Americans choose Harriet Tubman to be on the $20 bill

[_Rave_]

a spoils system where he awards friends with political office, the closure of the second national bank, and causing a deep recession are not the interests of the people.

jackson comes off as somebody who had his own political career in heart rather than the people's interests.

dude what are you even talking about.  Jackson created the rotation-in-office specifically to avoid nepotism and he closed the bank because it was way too strong and held ridiculous influence over all other banks in the nation.  that banking system was not effective.

"Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and George Washington are consistently ranked at the top of the lists. Often ranked just below those Presidents are Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt. The remaining places in the top ten are often rounded out by Harry S. Truman, Woodrow Wilson, Dwight D. Eisenhower, James K. Polk, and Andrew Jackson."

http://millercenter.org/president/jackson/essays/biography/9

do better

[Ad Bot]

[ultimamax]

I think it's more people arguing the significance of it. I don't care or am indifferent on the matter because I didn't experience it, I'm not trying to downplay how horrible the trail of tears must have been, but I'm not going to go crying about how people should recognize me for stuff my ANCESTORS went through. That's petty as forget in my opinion, and pretty low to stoop (looking at you, skeletons that still bitch about slavery)

Most of the ills of life on the reservation can be traced back to the stuff end of the stick they got from the US government. Same with African American people, Jim Crow laws were legal until 1964, you think they'd just bounce back socioeconomically in 50 years? It takes much longer than that. It's not like they're angry about only what their ancestors went through, the effects of what their ancestors went through still ring true today. Slavery is an indirect cause of the socioeconomic troubles of African Americans today.

(Slavery > Slavery ends, but Reconstruction is ended prematurely in a compromise between political parties, so the Freedmen are still poor as forget > Many end up working for people who would have previously been their masters, in exchange for no pay they get a bit of land to farm on and housing, they give their crop to their "landlord", they are trapped in poverty > Jim Crow and segregation and being unable to vote > 1964 > Today)

[ZombiLoin]

-snip-

considering the fact that there was a major recession right after his presidency (that could probably be attributed to the closure of the bank or something) there was probably a less violent way he could've reformed the bank.

the spoils system was a not a fair or sound system. it rewarded people on the basis of their relationship to jackson and not on their ability. while it would've allowed jackson to have more control over the government, i'd rather not have a system based on favors.

[devildogelite]

it's because the government of the USA made signed agreements with the native americans pertaining to land that were supposed to be honored, but were mostly ignored during that era.

When the Supreme Court told Jackson that the Indian Nations were to be treated as a nation he said "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!". If a modern president were to tell the Supreme Court to forget off like that I don't think people would appreciate it.

"Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and George Washington are consistently ranked at the top of the lists. Often ranked just below those Presidents are Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt. The remaining places in the top ten are often rounded out by Harry S. Truman, Woodrow Wilson, Dwight D. Eisenhower, James K. Polk, and Andrew Jackson."

do better

Old Hickory should really really not be in the top 10, he was a very interesting guy and president but he was not good.

[Harm94]

I'm from the rez but we moved off, if that counts.

Depends on how long you lived there and how recently you moved.

[ultimamax]

considering the fact that there was a major recession right after his presidency (that could probably be attributed to the closure of the bank or something) there was probably a less violent way he could've reformed the bank.

the spoils system was a not a fair or sound system. it rewarded people on the basis of their relationship to jackson and not on their ability. while it would've allowed jackson to have more control over the government, i'd rather not have a system based on favors.

didn't spoils go up until the 1890s? especially in political machines like chicago

i wouldn't be surprised if what he was doing was expected at the time
he's still a richard though

[Nonnel]

And why's that, because it literally just proved your whole "x doesn't matter" thing wrong.

because it's completely irrelevant? what didn't happen doesn't have anything to do with what did.

he was talking about racism

in a specific situation, which i replied to.

no one called american indians lazy
no one said the europeans were in the right.
the american indians wanted to live like they were, but we wanted their land. we moved them out to stufftier and stufftier land. the europeans wanted the indians to act like them, and the indians wanted the europeans to go away. today most of them do not practice the traditions they had which they wanted their land for. all of them have been at least partially assimilated. all of them today that "want their land back" have nothing to back it except for deals their ancestors made with other peoples' ancestors. they're moot. it's not their land. they never owned it.

the point is that the american indians who are living today did not experience the trail of tears directly and should not use it as any sort of argument for trying to get more of their land back. they didn't experience it. they should live on what the government gave to their ancestors and not whine, or live with the rest of the society our ancestors created.

there was tons of racism back then and there is racism now. it was and is wrong and bad. there is no point for it. but things in the past cannot be changed. something that affected your ancestors does not affect you. just because my ancestor made a deal with your ancestor does not mean i am obligated to honor that deal with you. both parties involved are no longer existent. the deal is gone.

[Cappytaino]

Depends on how long you lived there and how recently you moved.

Probably doesn't count then, since we moved when I was pretty young.

[Harm94]

Probably doesn't count then, since we moved when I was pretty young.

The reason I bring it is because things change over time.

[ZombiLoin]

because it's completely irrelevant? what didn't happen doesn't have anything to do with what did.
in a specific situation, which i replied to.
no one called american indians lazy
no one said the europeans were in the right.
the american indians wanted to live like they were, but we wanted their land. we moved them out to stufftier and stufftier land. the europeans wanted the indians to act like them, and the indians wanted the europeans to go away. today most of them do not practice the traditions they had which they wanted their land for. all of them have been at least partially assimilated. all of them today that "want their land back" have nothing to back it except for deals their ancestors made with other peoples' ancestors. they're moot. it's not their land. they never owned it.

the point is that the american indians who are living today did not experience the trail of tears directly and should not use it as any sort of argument for trying to get more of their land back. they didn't experience it. they should live on what the government gave to their ancestors and not whine, or live with the rest of the society our ancestors created.

there was tons of racism back then and there is racism now. it was and is wrong and bad. there is no point for it. but things in the past cannot be changed. something that affected your ancestors does not affect you. just because my ancestor made a deal with your ancestor does not mean i am obligated to honor that deal with you. both parties involved are no longer existent. the deal is gone.

alright, awesome, you can't change the past and people shouldn't pay for the sins of their fathers.

we can all agree you're dumb for saying any part of history doesn't matter, though.

[otto-san]

something that affected your ancestors does not affect you.

to be completely fair, this isn't a fantastic general rule, because past events can cause long-standing stratification and divisiveness generations after the primary problem ends. but on a surface level i obv understand what you're trying to say

[Nonnel]

alright, awesome, you can't change the past and people shouldn't pay for the sins of their fathers.

we can all agree you're dumb for saying any part of history doesn't matter, though.

nitpicking

[Akio]

I vote Captain Falcon on the 20$ bill.

thank you

[Aces]

nitpicking

Not really nitpicking if it was the bone of your argument.

[Foxscotch]

Betsy Ross created the American flag, that is a large scale contribution.

it's a tiny, meaningless contribution. if she didn't make it, someone else would have. several other people did make their own versions
her design has also been changed many times, so it isn't even the same flag that she made
it's just a flag. the specific design that was chosen is insignificant

Regardless of Lincoln did? He freed the slaves!

he made an empty threat for completely political reasons, then carried through because he'd lose his power if he didn't

I don't think people should be on our money anyway. like, all the state and national park quarters, the backs of those are great. that's the kinda stuff I wanna see on all of our money