ou li’e.rnCalhoun found a lack of restraint inrnarious places, but nowhere more than inrnthe demagogic st)’lc of politics popular inrnniid-19th-centur’Aiuerica, as polihciansrnencouraged Americans to sacrifice theirrnpersonal and communal interests to anrnabstract union and abstract rights. Calhounrndeplored the prospect of the UnitedrnStates becoming an undifferenriatedrnmass or a nation composed of millions ofrnself-contained individuals. Both extremes,rnhe thought, must be moderatedrnb’ popular rule.rnCheek explains Calhoim’s understandingrnof popular rule through an importantrninstance in then-Vice PresidentrnCalhoun’s career. Presiding over a bitterrnsenatorial contest involving John Randolphrnof Roanoke, Calhoun refused torncall Randolph to order during a speechrndeemed derogator of President JohnrnOuincv Adams. When adiuinistrationrnforces attacked Calhoun in the publicrnpress, he replied witli a series of newspaperrnarticles written under the pseudonvnirn”Onslow.” Calhoun argued that his posihonrnas president of the Senate did not in-rn()le an intrinsic power —onl’ thatrnwhich the Senate expresslv delegated.rnHis opponent, using the name “PatrickrnHenrv,” argued that a source of powerrnmust possess any and all means necessaryrnfor its self-preservation. Calhoun believedrnsuch reasoning denied the peoplernof their continuing possession of legitimaternpower. But when “Patrick Henrv”rnwrote that the people’s capacih,’ to electrnthe right person limited the abuse ot politicalrnpower, Calhoun responded thatrnwe must do more than change the officer;rnwe must reform the office.rnCalhoun chose not to place his faith inrnelecting the right man to office but inrnseeking a diffusion of pover to match therncultural and economic diversity of thernpeople. As Cheek points out, Calliounrnbelieved the sunwal of the federal regimerndepended upon the proper restraint of itsrnpowers. Each branch of governmentrnnuist assume responsibility for its ownrnprerogatives and not interfere with thosernof others. This rule applied in state-federalrnrelations as vell. A state should notrnassume its unic[ue interests were supremernand then use federal power to furtherrnthose interests at the expense of otherrnstates.rnCalhoim’s strateg-, which he believedrnthe .AjTierican political tradition endorsed,rnrecjuired die protection of minorifies so thatrntrue majoritv rule would not be thwartedrnb’ those building temporar’ coalitionsrnamong disaffected groups. It also includedrna recognition that homogenous majorihes,rnthe kind that make democraciesrnstable, coidd never materialize in a countryrnas diverse as the United States —exceptrnon the local level. Calhoun sharedrnthis belief with previous generahons, ineludingrnmany Antifederalists, who believedrnrepublican forms of governmentrncould not exist in die United States becausernnational majorities could neverrnform.rnhi some respect, Calhoun and PopularrnRule raises more questions than it answers.rnIf human beings are naturall- social,rnseeking to build social imits, howrncan political authorit)’ be prevented fromrnniigrahng too far from local control? IfrnCalhomi was correct, family creationrnnaturally leads to other forms of coniniunitvrnbuilding, which increase one’s obligations.rnIn turn, people seem unwillingrnto accept all of their duhes; instead, theyrnchoose the ones tliev wish to fulfill. Manyrnexercise their rcsponsibilitv’ to larger socialrninstitutions at the expense of localrnones.rnRadical localists and states’-rights advocatesrnchallenged the varied forces causingrnthe shift in responsibility, not the leastrnThe Rockford Institute PresentsrnAn International ConviviumrnToscanarnApril 2002rn]oin us as we explore how civilization was reinvented hy Italians living inrnthe free cities of Siena, Visa, Florence, Lucca, and Arezzo.rnJoin our discu.ssions of Petrarch and Dante, of the great painters of the Middle Ages and thernRenaissance, and of one of the most significant pohtical intellectuals the world has produced,rnMachiavelli, whose muscular defense of republican liberty helped inspire the men who laid thernfoundation of our own republic.rnGet to the heart of a great civilization and understand how small-town provincial peoples recreatedrnand fought for liberty—town by town and, sometimes, street by street. Lecture topics willrninclude Machiavelli, Petrarch, Dante, Saint Catherine of Siena, the brave Pisans who resistedrnFlorentine domination, and the gangster-banker Medici who devoted themselves to destroying liberty.rnA special bonus lecture will set the record straight on the Galileo controversy.rnAs always, you will enjo’ an abundance of good food and drink and the company of like-mindedrncitizens of Ghristendom.rnFor more details, contact Institute Executive Vice President ChristopherrnCheck at (815) 964-5811 or visit www.ChroniclesMagazine.org.rnNOVEMBER 2001/29rnrnrn