For hundreds of years, politicians have searched for the perfect form of government to be the foundation onto which a strong and prosperous nation can be built. A Democracy is a form of government by the people. In a Democracy, a code of law is not required and the majority always rules. Similarly, in a Republic, the power of the government resides with the people. In addition, a Republic requires a code of law, which protects the minority by limiting the majority, and a system of checks and balances. In the New Nation era, the Sedition Act and the Revolution of the 1800s demonstrated the need for a code of law in order to prevent revolts. Furthermore, in the Jacksonian Era, Andrew Jackson’s abuse of power exhibited the importance of checks …show more content…
The Sedition Act states that “any person who shall write, print, utter or publish...scandalous and malicious writing…against the government…shall be punished” (“The Sedition Act”). This Act violated the first amendment of the Constitution by outlawing free speech. Because the government disregarded its code of law, the Constitution was clearly not a strong element of the government in the New Nation Era. Thus, in response to this disregard of the Constitution, Kentucky and Virginia threatened to revolt if they were forced to follow this un-constitutional act (class notes, 9/22/16). These un-constitutional actions rendered the people to feel that their inalienable rights were being jeopardized, causing states to threaten revolt against the government to maintain their inalienable rights. Thus, in order to be successful, a government must highly value a code of law, protecting the people’s inalienable rights, to prevent violent revolts. The Revolution of the 1800s was a “peaceful transfer of power from Federalists to Democratic Republicans (Anti-Federalists)”, showing that “different political parties can exist” (class notes, 9/22/16). The Constitution outlines a process to peacefully transfer power between two political parties, preventing violence in the United States. Thus, a code of law is able to restrict violence among …show more content…
In the Gilded Age, “the 250,000 Native Americans who lived on the Great Plains were confined onto reservations” (“Overview of the Gilded Age”, Mintz). Because the Native Americans were not given as much political power as whites, they were considered a racial minority. The Native Americans’ lack of political power enticed the white majority to act selfishly, confining the Native Americans into reservations to make room for westward expansion. Although these reservations were beneficial for whites, they were not beneficial for the Native Americans who were forced out of their homes. Thus, the power of the white majority caused negative repercussions for the Native American minority. Furthermore, during the Gilded Age, the “rich and powerful influenced politics, changing the government for their best interest”. This power within government caused “the wealthier to get wealthier and the poor to get poorer” (class notes, 9/22/16). The wealthy had more power within the government, putting them in the majority. This power allowed the wealthy to act selfishly, enacting laws to improve their businesses. Thus, during this time the wealthy got wealthier. However, as the wealthy majority ignored needs of the poor minority, the poor became poorer, increasing wealth inequality. Similarly, in the south, “white southerners made it difficult for African Americans to vote” (class
As the author of Andrew Jackson and the Search for Vindication, James C. Curtis seems to greatly admire Andrew Jackson. Curtis pointed out that Jackson was a great American general who was well liked by the people. As history shows, Andrew Jackson had his flaws; for example, he thought the National Bank of the United States was going to kill him but he was determined to kill it first. He resented the Bank because he thought it was the reason for the Panic of 1819. Andrew Jackson was elected to the presidency in 1824 after first being nominated in 1822. He was sixty-one when he was elected the seventh president of the United States.
Throughout his presidency, Andrew Jackson was regarded as both a tyrant (Document E) as well a democratic rembrandt. However, by the conclusion of his rule, Andrew Jackson’s America had emerged as a pseudo democracy, strongly supported and advocated for, but falling short and ultimately failing. The drastic reforms during the Age of Jackson brought about radical changes to the young nation that would be felt throughout the country and would set the foundation for politics today. President Andrew Jackson reformed the American voting system, made significant moves against the National Bank, sparked the beginning of democratic reform movements, and most importantly gave the Common Man a voice in the government. These democratic initiatives, however, were not seen everywhere as America was slowly divided by differing views on contentious topics and individualistic ideals. Jacksonian America, did not promote the democratic
During and after the turmoil of the American Revolution, the people of America, both the rich and the poor, the powerful and the meek, strove to create a new system of government that would guide them during their unsure beginning. This first structure was called the Articles of Confederation, but it was ineffective, restricted, and weak. It was decided to create a new structure to guide the country. However, before a new constitution could be agreed upon, many aspects of life in America would have to be considered. The foremost apprehensions many Americans had concerning this new federal system included fear of the government limiting or endangering their inalienable rights, concern that the government’s power would be unbalanced, both within its branches and in comparison to the public, and trepidation that the voice of the people would not be heard within the government.
The validity of President Andrew Jackson’s response to the Bank War issue has been contradicted by many, but his reasoning was supported by fact and inevitably beneficial to the country. Jackson’s primary involvement with the Second Bank of the United States arose during the suggested governmental re-chartering of the institution. It was during this period that the necessity and value of the Bank’s services were questioned.
