Andrew Jackson As A Treason Project - Pt 1
April 27, 2012 • 12:27PM

By Anton Chaitkin

This report was originally published in Executive Intelligence Review in December 2007 as part of The American Patriot series. We will be publishing it in three separate parts over the next several days. This is the first installment. Part 2 Part 3

Preface: The Jackson Lie And the Current Crisis

Every year, Democratic Party leaders stage an ugly ritual known as "Jefferson-Jackson Day."

They give this name to fund-raising events, to boast that their party continues a political tradition inherited from the early U.S. Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson.

This fraud is designed to bury the legacy of the most famous and revered Democratic President, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and to declare the party's allegiance to a political philosophy directly opposed to Roosevelt's.

FDR used national power to protect the rights of workers and the poor, and to promote universal economic progress, thus reviving those activist-government initiatives of America's founders and of Abraham Lincoln, which the world so admired. Roosevelt rescued the people from the 1930s Great Depression, and led the forces defeating Hitlerism in World War II.

Roosevelt's London and Wall Street enemies asserted that men have no right to progress, that government must not protect wages or otherwise interfere with colonial subjugation, looting, and backwardness.

This brutal anti-national philosophy, practiced on the world by the British Empire, came into the White House with Andrew Jackson's Presidency (1829-37). The first President under the new "Democratic Party," Jackson was an enemy of the earlier, more nationalistic President Thomas Jefferson, whose administration (1801-09) had subpoenaed Jackson to testify as an unindicted co-conspirator in the treason trial of Aaron Burr.

President Jackson broke down the nation's power over credit, tore down the tariffs protecting U.S. industry and wages, and blocked national expansion of canals and railroads.

As a result, the industrial economy crashed, and Southern states gave up plans to acquire industry and abolish slavery. A cheap-labor ("free-trade") alliance of plantation slaveholders and their British cotton customers fostered anti-national radicalism in the South. Jackson destroyed the previous American consensus behind nationalist economics, in which Southern leaders such as Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, and John C. Calhoun had all participated. This political catastrophe is the origin of the Slave Power, and of the Civil War.

But you have no doubt heard that Andrew Jackson was "the people's" champion, who enhanced the power of "the little guy"—a dogma always repeated at the above-cited fund-raising dinners.

You may also have heard that the current national leadership of the Democrats, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her ilk (those who put on those historically fraudulent rituals) have blocked Franklin Roosevelt-style action by Democrats to rescue the country from economic collapse and imperial disaster.

The "Jackson, not FDR" policy was imposed on the Democratic Party in association with a history hoax published in 1946, just after Roosevelt's death: The Age of Jackson, by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. In it Andrew Jackson is sold as "the people's own President," his reign as "the rule of the people."

Who Jackson was in fact, and whose instrument, will be documented in the present report.

Schlesinger's book came out as the British establishment, from Winston Churchill to Bertrand Russell, were rushing to reprogram the war-triumphant U.S.A. away from Roosevelt's anti-colonial program. By 1950, Schlesinger, Russell, Allen Dulles, and Sidney Hook would be among the leaders of the Congress for Cultural Freedom,1See "Children of Satan III: 'The Sexual Congress for Cultural Fascism'" EIR, June 25, 2004. designed to nail the coffin shut on the American Revolution, and the mother enterprise of what would become neoconservatism.

The Age of Jackson explains that "Southern planters" provided "the mass with leadership in their struggle for political power,"2Arthur Schlesinger, Age of Jackson (Boston: Little, Brown, 19460, p. 17. that slaveowners' political operatives, by backing Jackson, "kept alive the democratic soul," against "the aggressions of a central government controlled by a moneyed aristocracy."3Ibid., p. 29.

Hoping that his readers know nothing of pre-Civil War American history, Schlesinger never presents two stark features of that period's politics:

1. That the Northeastern aristocrats who came to dominate the Federalist Party ("against Jefferson") were notoriously British-allied anti-nationalists, not Hamiltonians; and

2. That Henry Clay-led nationalism was premised on a world contest against the British Empire and European oligarchism. In the time of Jackson, such patriots as James Fenimore Cooper might be found as Democrats, in opposition to the influence of "anti-Jackson" (i.e., Whig) Northeastern aristocrats, just as Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams had adhered to the party of Jefferson despite their Hamiltonian principles, in opposition to the core oligarchical alliance of Britain, the Boston tories, and the worst Southern planters. The pro-high-tariff Cooper and the Indian-slaughtering thug Andrew Jackson had nothing in common.

Setting the Stage

The revival of nationalism had begun in 1810. Henry Clay had led in electing to Congress feisty advocates of war against the British Empire—Clay's "War Hawks." This anti-imperial movement, committed as well to Alexander Hamilton's nationalist economic program, elicited fear and loathing from the Anglophile treason faction, and from the British, speaking in their own name.

