Slavery and Abolition in Chartist Thought and Culture, 1838–1850

In Britain between 1838 and 1858, the Chartist movement demanded the implementation of the ‘Six Points’, a parcel of parliamentary reforms centred on universal male suffrage. Despite the movement's recognized importance, little study has been made into Chartism's attitude towards slavery and abolitionism. This article will provide the first comprehensive study of this topic, from Chartism's origins in the 1830s until its decline in the decade after 1848. It will illustrate that Chartism was influenced by the radical labour component of the ‘Democratic’ coalition that supported President Andrew Jackson. This helped reinforce amongst early Chartists theories that wage labour was more exploitative than chattel slavery, alongside a racist reaction to West Indian emancipation more extreme than has previously been acknowledged. By 1842, however, various changes within the movement helped bring to the fore more consistently anti-slavery and even anti-racist sentiment with Chartist culture, as did growing exposure to American abolitionism, especially that of William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglass. The development of the anti-slavery ‘Free Soil’ ideology amongst American labour radicals profoundly influenced the late Chartist position on slavery by inserting abolition into Chartist aspirations for land reform. Consequently, a core component of late Chartism was its own anti-slavery ‘Free Soil’ ideology, which greatly informed pro-Union working-class agitation during the American Civil War.

Populism in the United States: Binary Constructions by Donald Trump in the Domestic and Foreign Policies

This study intends to explore the rise of Donald Trump to the White House. Why was Donald Trump considered a populist leader, and how did his populist rhetoric and actions impact the contours of American domestic and foreign policies? The study adopted qualitative exploratory and explanatory research techniques. Specific methods utilised to conduct the study remained political personality profiling. It finds that the populist leaders construct the binaries in the society by dividing the nation into two groups: �us� the people, against �them� the corrupt elite or other groups presented as a threat to the lives and livelihood of the nation. Though populism as a unique brand of politics remained active through most of the US history, yet these were only two occasions that populists were successful in winning the American presidential elections � Andrew Jackson in 1828 and Donald Trump in 2016. Structural and historical reasons became the biggest cause behind the election of Donald Trump, who successfully brought a revolution in American domestic and foreign policies. And if structural issues in the United States are not addressed, there is a clear chance that Trump � who is not withering away � will come back to contest and challenge any competitors in the 2024 presidential elections.

The Legacy of 1812: How a Little War Shaped the Transatlantic World

The War of 1812 may have been a small and inconclusive war, but it had a profound and lasting impact of all the belligerents. The war may be largely forgotten, but it left a huge legacy that is still evident today. Wars can best be measured by their consequences, and the legacy of this war was both multifaceted and lasting. The conflict shaped both the United States and Canada as well as their relationship with Great Britain for nearly a century thereafter. It helps to explain how the Anglo-American alliance originated and why the British welcomed the Pax Americana in the twentieth century, as well as why Canada never joined the American Union and why American expansion after 1815 aimed south and west rather than north. It was during the War of 1812 that the great Shawnee leader Tecumseh earned his reputation, Laura Secord became famous, and Andrew Jackson began his rise to the presidency. Its impact on American culture was also far reaching and produced ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’, Uncle Sam and ‘Old Ironsides’, amongst other symbols of United States nationhood.

Was President Andrew Jackson Overcharged? An Economic Evaluation of 19th Century Surgical Charges for Urologic Procedures and their Comparison to the Modern, RVU Era

Objectives Surgical billing is as old as the profession of surgery but there is no published data that has characterized changes in surgical fees over history. Surgical remuneration has been better studied in the Medicare era of relative value units (RVUs)-based payment but what surgeons charged in the American 18th and 19th centuries is unknown. President Andrew Jackson underwent surgery by Dr. James Hall for a hydrocele in 1832 and was billed, and then paid, $30. Our initial objective was to determine the appropriateness of Dr. Hall’s surgical billing for that era. We then wished to determine historical trends in physician billing for similar urologic procedures in the 18th-19th centuries compared to the current RVU era, correcting for inflation. Methods Published fee tables from 18th and 19th century regional medical societies, prevailing charge data from the Center for Medicare Services (CMS) from 1967-1985, and published RVU values and conversion numbers from 1992-2020 (CMS) were used for analysis. To correct for inflation, we used a published consumer price index (CPI) for 1774-2020 indexed to 2020 US dollars. Mann-Whitney U-tests were used to compare unpaired differences without parametric assumptions. Results A total of 43 fee tables from 18 states from 1818-1898 were identified. The $30 charge to President Jackson for hydrocele surgery was similar to other states’ medical society recommendations of the early 1830s. Over the 19th century, there was an insignificant increase in the low-end fee pricing for hydrocele surgery of $18.4 +/- 17.9 in 1818-1840 versus $28.70 +/- 36.83 from 1880-1890 (p > .05), adjusting for inflation. Similarly, for initial male urinary catheterization, the mean surgical fee of $4.28 +/- 1.25 in 1818-1850 was similar to the $4.75 +/- 5.62 mean surgical fee in 1851-1900 (p>.05). Adjusting to 2020 dollars, however, reimbursement for urinary catheterization in 1818-1850, 1850-1900, 1975-1984, and 1992-2020 was $113.04 +/- 38.06, $131.20 +/- 169.53, $73.87 +/- 2.38, and $23.05 +/- 4.69, respectively (p<.01). of 11%. Conclusions Dr. James Hall, physician to 10 US Presidents, appropriately billed the 7th President for what would be now described as a hydrocele drainage and scarification. Fees for that procedure remained stable or decreased throughout the 19th century. Surgical fees for male urinary catheterization, however, decreased 82% from the 1840s to the 2020s, correcting for inflation.

Populism, Trade, and Trump’s Path to Victory

This chapter traces US populism back to President Andrew Jackson (1828–1836), providing early characteristics of a US populist leader. Major US populist issues have included immigration, the banking sector, and more recently, foreign trade. While Franklin D. Roosevelt’s populist-inspired New Deal reforms included trade liberalizing measures, postwar populists linked advancing globalization in the late twentieth century to elitist trade policy, inspiring new populist movements. Anti-trade populists were unsuccessful third-party presidential candidates until Donald Trump exploited this issue, capturing the Republican Party nomination and developing particularly provocative anti-trade rhetoric. He successfully integrated an anti-trade platform with a host of other populist issues, and vowed to alter US trade policy to “make America great again.”

The Park Movement Picturesque rus in urb

In the mid-nineteenth century, the urban bourgeoisie sought to respond to challenges of city life through the creation of public urban parks in a wide-scale project that has been termed the “park movement.” The park movement involved not only the design and development of parks, but also extensive writings starting in 1840s that depicted the social benefits to be gained by building picturesque rus in urbe (“country in the city”) spaces. The writings of the park movement, dominated by the topic of New York’s Central Park but also encompassing comparisons between European and American public spaces and the broader possibilities of U.S. urban parks, included work by Andrew Jackson Downing, Frederick Law Olmsted, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and even a novel by Sylvester Judd that centered on public park design. This chapter argues that although the park was ostensibly envisioned as an egalitarian instrument of social reform, bringing together the genders and classes in an idealized intimate public sphere, ultimately the literature of the park movement most fully addressed the anxieties of bourgeois men about their authority over female-dominated domestic spaces, as well as seeking to reclaim moral order against working-class men’s domination of the city streets.

{ Introduction }

Introducing the book as a whole, this chapter argues that the rise in popularity of the picturesque in mid-nineteenth-century America was a discipline of transforming landscapes to serve bourgeois ideological purposes, not simply a vogue in landscape aesthetics. Centering on the work of Andrew Jackson Downing (1815–1852), whose influential writings and designs shaped the creation of the suburbs, new urban parks, and reconfigured domestic spaces, the Introduction traces the social meanings of the picturesque in late eighteenth-century England and its popularization in the United States in scenery books, aesthetic treatises, and design books in the 1830s and 1840s. Literary landscape genres had a role in popularizing the picturesque and helping middle-class Americans to imagine a new national landscape. In theorizing this role, the Introduction also recovers a literary tradition that has been largely excluded from the dominant narratives about nineteenth-century American literature.

Leadership, Idiosyncrasies, and Political Behaviour: Personality Analyses of Presidents Donald Trump and Andrew Jackson

How do leaders' idiosyncrasies are developed, and how do these, in turn, impact their political behaviour? This study traces the idiosyncratic behaviour of Presidents Andrew Jackson and Donald Trump. It details four historical traditions - Hamiltonian, Wilsonian, Jeffersonian, and Jacksonian. The study expands upon Jacksonian tradition and sees that how Trump pursued this tradition and how is his political behaviour remained similar to that of Andrew Jackson. Three specific areas in which these variables are determined are personal lives, narcissism and authoritarian behaviour, and populism and corruption. The paper also charts out the ways and means through which Donald Trump's administration is termed as Jacksonian in nature.

Andrew Jackson, Black American Slavery, and the Trail of Tears

Many revisionist historians today try to make the late President Andrew Jackson out to be something that he was not—that is, a man of all the people. In our uninhibited, polarized culture, the truth should mean something. Therefore, studying the character of someone like Andrew Jackson should be fully investigated, and researched, as this work attempts to do. Indeed, this article tells us that we should not accept lies and conspiracy theories as the truth. Such revisionist history comes into sharp focus in Bradley J. Birzer’s latest book, In Defense of Andrew Jackson. Indeed, his (selective) efforts are surprisingly wrong, as he tries to give alternative explanations for Jackson’s corrupt life and political malfeasance. Hence, the lawlessness of Andrew Jackson cannot be ignored or “white washed” from American history. More important, discrediting the objective truth about Andrew Jackson, and his blatant misuse of executive power as the U.S. President should never be dismissed, like his awful treatment of Blacks and other minorities in the United States. It should have been important to Birzer to get his story right about Andrew Jackson, with a more balanced approach in regards to the man. Finally, Jackson should have tried to eliminate Black slavery in his life time, not embrace it, based on the ideas of human dignity and our common humanity. To be brutally honest, it is one thing to disagree with Andrew Jackson; but it is quite another to feel that he, as President of the United States, was on the side of all the American people during his time, because it was not true. Perhaps the biggest question is: Could Andrew Jackson have made a positive difference for every American, even Black slaves and Native Americans?