The Pete Quiñones Show - Pete Reads John C. Calhoun's 'Disquisition on Government' Part 1

Episode Date: March 20, 2024

63 MinutesIn this reading and commentary Pete starts on John C. Calhoun's celebrated "Disquisition on Government." John Caldwell Calhoun was an American statesman and political theorist who served as the seventh vice president of the United States from 1825 to 1832.VIP Summit 3-Truth To Freedom - Autonomy w/ Richard GroveSupport Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's Substack Pete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

You catch them in the corner of your eye. Distinctive, by design. They move you, even before you drive. The new Cooper plugin hybrid range. For Mentor, Leon, and Terramar. Now with flexible PCP finance and trade-in boosters of up to 2,000 euro. Search Coopera and discover our latest offers. Cooper.

Design that moves. Finance provided by way of higher purchase agreement from Volkswagen Thuron Financial Services, Ireland Limited. Subject to lending criteria. Terms and conditions apply. Broke wagon Financial Services Ireland Limited. Trading as Cooper Financial Services is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Those people who love going out shopping for Black Friday deals, they're mad, aren't they?

Like, proper mad. Brenda wants a television and she's prepared to fight for it, if you ask me. It's the fastest way to a meltdown. Me, I just prepare the fastest way to get stuff, and it doesn't get faster than Appliances Delivered. Top brand appliances, top brand electricals, and if it's online, it's in stock. With next day delivery in Greater Dublin. Appliances delivered.aE, part of expert electrical. See it, buy it, get it tomorrow. Or you know, fight branda. Did you know, those Black Friday deals everyone's talking about?

They're right here at Beacon South Quarter. That designer's sofa you've been wanting? It's in Seoul, Boe Concept and Rocheburoix. The Dream Kitchen? Check out at Cube Kitchens. Beacon South Quarter Dublin, where the smart show. Shoppers go. Two hours free parking, just off the M50, exit 13. It's a Black Friday secret. Keep it to yourself. I want to welcome everyone back to my second book reading. I chose this one because this is one of the first books I would read when I was questioning libertarianism. I knew that Murray Rothbard had quoted it all the time, and he always talked about John C. Calhoun, and I had heard about this book, and so I read it, and it raised a lot

of questions. Let's just put it that way. One of the reasons I picked this one and not someone else is, he's an American, a southerner, and a controversial figure. Let's just put it that way. But just to give you some background on John C. Calhoun, and I'm going to take this off of, I'm going to read this off of the United States Senate's website. Okay. So as a featured biography, John C. Calhoun of South Carolina first entered politics in 1808

when he was elected to the state legislature. He moved to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1811, where he served almost four terms before resigning to become Secretary of War under President James Monroe, a position he held from 1817 to 1825. In both positions, Calhoun was known for his strong

support for federally funded internal improvements. Cahoon was an early candidate for president in 1824, but dropped out and sought the vice presidency instead. Although he publicly backed Tennessee's Andrew Jackson for president, his vice presidential candidacy received endorsements from both Jackson supporters and those of John Quincy Adams. Calhoun easily won the vice presidency, making him the president of the president of Senate, while the presidential election was decided by the House of Representatives, which elected

John Quincy Adams over popular vote winner, Andrew Jackson. When Jackson was elected president in 1828, Calhoun was again elected vice president, but his growing opposition to Jackson's policies prompted his resignation. Elected to the Senate in December of 1832, Calhoun became an influential leader of the southern states during the antebellum period, a period in Senate history marked by heated debates over slavery and territorial expansion. A staunched defender of the institution of slavery and a slave owner himself, Calhoun was the Senate's most prominent state's rights advocate, and his doctrine of nullification professed that individual states had a right to reject federal policies that they deemed unconstitutional.

In 1850, as the Senate debated a legislative compromise designed to quell calls for disunion, a dying Calhoun continued to argue for the continuation and expansion of slavery. He died on March 31, 1850, as that debate continued. A century later, when a special Senate committee was tasked with choosing individuals to be included in a famous five, quote-unquote famous five, collection of portraits, it shows three leaders of the pre-Civil War Senate whose influence lived after them. Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, and John C. Calhoun. All right.

So let's get to reading this. This is good stuff. And I don't know if it's going to take seven episodes like the last book took, but this really is only 100 pages. But let's see. All right. A disquisition on government. In order to have a clear and just conception of the nature and object of

government, it is indispensable to understand correctly what that constitution or law of, what the, what that constitution or law of our nature is in which government originates, or to express it more fully and accurately, that law without which government would not and with which it must necessarily exist. Without this, it is as impossible to lay any solid foundation for the science of government as it would be to lay one for that of astronomy without a like understanding of that constitution or law of the material world, according to which several bodies composed in the solar system mutually act on each other and by which they are kept in their respective spheres. The first question, accordingly to be answered, considered is, what is that constitution or law of our nature without which government would not exist and with which its existence is necessary?

So obviously here when he's using the term constitution, he's talking about the makeup of something and not a written, the written documents. In considering this, I assume, and he's also assuming government. There's no question of whether government should exist. That's without question here. He's assuming government. In considering this, I assume as an incontestable fact that man, is so constituted as to be a social being. His inclinations in wants, physical and moral, irresistibly impel him to associate with his kind, and he has, accordingly, never been found in any age or country

in any state other than the social. In no other, indeed, could he exist. And in no other, were it possible for him to exist, could he attain to a full development of his moral and intellectual faculties or raise himself in the scale of being much above the level of the brute creation. Basically, what he's saying is man without, men without other men are brutes. Men need to come together in order to form civilization. I next assume, also, as a fact not less incontestable, that while man is so constituted as to make the social state necessary to his existence and the full development of his faculties, this state itself cannot exist without government.

