liberty and equality are so intimately united that liberty cannot be perfect without perfect equality (282). Calhoun grants that this is true of equality before the law, but he goes further and makes equality a condition essential to liberty. This, I feel would help to destroy both the idea of liberty and progress because many people such as women and African-Americans were left out. Calhoun notes:the mainspring to progress is the desire of individuals to better their condition . . . [, and] the necessary effect of leaving all free to exert themselves to better their condition must be a corresponding inequality between those who may possess these qualities and advantages in a high degree and those who may be deficient in them. . . . But to impose such restrictions on them would be destructive of liberty, while to deprive them of the fruits of their exertions would be to destroy the desire of bettering their condition (282). Personally, I believe freedom and state of nature is purely supposed. In a society, it never did nor can exist, as it is inconsistent with the preservation and perpetuation of the race, simply for the fact that society and government needs rules. Calhoun notes that men, instead of being born free and equal, are born subject, not only to parental authority, but to the laws and institutions of the country where born and under whose protection they draw their first breath (283). In essence, I think is a two-pronged fallacy, because those who are protected by the freedom were white males with standing, while women, slaves and the poor were left out. The Disquisition of Government and his ideas of a concurrent majority, and numerical majority more than valid because it is the prime example, in my opinion on how a government would work best. It is important that the interests of the majority counteract the beliefs of the few. I think however, he misses the ball when he tries to mention the balance of liberty, rights and p...
