Hi APUSH!
Pls answer after reading how AJ destroys Hamilton's bank!!!!!
**********
1. Why does Jackson distinguish between just and unjust "distinctions in society"?
2. What does Jackson see as the legitimate scope of government action?
Best -- always,
Mr. B
1. Why does Jackson distinguish between just and unjust "distinctions in society"?
ReplyDeleteJackson distinguish the just and unjust because he believes that the distinction in society is determined by the government of which they are a part of. Should the bill get passed Jackson believed that the rich and powerful will bend the government to their will
2. What does Jackson see as the legitimate scope of government action?
Jackson says that the legitimate scope government action is based on what the constitution says. Many times In this excerpt, Jackson used the constitution to justify his choice of vetoing the bank bill and even said that the one of the reason why he vetoed this bill was because it was not justified by the constitution
1.) wheeeewwwwww , Jackson told it all , from the unjust to the just because he is very much determined that the government is causing the distinction. Jackson believe that the give me men will only pay attention to the rich because of being rich and having power.
ReplyDelete2.) Jackson recites the legitimate scope as the constitution, Jackson uses the constitution to justify his choice of vetoing the bank bill and even said that the one is the reasons was because it was not justified by the constitution and that’s not true.
1. Why does Jackson distinguish between just and unjust "distinctions in society"?
ReplyDeleteTo summerize what Jackson is saying about just and unjust ''distinctions in society,'' Jackson is expression his opinion that the government or party you support or promote, is the main factor of what brings differences in society. For example, he believed that the rich and powerful will bend over the government, creating further seperation between the rich and the poor.
2. What does Jackson see as the legitimate scope of government action?
Jackso sees the constitution as the legitimate scope of government action. For example, he used the constitution to make a point about the black bill being vetoed, as the constitution didn't justify the bank bill.
Jackson distinguishes the Just and unjust because he believes that the distinction is solely based off what part of the government u side with. The different parts of the government bridges a gap in society.
ReplyDeleteJackson believes the constitution is the legitimate scope of the government’s action. He uses the constitution to back some of his decisions like when he veto the US bank
Andrew jackson believe in the ideal of just vs unjust. He thought that the people should slide with sides that most align with your belief. That’s why he said that the people who are rich will support the rich and since your poor supporting the rich will only empower the rich to make themselves richer. That’s why he thought government should be more inclusive and thought the government should be an equaliser for the poor.
ReplyDeleteHe believed in the constitution, but he wasn’t a firm believer and was kind of a lose interpretation of it. So he would use the constitution to justify his decisions but instead of allowing for a chance of debate he cuts it short at his own bias.
Why does Jackson distinguish between just and unjust "distinctions in society"?
ReplyDeleteJackson distinguishes just and unjust "distinction is society" because he believes that there is a clear gap between the rich and the poor.
What does Jackson see as the legitimate scope of government action?
Jackson sees the constitution as the legitimate scope of the governments actions. When he made a veto he used the constitution as reasoning.
1. Why does Jackson distinguish between just and unjust "distinctions in society"?
ReplyDeleteJackson focuses closely on the fact that the poor does not have the same leverage as the rich. He wants to fix that because it goes against the constitution(even though he was a loose constitutionist)and DOI of all men being created equal.
2. What does Jackson see as the legitimate scope of government action?
Jackson believes the constitution is the legitimate government action because it allows him to veto the bill on the Second Bank, thinking the constitution justifies his actions.
Jackson distinguished between just and unjust “distinctions in society” because he believes that there is separation between the rich and poor.
ReplyDeleteWhat Jackson sees as the legitimate scope of government action is the constitution. It allowed him to veto the bank bill and said the bill was not justified by the constitution
1. Why does Jackson distinguish between just and unjust "distinctions in society"?
ReplyDeleteJackson states that he want all his citizens to be equal. He states that usually the government focus on trying to make the rich become richer, do things to try to benefit the wealth only.
2. What does Jackson see as the legitimate scope of government action?
Jackson see the legitimate scope of government action as a chance to veto the bill on the Second Bank.
1. Jackson identifies between the Just and the Unjust because he claims that the distinction is solely based on the part of the u part of government. Jackson says he wants to be equal for all his people. He says the government typically works on trying to make the rich richer, doing stuff just to try to benefit the rich.
ReplyDelete2. He believed in the constitution, but he was not a firm believer, so he was kind of a losing understanding of it. So he would use the constitution to explain his decisions, but instead of providing for a chance to debate, he cut it short on his own prejudice. Jackson sees the constitution as the legitimate scope of the governments actions. When he made a veto he used the constitution as reasoning.
Jackson distinguish the just and unjust because he believes that the distinction in society is determined by the government. If the bill get passed he believed that the rich and powerful will bend the government to their knees.
ReplyDeleteHe believed in the constitution, but he wasn’t a firm believer, so he lost the true meaning of it. Hw would use the constitution to back his decisions, but instead of providing for a chance to debate, he cut it short on his own prejudice.
Jackson believed that the different parts of government created gaps between the rich and poor. It would make the most sense to side with the party who closely identifies with you. The government was meant to give those that were “inferior” a voice. If the bill was to get passed their voice would be taken away and the rich will use the government to their advantage.
ReplyDeleteJackson considered the constitution the legitimate scope of government action. He used it as an excuse to veto the bank bill.
Jackson distinguishes the just and unjust by considering what the government distinguishes to be just and unjust.
ReplyDeleteJackson believed in the constitution but didn’t firmly follow the constitution
Jackson distinguishes the just and unjust by considering what the government distinguishes to be just and unjust.
ReplyDeleteJackson believed in the constitution but didn’t firmly follow the constitution
Jackson believed that the different parts of gov created a separation of the rich & poor, therefore people will side with the person who represents them best.
ReplyDeleteJackson sees the constitution as the legitimate scope of government action. He used the constitution to make a point about the black bill being vetoed.