The assumption rests on universal experience. In no age or country has any society or community ever been found, whether enlightened or savage, without government of some description. 100% true. People can talk about medieval Iceland and medieval Irish. all they want. They had a form of government. And if someone got out of line, somebody would step up, create the exception, and handle it. Having assumed these as unquestionable phenomena of our nature, I shall, without further remark, proceed to the investigation of the primary and important

question. What is that constitution of our nature, which, while it impels man to associate with his kind renders it impossible for society to exist without government. The answer will be found in the fact, not less incontestable than either of the others, that while man is created for the social state and is accordingly so formed as to feel what affects others, as well as what affects himself, he is, at the same time, so constituted as to feel more intensely what affects him directly than what affects him indirectly through others, or to express it differently. He is so constituted that his direct or individual affections are stronger than his sympathetic

or social feelings. I intentionally avoid the expression selfish feelings as applicable to the former, because as commonly used, it implies an unusual excess of individual over the social feelings in the person to whom it is applied, and consequently something depraved, and vicious. My object is to exclude such reference and to restrict the inquiry exclusively to facts in their bearings on the subject under consideration viewed as mere phenomena appertaining to our nature constituted as it is and which are as unquestionable as is that gravitation or any other phenomenon of the material world. So so far the statement he's making is

that as much as we love our neighbor, if it comes down to choosing, we're going to choose ourselves. But he's going to get a little more into that. So I'll have more to say about it. In asserting that our individual, that our individual are stronger than our social feelings, it is not intended to deny that there are instances growing out of peculiar relations as that of a mother and her infant, or resulting from the force of education and habit over peculiar constitutions in which the latter have overpowered the former. But these instances are few and always regarded as something extraordinary. The deep impression they make whenever they occur is the strongest proof that they are regarded

as exceptions to some general and well-understood law of nature. Just as some of the minor powers of the material world are apparently to grav... World are apparently to gravitation. So what he's saying is when you see somebody who steps out

and steps out of themselves and sacrifices for somebody else, the fact that we have to point that out, the exception proves the rule. You catch them in the corner of your eye. Distinctive. By design.

They move you even before you drive. The new Cooper plugin hybrid range For Mentor, Leon and Terramar Now with flexible PCP finance and trade-in boosters of up to 2000 euro Search Coopera and discover our latest offers Coopera Design That Moves Finance provided by way of higher purchase agreement

From Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited Subject to lending criteria Terms and conditions apply Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited Trading as Cooper Financial Services is regular by the Central Bank of Ireland. Those people who love going out shopping for Black Friday deals, they're mad, aren't they?

Like, proper mad. Brenda wants a television and she's prepared to fight for it, if you ask me. It's the fastest way to a meltdown. Me, I just prepare the fastest way to get stuff and it doesn't get faster than Appliancesdelivered.aE. Top brand appliances, top brand electricals, and if it's online, it's in stock.

With next day delivery in Greater Dublin. Appliances delivered.e, part of expert electrical. See it, buy it. at it tomorrow, or you know, fight Branda. That self-interest is more important than the interest of strangers or even neighbor. And he doesn't stop there. I might go farther and assert this to be a phenomenon, not of our nature only, but of all animated existence throughout its entire range so far as our knowledge extends.

it would indeed seem to be essentially connected with a great law of self-preservation, which pervades all that feels from man down to the lowest and most insignificant reptile or insect. In none is it stronger than in man. His social feelings may, indeed, in a state of safety and abundance, combined with high intellectual and moral culture, acquire great expansion and force, but not so great as to overpower this all-pervading and essential, law of animated existence. Hope you're following. He's getting deep here. And really, it's very simple.

It's very simple that you are going to put yourself and your family ahead of anyone else. That's just, that's our nature. And if you really look at what has, they've tried to build, you know, with this, what Jason from the two-bit podcast calls, this devouring mother. culture. They want you to be more worried about people outside and especially who they deem to be minorities and people who have been marginalized. They want you to care more about them than if you're a female, the child that came out of your womb, if you're a man, the seed that came out of your wife's womb. It's truly remarkable. But that constitution of our nature, which makes us feel more intensely what affects us directly

than what affects us indirectly through others, necessarily leads to conflict between individuals. And here's where we start getting into it. And everybody's going to have all sorts of comments. What I was reading this, the comment, because I was still very much in a libertarian mindset of the time, all the objections were running through my head. But stick around. Each, in consequence, has a good. greater regard for his own safety or happiness than for the safety or happiness of others,

and where these come in opposition is ready to sacrifice the interests of others to his own. Common sense. I hope that's common sense to everyone. And hence, the tendency to a universal state of conflict between individual and individual, accompanied by the connected passions of suspicion, jealousy, anger, and revenge, followed by insolence, fraud, and cruelty, and if not prevented by some controlling power, ending in a state of universal discord and confusion, destructive of the social state, and the ends for which it is ordained. This controlling power, wherever vested, or by whomsoever exercised, is government. That was a list. That was quite a list. suspicion, jealousy, anger, revenge, insolence, fraud, cruelty.

