. . . . . entries for 4.12.05 . . . . .
And here is my John C. Calhoun reaction paper - FINISHED. (I am such a history nerd. SUCH. A history nerd. I love it. Ah me.)
Before I commence thoroughly ridiculous reactions to the John C. Calhoun chapter, I have a more general comment on the entirety of Hofstadter’s The American Political Tradition. It is an observation particularly well-suited to this chapter, titled, as it is, “John C. Calhoun: The Marx of the Master Class.” Due in part, I am sure, to when it was written, this book focuses quite a lot on concepts one could relate back to Marx. To me, this makes it both a frustrating and a fascinating read. I am of the personal opinion that stage theory and other methodical lenses seriously hinder the study of history, because one is always trying to put something into a box in which it does not necessarily fit. Since this book was written by one looking through that glass as a fact of life, it presents an interesting challenge to the reader: To figure out to oneself how fit the box is to hold its contents, based upon one’s own knowledge of both objects. Unfortunately, I am not as well-educated on the topics of John C. Calhoun or Karl Marx as I could be, and feel myself unfit, as of now, to evaluate the legitimacy of the point of view of Hofstadter’s book. Because of this, I can’t help but be a bit uneasy about reading it, and have a feeling that with every word I am being misled by the author into a mindset which his generation essentially created to enhance their own understanding of a different period of history.
Now, on to the somewhat bizarre part of my response. I must warn you before you read the bulk of this paper: It will, at least in part, come off as thoroughly incoherent, and that is because I feel so impossibly close to the subject at hand that I find it difficult, if not impossible, to get my thoughts quite in order. As the reader probably is not very familiar with me as a human being at this point in time, it may be difficult to quite follow my conclusions about Calhoun and my reasoning behind them. Suffice it to say that I know myself fairly well, and those who know me at a similar level will understand me when I say that I am genuinely concerned that I may be John C. Calhoun reincarnate.
Granted, I look nothing like Calhoun, am female, et cetera, et cetera, and granted, I have espied in different early American political figures certain similarities to myself; these others, however, have had only one or two traits in common with myself, whereas nearly the entirety of Calhoun’s personality pangs of a Jackson era, Y chromosome-bearing Erin Elizabeth Sherman. Jefferson, for example, once reminded me of myself because of his distaste for political parties, interpersonal conflict, and religion in government. In every other case, however, there is some quality - Jefferson’s unwillingness to involve himself in political reality, for example - which removes the thought of striking similarity from my mind.
As a disclaimer, of course, my political views aren’t much like Calhoun’s, but the similarity isn’t about the particulars caused by circumstance; it’s about personality. For example, I am not inclined to say that slave labor - or, I suppose, a modern near-parallel, such as outsourcing of factory jobs - is something that must be preserved as the basis for the freedom and equality among the white United States citizenry. I do, however, see what Calhoun must have seen: any attempt to slow or stop slavery would bring enormous political entanglements and the downfall of not only the planter class, but also of shipping interests. The replacement of slave labor with free labor, in an attempt to save the economic sphere, could result in revolution; the uprising would then come not from Africans (or, in the modern case, foreign laborers), which were easier to dismiss from the view of the white man (or the American civilian), but from their own people, which would threaten the integrity of the American experiment itself. The gross hypocrisy of slavery or of cheap foreign labor, while present and terrible to think of, was, and is, basically unfixable, unless Americans and the West at large were suddenly to become willing to give up their exorbitant lifestyle. Calhoun, like myself, seemed to value the preservation of a republic above all else; every political action on his part, including his advocacy of slavery, was motivated by respect for America and the fragile dream of freedom and prosperity which it attempted to foster. I, unlike Calhoun, would like to think there’s still a way to escape the hideous little predicament of class division, but that is probably due more to naïveté and youth than an actual difference of opinion. May I cherish this naïveté until I die; I am not sure what I would do without it.
Calhoun, too, had a certain idealism about him which was never entirely quashed by politics. This similarity is more an object of hope for me than one of actuality, as I am not sure how anyone in the modern world can enter into the body politick without having their innocence drawn and quartered at the door. Nevertheless, I hope I will become like Calhoun in one respect, in his absolute confusion when it came to a common principle on Capitol Hill: A respectable politician stands by his man first, his ideals later - if at all. I cannot understand why anyone would remain loyal to someone who abandoned their ideals and beliefs in favor of personal success, especially monetary success, which Calhoun and I agree is basically unimportant as compared to the acquisition of knowledge and, most notably, the victory -- temporary as it may be, and all the more precious for its transience -- against “evil.”
Calhoun’s frustration with the apparently random cruelty of human affairs and the senseless sensitivities of the individuals caught up in them is one I identify with strongly. When Hofstadter wrote, after a reference to the man of stone’s perplexedness with regard to his wife’s sadness following the death of their child, “Here surely is a man who lived by abstractions; it is amazing, and a little pathetic, that he sought to make his business the management of human affairs,” I could not have been more wounded if Hofstadter were writing about me by name.
I suppose the statement wouldn’t have stung so if it hadn’t possessed, perhaps, a kernel of truth. I must be crazy to want to work, in this life, in the line of human management; I understand humans so little. Again, however, I am perversely satisfied about the whole matter, and refuse to change. That same nervous feeling of confidence borne of destiny which propelled John C. Calhoun propels me as well, and will propel me for some time to come.
come home?
.:people:.
{ting}
she looks like the real thing
{mari}
out and about
[kelsey]
THIS IS AMERICA
{yianni}
stop being depressed
{alisa}
other
[shannon]
close and far
{frank}
islands where no islands should go
[cassie]
eating knowledge
{colin}
my dm
[emily]
shoulder to the wheel
[brian]
nostalgic for fantasy
[nicole]
industry insider
{elle}
angry enviro
[matt]
never heard of miyazaki
[pirate dan]
are you reading this?
[olga]
distracted
[messiah dan]
messiah/believer
{max}
approach focus
[natalie]
wait a minute
[susan]
solitude
{greg}
manbeargreg
.:past:.
April 2002
May 2002
June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002
November 2002
December 2002
January 2003
February 2003
March 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
November 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
June 2012
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
.:skin:.
turtles! turtles! by araglas
(heavily modified by yours truly)