Andrew Jackson: The Future Of American Democracy

1297 Words 6 Pages
Andrew Jackson was one of the most powerful presidents in the nineteenth century and often viewed as being the future of the American democracy. As a president, he was not a friend of the Native American population to say the least. This was no surprise considering the numerous campaigns he had led against many of the Indian tribes along the Southern borders as a major general. In his rise to presidency, inequality was very much present, especially among the Native American people. Jacksons view of the Indians was based solely on their land. This was a time where white settlers were in the golden era of expansion and the only obstacles in their way were the Indian nations who inhabited this land. Jackson was a strong advocate of relocating …show more content…
Just like Jackson, the southern states were greedy for land expansion. They wanted the Indian territories and would do whatever it took to get them. Many of these white settlers in the southern states viewed the Native American peoples as a “savage” group that had no chance of being civilized. If the people had no respect or intent of compromise with the Indians, it was quite apparent that the state officials would act in the same manner. With Georgia being the guiding leader, several of the southern states passed laws that restricted the authority and rights of the Indian nations over their own territories. The Indians were basically seen as renters living on the state owned land having no authority over their own territories. This was where the Supreme Court differed in opinion. They had initially ruled that Indians had the right to occupy lands in the U.S. without any legal title to the lands. This worried the Indians and in turn brought upon policies of their own restricting land sales to the state governments. When the southern states began to act against these growing Indian policies and denials of land, the Supreme Court acted again to implement more policy. This was the differing factor of opinion where the court actually ruled in favor of the Indian nations. They declared that the Indian nations had the right to …show more content…
I understand the era of expansion that America was experiencing, but land ownership was no excuse for the cruel nature of the Indian removals. The biggest surprise to me was the lack of compromise that was present during this time. There was no attempt at acceptance for the Indians. This was even after the majority of the Indian nations turned to acts of assimilation hoping to live among the settlers. Jackson was unyielding in his opinion of the Indians and carried it out by taking full advantage of his presidency. Even when some settlers found sympathy with the Indians, it was impossible to fight for them with the authority that was against them. There was absolutely no hope or chance for the Southern Indian nations in this instance. Taking it further, some Indians peacefully consented to the treaties of exchange with promise of western lands and experienced more issues in the new land than they had experienced in their attempts to stay on their old lands. It was simply a cruel act of deception to rid of any obstacles in the way of white land

Related Documents