reviewed a number of historical experiences in which great powers experienced relative decline before succeeding—or failing—in regaining the initiative. These experiences include Britain in the Victorian era, the United States during the Progressive Era in the late nineteenth century, the Soviet Union in the 1980s, and China during its transitional periods. The study sought to draw general lessons from these experiences that would help understand the potential for American national renewal before it is too late. The report argues that the proactive renewal of any great power cannot occur without a minimum of subjective and objective conditions, including internal social consensus, flexible political institutions, a productive and innovative private sector, and the state's ability to utilize its resources strategically. It also notes that successful renewal requires a clear recognition of the crisis, not merely cosmetic or defensive rhetoric, as denial often leads to further decline. In this context, the report calls for the need to overcome the sharp partisan divisions in the United States, which it views as a real obstacle to any radical reform. In a systematic approach, the report identified nine key indicators deemed essential for measuring a state's ability to launch a proactive national renewal process. These indicators are: Sustainable resilience: This refers to a society's ability to adapt to crises and transformations without losing its cohesion or dynamism. Sovereign capacity: This is the state's ability to preserve the well-being of its people while ensuring protection from external threats. Freedom of international decision-making: This refers to a state's ability to act externally in accordance with its own interests, without dependence on other powers or coercive alliances. Military power: This refers to the possession of deterrence tools and operational superiority in various arenas of conventional and unconventional conflict. Alliances: The extent to which a state can build a cohesive and effective network of allies based on shared interests, rather than dependence or extortion. Economic power: This refers to the ability to influence the global economy through GDP, production, exports, and the ability to innovate. Market dominance: This refers to control over global market mechanisms, especially in vital sectors such as technology, energy, and finance. Cultural power: This refers to the ability to influence global thought patterns and values through the media, education, and the arts. Technological supremacy: This refers to leadership in technological innovation, including artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, and cybersecurity. The report indicates that the United States, despite the challenges, still retains some of the strength needed to rebuild its global position, but it urgently needs a radical review of its economic, social, and educational policies. It also emphasizes that the time available for this transformation is narrowing, and that delaying the launch of the reform process could lead to irreversible consequences, especially in light of the rapid progress achieved by other powers, such as China, in the areas of trade, technology, and geopolitics. The report does not deny the United States' vast resources, but warns that the lack of internal consensus, the escalation of partisan divisions, and the erosion of trust in institutions could empty these resources of their substance and render them unable to fulfill their role in revitalizing the nation. It also indicates that the greatest challenge lies not only in regaining military or economic supremacy, but in renewing a national vision that unites Americans around a common goal and reshapes the relationship between state and society based on justice, efficiency, and innovation. While the report acknowledges that successful cases of proactive renewal are rare in history, it insists that the United States still has a chance to achieve this if it takes serious, thoughtful, and courageous steps. It also emphasizes that renewal is not merely a response to external decline, but rather a voluntary act that requires collective awareness and leadership capable of addressing the public with a language of frankness and responsibility, not one of reassurance and condescension. In this sense, the report is not merely an analytical document, but rather an early call for the need to preempt decline with comprehensive reform initiatives stemming from within and drawing on America's historical legacy of overcoming crises. This warning—issued by one of the most important American research institutions—may be an indication of a shift in the ruling elite's awareness of the magnitude of the challenges facing their country, and a belated realization that progress is only sustainable for those who dare to review and renew. Hasan Dajah is professor of strategic studies at Al-Hussein Bin Talal University
Eyewitness News
30-05-2025
- Politics
- Eyewitness News
The people must ceaselessly challenge the lawlessness of the SA government
Malaika Mahlatsi 30 May 2025 | 13:08 Nandipha Magudumana appeared at the the Bloemfontein High Court on 5 June 2024. Picture: Katlego Jiyane/Eyewitness News The people must ceaselessly challenge the lawlessness of the SA government A few weeks ago, the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa delivered a judgment in the Magudumana v Director of Public Prosecutions, Free State and Others. The case sought to decide whether Magudumana's extradition from Tanzania (which she contends was, in fact, an abduction by the South African Police Service (SAPS) on the instruction of the South African State) was lawful. The majority judgment found that it was. But Judge Makgoka, in his minority judgment that has been lauded by international law experts, disagrees with his colleagues, arguing that the arrest of Magudumana was unlawfully disguised as an extradition when it did not, in fact, follow proper extradition processes. The judgment is extensive, delving into the complexities of international law. But it is on page 43 of its conclusion that Judge Makgoka makes a profound reflection, one that goes beyond the case in question and to the very issue at the core of the moral crisis of the South African state – its perennial lawlessness. Speaking to this lawlessness, Judge Makgoka quotes the words of Judge Louis Dembitz Brandeis in the Olmstead et al v United States judgment, where the then Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States made this profound input: 'In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously…Government is the potent, omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy'. Judge Brandeis had spent many years challenging the erosion of morality on the part of the American state, specifically about its problematic relationship with the banking industry. For Brandeis, this relationship was one of the roots of corruption within the state, particularly because of the stranglehold that the industry and its lobby had over politicians. Nowhere was this relationship more evident than in the influence of the leading financier and investment banker of America's Progressive Era, J.P Morgan, who directly and indirectly directed American economic policy, particularly during and following the Panic of 1907. I found myself reflecting on Judge Brandeis' argument on the danger of a lawless government in the context of the recent (now withdrawn) appointment of board chairs of the Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA) and the consolidated general report on local government audit outcomes by the Auditor-General (AG). A few weeks ago, the Higher Education and Training Minister, Dr Nobuhle Nkabane, announced the board chairs of SETAs that comprised largely of African National Congress (ANC) leaders and former leaders. Following public uproar, the minister withdrew the appointments and indicated that the process would be redone. But while she claims that the withdrawal is indicative of her regard for the voices of the people, her actions border dangerously on lawlessness, or at the very least, very serious unethical conduct. That the minister presided over the appointment process and signed off on it as the Executive Authority, and then failed to account and explain her actions, choosing to restart the process, is a dereliction of duty. In South African labour law, dereliction of duty, which refers to an employee's intentional or conscious failure to perform their duties, is a serious offence, potentially leading to dismissal. The AG's report paints a debilitating picture of the state of municipal finances in the country. Only 41 of the country's 257 municipalities received clean audits. In cases of those that received unqualified audits with findings, which amount to 99, the issue of financial mismanagement is at the centre. Of particular interest for me is the City of Johannesburg, the nerve-centre of the national and regional economy, and a city that I call home. That the metro is in a state of collapse is no longer a question. It scores highest in all areas of poor performance - having the highest unauthorised expenditure at an alarming R2.8 billion, the highest water losses at R2.9 billion and the highest electricity losses at R4.9 billion. The metro also has high levels of fruitless and wasteful expenditure, with the amount standing at over R350 million in the last three years. The AG's report also noted poor governance not only in the municipality and its entities. But of significance is the criminality that the AG flagged. According to the report, nearly R1 billion in contracts in the City of Johannesburg were awarded to companies with close ties to employees of the municipality, including councillors, who failed to declare conflicts of interest in the 2023/2024 financial year. This is in direct violation of the law. The Public Administration Management Act (PAMA) 11 of 2014, specifically Section 8 (2), and Regulation 13 (c) of the Public Service Regulations, 2016, prohibit State employees from conducting business with the State or being a director of a company doing so. What this indicates is that there is a flagrant disregard for the law in the City of Johannesburg and other municipalities across the country. These are two of many instances in which the political leadership of South Africa has been very casual about being party to or presiding over complete lawlessness and immorality. It has become so embedded in our society that it does not shock anyone anymore. It is just another news item – another point of discussion on social media before something else grabs our attention. But this should not be the case. The people of South Africa should be ceaseless in challenging the lawlessness of our government whenever it rears its ugly head. Forcing the minister to withdraw her appointments was a step in the right direction. We should do more of this. As Brandeis so correctly asserted, the government should never engage in acts of lawlessness because this breeds contempt for the law and invites every man and woman to become a law unto him/herself. This breeding of anarchy is the foundation on which the erosion of the state is built. Malaika, an award-winning and bestselling author, is a geographer and researcher at the Institute for Pan African Thought and Conversation. She is a PhD in Geography candidate at the University of Bayreuth in Germany.
