Andrew Jackson’s Democratic Presidency
In my opinion, Jackson’s Presidency was not democratic. It was mostly “the reign of the King Andrew I.” Democracy is the government by the people where the people choose their leaders who favor them. In democracy equal political, social rights are practiced. Jackson’s presidency was nothing like democracy. Democracy was just the title of the government given to Jackson’s presidency. Jackson was more like King Andrew I, because Jackson’s presidency was not less than a dictatorship. Cruel things were happening during Jackson’s presidency, which he was aware of, but failed to do something about it.
He just ordered people around, and they obeyed without question. People weren’t able to raise their voices and speak for their mind which is democracy. The perfect examples of “the reign of King Andrew I” are the events Indian Removal Act, and the Nullification Crises. Native Americans had no part in Jackson’s democracy. Under his administration, one thousand Indians were forcibly removed from their homes in the East and relocated West of the Mississippi. You can tell it wasn’t democracy; it was “the reign of King Andrew I” by the actions taken under Jackson’s administration. Another example is the Nullification Crises. The whole Nullification Crises arose due to the Tariff of Abominations, which raised the prices of European imports that competed with New England manufacturers’ products. Southerners objected the tariff because the tariff inflated the price of imports and levied an indirect tax on their region. After the tariff was passed, “the Controversy Over States’ Rights” arose. The most of the controversy was “Whether United States was one indivisible nation with a supreme federal government? Or did the states have final say on how much national authority would accept, as Jefferson and Madison had suggested in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolution in 1798?” Southerners said that they don’t have to accept the tariff since the state can held the acts of congress unconstitutional. On the other hand, Webster of Massachusetts argued that federal government, not the states, held the final authority under the constitution. Another tariff was enacted in 1832, which forced the southerners to declare the tariff null and void in South Carolina. Jackson couldn’t take the disobedience anymore. He warned the southerners “I will hang the first man I can get my hands on to the first tree I can find.” In 1833, Jackson requested Congress to pass a “force bill” allowing him, if need to, to call on the military to enforce the new tariff. Jackson represented dictatorship more than democracy. Jackson was a Democratic-Republican, who believed the government should be run by the common people, but his presidency didn’t show any signs of the “COMMON PEOPLE.”
From what I have learned about Andrew Jackson, I think he agreed with the settlers who wanted the Native Americans removed, because the setters who wanted the land owned by the Indians were southerner planters, small farmers in south and west whom supported Jackson a lot through the election and they shared the same background as him. Another reason I think Jackson agreed with the settlers because the land east of the Mississippi was very fertile to cultivate on, and he thought that it would be significant to the American economy since as a Democratic-Republican he believed that the economy should be based on agriculture. New Orleans which was on the land of Indians was
the major sea route in America at that time. Jackson might have thought that the American might loose the right to use the port if the Indians stay there. In order to feel protected, Jackson agreed with the settlers.
Please do not pass this sample essay as your own, otherwise you will be accused of plagiarism. Our writers can write any custom essay for you!
Andrew Jackson’s Democracy With Jackson's warm welcome to office in 1829, a strong foundation was set for a powerful Democratic rule. With Jackson's Machiavellian theories he believed that the "ends justified the means." Jackson integrated those beliefs into his presidency and used big government means to create a more democratic nation.
Jackson's Democratic thought was in obvious opposition to Critical Analysis of Andrew Jackson’s Presidency Andrew Jackson and his supporters have been criticized for upholding the principles of majority rule and the supremacy of the federal government inconsistently and unfairly. The validity of this statement varies in the cases of the recharter of the Bank, the nullification controversy, and the removal of the Native Americans.
In the case of the recharter Andrew Jackson During Andrew Jackson’s presidency (1829-1837), Jackson put in his own ideas that were significantly different being called Jacksonian Democracy. He dealt with the nullification in Southern states because of tariffs, removal of Native Americans, dealing with Federalist vs. State regarding removal, spoil system, and attacking the National Bank. Some of these events had a positive Andrew Jackson Bio More nearly than any of his predecessors, Andrew Jackson was elected by popular vote; as President he sought to act as the direct representative of the common man.
Born in a backwoods settlement in the Carolinas in 1767, he received sporadic education. But in his late teens he read law for about two years, and he Andrew jackson I will go over Andrew Jackson’s presidency, focusing on both the highs and the lows of his two terms in office, from 1829-1837. The issues that I'll focus on are states' rights, the tariff, the spoils system, Indian removal, and banking policies; these controversies brought forth strong rivalry over his years of president. He was