The Audience of the Declaration

Barrett and Alex look at the opening paragraph of the Declaration and how it was publicized to learn more about its intended audience and the purposes of the document.

Transcript

SPEAKER_02 0:02

To understand the foundations of America, we need to dig into the key texts and thinkers who've helped define our nation. I'm Barrett Randall, and I'm not an academic, but I'm also not afraid to talk to one. On the Foundations of a Nation podcast, I have conversations with my friend Alex Tuckness, Chair of the Political Science Department at Iowa State University, about the ideas that have shaped America. Welcome to Foundations of a Nation, a podcast that explores the ideas that shaped America. In season one, we're looking at the ideas that shaped the Declaration of Independence. I'm Barrett Randall, and I run a golf course. And I'm Alex Stuckness, and I'm chair of the political science department at Iowa State. And we're going to be your hosts. In this episode, we're going to be talking about the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence and I guess the purpose of the document. Alex, what are we learning?

SPEAKER_01 0:58

Well, you know, I think you can learn a lot about what the authors were up to by looking at uh the first uh bit. So actually, yeah, like what are they what are they trying to accomplish? Aaron Ross Powell Yeah. To it. Uh what is let's bear go ahead and read the first paragraph and we'll kind of work through it.

SPEAKER_02 1:16

Trevor Burrus, I'll I'll do it in my most uh regal voice. When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them. A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

SPEAKER_01 1:50

So, yeah, so the first thing we learn is they liked very long sentences. Uh, the next sentence is even longer than that one. Uh, but one of the things that's interesting, right, is uh some of the language of like mankind uh and the idea of uh later in the document where they talk about uh like let these facts be submitted to a candid world, right? So before you get later in the document, you get uh this like list of grievances. But the document itself seems to indicate like that the whole world is the audience, right? So uh when it says that uh we have a decent respect to the opinions of mankind, it indicates like there's more than just a an American local audience here, right? That there's kind of an international audience and world opinion that they're interested in.

SPEAKER_02 2:39

So, okay, why is it important that the whole world reads our big breakup letter?

SPEAKER_01 2:46

Yeah, yeah. Well, I mean, part of this is just like realism, right? They're they're already in the middle of a war with England, and they could use some help, right? And so nations like France are powerful, and France could either make things better or make things worse, depending on you know what France in particular decides to do. And so partly this is a kind of invitation uh to you know other powers to like recognize them as uh an independent country, hopefully support them in the war against uh against Britain.

SPEAKER_02 3:19

Yeah. So if okay. In my realm, I'm gonna just camp this in the in the in the in the image of a breakup. Sure. Right. So you just want everyone to know who's available. I'm on the market. Yeah, yeah. I'm on the market. Look, this is done. I'm on the market. And we're trying to, in this case, we're not impressing. We're look, we we have one person in mind. We're looking at France, we're like, hey, hey, I just want you to know I'm available.

SPEAKER_01 3:49

Yeah, yeah. So I mean, at one level, that's right. And and if you want to, if you want to, if you want to take the breakup analogy a little further, like when there's a breakup, one of the big questions is whose fault is it? Sure. Right? Who was the bad guy? It's certainly not mine. Right, right. He's you know, and so it it's so it's a little bit of them saying, it's not us, it's him. Yeah. Right? King George is the problem. It's not, we're we're great subjects. You would you would like to be our allies. It's he's the problem. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 4:16

We're we're great people.

SPEAKER_01 4:17

We're gaslighting all of England. Right. Right. So, so yeah. So at one level, right, you could say the declarations, it's it's written to impress the French. Uh, but I mean, that's what the text implies. And obviously, there's historical reasons why that would have been important, but there's some other reasons to think that's actually maybe a little bit more going on than just that. So um there's a there's there's uh uh an interesting historian who's who's looked at the declaration, uh, Pauline Mayer. And uh she notes that like one interesting trivia point is that you know they they adopt this on July 4th. Yeah. And on July 8th, they send off a letter, you know, to France, right? So they can, you know, get the letter read over there. And it gets lost, right? It never makes it, right? So the French don't actually get notified until like months later, and everybody already kind of has heard about it secondhand, right? So at a certain level, it doesn't seem like this was their highest priority, right? Of making sure this got to You didn't get my text. You know, yeah, it didn't get their text.

SPEAKER_02 5:19

You didn't see the Facebook status.

SPEAKER_01 5:20

But the the other interesting thing to think about, like, is if you know if Louis XVI is really like the target audience of this. Right. Um it's a really strange text to try to like win over a monarch, right?

SPEAKER_02 5:34

Sure. You know, so in other words, I mean I can see where my il illustration is gonna fall apart here a little bit, but yeah, go ahead, sir. Right.

SPEAKER_01 5:42

Well, you know, but if you if you think about the underlying ideas in this document, they're not exactly monarch-friendly, right? You know, if you're King uh Louis XVI, you're reading this and you're like, oh, so you're saying that all of my authority here in France only extends if the French people say I have it. Um I'm not sure how I feel about that, right? So in other words, if the whole goal was really just to win over French support, it's not like they did they didn't do a great job, right? There's probably other ways they could have made the case with a little bit less, you know, popular sovereignty. Sure. Right. That would have been would have been a little bit more uh effective in trying to win over.

SPEAKER_02 6:22

So basically, when they're telling them all the things I don't like about you to someone who's just like them.

SPEAKER_01 6:26

Right. You know, you're you're saying like, here's our complaints. I mean, at one level, at one level, they could say, look, George is a bad king, you're a good king. Right. Right. So I mean, there there's ways they could have written this that would have played that up. But when we start getting into the second paragraph and it starts talking about how all rulers derive their power from the consent of the governed, you know, if you're Louis XVI, that's not necessarily the way you think of your political power.

SPEAKER_02 6:54

Okay. So so okay. So we've got the guys writing this letter. They're they're obviously writing it to England. They're writing to King England. They're they're sort of tangentially writing it to France. Right. Right. But if not even all of that, is there then another audience or maybe a a broader image here that they're also trying to pr portray or at least reach?

SPEAKER_01 7:15

Yeah, no, I I think so. So so what what what Pauline Mayer, who I was mentioning earlier, what she argues, and I I think makes a pretty good case, is that if you look, like right after July 4th, uh right after they adopt the Declaration of Independence, they order it to be authenticated and printed. And Congress then votes, uh, and I'm in a quote here, uh, the copies be sent to the several assemblies, conventions, committees, or councils of safety, and to the several commanding officers of the continental troops that it be proclaimed in each of the United States and at the head of the army. Right? So basically, Congress is ordering we want this distributed all across the country, right? We want soldiers to be, you know, hearing about this. We want, you know, the states to be informed about this, we want local governments to be hearing about this. So at a certain level, what they're trying to do is they're trying to build consensus among the Americans uh for the justness of their cause, right? So so at a certain level, the ostensible reason is we need to explain to the whole world why we're doing this. Right. But the way it's written, I think it's written more to try to like build American support for independence and for uh the revolutionary war that's going on.

SPEAKER_02 8:34

So just bear with me as I ask a silly question. What is difference in this than like traditional what we would consider propaganda? Well, how do you what do you what do you what do you mean by by propaganda? I mean, are they trying to influence people's opinions or are they or are they echoing people's opinions? Is that fair?

SPEAKER_01 8:52

Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, I so what they would say, you know, and so interesting, like there's we may have talked about this a little bit in an earlier episode. Uh like what Jefferson said he was trying to do was to capture like the general sense of what uh people thought. Right.

SPEAKER_02 9:11

So they're sending this out. They're not sending it out as, hey, just so you guys know. Uh-huh. I mean, they are, but they're like, just so you know, we did what you'd asked. We did what we're all, we're all on board for this for the most part.

