A professor from UCLA’s history emeritus department, Daniel Walker Howe, not only a professor but also an author of The Political Culture of the American Whigs (University of Chicago Press, 1980) and Making the American Self: Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln (Harvard University Press, 1970). (Pg. 92) Included in the article, Did the Election of 1828 Represent a Democratic Revolt of the People?, was Daniel Walker Howe’s article, What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848. Howe’s article disagreed that the 1828 election was the result of the American people pursuing a democratic revolt. Overall, some of his supporting evidence included; statements that there wasn’t a true democratic party fully established, he mentions …show more content…
After reading both sides, one may feel more comfortable with Howe’s point of view, because he made me feel that it was premature to claim that the 1828 was when the people wanted to make a transition to a democratic government. Some may find that it was premature, because one could conclude from the UCLA professor’s article that the term had only just started being used, and that they didn’t even always call themselves democrats. Also, it may appear that the term “democrat” was fully established even throughout the political atmosphere, so it seems to me to be inappropriate to say that Jackson’s victory was a democrat revolt of the people, because the reader could feel as the people don’t understand the difference between a republican and a democrat, but instead saw the difference between Jackson and Adams as people. This reviewer, however, agrees that this election was a pivotal transition in the American government and started the democratic political party, but doesn’t believe that it was intended that way by the voters, but a …show more content…
(Pg.88) Unlike Howe, Wilentz agreed that the election of 1828 was a Democratic revolt of the people, because he believed Jackson’s campaign focused on reforms. “Instead of a long list of positions and proposals Jackson’s campaign revolved around calls for “reforms,” a theme broad enough to unite disparate coalition without merely resorting to platitudes.” (Pg. 84) This statement contrasts with what Howe believed Jackson’s campaign platform was, Wilentz didn’t revolve his article around the personal aspects of the election, such as all the direct character attacks against each other, but instead he seemed to believe that the election was surrounded on the actual political issues and the candidate’s political stances. Readers could be convinced, because they feel as if he overlooked the effect that the personal character attacks had on the voter's’ choice for their president. While, some may have been concerned over the political issues how could the vast majority learn enough about a democratic party to know they want it to completely overtake the republican party in office at the time. Lastly, readers may feel as though there wasn’t enough time or a well enough established democratic party for the people to intentionally to want to overthrow the republicans in
George Washington himself wanted to avoid a party system in America. Unfortunately, even when saying this he was part of the beginning of one of the first parties in United States politics. There have been many different parties surface since the beginning of the American political system. They all have different thoughts, policies, and motivations. Each party has come and gone, some have made significant contributions and others have not. The first split, and beginning of the party system, came with the differentiation between the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans. These two parties were extremely different in thought, design, and status of people involved. This paper, will deal with
Democratic ideals have proven elusive throughout history, and are oftentimes only gained through bloodshed, as shown by the Revolutionary and Civil Wars. While some opposed social reform for fear of tearing down entire social structures (G) antebellum reformers were still able to push for, if not fully gain, many democratic ideals between John Quincy Adams’ election and 1850, especially with suffrage (I), abolition (C), and with education (A and E).
Voters in 1828 celebrated election day because all white males, no matter how much money or education they had could vote. His campaign told people to vote for him if they believed the people should govern. (Document 1) This evidence helps explain how Andrew Jackson is a democratic supporter of the people because this document shows how Jackson taking away property requirements for voting made there be more voters, the vote being given to the “common man”. Jackson believed in the type of government where the people
When it came to political matters the Jacksonians “Democrats” favored states' rights and frowned upon the Federal Government’s involvement in social and economic affairs. The Democrats portrayed and thought of themselves as the common man, a lower-class person who made his living off the land. They also promoted the idea that anyone could hold a government position. This would glorify the individual and its mind.
Between the years 1825 and 1850, the US underwent a series of social and political reforms which attempted to democratize American life. The Age of Jackson was a time of tremendous reform with American society and politics. Andrew Jackson’s position as president lasted from 1829-1837, therefore the fact that many writers and historians have attached his name to the time period between 1820 and 1850 indicates the high importance of his spirit of the reform. During this period, known as Jacksonian Democracy, social and political reform movements and equal rights dominated the American landscape. Many of these reforms were supported by religious ideals over democratic system, but in this period the democratic ideals in America came to greater results than ever before.
The democratization of American society that started in 1820s has led to a significant change of relations between government and people. These changes include growing equality of opportunities for white men and possibility for people to influence political processes taking place in the US. While people gained new rights and chances to start another life, government was, on the one hand, set under the growing pressure of society, and on the other hand, could be constructed by people.
The Jacksonian Democrats were very important in the revolutions in political democracy that took place during this period. During this period universal white male suffrage took place and was the first step towards the revolution of the common man in politics. Also, Jackson's acceptance and support of the two-party system helped create a more democratic America in which people with similar views could unite in their support of a singular candidate. Many "working men" of this time period had felt they had been taken advantage of and misrepresented by tyrannical aristocrats who treated them poorly (A). Jackson used this to his advantage with emotionalized speeches exploiting class differences. However, it should be said that during this time period the amount of voters increased dramatically which means that more Americans were involved in American politics (D). Jackson's use of the "Kitchen Cabinet" kept his knowledge of critics and the wants and needs of the people up
The Jacksonian democracy of the 1820s-1830s is often associated with an expansion of the political influence, economic opportunities, and social equality available to “the common man,” a concept of the masses which President Andrew Jackson and his newly founded Democratic party came to represent. The new administration certainly saw gains for the majority; namely, public participation in government increased to unprecedented levels, and several economic decisions were made to favor the people over monopolies. Beginning with their exaggerated portrayal of the “corrupt” 1824 election however, the Jacksonian democrats also left a legacy of substantial miscalculations
Despite the outcome I fully believe that the election of 1828 did in fact, create a democratic revolt of the people because of the social and political backlash that the election created. The election of Andrew Jackson as President in 1828 marked the beginning of an era known as Jacksonian Democracy or the Age of the Common Man. The changes in politics during Jackson's presidency provided various social and economic changes.
Despite the fact the founding fathers advised contrary to the establishment of political factions as the Constitution withstood the ratification process, a rift amongst men in President George Washington’s cabinet instituted the move toward the conception of political party. During the time period between 1791 and 1833, a two-party system had begun that demonstrated the philosophy of the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans. Although these two political groups were unyielding in their original ideas and beliefs, both had to change a few of their initial standpoints on numerous topics as they dealt with the truth of the government.
Jacksonian democrats viewed themselves as the guardians of the Constitution, political democracy, individual liberty, and equality of economic opportunity." In light of the documents and your knowledge of the 1820s and 1830s, to what extent do you agree with the Jacksonians' view of themselves?
Although the “Age of Jackson” wasn’t a time era, which brought forth a great political, social, or economic freedom and equality to the U.S., it did in fact put our country through a metamorphosis in our political lives of the nation. The start of a new presidency (Jackson’s presidency) was accompanied by huge numbers of Hickoryites (Jacksonian supporters) and official hopefuls. Many of these hopefuls were granted their desire of holding office, which is one of the changes brought into Washington by Andrew Jackson.
Harry L. Watson’s book, “Liberty and Power, The Politics of Jacksonian America”, takes an analytical look at America and her politics during the Age of Jackson. Watson uses the economy and the ideological mindset of the people, to support a powerful argument about the beginning of American political parties and their importance in defining the political direction of the country. Watson argues that economic inequalities caused by the “Market Revolution” and a threat to American liberty caused Americans to organize politically in support of a
In the book “A Magnificent Catastrophe” the author, Edward J. Larson, writes about all of the little details that has occurred in the First Presidential Campaign in the 1800s. He begins his book with how the two parties, the Republicans (Jefferson) and Federalists (Adams), were going to compete in who will govern the United States now that it is a free country and no longer under Britain’s rule. Although they had at first been friends they soon became enemies because of how they believed the government should be. Jefferson believed that the government should be a populist government that trusted popular rule. While Adams believed that America should have a strong government and that al
this really meant to the American people. At this point in the book Parsons is specific in breaking down the first party system of the Federalists and Democratic Republicans. This crucial moment would later play in the election of 1828, as Jackson and Adams were different political parties. This is also one of the first political differences between Jackson and Adams discussed by Parson. In 1780, John Adams declared that “a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader…this in my opinion, is to be dreaded as the greatest evil under our Constitution” (Modern Politics, 2009). On the flip side, we also learn about John Quincy Adams who like Jackson studied law. Unlike Jackson, however, Adams “hated the law or the practice of it” (Modern Politics, 2009). Adams spent most of his “spare time in Boston writing newspaper essays defending the Washington administration” (Modern Politics, 2009) while Jackson enjoyed “cock-fighting, slave-holding, and horse racing” (American Politics, 2009) in his.