The Unz Review - Mobile

The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection

A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Ilana Mercer Archive
Has Trump Awakened John C. Calhoun's Concurrent Majority?

Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information

John C. Calhoun, by George Peter Alexander Healy
John C. Calhoun, by George Peter Alexander Healy

In his August 20 rally in Fredericksburg, Va., Donald Trump continued to say things surprisingly basic. Or, “insubstantial,” if you believe the presstitutes (with apologies to prostitutes, who do an honest day’s work and whom I respect). I paraphrase:

We are going to take our country back.

It is going to be a new day in America. It is going to be a great day in America.

Government will listen to the people again. The voters, not the special interests, will be in charge. Ours will be a government of, by, and for the people.

Our economy will grow. Jobs will come back. New factories will stretch all across the nation.

Families will be safe and secure. Crime will go down. Law and order will be restored to these United States of America.

In Charlotte, NC, on August 18, Trump spoke of embracing weeping parents whose kids were killed by illegal immigrants. Immigration laws will be enforced, he promised. Make every city a Sanctuary City for Americans, not their killers (OK, the last line is mine).

We’re going to reject globalism and put America first. The era of nation building is over.

And again: It’s going to be America first from now on; we’re going to put country first, our American workers first, our people first. Trade deals will protect the American worker again, roared Trump.

It’s hard to keep up with all the impassioned addresses the high-energy Mr. Trump has given in the last week. However, his law-and-order speech in Charlotte was especially phenomenal, because so very basic:

One thing I’ll promise you, I will always tell you the truth. I will speak on behalf of the voiceless, return the government to the people; give the people their voice back. I will never let you down.

Let our kids be Dreamers too, suggested Trump. He was alluding to the affectionate legislation and terminology developed by the New York-Washington axis of power for its young, illegal-alien protégés.

In Trump you have a political outsider, despised by the media-congressional-donor complex, talking to the multitudes living in Rome’s provinces and groaning under the burden of its policies. To this voiceless Common American is Trump vowing to give a voice.

Also in Charlotte, Trump said he’d never put special interests before American interests, pointing out that none controlled him. “My only interest is the American people.”

And from West Bend, Wisconsin, where Trump materialized on August 16, he declared: “I’m with you, the American People. We’ll once again be a country of law-and-order and unparalleled successes. I’m with you; I’ll fight for you; I’ll win for you.”

The American scheme of government was meant to be pretty basic—more about what government was to refrain from doing to its people than what it was to do to and for them. America’s Silent Majority is hankering for pitifully fundamental things from a government that has forgotten this.

As I argue in “The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Reconstructed,” Trump is no “visionary vis-à-vis government.” If anything, “he is practical and pragmatic. He wants a fix for Americans, not a fantasy.”

In “The Trump Revolution,” I attempted to place this hankering for things simple and universal within a uniquely American framework. This led me to posit a thesis invoking a concept developed by one of America’s greatest political thinkers, in the estimation of historian Clyde N. Wilson. The concept is that of the concurrent majority. The thinker is John C. Calhoun.

In A Disquisition on Government, published in 1851, Calhoun developed the profound idea of “two different modes in which the sense of the community may be taken.” The one “regards numbers only.” The other invokes an entirely different quality or dimension, over and above the “numbers.”

“The former of these,” Calhoun termed “the numerical or absolute majority”; the latter “the concurrent or constitutional majority.” The numerical majority “regards numbers only, and considers the whole community as a unit, having but one common interest throughout.” Conversely, the constitutional majority considers “the community as made up of different and conflicting interests, as far as the action of the government is concerned.”

“So great is the difference, politically speaking, between the two majorities,” cautioned Calhoun, “that they cannot be confounded, without leading to great and fatal errors.”

The numerical majority Calhoun associated with the “tendency to oppression and abuse of power.” He recommended that “the numerical majority … be [but] one of the elements of a constitutional democracy,” but advised that “to make it the sole element, in order to perfect the constitution and make the government more popular, is one of the greatest and most fatal of political errors.”

As early as 1851, the prescient Calhoun was able to categorically state: “[T]he numerical majority will divide the community … into two great parties, which will be engaged in perpetual struggles to obtain the control of the government.” It was to the concurrent majority that Calhoun looked for unity and transcendence.

The concurrent majority, on the other hand, tends to unite the most opposite and conflicting interests, and to blend the whole in one common attachment to the country. … Each sees and feels that it can best promote its own prosperity by conciliating the goodwill, and promoting the prosperity of the others. And hence, there will be diffused throughout the whole community kind feelings between its different portions … instead of antipathy, a rivalry amongst them … Under the combined influence of these causes, the interests of each would be merged in the common interests of the whole; and thus, the community would become a unit, by becoming the common center of attachment of all its parts. And hence, instead of faction, strife, and struggle for party ascendency, there would be patriotism, nationality, harmony, and a struggle only for supremacy in promoting the common good of the whole.

Could Donald J. Trump be tapping into our country’s still-extant concurrent majority?

Could Trump be uniting the American Tower of Babble behind things true and shared? These are: Economic prosperity, national pride and unity, the pursuit of comity and fair commerce with the nations of the world, without compulsion to control them or save them from themselves, and a yen for recognizable neighborhoods. The last demands less Islam and immigration, and an end to the transformation of communities through centrally planned, mass immigration.

