Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and Andrew Jackson - Essay Example

presidents Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, since the time the Constitution was drafted. Jefferson is well known to advocate governance of the country by common people whereas Hamilton believed in the ‘rule of the few’ or that the country be run by the elite who he argued could be trusted for being selfless as opposed to the greedy brutish trait of the common ones (Trey, 2009). In a way, this had extended to their positions regarding the issue of government centralization wherein while the Federalist Hamilton expressed belief in a strong central government, Democratic-Republican Jefferson perceived weakness in it yet imagined strength and solidarity in public control at its height.

By the time certain economic decisions and policies were deliberated upon, taking foreign affairs to account, these revolutionary U.S. leaders further acquired opposing perspectives on addressing how the national debt should be managed. According to Hamilton, national debt ought to be kept permanent for the sake of a healthy economy for the nation and that such debt must be paid off by the government to the party in current possession of the certificate at the time. On the other hand, Jefferson contradicted the permanence to national debt and asserted that it should be the original bearer of the certificate who must get paid off, knowing that this would be advantageous to the common citizens.

However, the following enactment approved the proposition made by Hamilton instead and the affluent became even wealthier, having purchased the certificate from their common counterparts (Trey). Similarly, the two greatly differed in terms of financial principles concerning the U.S. Bank. To Hamilton, the federal bank would help the Constitution to take in relevant effect as the country progressed in terms of debt settlements. Most merchants from the north highly complied to this view for their benefit but the ordinary people of the south and several others were unable to find worth in a centralized bank especially for the case of the farmers.

Thus, Jefferson earned their favor by supporting the philosophy that incorporation of a central bank is beyond sensible necessity. As another president who committed himself to being a ‘common man’ or man of the people, Andrew Jackson established policies for which his leadership received either revering loyalty of the mass or reviling hostility of those who could not take their intended advantage of his principles and relation. Such treatment of his regime may be attributed to policies where drawn for particular aspects as the spoils system, the nullification, the removal of Indians, and the ‘Bank War’.

While Jacksonian democracy emerged to promote the rule of the ‘mass’ and the ‘common’ of America, the policies that substantiated Jackson’s regime and their impact apparently became the chief determinants that aid in the assessment of his presidency and the truth of its underlying ethics. The crisis on nullification which became a sensationalized conflict in South Carolina is one of the areas through which his policy on tariffs may be evaluated. For Jackson, modest decisions in favor of tariffs are necessary to ensure national security and the stable production of commodities.

This would also establish better commercial relations with European manufacturers, to be able to adjust revenue to the level that paid the nation’s debt. Jackson himself was against the philosophy of nullification, seeing how this had every tendency of dissolving the Union and violating the rule of majority. The tariffs imposed upon taxes on imported goods in the early 1930s, however, anguished the leaders and people of the state of South Carolina. Imposition of tariffs was treated with