Calhoun Conservatism Raises Its Ugly Head

by: Mike Lux

Fri Sep 11, 2009 at 12:15


One of the people I spent the most time discussing in my book on the history of the American political debate, The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came To Be, was a man named John C. Calhoun. I went so far as to call him the founder of modern conservatism, and the events of this year, including Joe Wilson's offensive outburst on the floor of Congress, Wednesday night, have added strong evidence to my argument.

Although discussions about the relative power of the states and the federal government had been around since the days of the Articles of Confederation in the 1780s, Calhoun was the South Carolina politician who fused a particularly extreme view of states' rights with a patriarchal and violent conservatism. Calhoun argued that states could come and go into and out of the Union, whenever they wanted to; that they could secede from the Union at any time and for any reason; and that even if they stayed in the Union they could nullify any law they wanted, again at any time and for any reason. He was also violently opposed to the idea of democracy itself, say that they growing population of the North had no power whatsoever over slavery or any other thing the southern states chose to do, and in fact believed that the Bill or Rights only applied to what the federal government couldn't do-that the states were free to eliminate freedom of speech and religion and other civil liberties. (In fact, most southern states had done exactly that by the time of the Civil War.)

Calhoun was ready to start a Civil War in 1832 when he and Andrew Jackson disagreed over a policy that would hurt Calhoun's beloved plantation economy. He resigned as Jackson's Vice President, and encouraged the state to secede and raise an army right then and there. It was a protégé of Calhoun who beat abolitionist Charles Sumner almost to death with a cane on the floor of the Senate in 1856, and protégés of Calhoun who led South Carolina to be the first state to secede from the Union in 1861 after Lincoln's election, and be the first state to fire on Union soldiers at Ft. Sumter. Calhoun's states' rights theories were used to justify Jim Crow in the South and oppose integration after the Civil War all the way into the 1960s. Today we are seeing Calhoun Conservatism spreading throughout the Republican party and the right wing movement. Joe Wilson's thuggishness on Wednesday night and the conservative movement's embrace of his action yesterday are just the latest examples. Some highlights from the last year:

• John McCain picks a Vice Presidential candidate who husband was a seven year member of a far right secessionist party with ties to the racist neo-confederacy movement. Palin had gone to at least one of the party's conventions herself, and had done a warm welcoming video for their most recent convention, telling them she shared their values.

• Texas Governor Rick Perry suggested that Texas might have to consider seceding from the United States.

• One of the Congressional sponsors of a right wing rally on the Capitol steps, the "9/12 movement," which will be attended by Wilson and several other Republican members of Congress, is an organization advocating secession and the violent overthrow the United States. See this remarkable clip of Rachel Maddow talking about this group.

• Just yesterday, Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, a likely Republican presidential candidate, said he would consider asserting "state sovereignty" to keep Minnesota from participating in a health reform passed by Congress. (State sovereignty is what Calhoun used to call the right for state to nullify and generally ignore Federal laws.)

Maybe you thought the victory of the Union at Appomattox settled these kinds of issues for good. Or the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Or the defeat of Jim Crow in the South in the 1960s. Not so much. Conservative Republicans, birthers, militiamen toting their assault weapons to town halls, Congressmen screaming insults at the top their lungs during a Presidential speech-they are united in wanting to refight the battles of the Civil War all over again, perhaps literally. These people are extremist to the core, and progressives have had to defeat their crazy political theories again and again in American history. But, hey, I guess we can be thankful for some things-at least Joe Wilson didn't try to cane anybody Wednesday night.

Mike Lux :: Calhoun Conservatism Raises Its Ugly Head

Tags: , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Hmm, somewhat OT, but wasn't Calhoun mentioned in "profiles in courage"? (0.00 / 0)
I don't have the book at hand now. Could someone look this up?

No (4.00 / 1)
Wikipedia lists the politicos profiled in Kennedy's book.  

The Civil War and pre-Civil War figures mentioned in the book were mostly about saving the Union, not ripping it apart but they were not all what you'd call progressives by any means.

Here is the full list:

# John Quincy Adams a Senator (1803-1808) (later a congressman and president) from Massachusetts, for breaking away from the Federalist Party.
# Daniel Webster also from Massachusetts, for speaking in favor of the Compromise of 1850.
# Thomas Hart Benton from Missouri, for staying in the Democratic Party despite his opposition to the extension of slavery in the territories.
# Sam Houston from Texas, for speaking against the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. Sam Houston was also profiled for opposing Texas' secession from the Union, for which he was deposed from the office of Governor.
# Edmund G. Ross from Kansas, for voting for acquittal in the Andrew Johnson impeachment trial. As a result of Ross's vote, along with those of six other Republicans, Johnson's presidency was saved, and the stature of the office was preserved.
# Lucius Lamar from Mississippi, for eulogizing Charles Sumner on the Senate Floor and other efforts to mend ties between the North and South during Reconstruction, and for his principled opposition to the Bland-Allison Act to permit free coinage of silver.
# George Norris from Nebraska, for opposing Joseph Gurney Cannon's autocratic power as Speaker of the House, for speaking out against arming U.S. merchant ships during the United States' neutral period in World War I, and for supporting the Presidential Campaign of Democrat Al Smith.
# Robert A. Taft from Ohio, for criticizing the Nuremberg Trials for trying Nazi war criminals under what Taft considered ex post facto law


sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.