If there were not somebody there to intercede outside of the individuals who are experiencing this, what does the world look like? Even if they don't, and we look at our government now, they don't. In many cases, they don't. They can't get there in time. But just people knowing that they could be subject to an outside force that doesn't care about their feelings, doesn't care who was right or who was wrong, is just going to look at what the facts that are there, how they're interpreting the situation. It does restrain people. No matter how much people don't believe that, people are restrained when they think that they can actually be punished for something.

and they can lose everything. It follows then that man is so constituted that government is necessary to the existence of society and society to his existence and the perfection of his faculties. It follows also that government has its origin in this twofold constitution of his nature, the sympathetic or social feelings constituting the remote and the individual or direct the proximate cause. if man had been differently constituted in either particular, if instead of being social in his nature, he had been created without sympathy for his kind,

and independent of others for his safety and existence, or if, on the other hand, he had been so created as to feel more intensely what affected others than what affected himself, if that were possible, or even, had this supposed interest been equal, it is manifest in either case, there would have been no necessity for government, and that none would have ever existed. But although society and government are thus intimately connected with and dependent on each other, of the two society is the greater.

It is first in the order of things and in the dignity of its object, that of society being primary, to preserve and perfect our race, and that of government, secondary and subordinate to preserve and protect society. Both are, however, necessary to the existence and well-being of our race and equally of divine ordination. So what's he saying? He's saying that if you had no self-interest, if your self-interest were on par with, if your feelings of self-interest were on par with your feelings of interest for your neighbor, government would have never needed to exist. But since that's not true, since that doesn't exist in anyone, no matter how much they want to tell you they're a good person

and they care more about their neighbor than they do about themselves, government is necessary. And divinely ordained. Sorry, Christian anarchists. Those people who love going out shopping for Black Friday deals, they're mad, aren't they? Like proper mad Brenda wants a television

and she's prepared to fight for it if you ask me it's the fastest way to a meltdown me I just prepare the fastest way to get stuff and it doesn't get faster than Appliances Delivered.e top brand appliances top brand electricals

and if it's online it's in stock with next day delivery in Greater Dublin Appliances Delivered.com part of expert electrical see it, buy it, get it tomorrow or you know fight Brenda

Pst, did you know those Black Friday deals everyone's talking about. They're right here at Beacon South Quarter. That designer's sofa you've been wanting. It's in Seoul, Boe Concept and Rocheburoix. The Dream Kitchen, check out at Cube Citchens. Beacon South Quarter Dublin, where the smart shoppers go. Two hours free parking, just off the M50, exit 13.

It's a Black Friday secret. Keep it to yourself. You catch them in the corner of your eye. Distinctive, by design. They move you, even before you drive. The new Cooper plugin hybrid range For Mentor, Leon and Terramar Now with flexible PCP finance and trade-in boosters of up to 2000 euro Search Coopera and discover our latest offers

Coopera Design that moves Finance provided by way of higher purchase agreement from Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited Subject to lending criteria Terms and conditions apply Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited Trading as Cooper Financial Services is Regulmonary

is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. I have said, if it were possible for man to be so constituted, as to feel what affects others more strongly than what affects himself or even as strongly, because it may be well-doubted whether the stronger feeling or affection of individuals for themselves, combined with a feebler and subordinate feeling or affection for others, is not in beings of limited reason and faculties, a constitution necessary to their preservation and existence. If reversed, if their feelings and affections were stronger for others than for themselves, or even as strong, the necessary result would seem to be that all

individuality would be lost and boundless and remedyless disorder and confusion would ensue. For each at the same moment, intensely participating in all the conflicting emotions of those around him would, of course, forget himself and all that concerned him immediately, in his officious, intermeddling with the affairs of all others, which, from his limited reason and faculties, he could neither properly understand nor manage. Such a state of things would, as far as we can see, lead to endless disorder and confusion, not less destructive to our race than a state of anarchy. He's saying that if we had If everyone had equal feelings and cared for each other equally, we'd be in a worse state than an anarchy.

Because it would be endless disorder, endless confusion. How would you be able to run your life if somebody was constantly, someone from the outside was constantly interrupting and coming in and saying, no, no, I'm seeing, I can feel your pain. I mean, it's insane. It's insane when you think about it. When he puts it that way, it's almost inarguable. It would, besides, be remediless, for government would be impossible, or if it could, by possibility, exist, its object would be reversed. They're saying it would be impossible to govern a people like that.

Selfishness would have to be encouraged and benevolence discouraged. Individuals would have to be encouraged by rewards to be encouraged by rewards to be become more selfish and deterred by punishments from being too benevolent. And this, too, by a government administered by those who, on the supposition, would have the greatest diversion for selfishness and the highest admiration for benevolence. To the infinite being, the creator of all, belongs exclusively the care and superintendence of the whole. He and his infinite wisdom and goodness has allotted to every class of animated beings, its condition, and appropriate functions, and has endowed each with feelings,

instincts, capacities, and faculties best adapted to its allotted condition. To man, he has assigned the social and political state as best adapted to develop the great capacities and faculties, great capacities and faculties, intellectual and moral, with which he has endowed him, and has, accordingly constituted him so not only to impel him into the social state, but to make government necessary for his preservation and well-being. It's amazing to me that at one time, I would have thought that this was garbage, that I would have argued against this. This isn't, and this isn't saying, because this is where the whole straw man comes in. It's like the straw man argument, right now is while government doesn't do that. Not the point. No one is saying that government does

that. As a matter of fact, wait, wait, you think Calhoun's stupid? Stop. But government, although intended to protect and preserve society, has itself a strong tendency to disorder and abuse of its powers, as all experience in almost every page of history testify. The cause is to be found in the same constitution of our nature, which makes government indispensable. I remember people saying, if man can't govern themselves, why, if man is so terrible at governing themselves, why would they, why would you want them to govern others? What's, what, okay, if man is so terrible at governing themselves, why would you want, no restraints?