SPEAKER_01 9:23

I the the way I would put it is um for people who had really been involved, yeah. A lot of the ideas that are here in this document are things that would have resonated, say, like, oh yes, that's what we Americans believe. Okay. Right. So it wouldn't be like a lot of these ideas are completely new, right? What what Jefferson said he was trying to do in his draft and what the committee did as they edit it is they're trying to turn this into something so that when an American hears it, it's not like this completely brand new thing, but it kind of summarizes and crystallizes in a succinct and compelling way how Americans think about this war and how they think about revolution and independence and why these things needed to happen.

SPEAKER_02 10:03

So kind of a like a like a unifying press release. Yeah. Less propaganda, more press release.

SPEAKER_01 10:08

Yeah, it's it's it's put it this way: like when you have a large number of people that you're trying to motivate for a common goal, there is a certain amount of trying to get everybody like on message and on script, right? And so there's a there's different ways you could have talked about why this war is taking place. And I think they're hoping that this will resonate with people. There's like, oh yeah, that that's why we're doing this. And Americans will have more of like a shared vocabulary and a shared story about independence.

SPEAKER_02 10:37

Got it. That helps. Um, what sort of clues do we get about how they're going to make that case?

SPEAKER_01 10:44

Yeah. So let's let's let's maybe go through the first paragraph and just go through it kind of section by section. And we'll talk about some clues we get even from the first paragraph about how they're going to they're going to make the case. Aaron Powell Okay.

SPEAKER_02 10:56

And this is okay. Do you want me to read the Trevor Burrus?

SPEAKER_01 10:58

Yeah, just read read read it in kind of shorter segments.

SPEAKER_02 11:01

Aaron Powell When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another.

SPEAKER_01 11:10

Okay. So let's let's maybe just like stop there for a second. Oh yeah. Um yeah, kind of do this in part. So so notice notice here the use of the word necessity, right? So necessity is is a word that like in international law and and other aspects of law has some significance to it, right? There's certain kinds of extreme measures that you're allowed to take under situations of necessity that you're not allowed to take under normal circumstances, right? So by saying that it's necessary, uh, they're they're trying to kind of give a sense that, like, hey, this isn't just business as usual, right? Some very specific particular things have happened, which mean uh that something like taking up arms against the king is appropriate here, even though we realize this is not like how normal life is supposed to go. Um but it also raises a question. Whenever you say, well, we had to do this because it's necessary, uh, one of the questions, well, necessary according to who? Right. And at a certain level, like part of what they're going to be answering as we get into the later uh, you know, you know, sentences in the in the document, yeah is they're at a certain level to say, necessary according to us, right? We've reached the judgment that this is necessary. And because we've reached the judgment that's necessary, that was sufficient for us to start taking this uh this action. Like they don't have to wait until King George agrees that it's necessary. Um they're thinking it's necessary is enough for them to move ahead. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 12:44

That yeah, that's uh uh very complicated. But yeah, all right. So all right, so we then for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them to another.

SPEAKER_01 12:56

Yeah. Yeah. So notice like this is really interesting that it uses the phrase one people. Right. One people. Uh and it's interesting because like even in that little bit I was just quoting, this is you know, when Congress says that uh, you know, copies of this are going to be sent out, they want it to be sent out to each of the United States, which is grammatically really interesting, right? Because they're saying uh there are multiple states, 13 of them, uh there are United States, and so each of those United States uh is going to get you know copies of the Declaration of Independence sent to them, right? So even back then, they often talked about themselves as a plurality, right? This like a little interesting fact of American history and language, um that up, you know, up until around the Civil War and after the Civil War, people often took the noun United States as plural. You know, because the word states is plural. United is the adjective, right? And so they would say, uh, the United States are that. Uh and now we'd say the United States is this or that. Uh so it's interesting that even though they often talked like that, in this document, they also include the idea that at least for the purposes of this declaration and this war and all that, we are one people. Yeah. Um, which is why uh, you know, Abraham Lincoln and others have argued, right, that this is how we should count the beginning of the United States. Um, this is us declaring ourselves to be one people. Okay. Uh is that that's like the origin of the United States as like a a singular, a singular collective.

SPEAKER_02 14:37

Yeah, because it, I mean, historically, the colonies didn't always feel united at all.

