Andrew Jackson

Andrew Jackson's image has become ubiquitous, even some one hundred and seventy years after his death. Those still living in the slowly diminishing world of tangible money see it every day on the cotton fiber workhorse of commerce, the twenty dollar bill. Altering the nation's money takes an act of Congress, an event sometimes requiring Herculean effort and Houdini-esque timing, so Jackson's determined and distantly focused visionary gaze has remained there since 1928. Those that preceded him on that denomination, including George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, James Garfield and Grover Cleveland, speak to the status that the rambunctious and highly controversial seventh president still holds among those who mold the popular, and often mythologized, iconography of the still relatively young United States of America. Generations have made innumerable purchases and exchanges with this recognizable yet little known personage providing an unspoken authorization and legitimacy for cash that lacks inherent value, which adds an element of paradox, because Jackson largely distrusted paper money. He would have likely preferred his face on specie, or on a circulating coin, which didn't happen until the 2008 presidential dollar. By then, the dollar coin's clad amalgam of copper, zinc, manganese and nickel, with an approximate 10 to 20 cent production cost, didn't really carry any inherent value either, unlike the "hard money" made of silver or gold that circulated in Jackson's day. Not to mention the "golden" presidential dollar's almost complete absence in circulation. So this late honor probably would have just annoyed him, as would the general state of the nation's coinage and possibly the state of the nation itself.Examining the United States today, Jackson probably wouldn't know what to think because the political categories have changed so drastically. This makes it hard to place Jackson in today's political spectrum. Where does he fit? Though often harshly condemned by those of liberal persuasion for his undeniable atrocities, his legacy doesn't sit comfortably within more conservative framings, either. He held a deep distrust of "moneyed interests" and tried, with varying degrees of success, to protect the "common man" from the corruption of wealthy politicians and individuals who tried to steer government towards their own selfish ends. In some ways he declared war on them. At the same time, no one would call him "anti-business." Of course his definition of "common man" did not include slaves, women or the Indigenous population, but one could still arguably call him progressive, at least in some respects, for his era, now often denoted as "the Age of Jackson." The intervening years have made it very difficult to identify with or relate to the people, culture and politics of the 1830s, but the seventh volume of "The American Presidents" series makes a valiant attempt at providing some perspective to help bridge the unbridgeable gaps between the murky past and our own times. The book depicts Jackson as a far more complicated figure, one extremely difficult to come to terms with today, than a glance at the romanticized portrait on the twenty dollar bill might suggest.Opening with Moby Dick's biblically-hued reference to Jackson as "culled" from "Thy selectest champions from the kingly commons," the prologue claims that historians usually rank Jackson just below the revered Washington, Lincoln and FDR and that many cultural signs today suggest that we "should admire" Jackson. In contrast, many recent historians have re-evaluated his legacy, especially in light of the 1830 Indian Removal Act and his actions against the abolition movement, yet in his time many considered him "a man of the people" and a fervent bulwark against wealthy elites and special interests. He did fight against his own conceptions of inequality, but he didn't see other raging inequalities around him that seem so obvious and deplorable now. As such, some consider him a "transitional democrat" who left his predecessors to finish the implementation of a wider democracy in the United States.The first president from humble origins, Jackson rose from poverty in Waxhaw, South Carolina, picked up the law profession and found himself, through connections, elected to Congress after establishing himself in Nashville, Tennessee. Marrying the well-connected Rachel Donelson probably didn't hurt, but a technicality in the proceedings would later haunt the couple. He fought duels, bought slaves and founded The Hermitage, but desired military experience, which came against the Creeks, who, after multiple slaughters, ceded 23 million acres of land. Jackson become a Major General, which ultimately led to his famous victory over the British at the Battle of New Orleans in 1814. This made him a national household hero. The book claims that he didn't live up to his reputation and that he actually made some nearly fatal blunders, but, seeing that he prevailed, he never admitted to any miscalculations. The Seminole war brought him to Florida, where he executed two British agents on his own authority and dubiously laid the groundwork for the Adams-Onis treaty. He nearly retired to the Hermitage, but some friends wanted to nominate him for president. Initially intended as a diversionary candidate, his enormous popularity instantly made him a viable contender. He won the popular vote, but not a majority and the 1824 election went to the House, which chose John Quincy Adams. The person who decided the presidency, Henry Clay, became Adams's Secretary of State. Jackson cried foul and vowed revenge, which he obtained in the volatile 1828 election. The wealthy elite, who saw Jackson as a hothead rogue, were terrified. Jackson in turn saw them as a threat to the Revolution, the Union and democracy. Sadly, following his election, Rachel died of a heart attack, which Jackson blamed on the humiliating criticism she endured from his opponents.As if to validate the elite's anxieties, Jackson's inaugural turned into a wild party resembling a mosh pit. Further validation came with the tabloid-worthy so-called "Petticoat Affair" that distracted the