The Pete Quiñones Show - Pete Reads John C. Calhoun's 'Disquisition on Government' Part 4

Episode Date: March 27, 2024

47 MinutesIn this reading and commentary Pete continues reading 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.

Ready for huge savings, we'll mark your calendars from November 28th to 30th because the Lidl Newbridge Warehouse Sale is back. We're talking thousands of your favourite Liddle items all reduced to clear. From home essentials to seasonal must-habs, when the doors open, the deals go fast. Come see for yourself. The Liddle New Bridge Warehouse Sale, 28th to 30th of November. Liddle, more to value. You catch them in the corner of your eye. distinctive by design they move you even before you drive the new cupra plug-in hybrid range for mentor

leon and terramar now with flexible pcp finance and trade-in boosters of up to two thousand euro search cupra and discover our latest offers cupra design that moves finance provided by way of higher purchase agreement from vows wagon financial services arland 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. 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 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.

I want to welcome everyone back to part four of my reading of John C. Calhoun's A Dysquisition on Government. Should be able to knock this out in two more, this one, and one more. And there was a question from the last episode on what exactly does Calhoun mean by a concurrent government. And you will see when I made some notes on it to give a basically. basically a brief analysis of what he sees as would be able to prevent the majority, quote unquote, democratic from subjugating the minority. So, you know, what basically does he mean by concurrent?

So he's looking at, it consists of voices of conflicting interests, which are given veto powers against each other in a way that. Basically, qualitative and quantitative features exist. So any government action can only be taken with widespread consent across basically all the sectors and strata of government. So he basically said that an organism can more fully collect the sense of the community and therefore aid and perfect the right of suffrage. So you can see how really this would almost have to be brought down to the local level unless you are, well, what are you going to have? Lobbies, things like that. One of the reasons I think I've said this before wanted to read this is because it talks about our government.

It talks about the system of government that we probably recognize the most. But it also, he does a great job in sections of showing why it doesn't work. So, yeah, and the concurrent majority is one of those things that once you understand that you're like, yeah, well, how would you even, how would that even work now? You don't even have, there's not even a foundation of subjective truth or, I mean, of objective truth or morality. I mean, we're basically at war because of that. So, yeah, no, it's not going to work. I still think finishing this and reading it in the first place helps because, in my opinion, he was the greatest political thinker, probably when it comes to political theory,

the greatest American political thinker. So, yeah. All right, I'm going to continue reading. I think we're at page 69, and I'm going to pick up where I left off. But to form a juster, that should be, why do I want to scream more just, but to form a juster estimate of the full force of the impulse to compromise, there must be added that in that in governments of the concurrent majority, each portion in order to advance its own peculiar interests would have to conciliate all others by showing a disposition to advance theirs.

And for this purpose, each would select those to represent it whose wisdom, patriotism, and weight of character would command the confidence of the others. leaders that everybody can agree upon. Natural elites, maybe Hans-Harman Hoppa might call them, but you're talking about elites here. Under its influence and with representatives so well qualified to accomplish the object for which they were collected, the prevailing desire would be to promote the common interest of the whole,

and hence the competition would be not which should yield the least to promote the common good, but which should yield the most. It is thus, that concession would say, ceased to be considered a sacrifice, would become a free will offering on the altar of the country, and lose the name of compromise. And herein is to be found the feature, which distinguishes governments of the concurrent majority so strikingly from those of the numerical. In the latter, each faction in the struggle to obtain the control of the government, elevates the power to designating the artful and unscrupulous, who, in their devotion to party, instead of aiming at the

good of the whole, aim exclusively at securing the ascendancy of the party. When traced to its source, this difference will be found to originate in the fact that in governments of the concurrent majority, individual feelings are, from its organism, necessarily enlisted on the side

of the social, and made to unite with them in promoting the interests of the whole as the best way of promoting the separate interests of each, while, in those of the numerical majority, the social are necessarily enlisted on the side of the individual and made to contribute

to interest the interest of parties, regardless of that of the whole. To affect the former, to enlist the individual on the side of the social feelings to promote the good of the whole is the greatest possible achievement of the science of government, while to enlist the social on the side of the individual to promote the interest of parties at the expense of the good of the whole is the greatest blunder which ignorance can possibly commit. And yet that's where we are. to this also may be referred the greatest solidity of foundation on which governments of the concurrent majority repose. Both ultimately rests on necessity for force by which those the numerical majority are upheld and is only acquiesced in from necessity, a necessity not more imperious, however, than that which compels the different portions in governments of the concurrent majority to acquiesce and compromise.

There is, however, a great difference in the motive, the feeling, the aim, which characterized the act in the two cases, in the one it is done with the reluctance and hostility ever incident to enforce submission to what is regarded in injustice and oppression, accompanied by the desire and purpose to seize on the first favorable opportunity for resistance, but in the other, willingly and cheerfully under the impulse of an exalted patriotism, impelling all to acquiesce in whatever the common good requires. Do you think, does anyone think there's any possibility that you will ever see that again with the system of government that we have today? If that's impossible, then the system needs to be changed. I'm not talking about, here it is. If your car breaks down, if your car is broken, you have two choices. repair it or replace it, can this system be repaired?

I think anyone who understands the slightest political theory, Dred Burnham, which I've read on the show before, knows that the only way it needs to be replaced. Something new has to be done. It's not going to, you're not going to repair this. It needs to be replaced. It is then a great error to suppose that the government of the concurrent majority is impracticable, or that it rests on a feeble foundation. History furnishes many examples of such governments, and among them, one, in which the principle was carried to an extreme that would be thought impracticable had it never existed.

I refer to that of Poland. In this it was carried to such an extreme that, in the election of her kings, the concurrence or acquiescence of every individual of the nobles and gentry present in an assembly numbering usually from one hundred and fifty to two hundred thousand was required to make a choice thus giving to each individual a vote on his election so likewise each member the deit the supreme legislative body consisting of the king the senate bishops and deputies of the nobility and gentry of palatonites possessed a veto on all its proceedings, thus making a unanimous vote necessary to enact a law or to adopt any measure whatever. And as if to carry the principle to the utmost extent, the veto of a single member

not only defeated the particular bill or measuring question, but prevented all others passed during the session from taking effect. Further, the principle could not be carried. It, in fact, made every individual of the nobility and gentry a distinct element of the organism or to vary the expression made him an estate of the kingdom. And yet this government lasted in this form more than two centuries, embracing the periods of Poland's greatest power and renown. Twice during its existence, she protected Christendom, went in danger by defeating the Turks under the walls of Vienna, and permanently arresting thereby the tide of their conquest westward. What's the difference between Poland then and the United States now?

If you thought I was going to say a multicultural society versus a homogenous society, you'd be right. Also, he's writing here at the beginning and going, basically, the Industrial Revolution is on. I personally think that the Industrial Revolution, when people are out there working, when people, when people have to really put in the work to make money, even the, that there's a tendency to, there's no easy, there's no real easy money to be made. Sure, there can be easy money in monopolies. Sure, there can be easy money in cronyism. But it's not the easiest money. Once you get out of the industrial, once you get into the age of banking,

where you can just make money by sitting at home if you have enough of it. and you have access to the power. You have like our government right now. Government officials can trade, can inside trade legally. Okay? There's no, there's no cohesiveness. It's every, it's every man for himself.

And I really think that's what banking and that's what usury and the stock market, all of this. That's what brought us here That you can You know there's no skin in the game There's no skin in the game You just want what you can get And that's what bringing in central banking

And that's what bringing in the stock market Things like that If you want riches If you want a government that's based off of You want a society that's based off That you think is a healthy society Because line go up Well

That's our society society. Congratulations. It is true her government was finally subverted and the people subjugated in consequence of the extreme to which the principle was carried, not however because of its tendency to dissolution from weakness, but from the facility it afforded to powerful and unscrupulous neighbors to control by their intrigues the election of her kings. But the fact that a government in which the principle was carried to the utmost extreme not only existed, but existed for so long a period in great power and splendor is proof conclusive both of its practicability and its compatibility with the power and permanency of government. Another example not so striking

indeed, but yet deserving notice, is furnished by the government of a portion of the Aborigines in our country. I refer to the Confederacy of the Six Nations who inhabited what now is called the western portion of the state of New York. One chief delegate chosen by each nation associated with six others of his own selection, and making in all 42 members constituted their federal or general government. When met, they formed the Council of the Union and discussed and decided all questions relating to the common welfare. As in the Polish state, each member possessed a veto on its decision so that nothing could be done without the united consents of all. But this, instead of making the Confederacy weaker and practicable, had the opposite effect. It

secured harmony and counsel in action and with them a great increase of power. The six nations in consequence became the most powerful of all the Indian tribes within the limits of our country. They carried their conquest and authority far beyond the country they originally occupied. 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.

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. Ready for huge savings? Well, mark your calendars from November 28 to 30th, because the Liddle Newbridge Warehouse Sale is back. We're talking thousands of your favourite Liddle items,

all reduced to clear. From home essentials to seasonal must-habs. When the doors open, the deals go fast. Come see for yourself. The Liddle New Bridge Warehouse Sale. 28th to 30th of November. Lidl, more to value. 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. 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 I pass for the present the most distinguished of all these examples the Roman Republic where the veto or negative power was carried not indeed to the same extreme as in the Polish government but very far and with great increase of power and stability, as I shall show more at large hereafter.

It may be thought, and doubtless many have supposed, that the defects inherent in the government of the numerical majority may be remedied by a free press as the organ of public opinion, especially in the more advanced stage of society, so as to supersede the necessity of the concurrent majority to counteract this tendency to oppression and abuse of power. Yeah, we're going to trust in the press. It is not my aim to detract from the importance of the press, nor to underestimate the great power and influence, which it has given to public opinion.

On the contrary, I admit that these are so great as to entitle it to be considered a new and important political element. Its influence is, at the present day, on the increase, and it is highly probable that it may, in combination with the causes which have contributed to raise it to its present importance, effect in time, great changes, social and health. political. But however important its present influence may be, or may hereafter become, or however great and beneficial the changes to which it may ultimately lead, it can never counteract the tendency of the numerical majority to the abuse of power, nor supersede the necessity of the concurrent as an essential element in the formation of constitutional governments. These, it cannot affect for two reasons, either of which is conclusive. The one is that it cannot change the principle of our nature, which makes constitutions necessary to prevent government from abusing

its powers, and government necessary to protect and perfect society. Constituting, as this principle does, an essential part of our nature, no increase of knowledge and intelligence, no enlargement of our sympathetic feelings, no influence of education or modification of the condition of society can change it. But so long as it shall continue to be an essential part of our nature, so long will government be necessary. And so long as this continues to be necessary, so long will constitutions also be necessary to counteract its tendency to the abuse of power?

And so long must the concurrent majority remain an essential element in the formation of constitutions. The press may do much, but giving impulse to the progress of knowledge and intelligence to aid the cause of education and to bring about salutary changes in the condition of society. These, in turn, may do much to explode political errors

to teach how governments should be constructed in order to fulfill their ends, and by what means they can be best preserved when so constructed. They may also do much to enlarge the social and to restrain the individual feelings, and thereby to bring about a state of things when far less power will be required by governments

to guard against internal disorder and violence and external danger, and when, of course, course, the sphere of power may be greatly contracted and that of liberty proportionally enlarged. Good luck. But all this would not change the nature of man, nor supersede the necessity of government. For so long as government exists, the possession of its control as the means of directing its action and dispensing its honors and emoluments will be an objective desire. While this continues to be the case, it must, in governments of the numerical majority, lead to party's struggles. and as has been shown to all the consequences, which necessarily flow in their train, and against

which the only remedy is to concurrent majority. The other reason is to be found in the nature of the influence, which the press politically exercises. It is similar in most respects to that of suffrage. They are, indeed, both organs of public opinion. The principal difference is that the one has much more agency informing public opinion, while the other gives a more authentic and authoritative expression to it. Regarded in either light, the press cannot, of itself, guard any more against the abuse of power than suffrage, and for the same reason. If what is called public opinion were always the opinion of the whole community, the press

would, as its organ, be an effective guard against the abuse of power and supersede the necessity of the concurrent majority, just as the right of suffrage would do where the community in reference to the action of government had but one interest, but such is not the case. On the contrary, what is called public opinion instead of being the united opinion of the whole community is usually nothing more than the opinion or voice of the strongest interest or combination of interests and not unfrequently of a small but energetic and active portion of the whole that we call an elite. And they'll always be here. This is a pipe dream.

public opinion in relations to government and its policy is as much divided and diversified as are the interests of the community and the press instead of being the organ of the whole is usually but the organ of these various and diversified interests respectively or rather are the parties growing out of them

it is used by them as the means of controlling public opinion and of so molding it as to promote their peculiar interests and to aid in caring on the welfare of party but as the organ and instrument of parties in governments of the numerical majority, it is as incompetent as suffrage itself to counteract the tendency to oppression and abuse of power, and can, no more than that, supersede the necessity of the concurrent majority.

On the contrary, as the instrument of party warfare, it contributes greatly to increase party excitement and the violence and virulence of party struggles, and in the same degree, the tendency to oppression and abuse of power. Instead, then, of superseding the necessity of the concurrent majority, it increases it by increasing the violence and force of party feelings in like manner as party caucuses and party machinery, of the latter of which, indeed, it forms an important part. You can just see how this can't work anymore, right? In one respect and only one, the government of the numerical majority has the advantage over that of the concurrent, if indeed it can be called an advantage. I refer to its simplicity and facility of construction. It is simple indeed, wielded as it is by a single power,

the will of the greater number, and very easy of construction. For this purpose, nothing more is necessary than universal suffrage and the regulation of the manner of voting so as to give the greater number to supreme control over every department of government. When he says universal severage, he's not universal within the scope of a certain group. But whatever advantage is simplicity and

facility of construction may give it, the other forms of absolute government possess them in a still higher degree. The construction of the government of the numerical majority, simple as it is, requires some preliminary measures and arrangements while the other, especially the monarchical, will in its absence

or where it proves incompetent forced themselves on the community. And hence, I hate when he does that because you can pull numerous, numerous examples. This isn't one of those things where these are exceptions. I think Hapa did a really good job of proving that it's pretty much the rule. It was the rule. If anything, they were indifferent to your existence half the time. And even under feudalism, the feudal lord, and the, even under feudal lord and the,

and the serfs would drink at the same bar and, yeah. Yeah, it's, yeah. And hence, among other reasons, the tendency of all governments is, from the more complex and difficult of construction to the more simple and easily constructed, and finally, to absolute Marnarchy as the most simple of all. Complexity and difficulty of construction, as far as they form objections, apply not only to governments of the concurrent majority of the popular form, but to constitutional governments of every form,

the least complex and the most easily constructed of them are much more complex and difficult of construction than any of the absolute forms. Indeed, so great has this difficulty, has been this difficulty, that their construction has been the result, not so much of wisdom and patriotism, as of favorable combinations of circumstances.

They have, for the most part, grown out of the struggles between conflicting interests, which, for some fortunate turn, have ended in a compromise by which both parties have been admitted in some way or another to have a separate and distinct voice in the government. Where this has not been the case, they have been the product of fortunate circumstances acting in conjunction with some pressing danger which forced their adoption as the only means by which it could be avoided. It would seem that it has exceeded human sagacity deliberately to plan and construct constitutional governments with a full knowledge of the principles on which they were formed,

or to reduce them to practice without the pressure of some immediate and urgent necessity. Nor is it surprising that such should be the case, for it would seem almost impossible for any man or body of men to be so profoundly and thoroughly acquainted with the people of any community, which has made any considerable progress in civilization and wealth, with all the diversified interests ever accompanying them, as to be able to organize, constitutional governments suited to their condition. But even were this possible, it would be difficult to find any community sufficiently enlightened and patriotic to adopt such a government without the compulsion of some pressing necessity. A constitution to succeed must spring from the bosom of the community and be adapted to the intelligence and character of the people

and all the multifarious relations internal and external which distinguish one people from another. If it did not, it will prove, in practice, to be not a constitution, but a cumbrous and useless machine, which must be speedily superseded and laid aside for some other more simple and better suited to their condition. There it is. I mean, it's a constitution to succeed must spring from the bosom of the community. I think Orrin McIntyre has talked about this. He's like, once you have to write it down, once you have to write the laws down, If you have to write the laws down because you think that's what's going to control the community, you've lost.

I love this. It should spring from the bosom of the community and be adapted to the intelligence and character of the people. I don't know how, I mean, this goes to so many arguments. It goes to not only the, I mean, obviously the immigration argument. You don't want people coming in here who don't, who can't grasp it, who don't care. who will do anything to supersede it, to get around it. But you also have to teach your children. You have to teach your children.

You have to teach each other. You have to remind each other. Because one of the biggest problems with Hopian, like, the Hopian covenant community that I used to always talk about is the fact that, you know, in a generation, you're going to have new members. And you can teach them and bring them up all you want in the ways that you, of the community, but they could rebel. and then what are you going to do?

Are you going to kick them out? You're going to keep them ready? You kick your kids out? Because they don't believe in, you know, everything that's on the covenant constitution. Well, maybe you will. I don't know how you're going, how that will last past one generation or two,

but hey, at least you had something there for a while, right? It's not like you would want to build anything lasting. There's so much Rokeme on Sports Exter from Sky. They've asked me to read the whole lad at the same speed I usually use for the legal bit at the end. Here goes. This winter sports extra is jam-packed with rugby. For the first time we've got every Champions Cup match exclusively live, plus action from the

URC, the Challenge Cup and much more. Thus the URC and all the best European rugby all in the same place. Get more exclusively live tournaments than ever before on Sports Extra. Jampack with rugby. Phew, that is a lot of rugby. Get Sports Extra on Sky for 15 euro a month for 12 months. Search Sports Extra. New Sports Extra customers only. Standard Pressing applies after 12 months for the terms

apply. value, you love this fantastic offer on celebrations, roses, heroes, and quality street tubs, all now only $3.99. An amazing low price on elite Kimberly biscuits was $1399, now only $999. Great value on these must-have Tato and King Party Boxes was $549, now only $4.99. If you love Christmas, you love Aldi. While Stocks last, Kimberly and Party Box offer available until November 30th. Hops and Wild? Wild and Hopps. The dream team.

They're back in Disney's Zootropolis, too. Funny, fucks. This is a make or break assignment. In cinemas November 28th. No snake has set foot in Zutropolis in forever. Don't miss the wildest adventure of the year. There's a snake. I want the fox and that rabbit.

All right, carrots. Any idea where you want to start? Disney Zootropolis 2 in cinemas November 28. Good luck. I love you. It would thus seem almost necessary that government should commence in some one of the simple and absolute forms, which, however well-suited to the community in its earlier stages, must, in its progress, lead to oppression and abuse of power, and finally, to an appeal to force,

to be succeeded by a military despotism, unless the conflicts to which it leads should be fortunately adjusted by a compromise, which will give to the respective parties a participation in the control of the government, and thereby lay the foundation of a constitutional government to be afterwards matured and perfected. Such governments have been emphatically the product of circumstances, and hence the difficulty of one people imitating the government of another, and hence also the importance of terminating all civil conflicts by a compromise, which shall prevent either party from obtaining complete control and thus subjecting the other. Of the different forms of constitutional governments, the popular is the the popular is the most complex and difficult of construction.

It is indeed so difficult that ours it is believed may with truth be said to be the only one of a purely popular character of any considerable importance that ever existed. Of any considerable importance. Let's see what he says about practicality. The cause is to be found in the fact that in the other two forms, society is arranged in artificial orders or classes, outer official orders or classes. Where these exist, the line of distinction between them is so strongly marked as to throw into shade or otherwise to absorb all interests which are foreign to them respectively. Hence, in an aristocracy, all interests are politically reduced to the nobles and the people,

and in a monarchy with a nobility into three, the monarchs, the nobles, and the people. In either case, they are so few that the sense of each may be taken separately, though its appropriate organ so as to give to each a concurrent voice and a negative on the other through the usual departments of the government without making it too complex or too tardy in its movements to perform with promptness and energy all the necessary functions of government. The case is different and constitutional governments of the popular form. In consequence of the absence of these artificial distinctions, the various natural interests resulting from diversity of pursuits, condition, situation and character of different portions of the people, and from the action of the government

itself, rise into prominence and struggle to obtain the ascendancy. They will, it is true, in governments of the numerical majority, ultimately coalesce, and form two great parties, but not so closely as to lose entirely their separate character in existence. These, they will ever be ready to reassume, when the objects for which they coalesced are accomplished, to overcome the difficulties occasion by so great a diversity of interest or an organism far more complex is necessary. Another obstacle, different to overcome, opposes the formation of popular constitutional governments. It is much more difficult to terminate the struggles between conflicting interests by compromise in absolute popular governments than an aristocracy or monarchy. and in aristocracy, the object of the people in the ordinary struggle between them and the nobles is not, at least in its early stages, to overthrow the nobility and revolutionize the government, but to participate in its powers.

notwithstanding the oppression to which they may be subjected under this form of government, the people commonly feel no small degree of respect for the descendants of the long line of distinguished ancestors and do not usually aspire to more in opposing the authority of the nobles than to obtain such a participation in the powers of the government as will enable them to correct its abuses and lighten their burdens. Among the nobility, on the other hand, it sometimes happens that there are individuals of great influence with both sides, who have the good sense and patriotism to interpose in order to effect a compromise by yielding to the reasonable demands of the people, and thereby to avoid

the hazard of a final and decisive appeal to force. It is thus, by a judicious and timely compromise, the people in such governments may be raised to our participation in the administrative sufficient for their protection without the loss of authority on the part of the nobles. In the case of a monarchy, the process is somewhat different. Where it is a military despotism, the people rarely have the spirit or intelligence to attempt resistance, or if otherwise, their resistance must almost necessarily terminate in defeat, or in a mere change of dynasty, by the elevation of their leader to the throne. It is different, where the monarch is surrounded by a hereditary nobility,

in a struggle between him and them, both, but especially the monarch, are usually disposed to court the people in order to enlist them on their respective sides, a state of things highly favorable to their elevation. In this case, the struggle, if it should not be continued without decisive results, would almost necessarily raise them to political importance and to a participation in the powers of the government. The case is different in absolute democracy. Party conflicts between the majority and minority and such governments can hardly ever terminate and compromise. The object of the opposing minority is to expel the majority from power and of the majority to maintain their hold upon it. It is, on both sides, a struggle for the whole, a struggle that must determine which shall be the governing and which the subject party,

and in character, object, and result, not unlike that between competitors for the Scepter in absolute monarchies. Its regular course, as has been shown, is excessive violence and appeal to force, followed by revolution and terminating at last in the elevation to supreme power of the general of the successful party, and hence, among other reasons, aristocracies and monarchies more readily assume the constitutional form than absolute power governments. Of the three different forms, the monarchical has the heretofore been much the most prevalent and generally the most powerful and durable. This result is doubtless to its attributed principally to the fact that in its absolute form, form it is the most simple and easily constructed. And hence, as government is indispensable, communities having too little intelligence to form or preserve the others naturally fall into this.

It may also in part be attributed to another case already alluded to that in its origin, in its organism and character, it is much more closely assimilated than either of the other two to military power, on which all absolute governments depend for support. And hence, also, also, the tendency of the others of constitutional governments which have been so badly constructed or become so disorganized as to require force to support them to pass into military despotism, that is, into monarchy in its most absolute and simple form. And hence, again, the fact that revolutions and absolute monarchies end, almost invariably, in a change of dynasty, and not of the forms of the government, as is almost universally the case in the other systems. But there are,

of these, other causes of the higher character which contribute much to make monarchies the most prevalent and usually the most durable governments. Among them, the leading one is they are the most susceptible to improvement. That is, they can be more easily and readily modified so as to prevent, to a limited extent, oppression and abusive power without assuming the constitutional form in a strict sense. It slides almost naturally into one of the most important modifications. I refer to hereditary dissent. When this becomes well-defined and firmly established the community or kingdom comes to be regarded

by the sovereign as the hereditary possession of his family, a circumstance which tends strongly to identify his interests with those of his subjects and thereby to mitigate the rigor of the government. It gives, besides, great additional security to his person and

prevents in the same degree not only the suspicion and hostile feelings, incidents insecurity, but invites all those kindly feelings which naturally spring up on both sides, between those whose interests are identified when there is nothing to prevent it. And hence, the strong feelings of paternity on the side of the sovereign and of loyalty on that of his subjects, which are often exhibited in such governments. There is another improvement of which it is readily susceptible,

nearly allied to the proceeding. The hereditary principle not unfrequently extends to other families, especially to those of the distinguished chieftains by whose aid the monarchy was established when it originates in conquest. When this is the case, and a powerful body of hereditary nobles surround the sovereign, they oppose a strong resistance to his authority and heed of theirs, tending to the advantage and security of the people. Even when they do not succeed in obtaining a participation in the powers of the government, they usually acquire a sufficient way to be felt and respected. From this state of things, such governments usually, in time, settle down on some fixed rules of action which the sovereign is compelled to respect, and by which,

increased protection and security are required by all. It was thus the enlightened monarchies of Europe were formed, it was thus that the enlightened monarchies of Europe were formed, under which the people of that portion of the globe have made such great advances in power, intelligence, and in civilization. Well, it's nice of them to say that. So these may be added the greater capacity, which governments of the monarchical form have exhibited,

to hold under subjugation a large extent of territory in a numerous population, and which has made them more powerful than others of a different form, to the extent that these constitute an element of power. All these causes combined have given such great and decisive advantages as to enable them, heretofore, to absorb, in the progress of events, the few governments which have, from time to time, assume different forms, not accepting even the mighty Roman Republic, which, after attaining the highest point of power, passed seemingly under the operation of irresistible causes into a military despotism. I say herefore, for it remains to be seen whether

they will continue to retain their advantages in these respects over the others under the great and growing influence of public opinion and the new and imposing form which popular government has assumed with us. These have already affected great changes and will probably affect still greater, adverse to the monarchical form, but as yet, these changes have tended rather to, rather to the absolute than to the constitutional form of popular governments for reasons which have been explained. If this tendency should continue permanently in the same direction, the monarchical form must still retain its advantages and continue to be the most prevalent. Should this be the case, the alternative will be between monarchy and popular government in the form of the numerical majority or absolute democracy, which, as has been shown, is not only the most fugitive of all the forms, but has, has the strongest tendency of all others to the monarchical.

If on the other, if on the contrary, this tendency, or the change is referred to, should incline to the constitutional form of government of popular power, and a proper organism comes to be regarded as not less indispensable than the right of suffrage to the establishment of such governments, in such case that is not improbable that in the progress of events, the monarchical will cease to be the prevalent form of government. Whether they take this direction, at least for a long time, will depend on the success of our government

and a correct understanding of the principles of which it is constructed. Or technology can create great weapons in which you can go to war and you can wipe out monarchies. Through banking, too, through... Let's face it. To comprehend more fully the force and bearing of public opinion and to form a just estimate of the changes to which aided by the press, it will probably lead politically and socially.

It will be necessary to consider it in connection with the causes that have given it and influence so great as to entitle it to be regarded as a new political element. They will, upon an investigation, be found in the many discoveries and inventions made in the last few centuries. Among the most prominent of those are an earlier date of those of those of an earlier date stand the practical application of magnetic powers to the purposes of navigation by the invention of the mariner's compass, the discovery of the mode of making gunpowder, and its applications to the art of war, and the inventions of the art of printing. Among the most recent

are the numerous chemical and mechanical discoveries and inventions, and their applications to the various arts of production, the application of steam to machinery of almost every description, especially to such as is designed to facilitate transportation and travel by land and water, and finally the invention of the magnetic telegraph. All these have led to important results, though the invention of the Mariners' Compass, through the invention of the Mariners' Compest, the globe has been circumnavigated and explored,

and all who inhabit it, with but few exceptions, brought within the sphere of an all-pervading commerce, which is daily diffusing over its surface, the light and blessings of civilization, though that of the art of printing, through that of the art of printing, the fruits of observation and reflection of discoveries and inventions,

with all the accumulated stores of previously acquired knowledge, are preserved and widely diffused. The application of gunpowder to the art of war has forever settled the long conflict for ascendancy between civilization and barbarism in favor of the former, and thereby guaranteed that

whatever knowledge is now accumulated or may hereafter be added, shall never again be lost. The numerous discoveries and inventions, chemical and mechanical, and the application of steam to machinery, have increased manyfold the production powers of labor and capital,

and have, thereby, greatly increased the number who may devote themselves to study an improvement, and the amount of means necessary for commercial exchanges, especially between the more and the less advanced and civilized portions of the globe, to the great advantage of both, but particularly of the latter.

The application of steam to the purposes of travel and transportation by land and water have vastly increased the facility, cheapness, and rapidity of both, diffusing with them information and intelligence almost as quickly and as freely as it is borne by the winds, while the electrical wires outstrip them in velocity, rivaling in rapidity, even thought itself. The joint effect of all this has been a great, increase in diffusion of knowledge, and with this, an impulse to progress in civilization heretofore unexampled in the history of the world, accompanied by a mental energy and activity unprecedented.

To all these causes, public opinion in its organ, the press, oh their origin and great influence. Already they have attained a force in the more civilized portions of the globe, sufficient to be felt by all governments, even the most absolute and despotic, but as great as they now are, they have as yet attained nothing like their maximum force. It is probable that not one of the causes, which have contributed to the formation and influence, has yet produced its full effect, while several of the most powerful have just begun to operate, and many others, probably of equal or even greater force, yet remain to be brought to light. it's good looking ahead by him when the causes now in operation have produced their full effect and inventions and discoveries shall have been exhausted if that may ever be they will give a force to public opinion and cause changes political and social difficult to be anticipated what will be their final

bearing time can only decide with any certainty that they will however greatly improve the condition of man ultimately it would be impious to doubt out. It would be to suppose that the all-wise and beneficent, beneficent creator being, the creator of all, had so constituted man as that the employment of the high intellectual faculties with which he has been pleased to endow him in order that he may develop the laws that control the great agents of the material world and make them subservient to his use would prove to him the cause of permanent evil and not of permanent good. If then, such a supposition be admissible,

they must, in their orderly and full development, end in his permanent good. But this cannot be, unless the ultimate effect of their action politically shall be to give a sentency to that form of government best calculated to fulfill the ends for which government is ordained. For so completely does the well-being of our race depend on good government that it is hardly possible

any chance. It is hardly possible any change. The ultimate effect of which should be otherwise could prove to be a permanent good. It is, however, not improbable, that many and great, but temporary evils will follow the changes that have affected and are destined to effect. It seems to be a law in the political, as well as in the material world, that great changes cannot be made, except very gradually, without convulsions and revolutions, to be followed by calamities, in the beginning, however beneficial they may prove to be in the end. The first effect of such changes on long-established governments will be to unsettle the opinions and principles in which they originated and which have guided their policy.

Before those which the changes are calculated to form and establish are fairly developed and understood. The interval between the decay of the old and the formation of the establishment of the new constitutes a period of transition, which must always. necessarily be one of uncertainty, confusion, error, and wild and fierce fanaticism. I'm going to leave it right there. I can't think of a more perfect place to stop and finish the next time. So it's page 90. Governments. All right. I hope you're getting a lot out of this. I think that Calhoun is indispensable to understand where a political mind was at at the time and what he saw the future. And it's really easy to see that he knew that all this was going to fall apart, that it wasn't going to work the way he wanted it to work.

As much as he would want it to, it wasn't going to turn out the way he wanted. So that's it. I'm not going to tack an ad on to the front of this. So if you go to Freemam BeyondtheWall.com forward slash support, you can support the show. This episode had ads in it. You can avoid the ads and get the show early before it's released to the public. Freemand Beyond the Wall.com forward slash support. You can do it right there through my website by subscribing.

You can subscribe through Substack. You can subscribe through Patreon. on Subscribe Star, and I started a Gumroad. Now you got a couple subscribers over there. So if you go to Gum Road, they take care of our people, and they make sure that we don't experience any censorship. And yeah, we'll be back for the finish, the final episode, which would be part five of Calhoun's disposition on government.

And then I've already decided what the next one's going to be, and it's going to be long. There's, well, it's not going to be as long as you. could be. Some books that I would love to read, but would take 20 to 30 episodes. But this one could take possibly a couple more than race war in high school did. So that's it. See on the next, we'll see you for the final episode of John C. Calhoun's Dysquision on Government.