Trump's Appeal as American as Andrew Jackson

Real Clear Politics ^ | 11/24/15 | Rich Lowry

[freddy005]

Trump's Appeal as American as Andrew Jackson

After the Paris attack, conventional wisdom held that Republican voters would finally turn away from political outsiders and reward candidates representing sobriety and experience. No one stopped to consider that, actually, voters might be drawn to the guy who memorably said of ISIS that he would “bomb the [expletive] out of them.”

Not only has Donald Trump not been hurt by Paris, he has bumped up in the aftermath (Ben Carson, on the other hand, has indeed dropped). The cliché about Trump is that he’s defying the laws of political gravity. If Trump is cutting against the contemporary political grain — certainly, no one else could get away with being as routinely careless and insulting in his statements — he is also tapping into one of America’s deepest cultural and political wellsprings.

In large part, Donald Trump is a Jacksonian, the tradition originally associated with the Scotch-Irish heritage in America and best represented historically by the tough old bird himself, Andrew Jackson. Old Hickory might be mystified that a celebrity New York billionaire is holding up his banner (but, then again, Jackson himself was a rich planter). Trump is nonetheless a powerful voice for Jacksonian attitudes.

Historian Walter Russell Mead once wrote a memorable essay on the Jacksonianism that, so many years later, serves as a very rough guide to the anti-PC and fiercely nationalistic populism of the 2016 Trump campaign.

Continue reading..http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/24/trumps_appeal_as_american_as_andrew_jackson_128842.html#disqus_thread

[freddy005]

Even the MSM pundits like Rich Lowry are starting to get it!

[Fai Mao]

Academics have, with some reason, hated Jackson for years.

Of interest is Jackson’s fight with the Bank of the United States (A precursor to the Federal Reserve) Jackson was afraid that the bank would become political and favored abolishing it. The bank president then did use the banks influence to oppose Jackson. Dd Jackson’s allegations drive the bank to a corrupt position or did Jackson’s allegations merely force the bank to expose its corruption?

I ask because we see much the same thing today, right now.

[TBP]

“Justice Taney has made his decision. Now let him enforce it.” — Andrew Jackson

[freddy005]

Absolutely agree! I’ve been learning more and more as to why our early founding fathers DID NOT want a “Central Banking” cartel involved in the “coinage” of our currency. Unfortunately everything they feared has come to light as the creation of a “Central Bank” (i.e. the privately held Federal Reserve) has made the US a debtor slave nation - allowing for the growth of Government to become unstoppable!!! Pray America is Waking Up!!

[TBP]

http://nypost.com/2015/11/23/donald-trumps-appeal-is-as-american-as-andrew-jackson/

Trump doesn’t believe in limited government. “Jacksonians believe that the government should do everything in its power to promote the well-being — political, moral, economic — of the folk community,” Mead writes. “Any means are permissible in the service of this end, as long as they do not violate the moral feelings or infringe on the freedoms that Jacksonians believe are essential in their daily lives.”

Trump isn’t ideologically consistent. The Jacksonian philosophy, Mead notes, “is an instinct rather than an ideology — a culturally shaped set of beliefs and emotions rather than a set of ideas.”

[RobbyS]

Justice Marshall, Roger Taney was a Jacksonian.

[TBP]

http://nypost.com/2015/11/23/donald-trumps-appeal-is-as-american-as-andrew-jackson/

Trump doesn’t believe in limited government. “Jacksonians believe that the government should do everything in its power to promote the well-being — political, moral, economic — of the folk community,” Mead writes. “Any means are permissible in the service of this end, as long as they do not violate the moral feelings or infringe on the freedoms that Jacksonians believe are essential in their daily lives.”

Trump isn’t ideologically consistent. The Jacksonian philosophy, Mead notes, “is an instinct rather than an ideology — a culturally shaped set of beliefs and emotions rather than a set of ideas.”

[TBP]

http://nypost.com/2015/11/23/donald-trumps-appeal-is-as-american-as-andrew-jackson/

Trump doesn’t believe in limited government. “Jacksonians believe that the government should do everything in its power to promote the well-being — political, moral, economic — of the folk community,” Mead writes. “Any means are permissible in the service of this end, as long as they do not violate the moral feelings or infringe on the freedoms that Jacksonians believe are essential in their daily lives.”

Trump isn’t ideologically consistent. The Jacksonian philosophy, Mead notes, “is an instinct rather than an ideology — a culturally shaped set of beliefs and emotions rather than a set of ideas.”

[TBP]

http://nypost.com/2015/11/23/donald-trumps-appeal-is-as-american-as-andrew-jackson/

Trump doesn’t believe in limited government. “Jacksonians believe that the government should do everything in its power to promote the well-being — political, moral, economic — of the folk community,” Mead writes. “Any means are permissible in the service of this end, as long as they do not violate the moral feelings or infringe on the freedoms that Jacksonians believe are essential in their daily lives.”

