The only part that bothered me a bit was when he was talking about Jefferson. Perhaps you could argue that he didn't do enough about slavery, but not nothing. He pushed a law in the Virginia colony prior to the American Revolution to put an end to the institution there that was unilaterally batted down by Parliament and as president ended America's involvement in the Transatlantic Slave Trade in 1807 on the first day the Constitution permitted him to do so.

This was great, thanks for sharing !

Mitch, increase the volume on your audio..I have noticed this is an ongoing problem with your stream. But I do enjoy your interviews!

The basement grandpa doesn’t want to talk about.

The architect of the doctrine of nullification. He was indeed a vampire, that sucked the blood out of enslaved people.

@25:38 ish. The cornerstone speech is so fixated on it’s very strange. This seems to me to be something that the North latched on to in order to “prove” that the South was fighting for slavery. Why should the vice president get the last word on what it was all about? His superior, President Davis, was willing to give up slavery for foreign intervention in order to achieve independence. That should give people a clue as to the priorities of the confederacy.

The more I think about it Calhoun sounds like a good Irish name

I have yet to see a portrait of Calhoun in which he doesn't look deranged. Maybe mental illness was mistaken as holy enlightenment.

He used to play with himself.

ironic that Jeffersonian republicanism is best manifested in Vermont and Northern New England.

@32:30 the idea that Calhoun thought that secession was permissible but did not advocate for it is only contradictory to some people because they have this cognitive dissonance about secession wherein the founding fathers advocating for secession is good but on the other hand secession is illegal and wrong. They have an illogical fixation on Southern secession. I’m sure everyone can think of something that they think is permissible but should not be advocated except as a last resort. I think divorce is permissible but should only be pursued when all else has failed. Is that contradictory? Or is it just reasonable?

The interviewer keeps saying “succession” rather than “secession”. Is that a valid alternative pronunciation that I’m not aware of?

I think the exploitation is one of the finer points defenders of capitalism. Kind of miss. Because they believe exploitation means stuff, necessarily generated by themselves, or privately, by an individual person which never happens. If there was a segue into the capitalism that they were talking about then it would be this dispensation that involves mechanization, because mechanization discourages the use of human beings as being in efficient. I think that Eli’s Whitney and the use of the cotton gin is a good example of that.

Conservatives, looking at American history through "rose colored glasses?"🤔

i think that calhoun would have advocated a more gental slavery as an investment. its interesting because I long said that america would have been more comfortable with black people only occupying certain sectors in america as in labor and never thinkers.

Southern secession was legal. How do we know this? The states ratified the constitution in 1789. Three states Virginia, New York and Rhode Island put resumption clauses in their ratification documents. Abraham Lincoln gave a speech in Congress in 1848 stating secession was the right of all free people. The north considered secession five times in the early republic period. No one said it was illegal. The United States was and is a federal republic. The notes from the Philadelphia Convention, notes on state ratification, and "Federalist" papers show that America remained a federation when it left the Articles of Confederation and made a more perfect union. It was Joseph Story “Commentaries on the Constitution” who advanced that America was not a federation but a consolidated government despite the Framers words who wrote the document and primary documents contradicting his false assertion. Daniel Webster, and Lincoln would cling to Story’s single nation theory as a way of saying the union was indivisible. Remember that Webster was pushing for nullification during the War of 1812 and this contradicts his later Webster-Haynes speech. The north would not let the South leave the union because of the negative economic consequences of disunion. If the south left the union, it would have been a free trade zone which would have collapsed northern industry. Additionally, the south was providing over 75 percent of the revenue for the general government from the tariff which disproportionately impacted the south. You must not confuse the reasons for the south leaving the union with the causes of the war. Northern industrialist and commercial bankers wanted to use the general government to promote industry. Think crony capitalism. The problem with this is it was not constitutional. Though the southerners eventually capitulated on the railroad the rest of Henry Clay’s American System was contested by the south. The northern Congressmen thought if they could limit slavery in the territories, then new states would side with them on the American System. The Anti-Slavery movement of the north was a racist position as it prohibited slaves or free blacks in the western territory. It was for “free white labor only.” Lastly, John C Calhoun “Disquisition on Government” said the only way you could limit power and force the general government to follow the constitution was a concept called the “Concurrent Majority” which meant the states would have a veto over unconstitutional law. This would protect the minority form the majority which is how you protect liberty. This is why he is considered one of the greatest political thinkers of the 1800’s. In order to understand the 1800’s, you must set aside presentism. Wise men learn from history while ignorant men judge history. Plantation slavery was terrible but so was “Yankee wage save labor.” Men working in foundries died and lost limbs all the time for scant wages. Working in cotton mills exposed lungs to debris that caused medical conditions and death. Slavery is evil but slaves were fed, clothed, sheltered, provided medical care and taken care of in their old age. It was in this context that John C. Calhoun gives his slavery as a “Positive Good Speech.” The elite banking and industrial families who won the war are still in power today. They exported wage slavery all over the world yet leftist professors cling to slavery that died over a hundred years ago. Are these college professors side tracking Americans to protect these elites?

Excellent video. I was curious about how slavery was intellectually(?)defended. 🤔🇺🇸

In all fairness to Calhoun. 90% of Americans thought like him at the time on race. Calhoun was a brilliant scholar of the Constitution and his Constitutional views deserve consideration.