How Did The Indian Removal Act Under President Jackson Help Establish A New Interpretation Of Democracy?

Robert V. Remini shows that Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Act benefits the Native Americans. Andrew Jackson made notice of the issue with the Indians in his inaugural speech on March 4, 1829. He declared that he wanted to give humane and considerable attention to the Indian’s rights and wants in respect to the government and people. Jackson knew that meant to get rid of all remaining tribes beyond the Mississippi River. He (Jackson) believed that the Indians would be better off in the west; without the influence from the white man or local authority. Jackson hired two Tennessee generals to go visit the Creeks and Cherokees to see if the Indians would leave voluntarily. In that, those who did not leave would be protected by the

Throughout Andrew Jackson’s eight years in office, many decisions he made were unsuccessful in helping our growing country continue to prosper. To this day, people still refer to him as King Andrew the First, seeing that many of his actions seemed like abuses of power. Though Jackson’s intentions had the common man in mind, the means by which he tried to please the common man, cast him as a king. Jackson’s abuse of power began when he passed the Indian Removal Act in 1830. This act authorized him to negotiate land exchanges with the Natives and led to treaties that paved the way for reluctant and forcible emigration of the Indians from their native lands.

In his article “Andrew Jackson and His Indian Wars”, the author Robert V. Remini believed that Andrew Jackson’s Removal Policy benefited Native Americans. However, in his article he contradicts himself. While speaking of Andrew Jackson’s inaugural address Robert V. Remini points out “Anyone who

Surprisingly, even though many Americans wanted the Indians’ land, some Americans disagreed with the government’s decision over the Indians removal. This can be seen though an account made by John G. Burnett, “I saw helpless Cherokees arrested and dragged from their homes, and driven at the bayonet point into the stockades. And in the chill of drizzling rain…. loaded like cattle or sheep into… wagons and started toward the west. One can never forget the sadness and solemnity of that morning,” (Doc. M). This was considered the lowest point of Jackson’s career (Shi and Tindall, 330). Jackson’s administration completely ignored the Indians’ rights as people and forced them to leave everything they’ve ever known, which completely ignores basic human rights much less the basics of a democracy.

Andrew Jackson, The United States seventh president, was possibly one of the worst human beings to be president and treated the Native Indians horribly. He, was a bully and used his position to get acts and petitions like the Indian Removal Act passed, to help push Native Indians around so he could get his own way. The Indian Removal Act in and of itself seemingly doesn’t contain that much power, however it was all the power Jackson needed. The circumstances of Jackson’s character and the debates surrounding the Act also lend and interesting lens to examine what Jackson intentions were. When looking at Jackson and how he managed to relocate the Native it becomes substantially more integral to examine all the documents with a wide scope to see how he even managed the relocation of Natives.

Looking at the ballots of 1828 and 1832, Andrew Jackson was clearly labeled as a Democratic Republic, a party founded by Thomas Jefferson. These Democrats supposedly believed in the ideas of a limited central government, states’ rights, and protection of the liberty of individuals. However, based on these principles, tyrannous “King Andrew I” may not be as democratic as one may think. Jackson shifted the Presidency to a more personal style, by vetoing anything that disagreed with his own beliefs, rather than the beliefs of the people. Through the Indian Removal Act, the Spoils System, and the Bank War, Andrew Jackson revealed himself to be a non-democrat who cared more about himself than the people. And among these people, natives and slaves were given the least liberties out of all the racial groups in America at the time.

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

When we look back into history, we are now able to fully comprehend the atrocities the Indians faced at the hands of the historic general and President, Andrew Jackson. It can be seen as one of the most shameful and unjust series of political actions taken by an American government. However, as an American living almost 200 years later, it is crucial to look at the motives possessed by Andrew Jackson, and ask whether he fully comprehended the repercussions of his actions or if is was simply ignorant to what he was subjection the natives to. We must also consider weather he truly had the countries best interest in mind, or his own.

7. What were the major economic, humanitarian, political and social arguments for and against Indian removal?

The Indian Removal Act was signed into law on May 28th 1930 during the presidency of Andrew Jackson. Perhaps best known as the black eye of the administration and overshadowing his presidency’s accomplishments, the Indian Removal Act was passed into law to allow the president to negotiate with Indians to purchase land they occupied and offer them lands west of the Mississippi. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 could also amount to pure greed and racism, the beginning of the arrogance of Americans in the belief that we deserve to take something just because we want it.

The Indian Removal Act was a law passed by Congress on May 28, 1830, while Andrew Jackson was the president. The law approved the president to ask the Indians to move to land west of the Mississippi River in exchange for their homelands. There were many arguments president Andrew Jackson and the other members of the United States government used to convince society that the Indian Removal was best for everyone. For example, the members of the US government tried to persuade the Indians that their removal was a good idea by saying it would save them from extinction, free them from the power of the states, help them pursue happiness their own way and stop them form separating amongst themselves. The US government also told them that they would

The Purpose of this essay is to discuss the Andrew Jackson Administration. I will first talk about Jackson’s war on against the U.S. Bank. Second, I will talk about the Presidential election of 1824, 1828, and 1832. Third, I will talk about the Indian Removal Act as well as the Trail of Tears. Fourth, the ways in which Jackson expanded the power of the president. Fifth and final, the Nullification Crisis of 1832.

Robert V. Remini argues that Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Act of 1830 was socially motivated by humanitarian impulses, and that Jackson’s actions where driven by the desire to save the culture and populace of the Native

Having just broken the colonial bond to Great Britain, one of the main concerns of the founding father was tyranny. As a way to prolong the process of passing any legislation that would drastically change the country, the founding fathers created a system of government that separated power between three branches in an attempt to prevent any potential dominance of any one branch. This was done to create

The Indian Removal Act was supposed to give Native Americans the option to stay on their sacred land, but they were driven out involuntarily anyway. Jackson did not abide by the Indian Removal Act passed through congress, which exemplified absolute abuse of his power as president. “ In both houses of Congress, a substantial block of legislators