Trump isn’t ideologically consistent. The Jacksonian philosophy, Mead notes, “is an instinct rather than an ideology — a culturally shaped set of beliefs and emotions rather than a set of ideas.”

[central_va]

Say what you want but AJ knew how to throw a good party. Toga!

[dasboot]

19 posted on Tue Aug 18 2015 08:47:37 GMT-0400 (EDT) bystremba

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

To: jimbo123

Some people look at things as they could be, and ask Why not?’

Refreshing to have a LEADER available for POTUS.

Andy Jackson. Party at the W.H.; then dimantled the mercantilists’ grip on our nation. Trump is the right guy at the right time...and not for the
First time in our history.

20 posted on Tue Aug 18 2015 08:50:50 GMT-0400 (EDT) by dasboot

Please note posts’ date.:^)

[ozzymandus]

Well, lefties hate Jackson, so that fits.

[Publius]

Ping. Someone is noticing the bigger picture here.

[Robert357]

Andrew Jackson was a total bad-ass.

http://www.cracked.com/video_18463_andrew-jackson-most-terrifying-man-ever-elected-president.html

[Robert357]

Another Andrew Jackson description, but in text

http://www.badassoftheweek.com/jackson.html

[LS]

Well, a) the BUS wasn't corrupt. It had very strong, almost universal support from the small, "country" banks; 2) it was 4/5 private anyway; 3) Jackson was a oaf when it came to the bank and all along had a plan to get rid of all banks, as I showed in my book, "Banking in the American South"; 4) BOTH houses of Congress passed not one, but two Bank recharter bills and Jackson vetoed both; so, 6) with no hope of continuing, the BUS just died.

I personally didn't see anything wrong with the BUS because it always was forced to compete with ALL banks in terms of money creation. It did not, unlike the Fed, have a monopoly on money. Any bank (or insurance, or railroad company) could get a charter to print money, backed by gold or silver.

On the other hand, Jackson is innocent of causing the Panic of 1837, which was shown to be caused by the decline of silver importation.

Historians recently have begun to hate Jackson for his treatment of Indians, but up til the 1980s, libs like Arthur Schlesinger loved AJ and saw him as the forerunner to FDR. AJ ranks very low on our list in "Patriot's History of the United States," and I hate to see Trump even remotely compared to him. Knowing Lowry, it makes the comparison unfavorably.

That said, I think like Jackson, in office Trump would say to hell with Congress if they blocked efforts to protect America, build the wall, or admit Syrians.

[LS]

Dunno what "Founding Fathers" you read, but Hamilton initiated the idea of the Bank of the United States on George Washington's instructions; James Madison was fully in favor of it; John Marshall as well, ruling it Constitutional; John Adams liked it. Only Jefferson disliked it, but instructed his supporters to vote for it on the grounds the capital was moved to DC. Franklin favored a similar, earlier bank.

The difference between the BUS, which was pretty good at providing a reliable circulating medium and in generating economic growth, and the Fed, is that the BUS was not a monopoly when it came to printing money. ANY bank could get a charter and print money prior to 1863, and it worked very, very well. We had three panics from 1793-1861. Only one in any way was caused by "the economy" or "capitalism," the Panic of 1819. But the Panic of 1837 was simply a drying up of Mexican silver used by all the banks as a reserve; and the Panic of 1857 was caused (as I proved in a 1991 article with Charles Calomiris) by the Dred Scott decision crashing railroad bonds. So I think looking back the Founders in fact had it right: a central bank that had to compete with every other bank was not a threat to anyone.

[LS]

Mead is badly wrong. Jacksonianism was the most inconsistent philosophy out there. It strongly protected slavery, and in fact the Democrat (Jacksonian) party was CREATED specifically to protect and perpetuate slavery. It was not "small government" in anything it did. Jackson expanded executive power, especially through the veto, which, like a muscle is a power no matter how you use it. He ignored the US Supreme Court when the Court protected the Indians. He imposed the (Legally passed) Tariff of Abominations rather than, as a small government guy would, get it repealed.

You'll find in our "Patriot's History of the United States" that Jackson comes out as one of the biggest "big-government" presidents ever, and overall as a % of population or just in sheer numbers, the government grew absolutely and relatively under Jackson.

[Fai Mao]

I am aware of what you are saying but the BuS did use its influence to try and defeat Jackson and in some sense validated his fears.

jackson is also somewhat hated because he is viewed as sort of a bigot’s bigot, what all bigots would aspire to be. I am not sure that is completely true but it fits the “Narrative”

You at least have to give me credit for knowing about the issue.

[LS]

I would disagree that AJ dismantled anything. He was the croniest of crony capitalists. He threw the US into a five year depression (not entirely his fault, but he didn’t help). I can’t find one major economic policy he engaged in that really accelerated business or commerce.