Summary_for_the_Legacy_of_Andrew_Jackson_by_Robert_V._Remini

Based on Robert V. Remini’s book “The Legacy of Andrew Jackson” the central question of the Jacksonian period focused upon how the doctrines of democracy replaced the doctrines of republicanism in United States. He assure that the Founding Fathers never envisioned that a democracy would result from their deliberations in Philadelphia in 1787. Jackson feared that the development of powerful central government will jeopardize the freedom of the individual and the sovereign states. Also, he feared that it will generate elitism, which excited the interest and attention of the rich because of the economic benefits it produce. Then, the government will be the tool for the wealthy to increase their wealth at the expense of the less fortunate. Ultimately, Jackson said, a powerful central government “is calculated to raise around the administration a moneyed aristocracy dangerous to the liberties of the country.” Since Jackson was the governor of the Florida Territory Jackson repeatedly argued that there must be “no distinction between the rich and poor the great and ignoble.” In 1822 Jackson said “My fervent prayers are that our republican government may be perpetual, and the people alone by their Virtue, and independent exercise of their free suffrage can make it perpetual.” He believed that the virtue of the free people is the only protector of the liberty and when virtue fled, free government ceased to exist. In the presidential election of 1824-25 the popular vote had been registered. Jackson had 153,000 votes while the combined tally of his opponents was 208,000. He did have the plurality more than anyone else but the members of Congress set that result aside and voted for John Adams. This was the single event that exercised more influence on Andrew Jackson’s thinking about republicanism and democracy more than any other thing. That point was a turning point in the evolution of the country from a republic to a democracy. Since that he converted into a rabid democrat who passionately believed in the need for majority rule, the right of the people acting through the ballot box to decide “upon all national or general subjects, as well as local.” During the Jackson presidency, the Democratic party, which was founded at that time and organized around his appeal to the American people, appeared to rest on a moral base. The democratic party from its inception was ostensibly committed to the concerns of the masses of people. Jackson himself always insisted that he spoke for and represented the majority of Americans, that he stood for their interests against the interests of the few, that he resisted the greed and corruption of the wealthy elite. Unlike many of the Founding Fathers, whose political faith rested squarely on republicanism, Jackson did not fear democratic rule. For Jackson there was never any question that democracy consisted of rule by the majority. He called the electorate to support his cause and join him in his efforts on their behalf. And they responded in overwhelming numbers. Jackson loosed the power of the masses, which never done before in American history. In justifying his veto of the bill to renew the charter of the Bank of the United States, Jackson wrote: “The authority of the Supreme Court must not be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve.” Not only did he deny that the electorate may intrude no more except by amending the Constitution, he also denied that the Supreme Court was the final interpreter of the meaning of the Constitution. Jackson’s view of the American system of government was far more democratic than the Founding Fathers. He maintained that the people can never be excluded and always remain active in the governing process; they did not surrender their right of self-government when they adopted the Constitution. They exercise it regularly through the ballot box, which all agencies of government must obey, even the Supreme Court. He placed his entire confidence in the wisdom of a virtuous people to arrive at right conclusions. His philosophy of government was simple: the people govern. Their will must be obeyed. Majority rule constitutes the only true meaning of liberty. Sovereign power resides with the people, not with the states, and certainly not the courts. Jackson believed that the participatory democracy is a guarantee for the preservation of liberty. He also believed that there must be no elitism, no official class. All citizens have a right to participate in the day-to-day function of government. It took only a few years, he said, for an officeholder to believe that he has a life estate in it, a vested right. Furthermore, as he matured, his views on holding office became even more democratic. He reasoned from the premise that all offices must fall under the absolute control of the people. And elected offices must be filled directly by the people, not indirectly, as was then widely practiced. Obviously, Jackson had a most optimistic opinion of the people as to their capacity for self-rule. He considered them virtuous and politically intelligent. And he firmly believed that they would always act wisely. He capped all his suggestions and possible constitutional amendments with a doctrine he called “the right of instruction.” This doctrine argued that because the people were indeed capable of self-government, that because they were virtuous and wise, and that because the government had been established to serve their interests and needs, it necessarily followed that people had the right to instruct their representatives on how they should vote with respect to particular issues.