Interesting article, CB. However, if he means to infer by "Jacksonian" a way of warfare that Jackson actually supported, allowed or did, then his statement "The fiercest Jacksonian outrage is reserved for enemies who are deemed to be dishonorable—that is, those who fight contrary to the recognized rules of war. Ordinary opponents, who honor longstanding traditions such as the flag of truce, and who treat prisoners humanely, are entitled to be treated in the same fashion" is wrong. Jackson didn't care about honor among Indians. When white Georgians decided that good farmland that had been ceded by treaty to the Cherokee in previous decades ought to be theirs and got the Georgia legislature to agree, the Cherokee disagreed. They hired a white lawyer to take their case, which got all the way to the Supreme Court. The SC agreed with them, but Jackson refused to honor the decision, allowing the GA legislature to confiscate the land. Then he sent troops to GA to lead the Cherokee to mosquito infested land in Kansas, then the dumping ground for Indians who were on land that white people wanted. The Trail of Tears ensued, where more than half of those who began the long journey died before even reaching Kansas. Others who refused to go to Kansas and ran away were killed in Georgia.
What Moser doesn't say is that Jacksonians have a way of rationalizing their actions so that no matter what they do they become virtuous. A trait that continues today. |
