Jackson’s political philosophy
The spirit of Jackson’s political philosophy was indeed democratic. He was in favor of the participation of the common man in the government. He was a populist leader, a war hero, and he believed in the power of the “common man”. Instead of all this republican thinking, Jackson’s political philosophy had some serious limitations. That is his political philosophy can best be described as Jackson’s democracy, or to be more precise a limited democracy.
Jackson political philosophy was built on the following tenets. One, he believed in the extended voting rights of the people. Universal suffrage for white males was a central element of his philosophy. He was very engaged in the process of removing the property restriction for voting. Second, he was a strong supporter of the “spoils system”. The “spoils system” was the policy to appoint political supporters to government positions. In his eyes that was a good policy as it encouraged the participation of the common man in politics. In the economic sphere, his philosophical views favored the free market economy. He did not look favorably to the banking system as in his opinion they were there to exploit the common man.
Jackson was in favor of the expansion of the settlement of the white people further westward into the continent. But, expansion of white settlement would mean removal of the native Indians and so consequently Jackson favored Indian removal policy. That is why, he was not eager to interfere when the state of Georgia claimed its jurisdiction on the lands Cherokee people. The U.S Supreme Court gave its verdict in favor of the Cherokee tribe. Jackson’s views regarding the matter were, “Well, [Chief Justice] John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” He didn’t want to undermine the sovereignty of individual state, and he also knew expansion of the white settlements is necessary to improve the condition of the white common man. His political views compelled him to support the Indian removal policy. (Remini, Andrew Jackson and his Indian wars)
Jackson believed in a strong presidency, and though he was in favor of the state sovereignty, but he was not willing to undermine the writ of the Federation under any circumstances. So, when South Carolina nullified the ruling of the Federation regarding the new increased tariffs, Jackson was willing to go to war with South Carolina in order to prevent the encroachment of a state on the sphere of Federation’s authority. He considered presidency to be standing on the power of the common man and that is why he was not willing to accept that a state should undermine the will of the whole nation. In his eyes, increasing the tariffs was an act for the betterment of the whole Federation, and no single state had a right to nullify it.
The most significant crisis of Jackson’s era was his head on clash with the Second Bank of United States. He believed that the bank was a government monopoly, and it served only the elite. He considered the bank as an opponent of public interest and a tool for the exploitation of the common man. So, as an Everyman’s President, he set out to destroy the bank. To quote Jackson’s own words, “The bank is trying to kill me, but I will kill it!” So he did. (Remini) The political effect of the bank war included political upheaval as all the opponents of Jackson joined hands and made the renewal of the Bank an election issue. But the victory of Jackson in the election showed that people favored his view. Not only that even his nominee for the next election won the election and his party won the majority in the Senate as well. As, for the economic effects, the bank war did cause panic in the economic sphere as the state banks were unable to meet the demands of the public. In the views of some experts, this clash was behind the economic slowdown of mid 1830s.
Many critics of Jackson are of the opinion that he was an autocrat even during his reign, his opponents called him “King Andrew I”. An objective analysis of Jackson‘s era would show that though he didn’t look upon very favorably towards the emancipation of slaves and women, yet the overall spirit of his era was democratic. No one can deny that he was a populist leader and sincerely wanted to improve the plight of the common man. He was not a dictatorial autocrat rather he just believed in a strong presidency, as in his views, the presidency was the real manifestation of people’s will. No doubt, Jackson’s democracy is not as egalitarian as our modern day democracy is, but still the overall color of his philosophy was republican. And in an unbiased judgment, we have to categorize Jackson as a democrat.
Works Cited
"Andrew Jackson." n.d. sparknotes.com. 25 October 2014.
"Andrew Jackson." n.d. whitehouse.gov. 25 October 2014.
Remini, Robert V. Andrew Jackson and the bank war. 1967.
Remini, Robert Vincent. Andrew Jackson and his Indian wars. Penguin Group USA, 2002.
