Andrew Jackson never sought to be a controversial figure in American history. He was considered a great solider and a leader of men. However, in his presidency, they wondered about this same great soldier and thought he would make a great president. Although Jackson sought to prosper the American people, some of his decisions went down in history as the worst start of democratic government. Several historians wrote about his influence in American history and the beginning of democratic government. This article was chosen in order to see what those historical writings and opinions were about.
In this article, the author Charles Sellers sought to analyze the information that was written about Andrew Jackson as written by several historians. …show more content…
Even after Jackson, they continued to see his impact on their political strife and struggled through its implications. “Yet the democratic historians have suffered less from these dissenting views than from their own inability to make clear just what they mean by “democracy””. He profusely argued that despite what was being written and the consensus of the different parties, they were not experiencing any imputed backlash. It was implied that their viewpoints and writings were more like a fantasy of American democracy because one man could not change the way it was to be. However, every subsequent president and governing official run for their elected office to make changes that they hope will remain and continue to be better. Whether good decisions or negative ones, you learn from them and continue to strive for a better work. The author mainly strategizes on the negative implications of the historian’s viewpoints of Jacksonian democracy and lean towards their need to find someone to blame for their lack of prosperity and development. He also pointed to the possibility that the information written was more about the historians and not Jackson. “Do historical writings tell us more about their authors than they do about their purported
In this article, the author Charles Sellers sought to analyze the information that was written about Andrew Jackson as written by several historians. …show more content…
Even after Jackson, they continued to see his impact on their political strife and struggled through its implications. “Yet the democratic historians have suffered less from these dissenting views than from their own inability to make clear just what they mean by “democracy””. He profusely argued that despite what was being written and the consensus of the different parties, they were not experiencing any imputed backlash. It was implied that their viewpoints and writings were more like a fantasy of American democracy because one man could not change the way it was to be. However, every subsequent president and governing official run for their elected office to make changes that they hope will remain and continue to be better. Whether good decisions or negative ones, you learn from them and continue to strive for a better work. The author mainly strategizes on the negative implications of the historian’s viewpoints of Jacksonian democracy and lean towards their need to find someone to blame for their lack of prosperity and development. He also pointed to the possibility that the information written was more about the historians and not Jackson. “Do historical writings tell us more about their authors than they do about their purported