Answer:
An ambiguous, controversial concept, Jacksonian Democracy in the strictest sense refers simply to the ascendancy of Andrew Jackson and the Democratic party after 1828. More loosely, it alludes to the entire range of democratic reforms that proceeded alongside the Jacksonians’ triumph—from expanding the suffrage to restructuring federal institutions. From another angle, however, Jacksonianism appears as a political impulse tied to slavery, the subjugation of Native Americans, and the celebration of white supremacy—so much so that some scholars have dismissed the phrase “Jacksonian Democracy” as a contradiction in terms.
Such tendentious revisionism may provide a useful corrective to older enthusiastic assessments, but it fails to capture a larger historical tragedy: Jacksonian Democracy was an authentic democratic movement, dedicated to powerful, at times radical, egalitarian ideals—but mainly for white men.
Socially and intellectually, the Jacksonian movement represented not the insurgency of a specific class or region but a diverse, sometimes testy national coalition. Its origins stretch back to the democratic stirrings of the American Revolution, the Antifederalists of the 1780s and 1790s, and the Jeffersonian Democratic Republicans. More directly, it arose out of the profound social and economic changes of the early nineteenth century.
Recent historians have analyzed these changes in terms of a market revolution. In the Northeast and Old Northwest, rapid transportation improvements and immigration hastened the collapse of an older yeoman and artisan economy and its replacement by cash-crop agriculture and capitalist manufacturing. In the South, the cotton boom revived a flagging plantation slave economy, which spread to occupy the best lands of the region. In the West, the seizure of lands from Native Americans and mixed-blood Hispanics opened up fresh areas for white settlement and cultivation—and for speculation.
Explanation:
William Jennings Bryan (1860 -1925) was an American politician and orator, he was also a dominant figure in the Democratic Party, who stood three times as a nominee for President of the US unsucessfully. He was a member of the US House of Representatives and served in the United States Secretary of State.
As a response to the agrarian movements that were taking place in the South, and in order to help farmers, regulate the establishment of railroads, and the limits of corporations he positioned himself in favour of the intervention of the state in such matters. <u>He was an advocate of two measures:</u>
- Free coinage of silver. This mechanism or policy option was called "free silver", and consisted on a expansionary monetary policy that aimed to coin silver money unlimitedly as mechanism of increasing demand. This policy appeared in opposition to the fixed money supply dictated by the gold standard.
- Establishment of a progressive federal income tax. This type of tax is such in which as the taxable amount increases so does the tax rate owed. In the case of the income tax, the taxable amount would be the income earn by a person.
Answer: What would you like me to answer?
Explanation:
The Populist Party is the answer
