Andrew Jackson could have averted the American Civil War

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jpietrzak8, May 1, 2017.

  1. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #1
    Why was there a Civil War in the United States? It could have easily been averted. But only if Andrew Jackson had been in charge at the time. This info provided to us by one Donald J Trump:

    I mean, had Andrew Jackson been a little later, you wouldn't have had the Civil War. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart. He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War. He said, “There's no reason for this.” People don't realize, you know, the Civil War — if you think about it, why? People don't ask that question, but why was there a Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?​

    https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/859020505034231809

    (Note: it would have been very tough for Andrew Jackson to have commented about the Civil War, as he died more than a decade before it began.)
     
  2. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #2
    Maybe he could have. Instead, he appointed Roger Taney.
     
  3. Scepticalscribe Contributor

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #3
    So, now, under Mr Trump, not only do we have alternative facts, and, indeed, alternative fictions, but it appears that we also have an alternative history?

    Fascinating.
     
  4. BeeGood macrumors 68000

    BeeGood

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2013
    Location:
    Lot 23E. Somewhere in Georgia.
    #4
    Sure Donnie, a man who's wealth was primarily built on the backs of slaves would have been in favor of the concessions necessary to avoid the civil war. Yeesh.

    I'm not really sure what to make of this actually. His propensity to minimize serious problems is stupefyingly naive, but it also shows some optimism to a certain extent.
     
  5. Scepticalscribe Contributor

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #5
    It also shows a complete and stupefying ignorance of the facts, and how (and why) facts might be relevant when trying to arrive at an understanding of a situation, challenge, issue or problem.
     
  6. appleisking macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    #6
    Expect nothing less from the man who thought the presidency would be easier than his old life and who has flip flopped on so many issues because of his lack of understanding of anything prior to the presidency.
     
  7. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #7
    Damn those fake telegrams. Hannity told him they were wrong.
     
  8. Nefilim Suspended

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    #8
    Zin & co are just laughing at you silly lefties getting hung up on irrelevant details and semantics ;-) . (Not that they have any other way to explain their completely hilarious and ignorant mindset)
     
  9. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #9
    Instead, Andrew Jackson was arguably responsible for the biggest genocide this country has ever participated in.

    BL.
     
  10. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #10
  11. Solomani macrumors 68030

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #11

    Trump is such an ignoramus, he makes George Dubya look like a genius.



    [​IMG]
    (above) I remember the day of September 11, that morning President Dubya was still having difficulty reading a children's book to 2nd graders while the World Trade Center was in flames.
     
  12. Scepticalscribe, May 2, 2017
    Last edited: May 2, 2017

    Scepticalscribe Contributor

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #12
    Well, as a professional historian, what some term "irrelevant details" are what I would describe as facts. And - facts matter.

    In history, something either happened or it didn't. We can debate the how, and the why - (the questions governing 'the what, the who, the when and the where' are usually easily enough answered and are rarely a subject of debate) - but to attempt to ludicrously argue that something that couldn't possibly have happened did happen - as Mr Trump did - tells us that Mr Trump is either uninformed, (possible), intellectually stupid (also possible), delusional (very possible), and/or couldn't care less, (very very possible) as the world he lives in offers him his own truth, and his aim is to remake the real world to mirror the madness in his mind.

    A man so triumphantly ignorant of historic facts ought to be a cause for some concern. Not out of respect for the nation's history (though that matters) but because of what it reveals about his fidelity to facts generally.

    If facts don't fit, re-make the world, seems to be the Trump mantra; this is - or ought to be - a source of some worry.

    I will not say that I forgive George W Bush everything - I don't, - but context matters, and when one compares and contrasts the pair, the results can be illuminating and redound very much to the credit of George W Bush.

    To his interlocutors, the man was courteous, and invariably affable.

    He was not personally corrupt.

    People who have met him tended to like him, as did his own staff - few bailed - or were fired - in odd circumstances in the Bush years. He listened to and respected his advisors (even if they weren't always right).

    And yes, family relationships within the Bush family did not tend to resemble the embarrassing spectacle of a madder episode of the Addams Family.

    However, leaving aside all that - and it is considerable, and - tellingly, - none of it applies to the narcissistic vulgarian who currently occupies the White House - the very fact that he would - memorably - describe actions taken by the Trump Presidency as "this is some weird ****" is simply wonderful.
     
  13. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #13
    Dubya was... well, Dubya.
    But on that day, that guy didn't storm out of the room to be protected as many leaders would've done. He didn't show panic in front of the camera. He was calm, and trusted his advisors, and then he wanted to go to DC but Secret Service stopped him.
    That was a difficult day, and he handled it well except for looney conspiracy theorists.
     
  14. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    #14
    Must watch - if only for the segment on the Civil War

     
  15. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #15
    Who knew that American history could be so complicated!?!?!
     
  16. BaldiMac macrumors 604

    BaldiMac

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    #17
    I mean, Trump does have a point. If Andrew Jackson was president 30-40 years later, he certainly would have prevented the Civil War by forcing a compromise. Just think! We could still have some form of slavery here in the South!

    :eek::rolleyes::(
     
  17. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    #18
    Would they be forced to guard the wall?
     
  18. Gasu E. macrumors 601

    Gasu E.

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    Not far from Boston, MA.
    #19
    Well, at least he's learning. You can't say that for many of his supporters.
     
  19. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #20
    And, to be honest, the trigger for the Civil War was due to a candidate from the new "radical" Republican party winning the presidency, which advocated total abolition. The southern states would never have seceded in the first place had the new president been a slave-owner like Jackson.
     
  20. BaldiMac macrumors 604

    BaldiMac

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    #21
    I think any answer to that would be too racist for me. :(
     
  21. Scepticalscribe Contributor

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #22
  22. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #23
    Next thing you know, the GOP will hold dinners honoring Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson.
     
  23. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #24
    Is Donald Trump running out of present-day issues to be completely wrong about?

    I await his epically dunderheaded pronouncements on Napoleon's Continental System; the Russo-Japanese War; and Henry VIII's marital woes.
     
  24. JMacHack macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    #25
    The Civil War was an inevitability, there's nobody who could've stopped it. Slavery was the unanswered question from the founding of the U.S., and even at the start the North was heavily abolitionist while the South was dependent on it.
    All the "compromises" that led up to that point were just to keep the United States together, and even then stuff like the 3/5s compromise only postponed the inevitable.

    The only one who could've possibly prevented it was Thomas Jefferson, but as soon as the Louisiana Purchase was done the Civil War became inevitable.

    Why not honor the Founding Father that authored the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution?
     

Share This Page