SPEAKER_01 14:43

Aaron Powell No, no, they didn't. And you know, this is this is part of the reason why like the Articles of Confederation that they adopt after the war are not an accident, right? They, you know, they are really suspicious when they write the Articles of Confederation of centralized power. They reserve a lot of authority to the states because they really are like a lot of them more attached to being, say, from Virginia or Massachusetts, right, than America. But they also, like, I think in this moment, as they're trying to fight this war against England, they realize they have to be a united front, right? You know, as they uh are trying to win the war, soldiers from all these states have to be working together. As they deal with other countries, they have to be unified. And so this is like a critical step forward in the process of Americans starting to think of themselves as one nation.

SPEAKER_02 15:34

So, all right, perfect. So we're separate, we're thinking of uh one person, um, the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature. Well, let me not go that far. Let's say we've got it becomes necessary for one people, which we're talking about, to dissolve the political bands which have connected them to with one another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them.

SPEAKER_01 16:07

Yeah, so so one of the things that's interesting, right? So it is describing like the the these bands we had uh that are being severed. And now that we have become separate, it says we're going to assume uh among the powers of the earth a separate and equal station. Uh and this is the first mention in the document of the idea of equality. So when we get to the next sentence, you know, uh maybe the most famous phrase in the entire document is uh that all men are created equal. Yeah. Right. But it's interesting, the first mention of equality is not actually individual equality, it's it's collective equality, right? They're saying we as a nation are equal to all the other nations of the world. So at this point, America is young and it's not as it's not as powerful as England, it's not as powerful as France. But even though it's not as powerful, as a matter of like moral rights, they're saying like we as a nation have the same set of powers uh that other nations have as well.

SPEAKER_00 17:10

Um so yeah, so uh yeah, so Daniel Allen, she's written about this, and uh and I I think she makes a pretty interesting argument uh that this is kind of a clue that the document isn't just interested in like individual equality and individual freedom. The document is also interested in our like collective equality and our collective freedom as well.

SPEAKER_02 17:37

All right, Alex. So I'm gonna outdork myself a little bit here and tell you I am I am visualizing these colonies kind of like Voltron, my favorite one of my favorite superheroes from when I was a kid. Obviously, my I I won't remember everything correctly, but basically you have five individual warriors who in their own right can be powerful and have these wonderful vehicles, these little iony vehicles that run them all over the place, but they join together to create Voltron. And Voltron is like super powerful.

SPEAKER_01 18:18

Right. So so in other words, like the if they when they combine, their power is much more than the sum of the individual parts.

SPEAKER_02 18:26

Oh, totally. Yeah. Voltron is the defender of the universe. Okay. Yeah. Right. So Yeah, yeah, individually individually. I mean, they'll keep their own color. Right. They look their own. I mean, you still have a left leg guy, a right leg guy, left arm, right arm. But no, you bring them together. It is Voltron, the defender of the universe. This is what we've done, just to make sure I understand the United States correctly. I'm just gonna continue.

SPEAKER_01 18:51

Yeah, so so I think I think the the colonists are definitely thinking if we're going to be successful in this war against England, we have to figure out a way to combine and be more than the sum of our parts. And that's why we have to start talking about ourselves, at least for this purpose of this war in this document, as one people. Uh and so that's Voltron. Yeah. And and so the now the long-term question, and we'll we'll talk about this in in future seasons, uh, is after the war, are they going to stay Voltron, right? Yeah. Or are they going to try to say, hey, why don't maybe we could just be five individual warriors who have, you know, good trading relations with each other. Right. You know, there's there's kind of different ways that they could conceive of themselves. But the the point would be they are recognizing this need to combine their powers in order to fight a common enemy. And this is a significant step forward for Americans thinking of themselves as one people.

SPEAKER_02 19:48

Aaron Powell This is the greatest analogy I've ever made. I've decided United States is okay.

SPEAKER_01 19:56

Okay. And let's maybe we can talk a little bit about the so the laws of nature and nature's God. Right.

SPEAKER_02 20:01

So this is Yeah, this is as that that actually when I was reading that, that was the one part that I thought, oh, that's odd that that's in there because it it it's definitely less legalese. We're not in legal Easville there.

SPEAKER_01 20:15

Aaron Powell Well, it is a little bit because it still has the word law. Aaron Powell Okay, never mind. Right. But it's but it's a different kind of law. It's a different kind of law. Fair enough. Fair enough. Right. Yeah, yeah, you're right. So but it's it's a what's important here, I think, is they're wanting to make a point that there is a higher moral law that takes priority over the laws of England. So, you know, the English Parliament can pass a law and the king can approve that law, and they're saying the King of England and English Parliament are not the highest authority.

SPEAKER_02 20:52

Okay.

SPEAKER_01 20:52

God has this law, this is an even higher authority, and it's according to that authority that we are your equals.

SPEAKER_02 20:59

Is this a normal thing? Yeah, a little bit. I mean, is that that seems like That seems to me like a really brilliant uh like you're not the boss of me.

SPEAKER_01 21:11

Right. Right. Yeah, so it so they're drawing on uh like some some ideas that were common going back to you know England in the 1600s. So like I think for us, when we hear like law of nature, we often think like science and physics and things like that. Correct. Right. And so so like Isaac Newton, right? So he was, you know, friend of John Locke, actually. Thermodynamics back in the you know, late 1600s. We think of that stuff. Yeah. Um gravity. And that but that's not what they mean here. Okay. What what they mean here is more John Locke's sense of laws of nature, which is moral rules that human beings know uh through reason uh about like what God wants us to do. Right. So, you know, when we get into the second paragraph and it starts talking about uh we have these rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The argument is we know that people have these rights, uh, apart from any human government having to tell us. Uh it's it's at some level against God's will if I try to kill you or enslave you or steal from you. Um because I'm I'm supposed to kind of recognize that there's certain things that just ought not to be done, right? So sometimes in our society, we might talk about this the idea of conscience, right? That something inside me kind of tells me that certain things are right or wrong.

SPEAKER_02 22:37

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 22:38

But uh within that historical framework, often the way they would talk about this and this is kind of theological language, where God is the lawgiver, and there's this kind of moral law, and there was kind of this common idea that even if you didn't have a Bible, like you could know certain parts of the moral law. So we're gonna get it, we'll get into the details of this more when we get to like paragraph two. Got it. Um, but just to kind of be aware that uh this was kind of like a normal way of understanding like laws of nature uh and things like that. No, no, no, you you you've got the American colonists who are trying to say, how do we articulate in a clear and compelling and concise way?

SPEAKER_02 23:22

And unavoidable. Just say this is an un basically this is an unavoidable.

SPEAKER_01 23:27

We couldn't help circumstances make this necessary. Right. Uh you know, like it's almost like, you know, when in the course of human events, the the image there is like a river flowing, right? The river's gonna flow, right? It can't go any other way than, you know, where it's just the way it is. The way things go. Yep. And so uh in the same way that those things are necessary, us separating from England was also necessary. And their their hope is twofold. I mean, I do think they hope France is going to help, but they're also really trying to like start telling a common story about America as a place where people who had a certain equality and standing, irrespective of what the king says, have the authority to come together and create a new nation. Got it.

SPEAKER_02 24:15

This is great. Um, so what it's gonna be going on in the next episode then?

SPEAKER_01 24:19

Okay, so next episode, we're gonna go into that uh second paragraph, which is also the second sentence. Um, and we're gonna talk about that first part. You know, we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, right? So this is probably the most talked-about phrase in the entire Declaration of Independence. And so we'll talk a little bit like what did they actually mean by equal? And how do we think about the fact that Jefferson and some of the other founders had slaves, right? So, you know, a whole host of questions related to how they understood uh and what they meant by equality.

SPEAKER_02 24:51

We'll see what sort of uh dancing around we can get there. Golly, how did they make that work? Uh great. Thank you, Alex.

SPEAKER_01 25:02

The views expressed on this podcast are those of the speakers and not necessarily those of Iowa State University. Thank you for listening.