Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Trump's
Twisted History: His Presidential Idol Andrew Jackson Paved the Road to the
Civil War by Suppressing the Abolitionists
By Jefferson Morley [1] / AlterNet [2]
May 1, 2017
6
When
President Trump mused in an interview with SiriusXM radio that “People don’t
ask [the] question, but why was there the Civil War [3]?" the internet choir
answered in unison, "because of slavery [4]," followed
by the observation that there are few questions that have been asked more often
by historians.
Trump
has answered his own question by saying, "had Andrew Jackson been around,
you wouldn't have had a civil war." That isn’t convincing many people.
Even Breitbart News found it "puzzling [5]."
But
the counterargument that conflict over slavery caused the Civil War is
incomplete at best, because it doesn’t explain why the differences could not be
resolved peacefully.
"Some
issues aren’t amenable to deal-making," argues Yoni Appelbaum at the
Atlantic. "Some principles don’t lend themselves to compromise."
But
there were literally millions of people who wanted compromise on the slavery
issue 25 years before the Civil War. They were, for the most part, the people
who wanted to abolish slavery by peaceful and legislative means. They were
dubbed "abolitionists" and they were amenable to peaceful change.
Their opponents were not.
The
truth is that Americans went to war over slavery in 1861 because those who
sought a peaceful solution had been systematically suppressed for decades by
leaders in Washington—starting with President Andrew Jackson. Such historical
polemics are not important because they reveal Trump’s limited understanding of
Jackson, his favorite president. They matter because Trump's answer,
intentionally or unintentionally, glosses over Jackson’s attack on American
democratic norms in the 1830s, just as Trump seeks to gloss over his own
attacks on democracy today.
'Land
of the Free'
Trump,
like most Americans, is largely ignorant of Jackson’s unconstitutional
suppression of the anti-slavery movement in the 1830s. The story seems unknown
even to writers at the Atlantic, a magazine founded in anti-slavery principles
in the 1850s.
The
anti-slavery movement emerged as a potent political force in 1833 with the
creation of the American Anti-Slavery Society. Originally consisting of 10
chapters in Massachusetts, the society grew to 200 chapters nationwide two
years later. Jackson used every tool at his command to blunt this burgeoning
movement, which was the first mass membership interest group in American
politics.
As
Jackson began his second term in 1833, he appointed Francis Scott Key [6], the famous
author of the "Star-Spangled Banner," as the district attorney for
the city of Washington. Jackson wanted to deploy Key’s patriotic celebrity in
service of pro-slavery law enforcement.
One of
Key’s first actions was to indict an itinerant editor named Benjamin Lundy and
his young assistant, William Lloyd Garrison. They dared to publish Lundy’s
anti-slavery magazine, The Genius of Universal Emancipation, in
the District of Columbia. Facing the constant threat of assault by enraged
slave traders and the prospect of Key’s persecution, Lundy and Garrison had to
retreat to the safety of the northern states. Key also indicted [6] Thomas Cary, a
black barber on Pennsylvania Avenue, who distributed anti-slavery material to
his customers. Cary moved to Toronto, Canada.
Key,
the man who celebrated the "land of the free and the home of the brave [6]," had
no problem with enforcing white supremacy at the behest of Jackson.
Jackson
did not let the law get in his way. When the abolitionists launched a mass
mailing of anti-slavery literature in the summer of 1835, a white mob in
Charleston, South Carolina trashed the post office to prevent their delivery.
With Jackson’s blessing,
Postmaster General Amos Kendall sanctioned this attack
on the freedom of the mail, and Jackson urged Congress to pass legislation
outlawing anti-slavery publications. While the legislation did not pass,
postmasters in the South and North felt free not to deliver anti-slavery
material even to those who wanted it.
Jackson’s
action “may well have been the largest peacetime violation of civil liberty in
U.S. history,” writes historian Daniel Walker Howe.
‘Gag
Rule’
The
conflict over slavery only grew. In December 1835, the anti-slavery societies
of the North started petitioning Congress to abolish slavery in the District of
Columbia. Within a few months, hundreds of petitions had arrived in Washington,
and pro-slavery congressmen were apoplectic. With Jackson’s uncompromising
support, they changed the rules of Congress to bar consideration of and debate
about the petitions. The so-called gag rule [7] stifled all debate in
Congress about the legality of slavery for the next 25 years.
The
abolitionists’ agenda was almost entirely peaceful. As evangelical Christians,
the anti-slavery activists were pacifists. Even the most militant among them,
including the soon-to-be famous William Lloyd Garrison, rejected a violent
response to slavery. Garrison argued that slave rebellions were inevitable but
unwise. Only moral suasion, he said, would convince the sinning slave owner to
repent.
The
anti-slavery societies advocated peaceful resolution of the slavery issue by
immediate or gradual emancipation of two million black people then living in
bondage. Only many years later did John Brown and a handful of militant
abolitionists, black and white, advocate violent resistance to slavery.
The
abolitionists were open to compromise. The tens of thousands of Americans who
petitioned Congress in the 1830s did not seek to abolish slavery in the
Southern states, only in the nation’s capital. They wanted to set an example
for the slaveholding states, not impose their emancipationist interpretation of
the Declaration of Independence on others.
Even
that was too much for the slave masters. Jackson and Co. did not seek to rebut
the moral, religious and practical arguments against slavery. They sought to
silence them with the threat of violence or prison.