administration for a year as the wives of his Cabinet refused to socialize with Margaret O'Neale Timberlake, who they considered a "low woman" and an adulteress. Jackson asked his entire Cabinet to resign to end the scandal, which led to his "Kitchen Cabinet," or his real, but unofficial, advisors who entered the White House through the kitchen. To add to the tensions, Jackson broke with his own Vice President, John Calhoun, over states' rights. Discovery of Gold on Cherokee land in 1829 led to the most nefarious event of Jackson's presidency and one of the United States' saddest episodes, the 1830 Indian Removal Act, which culminated with the deaths of thousands of Cherokee on the forced march known as the Trail of Tears. The book soundly condemns Jackson's handling of the situation, but defends him against charges of genocide, claiming that he considered relocation the best option for the tribes and though his intention wasn't extermination, he didn't allocate enough funds for their relocation and so nonetheless remains ultimately responsible for the numerous deaths.Jackson shocked even his own supporters by taking on the Second Bank of the United States. He saw it as tyrannical, a burden on ordinary Americans and an attempt to divert economic control away from the government and hand it to the wealthy. His war on the bank was nearly tantamount to a president today attempting to destroy the Federal Reserve. Despite the controversy around this move, Jackson thoroughly defeated Henry Clay in the 1832 election. Martin Van Buren then became Jackson's running mate, vice president and official successor. He would destroy the Bank in his second term in defiance of the machinations of Bank president Nicholas Biddle. This victory became somewhat pyrrhic, as it brought on the Panic of 1837 that probably cost Van Buren a second term and led to the rise of the anti-Jacksonian Whigs. Jackson also had to contend with the South Carolina nullification crisis of 1832. Out of fears of the spread of anti-slavery sentiment and disgust over the "tariff of abominations," South Carolina, citing state's rights, moved to nullify the tariff, which Jackson considered treasonous. Things cooled off after military threats echoed throughout the state and the nullifiers conceded. Jackson had again won, but he didn't fully appreciate the tensions that underlied the crisis, including the ongoing resentments of the 1820 Missouri Compromise and the rising abolition movement. The roots of the coming Civil War had already taken shape.Unlike his political forebearer, Thomas Jefferson, Jackson never privately expressed any doubts about the morality of slavery. In fact, he tried to keep the subject out of politics altogether, a tactic that only brought on the fury of the opposition. Jackson and Van Buren even thought that the abolition movement hid an ulterior motive: a plot to bring back Federalism. This obscured the moral dimension of the issue. His paranoia even led him to censor abolitionist media, an act that should have made his strong democratic principles wince. In the end he failed, because, as always, censorship usually draws attention to the suppressed object or cause. The "Age of Jackson" also saw the independence of Texas from Mexico, along with the Alamo, "Davy" Crockett, Sam Houston and the continuing battle over slave versus free states as the nation expanded westward. The book adds that Jackson did "not add an inch of soil to the American dominion during his eight years in the White House."As he polarized people in his own day, Jackson remains a polarizing figure right up to the present. Some see him as a demagogue, a dictator, an overly macho militant windbag and a celebrated mass murderer, while others see a genuine "man of the people" who fought passionately for the "common good" against aristocratic elites who courted power only for themselves. Jackson definitely did not leave America the way he found it. He extinguished the last gasp of Federalism in American politics and carried the ideals of democracy beyond any of his predecessors. He truly believed in the "sovereignty of the people" and expanded the government's powers to protect them from wealthy interests. He didn't solve the growing divisions between north and south, in fact he sometimes unknowingly helped to aggravate them. Never a man of letters like Jefferson, he usually missed the deeper moral implications of his actions. Everything reduced to the political and the practical. The horrors of the Indian Removal Act will forever remain a stain on his legacy. He also didn't see, or want to see, the barbarity of slavery. Yet this bizarre gruff figure manages to still maintain a small dose of inspiration for those born into less than satisfying conditions and for those who root for the underdog. He did take on the rich and powerful, something rarely seen in recent politics.The popular celebrated legendary Jackson, the Jackson of the twenty dollar bill and featured on glorified equestrian statues, presents a very incomplete Jackson. But so does a purely negative portrayal of Jackson. Nonetheless, he has become a figure difficult to claim for any political persuasion today. One should not compare oneself with Andrew Jackson without expecting a ferocious backlash. His positives and influence remain, but one has to look through his negatives to see them. As such, his undeniable contributions sit in the shadow of his stark political and moral failures. He has become one of the most controversial presidents, probably because no one can simply dismiss him outright or sweep him under the carpet and hope that he will just go away. Jackson, for all his faults, forever shaped America in both good and bad ways and both sides of his legacy endure. America must deal with him and what he signifies. After all, most people see Jackson almost every day in their wallets. He's still here, like it or not. Hopefully this image reminds us to grow morally, overcome the failings of the past and expand the concept of equality far beyond Jackson's limited conception. The seventh installment of "The American Presidents Series" presents a great general introduction to this enigmatic and often inscrutable leader.

