tv Richard Brookhiser Give Me Liberty CSPAN November 24, 2019 8:00am-9:02am EST
third party candidates, americans are wise to that, and they know that often those are, that that -- we're not in a climate that's appropriate for a third party or other parties to become viable at this point. maybe down the line. but at this point right now in 2020, it would only be done for nefarious reasons. >> bradford kane, he's the author of this book, "pitchfork populism." thanks so much. >> thank you kindly. >> and now on c-span2's booktv, more television for serious readers. [inaudible conversations] [applause] >> so good evening, earn, and welcome to the -- everyone, and welcome to the new york
historical society. i'm thrilled to see all of you this evening in our beautiful robert h. smith auditorium. tonight's program, "give me liberty: a history of america's exceptional idea," is a part of our bernard and irene schwartz speakers series, and as always, i'd like to thank mr. schwartz for his great generosity which has enabled us to bring so many fine speakers to this stage. also want the thank all of our chairman's council members who are in attendance this evening and to thank you for your great support which enables us to do our work. tonight's program will last about an hour, and it will include a question and answer session. you should have receivedse a noe card and pencil as you entered the auditorium this afternoon, in the evening, and if not, my colleagues are a going up and dn the aisles with note cards and pencils. the note cards will be collected later on in the program with your questions. following the program, there will be a book signing in our ny
district store and copies of our speaker's books will be available for prime minister tonight -- for purchase. tonight we arelc thrilled to welcome richard brookhiser back to the new york historical society. he's a senior fellow at the national review institute, a senior editor at the national review and the author of numerous books including john marshall: the man who made the supreme court, and alexander hamilton: america. american, sorry. i got to know him when he was our historian, chief historian curator on the blockbuster show alexander hamilton: the man who made modern america, way back in 2004. he and we were way ahead of our time in the hamilton craze, but it caught up with us. [laughter] so richard brookhiser was awarded the national humanities medal by president george w. bush in 2008, and his newest book, "give me liberty: a
history of america's exceptional idea," was published just this week. congratulations. our moderator this morning is our own trustee, professor of political science at yale university. before joining yale's faculty, professor amar clerked for judge, now associate justice stephen breyer when he was a judge on the u.s. court of appeals for the first circuit. in 2017 president amar received the american b bar foundation's annual outstanding scholar award as well as the howard r. lemar award. he's the author of numerous books including his most recent, "the constitution today." we're grateful that professor amar is our very own, as i said, a trustee at new york historical. as always, before our speakers their conversation, i'd like to ask that you make sure that anything that makes a sound like a cell phone is switched off. and now please join me in welcoming ourff speakers this
evening. [applause] >> good evening. it's a great honor and personal pleasure, a treat, to be here with one of my heros, rick brookhiser. i've admired him ever since the first time i saw him, it was my very first week at yale college. i'd just turned 18 that week and listened to rick hold forth at the yale political union, and i've beenin following his words ever since. [laughter] and his latest is, as you've heard, this book, "give me liberty." it's a history of america's exceptional idea. and dedicated to the american people. a bigger, it's slender,
it has your trademark pith and wit and incisiveness, but it's also a a big book in a way because most history books don't try to take on such a broad sweep of time. talk a little bit about the choice, the choices that went to the basic framing of the project. >> right. i'm making an argument in this book and i'm saying that the characteristic of american nationalism is our concern with liberty. that's the thing that makes us not canada, not mexico, not whatever. and this has been going on a long time. it began before we were a country. it began in our colonial past. so in this book, i take 13 episodes, each of which produces a document of some kind. and the first one is 1619 in
