John C. Calhoun was the seventh Vice President of the United States under both John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson. He was the Secretary of War in the administration of James Monroe, and Secretary of State under John Tyler. He represented the State of South Carolina in the United States Senate from 1845 until his death in 1850.
A lawyer and a graduate of Yale University, Calhoun
was known as an able political theorist in his day. Some of his ideas would
shock the ears of Americans today.
Calhoun was an adamant defender of slavery, and he did
it in a sophisticated and academic fashion.
To begin with, he took issue with the Declaration of
Independence’s famous assertion that all men are created equal. He insisted
that only two human beings were created: Adam and Eve. All the rest were born.
And they weren’t born as men; they were infants.
To Calhoun, liberty was not a right. Nor was it a
gift. Liberty, to Calhoun, was a prize, a reward, if you will, conferred only
on human beings who earned it by their conduct and their character.
Enlightened, civilized, law abiding, virtuous men and women were capable of
enjoying freedom. For them, very little government is needed. Ignorant, greedy,
violent, selfish people require more and more government as their conduct
intrudes on the freedom of others.
Calhoun believed that the worst kind of despotic
dictatorship is better than anarchy. Like James Madison, he agreed that if men
were angels, no government would be necessary.
Calhoun was a slave owner who defended the institution
of slavery in the southern states. He
was a candid and unapologetic racist, who believed that people of African
descent were genetically inferior to those of Caucasian ancestry.
Assuming Calhoun was true to his own words, however,
it is hard to believe that he would not have agreed with and applauded Doctor Martin
Luther King, Jr.’s dramatic “I have a Dream” speech. Especially King’s hope
that someday his children would be judged by the content of their character and
not the color of their skin. Presumably both Calhoun and Madison would concede
that black angels wouldn’t need government either.
I thought of Calhoun as I read about Cliven Bundy’s stupid and
stumbling attempt to explain his inexplicable racial comments. His Hollywood
inspired vision of slavery as a life of family oriented, gospel singing, home-and-
hearth security and happiness is not only disgusting and wrongheaded, it is an
insult to the vast majority of Americans, black and white, who embrace the words
of the Declaration of Independence in their true and transcendent meaning.
I am sure that my law professor friend who took me to
task for defending “that wing-nutty cowboy” in Nevada has been gleefully
chuckling over Bundy’s downfall.
I am left with the difficult task of reminding him
that even guilty people are entitled to have a lawyer for their defense, that
the ACLU has frequently defended the right of Nazi-type organizations to
protest and demonstrate, and that even the most despicable villain is entitled
to the protection of the constitution.
It’s an uphill battle, people being what they are.
Alexander Hamilton launched the Federalist Papers with
the observation that political discourse is often characterized by an
intolerant spirit, which unleashes a torrent of angry and malignant passions.
Judging by their conduct, you would think, he says, that many partisans hope to
make converts by the “loudness of their declamations and the bitterness of
their invective.”
That said, I firmly believe that a sense of humor is
critically essential to useful political discourse. I don’t mind a good natured
barb or two being thrown my way, and I treasure long standing friends who can
take a little kidding in their stride.
On the whole, I believe that politics is too serious
to be taken too seriously.
Why is the legal issue in NV related to the individual's personal views? Obama was against gay marriage before he "evolved", Hillary was "adamantly" against illegal immigration when she was running for the Senate. John Kerry voted to fund Desert Storm before he voted against it, and Bill Clinton supported Strom Thurmond's membership in the KKK by saying that Strom just joined to get elected. I find it very interesting that you feel a need to defend Mr Bundy's personal views against a law professor who is "gleefully chuckling" over someone's "downfall" based on his words rather than his actions. I wonder if there was any chuckling going on in the faculty lounge when discussing the Obama, Clinton, Kerry and Clinton statements.
ReplyDeleteWhen I read the bantering between lawyers I cannot help but think about medieval scholars debating "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"