Sean Wilentz has penned an admirable brief biography of Andrew Jackson. This thin volume is part of The American Presidents series of books. They are brief and accessible to a larger readership. Do you want a detailed picture of Jackson? This isn't for you (try Brands' biography for example). Do you want a quick and accessible introduction? Then this book would be useful.One of the factors making this a good book is its realistic view of Jackson. He had great accomplishments; he also was flawed. His record in engaging in duels speaks to a pretty edgy personality. Wilentz, for instance, notes that some of his demons in how he viewed political foes was not so dissimilar from Richard Nixon and his "enemies' list." He observes Jackson's views toward removal of Indian nations from their lands and his hard core pro-slavery stance.But this is also balanced by its appreciation of some of Jackson's great achievements. His efforts to democratize politics surely are worthy of note. His stand for a strong national sensibility against John Calhoun's flirtation with nullification is noteworthy (one may disagree with Jackson, but he clearly took a stand on the basis of principle).The book discusses major political battles fought by Jackson, such as his effort to eliminate the Second Bank of the United States.Early, the book examines why he became as he was, from his awful experience during the Revolutionary War to his loss of family early on to his hardscrabble life. The work also traces his advancement through military daring and leadership (and also his sometimes careless behavior that created problems for his troops).In short, a nicely nuanced and realistic view of one of the most important of American presidents.

Having read the American Presidents Series from Washington through Jackson, I think this short biography by Sean Wilentz may be the best so far. As fits the series, the vast majority of the book is on Jackson’s two terms as president. Wilentz provides a clear, scholarly and highly readable summary of these critical years in American history. He does a fine job balancing Jackson’s successes and failures and, while never justifying Jackson’s destructive actions, gives the reader a clear explanation of why they occurred and Jackson’s own thought processes. In fact this may be the book’s best quality – an insistence throughout of tracing Jackson’s own thinking on issues distinct from how he may have been judged (pro or con) by some of his contemporaries and later historians. The book is in no way sympathetic to Jackson’s actions concerning slavery or Native Americans and clearly lays out the results of his actions. But it is important to know why this man acted as he did. This is a highly readable and well-written book. I recommend it as a brief but excellent summary of Andrew Jackson and his important and controversial role in the history of the presidency.

Overall I enjoyed this book, and felt it was balanced in the assessment of Jackson. On the one hand it acknowledged some of the terrible things that happened under his presidency, yet also pointed out ways his presidency redefined democracy in America in very positive ways. Jackson is a complicated figure, and had a very important presidency. Because of this it's important students of history study books like this to better understand him.

Read this as Trump seems to want to invoke Jackson's reputation as a disruptorThe book assumes that the reader has a pretty detailed understanding of the US and the players of the era. I realize that it isn't intended as a deep dive but in the end I was somewhat confused with whether Jackson was a pro-slavery, Indian murdering bigot or someone fighting against entrenched power groups in both the north and the south and trying to keep the Union togetherGuess I'm going to have to read more if I really want to know the answer but not sure I care enough

Another great book to add to my collection of The American Presidents.

Helped me understand the formation of the Democratic Party.