His entire appeal has been based on the fact he's the first president of the common man. He did nothing good. Hell he practically did nothing at all. He has no accomplishments other than Congress officially telling him to go fuck himself.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Treasury Secretary to announce Harriet Tubman to replace Jackson on the $20 bill
- Thread starter Macho Madness
- Start date
- Status
His entire appeal has been based on the fact he's the first president of the common man. He did nothing good. Hell he practically did nothing at all. He has no accomplishments other than Congress officially telling him to go fuck himself.
Hellwarden
Member
So Jackson will still be on the back....
Eh, still happy with the change.
Eh, still happy with the change.
I didn't say that that view of him made sense (though it is true enough that the electorate expanded, so that part is true enough), but those arguable misinterpretations were indeed the foundation for his popularity.
Same with Jefferson, for that matter. In many ways FDR's views on the federal government were more in line with Alexander Hamilton's, but FDR considered Jefferson his political hero and viewed Jefferson's opposition to Hamilton's banking system, etc. as analogous to FDR's advocacy for the common man.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
If they provided a service and you are indebted to them, they are legally required to take all legal tender. Whether that is a $20 bill or 200 pennies, they cannot refuse or the debt is waived.
StopMakingSense
Member
Right, an upfront payment for goods or services could be refused, but a payment for incurred debt for goods and services rendered cannot.
HUELEN10
Member
This is correct, at least from what I have seen over the past few years.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
You can't just say it was oldentimes as a defense to moral atrocities and genocide. Plus, all you need is one person from that era who recognized it for what it was to provide a counter-example to the idea that no one knew better. The idea that nobody from that era considered slavery or the treatment of Indians as immoral and evil is farcical.
ZeroTheShadow
Member
RIP Jackson. You were my favorite President to learn about in history class. I just hope Tubman looks a G as Jackson does on the 20. At least we are trading one G for another.
He let random people eat a big block of cheese at his white house party after it sat there for a year, messing up the place for the next guy. Not every president can say that.
There are establishments that won't take any bills over $20. This is usually reserved for mom and pop shops and other small business owners. I think it is more of a security risk in case of being robbed or accepting counterfeits.
They always have big signs hanging up when you walk in.
It's not hard at all. That's a similar argument people made about Jefferson owning slaves or whatever, yet some of his contemporaries including other Founding Fathers were able to passionately argue against it and refuse to own slaves and argued so with some of the precise same reasoning any modern person would.
People understood things like the Trail of Tears was fucked up even back then, and some spoke up about it. It's not hard to judge Andrew Jackson for the fucked up piece of shit he actually was.
Mixolydian
Member
Absolutely fantastic news.
VaultBoy101
Member
Dark spirit Wilma Mankiller has invaded
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
You can't look at history with modern morals and values and expect to find anything salient. Presentism as it is called is a fallacy of the historical method and is anathema in academia. History and historical figures must be judged within their historical context.
For example, Washington and Jefferson owned slaves, yes. Yes, they both had reservations on slavery and there were some minor antislavery movements at the time. Was slavery in the culture of the time considered evil or was illegal in law? No to both. Therefore harshly judging them for being slave owners is not proper in context. Now, look at Jackson. Was Indian Removal controversial at the time? Was it illegal? Yes and yes. Therefore Jackson can be judged harshly on that subject.
This is a simplification as historical theory and methodology is more complex than I feel I can adequately elaborate on my phone.
Dreams-Visions
Member
He let random people eat a big block of cheese at his white house party after it sat there for a year, messing up the place for the next guy. Not every president can say that.
wtf...
DecoReturns
Member
Great news.
Although these guys were Men of their Time, views change and we should reflect that.
Although these guys were Men of their Time, views change and we should reflect that.
Even among people who lived in that time, they recognized how fucked up Jackson was. He's the only president to be censured by Congress.
Quincy Adams and many others viewed him in the same way we view Trump today.
There is a reason why Quincy Adams manged to get the presidency even though Jackson won the popular. (In the first Adams vs Jackson election, no one got enough electoral colleges, so the vote went to the house and Adams won the presidency despite having less popular votes.)
Big Green Anus
Member
I'm VERY happy for Harriet Tubman to be on the front of the bill, but having Andrew Jackson on the back is not a good thing at all. I hope that decision is not finalized.
DecoReturns
Member
I'm aware of everything he's done.
This was mostly reflect on all past president/past figures.
Off-topic but some people got made when I said that Mount Rushmore shouldn't exist.
It shouldn't have, at least not where it was put.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
Yes, but it also shouldn't be destroyed or abandoned now.
Gnome Scat
Member
YES!
DecoReturns
Member
That land shouldn't really belong to us anyways
TheWarrior
Banned
I can't understand it considering how much he hated the idea of a federal bank
This is so racist will accept your money. You just have to give it to them back-side up now
Jackson was very polarizing. He was clearly very well liked among a LOT of people. His stance on the trail of tears wasnt a very unpopular one. Was it awful in modern hindsight? Yes.
Right. And if you walk into a store and try to buy something with a $20 bill the business can refuse to accept it.
They'll make a flag out of the current one and say it's only for celebrating their heritage
That will be one expensive flag.
Good for them. The amount of racist butthurt this is already causing is hilarious.
That's a little tricky. There really aren't any Native American leaders who were not expressly opposed to the US federal government. While Tubman was certainly fighting against the laws of state governments, she wasn't against America as an institution, and actually worked officially with the US army during the Civil War.
That's a little tricky. There really aren't any Native American leaders who were not expressly opposed to the US federal government. While Tubman was certainly fighting against the laws of state governments, she wasn't against America as an institution, and actually worked officially with the US army during the Civil War.
They can take Jackson off the twenty, but he'll still have the most balling Presidential portrait.
Jackson being a vampire explains a lot, really.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
They can just refuse you service. I just bought a snowball and the stand had multiple signs saying that they don't take anything over a $20.
On topic: This is cool. Tubman is a good pick to put on money.
COMING IN FOR THE QUEEN OF THE ACELA CORRIDOR
https://twitter.com/benchmarkpol/status/722875270563139584
https://twitter.com/benchmarkpol/status/722875270563139584
@benchmarkpol
Connecticut model run. #CTPrimary Result: 55% Clinton - 45% Sanders
TheOohChild
Member
Breitbart going with this headline:
Black Republican Harriet Tubman to replace Jackson on $20 bill
Not brave enough to dive in to the comments.
Black Republican Harriet Tubman to replace Jackson on $20 bill
Not brave enough to dive in to the comments.
Macho Madness
Member
ivy, uhhhh.
Also, the treasury announced the following:
Little disappointed they're retaining Jackson on the back.
what did i do now
Wrong thread?
Macho Madness
Member
This isn't poligaf is all lol
That quote was a well crafted answer to the current white mans fears that one day black people would take over. Context is most definitely needed.
UGH.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked