The danger in our system is that the general government, which represents the interests of the whole, may encroach on the states, which represent the peculiar and local interests, or that the latter may encroach on the former.
John C. CalhounRead
It is a remarkable fact in the political history of man that there is scarcely an instance of a free constitutional government which has been the work exclusively of foresight and wisdom. They have all been the result of a fortunate combination of circumstances.
Interpretation
Free governments often arise from a mix of luck and circumstances rather than just careful planning.
This quote by John C. Calhoun highlights the idea that the establishment of free constitutional governments is not solely due to foresight and wisdom of leaders or philosophers. Instead, it emphasizes that such governments tend to be the fortunate outcome of various coinciding events and conditions, suggesting that luck and timing play significant roles in political evolution.
In practice
In a discussion about the founding of democracies, this quote can illustrate the unpredictable nature of political development.
The danger in our system is that the general government, which represents the interests of the whole, may encroach on the states, which represent the peculiar and local interests, or that the latter may encroach on the former.
There is a tendency in all parties, when they have been for a long time in possession of power, to augment it.
I hold that there is a mysterious connection between the fate of this country and that of Mexico; so much so that her independence and capability of sustaining herself are almost as essential to our prosperity and the maintenance of our institutions as they are to hers.
The error is in the assumption that the General Government is a party to the constitutional compact. The States ... formed the compact, acting as sovereign and independent communities.
There is not an example on record of any free state holding a province of the same extent and population without disastrous consequences. The nations conquered and held as a province have, in time, retaliated by destroying the liberty of their conquerors through the corrupting effect of extended patronage and irresponsible power.
Stripped of all its covering, the naked question is, whether ours is a federal or consolidated government; a constitutional or absolute one; a government resting solidly on the basis of the sovereignty of the States, or on the unrestrained will of a majority; a form of government, as in all other unlimited ones, in which injustice, violence, and force must ultimately prevail.
Now you have people in Washington who have no interest in the country at all. They're interested in their companies, their corporations grabbing Caspian oil.
The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
Over the course of history, governments, political regimes, and leaders have done some stupid things despite all arguments to the contrary, at times even against their own self-interest.
I don't see any possibility of Britain and the U.S. allowing a sovereign independent Iraq; that's almost inconceivable.
There cannot be true democracy unless all citizens are able to participate fully in the lives of their country.
The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't have to waste your time voting.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.