THE RIGHTS OF UNJUST MINORITIES James H. Read: Majority Rule versus Consensus: The Political Thought of John C. Calhoun. (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2009. Pp. xi, 276. $34.95.) (original) (raw)
Related papers
Political Philosophy of John C. Calhoun (Source texts)
Source texts covering Political Philosophy of John C. Calhoun. Introduction for editor for book as a whole and several chapters. Book was originally printed as bilingual - polish translation is available as separate file
John C. Calhoun on the Guarantee Clause
South Carolina Law Review, 1989
One of the most elusive provisions of the United States Constitution is the clause found in article IV, section 4, which guarantees each state a "Republican Form of Government." 1 In light of the many concepts associated with the notion of republicanism, this clause potentially could have become one of the most important in the Constitution.' Arguably, it is capable of reaching issues that courts in this century have tackled only under the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment. 3 In the nineteenth century, however, the Supreme Court gave the guarantee clause a restrictive reading from which it has never emerged. 4
2007
miliarizing myself with novel perspectives and receiving new impulses and I was not disappointed. I wish to thank all the people who, in one way or another, inspired me to conceive and complete this text which developed out of my dissertation. First of all, I owe thanks to David W. Noble of the University of Minnesota for familiarizing me with the work of J. G. A. Pocock, Sacvan Bercovitch as well as to John R. Howe of the University of Minnesota, who directed my attention to Calhoun's republicanism. I am particularly grateful to Bálint Rozsnyai for his invaluable comments on my work in progress, his criticism of an earlier version of the manuscript, his several important suggestions for improvement as well as for his patience and encouragement. Several short term grants and study trips helped me struggle my way through: a TEMPUS grant at the University of Hull, another offered by the John F. Kennedy-Institut at Freie Universitat, Berlin, yet another by USIS at Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo. Since I acquired most of the research material via interlibrary loan, Éva Ötvös and the late Zsófia Németh of the interlibrary loan division of the one-time József Attila University of Szeged's Central Library provided me with indispensable assistance. So did James Carlson, W. Kirk Wood, and Randy Hanson who were kind enough to provide me with pertinent materials. I also owe debts to Dwight Hoover, Paul Kantor as well as Zsolt Virágos, Ádám Anderle, and György Novák for their comments on different versions of my writing. For the same reason and much more, I am also grateful to Robert Hughes, a faithful friend and a great southerner. I also wish to thank those colleagues who helped me with their comments at conferences where I read parts of the work as well as colleagues at the Institute of English and American Studies of the University of Szeged, whose work inspired me in more ways than they would think. Last but not at all the least, I wish to convey my deepest thanks to Liz Driver, a keeneyed outsider to this subject, for reading and scrutinizing the manuscript in its entirety for language and style and giving me the benefit of her suggestions and evaluation. Needless to say, all the errors and oversights that remain are my own responsibility. I wish to express my gratitude to Rhetoric and Public Affairs and its publisher, Michigan State University Press for their kind permission to reprint parts of my article "John C. Calhoun's Republicanism Revisited" published in Rhetoric and Public Affairs Vol. 4, No. 3 (2001), appearing in a modified and extended version in Chapter 2 of this book.
Paul to Jeremiah: Calhoun’s Abandonment of Nationalism
2002
The name “John C. Calhoun” is associated with a state-centered reading of the American Constitution of 1788. However, for the first fifteen years of his political career, Calhoun stood in the front rank of nationalist politicians. Over the course of his career, Calhoun abandoned nationalism for an emphasis upon states’ rights, then ultimately became an advocate of Southern regionalism. This article will describe the series of events that launched John C. Calhoun down the path from apostle of nationalism to increasingly angry prophet (not to say advocate) of disunion.
John C. Calhoun and William G. Sumner: A Jeffersonian Study
2000
John C. Calhoun and William G. Sumner were famous for their well-organized works and thoughts on contemporary political issues concerned. These issues included the law of nature, natural rights, the origin of individual-state relationship, and relevant others, all of which had much to do with how Americans would proceed and develop with their political life, established an American-mind base, and dissolved in stereotype of the spirit of the country. Calhoun's and Sumner's doctrines, despite their differences, could be considered those reflected such thinking. For example, Calhoun and Sumner, based on the notion of limited government, insisted that the majority rule be curbed. The former advocated a concurrent democratic system, whereas the latter maintained a Social-Darwinist kind of individualism. Thomas Jefferson was the third President of the United States of America, whose political belief was believed to have set up and refreshed American political traditions, and whose...