Epoch Times
13-05-2025
- Business
- Epoch Times
Science and Liberty: Social Physics From Comte to Samuelson
Commentary In his 1933 lecture at the London School of Economics titled 'The Trend of Economic Thinking,' Frederich Hayek identified a shift in economic thought toward planning and interventionism. He argued that the German Historical School and the institutionalists were major contributors to this trend. However, what actually laid the foundation for planning and interventionism in the following years was the formalism of neoclassical theory itself. Hayek and his mentor Ludwig von Mises in the 1910s and 1920s were part of the neoclassical tradition, and the idea that 'formalism' itself initiated this shift in economic thinking is what Boettke calls, 'Where Hayek went wrong.' Hayek was being left behind by his profession. Once among the most referenced economists in England, by the postwar era, some economists questioned whether his work even qualified as economics. The best example of this was when he submitted his Nobel lecture to 'Economica,' and they asked him to revise it. What caused this departure from the market to the plan? The major intellectual forces of the time: scientism and statism, which always seem to co-exist. The followers of scientism—those who hold a dogmatic belief in the validity and certainty of their theories—tend to believe that the only obstacle to solving social ills is a problem of execution. Since they believe they already have all the answers, the temptation toward statism becomes irresistible. The Man of Good Will Paul Samuelson, in his famous 1948 textbook ' This dream is what Robert Nelson calls the 'secular religion of scientific management' in his 2001 book ' The Scientific Management of Society In this historical context, it seemed regressive for post-World War II America not to embrace the idea of scientific management of society. If the entire world was moving in that direction, and the numbers from the Soviet Union appeared to demonstrate success in postwar reconstruction, then the only question was: when should the United States begin the process of saying goodbye to the invisible hand of the market and welcome the man of good will, who will help us solve our societal problems? The dream was to manipulate the market mechanism to achieve desired social outcomes, as envisioned by the 'planner,' presumed to act in society's best interest. When reading the texts of the Progressive Era, one finds a passion for discovery in the writings of its thinkers. A belief that they were uncovering something entirely new. A confidence that makes one exclaim: 'Why has no one thought of this before!' These thinkers shunned the past and embraced science as the path forward. And while the reformers of the New Liberalism in the late 19th century shared a similar enthusiasm—though perhaps to a lesser extent—the Progressive Era was especially marked by its confidence in the power of scientific solutions.. Social Physics and Its Unintended Consequences What's interesting about Comte is that his starting point was similar to Hayek's: the idea that society possesses a spontaneous order, not directed by a rational plan but emerging from countless individual plans. This is evident in his works like 'Social Statics, or Related Stories 5/4/2025 4/23/2025 As the 'Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy' describes Comte's view: 'The moral question, 'What should I do?' is no longer asked in the first person, and is transformed into an engineering problem: 'What should be done to make men more ethical?'' The question that social scientists must answer thus becomes an engineering problem. In this literature, as emphasized by Comte, the dogma of liberty is seen as an obstacle to reorganization. Comte's vision of reorganization is tied to his theory of the three stages of history. The first is the Theological Stage, in which society and politics are primarily influenced by religion. The second is the Metaphysical and Abstract Stage, which one might argue is closest to Adam Smith's grand plan of liberty. The third is the Scientific or Positive Stage, in which society is no longer directed by religion or liberty, but by science. This is the trajectory of history in Comte's view, and any resistance to it is reactionary—an impediment to the development of civilization. As Comte famously put it, 'The goal of every science is foresight.' He regarded the Positive Stage as 'the highest accomplishment of the human mind.' This idea, described by Frank Knight as 'salvation by science,' is a recurring theme in the history of social thought. As shown in this article, the belief in scientific management of society stretches from Comte to Samuelson. It assumes that scientists have