jamestown, and the most recent one is 1987 in berlin when president reagan produces his tear down this wall speech. so that's not quite 400 years, but it's four centuries of concern with this concept of liberty, defining it, sometimes fighting for it, e -- annoyancing it. finish and, you know -- announcing it. ing three of the episodes are colonial. they are before our independence, before the declaration of independence. because this concern of ours goes back that far. you have to trace it back that far to begin to get a grasp on it. finish. >> now, you won't be surprised, i expect, to learn that there are 13 different episodes. you describe them as snapshots
in an album, a narrative album, over these 400 year, and we can't do all 13 probably in the time we have today. so since this is the new york historical society, we're going to focus on the new york aspects of your story. but why don't you just, before we focus in on that line, tell us what the 13 episodes are, if you can. it's a test. >> sure. >> can you do all 13. >> okay. the 13 are, the first is the minutes of the first meeting of the general assembly of jamestown colony in 1619. number two is the flushing -- [inaudible] 1657. number three is the trial and particularly the argument to the jury at the trial of john peeter or zanger in 1735. number four, the declaration of independence. number five is the constitution of the new york man you missions
society, that's 1785. number six is the constitution, 1787. number seven is the monroe doctrine which is 1823. number eight is the seneca falls declaration are of sentiments, 1848. next is the gettysburg address, 1863. next is the new colossus which is written for the pedestal of the statue of liberty, and i pair the two. the poem has to be seen along with the statue, but the poem was written in 1883. the next is the cross of gold speech, 1896. the penultimate one is the fireside chat on the arse that would of democracy, 1940. and the last, as i said, is the tear down this wall speech, berlin, 1987. >> that was well done. 13 out of 13 -- [laughter] [applause] so we're not going to talk about
1619 and jamestown, but we are going to talk about something that, i'll be honest with you, i had never even heard of before. you have to teach me about it, the flushing remonstrance. what the heck is that? >> well, this is when new york is still new netherland. it's still a dutch colony, and it is being governed by a man who turns out to be the last governor, peter stuyvesant. i live down 16th street and third avenue near stuyvesant park, and they have this splendid statue of peter stuyvesant. and it really captures the man's personality. he looks vigorous, he looks energetic. he has, of course, a wooden leg. he lost it in holland in the wars against spain, and he looks like you wouldn't want to cross this guy. i mean, he's very much, wants to be in charge of everything. and although he did a lot -- >> new yorkers can be like that.
>> well, you know, he kind of remindedded me a little of rudy giuliani. [laughter] somewhat somewhat crazy but also very effective. despite all the good he did for new netherland, he was a bigot. he was a dutch calvinist, his father had been a minister, and he wanted to impose that on his domain here in new netherland. he tried to throw out lutherans and jews at different points, but because there were lutheran jewish investors and directors in the dutch west indies company which employed him, he was told to back off of and leave them alone. then he decided to pick on quakers. there were no quakers in the company, so he had a free hand for a while. and quakers then were an extremely countercultural religion. they did not recognize rank.
they would not doff their hats. they used the same forms of address for everybody. they believed everyone had access to the inner light. and so this made them, this made them very we peculiar and threatening, certainly to peter stuyvesant. so they started a appearing in new netherland, and, you know, he handles them in various ways. he expels a couple of them, he almost whips to death another one. and then he decides, okay, we can't have any of them in here, we're just not going to let them in at all. and -- any ship that comes in with them, find, we're going to send it back. anyone here who harbors one in his house, that will be a crime. you cannot let a quaker in your house. he promulgates this. and then 30 men in flushing which then as now is the same
place it is now, and that was part of his domain, they sent him a remonstrance, a public letter, and they tell him we cannot obey this order of yours. and they say it's for religious reasons. we would do unto other men as we would have other men do unto us, and this is the law of church and state. this is what god and the prophets tell us to do. and they send this letter to him. it's a remarkable stand for freedom of conscience. and what moves me most about this -- you can find this online -- six of them couldn't sign their names. they didn't know how to spell their own names, so they made marks. but they laid down a marker. you know, they were standing up to this guy. and he leanedded on them. leaned on them. he had them a arrested, he brought in the guy who was the actual scribe of the document, a man named edward hurt.
the dutch kept very good records, so we have the record of his interrogation of edward hart. and, you know, it's like who told you to write this? no one told me to write this. well, how did you come to write it? i was just listening to the sentiments of the people. where did they edges press their sentiments? concern express -- no place in particular. where did you write this? well, it was so on -- i mean, it really, it is an interrogation. no beating up of him, no torture, but it is really an interrogation. and he made them all crack. finish he did make them all crack. but quakers continued to come in dedpiens of his order -- defiance of his order. he decided to send one to amsterdam to be tried. you know, he wasn't goinged to do it here, he was going to send them across the ocean. and then finally his bosses, ooh even though there were no quakers among them, decided lay off these people too. they said to him we don't like quakers any more than you do,
but we want population. so if they're willing to come in, fibro, let them -- fine, let them come in x. he finally does back off. >> so speaking of thin-skinned people running new york -- [laughter] you mentioned rudy giuliani, the next one is the trial of john peeter zanger -- peter. and we have now another thin-skinned person, now the governor, royal governor -- >> royal governor. >> english. >> english royal governor. >> yeah. so so tell us the story, and this is going to be a different hamilton, i think. >> yeah, a different -- >> than the one they've heard you talk about before. >> that's right. the english, of course, conquer new amsterdam in 1664, and that -- in the 18th century we've had a series of royal governors who have been sent over. some of them are worse than others. the new york historical society owns a portrait of one of them in woman's dress because he -- >> rudy giuliani on saturday
night live, by the way. just saying. [laughter] >> this man would allegedly lurk on the street corners at night and tug men's ears in woman's dress. [laughter] and this picture depicts him in drag, although it's probably a forgery done, a hoax done by his enemies, political enemies. but there was another man, william cosby, who becomes governor of new york because he married the daughter of an earl. and when he gets his appointment, it takes him six months to get over here from england. and during that time, the job of governor was filled by a substitute. so when cosby arrives, he says, well, you owe me my back salary for these six months that i wasn't here -- [laughter] they don't want to pay him. it goes before the local court, presided over by a man named
louis morris. he rules against cosby. so cosby fires morris and puts in morris' place a much younger man, last name delancey. as in the street down on the lower east side. and what morris does to fight back is he hires an immigrant named john john john peter zangt a newspaper. and newspaper culture has already started in the 13 colonies. the franklin brothers have started one, james and benjamin. later much more famous than his older brother. every significant town along the coast has one i newspaper, at least one newspaper. now new york has two. the previous one was the official one. it would print all the official notices and laws and what not. and, obviously, it was in the pocket of whoever the governor was. but now there's a rival one, the
weekly journal. and for a year, it campaigns against governor cosby, rarely mentioning him but, you know, talking about arbitrary power and what a terrible thing that is. they run bogus ads. there's an ad for a missing spaniel, and that's supposed to be one of cosby's supporters. [laughter] spaniels are very affectionate, loyal dogs. and, you know, cosby doesn't like this. so he finally, on his own say so, he has zanger arrested, he has issues of the paper burned. and he does grant him a trial. so zanger's supporters hire from out of town the best lawyer at that time in british north america who's a man named andrew hamilton, no relation to alexander. he's a lawyer in philadelphia who comes up to defend his client. now, you know, as a law professor you'd be very interested in the courtroom drama here because the law, the
relevant law is the law of seditious libel. which, at the time, it was a recognized law in anglo-american law. and it criminalized criticism of rulers on the grounds that that could cause violence and upheaval and rebellion. and we, obviously, we don't want that so, therefore, we will not permit criticism of rulers. and that is the law of the land both in england and in its colonies. so what hamilton does, and it's a brilliant performance, he's basically asking for jury nullification. he's asking for the jury to ignore the law. now, he can't say that. and there are times when judge delancey pulls him up short, you know, won't let him make a certain argument. and what hamilton always does -- he's quite as old as -- twice as old as delancey. he knows his way around a courtroom. so he will, you know, apologize,
and then he'll make the same argument later in a slightly different form. i mean, it's a brilliant performance, and it's also a very eloquent performance. he's saying what other recourse do free men have if they're being misruled? they have to have the right to complain because how else can anything be redressed if nobody knows what it is and nobody can talk about it? and if you don't allow this, the only alternatives you're allowing is revolution. and he mentions the overthrow of the roman kingdom by the first brutus, he mentions the english civil war. but he keeps coming back to this point that the right to complain, to oppose and expose misrule is something that every free man has. >> uh-huh. >> and the jury agrees with him. they leave the box for a very short time, they come back, these 12 ordinary new yorkers --
