The differences in positions between President Andrew Jackson and US Senator and vice-presidential running mate of Henry Clay, Theodore Frelinghuysen, are largely to due the differences in perception of the value of the Cherokees history in America and the superiority of the white man. Jackson believed that the Natives were savages that did not deserve the vast lands of the country but rather that the whites were entitled to it because they were much more “civilized” and “prosperous” as he claims in his Case for the Removal Act in 1829, rhetorically questioning,“What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and raged by a few thousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, and prosperous farms, embellished with all the improvements which art can devise or industry execute, occupied by more than 12,000,000 happy people, and filled with all the blessings of liberty, civilization, …show more content…
He says that there are only a “few thousand savages” that “rage” the forests of the nation creating a largely negative connotation whereas for the white men he says that there are “12,000,000 happy people” that are all joyously frolicking with the novel ideas of “liberty, civilization, and religion”. Jackson’s view is that any “good man” could see that the natives are simply inferior the whites and thus they must be moved in order to let the American people live in peace. However, opposing the bigotry of the heroic villain, Jackson, is Frelinghuysen, who made the case that the rights of man and civil liberties extended beyond the barriers of color and race. In his own protest speech, he maintains that, “Our ancestors found these people, far removed from the commotion of Europe, exercising all the rights, and enjoying the privileges, of free and independent sovereigns of this new
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Robert Remini’s Andrew Jackson and His Indian Wars is a book that makes you question Jackson's character. Remini addresses the long-standing debate of historians and scholars over whether or not Jackson was barbaric or whether he was a merciful savior that prevented the Native Americans from going extinct. Remini instead argues the opinion that Jackson was simply a man of his time. Despite this, Remini does show Jackson's inexcusable cruelty towards the Native Americans. He learned to fear and hate Indians from an early age.
Andrew Jackson and John Ross are two important historical figures when it comes to American democracy. When the United States was in a major constitutional crisis, these two men led the way back to greatness. They had quite a few things in common but they were two completely different people. Andrew Jackson is a person that we all know, or at least we think we know him (p. 1).
The Age of Jefferson and Jackson were distinct periods in American history that had a significant impact on the cultural and political realms of the US. The Age of Jefferson was from 1801 to 1825, distinguished by a focus on agrarianism, expansion, and a limited federal government. During Jefferson’s presidency, it was marked by the Louisiana Purchase. Which had doubled as big as the country. Besides, Jefferson’s philosophy emphasized the importance of individual liberty.
It is clear from the documents that Andrew Jackson was the hero of the common man. One reason that Andrew Jackson was the hero of the common man because he was very popular. Document 1 stated that he increased turnouts of voters. Document 1 states “shall the people rule ? Andrew Jacksonions the answering roar seeming to say, the people shall rule”.
When the year of 1807 came around, the way that America elected a president changed. In previous elections, only the rich men were able to vote which as a result whoever promised more the wealth was elected for president. When the common man was able to vote in 1807, the type of candidate to win the election change. As seen in the election of 1828 the person who was more relatable to the people, won because the common man was able to vote and so they used that opportunity and elected whoever they thought was going to help them. Overall the people preferred Jackson over Adams because Jackson was able to relate to the people better, and because he was a symbol of the American dream.
Because of that Jackson believed that they could be removed with violence. Andrew Jackson was a good president even though he did not respect the indians. The people also believed that he could defend them, since he was a general in the Battle of New Orleans. He made a courteous society instead of crooked democrats. Jackson was distinguished as a "true American" when he was a candidate for president.
The root of Jackson’s hatred toward the Native Americans, which would lead to the Trail of Tears, is with the Battle of Horseshoe Bend. In this battle, he ruthlessly massacred the Creek Indians. In fact, one American said, “The river might very well be called a river of blood” (4, 28:30). Fast forward to 1830, during which Congress passed the Indian Removal Act. This gave the green light for “the President to demarcate Indian territory on public land west of the Mississippi River and negotiate treaties with the Indian tribes for their resettlement” (1).