either found or will soon find the solutions to our social ills. The only remaining obstacles are those 'reactionary' classical liberals who resist the execution of these plans and seek to limit state power. Even if the theorists of a positive science of human society try to remain apolitical, their assumptions inevitably lead to statism. They assume that we already possess all the knowledge and solutions to our problems, and yet those problems persist—therefore, the market must be inadequate, and we need the visible hand of the state. The unintended consequence of this thinking is captured well by Hayek: 'Once one understands this, it also becomes clear why methodological and political differences so frequently go together: those who believe that it is in the power of science to predict particular individual events, or the position of individuals, naturally also want to use that power to produce the particular results they desire.' Then, What Is the Role of Economists? In light of this, one may reasonably ask: What is the role of the social scientist? And more specifically, what is the role of the economist? This question has been answered in different ways by various thinkers, including Samuelson, as discussed earlier. One compelling answer comes from James Buchanan in his book 'What Should Economists Do?' The role of economists is not social engineering but aiding in the process of social understanding. Economists have this role because of the subject matter they study: the inevitable ignorance of mankind and the fundamentally different nature of solutions to social problems—solutions that involve trade-offs, not final answers. And when society faces trade-offs, it is better for individuals to be autonomous contractors—free to choose and free to preserve their liberty—rather than servants of a state, whether that state is theological or scientific. From the Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
5 things to know about Trump, Pope views on wealth, values and why MAGA worries
The American president and the American pope both have their eyes fixed on the late 19th century, but they seem to be drawing very different, if not clashing, lessons. President Donald Trump has recently waxed nostalgically about the period from 1870 to 1913 in defending his imposition of across-the-board tariffs. Cardinal Robert Prevost, in choosing the papal name Pope Leo XIV, follows in the footsteps of Leo XIII who set forth the concept of Catholic social teaching in 1891. While theologians point out the two views are not necessarily contradictory, some in the MAGA-verse were ringing alarms louder than the tolling bells in St. Peter's Square after white smoke heralded the selection of a new pontiff on Thursday. Firebrand Lara Loomer denounced Prevost as "pro-open borders" and Catholics for Catholics President John Yep said he viewed Prevost's election with "great concern." Here are five things to know. Trump speaks of the era as one in which America was at its "richest." Certainly a clique of industrialists and others profited mightily from the country's industrial boom at the time. This was the so-called Gilded Age in U.S. history, in which Manhattan's richest families, such as the Vanderbilts, Astors and Morgans, built palatial estates in Newport, Rhode Island. But for the vast majority of America, life was a very different experience. Many moved to urban centers in search of work and found jobs in factories where the hours were long and the wages minimal. Labor unrest ensued, sometimes turning violent. Immigrants and others working in factories lived in squalor. "It was not uniformly a period of strong growth. The analogies to the 1890s are extremely weak," said Edward Alden at the Council on Foreign Relations in an April interview. "If you're learning lessons from that era, they are going to be the wrong ones for sure." The Progressive Era of American politics ushered in safety protocols, a 40-hour week, anti-child-labor laws and many other workplace reforms. In calling for broad duties on imports, Trump has extolled the nearly 50 years that spanned the last centuries of the past millennium. "You know, years ago, 1870 to 1913, we didn't have an income tax. What we had is tariffs," Trump said in one speech. "And the tariff system made so much money. It was when we were the richest — from 1870 to 1913. … It was when we were the richest." The president has often alluded to wealth, telling Americans he will make them more affluent than ever. He has said he will usher a "golden era" and even redecorated the Oval Office with gold trimmings. 'You see the new and improved Oval Office,' Trump said to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney during their May 6 meeting. 'As it becomes more and more beautiful with love — you know we handle it with great love — and 24-karat gold, that always helps too.' As pope, Leo XIV has not mentioned the era nor drawn lessons from it, but has alluded to faith and wealth. In his first homily as pontiff on May 9, Leo XIV cited from the Gospel of Matthew a conversation between Jesus and the disciples in Caesarea Philippi, a place the pontiff said was marked by "luxurious palaces" but "also a place of cruel power plays and the scene of betrayals and infidelity." There, Jesus was a "completely insignificant person," the pope noted, and once this 'world' saw him as a source of irritation, it opted to "eliminate Him." Others there saw Jesus, Leo XIV said, as a courageous "upright man," similar to other great prophets, but at the moment of "danger," they turned away and abandoned him in disappointment. "What is striking about these two attitudes is their relevance today," the pope concluded. "Even today, there are many settings in which the Christian faith is considered absurd, meant for the weak and unintelligent. Settings where other securities are preferred, like technology, money, success, power or pleasure." Sister Maryanne Stevens said the choice of Leo has several messages. Stevens noted Leo I, also called Leo the Great, worked for peace and kept Attila the Hun from entering Italy. The most recent Leo, the 13th, was the founder of modern Catholic social teachings. Leo XIII's encyclical "Rerum Novarem" critiqued the excesses of socialism and capitalism. During his 25-year papacy, from 1878 to 1903, the pontiff exhorted people to "come together guided by values" and preached "solidarity between the classes," said Stevens, a theologian and the retired president of the College in St. Mary in Omaha, Nebraska. According to her, Leo XIII spoke out against "exploitation" of workers by capitalist industrialists but did not agree the "state should take over everything," either. Rather, she said the pontiff recognized the dignity of the human person and called on the broader community to safeguard the rights of people, particular those most vulnerable. She said Leo XIII wrote there is dignity to every human person and extolled the dignity of work. Stevens said the pontiff pressed capitalists to provide safe environments and healthy environments and create just wages. "There was a tremendous amount, at the time, of social inequality and exploitation of people and they were problems that had to be faced by both the Church and the state," she said. "That was one of his basic points." Stevens cautioned against commentary suggesting Leo XIV chose the name in order to send a message to the president. "I'm not prepared to suggest that Leo chose that name so as to respond to Trump," she said. Trump's supporters point out the president won election in 2024 by waging a campaign for blue-collar and other workers forgotten and left behind by U.S. free trade and neglectful manufacturing policies in the past 40 years. He vowed, during the campaign, to end taxation of tips and overtime for wage employment. But once in office, the Trump administration has sought to slash federal spending, including numerous safety net programs for the poorest Americans and the elderly. The White House has also delivered on Trump's harsh rhetoric toward immigrants with equally harsh deportations. Some in the MAGA-verse were decidedly unhappy over Prevost's immigration tweets, some of which rebuked Trump and Vice President JD Vance's views. Loomer, a failed congressional candidate in Palm Beach County, wrote on X that the new pontiff "supports illegal aliens and open borders." Yep said in an interview with Charlie Kirk of the far-right youth group Turning Point USA that he harbored "great concern" because Leo XIV had "an ambiguous scorecard on same sex blessings." In a statement to The Palm Beach Post, Yep reiterated his belief there is "justifiable apprehension" for what the new papacy will bring due to prior postings on social media. But Yep also said other "praiseworthy actions" by Prevost, such as his emphasis on the "defense of babies in the womb," offer hope. "We pray that he will work well with the Trump Administration as well as ending immediately the Francis era Secret Accord between the Vatican and the Chinese Communist Party signed in 2018," Yep wrote. "Catholics above all should be praying for this man as undertakes a tremendous responsibility as head of 1.4 billion people." Antonio Fins is a politics and business editor at The Palm Beach Post, part of the USA TODAY Florida Network. You can reach him at afins@ Help support our journalism. Subscribe today. This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Trump, Leo XIV cast gaze on Gilded Age but draw different lessons
