Thomas Jefferson and John Calhoun

Between the presidency of Thomas Jefferson and the political buzz generated by the South Carolina representative, John Calhoun, there was an increasing tension about the true position of the South. More specifically, the whole of the American South was seen in opposition to the values Northerners touted, the most prominent of which were slavery and political autonomy. While many Southerners, John Calhoun in particular, were quick to defend slavery, the invading Northern sentiments were becoming impossible to ignore, despite the fact that so many politicians like Calhoun were anxious to defend it—for economic reasons in particular. The steady buildup to the War of 1812 and new abolitionist movements created an atmosphere of further political division between the North and South and the question became, of course, who was right? 

When one considers who a better representative of the American South would be—Thomas Jefferson or John Calhoun, it’s nearly impossible not to get mired in the simple fact that slavery is wrong and the South was wrong for being the most supportive of it. Modern sentiment must not invade one’s perspective and although this paper will argue that Calhoun was a better representative of the South, this is not a statement based on these contemporary historical perspectives that the whole of the South was anti-abolitionist. Instead of claiming that the ideas of Calhoun are distinctly “Southern” because of these associations, the argument will be posed that Calhoun was “caught in the middle” of the North and the South, that although he strongly supported slavery, this is not enough to deem him worthy as a representative—rather, his ideas that cross the boundaries between the two regions should be the focus.