i give their names, it's an impressive group. we've never heard of any of them -- [laughter] but they, again, like men of flushing they stood up, and they acquit zanger. and the effect of this is that colonial governors will not bring actions for seditious libel after this. because no jury is going to bring in a conviction. so the effect is that the press in colonial america will be the freest in the world. >> so this is in 1730 -- >> 1735. >> and one of the things about your book since you said you mentioned the names, you do this throughout. you want us to know these names. symptom are recognized -- some are recognizable today, but many are not. here's a name you mentionedded, before you mentioned the name of louis morris. >> right. he's zanger's backer. >> now, the next chapter isn't really completely a new york story, it happens down in
philly, the declaration of independence. but in my copy of the declaration of independence since i looked up the names and you got them, there's a louis morris there. so same guy? >> grandson. >> grandson, okay. and there's going to be another family connection soon enough that you're going to tell us about. >> yeah. >> okay. so we are going to pass over the declaration of independence. you focus especially on the ode to liberty in the declaration of independence. and there are other aspects of it as well. it declares independence, for example, which has international law significance and all the rest. but we'll jump over that because with we can't do everything, so you're just going to have to read the chapter for yourself to get his views on the declaration of independence. but now let's leapfrog to constitution not of the united states yet, but the constitution of the new york -- and it's even hyphenated, like the new york historical society, the new york
manumissions society. what's up with that this. >> well, some of the chapters in this book are filling gaps. i target that this -- i argue that this is centuries long and, of course, we've also violated it in numerous ways. and we've had to correct those violations over the course of our history. finish and the largest, most enflamed because of issues finally in the civil war, most painful, was human -- [inaudible] and i wanted to do a chapter on a northern state because we forget that this wasn't just a southern thing. new york was a slave colony, and it was a slave state after independence. i learned in writing this book that new york city had more slaves than any american city
except charleston. it's partly a function of our size. we had become the largest city. but, still, that is a startling and shameful statistic. so after the revolution, there was a scandalous event where some free blacks living in new york were about to be lured aboard a ship and taken either to charleston or to bay of honduras where a lot of slave trading went on. and new york and other free towns were prey to man stealers or blackbirders, they were also called. these were people looking for runaway slaves, but if they couldn't find a runaway slave, they might try to pick up some freed blacks and carry them off into slavery. so the authorities had stopped this. it was a scandalous event. and so there was a meeting in
new york of an interesting combination of people. there was the elite of the city and of the state, governor george clinton was part of this, first post-independence governor. mayor duane, john jay, the great diplomat and patriot, and the young joining these ranks, alexander hamilton, who had a very good war, had been on washington's staff, and you can see the musical. [laughter] but these men were also working with new york's quakers who appear several times in this book, and they're always, they're always on the outs. they're always outsiders. and by their own choice, because their own religious vision is so radical and to what extent should they participate in what the rest of the world is doing, this is an ongoing debate within the quaker community.
but at this moment, the two of them see a common interest in trying to rectify new york's situation with respect to slavery. they feel that this is a violation of the principles of the revolution for which some of these men have fought -- not the quakers, obviously, but people like hamilton did -- and they want to set new york on the path of manumission. so they write a constitution which is very eloquent. it resembles the famous opening of the declaration of independence. it's much more explicitly religious. i mean, jefferson talked about the laws of nature and nature's god. the constitution of the new york manumissions society speaks of the benevolent creator and father of men. now, this is not a philosopher's god, this is the father of men. and it says it is our duty as citizens and as christians, you know, not only to sympathize
with the condition of black people in new york, but to actively work so that they can enjoy the same rights as ourselves. that these are brethren can enjoy the same rights as ourselves. is so this is a very sweeping statement. now, many of the members of this society owned slaves. they owned slaves. but they were willing to put themselves on record and to go to work to try and end this institution. over time they did it in various ways. they passed -- they lobbied for certain laws as such as no slavn new york can be sold outside the state. nor can any slave be brought into the state. there were a number of slaves who belonged to tories during the war, and the statement had confiscated them -- state had confiscated them. they should all be freed.
they established a system of schools for black children because they felt that ignorance made them prey to man stealers and blackbirders. they started with boys, and the girls were allowed a few years later, and these were ultimately folded in the school system in the 19th century. and the final result is john jay, he's elected governor at the end of the 1790s. and. >> 1799 he signs a bill -- in 1799 he signs a bill which will end slavery in new york by 1827. that's a long time. you know? it's a long time. and i think, you know, when people reading about this who come to it the first time they may say, well, they were really dragging their heels, weren't they? pleasure but the other side of it is they got it done. they got it done. this was something that was in the culture of this thing, and they wanted to get it out. and someone has to do it, you know in you can't just say,
well, over time it'll go away. you've got to push. you've got to work. and that's what they did. and in 1827, finally when the last slaves in new york are free on july 4th, i end the chapter with yet another hamilton, a man named william who is a black man, a self-trained journalist, founded a church in the city, and he wrote this eloquent essay about the end of slavery this in new york -- in new york in which he praises the manumissions society as being the engine, the main engine of this process. >> and let me introduce for the audience one very important conceptual distinction between manumission or emancipation, the freeing of individual slaves, which goes back to antiquity. virtually all societies prior to 1776 had some sorts of human unfreedom, and they had regimes
of manumission or emancipation. see, a funny thing happened on the way to forum are, or something like that. but, actually, it's the americans that develop the idea of abolishing slavery itself, abolition, as distinct from merely freeing slaves. you go from a manumission society to, ultimately, abolition. >> right. >> it might free that many existing slaves for a long time, but eventually there will be -- >> they're all -- >> -- no slavery at all. ever. >> right. >> one final thing, since you mentioned john jay and he's the governor who signs this law, this gradual abolition law bill into law, and he's the president of the manumissions society. he's so posed to slavery, you tell us, that he buys some slaves. what's up with that? >> well, he -- his extra nation
is that -- explanation is that when they work off their price, they will be free. sounds odd to us. i would also maybe in his defense say that he tried to get anti-slavery language in new york state's first constitution during the revolution. he helped write it. he failed in this respect. and then three years later he wrote, "until we do this, our prayers to heaven for liberty will be impious." so that's some pretty hard saying. >> so the next chapter is a different constitution, the constitution of the united states. much of it is not quite a new york story in that in the drafting of the constitution robert yates and lansing a basically defect. they, at a certain point, leaving new york really without a vote.
there's alexander hamilton, he can't really cast a vote on behalf of new york. but there is a new york angle. we're going to move quickly because there's more new york stories. but there's another morris who comes into the picture, and you've written a little bit about him. >> he's my favorite. >> some connection to the lewis ', so you can tell us about governor morris. and then you have a few observations about the ratification process in new york led by the folks on the other side. so give us the new york take on the u.s. constitution. >> well, giewfer in morris is also the grand southern of louis morris and the half brother of the louis morris who signs the declaration. so the morrises are an active political family. laugh goes on for a long time. look, i love him. >> you've written a biography. >> yeah, yeah. he too had a peg leg are, he was
a ladies' man, he was a wit. he was brave. he'll go on after this to be our minister to france during the reign of terror, and if he, you know, he sticks to his guns and holds his own when friends of his are being guillotined and writes it all in his diary. fascinating writing. in terms of the ratification struggle, new york is a must-have state. the documents says when 9 of 13 states rat fire, it goes into effect, been ratify, but they know they have to have the biggest ones which are massachusetts, pennsylvania and virginia. you also have to have new york which is not so big yet, but it is clearly growing, and it's also centrally located. if new york stays out, you know, you already new england and this gap. and so there is a very lively press controversy about the
ratification of the constitution here. we've all read the federalist papers, they are the great blast on the pro-constitution side, but they're also -- >> and these are new york newspaper essays in the zanger tradition. >> yeah. these are op-eds, you know? paul krugman and david brooks write 750 words twice a week. these were 2,000 words coming out three, four, sometimes five times a week. so it's a quicker rate. but there were also very eloquent and intelligent essays on the other side. and new york state is one of the places where there are actual riots. there was a riot in albany and one here in new york. happily, no one was killed, but that just shows you how high the passions were. >> and lankton smith, the book has lots of names. you think it's very important we remember these people. part of the new york
manumissions society, he's many people think a leading anti-federalist, federal farmer. in the end he's going to be the swing vote and vote with the federalists. so these people -- they might agree on some things, anti-slavery, george clinton's there and alexander hamilton, but they're going to disagree on other things like the constitution -- >> right. >> so it's a fascinating story there. we're going to skip over the monroe doctrine just because there's not strong new york angle to that, and then we're going to go upstate, and you're going to tell me about seneca falls. >> seneca falls, this is another gap to be plugged, and it's obviously the fact that women mostly have not had the right to vote here. i say mostly because in new jersey from 1776 to 1807 women who met the property qualification could vote. and that was because the language of the first new jersey constitution spoke of inhas inhabitants. not free men.
people noticed this. and there were enough women meeting the property qualification. now, the joker in this deck is that married women, their property belonged to their husbands. but if you were single or a widow and you met the property qualification, you could vote in new york for those 31 years. and there were enough of these women that they had a name. they were called the petticoat vote. they were recognizedded like blocks that the parties contended for. but that ended in 1807. so mostly women don't have it. and this chapter the most important individual is a woman from johnstown, new york, upstate, named elizabeth katety stanton. elizabeth cady stanton. and her interest in politics is really from her youth, from her family. her father's a judge, he served a term in congress. she's, in effect, been his law clerk. she marries a man who is himself
very involved in politics, in the politics of abolition. and then in 1840 she and her husband go to a worldwide abolition conference in london where the issue is are the women in attendance to be allowed to vote. and this becomes an argument, and the conference votes and says, no, they shall not be allowed to vote are. and then when this young american gets home, she says to one of her friends, why can't we have a conference on women's rights? and then she moves, ultimately with her husband, to a town called seven ca falls which is in the -- seneca falls which is in the finger lakes. and there one afternoon she's having tea with some friends of hers, and her life of is kind of stressed at this point. she's, she and her husband are prosperous enough. her father is, you know, helping to support them. but she's got three little boys, her husband's away politicking a
lot of the time. she has to run everything. and they're talking about such situations. and the husband of one of these women says why don't you do something about it. so they decide we're going to have a conference on women's rights. and they have to act quickly because there is a noted woman orator in the cause of abolition who is visiting seneca falls. she's going to be going home very soon, so they've got to put the word out fast, get a venue. they get a wesleyan chapel which is an anti-slavery section of the methodist church to hold their meeting in. they have a two-day meeting. one of the more famous people who attends is frederick douglass. he comes down from rochester, new york. he's the only known black person there, although there are 12 people of who we know nothing.
so there possibly were others. and what is interesting to me about this meeting is that even here the issue of women voting was controversial. because many of these women were quakers. and quakers by this point are thinking, well, you know, the whole political system is corrupt. i mean, it supports slavery, you know? why have anything to do with it. we should agitate outside politics. but to participate in it is playing the devil's game. and elizabeth cady stanton says, no. if you're not voting, you're not represented, and you have no guarantees, no ways of protecting your own station and your own rights. and i think she's guided to this by the fact that her father was in politics and the fact that her husband was in politics, and she's been observing politics all her life, so she knows the importance of it. he wins this point and gets -- she wins this point and gets in the document. now, i'll skip ahead a lot of
years. obviously, the civil war sucks up everyone's attention. after the civil war, western states and territories view individually -- do individually allow women to vote. and before the 19th amendment is passed, new york state -- a year before -- lets women vote. elizabeth cady stanton has died, but there's one woman still surviving from the seneca fallsen convention. she's 102 years old. her name is rhoda palmer. she's lived all her life in geneva, new york, in two houses. she went with her father to the seneca falls convention. he drove her in a carriage and they drove back home. and if when she's 102, she's taken in a car to the polls to vote. >> much as it pains me to jump over the gettysburg address but doesn't have as strong a new york angle, but tell us about the new colossus, the statue and
the plaque which you say have to be understood together. >> yes. the statue of liberty was a gift to this country from france. and it was a gift from a particular slice of the french nation. you know, when you wring your hands over american politics, just look at france sometime -- [laughter] they really have always had a tougher time than we have. but, you know, there have been reactionaries, there's been a left, so much further left than ours, but there has always been in france from the 18th century on a kind of centrist-liberal strain which has honestly admired american republicanism and if felt proud of its role in sustaining the american revolution. ..
at the luncheon in which he floats this idea. learning his trade in france and for his own reasons he is interested in monumental sculpture. he writes some very interesting theoretical things about how you should do this. it's very important not to have too many details you do not want to distract the eye. it's almost like advertising. these to get together when france becomes a republic once again in 1870 republicanism is now the official position of the french nation and they offer this gift to the united states. but, they are not going to pay for the pedestal. one of the projects is an
album of literary productions. they have some poetry in there and one of the poems is by a new yorker. that is who writes the sonnet about this statute. it's called the new colossus because she is contrasting it with the ancient statue everyone would have thought up at the time. and that celebrated a military track. and she said this is different. this is welcoming people here as a refuge. and this is what we should be proud of that we have a free country to country of liberty and we are willing to welcome people to it. it gets put on the statue
after she is dead she leaves and tells her sister who is her executor when you publish them. make sure the new colossus is at the front. there seems to be some family issues going on. but she have a friend another blue stocking who was a descendent of alec ziemer henderson. that is how the statue in the palm meat. i think it is a very effective piece of a rhetoric i think it is important that it's on that statute. that identifies who the mother of exiles is. it's not just you're broke or being oppressed come over here that will stop. but you come over here and it will stop for good because
this is a country of liberty. and you will not had to worry about it happening again. >> one of the exciting things about this book. i have some great questions here to turn to responding to the exclusions of slaves or blacks or women early on. this book fills a gap in a way because you had been a journalist about the contemporary hero. and you been a great scholar of the founding and the founders i kind of nudged you all the way to lincoln with your great book. i don't remember a lot of rick burke kaiser. posting pre- reagan. and with the colossus for the
first time that i can recall talking about that man who isn't always a beloved by the national review. franklin roosevelt. we will skip across the gold speech. i will let you talk about reagan today. we will take the questions. there are three chapters in the book that deal with america and the world. i am talking about liberty in america but i think there are instances when we have seen that our interests and our preservation is bound up with liberty elsewhere.
this is certainly what roosevelt thought as the 1930s went on. he was elected president to be a foreign-policy president. he was elected to deal with the oppression. he saw he took steps to prepare to deal with them. one of them was putting two young officers in charge of the army and the navy and george marshall. they developed plans to how we would fight a war if it came to that against germany, italy and japan.
in military code dog stands for d. there were four options he made his fourth and final one the one he really wanted and was trying to direct roosevelt to do. you hold the line in the pacific but your main focused as can be on to be on europe in defeating germany. germany has overrun norway in the low countries of france. as stark tells roosevelt if britain survives we can win everywhere. we might not lose everywhere but we could not win. so britain says stark has to be saved. roosevelt has his means of
communication that was a way of intimately connecting with americans and his 16th chat it was telling america that we want the arsenal of democracy in the defense of britain. and he says least of oceans. the oceans are still there but they are smaller now. transportation is quicker or better. he explains that from senegal. it is shorter than washington dc to denver.