Supreme
Court Appointee
To
enforce the suppression of free speech, Jackson looked to the Supreme Court.
With the death of Chief Justice John Marshall in 1835, Jackson had a vacancy to
fill. He named one of his closest confidants, Roger Taney, to the court.
(Taney, incidentally, was brother-in-law and best friend [6] of
Francis Scott Key.)
Jackson
especially liked Taney’s views on slavery. In 1833, Taney wrote in a legal
opinion for Jackson, “The African race in the United States even when free are
everywhere a degraded class, and exercise no political influence. The
privileges they are allowed to enjoy are a matter of kindness and benevolence
rather than right.”
Taney
would go on to have a three-decade career on the Supreme Court, culminating in
his notorious decision in the Dred Scott case of 1857. Taney ruled with the
majority that Scott, a freed slave living in Minnesota, had to be returned to
the family that claimed ownership of him. By then Jackson was dead, though
there is no reason to think he would have disagreed with Taney's decision.
Trump’s
musings, while uninformed, are a reminder that the conflict over slavery might
have been resolved peacefully if American democracy had allowed the public
debate the abolitionists sought.
Slavery
was not universally popular, as the slave masters knew full well. A proposal
for compensated emancipation of slaves nearly passed the Virginia legislature
in 1834. By that time, the anti-slavery bloc in Congress, led by former
President John Quincy Adams, held about 20 percent of the seats on Capitol
Hill. The proposal to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia might have
inspired action elsewhere. For a passing moment in the 1830s, peaceful
change on the slavery issue could have been possible.
The
Southern states, led by Andrew Jackson, were not merely uninterested, they were
violently opposed. Jackson, who owned 100 people himself, hated the
abolitionists with characteristic fury. He loathed the idea of emancipation for
black people, compensated or not. He despised all those who challenged the
white man’s constitutional right to own human property. He used the Congress,
the courts and the press to demonize and suppress those who disagreed with him.
Fantasy
Trump’s
belief that there would have been no Civil War if Jackson had been president in
1860 depends on believing that a tough but big-hearted president who stood firm
against Southern secession could have prevented the war. But the United States
did have a tough but big-hearted president who did just that. His name was
Abraham Lincoln, and all he got for his trouble was war. Jackson would have
received the same.
Trump’s
vision of Andrew Jackson is a historical fantasy. In reality, Jackson, as much
as any other president, killed the possibility of peaceful change and paved the
road to the Civil War.
Jefferson
Morley is AlterNet's Washington correspondent. He is the author of Snow-Storm in August: Washington City,
Francis Scott Key, and the Forgotten Race Riot of 1835 [8] and Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and
the Hidden History of the CIA [9].
[11]
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/jefferson-morley-2
[2] http://alternet.org
[3] http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/05/01/trump-why-was-there-a-civil-war-sot-nr.cnn
[4] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/trump-magna-cum-laude-from-the-dunning-school/524892/
[5] http://www.breitbart.com/news/trump-makes-puzzling-claim-about-andrew-jackson-civil-war/
[6] https://www.amazon.com/Snow-Storm-August-Washington-Francis-Forgotten/dp/0385533373/?tag=alternorg08-20
[7] http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/mitch-mcconnell-gag-rule-elizabeth-warren-echoes-slavery-debate
[8] https://www.amazon.com/Snow-Storm-August-Washington-Forgotten-2012-07-03/dp/B01K2EAA7G/?tag=alternorg08-20
[9] https://www.amazon.com/Our-Man-Mexico-Winston-History/dp/0700617906/?tag=alternorg08-20
[10] mailto:corrections@alternet.org?Subject=Typo on Trump's Twisted History: His Presidential Idol Andrew Jackson Paved the Road to the Civil War by Suppressing the Abolitionists
[11] http://www.alternet.org/
[12] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
[2] http://alternet.org
[3] http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/05/01/trump-why-was-there-a-civil-war-sot-nr.cnn
[4] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/trump-magna-cum-laude-from-the-dunning-school/524892/
[5] http://www.breitbart.com/news/trump-makes-puzzling-claim-about-andrew-jackson-civil-war/
[6] https://www.amazon.com/Snow-Storm-August-Washington-Francis-Forgotten/dp/0385533373/?tag=alternorg08-20
[7] http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/mitch-mcconnell-gag-rule-elizabeth-warren-echoes-slavery-debate
[8] https://www.amazon.com/Snow-Storm-August-Washington-Forgotten-2012-07-03/dp/B01K2EAA7G/?tag=alternorg08-20
[9] https://www.amazon.com/Our-Man-Mexico-Winston-History/dp/0700617906/?tag=alternorg08-20
[10] mailto:corrections@alternet.org?Subject=Typo on Trump's Twisted History: His Presidential Idol Andrew Jackson Paved the Road to the Civil War by Suppressing the Abolitionists
[11] http://www.alternet.org/
[12] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Donations can be sent
to the Baltimore Nonviolence Center, 325 E. 25th St., Baltimore, MD
21218. Ph: 410-323-1607; Email: mobuszewski [at] verizon.net. Go to http://baltimorenonviolencecenter.blogspot.com/
"The master class
has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles.
The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject
class has had nothing to gain and everything to lose--especially their
lives." Eugene Victor Debs
No comments:
Post a Comment