No restraints except the guns that you. can carry. I never understood that. The whole idea that somebody was going to be on their farm and, you know, a horde, a horde of people comes and they're going to be up on the roof with their 308, just picking them all off. That's not how that works. It just, that's not how that would work. It sounds like a great fantasy. And, you know, I've seen Walking Dead too. I've seen Revolution. Those, those TV shows, yeah, it's not how it works. Get real people. The powers which it is necessary for government to possess in order to repress violence and preserve order

cannot execute themselves. They must be administered by men in whom, like others, the individual are stronger than the social feelings. And hence, the powers vested in them to prevent injustice and oppression on the part of others will, if left unguarded, be by them converted into instruments to oppress the rest of the community. That, by which this is prevented, by whatever name called, is what is meant by Constitution, in its most comprehensive sense when applied to government.

Having its origin in the same principle of our nature, Constitution stands to government as government stands to society, and as the end for which society is ordained, be defeated without government so that for which government is ordained would, in a great measure, be defeated without constitution. But they differ in the striking particular. There is no difficulty in forming government. It is not even a matter of choice whether there shall be one or not. Like breathing, it is not permitted to depend on our volition. Necessity will force it on all communities in some one form or another.

Very different is the case as to Constitution instead of a matter of necessity. It is one of the most difficult task in Post on Man to form a Constitution worthy of the name while to form a perfect one, one that would completely counteract the tendency of government to oppression and abuse and hold it strictly to the great ends

for which it is ordained. Has thus far exceeded human ones, wisdom and possibly ever will. From this, another striking difference results. Constitution is the contrivance of man, while government is of divine ordination. Man is left to perfect what the wisdom of the infinite ordained as necessary to preserve the race. No matter where you go, no matter what you do, it's one failure after another. it's our self-interest.

This is something that this is something I would hear about free trade when you would talk to an economist, like an Austrian economist. They would say, well, you know, the reason we'll have,

you know, in a free trade society or an anarchist society, the reason we'll have all of these things is, you know, it's a matter of self-interest. The manufacturer, the business owner, they're self-interested, so they're going to create it and they're going to sell it.

You know, they won't just, you know, create it and use it just for themselves. Why wouldn't they? I mean, they could. Okay? And then what's going to happen? They're going to get raided. They're going to get killed. And people are going to steal the stuff.

That sounds like a violation of the nap. It does. Maybe I'm wrong. But for the same reason why Calhoun says, we need a government, there'll always be a government. Anarchists will say that an anarchist society can exist because of self-interest. What happens when that self-interest gets pushed? What happens if there's scarcity?

Do you think all of these rational human beings are going to rely upon self-interest? They're all going to come together and figure it out. Now we have a commune, but oh, as long as it's done voluntarily, right? Now you're going to have a commune that's going to come together. It's voluntary commune. No. No. Where was I?

Okay. Let me just start over that paragraph. With these remarks, I proceed to the consideration of the important and difficult question. How is this tendency of government to be counteracted? Or to express it more fully, how can those who are invested with the power of government be prevented from employing them as the means of aggrandizing themselves instead of using them to protect and preserve society. It cannot be done by instituting a higher power to control the government and those who administer it. Pst, did you know? Those Black Friday deals everyone's talking about?

They're right here at Beacon South Quarter. That designer's sofa you've been wanting? It's in Seoul, Boe Concept, and Rochebuoy, the Dream Kitchen. Check out at Cube Kitchens. Beacon South Quarter, Dublin, where the smart. Shoppers go. Two hours free parking, just off the M50, exit 13.

It's a Black Friday secret. Keep it to yourself. You catch them in the corner of your eye. Distinctive. By design. They move you. Even before you drive. The new Cooper plugin hybrid range.

For Mentor, Leon, and Teramar. Now with flexible PCP finance and trade-in boosters of up to 2000 euro. Search Cooper and discover our latest offer. Cooper's. Cooper. Design that moves. Finance provided by way of higher purchase agreement from Volkswagen Financial Services,

Ireland Limited. Subject to lending criteria. Terms and conditions apply. Volkswagen Financial Services Ireland Limited. Trading as Cooper Financial Services is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. This would be but to change the seat of authority and to make this higher power in reality, the government, with the same tendency on the part of those who might control its powers to pervert them into instruments of aggrandizement.

Nor can it be done by limiting the powers of government, so as to make it too feeble to be made an instrument of abuse. For passing by the difficulty of so limiting its powers without creating a power higher than the government itself to enforce the observance of the limitations, it is a sufficient objection that it would, if practicable, defeat the end for which government is or by making it too feeble to protect and preserve society.

The powers necessary for this purpose will ever prove sufficient to aggrandize those who control it at the expense of the rest of the community. Immediately, if you've read Schmidt, you think of his, you know, exceptions. Exceptions need to be made. Somebody has to be able to say, somebody has to be able to make a decision that other people can't make. Get into a state of exception. In estimating what amount of power would be requisite to secure the objects of government,

we must take into the reckoning what would be necessary to defend the community against external, as well as internal dangers. Government must be able to repel assaults from abroad, as well as to repress violence and disorders within. It must not be overlooked that the human race is not comprehended in a single society, or community.

The limited reason and faculties of men, the great diversity of language, customs, pursuits, situation, and complexion, and the difficulty of intercourse with various other causes have by their operation formed a great many separate communities acting independently of each other. Between these, there is the same tendency to conflict, and from the same constitution of our nature as between men individually and even stronger because the sympathetic or social feelings are not so strong between different communities as between individuals of the same community. So powerful indeed is this tendency that it has led to almost incessant wars between contiguous communities for plunder and conquests or to avenge injuries, real or supposed it. So long as the state of things continues, exigencies will,

occur in which the entire powers and resources as a community will be needed to defend its existence. When this is at stake, every other consideration must yield to it. Self-preservation is a supreme law, as well with communities as individuals, and hence the danger of withholding from government the full command of the power and resources of the state and the great difficulty of limiting its powers consistently with the protection and preservation of the community. And hence the question recurs, by what means can government without being divested of the full command of the resources of the community be prevented from abusing its powers? Because that's what everyone reading, everyone who was listening to this or reading along with me is thinking. It's like, sure.

But then they're just going to start wars because you have special interests. You have the military industrial complex. You have this. You have that. He's not stupid. The question involves difficulties which, from the earliest ages, wise and good men have attempted to overcome. But hitherto with partial success, for this purpose many devices have been resorted to, suited to the various stages of intelligence and civilization through which our race has passed,

and to the different forms of government to which they have been applied. The aid of superstition, ceremonies, education, religion, organic arrangements, both of the government and the community, has been from time to time appealed to. Some of the most remarkable of these devices, whether regarded in reference to their wisdom and the skill displayed in their application or to the permanency of their effects, are to be found in the early dawn of civilization,

and the institutions of the Egyptians, the Hindus, the Chinese, and the Jews. The only materials, which that early age afforded for the construction of constitutions, when intelligence was so partially diffused, were applied with consummate wisdom and skill. To their successful application may be fairly traced to subsequent advance of our race and civilization and intelligence, of which we now enjoy the benefits. For without a constitution, something to counteract the strong tendency of government to disorder and abuse and to give stability to political institutions, there can be little progress or permanent improvement.

In answering the important question under consideration, it is not necessary to enter into an examination of the variance contrivances adopted by these celebrated governments to counteract this tendency to disorder and abuse, nor to undertake to treat of constitution in its most comprehensive sense. What I propose is far more limited, to explain on what principles government must be formed in order to resist by its own interior structure, or to use a singular term, organism, the tendency to abuse of power. This structure or organism is what is meant by Constitution in its strict and more usual sense, and it is this which distinguishes what are called constitutional governments from absolute. It is in this strict and more usual sense that I propose to use the term hereafter. How government then must be constructed in order to counteract through its organism, this tendency on the part of those who make and execute the laws to oppress those subject to their operation

is the next question which claims attention. There is but one way in which this can possibly be done, and that is, by such an organism as will furnish the ruled with the means of resisting successfully, this tendency on the part of the rulers to oppression and oppression and, and abuse. You know where he's going? Power can only be resisted by power and tendency by tendency. Those who exercise power and those subject to its exercises, the rulers and the ruled, stand in antagonistic relations to each other. The same constitution of our nature, which leads rulers to oppress the ruled, regardless of the object for which government is ordained,

will, with equal strength, lead the ruled to resist when possessed of the means of making peaceable and effective resistance. such an organism then, as will furnish the means by which resistance may be systematically and peaceably made on the part of the ruled to oppression and abuse of part on the part of the rulers is the first and indispensable step toward forming a constitutional government. And as this can only be affected by or through the right of suffrage, the right of the people on the part of the ruled to choose the rulers at proper intervals and to hold them thereby responsible for their conduct. The responsibility of the rulers to the ruled through the right

of suffrage is the indispensable and primary principle of the foundation of a constitutional government. When this right is properly guarded and the people sufficiently enlightened to understand their own rights and the interests of the community and duly to appreciate the motives and conducts to those appointed to make and execute the laws, it is all sufficient to give to those who elect effective control over those they have elected. Those people who love going out shopping for Black Friday deals, they're mad, aren't they? Like, proper mad.

Brenda wants a television and she's prepared to fight for it, if you ask me. It's the fastest way to a meltdown. Me, I just prepare the fastest way to get stuff, and it doesn't get faster than Appliances Delivered.e. Top brand appliances, top brand electricals, and if it's online, it's in stock. With next day delivery in Greater Dublin.

Appliances Delivered.com. Spirit Electrical. See it, buy it, get it tomorrow. Or, you know, fight Brenda. Again, somebody can just stop and say, well, I mean, look at the elections we have now. Yada yada. Nobody, the last election was stolen, this and that. Yeah. Well, he also, what else is he saying here? I mean, that just goes without saying. Elections have been stolen since the dawn of mankind, all right? But what else is he saying? here. You're saying that the people who are voting have to be sufficiently enlightened to understand their own rights and the interests of the community. They have to be intelligent and they have to have skin in the game. I call the right of suffrage the indispensable and primary principle, for it would be a great and dangerous mistake to suppose, as many do, that it is of itself sufficient to form constitutional governments. To this erroneous opinion, may be traced one of the causes why so few attempts to form constitutional governments have succeeded,

and why of the few which have, so small a number, have had durable existence. It has led not only to mistakes in the attempts to form such governments, but to their overthrow when they have, by some good fortune, been correctly formed. I wonder what he's thinking of. so far from being of itself sufficient, however well-guarded it might be, and however enlighten the people, it would, unaided by other provisions, leave the government as absolute as it would be in the hands of irresponsible rulers and with a tendency at least as strong toward oppression and abuse of its powers, as I shall next proceed to explain.

The right of suffrage itself can do no more than give complete control to those who elect over the conduct of those they have elected. In doing this, it accomplishes all it possibly can accomplish. This is its aim, and when this is attained, its end is fulfilled. It can do no more, however, enlighten the people, or however widely extended or well-guarded the right may be. The sum total, then, of its effects when most successful is to make those elected, the true and faithful representatives of those who elected them, instead of irresponsible rulers, as they would be without it, and thus, by converting it into an agency,

and the rulers into agents, to divest government of all claims to sovereignty, and to remain it unimpaired to the community. But it is manifest that the right of suffrage in making these changes, transfers, in reality, the actual control over the government, from those who make and execute the laws, to the body of the government and thereby places the powers of the government as fully in the mass of the

community as they would be if they, in fact, had assembled, made, and executed the laws themselves without the intervention of representatives or agents. The more perfectly it does this, the more perfectly it accomplishes its ends. But in doing so, it only changes the seat of authority without counteracting in the least the tendency of the government to oppression and abuse of its power. all right I would love for a John C. Calhoun to be resurrected today and see if he still agrees with this because at the time that's what this it looked like yeah if he would have compared what happened in France you know with the French Revolution would he

yeah I mean would he say that giving the people that that you could trust the people with a vote. I mean, here what he's saying is you can only trust a certain amount of people with a vote. But we know it's gotten to the point where that's never going to happen again. It's either going to be everyone votes or no one votes. And I'm pretty sure I'm not going to speak from Mr. Calhoun. I will speak for myself. As someone who grew up in the civic religion, and voting mattered and voting was everything. What I will say is that, yeah, I don't believe I would rather have a CEO. I would rather have somebody who, the possibility that they could become tyrannical in themselves

than the tyranny of 2.1 million. And that's how many, I think that's how many members there are of the executive, which is not even the executive anymore. just call it the managerial. Yeah. This sounds great, and it probably looked great when it probably worked out pretty well early on when the country was homogenous when only men and landowners could vote. But now anyone can vote, and people who just stepped over the border can vote.

I mean, they give, people say, oh, that doesn't, that doesn't happen. you're forced, like, to get a driver's license in California, you're, I think you're forced to register to vote, like, no matter if you're legal or not. So, I mean, I know it doesn't really mean anything in California because, I mean, Democrats are going to win California anyway. If California goes red, you know, it'd be weird. But, yeah, I mean, at this point, we've seen what voting does.

maybe if you had a country that was homogenous, maybe El Salvador's elections look pretty good and Russia seems to be pretty happy with Putin. Well, you know, maybe in a homogenous society, it works.

We don't have that here. We need someone who who we need somebody who makes the decisions, basically, declares the exception. is right now we have a couple million people who do that. And look at what we have onward.

If the whole community had the same interests so that the interests of each and every portion would be affected by the action of the government that the laws which oppressed or impoverished one portion would necessarily oppress and impoverish all others, or the reverse, then the right of suffrage of itself would be all sufficient to counteract the tendency of the government to oppression and abuse of its powers, and, of course, would form of itself a perfect constitutional government. The interest of all being the same,

by supposition, as far as the action of the government was concerned, all would have like interests as to what laws should be made and how they should be executed. All strife and struggle would cease as to who should be elected to make and execute them. The only question would be, who was most fit? the wisest and most capable of understanding the common interests of the whole. This decided the election would pass off quietly and without party discord, as no one portion

could advance its own peculiar interests without regard to the rest by electing a favorite candidate. But such is not the case. But on the contrary, nothing is more difficult than to equalize the action of the government in reference to the various and diversified interests of the community, and nothing more easy than to pervert its power into instruments to aggrandize and enrich one or more interests by oppressing and impoverishing the others. And this, too, under the operation of laws, couched in general terms,

and which on their face appear fair and equal. Nor is this the case in some particular communities only. It is so in all. the small and the great, the poor and the rich, irrespective of pursuits, productions, or degrees of civilization. With, however, this difference, that the more extensive and populistic country,

the more diversified the condition and pursuits of its population, and the rich are more luxurious and dissimilar to people, the more difficult it is to equalize the action of the government, and the more easy for one portion of the community to pervert its power to oppress and plunder the other. that you didn't think that I was going to be using this to make an argument for monoculture, did you? Well, you know. Such being the case, it necessarily results that the right of suffrage by placing the control of the government and the community must,

from the same constitution of our nature, which makes government necessary to preserve society, lead to conflict among its different interests. Each striving to obtain possession of its powers as the means of protecting itself against the other, or of advancing its respective interests regardless of the interests of others. For this purpose, a struggle will take place between the various interests to obtain a majority in order to control the government. If no one interested be strong enough of itself to obtain it, a combination will be formed between those whose interests are most alike,

each conceding something to the others until a sufficient number is obtained to make a majority. The process may be slow and much time may be required before a compact. Organized majority can be thus formed, but formed it will be in time, even without pre-concert or design, by the sure workings of that principle or its constitution of our nature in which the government itself originates. When once formed, the community will be divided into two great parties, a major and minor, between which there will be incessant struggle. on the one side to retain and on the other to, on the one side to retain and on the other to obtain the majority,

