Suppose big business had vigorously opposed the Sherman Antitrust Act, but that it had been passed anyway. What sort of politics would have been required for this to happen?

To understand what sort of politics would have been required for the Sherman Antitrust Act to be passed despite vigorous opposition from big business, we need to delve into the historical context and the legislative process. Here's an explanation of the key factors that could have influenced such an outcome:

1. Public Support: The Sherman Antitrust Act was enacted in 1890 during a period known as the Progressive Era. At that time, public sentiment was increasingly shifting against the growing power of monopolies and trusts. To pass the act against big business opposition, it would have required strong public pressure and support for anti-monopoly measures. This could have been fueled by concerns about economic inequality and a desire for fair competition.

2. Political Will: The passage of any significant legislation requires political will. It would have been necessary for key political figures, such as influential members of Congress or the President, to support and champion the Sherman Antitrust Act despite opposition. These individuals would have needed to prioritize the public interest over the concerns of big business, potentially motivated by popular support or personal convictions.

3. Coalitions and Compromises: In the realm of politics, building coalitions and finding compromises is crucial to passing legislation. To counterbalance the powerful lobbying efforts of big business, proponents of the act would need to form alliances with other influential groups or factions. This could include working with labor unions, smaller businesses affected by monopolies, or other progressive reform movements of the time.

4. Information and Advocacy: In order to pass the Sherman Antitrust Act, proponents would have needed to effectively present the case for regulating monopolies to the public, Congress, and other decision-making bodies. This would involve highlighting the negative impact of unchecked corporate power on consumers, small businesses, and overall economic stability. Advocacy groups, intellectuals, and journalists may have played crucial roles in shaping public opinion and providing expert analysis.

5. Political Context and Timing: Passage of significant legislation often relies on specific political contexts and windows of opportunity. For such an act to succeed against big business opposition, the political climate would need to be conducive to progressive reforms and responsive to public demands. Additionally, the timing of events, such as a major scandal involving a monopoly, economic downturn, or change in party dynamics, could have influenced the likelihood of passage.

It is important to note that the Sherman Antitrust Act did face subsequent challenges and limited enforcement in its early years. However, it laid the foundation for future antitrust efforts and significantly shaped the legal framework around competition and monopolies in the United States.