Final answer:
Political machines like Tammany Hall balanced acts of community service with rampant corruption and exploitation. They provided infrastructure and services to citizens in exchange for votes but also mismanaged funds and accepted kickbacks. They were both beneficial and detrimental, making their overall impact a complex debate.
Step-by-step explanation:
Political machines like Tammany Hall can be viewed with mixed opinions when considering their actions as either beneficial or detrimental to society. They played a significant role in the urban development and provided essential services to certain communities, notably to the working class and immigrants. For instance, by responding to immediate problems like the need for sidewalks in Little Italy, they facilitated community development and provided timely solutions. However, the operations of such machines were steeped in corruption and exploitation, where city funds were misused, and kickbacks were a regular occurrence. They exercised control over elections through various forms of bribery and manipulated the political landscape to their advantage. In essence, political machines like Tammany Hall were seen as both providers for the needy and symbols of systemic corruption.
During the Progressive Era, movements aimed to eradicate the inefficiency and corruption exemplified by political machines. Efforts included the adoption of commission systems in cities to reduce the power of political bosses and minimize graft. Despite the occasional good they did in the community, political machines were largely considered a negative force due to their corrupt practices. For example, Boss Tweed of Tammany Hall notoriously used political power for personal enrichment, swindling vast amounts of money from the public.