[ Parent ]
Thx, STiVo, but John Emerson already answered this downthread (0.00 / 0)
Calhoun was the powerful adversary of Daniel Webster during the fight about the compromise of 1850. So, he's in the book, but not as a "profile in courage".

However, thx for looking this up, and for posting the complete list! I really have to read this again. Those stories don't get old, and there's sure something to be learned from them.


[ Parent ]
Call the crackers' bluff (4.00 / 2)
Barney Frank or Al Franken or  someone else funny should write up a secession bill. Tennessee, the Carolinas. Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, and Louisiana would hardly be missed. Texas is a bit heftier, and they'd probably cuddle up to Saudi Arabia immediately, and probably Iran too. I doubt that Virginia and Florida would want to leave.

The banks would stay in the North, and most of the tax revenue. I suppose that both nations would be nuclear powers, but mutually assured destruction probably will deter the crazies. Probably.

Pawlenty's just hot air. He isn't running again, possibly  because he couldn't win, and won't be governor long. I'm not sure that he'd be a strong Presidential candidate in Minnesota either.



Don't underestimate Pawlenty (0.00 / 0)
His most recent moves are aimed squarely at upping his hard-core conservative cred in advance of a Presidential bid.  

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
Yeah, I know (0.00 / 0)
He had to ditch Minnesota to do that, though. I don't see Minnesotans buying the New Pawlenty.

[ Parent ]
Exactly! (0.00 / 0)
He had to play to the left (or what passes of it) to be Governor of MN and now he'll have to tack hard right to be viable as a GOP Presidential candidate.

I live in MN. I watched the guy operate. I think the GOP would be making a good choice (for them) in nominating Pawlenty - even as Romney's running mate - in 2012. Even if he ends up losing, he can write it off to the incumbency effect. If he can stay clean and keep his pants zipped up, we'll be seeing more of this guy on the national scene.  

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
It was Webster v. Calhoun in Profiles in Courage, featuring Webster (4.00 / 2)
Webster was the hero. Kennedy's judgment wasn't necessarily that great. Nobody came out of the slavery debate looking very good.  

Ah, thank you, John! I only remembered reading Calhouns name there. (0.00 / 0)
And you're right, I have always wondered about some of Kennedy's choices. Looks like he put courage above all other ethical values. A bit strange for a liberal, but maybe understandable for a Senator who has to deal with conservatives and Souterners to get bills passed...

[ Parent ]
Thomas Hart Benton vs Calhoun (4.00 / 1)
Another politician profiled was Benton, who despite being a slaveowner, opposed the expansion of slavery, leading to a loss of his seat and almost being shot by another Senator.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

[ Parent ]
Alaska (4.00 / 1)
The most ridiculous is a welfare queen like Palin, whose state is the first or second biggest beneficiary of federal money, whining about "welfare" and associating with secessionists. Like Alaska could last for a day once off the gravy train.

Red states in general, especially out West, have depended tremendously on federal largesse for their development. It's really amazing how the most aggressive beggars are also the biggest shriekers about "welfare" and "socialism".

Yeah, I'd let some states go, happily, but not with any federal property for which they didn't pay their full share.

http://attempter.wordpress.com


Alaska could last better than, say, Louisisana! (0.00 / 0)
Excuse me pls, Russ, but are you aware that Alsakans pay NO INCONE TAX but RECEIVE A THOUSAND DOLLARS or more very single year from their state? There is sinply no reason at all why the Feds should support that oil rich state. About time to stop this nonsense. If Alaskans want services from their government, they should pay taxes like everybody else. Period.

[ Parent ]
Good job (4.00 / 5)
It's important that people understand the social and political history behind notions of "states rights" that are deployed to destroy the ability of the federal government to provide public services and legal protections that some states would rather didn't exist.

This is a completely different question from states that actually provide these services and protections more fully than the federal government, as the willingness of these hypocrites to eviscerate state-level health care regulations demonstrates.  


I can't wait for the video (4.00 / 1)
of Gov. Pawlenty standing at the entrance to the Mayo Clinic's ER, steadfastly barring entrance to any patients enrolled in the Public Option.

For-profit insurance today, for-profit insurance tomorrow, for-profit insurance forever!


lux is a lot like david brooks .... (0.00 / 1)
... he is willing to concede on the points against their side that are too ludicrous to argue for.  These folks do that to maintain their credibility which they then try to later cash in to most effectively carry the water for their pals, which in lux's case is the dlc dc dems.

Then when they get called out on it, you get the favorite bullshit line from these types of propagandists:  "I get it from both sides becoz I hammer on obama too."  Meanwhile any "hammering" of obama is full of "yeah buts".

Another tactic these types use is that they spout out the diversionary "aren't those reps just terrible" bullshit just as their party sells out the american people.  We are getting it today from him as his dc dem pals "progress" towards selling us out on what 75% of the public wants:  a public option.

lux worked for bill clinton ... I'd be ashamed to admit that ... and has been fully coopted by the dlc dem establishment.  He is part of the problem ... to call him a progressive is a real affront to progressiveness becoz he is essentially willing to settle for anything that comes from the dlc dem establishment and put his happy face on it.  

If obama passes a bill with triggers, lux will be waxing about the historical significance of a universal health care bill, weeping about how happy a dead ted kennedy is right now, lecturing us not to allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good, and then addressing the progressives' concerns with the triggers ... that the health insurance companies will essentially write into the bill ... with the old "we have to hold them to it" bullshit.  lux is not about holding them to anything, but he is all about holding them in power.  what's good for his dlc dem friends is good for him and that's what he's primarily about.  Maybe he wasn't like that at one time, but that's what he is now IMO.  

If you haven't read lux's recent essay on "The Handoff", don't ... it'll make you throw up.  He even manages to segue it into a plug for his book.

here's lux at his "yeah but" best as he pimps for hillary clinton for the '08 primaries (note how he can empathize with all the concerns about hillary ... he has them too, just like you! ... but it all comes down to the fact that him and hillary are buds):

"Like a lot of you, I was disappointed by her vote five years ago and her reluctance until recently to push for an end to the war; I've never been a fan of her or her husband's positions on trade, and I wish she was more of a populist on economics in general. I worry about some of the people advising her and some of the people giving/raising her money; and I am concerned, for her own sake and the country's, that she has a tendency toward being cautious when what this country needs is bold solutions.

But you know what? I'll fess up: I really like her. I tend to bond with people, to see what is best in them, and my years working with Hillary in the '92 campaign and at the White House made me a very big fan. I know I'll get plenty of shit for saying that, but before you let loose, let me make my case.

One thing I really respect about her is that she actually cares about getting the details of legislation right. She always wanted to know how provisions in bills would affect specific people she had met on the campaign trail or knew from Arkansas or other places. For me, having someone in her position care that much about the problems of specific people is an incredible thing."
http://www.democraticundergrou...

Z  


Here's some other hits from lux's article endorsing hillary ... (0.00 / 0)
http://openleft.com/showDiary....

centrist is best ...

"I have also believed that strong progressives need to engage with elected Democrats who are more centrist and not just work for the strongest lefties in any given race."

hillary has done more as an elected official to build progressive infrastructure than anybody except maybe for now corporate lobbyist and all-time senate corporate whore tom daschle! ...

"The other thing I should say to the OpenLeft.com community, since we are so focused on building progressive infrastructure, is that she has done more than any other elected official I know about, with the possible exception of Sen. Daschle who has also been a stalwart in this arena, in terms of helping to build progressive infrastructure."

Z

 


[ Parent ]
hillary and daschle do not build progressive infrastructure ... (0.00 / 0)
... they build cages for progressives.

Z


[ Parent ]
Blahblahblah (0.00 / 0)
All your criticism boils down to that you don't like centrists. Fine, but somewhat lame. That Lux worked for a Dem president (who happened to be Bill Clinton) and later stomped for Hillary (who you even like) is hardly evidence enough for proving Mike is to the extreme right of the party.

Apart from that, this stuff is very close to an ad hominem attack. What's that gut to do with the story at hand? And do you think this useless infighting is helpful for getting progressive health care reform done? More reasonable criticism, pls, and less fingerpointing. This isn't du or dkos here.


[ Parent ]
Blahblahblah back (0.00 / 0)
That's about the only response your off-target drivel deserves.

I don't like hillary clinton.

Z


[ Parent ]
And I don't like Zorro. (0.00 / 0)
Ridiculous macho story, imho. However, what's that got to do with anything?`Our discussions here are about facts and strategy, not so much about emotions. And rightly so, since arguments like "I don't like her pantsuits" or such are really ridiculous in a political debate.

[ Parent ]
Wars do not settle (0.00 / 0)
questions of political theory.

Maybe you thought the victory of the Union at Appomattox settled these kinds of issues for good.

You obviously don't think if the South won the Civil War, it would have vindicated their position, so how can the North winning the war vindicate the Northern position?

The South seceded in the name of violating human rights - it would have been wrong if completely and explicitly authorized by the Constitution.  The question that was settled by the 14th Amendment is the relevant one - former slaves were now citizens, and all persons in the US were entitled to equal rights, and government was duty bound to protect all persons.  The use of bizarre constitutional claims selectively to deny government powers accepted in other arenas when those powers might be used to provide social and economic security to all is the real issue here.

That said, I'm looking forward to seeing you and David on Rachel tonight.

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox