The comparisons between Donald Trump and Andrew Jackson continue to appear. This recent one does a poor job of making its case, but as we discussed it in my Jacksonian America course this morning, it occurred to me that if commentators really wanted to use a Jackson comparison to Trump, they should focus on free speech.
Many people may not realize that Andrew Jackson used his influence to help the federal government infringe upon Americans’ First Amendment rights. In 1835, at the behest of Postmaster General Amos Kendall, he authorized the suppression of mailings sent by northern abolitionists into the South. In a 9 August 1835 letter to Kendall, Jackson acknowledged, “we are the instruments of, and executors of the law; we have no power to prohibit anything from being transported in the mail that is authorized by the law” [1]. He went on to say, however, that he approved of Kendall’s suggestion to verbally tell southern postmasters that the mailings should only be delivered to subscribers.
That doesn’t necessarily sound so bad. Even Americans in the Jacksonian era didn’t appear to like unsolicited mail. But then Jackson wrote that the postmasters
ought to take the names [of the subscribers] down, and have them exposed thro the publik journals as subscribers to this wicked plan of exciting the negroes to insurrection and to massacre. This would bring those in the South, who were patronizing these incendiary works into such disrepute with all the South that they would be compelled to desist, or move from the country.
Sounds to me like executive encouragement to use intimidation in limiting free speech.
Trump has hardly been a supporter of free speech. Publications as diverse as The Hill, National Review, Techdirt, and The Verge have commented on his willingness to shut down critics through legal action, verbal threats, and inciting violence among his supporters. One can only imagine a United States government under the presidency of such a prickly personality.
If journalists and others want to find the most apt comparison between The Donald and Old Hickory, they might want to start here.
[1] Andrew Jackson to Amos Kendall, 9 August 1835, in Bassett and Jameson, eds., Correspondence of Andrew Jackson, 5:360-361.
Jacksonian America: Society, Personality, and Politics 
There actually is a genuine Trump/Jackson similarity on the horizon that no one (as far as I know) has pointed out yet – both are likely to win a plurality, fall short of a majority, and yet claim to be morally entitled to a victory. I guess this makes Cruz Adams (I can actually see some personality similarities – but very different theologies!), Kasich Crawford, and Rubio/Bush Clay.
Several people have made the comparison to the 1824 debacle if Trump doesn’t get the nomination in Cleveland. Although I don’t think the comparison is apt, this is one of the better ones: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/gop-2016-andrew-jackson-1824-213726
Oh, I know it isn’t really apt – historical analogies very rarely are! – but I thought it was an interesting loose similarity.
P.S. That article is OK, but the headline is terrible – it really strains the analogy to the breaking point.
I agree.
I thought that back in the day — actually, way back in the day — the postage was paid all the time by the recipient. Would that have affected the situation?
You are correct, but I don’t know if it played a role in this situation.