and thereby the control of the government and the advantages it confers. I guess the only thing I have here is he said, the process can be slow, much time organized majority thus form, but formed it will be in time even without pre-concerted design. I would say there's always pre-concerted design. because I believe that there's always elites. You may get that majority, but it's only going to be a very, very small minority

that's even running that, quote-unquote, majority. So deeply seated indeed is this tendency to conflict between the different interests or portions of the community that it would result from the action of the government itself, even though it were possible to find a community where the people were all of the same pursuits, placed in the same condition of life, and in every respect so situated,

as to be without any quality of condition or diversity of interests. The advantages of possessing the control of the powers of the government, and thereby of its honors and emoluments, are of themselves exclusive of all other considerations, ample to divide even such a community into the two great hostile parties, saying even people with tons of things in common, with everything in common can be split apart

in such a way. In order to form a just estimate of the full force of these advantages without reference to any other consideration, it must be remembered that government to fulfill, it must be remembered that government to fulfill the ends for which it is ordained,

and more especially that of protection against external dangers, must in the present condition of the world, be clothed with power sufficient to call forth the resources of the community and be prepared at all times to command them promptly in every emergency which may possibly arise. For this purpose, large establishments are necessary, both civil and military, including naval, where, from situation that description of force may be required, with all the means necessary for prompt and effective action, such as fortifications,

fleets, armories, arsenals, magazines, arms of all descriptions, with well, trained forces in sufficient numbers to wield them with skill and energy, whenever the occasion requires it. The administration and management of a government with such vast establishments must necessarily require a host of employees, agents, and officers, of whom many must be vested with high and responsible trusts, and occupy exalted stations accompanied with much influence and patronage. To meet the necessary expenses, large sums must be collected and dispersed. And for this purpose, heavy taxes must be imposed, requiring a multitude of officers for their collection and disbursement. The whole United must necessarily

place under the control of government an amount of honors and emoluments sufficient to excite profoundly the ambition of the aspiring and the cupidity of our evaricious. And to lead to the formation of hostile parties and violent party conflicts and struggles to obtain the control of the government. And what makes this evil remedyless through the right of suffrage of itself, however modified or carefully guarded or however enlightened the people, the people, is the fact that, as far as the honors and emoluments of the government and its fiscal actions are concerned, it is impossible to equalize it. The reason is obvious. It's honors and amoluments, however great can fall to the lot of but a few compared to the entire number of the community

and the multitude who will seek to participate in them. But without this, there is a reason which renders it impossible to equalize the action of the government so far as its fiscal operation extends, which I shall next explain. Few comparatively, as they are, the agents and employees of the governments constitute that portion of the community who are exclusive recipients of the proceeds of the taxes. Whatever amount is taken from the community in the form of taxes, if not lost, goes to them in the shape of expenditures or disbursements. The two, disbursement and taxation constitute the fiscal action of the government.

Their correlatives. What the one takes from the community under the name of taxes is transferred to the portion of the community by who are the recipients under that of disbursements. But as the recipients constitute only a portion of the community, it follows taking the two parts of the fiscal process together that its action must be unequal between the payers of the taxes and the recipients of their proceeds. Nor can it be otherwise, unless what is collected from each individual in the shape of taxes shall be returned to him in that of disbursements, which would make the process nugatory and absurd. taxation may indeed be made equal regarded separately from disbursement. Even this is no easy task, but the two united cannot possibly made equal. Such being the case, it must necessarily follow that some one portion of the community must pay in taxes more than it receives back in disbursements,

while another receives in disbursements more than it pays in taxes. It is then-man-then. I remember one time we used to just try to trigger government employees by telling them that they didn't pay taxes. Oh, no, I pay taxes every April 15. No, you don't. No, you know, they're just taking, they're taking back the taxes that were taken from someone else. Oh, no, but I do this. Okay, sure, sure, right.

Yeah, whatever you say. It is then manifest taking the whole process together that taxes must, be, in effect, bounties to the portion of the community which receives more in disbursements than it pays in taxes, while to the other which pays in taxes more than it receives in disbursements, they are taxes in reality. Burthens instead of bounties. This consequence is unavoidable. It results from the nature of the process, be the taxes ever so equally laid and the disbursements ever so fairly made in reference to the public service. It is assumed in coming to this conclusion, that the disbursements are made within the community. The reasons assigned would be applicable

if the proceeds of the taxes were paid in tribute or expended in foreign countries. In either of these cases, the burden would fall on all in proportion to the amount of taxes they respectively paid. Nor would it be less a bounty to the portion of the community which received back in disbursements more than it paid in taxes, because received the salaries for official services, or payments to persons employed in executing the works required by the government, or furnishing it with its various supplies, or any other description of public employment, instead of being bestowed gratuitously.