Partner DBQ Writing During the 1820’s and 1830’s, Andrew Jackson was a prominent and representative figure of the era, however, he primarily represented the South. Andrew Jackson was from the South and represented Southern beliefs. He ignored Northern issues and focused on what he believed was most important regarding his morals– the South. Jackson appeared like a tyrannical king, which caused him to believe in the idea of sacrificing the lives of certain people for the “greater good”. Andrew Jackson accomplished many different policies in his era of presidency, and although he only benefited the South, he is still considered a representative figure.
During Andrew Jackson’s presidency, he faced tremendous conflict with the Indians. As the United States began to expand, more and more issues began arising between the Americans and their Indian neighbors. Jackson had to decide whether or not to move the Indians out of Georgia and into a section of land in the west that he had specifically set aside for that purpose. Knowing the impact his decision would carry, he weighed the options before coming to a conclusion. Ultimately, he chose to move the Indians west.
Jeremy Correll Andrew Jackson DBQ Essay Andrew Jackson was elected as the 7th president of the United States in 1828. He was voted in with the title of being a representative of the Democratic Party. This started the beginning of what is known as the era of the common man. This is when the common people began to have a say in what the government did.
Born into a non-aristocratic poor family, somewhere in the Carolina’s on March 14, 1767, was a man named Andrew Jackson. Jackson, also called “Old Hickory” was a very bold proactive man in American history. From being a military hero and founding the democratic party to enacting the trail of tears and dismantling the of the Bank of the United States, the man and his legacy are a prominent topic for scholarly debate. Some believe he was a great president and some believe he was the worse president. But if you look at it from a moral perceptive or in the eyes of a foreigner, Jackson’s legacy was far more villainous than heroic.
I was very displeased by the information I learned this week. Native Americans, being the true residents of America, have been treated terribly throughout history. From the enslaving of innocent Native American tribes to receiving low value land, American Indians have not received respect or compassion. The pretentious white men who took over when “discovering” America completely destroyed many Native cultures and beliefs due to selfishness and ignorance.
The removal of Indians from their native lands being the start of a long list of actions made by Jackson, he was warmly thought of positively by most of the United States population and risked everything he had to give more power, and even control to everyday people and fighting for the everyday person, because he knew what it was like to come from nothing and be someone with nothing and no power and nothing to give to society like many of the everyday country. He was, a lot like his people ultimately kind and fearful, also smart but yet blind to some true problems in the everyday world, and a man who fought a war for what seemed like a life time Jackson was a man who to me could widely be compared to our first beloved president George Washington. But in Jon Meacham’s American Lion he has presented the set in history, human definition of an inspirational man who forever created the true and yet controversial definition of the American presidency and what it means to be an American. Because to be a President it’s more than a title it’s putting millions of people’s lives in your hands and looking to you to guide them in a time of national trouble and fear, this book gives you all of the above from start to
Andrew Jackson’s sentiment towards the Native Americans was certainly not a kind one. Manifest destiny was a popular belief among Americans, including Jackson, and he would go to the extent of forcing Native Americans out of their homes to reach their “ordained goal”. He believed in the expansion of southern slavery which is why he pushed for removing the Indians west of the Mississippi, which makes it the more disgraceful. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 said that it will allow American government to offer in-state territories to the Indian’s for their western land. This wasn’t the case when the U.S. went in and drove the Indians out by force.
Jackson vs. Clay Andrew Jackson vs. Henry Clay: Democracy and Development in Antebellum America is a book written by Harry L. Watson. Harry L. Watson writes the different stances of the presidential race in the Antebellum Era in America. He is very unbiased in his writing, clearly stating each presidential candidate. Andrew Jackson’s beliefs are clearly democratic, meaning he believed that a growing wealth and power in the business community may erode the equality of ordinary citizens. This party was also known as the ‘Jackson Party’.