Andrew Jackson's Presidency
The Presidency of Andrew Jackson constituted a significant change in American politics. Never before had a president claimed so much power, and never before had a president claimed to be a true representative of all classes of people. An accurate portrayal of this historical figure has been debated since 1857, when the first historical narrative of the Jacksonian era was published by George Tucker (Cave). There does not seem to be a time in the foreseeable future when the matter will be resolved. That being said, it is worth considering all the evidence which either suggests that the seventh President of the United States was a President of the Common Man or a dictatorial ruler. One of the actions that Jackson has taken that supports Jackson’s
…show more content…
Prior to Jackson, the veto was exercised strictly on constitutional grounds. However, 12 vetoes were dished out during Jackson’s term, strictly for political reasons (Bomboy). The largest example of this behavior is in Jackson’s vetoing of the National Bank’s recharter on July 10, 1832. Jackson stressed in his veto statement of the “great evils to our country and its institutions [which] might flow from such from such a concentration of power in the hands of a few men irresponsible to the people” (Schlesinger 91). Jackson created an ingroup, comprised of himself and “the humble members of society” - the farmers and laborers and producers -- and an outgroup, made up of the rich and powerful, the wealthy businessmen of the northeast who were capitalising on and taking advantage of these producers. As far as the common man was concerned, Jackson’s executive actions were aimed to further his protection from the exploitation he was experiencing from the upper class. Thus, he “responded enthusiastically to his leader’s appeal” (Schlesinger 91). Many argue, however, that Jackson’s argument is incorrect all together. Professor William Graham Sumner said, with regard to Jackson’s veto, that he, “unjustly, passionately, ignorantly and without regard to the truth, assailed a great financial institution” (qtd. in Cave 8). It can be argued that Jackson created and promoted this animosity between the upper and lower class in order to secure his popularity, which would allow him some forgiveness among the masses for his subsequent questionable acts as
Prior to Jackson, the veto was exercised strictly on constitutional grounds. However, 12 vetoes were dished out during Jackson’s term, strictly for political reasons (Bomboy). The largest example of this behavior is in Jackson’s vetoing of the National Bank’s recharter on July 10, 1832. Jackson stressed in his veto statement of the “great evils to our country and its institutions [which] might flow from such from such a concentration of power in the hands of a few men irresponsible to the people” (Schlesinger 91). Jackson created an ingroup, comprised of himself and “the humble members of society” - the farmers and laborers and producers -- and an outgroup, made up of the rich and powerful, the wealthy businessmen of the northeast who were capitalising on and taking advantage of these producers. As far as the common man was concerned, Jackson’s executive actions were aimed to further his protection from the exploitation he was experiencing from the upper class. Thus, he “responded enthusiastically to his leader’s appeal” (Schlesinger 91). Many argue, however, that Jackson’s argument is incorrect all together. Professor William Graham Sumner said, with regard to Jackson’s veto, that he, “unjustly, passionately, ignorantly and without regard to the truth, assailed a great financial institution” (qtd. in Cave 8). It can be argued that Jackson created and promoted this animosity between the upper and lower class in order to secure his popularity, which would allow him some forgiveness among the masses for his subsequent questionable acts as