As Congress debated whether to defend the United States from British military attacks, Boston Congressman Josiah Quincy (one of the Massachusetts "Essex Junto" that was scheming for New England to secede) called Clay's patriots "toad eaters"—commoners who had usurped the places of their betters in government. Clay said he was not disturbed "by the howlings of the whole British pack let loose from the Essex kennel."

The newly installed British ambassador to Washington, John Augustus Foster, wrote hopefully to the Foreign Office that since the James Madison Administration would not allow itself to "be pushed into a War with us...there never was a more favourable moment for Great Britain to impose almost what terms she pleases."4Foster to Wellesley, Dec. 28, 1811, Foreign Office [FO] 5:77, quoted in Bernard Mayo, Henry Clay: Spokesman of the New West (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1937), p. 429.

But under Clay's leadership, President Madison was made to understand that he would not be supported for a second Presidential term, if he did not come out for war with Britain.

Madison began issuing pro-war messages, and the Democratic caucus renominated him. For insurance, republican forces in New York secure the nomination of the nationalist DeWitt Clinton for U.S. President. There was no official Federalist candidate. At Madison's request, Congress declared war on Britain in June 1812.

British Ambassador Foster lamented the loss of "the old Democratic Party"—i.e., Albert Gallatin's free-trade gang, which had stood for economy, states' rights, and peace with England—and was, in a colonial fashion, England's best market and source of raw materials.5Foster to Wellesley, Jan. 16, 1812, FO 5:84; quoted in Ibid., p. 469. Previously, Gallatin's budget had had the effect of "damping the military ardour."6Foster to Wellesley, Jan. 31, 1812, FO 5:84; quoted in Ibid., p. 451.

Alarmed by an American political movement combining politicized city workers and internationally alert frontier farmers, the British ambassador denounced the large pro-war meetings in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and other seaports, which the Briton claimed were mobs "principally composed of Irishmen of the lowest order, Negros, and Boys."7Foster to Castlereagh, May 26, 1812, quoted in Ibid., p. 476.

In retirement, former President Jefferson agreed with "this second weaning from British principles, British attachments, British manners and manufactures." He looked forward to the outcome of a war—"a spirit of nationalism and of consequent prosperity, which could never have resulted from a continued subordination to the interests and influence of England."8Jefferson to William Duane, April 20, 1812; quoted in Ibid., p. 475. Duane published the Aurora, a Jeffersonian paper in Philadelphia, ridiculing and exposing Jefferson's Treasury Secretary Gallatin as a foreign agent and conspirator. See Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America (Washington: Executive Intelligence Review, 1985), pp. 82n, 83n.

The War of 1812 was entirely a defensive war, wherein the lightly armed and ill-prepared republic survived treachery by New England Federalist leaders and held its own militarily against the world's greatest power.

Following the conclusion of a peace treaty, it was clear that an entirely new political order had begun. Kentucky's Henry Clay and his Philadelphia ally, publisher Mathew Carey, had rallied countrywide support for a re-born nationalism, which would in ten years push through an astonishing program of technology development and westward-vectored transport. The resulting industrial revolution, delayed over the previous free-trade decades, would now give America muscle enough to survive even a Civil War.

The policies comprising what Clay dubbed "the American System" would become later identified with Clay's and Carey's Whig Party, and the nationalist program through which Abraham Lincoln completed the remaking of the United States as the world's leading industrial power.

The British Reaction

Lord Robert Gasocyne-Cecil, during the U.S. Civil War, hailed the Confederacy and demanded the breakup of the Union, saying the United States and Britain were “rivals politically, rivals commercially.”

America's successful industrial breakout deeply frightened the British Empire and its foreign collaborators, and moved them to hostile countermeasures.

By the 1860s—35 years after John C. Calhoun's and John Q. Adams' U.S. Army Corps of Engineers designed the first railroad in South Carolina—the British-armed insurrection of the Southern slaveowners threatened to terminate the world's first modern republic.

Lord Robert Cecil (later known as the Marquess of Salisbury) lectured the House of Lords in 1862 on why the American Union should be broken up: "we are rivals, rivals politically, rivals commercially. We aspire to the same position. We both aspire to the government of the seas. We are both manufacturing people, and in every port, as well as at every court, we are rivals to each other.... With respect to the Southern States, the case is entirely reversed. The population are an agricultural people. They furnish the raw material of our industry, and they consume the products which we manufacture from it. With them, therefore, every interest must lead us to cultivate friendly relations, and we have seen that when the [American Civil] war began they at once recurred to England as their natural ally."9March 7, 1862, from Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, quoted in James Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress: From Lincoln to Garfield, Vols. I and II (Norwich, Connecticut: Henry Bill Publishing Co. 1884-86).

