I've realised something interesting.
Andrew Jackson is possibly the single most controversial figure in American history, because he is STILL CONTROVERSIAL TO-DAY, over a hundred and fifty years after his death.
For those of you who may not know, Jackson was a military and political figure in early American history. He was a Senator from Tennessee and Military Governor of Florida, a ( Read more... )
For those of you who may not know, Jackson was a military and political figure in early American history. He was a Senator from Tennessee and Military Governor of Florida, a ( Read more... )
Jackson is definitely one of my favorite presidents, right up there with Cleveland and the Roosevelts.
I think Jackson is definitely a visionary- he had a way he wanted things to be in America, and damned if he wasn't going to get there. He got basically everything he wanted to, from the bank issue to public safety to the recommitment of democracy. When Jackson ran the first time, he was running against John Quincy Adams (JQA), Crawford, and Henry Clay (who never dies ever). Basically what happened is nobody won enough electoral votes and it went to the house (where Clay was Speaker, and very influential besides). JQA and Clay made a deal that if Clay swayed House opinion towards him, he would make Clay secretary of state. Clay agreed, the "Corrupt Bargain" (1824 btw) was struck, and JQA was president.
Now, JQA is a very cool guy, but he didn't mesh well with the American people at the time (especially with the new West, where Jackson with from. Because this is pre civil war, sectionalist tension is SUPER HIGH, especially with the generally unpopular Missouri Compromise just four years before) and so BASICALLY EVERYONE HATES JQA EVEN THOUGH HE REALLY ISN'T THAT BAD.
So naturally, the next year we have universal white male suffrage, and the west goes FUCK YEAAAAAH and elects Jackson!
And the Northern aristocracy is like, oh shit.
And the Southern aristocracy (which was actually a perverse adaptation of traditional English feudalism BUT THAT IS A WHOLE OTHER STORY) is like OHHHH SHIT.
Jackson arrives in Washington
and he is smooth with a capital smoooooooo.
There is so much more but I would probably go on forever and this makes like zero sense already. :(
If you haven't read it already, I highly recommend American Lion by John Meacham. It is an EXCELLENT biography of Jackson and does an excellent exposé of his home life, his political life, and where the two crossed.
Reply
BECAUSE MY FAVOURITE PRESIDENT IS JQA*!
Jackson's victory in 1828 was definitely a loud and clear message that with universal adult free male suffrage, things were not going to go the way that they had previously gone. Ever again. JQA was a Northern aristocrat whose experience was in diplomacy; that sort of person wouldn't be elected again until...well, EVER, actually. Although I think that if JQA hadn't been President he'd be better remembered as one of the greatest American diplomats instead of just 'that guy who became President because Henry Clay took kickbacks'.
Also, Clay was like a freaking cockroach. He was elected to the Senate despite not meeting the Constitutional age requirement, served there twice, entered the House when the Kentucky legislature wouldn't put him back in the Senate, became Speaker IN HIS FIRST YEAR IN THE HOUSE, served as Speaker THREE TIMES, became Secretary of State, entered the Senate again, and then entered the Senate AGAIN, FOR THE FOURTH NON-CONSECUTIVE TIME, before finally dying at the age of seventy-five. HE WOULD JUST NOT STAY DOWN.
Also, Jackson's inauguration. ONE-TON BLOCK OF CHEESE. Enough said.
What do you like about Cleveland, by the way? It's not that I don't like Cleveland, but I've never seen somebody list him as a favourite President.
*aside from Theodore Roosevelt. It's assumed that any time somebody says "my favourite American President is x" where x=/= TR, the words "not counting TR" are implied.
Reply
During his presidency, congress raised a notion to include a literacy test for all incoming immigrants, which was mostly born out of racism but under the guise of "national security". It was supposed to keep out communists. Clevelend vetoed it on the grounds that people who were very literate in Europe were actually more likely to be Communists, considering they could read all the propaganda (as opposed to the typical peasant-farmer-escaping-pogroms).
His last words also really resonate with me, just because they're so fitting- "I have tried so hard to do right." Is he a visionary leader? Not really. Is he controversial? Only in context. But despite that, I feel like this guy was just a fair, decent sort of gentleman who did his best with what he had. I respect that.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment