andrew jackson apush paper
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/8/2019 Andrew Jackson APUSH paper
1/7
Ray Cheng
APUSH Period 1
November 15, 2010
Mr. Kessler
A Great DemocraticExperiment?The rise of white male political influence, economic
opportunities, and a greeting to individual liberties.
-
8/8/2019 Andrew Jackson APUSH paper
2/7
The victory of Andrew Jackson at the Election of 1828 began a distinct era in Americanhistory, the Jacksonian Era. The economic, political, and social foundations set during the Federal
Era were shaken by a wave of change as America was transitioning into a new phase of
development. The people were ready for change and it was this necessity for change that led to
Andrew Jacksons victory. He saw that there was a lack of political democracy and that there had to
be more political influence for the common man. After the Panic of 1819, Jackson was angered that
the common man did not have the economic opportunity that the privileged had. He understood that
the common man was in need of more individual liberty. What defined Jacksonian Democracy was
the belief that America could become a true democracy through a trust in the abilities of the
common man. Andrew Jackson claimed to be the champion of his people and pledged to fight for
his common man. However, to Jackson, the common man was not black, Indian, nor female. To
Jackson, the common man was a white male. Although white males enjoyed an increase in political
influence and economic opportunity, and the Reform Movement increased support for individual
liberty during the Jacksonian Era, ultimately this era cannot be considered a great democratic
experiment because Andrew Jackson did not defend the economic, political, and social interests of
all the people; he abused his executive power at the expense of the people, and continued the
American tradition of inequality and discrimination against women and minorities.
There was an increase in economic opportunities for white males during the Jacksonian Era,
however these opportunities came at the cost of the individual rights of Indians and suppressed
women. Andrew Jackson had witnessed the suffering of the common man during the Panic of 1819
as a result of the Federal Banks actions. On July 10, 1832, President Jackson vetoed an early re-
charter bill for the Federal Bank passed by congress. Jackson viewed the Federal Bank as a
monopoly, not because it cornered the banking businessbut because it enjoyed a federal charter
-
8/8/2019 Andrew Jackson APUSH paper
3/7
that endowed it with privileges no other bank possessed (Degler p163). When President Jackson
won re-election in 1832, he appointed Roger B. Taney as Secretary of the Treasury and ordered him
to withdraw all federal funds from the Federal Bank. The Deposit Act of 1836 distributed these
funds to state banks. Jackson supported a policy of deregulation for his pet banks because he
believed that it would bring more economic opportunity to the common man. However, it was the
un-centralization of the state banks that led to an economic failure. Without a sober central bank in
control, the pet bank flooded the country with paper money (Text12 p272). Andrew Jacksons
bank veto and his deposit acts resulted in the Panic of 1837. The Jacksonian Era cannot be
considered a great democratic experiment because although Jackson terminated the Federal Bank to
prevent another failure such as the Panic of 1819, he abused his executive power at the expense of
the people when he vetoed the Bank Charter of 1832, and action clearly supported by Congress.
Ironically Jacksons decisions following the veto led to another economic failure, Panic of 1837.
The Panic of 1837 demonstrated the continuation of the American tradition of inequality. During
the Jacksonian Era, inequality [between the rich and the lower social class] wasgreater than it
would be even later in the century (Degler p159). In 1833, the richest one per cent of the
population owned a third of all the non-corporate wealth in Boston, while eighty-six per cent of the
population held only fourteen per cent (Degler p159). Furthermore, there was a factory boom and
an increase in manufacturing in America during this time. However, this expansion of economic
opportunity was not equal and it was at the expense of many. The factory boom led to the
establishment of Slater Textile Mills. The labor force of the Slater Mills was made up of young
rural girls being paid cent by cent. White male factory owners benefited greatly from the high
demand for textiles and cheap labor. Although the economic opportunities for profit and wealth
increased for white male factory owners, economic opportunity for the Lowell and Slater women
-
8/8/2019 Andrew Jackson APUSH paper
4/7
did not increase during the Jacksonian Era because they were exploited for cheap labor. Another
example of an increase in economic opportunities for white males but at the expense of others was
the Sweep West. This sweep came from industrialization and commerce, the growth of
populations, the rise in the value of land, and the greed of businessmen (Zinn p136). However
there was and obstacle to the land-hungry white males. The West had long been occupied by the
Native Americans. In order to remove the Native Americans to clear the way for white males, the
Indian Removal Act of 1830 was enacted. The politely named, Indian Removal, cleared the land
for white occupancy between the Appalachians and the Mississippi (Zinn p125), and forced the
tribes off their lands. This act went against Supreme Court Justice John Marshalls ruling for the
Cherokee tribe in the case of Worcester vs. Georgia in 1832. Andrew Jackson abused his executive
power once more to override the Supreme Court and forced the Cherokees to migrate from Georgia
to Oklahoma, where thousands lost there lives in this Trail of Tears. It is clear that there was no
increase in economic opportunities for the Native Americans. However, the economic opportunities
of white males clearly increased as a result of the Sweep West. There were happy effects for the
white majority at the cost of four thousand deaths for the Indian minority (Zinn p140). The Trail of
Tears was a clear example of the continuation of the American tradition of discrimination because
Andrew Jackson cleared the land for the common man at the expense of thousands of Indian lives.
The Jacksonian Era cannot be considered a great democratic experiment because Andrew Jackson
continued the American tradition of inequality and discrimination, by increasing economic
opportunity for white males at the expense of exploited rural girls and the lives of thousands of
Cherokees.
The increase in political influence for the common man cannot be considered a great
democratic experiment because Andrew Jackson abused his executive power not for the good of the
-
8/8/2019 Andrew Jackson APUSH paper
5/7
country but for his personal interests. Andrew Jackson supported the common man to the fullest,
and under Jacksonian Democracy, there was an expansion of voting rights for white males. States
altered their constitutions in conformity with the principle that manhood, not property, was the basis
for political rights (Degler p149). Jackson abolished property qualifications for suffrage, however,
this still cannot be considered a great democratic experiment because women, Indians, and slaves
were left out of the picture. This was a clear example of the continuation of inequality and
discrimination in America because Andrew Jackson only expanded the political democracy of white
males. Also, nullification became a difficult problem for Jackson. When a high tariff was passed
that benefited the North and the West, the South was angry against this Tariff of Abominations and
began to advocate states rights. The nullification advocates formed the Kentucky and Virginia
resolutions during the Federal Era and Jackson had inherited the political hot potato (Text12
p263) when he had to face John C. Calhouns South Carolina Exposition. Going a stride beyond
the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions, it bluntly and explicitly proposed that the states could nullify
the tariff (Text12 p264). There was a compromise, but Jackson was not satisfied and convinced
Congress to pass the Force Bill. This increased the executive power of President Jackson because it
gave him the authorization to use the military to collect federal tariffs. Here Andrew Jackson was a
strong advocate of a strong government. However, when it came to the removal of the Indians,
Jackson was an advocate for states rights. As soon as Jackson was elected President, Georgia,
Alabama, and Mississippi began to pass laws to extend the states rule over the Indians in their
territory (Zinn p133). The laws took away the individual rights of the Indians, and broke up their
territories through state lotteries. In Worcester vs. Georgia of 1832, a case defending the rights of
the Cherokee tribe members, Jackson ignored [the mistreatment of the Indians] and supported state
action (Zinn p133) even though Chief Justice John Marshall in the Supreme Court had ruled in
-
8/8/2019 Andrew Jackson APUSH paper
6/7
favor of the Cherokees. This obstruction to political liberty was a neat illustration of the uses of the
federal system: depending on the situation, blame could be put on the states (Zinn p133). This was
not an increase in political democracy but another example of Andrew Jacksons unconstitutional
use of executive power in pursuit of his own personal interests. Andrew Jacksons actions towards
these regional conflicts were examples of his personal disdain for defiance and Indians. Political
democracy during the Jacksonian Era cannot be considered a great democratic experiment because
Andrew Jackson exploited his executive power and continued the American tradition of inequality.
The nineteenth century Reform Movement demonstrated the need for more individual rights,
however, the Jacksonian Era cannot be considered a great democratic experiment because the
reform movement did not actually lead to an increase in individual rights. Before the reform
movements, women could not vote nor own property. During the reform movement, society was
called into question and challenged to justify themselves (Degler p168). In 1848, women such as
Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton came together at the Seneca Falls Convention in New
York. Together, these women fought for suffrage and gender equality. They drafted the Declaration
of Sentiments which supported female suffrage, but in the end, the fundamental rights of women
were still ignored and oppressed. Although these women fought for their cause, their actions led to
no true expansion of individual liberty until the nineteenth amendment of the Constitution which
granted voting rights for women in 1920, almost seventy years after the Seneca Falls Convention
took place. Women were still second-class citizens and still could not vote, and workers, too were
oppressed. John Marshall ruled worker unions legal and constitutional but they [had] to wait
another generation before social and economic conditions would allow them to strike root and
grow (Degler p167). This was a clear example of the continuation of inequality and discrimination
in America. The clearest example of the restriction of individual liberties was Jacksons Indian
-
8/8/2019 Andrew Jackson APUSH paper
7/7
Removal Act. This act forced countless Indian tribes off of their homelands and the migration of
thousands of Cherokees form Georgia to Oklahoma on the Trail of Tears to provide white males
with an obstruction free sweep west. The Indians not only lost their land, but they also lost their
individual rights. Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi passed laws to strengthen their rule over the
Indians and took away their fundamental rights. John Marshall ruled the Georgia Law
unconstitutional in Worcester vs. Georgia of 1832, but Georgia ignored him and President Jackson
refused to enforce the court order (Zinn p141). The Indians were without protection, without
funds, and at the mercy of the states (Zinn p138). Jackson once again abused his executive power
by overruling the Supreme Court, was undemocratic towards the treatment of Indians, and
continued the tradition of discrimination and inequality. The Jacksonian Era cannot be considered a
great democratic experiment because of the continuation of inequality and discrimination against
women, workers, and minorities.
Jacksonian Democracy led to an increase of political influence and economic freedom for
the common man and there was also an increase in the need for individual liberties. However, the
Jacksonian Era cannot be considered a great democratic experiment because Andrew Jacksons
common man did not include the African Americans, women, nor the Indians. Jacksons common
man was a white male. As President, Jackson failed to consider the interests of all people. Women
and slaves still could not vote or hold office. The Reform Movement only laid foundations for
future movements. There was only an increase of political influence and economic opportunities for
white males. In the end, there was a continuation of unjust decisions, inequality, and the
unforgettable inhumane actions made towards Indians in America. It is because of these issues that
the Jacksonian Era cannot be considered a great democratic experiment.