It is the disbursements which give additional and usually very profitable and honorable employment as to the portion of the community where they are made. But to create such employments by disbursements is to bestow on the portion of the community to whose the lot disbursements may fall, a far more durable and lasting benefit, one that would add much more to its wealth in population than would be the bestowal of an equal sum gratuitously, and hence to the extent that the disbursements exceed the taxes, it may be fairly regarded as a bounty. The very reverse is the case in reference to the portion which pays in taxes more than it receives in disbursements. With them, profitable employment,

are diminished to the same extent, and population and wealth correspondingly decreased. The necessary result, then, of the unequal fiscal action of the government is to divide the community into two great classes, one consisting of those who, in reality, pay the taxes, and of course bear exclusively the burden of supporting the government, and the other of those who are recipients of their proceeds through disbursements and who are, in fact, supported by the government, or in fewer words, to divide it into taxpayers and tax consumers. But the effect of this is to place them in antagonistic relations in reference to the fiscal action of the government, and the entire course of policy therewith connected, for the greater

the taxes and disbursements, the greater the gain of the one and the loss of the other, and vice versa. And consequently, the more the policy of the government is calculated to increase taxes and disbursements, the more it will be favored by the one and opposed by the other. The effect, then, of every increase is to enrich and strengthen the one and impoverish and weaken the other. This indeed may be carried to such an extent that one class or portion of the community may be elevated to wealth and power and the other depressed to abject poverty and dependence simply by the fiscal action of the government.

And this too, through disbursements only, even under a separate. system of equal taxes imposed for revenue only. If such may be the effective taxes and disbursements when confined to their legitimate objects, that of raising revenues for the public service, some conception may be formed how one portion of the community may be crushed and another elevated on its ruins by systematically perverting the power of taxation and disbursement for the purpose of aggrandizing and building up one portion of the community at the expense of the other, that it will be so used unless prevented is from the Constitution of Man just as certain as that it can be so used, and that, if not prevented, it must give rise to two parties and to violent conflicts and struggles between them

to obtain the control of the government is, for the same reason, not less certain. nor is it less certain from the operation of all these causes that the dominant majority for the time would have the same tendency to oppression and abuse of power which, without the right of suffrage, irresponsible rulers would have. No reason indeed can be assigned, why the latter would abuse their power, which would not apply with equal force to the former. The dominant majority for the time would, in reality, through the right of suffrage, be the rulers, the controlling, governing, and irresponsible, power, and those who make and execute the laws would be for the time, be in reality,

but their representatives and agents, nor would the fact that the former would constitute a majority of the community counteract a tendency originating in the Constitution of Man, and which as such cannot depend on the number by whom the powers of the government may be wielded, be it greater or smaller, a majority or minority, it must equally partake of an attribute inherent in each individual composing it, and as in each of the individual is stronger than the social feelings, the one would have the same tendency as the other to oppression and abuse of power. The reason applies to government in all its forms, whether it be that of the one, the few, or the many. In each, there must, of necessity, be a governing and governed, a ruling and a

subject portion. The one implies the other, and in all, the two bear the same relation to each other, and have, on the part of the governing portion, the same tendency to oppression and abuse of power. Where the majority is that portion, it matters not how its powers may be exercised, whether directly by themselves or indirectly through representatives or agents, be it which it may, the minority for the time will be as much the governed or subjected portion as are the subject in an aristocracy or the subjects in a monarchy. The only difference in this respect is that in the government of a majority, the majority may become the majority, and in the government of a majority, the minority may become a majority and the majority of the minority through the right of suffrage and thereby change their relative positions within the interference of, without the interference of force or revolution. But the duration or uncertainty of the tenure by which power is held cannot of itself counteract the tendency inherent to government to oppression and abuse.

of power. On the contrary, the very uncertainty of the tenure, combined with a violent party warfare, which must ever proceed a change of parties under such governments, would rather tend to increase than diminish the tendency to oppression. And I'm going to stop right there. That's what's wild about this. That's what's wild about Kyle Hoon on this disposition. He gives you the reason why government needs to exist. And then it gives you all the reasons why it doesn't work. It's truly amazing and it made me this is one of those things it made me come to a conclusion that yes, we need a government, but do we need one like this? He's basically spelling out why this can't work and the question is what comes to you? What kind of government do you want? So if you want something where

It's like this. This is what you're going to get. If you want something like monarchy where there's just one person in charge, CEO, basically a king type of administrator, you're going to have your own problems too. But what he's showing is that this is just, it's a cluster, necessity. But what makes it a necessity, why it doesn't work. And then you have people who say, well, then we should just get rid of them all together. Not understanding that what makes it, what makes a government necessary

would make insane chaos without one. So that's it. Now I know that most people are going to listen to this one or read the, read along with this one, watch a video. And, you know, That's when the drop-off happens. Episode two will have less people tuning in, and then three, and on down the line, it goes, and everything. Try to tune in for episode two, okay? Unless you just didn't get through to the end of this. But if you got through to the end of this, come for episode two, because there's going to be more of this. And it's just going to, it's fascinating the road he takes us down in this.

And we got through a lot of it today. So, yeah, we got through a lot, actually. there are as I mentioned at the end of um when I did zero to one there are going to be ads in here if you want to avoid the ads you can go to freeman beyond the wall.com forward slash support um support me on my website uh through patreon or through subscribe star and i you can get these without commercials um and it also helps just um it keeps me going and allows me to do more and i'm basically putting out like six episodes a week right now. And a couple weeks I put out seven.

I put out one every day. And people may say that's just too much. I can't keep up and everything. But some people are going to be more attracted to one thing and some people are going to be attracted to other. So I'm trying to hit a couple different audiences with the things that I'm doing, especially with the readings and the live stream kind of stuff, appearing on other people's shows. And then, you know, my regular episodes where I have a guest.

So, you know, think about supporting the show. and come back for episode two of John C. Calhoun's disposition on government. Thank you.