The bank would be more for the rich and the foreign, but have no benefits for the poor. Jackson’s political rival, Daniel Webster, believes that this letter from Jackson showed just how evil Jackson was. Webster does not think Jackson was vetoing for the good of the people, but to ‘stir the pot’. By Jackson sending this letter, it causes a stir between the rich and the poor. The poor would feel imbalanced against the poor, and arguments would rush out.
During The Jacksonian Era many different views and ideas were predominant about the United States. The Jacksonian Democrats were a loose coalition of different peoples and interests pulled together by a common practical idea. That idea was that they all were followers of President Andrew Jackson. Jacksonian Democrats viewed themselves as guardians of the Constitution when in fact they were not. When dealing with politics and ideas within the Democratic Party of the time the Jacksonians proved to be both guardians and violators of the Constitution. Individual liberty is another area in which the Jacksonians were advocates to different sides of the topic at different times. The Jacksonians also proved to be champions for equality of economic opportunity. The Jacksonians demonstrated themselves to be, not the proponents they thought they were, but instead violators of the US Constitution.
This reminds of the real reason Andrew Jackson was so passionate about vetoing the bank, which wasn’t that, “the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes,” (Doc B). During this time of Jackson’s presidency, the election was soon to come, and his opponent Henry Clay wanted to renew the bank charter well before it was due, in order to better his position to run. Andrew Jackson took this as an offense, and started a personal war with the bank’s president, Nicholas Biddle. In reality, it was Jackson with the “selfish purposes” to veto the bank in the first
Andrew Jackson was a man that people see that he is a good person and others say he is a terrible person. Andrew Jackson can be bad person and a good person it depends what type of person is Andrew Jackson is he going to help out the world or is he going to mess up the world? Democracy is a form of government were the people have a right to assist in the law making process. If Jackson didn’t support the people and wasn’t in the government the bank and the people would be in a huge mess. Andrew Jackson was very democratic and there are political , economic and geographic ways to prove it.
The United States of America is one of the most powerful nation-states in the world today. The framers of the American Constitution spent a great deal of time and effort into making sure this power wasn’t too centralized in one aspect of the government. They created three branches of government to help maintain a checks and balance system. In this paper I will discuss these three branches, the legislative, the executive, and the judicial, for both the state and federal level.
Andrew Jackson was a very influential, and controversial, president and Great American. Andrew Jackson was born on March 15th, 1767. He died on June 8th, 1845(“History.net”). He was 6’1” and weighed 145lbs(“History.net”). He also was the first president to try to be assassinated(“waltercoffey.wordpress.com”).
To some people Andrew Jackson is remembered as the, metaphorically speaking, “People’s King” and is accused of dictator-like political moves. However, Andrew Jackson was quite the contrary, he was exalted amongst the people for being the new era of democracy: instilling a political revolution, the protection of the American people, and social equality among the masses. Therefore, Andrew Jackson was a precedent of democratic rule in the United States.
Jackson remained in the military after the war. Late in 1817,he received orders to subdue the Seminole Native Americans, who were raiding across the border from Spanish Florida itself. He captured its bastions at St. Marks Pensacola and arrested, tried, and executed two British nationalists whom he charged with abetting the Native Americans.
Andrew Jackson is one of the most controversial presidents. Many regard him as a war hero, the father of the Democratic Party, an inspiring leader, and a spokesman for the common man. While there is plenty to praise about the seventh president, his legacy is tarnished by his racism, disregard for the law of the land, cruelty towards the Native Americans, and ruthless temper. Jackson was an intriguing man who was multi-faceted. One must not look at a singular dimension, and cast judgment on him as a whole. To accurately evaluate one of the most complex presidents, it is crucial to observe Jackson from all possible angles. Prior lifestyle, hardships in life, political ideology, lifestyle of the time, political developments, and his character
However, critics of Jackson and democracy called him “King Andrew I” because of his apparent abuse of presidential power [vetoing]. These critics believed he favored the majority so much that it violated the U.S. constitution, and they stated he was straying too far away from the plan originally set for the United States. Because of the extreme shift of power to the majority, the limiting of rights of the few [merchants, industrialists] and the abuse of power under Jackson’s democracy, the foundational documents set in the constitution was violated, and the work of the preceding presidents were all but lost. During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms.
The very history of the country, a major contributor to the evolution of its political culture, shows a legacy of democracy that reaches from the Declaration of Independence through over two hundred years to today’s society. The formation of the country as a reaction to the tyrannical rule of a monarchy marks the first unique feature of America’s democratic political culture. It was this reactionary mindset that greatly affected many of the decisions over how to set up the new governmental system. A fear of simply creating a new, but just as tyrannic...