President Jackson and Actions Against Natives

Introduction

Andrew Jackson, like any other American president and patriot of his nation, wanted to change his country for the better. This desire was the reason for several significant reforms, including the adoption of the Indian Removal Act. ¹ The forced relocation of people was a controversial decision; however, Jackson believed that the president should promote changes that contributed to the benefit of the majority, and the Native Americans prevented them by desiring autonomy.

Main body

The rights and opportunities of Native Americans have been one of the issues for discussion in the USA for centuries, since their reluctance to assimilate harmed Americans and the states’ economy. At the same time, Andrew Jackson believed that the liberty of Americans, which was the main principle of politics, could only be protected if decisions are made by the majority.² The desire of the Native Americans to develop their culture, administrative, and political structure impeded the economic development of states, since the tribes took away the lands that could be used by the local government. For this reason, Jackson’s relationship with the Native Americans was based on the belief that they interfere with the good of the most population.

However, the Native Americans did not want to change their lifestyle, adopt the rules by which most Americans lived, or obey the local government, since they had their own language and even system of power.³ Consequently, Jackson said that they could not prosper in civilized society while maintaining their way of living, and they must leave. ⁴ President Jackson was primarily concerned about the prosperity of his people – white men who presented the voting population. At the same time, the tribes wanted autonomy, which interfered with the state authorities on their territory.⁵ Hence, the duties and rights of the president, according to Jackson’s idea, express themselves in the obligation to contribute to the good of the whole nation but not its separate groups. For this reason, all the decisions that have infringed the Native Americans and forced them to leave their native lands fit into Jackson’s understanding of the ideal president.

Conclusion

Therefore, Andrew Jackson had acted against Indian tribes guided by the principles in which he believed, including the need to ensure the prosperity of the majority. The tribes that impeded the development of the states had to leave their lands because this measure was beneficial for most people and thereby presented the manifestation of liberty. In addition, granting autonomy to tribes might weaken a sense of national unity, and an attempt to get Native Americans to follow common traditions would ruin their culture.

References

1. Corbett, P. Scott, Volker Janssen, John M. Lund, Todd J. Pfannestiel, Paul S. Vickery, and Waskiewicz, Sylvie. U.S. History. Houston, TX: OpenStax, Rice University, 2017.
2. Holcombe, Randal. “The Electoral College as a Restraint on American Democracy: Its Evolution from Washington to Jackson”. In Reassessing the Presidency: The Rise of the Executive State and the Decline of Freedom, edited by Denson John, 137-168. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2001.
3. Remini, Robert. “Andrew Jackson Versus the Cherokee Nation”. American History (2001): 48-56.

Footnotes

1. Scott Corbett et al., U.S. History (Houston, TX: OpenStax, Rice University, 2017), chap.10.
2. Randal Holcombe, “The Electoral College as a Restraint on American Democracy: Its Evolution from Washington to Jackson,” in Reassessing the Presidency: The Rise of the Executive State and the Decline of Freedom, ed. Denson John (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2001), 165.
3. Robert Remini, “Andrew Jackson Versus the Cherokee Nation,” American History (2001), 48.
4. Remini, 55.
5. See note 3 above.