Andrew Jackson was inconsistent in his ideology throughout his administration. His positions on nullification, Cherokee Removal, and the Bank of the United States were key examples of his inconsistency. Jackson was against the Ordinance of Nullification because the tariffs were constitutional. However, he failed to listen to the common man as he preached by ignoring the complaints of the Southerners. Although he was a propentnt of slavery, he did not side with the South Carolinians, even though they disliked the tariffs because the decrease in profits threatened their power over slaves. He was inconsistent on his position towards slavery by siding against it through his opposition of nullification. While he believed in state rights, he declared Federal superiority over the legislatures and demanded they accept the tariffs. He additionally threatened the states with military force to ensure their compliance. Jackson contradict his beliefs in the limitation of executive power by forcefully silencing the state governments. Previously, Jackson had preached union with friends and to reward supporters, yet he sided with politicians held no respect for him, and vice versa. This alienated Calhoun, which went against his unity ideal. The Southerners who had supported him because of his “common man” image felt betrayed. Throughout the nullification ordeal, he strengthened executive power through the military Force Bill of 1833, therefore threatening the balance of the three branches. This contradicted his goal to limit presidential power. His actions proved that he onlt listend to certain regions of power, not the “common man”
Jackson was against the Bank of the United States for similar reasons as the republican, Jefferson. The bank helped promote an industrial society, and his opposition to it contradicted his “laissez faire” and democratic ideology. This was because he wanted to stop the growth of industrial society in exchange for an agrarian society, which was a republican ideal. Through providing the means for innovation and property ownership, the Bank represented the means for a more democratic society. His opposition stunted the rise of the middle class and led to the Panic of 1819, hurting many citizens.
Although he was considered the man of new opportunity, Jackson constricted the rights of women, blacks, and Native Americans. He ignored the pleas of the Cherokee and women supporters to stop the indian removal. He additionally undercut the Supreme Court’s ruling, contradicting his pledge to enforce the power of the Supreme court with commoners. Jackson wanted to limit presidential tyranny yet he used his presidential power to overrule everyone. Even if many Native Americans had adapted to Amrerican society, he only saw them as obstacles to the prevalence of the superior civilization. Although advertised as the “man of opportunity” and the “common man”, it became clear that this only referred to white men. He was a Democrat who became a tyrant, a defender of political and economic rights for all people but the Natibve Americans.
How did democracy change? Did “mass participation” improve American democracy?
Jefferson democracy, old democracy, meant government for the people, a yeoman ideal, state power, and only the elite in power. Jackson’s administration changed democracy into government by the people, mass participation, expansion of suffrage, and a “laissez faire” ideology. New democracy extended rights to all white men of any social standing. Civic duty was emphasized. Social class no longer limited political involvement. People of means no longer led for the commoners, they were given the right to rule for themselves. Mass participation improved democracy because it included more people. The inclusion of less educated citizens led to the support of education through democractic ideals. This did, however, lower the respect of visiting Europeans when they saw the less sophisticated politicians. This new democracy supported rights and suffrage movements over time.
How was the Whig party an alternative to Jackson and the Democrats?
The Whig party was an alternative to Jackson’s Democratic party because it was created to oppose Jackson’s king-like conduct. Followers were against the spoils system and the undermining of elected legislators. Similar to the Federalists of 1790 that fought the Democratic-Republicans, they wanted men of ability and wealth to lead. Unlike Jackson, they celebrated entrepreneurship and embraced the Industrial Revolution. Whigs supported moneyed capitalists and condemned Jackson’s crusade against nullification. The Southern Whigs wanted a stratified society because the richer yeoman resented the fact that the lower planters had equal political power. This political party focused solely on the rising middle class while Jackson changed the region of power he listened to. Contrary to the Democrats’ efforts to get rid of the Protective tariff and the National Bank, the Whigs supported both. Jacksonians represented the lower class, common man. They praised the individual’s mind. Meanwhile, the Whigs were the nationalists and industrialists. The difference in follower types was the key reason on why their policies drastically differed.
Refer to the documents on pgs 336-337 to answer a, b, and c.
Citing from the documents, and using your understanding of the era, briefly explain how the status of education was defended in ONE of the following regions: - New England - Mid-Atlantic States -The South
The Mid-Atlantic state of Pennsylvania defended education on the basis of democracy and pride. Thaddeus Stevens claimed that having an uneducated society is humiliating in the nineteenth century while the United States is competing with European nations. It would be “degrading to a Christain age and a free republic”. Being partly a republic, Americans deserve to have sufficient information not only to accumulate wealth but “to direct wisely the Legislatures, the Ambassadors, and the Executive of the nation”. Pennsylvania emphasized the importance of education by declaring it a duty of the government for the welfare of its citizens.
Citing from the documents, and using your understanding of the era, briefly contrast how the status of education was defended in ONE the other two regions from the list above.
The New England states defended education through the American ideals of freedom. An article in the “North American Review” declared eduction as the “palpable rights which are recognized by all free states” to promise the success of the people. Similarly to Pennsylvania, they defended eduction with American ideologies. In order for people to rise and become self-made entrepreneurs, they needed personal security and intellect. Only the educated could defend their rights and understand when to dispute injustices. “This would be freedom” because they would be able to understand politics.
How did the various conditions of education in America impact the changing concept of democracy?
The support of education raised the benefits of democracy. Voting was done efficiently to support beneficial projects. Injustices were more properly corrected. The increase in intellect led to in depth debates on policies based on what benefited different social groups and political parties. The common people could check the aristocratic population. Democracy was tied to the Industrial Revolution through the freedom to experiment and hold property. The Industrial Revolution was only possible through the rise of innovation through education. Education increased civic engagement, strengthening democracy through mass participation. Anti-democractic movements could be countered by the educated middle class. It additionally increased the likelihood of success for political movements through proper writing in pamphlets and cases against dictatorships.