Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
The agenda of the authors is to reasonably prove that Jackson is not suitable for the nation’s highest office. Citizens thought that his election would be dangerous. This view is supported by such prejudices as inexperience in public service, intemperance of character, and propensity for violence. These three aspects are supported by historical context and document. In public service, Jackson has held public office, including being a member of the Tennessee Convention, a two-time Senator in Congress, and a Justice of the Tennessee Supreme Court. However, he did not distinguish himself by particular achievements during the course of these posts, despite sufficient opportunities for distinction, and his qualifications remained mediocre.
In turn, the incontinence of Jackson’s character was manifested in disobedience to the orders of his superiors and non-compliance with laws and the constitution, as citizens talk about. They claim that Jackson sacrificed the freedoms and lives of people by making his arbitrary will the rule of his conduct. According to citizens, it is vital that an official, especially the President of the United States, be restrained, polite, forgiving, and able to manage his emotions in order to maintain peaceful relations between the government of the Union and the various States governments. However, Jackson’s character, they note, on the contrary, was characterized by impulsiveness, which affected his violent mismanagement. Jackson’s propensity for violence is confirmed by his Indian campaigns. Here the evidence comes from the tales of the brutal massacre at Horse-shoe, Bend, and of the decoyed and slaughtered Seminole Indians at St. Mark’s, Florida. Thus, the citizens considered General Jackson an unsuitable person for the presidency, and the prospect of his election was seen as hazardous for the population and the country.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.