IndexSummary and AnalysisConclusionWilliam Jennings Bryan was born in 1860 and lived until 1925. He was a democratic and populist leader. He also tried to run for president three times and failed each time. The "Golden Cross" speech was a speech by William that helped push the convention to nominate him as the Democratic presidential candidate. Bryan also ran in 1900 and 1908, which were failures. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayThe speech was given at the Democratic National Convention, so delegates from the 50 US states were engaged in the audience so they could cast their votesIt was William Jennings Bryan's Democratic presidential speech. Bryan believes that “we will point to their platform and tell them that their platform commits the party to getting rid of the gold standard and replacing it with bimetallism.” That was Bryan's entire argument. He was against the gold standard and thought it was destroying American wealth and wanted to exchange it for silver. Summary and Analysis Everyone has different opinions on what to do with wealth. How to get rid of it, how to earn it and how to proceed. Even now you might hear debates about why cryptocurrency should take over US money. This is what Bryan argued, how one should proceed with wealth. He wanted to replace the wealth of gold with bimetallism. He did not want to completely abolish the gold system, but he thought that silver and gold should have the same value. An interesting point he makes is that “if protectionism has killed thousands, the gold standard has killed tens of thousands.” Bryan shows the difference between what gold has done to America: it has killed it for tens of thousands of people. Bryan uses these topics to argue about what gold has done for America. One thing that is very noticeable is that throughout the speech, Bryan uses “my friends,” as he relates to his audience because he wants to build that connection. This allows the reader to think that whatever Bryan is saying will benefit them. It also allows them to pay more attention to what Bryan has to say because it will influence them greatly. Now, Bryan didn't just want to abolish the gold system, he didn't want to just get rid of it. He supported the idea of ​​bimetallism. The idea of ​​bimetallism allows for the coexistence of two metals, which is what Bryan wanted. He knew how difficult it would be to abolish gold because of the way the United States uses it to trade with different nations, so he decided to create something where gold and silver could converse together. He states that “if the gold standard is a good thing, we should be in favor of maintaining it and not in favor of abandoning it.” Even though he himself doesn't like the idea of ​​the gold standard, if the government thinks it is useful for the United States, keep it but add another currency that has the same value which is silver. ConclusionBryan thinks having gold for the rest of humanity will have a detrimental effect. To close his argument, Bryan states, “you will not crucify humanity on a cross of gold.” By the word “you” he refers to the government claiming that if it doesn't do something about the gold system, it will lead to bad things. Even going so far as to say that “he will crucify humanity”. This is a really great closing sentence because it allows not only the reader but also the people who were listening to his speech to really question the gold. Is it really worth it? Does it really have such a negative impact? Please note: this is just an example. Get.