John A. Roebuck, in the House of Commons a year later, put a bitter point to the matter: "America while she was united ran a race of prosperity unparalleled in the world. Eighty years made the Republic such a power, that if she had continued as she was a few years longer, she would have been the great bully of the world."10June 30, 1863, Ibid., Vol. II, p. 480.

The American Civil War was the military showdown of a struggle which had continued since the time of the earliest European settlements in America, into the era of the Republic.

The leaders of the American Revolution and their 19th-Century nationalist successors, sought to build a continent-spanning power, freed of any colonial relationship to Europe. They would promote rapid industrialization. They fought for public education, and education for the aboriginal American Indians. To expand westward, they would connect the Mississippi River basin to the East Coast with rails and canals. They would contain the spread of black slavery; and to prepare for its ending, sought to link the South to the North and West with a railroad grid, and bring new industry into the South. They would befriend and industrialize Ibero-America and all emerging countries, aiding them to withstand imperialism.

The enemy—the colonial oligarchy, straddling the Atlantic—acted to prevent America's westward development, and to obstruct the connection of East and West; to stop industrialization, undermine city-building, and perpetuate the colonial plantation economy; to isolate and whip up the geographical sections against each other, disrupting the Union; to prohibit the integration of the Indians into American society; and to attack Mexico, Cuba, and Central America, to spread slavery and bring about anti-Americanism there.

In the political arena, this persistent treachery appeared before the public through what came to be called the Democratic Party, beginning with the Presidency of Andrew Jackson. Leaving aside the mass of the voters, who were as fickle those as in Shakespeare's tragi-comic scenes of crowd-manipulation in Julius Caesar, the pre-Civil War Democrats may be divided into three categories of political operatives:

1. A continuing clique of strategists and top managers, including Aaron Burr, Albert Gallatin, Martin Van Buren, August Belmont, John Slidell, and Caleb Cushing, a collection of criminals and foreign agents representing a British tory political machine that was never displaced from Boston, New York, and the South, after their side lost the American Revolution.

2. The Presidents: Jackson (1829-37), Van Buren himself (1837-41), John Tyler (1841-45—elected Vice President as a Whig, he betrayed the mandate after he assumed office upon the death of President William Henry Harrison), James Polk (1845-49), Franklin Pierce (1853-57) and James Buchanan (1857-61).

3. Numerous patriotic leaders, committed to the General Welfare, who helped mitigate the damage done to the nation by the radical anti-nationalists. Among such outstanding Democrats were Sam Houston (aide to Jackson; general, governor and president of Texas, and U.S. Senator); William J. Duane (Secretary of the Treasury, 1833); Joel Poinsett (Secretary of War, 1837-41); James K. Paulding (Secretary of the Navy, 1838-41).11Democrats who were otherwise outstanding nationalists included scientific leader Alexander Dallas Bache, Bank of the United States president Nicholas Biddle, German-American economist Friedrich List, and authors Washington Irving, James Fenimore Cooper and Edgar Allan Poe.

This is the first part of a three part blog series. Part 2 Part 3

Footnotes

1See "Children of Satan III: 'The Sexual Congress for Cultural Fascism'" EIR, June 25, 2004.
2Arthur Schlesinger, Age of Jackson (Boston: Little, Brown, 19460, p. 17.
3Ibid., p. 29.
4Foster to Wellesley, Dec. 28, 1811, Foreign Office [FO] 5:77, quoted in Bernard Mayo, Henry Clay: Spokesman of the New West (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1937), p. 429.
5Foster to Wellesley, Jan. 16, 1812, FO 5:84; quoted in Ibid., p. 469.
6Foster to Wellesley, Jan. 31, 1812, FO 5:84; quoted in Ibid., p. 451.
7Foster to Castlereagh, May 26, 1812, quoted in Ibid., p. 476.
8Jefferson to William Duane, April 20, 1812; quoted in Ibid., p. 475. Duane published the Aurora, a Jeffersonian paper in Philadelphia, ridiculing and exposing Jefferson's Treasury Secretary Gallatin as a foreign agent and conspirator. See Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America (Washington: Executive Intelligence Review, 1985), pp. 82n, 83n.
9March 7, 1862, from Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, quoted in James Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress: From Lincoln to Garfield, Vols. I and II (Norwich, Connecticut: Henry Bill Publishing Co. 1884-86).
10June 30, 1863, Ibid., Vol. II, p. 480.
11Democrats who were otherwise outstanding nationalists included scientific leader Alexander Dallas Bache, Bank of the United States president Nicholas Biddle, German-American economist Friedrich List, and authors Washington Irving, James Fenimore Cooper and Edgar Allan Poe.

* Please follow the Commenting Guidlines.