American History: Impact of Andrew Jackson's Policies on Views

This essay examines how the attitudes and policies of U.S. President Andrew Jackson, particularly concerning Native Americans and the appointment of Roger Taney, altered perceptions of his presidency. The author explores Jackson's actions, such as the Indian Removal Act and the Dred Scott decision, arguing that these decisions reveal prejudices and biases that contradict his image as a defender of ordinary Americans. The essay analyzes how Jackson's disregard for treaties, exploitation of labor, and decisions favoring white Americans over people of color influenced his historical standing, ultimately leading the author to view Jackson as a figure whose policies, though beneficial in some ways, were morally compromised. The paper uses provided sources to support the analysis, emphasizing the impact of Jackson's actions on diversity and equality within the United States. The essay concludes by questioning Jackson's legacy, highlighting the conflict between his perceived achievements and his exclusionary practices.

Running head: AMERICAN HISTORY
AMERICAN HISTORY
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1AMERICAN HISTORY
The paper aims at discussing how the attitudes and policies of the American president
Andrew Jackson changed the existing views about him. Andrew Jackson was known for
defending the interests of the ordinary American citizens however, according to Ronald Tokaki
certain policies taken by the president are controversial that may change the perception of how
people view him. Two such policies of the president are highlighted in the paper and an analysis
into the change in the perception is provided.
Andrew Jackson took oath as the seventh President of the United States of America and
was recognized as a self-made military hero. He introduced several policies that benefited the
citizens of America however, on further analysis of the policies introduced by him show that his
beliefs were responsible for the harsh policies against the Indians. One such policy was the
Indian removal act that was signed by him on May 28, 1830. This act sanctioned the relocation
of the Creek, Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw and the Seminole tribes from their lands to the
lands on the west of the Mississippi river (Belohlavek). This enabled the president for the speedy
removal of the American Indian communities that were based on the eastern United States to the
west of the Mississippi river. The president had made remarks on the future of the American
Indians in the United States (Rogin). This message carried many observations and prejudices
against the Native Americans. However, he provided an explanation for the policy by stating that
due to the increase in the white settlement in the east, the number of the Native Americans would
diminish and therefore to avoid their extinction, it was necessary for them to be relocated.
After analyzing the policies of the president, it was evident that the president had certain
prejudices against the Native Americans. Jackson had earlier condemned many policies and had
raised his voice against corruption however, he had ignored the treaties that were forced upon the
tribes and had also ignored the corruptive actions of various government officials. This led me to

2AMERICAN HISTORY
change my views of the president. Earlier he was a symbol of a self-made military hero for me
however now he seems like a lunatic at best. His unpardonable sins involve building his
enormous wealth from taking advantage of the slave labour, massacring the Native Americans,
also trampling the rulings of the Supreme Court, and sending the Cherokee tribe to the fate on a
Trail of Tears (Belohlavek).
Another controversial decision made by Jackson was the nomination of Roger Taney who
was his supporter to the U.S. Supreme court. The nomination was rejected by the Senate
however, after the death of the Chief Justice John Marshall, Jackson re-nominated him. This
decision was controversial because it led to the Dred Scott decision. This decision declared that
the African American citizens were not considered as the citizens of the United States anymore
and that they lacked any legal basis to file a lawsuit (Rogin). He also stated that slavery could not
be forbidden in the U.S. territories by the federal government.
All these decisions of the president make it look like that the person was against diversity
in the United States of America. His decisions influenced the supremacy of the white in the
country and increased their favorability in the country. He was more interested in the welfare of
the white American and totally ignored the welfare of the people of colour. In the name of
working for the benefit of the people, he signed some shady treaties and appointed people who
worked for his favor. When he addressed the citizens of the country and referred to them as “us”
he excluded the American Indians and the African Americans. He saw them as obstructions in
the development and progress of the country (Whaples). He saw them as resources that could be
exploited for his own benefit. He was a lunatic at his best and a monster at his worst. His policies
though good for the country, the compromise in the moral outlook of the person cannot be
ignored at all.

3AMERICAN HISTORY
Thus, it can be concluded that Andrew Jackson was a good president that America got
however, his policies of excluding the diverse people were not according to the character that a
president should have. A president works for all the people residing in his country and looks into
their welfare however, Jackson failed to do so. He worked according to his prejudices and the
biases that he held against the African Americans and the American Indians. He exploited them
and these policies prove that the person was not that great a person that other people highly
regard him for.

4AMERICAN HISTORY
Works Cited
Belohlavek, John M. Andrew Jackson: Principle and Prejudice. Routledge, 2016.
Rogin, Michael Paul. Fathers and children: Andrew Jackson and the subjugation of the
American Indian. Routledge, 2017.
Whaples, Robert. "Were Andrew Jackson's Policies" Good for the Economy"?." The
Independent Review 18.4 (2014): 545-558.