Andrew Jackson should be removed from the 20 Dollar Bill

Thank you for posting so lucidly. I would like to counter refute my oppoints refutations and then reaffirm by rebuttals.My opponent says this being a pioneer does not mean greatness. This is totally false. I think that rising from poverty to greatness is a sure sign that someone is a good person. If JK Rowling had political importance than I think she would be a great person to be on a pound note.My opponent said that Jacksonian democracy was only for white men, and not women and people of color. First of all, no one thought that women and people of color were equal to white people. Sure, some people thought that slavery was bad, but there were no political movements saying that they were equal. Jacksonian Democracy was the most advanced political party of the time. It evolved into the current democratic party. Jacksonian democracy is still used today and envelops people of all gender and nationality.My opponent said that Andrew Jackson only supported the common man and not people of color and women. However, as I have stated in my last counter refutation, it was the belief of the time. Nobody supported women in the 1830s, so why should we judge Andrew Jackson for not doing so as well? All of his predecessors and many sucessors thought that women are less than men. Until very recently, many presidents were sexist.My opponent said that the debt went back up after his time in office, however, it should be noted that Andrew Jackson removed 58$ million of debt and it raised 3.3$ million when he left, so an overall sucess. Also, it is completely false that Jackson is "solely responsible" for the panic of 1837. There were many factors that led into it. It happened during Martin Van Buren's presidency...My opponent said that Jackson empowering the executive branch was contradictory to him supportin the common man, however, him empowering the executive branch helped the common man greatly. Before, rich aristrocrats in congress, the senate, and the court controlled most of America, but Jackson gave the presidency more power, which helped him support the common man against the rest of the government. Also, it should be noted that the bank of the United States was completely corrupt at the time and favored northern states over southern and western states. It put all of the nation's financial power into one privatize bank that could be easily abused by congress.My opponent also said that being a war hero does not make someone great. However, Andrew Jackson defeated the British in that war and was awarded rank of major general for his bravery. George Washington was a great man for being general in the Revolution, Lincoln was a great man for being a major part in the civil war, all these great men on bills had military merit that made them great men.I would like to reaffirm my rebuttals now.1. Everyone had slaves at the time. We cannot judge him for sharing beliefs with millions of other people. As to the trail of tears, Jackson saw the native americans as adversaries. Many had supported the British in the war of 1812, and he saw it as a war over precious land with limited resources. We have modern sympathies and a historical perspective that makes it seem like the way the Indians were treated was horribly unfair, but that isn't how people saw this issue as it was unfolding. The sectional conflict between slave states vs. free labor states had already heated up, diffused temporarily by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. If new lands for cotton cultivation weren't added to the Union, Jackson feared the South might become scared the North was becoming too powerful in Congress and secede from the Union, as indeed happened eventually. Jackson was trying to protect the citizens.2. WE CANNOT JUDGE A NINETEENTH CENTURY MAN BY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY STANDARDS! That is what this debate comes down to! While we may be sympathetic for native americans now, at the time they were opposing us in a war. While slavery was bad, many great men were pro-slavery. Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, the list goes on. All of them were amazing people, and we cannot say that they are bad just because they owned slaves along with everyone else.