he said the oceans are smaller than they were and we have to be mindful of that. he says irish-americans would it be possible that irish liberty could survive with the nazis let you be something of an exception. you have made an alliance with hitler. he is trying to address the voting blocs that are in his corner but maybe not disposed with the buildup of american resources it before we could take it on.
and he's not send bergen a go to war in fact he's denying that were to go to war. i think it is tacitly saying that. arsenal as weapons so if your a neutral you're a neutral supply in weapon to one side it's obviously very mindful of what's going on. he tries to not provoke this for the longest time. and the japanese of course who finally tripped the wire. we prioritize the war in europe the arsenal of democracy is a crucial step in that process. see mac and have you written about fdr before. >> i don't think so.
i will fold some of them together. i want to give one detail. of course 500 radio stations. the political inner circle. i thought that was fun. they did admire it back then. i did not know that. the obvious missing link. obviously you had thought about this a lot. what other documents did you consider that didn't quite
make the cut. and if you are trying to pick something since reagan's speech what might you have picked. i do addresses in the epilogue in my model is a wonderful book about the constitution by clinton rossa for. if you're reading one book about the constitution that's the one. is terrific. i'm teasing you. you had you've written many books about the constitution. but the book is outstanding. and in it he said is there a b team if these men had it come to philadelphia could we had found another set. and he comes up with another set of people in the same number from each state.
while washington and franklin are unique and irreplaceable. obviously the declaration in the constitution your neck and replace them. you can find other documents. there is martin luther king at the mall. and as a characteristic of a free society or a society concerned with liberty that has a lot. there options -- options to choose from. we should not rest assured on that. it is not self -- self or patch awaiting. that's why dedicated the book to the american people. we have to keep doing this. our fate is in our hand.
we have great inspirations. and something that has to be done. maybe this will only be obvious to us in the future but if you have to pick something since reagan, could you? i'm not to say. i don't want to turn anyone off the story i'm also writing a book of policy prescriptions. i'm back in a do your work for you. this book is not to hold your hand this is to show where we've come and how we did it and what is most important about this country. that's at this book is about. >> they blend together three questions early about america and the world american
exceptionalism and whether it still exists. i think you think it does. and then there is the second one much of the rest of the world since roosevelt's triumph has actually begin to emulate the united states in certain ways. are we less successful today since we have succeeded in spreading democracy. how do canada and holland differ from the u.s. today. >> you actually mentioned them at times in your narrative the closest i ever got to canadian politics vanity fair commissioned me to do of peace.
great in carter is a canadian. that's why he was aware of it. if he did people would say he ran it because he is a canadian. he decided not too. but he traveled all around canada. they are different. there is no first amendment. they can really landed hard on you and you have no recourse doesn't happen a lot. there are lots of protections that we have that they just don't. have you looked at the canadian constitution begins by some reference to where as
a statute. allows us to do this thing. we have permission from our parents to declare independence. from my point of view i think i would say canada basically becomes independent because our hero lincoln wins the civil war in canada and britain begins to give up the new world ambitions new world ambitions once it's clear that america is not going to divide. they all owe their independence actually to us. i didn't fight for us in quite the same way. i think to some extent people basically didn't want to fight. in the american revolution.
and even their independence i think is more a product of america. certainly there is unity. his job is the canadian specific railway and that's definitely in response to the american civil war and the fact that it was the first modern army all the sudden. maybe we should unite the colonies we have there. women had to pick. there was a great question about religious liberty. i just cannot resist this it pained me so much to not get to ask about the gettysburg address.
what is her new to say about the gettysburg address. and go for it. a little noted aspect of it is that this wasn't just about americans and for americans. the whole world was watching us. it is reflected here and there. shall not perish from the earth. this is the big republic in the world and if it falls apart and fails that will send a lesson to the world. it will send a lesson to england. working men do not still have the right to vote. it will be an argument on the side of let's not give it to them. it will be a lesson to france