Final answer:
Agrarian radicalism reflected the economic challenges that farmers faced, making it a realistic response rather than a hysterical one. The 1896 focus on free silver by farmers represented a strategic approach to address their economic plight and was not a betrayal of agrarian ideals.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question at hand addresses two related issues: the realism of agrarian radicalism and the strategy of farmers focusing on the issue of free silver in 1896. Agrarian radicalism, often associated with the Populist movement, emerged as a response to the harsh economic realities that farmers of the late 19th century faced, including overproduction, high tariffs, and a constrained money supply due to the gold standard. This movement can be seen as a realistic attempt to seek reform against the prevailing economic hardships and not merely as an irrational outburst. The mobilization of populist forces showed a coordinated and politically savvy approach to influencing national policy.
In the 1896 election, farmers' focus on the issue of free silver was a tactic grounded in the very real need to increase the money supply to cause inflation, which would benefit indebted farmers by increasing the prices of their products. The decision, rather than betraying the agrarian ideals, was a calculated move to address the political and economic context of the times. It was also a response to policies that had left many farmers in debt and unable to compete in an economy that favored industrial interests.
Upon President McKinley's victory, the Populist Party saw a decline. Nevertheless, the ideals of the Populist Party lived on, influencing subsequent political movements and being absorbed into the platforms of the major parties, paving the way for future reforms. The economic and political landscape of the time made agrarian radicalism a tenable approach rather than an extension of baseless fears.