Some people throughout history believe that Jackson’s actions under Indian policy were some of the only beneficial decisions he ever made. His decisions seemed to follow the tradition of Indian tribes gradually moving westward as more settlers entered America. Others believe Jackson had no right to destroy the lives of so many people and acted irresponsibly.
His view on Indian policy violated not only political and constitutional aspects, but also moral, and practical as well. Andrew Jackson’s decision to send the American Indians on the trail of tears, removed any type of moral standards that were in place at the time. Although some people of the time argued that they were incapable of change, Christian missionaries who worked closely with the Indians begged to differ. They saw the slow assimilation that was beginning to happen and opposed anything that would halt their efforts. Those who did not work closely with them, including Jackson, did not see any progress, and just assumed that none was being made. Another aspect of the moral failing of Jackson's decision pertains to the amount of lives lost on the journey. Those who were members of Cherokee tribes were …show more content…
Some believed that in order for American Indians to remain protected, they must surrender to a more powerful form of government such as the one that the U.S had. They believed that if the Indians refused to surrender, the American government had the right to remove them. If the Indians felt like they were unprotected and believed that they needed Americans to protect them, that should have been their decision to surrender. It was not practical for Jackson to have decided the Indian’s fate based on his own selfish wants. Alexis de Tocqueville criticizes Andrew Jackson’s opinion by noting how the tribes in question were not a disturbance to American society and were in no way endangering the Union or its