What Do You Think?

      

Is Andrew Jackson's long-standing reputation as "the people's president" deserved? Why? Why not?         Andrew Jackson was one of the presidents of the United States. He did many things in order to try and make his country better including putting the spoils system into place, completing the indian removal, and his involvement with the bank war. Taking a closer look at these three events, his reputation as "the people's president" may be questioned. My group in class was given the job to learn about the spoils system. Our project we put together is below.

We learned that the spoils system was put into place by Andrew Jackson that let the people in his campaign have government positions. He did this to bribe people into joining his party. If his friends and followers are getting these high ranking positions just because they support Jackson, then how do we know if they are qualified and fit for the position? Thinking back to the essential question if this makes Jackson the people's president, I would have to say no so much. He is pleasing the people who he is giving positions, but he isn't concerned about what is best for the country and everyone else in it. If he was, then people deserving of their positions would be put into the government jobs.

After sharing our own presentation, it was time to listen to the two other topics. First, the bank war. Andrew Jackson fought against the wealthy because he wanted equal class/ He also wanted to keep small businesses because he feared the big corporations would gain too much power since he saw them as having nothing to lose. He also didn't want the bank to become too powerful because these not elected people were running it and could essentially take control. However, he was warned that failing to agree to the new bank charter would threaten his re election and cause an economic collapse which it did. Does this make Jackson the people's president? I think this is a tough one to choose because Andrew Jackson had the best intentions for his people and wanted to help the middle and lower classes, but in the end people still suffered as a result.

Next, the Indian removal. Basically, Andrew Jackson made five different tribes move out west in order to expand the country by gaining more land. He claimed that the removal of the Indians should be voluntary although they felt like they were being forced. The Indians couldn't leave peacefully, so war and law was used to move them out as peacefully as they could. I think that in this case, his is only being the people's president to the Americans because he was doing good by trying to expand, but he wasn't so nice to the Indians in doing so.

All in all I think this question doesn't have a clear right answer. I believe that Andrew Jackson wanted the best for his people and tried to give them what they wanted. However, he may have not gone about everything the right way. What do you think?

To learn more about Andrew Jackson you can watch this Crash Course video below!