Given the disparate groups rooting for Donald Trump’s candidacy; it would appear that he may have awakened what John Calhoun called the concurrent majority.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: 2016 Election, Donald Trump, John Calhoun 

8 Comments to "Has Trump Awakened John C. Calhoun's Concurrent Majority?"

Commenters to Ignore Follow
Endorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Either he’s tapping into the majority who only grudgingly kowtowed to the leftist lunacy of the last 50 years, or his campaign is signaling that the “bribe everyone, all the time, with debt-based counterfeit coins” ethic that animated the last 50 years has reached apogee.

    Let’s face it. For 50 years Congress and the Fed colluded to vastly inflate the dollar money supply via issuing debt. The 1970′s witnessed huge CPI inflation, but when bonds bottomed in 1980 or so, and rates began an historic decline, creating wealth simply by issuing debt turned into a full time occupation.

    The inflation had to be hidden, however, and it was done in two ways: Consumer goods production was relocated to 3rd world countries to produce them far more cheaply (exporting the jobs that activity required) and vast numbers of people were allowed into the USA to compete for the dwindling number of jobs, keeping wages utterly stagnant.

    As long as inflation was invisible, an OCEAN of bonds was filled, and that OCEAN represented vast wealth. The “wealth effect” of this was a seemingly virtuous rise in asset prices. Everyone appeared to get richer, and none more so than the already wealthy. They got filthy, stinking rich and engaged in the largest game of “Buy the Government” ever.

    The Trump Phenomenon seems to be what happens when Americans realize they’re being crushed between fewer decent jobs and vast numbers of invaders competing for them.

    Truly, globalism is married to monetary madness of the Full-Fiat period. Never has there been such an elaborate facade on what is actually rot and gangrene and a practically hollow US economy.

    Thank Heaven the Bureau of Labor Statistics is around to do the embalming and render the US economy a “good looking corpse.”

    A Trump presidency is unlikely to do much to ameliorate the denouement of this, but anything would be better than 4 more years (or whatever she’d get before impeachment) of what already is a period of sclerosis and senility.

    • Agree: John Jeremiah Smith
    • Replies:
    Reply More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Even if this was so, it would not work with a leftist party hellbent on highlighting victimhood and thus dividing the country. Their vision of unity demands:

    1. The submission of dominant and majority demographics
    2. The belief that all demographics should be equals

    Which is to say their idea of unity doesn’t exist, and more importantly, should not be allowed to exist.

    In order for the “We’re all Americans!” thing to work, there would need to be some kind of media muzzle, preferably run by a nationalist government. Not gonna happen anytime soon.

    • Replies:
  3. We have to start somewhere. I choose to start with Trump, and you know it will NEVER happen with Clinton.

  4. A kick-ass comment. Kudos. However, Clinton would never be impeached, inasmuch as she is installed as a puppet for the forces with the money and influence to have her “elected”, along with the cohort of congressmen/scumbags necessary to complete the puppet agenda.

    If Trump wants to make a deal with the elites, it can be arranged for him to be President, but the agenda will be followed. The entire apparatus of government (and the courts) is corrupt. Until, when, and if there is revolution, all proceeds from productivity (such that exists) will go to the elites. It’s a well-known cycle that occurs, and has occurred, in every human civilization that has ever existed.

  5. John Calhoun was full of it in 1851 (see: Civil War w/in decade) and Ilana Issacson is full of it now: WHAT “concurrent majority”?? No more than 4o% of an electorate which represents a minor fraction of the adult population of ‘Murka is going to vote for Trump (we’ll leave aside the fact that he’s a complete con-artist) on 8 November 2016. And that 40% will be 90% White. Fact is, it’s too late for the shrinking (and ideologically/geographically factured) White population to vote itself out of an open-borders Judeo-globalist Tikkun Olam deathtrap that’s already snapped shut. Absent dollarCollapse and Civil War/Race War, Whites in the ‘Kwa will by 2030 be a minority facing a hostile majority amalgam of Blacks/Mestizos/Muslims/Asians run by lethally hostile Jews; bantustan’d by 2060; and exterminated by 2090. Now, I am aware that, as a Jew, Issacson prefers bogus elections featuring bogus candidates like Trump conning dumbass Whites into participating in the System while the System destroys them: Civil War/Race War, when it happens, is likely to be extremely dangerous to both Universalist Tikkun Olam Jews and Zionist Particularists like herself. That’s probably why she camps out in Seattle, close to an easily crossable international border. We must all hope that, when the hardRight wins, it does not choose to annex Canada…though I fear Emperor Haxo IV will likely do so

  6. That’s probably why she camps out in Seattle, close to an easily crossable international border.

    What good is an easily crossable border with China?

    • Replies:
  7. Calhoun himself was a member of a racial minority in his own state, and liked it that way. When Africans were self-deporting, he demanded their return, to the detriment of whites.

    I would take anything he said about “majorities” with a grain of pepper.

  8. lots of good. If you’re a refuge-seeking Wandering Jew. Because (asiatic) Jews and (asiatic) Chinese (unlike Jews and Whites) have always gotten along fine. And, not coincidentally, the Zio-globalist structural model for the NewWorldOrder – Police State Socialism + Crony Capitalism – is precisely what obtains in China today.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

My Information

 Email Replies to my Comment

Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter

Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ilana Mercer Comments via RSS
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?