Concluding the Declaration

Barrett and Alex conclude the first season talking about the conclusion of the Declaration and reflecting on the significance of the document and the risks taken by those who signed it. They hope these episodes will help people understand and appreciate the Declaration of Independence as America celebrates its 250 years on July 4 in a few weeks. 

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 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 the Foundations of a Nation podcast. I'm Barrett Randall, and I run a golf course. And I'm Alex Tuckness. I'm a political science professor. And we're going to be your hosts. In season one, we're looking at the Declaration of Independence. And in our final episode of the season, we're going to be looking at the conclusion to the Declaration. So what happens after this list, this long list of grievances?

SPEAKER_00 0:54

Yeah. So first we get a paragraph where they are really emphasizing how they have been trying repeatedly to get the British to answer and to listen to these grievances. So they say, nor have we been wanting an attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. In other words, we keep saying, hey, you don't really have the right to govern us this way, you know, ignoring our legislatures and just imposing from the British Parliament. And their British brethren have not been listening. We've reminded them of the circumstances of our immigration and settlement here. We've appealed to their native justice and magnanimity. And we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and consanguity, right? So sharing blood. Yeah. My favorite word. Yeah. We must therefore acquiesce in the necessity which denounces our separation and hold them as we hold the rest of mankind enemies in war, in peace, friends. Right? So one of the things that's interesting, right, is obviously there's the idea here of like the repetition of like we've we've tried all of these things. And they're wanting to emphasize it's not just that we appealed to the king. In a sense, we appealed to the British people, right? You know, we I think we talked about one of the early episodes. Part of what leads to the momentum for having the American Revolution is uh a lot of the colonists who were optimists about like being able to mend relations with Britain had thought, oh, you know, I think it's just a few, you know, there's a few bad apples uh, you know, giving bad advice to the king, but I think the people of England sympathize with us. And so when they elect the parliament next time, they're gonna elect, you know, new members of parliament who will be sympathetic to our plight, and we're gonna get this uh solved. And the opposite happens, right? That you know, they have elections and the British people elect a parliament. People are like, no, like we rule you. Like you don't you don't get to uh you know pick and choose which of our laws you uh you abide by. And so for the American colonists, there's a sense in which it's not just the government, the British people, right, have have let them down. And yeah, I I think it's interesting both the way they're emphasizing their brotherhood. You know, we share, you know, you're our British brethren, uh, you know, we we have this blood relationship with you. Um so you know, all of that language is there. At the same time, they're also saying, we have principles that still require us to fight you right now, but we're holding out the hope that when the war is over, we can be friends again.

SPEAKER_03 4:14

Okay. Okay. Right.

SPEAKER_00 4:16

Enemies in war in peace, friends, right? Is how the how the sentence ends there.

SPEAKER_01 4:20

Yeah. And then you get into the honestly, the mic drop moment of that last paragraph.

SPEAKER_00 4:27

Mm-hmm.

SPEAKER_01 4:28

Where Well, we don't maybe I'm jumping ahead, but it's yeah, we we can we can go ahead and go there, right? So I mean Yeah, because I feel like everything's been I mean I mean, duh Barrett, but yes, everything's been leading up to this. You know, we have all these you've got your excuses, your reasons, you've got your moral, whatever. All these things we've and then it's and what is it all leading to? Yes. And it is in fact leading up.

SPEAKER_00 4:57

Yeah, yeah, this this is the main event, right? Yes, this is the the last paragraph now. This is what we're getting. This is this is the thing, the crescendo. The crescendo. Yeah. Right. So they say we therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in general Congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentions, do in the name and by authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare that these United Colonies are and of right ought to be free and independent states, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connections between them and the state of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved. And that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and do all other things, uh all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. That's that's uh That's it. That's a big sentence. Yeah. But that is that I mean that is what the whole thing has been building toward, right? Is this uh is this sentence. Yeah. So yeah, one of the things that uh well let me ask Barrett, were there any any things that kind of jumped out at you about that paragraph as we were that last one? Yeah. That last sentence.

SPEAKER_01 6:30

Yeah, it just it feels it feels like a big exhale. Right. You know, like you know, there's you've been holding your breath and and it feels like at this point it's like boom, you know, the the mic drops, here it is. Yes. Yes. I don't know. It just feels very um it feels final. Uh-huh. I mean, there's a bit of analogy.

SPEAKER_00 6:52

I think that's right. You know, when they say solemnly publish and declare, yeah, right, they're saying like, no, this is a kind of legally binding moment. Right. So I if if I can give an example, right? There's a certain sense in which in a marriage ceremony, the saying of the vows is bringing about a legal change in situation, right? You know, so so like, you know, if say the minister declares, you know, I pronounce you man and wife, um, in that moment, the words have a kind of legal power, right? And and as what they're saying is like these words we are speaking in this moment indicate a new legal relationship we have with the rest of the world. Um, and it's it's important, right? This is uh this is a big deal. Maybe one thing to mention, like to say a little bit about how they ended up with this version. So this is one of the sections that the Continental Congress edited uh from Jefferson's version. So okay. Um so uh for starters, uh they added the reference to the supreme judge. Uh Jefferson, there were there were fewer God references in uh Jefferson's original version than uh in the final version. So they they added in the part about the supreme judge. Uh and so this is an example like of John Locke's political theory where he describes revolution as an appeal to heaven, right? And so there's a sense in which you're saying, hey, there are principles of right and wrong that are more fundamental than human laws. And so when human laws become unjust, when government becomes illegitimate, we can appeal to the higher law of God as our justification. But if I'm going to appeal to God's higher law, then I have to answer to God, right? And so you you've got the this kind of language of appealing to the supreme judge of the world. But also notice it says, for the rectitude of our intentions. So at a certain level, they've already made the case that the facts justify their actions and that their actions are justified. But, you know, I I think I've mentioned, like they're interested, I think, a little bit in just war theory. So if you were to go all the way back to St. Augustine, right, uh or Aquinas, uh, and and some of the people who are like Christian thinkers who helped shape thinking about just war, one of the things they would have said is that having a just cause is not enough for you to actually be in the right in a war. Just cause isn't sufficient. Okay.

SPEAKER_01 9:42

What else would you need?

SPEAKER_00 9:44

Yeah. So the the the uh you would need uh proper authority, right? And so I think that's why I'm saying like we are like properly constituted legislative authorities, right? We we have the authority to to make this declaration, but you also needed to have right intention because because there's an idea that you could be fighting in a just cause but have wrong motives. Uh so like you know, an example, you know, would be could be something like if country A invades country B, Country B now has just cause to go to war. And so let's say they go to war, but they've actually just hated country A forever, uh and they want to steal their stuff. Right? And so their motive isn't re-establishing just peace, their motive is uh something unjust. Since God knows your intentions as well as your actions, you're answerable not just for the acts you perform, but also the intentions behind them. Right. And so so they're basically saying, like, as we do this, it's not just our actions that are judged by God, it's our intentions uh that are judged by God as well. And so I, you know, however people today may think about the kind of the theological aspects of that, it is a way of saying intentions matter. Um and uh they're they're they're saying this as a way of like, we believe our consciences are clear, that our intentions are are correct in in taking this uh in taking this step. Aaron Ross Powell They're taking the moral high ground. Aaron Ross Powell Yeah, that's yeah, that's what they're saying. They're saying that.

SPEAKER_01 11:24

All right. So then here is actually a question that I think is probably simple to you, but confusing to me. How then did they deliver this? Oh, yeah, good question. Because I'll tell you a really silly story. All right. This makes me think This makes me think of a really dumb story that uh I had a friend who in elementary school was dating a girl. Well, you know, in elementary school, whatever that's like. Yeah, that's right. Sharing sharing crayons. Yeah, that's right. But they're going into summer break, and he doesn't want to be, you know, tied down for summer break. For summer break. And so as the as the last school bus, now I'm old enough to remember school buses, you know, like kids are the last school bus is leaving. She's on the school bus. He doesn't ride the bus. But he has he goes up to her window, he taps on her window, and she just grabs the little tabs and slides the bus window down. Yeah. And he he has crumpled up a piece of paper and he whips it in the window and he and we take and he takes off running. Okay. Okay. And he takes off running. She opens up the paper and it says on the paper, you're dumped. That's it. That's it.

unknown 12:37

Okay.

SPEAKER_01 12:38

That's that's the totality. How not to do a breakup. Yes. This is the totality of the delivery of the entire now. It's very clear. Yes. Right? There's no ambiguity. Right. It's extremely rude. Yes. But fairly appropriate for elementary school, I suppose. This is not what's happened. The United States has not thrown a piece of paper into Parliament saying you're dumped. Right. But they kind of have.

SPEAKER_00 13:06

Right. I mean, well, yeah. So so see, here's what I would say. Like if you think about how a declaration of war works, why declare war? Well, uh at because at a certain level Is that what this is? When declaring war, it's it's it's it's similar. It's not exactly the same, but I think that the analogy will be helpful. So when you're declaring war, that's an alternative to you just send in your army and start fighting. And an official declaration of war is giving the other side advanced notice of about what's about to happen. So you actually lose some tactical advantage by going through the process of doing a declaration of war. No surprise.

SPEAKER_01 13:47

Yeah, there's the surprise is lost.

SPEAKER_00 13:49

Right. So you know, if you think about uh like America and World War II, one of the big critiques of Japan was that Japan attacks American uh vessels at Pearl Harbor before uh formally declaring war. Right. And and this was this was kind of used one of the, you know, this is like one of the reasons for why, you know, America is like fully justified in in declaring war in response. And then the United States very quickly, Congress, you know, uh, you know, overwhelmingly votes to uh to declare war. So the idea of declaring war before you start fighting is intended to be a way of saying we realize this is a big deal. And so we're gonna go through this formal process of announcing our intentions before we act on them as a way of showing respect for you, even though we're about to fight. Um, and so there is a sense in which a declaration of war is announcing a kind of equality between the two sides, even as they begin to fight with each other. And the thought is having gone through those formalities on the front end, it makes it easier to negotiate a peace treaty on the back end, right? Because there's this a precedent, right, for being able to do that. And so now, in the case of the American colonies, chronologically, the Revolutionary War has already been going on for about a year when the Declaration is written, right? So the Declaration of Independence does come later. But the way the American colonies would have explained the chronology there is initially some were thinking if we just stand up for ourselves and push back a little bit, we can achieve a compromise where the English will say, okay, how about this as a compromise? Uh, you're still going to pay some taxes, but we're going to require the consent of your local uh legislators before we impose taxes, something like that. So there have been possibilities of still being a part of the British Empire, but with um you know greater autonomy for America's uh colonies that some people were holding out for. So so this is it's not that's so that's why the declaration of war analogy isn't perfect. Okay. But it's it's still similar in the sense that by going through this very formal process of declaring independence, they are assuming that there are other people who have a right to know and right to know the reasons. You know, so in your example, the just writing you're dumped, yeah, there's no reasons given. You know, and and it's by the way, in in in love, I'm not sure you have to. Right? You know, I my wife Anastasia, like at one point her dad set her down at one point and said, if somebody asks you out on a date and you don't want to go, you can just say no and you don't have to give a reason. Fair. Right? Yeah. Um, because if you give a reason, they're gonna start arguing with you and you may not want to argue about it. Yeah, I got some stories about that too, Alex.

unknown 16:57

Right.

SPEAKER_00 16:58

So but but in but in politics, I think there's a sense in which we owe each other reasons. You know, in in in politics, uh, you know, there's coercion, there's the use of force. Um, and so as a result, declaring the reasons is actually a really important part of showing respect for people as our political equals. And so, you know, you you'd asked a little bit, like, well, what's the communication plan right on this? And yeah, so so they immediately order this to be like typeset and copies printed, and they want copies sent all over the United States to all different colonies, sent to the army, and and they have copies sent across the ocean.

SPEAKER_03 17:42

Okay, right.

SPEAKER_00 17:43

And so it's it's supposed to go to France, England, you know, people are supposed to be um informed of this. So in doing that, right, there there really is a sense in which they're saying our we've announced this doctrine of political equality, right? All men are created equal. And they're not saying people are equal in all respects, but they are saying no one intrinsically has a right to have political authority over somebody else. Political authority ultimately derives from consent, not I'm smarter than you, I come from a better family than you, I'm richer than you. None of those are valid grounds for political authority. But if that's what we really think, then it means we can't just impose our will on others because we're stronger. We actually need to give real reasons, right, that will uh you know, appeal uh to their sense of justice, uh their sense of the public good. And they may not be persuaded. Well, I mean, we still may fight, but there's something about the the going through the process of declaring reasons that I think shows a kind of respect even for enemies.

SPEAKER_01 18:46

I can see how then this would be an entirely insane thing for people all over the world to hear, to see, to read. I mean, it would be an insane like it's it's yeah, it's it's it's it's surprising. It does give it, yeah. It gives it a bigger uh I don't know, like there's there's a there's just there's something more, I think, dramatic about it because you're dealing with like we, you know, you've you talked about like just how how unique this government was trying to be. But even even I mean I think about like France. France is a great example. I mean, we tr we try to, you know, get their help. You know, you know, we're trying to elicit their help. But at the same time, they're not they can't they can't be looking at the United States going, well, this is a great model. I'd like everybody, you know, in the French Empire to be like, oh yeah, we should, you know.

SPEAKER_00 19:44

Well, yeah, the the French King isn't certainly isn't thinking that. No. Right. And so so yeah, so the the French king is more thinking, uh whatever we can do to knock down England? Yeah, that that that's mostly what they're thinking. But it is interesting, you know. So this is 1776. Yeah, it's not that long. A little over a decade later is the French Revolution. Right. Right? And the the French Revolution is in many ways more radical, right, than the American Revolution. Uh and it's also um much more unstable, right? The the American Revolution, uh, there's a war of independence, but things settle down into reasonably stable government pretty fast. And even though the Articles of Confederation uh had their issues, it was not the reign of terror, right? Which is what happens after the after the French Revolution. But I think there is a sense in which like what happens here in America is kind of like beginning a process that's going to spread to other kinds of places. So uh, you know, maybe, maybe in some season we'll get to talking about Alexis de Tocqueville's uh book, Democracy in America, if we do this long enough. But but this is kind of what Alexis de Tocqueville thought. He thought uh he's writing about 50 years later, uh, so 1830s. And he thinks there's a wave of democracy that is sweeping the world. Oh, man. It's gonna, it's, it's, it's already, you know, the French Revolution has happened, and and he thinks the general trend is toward greater political equality. And his idea in going to America is I want to like America is farther down this road than these other countries are. So we can learn some things from the American experience about how to, you know, have democracy work well as opposed to go badly. Because France is not going to be able to avoid democracy. Like he thinks, you know, this is just the the wave of the future that it's gonna hit everybody. But you can you can guide the wave a little bit, right? And and you could try to learn from America's examples what they did right, what they didn't do right, uh, to try to have better versions of this uh elsewhere. So so in that sense, it is there is something significant, right, that's gonna have implications for America.

SPEAKER_01 21:57

It feels bigger than just the United States, I guess. I don't know. Gosh, it feels bigger. Like it feels like it's almost like a call to arms. I don't know.

SPEAKER_00 22:21

Well, I think, I think because there are different ways the Declaration of Independence could have been written. And one way it could have been written would have been framing everything in terms of here are the rights we have simply because we are English citizens. And as English citizens were entitled to these historical rights, they've been systematically violated and so bad now that the only way that we can retain our rights as English citizens is by becoming independent. They could have done that. And if you if you look back to some of the uh Revolutionary War pamphlets, there are some of them that make that sort of argument. But instead, by by using this more kind of John Locke style of argument that grounds things in these like timeless principles that all men are created in that all, you know, all of us have these rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. That timeless universal language means it is a document that's making a claim that's bigger than America. Right? It it's making a claim about how politics should be everywhere.

SPEAKER_01 23:25

Trevor Burrus, Jr.: Yeah, it can inspire. I think it would inspire people into to corners of the earth, you know, if they're feeling this revolutionary nature or feeling unjustly undermined or whatever.

SPEAKER_00 23:37

But golly.

SPEAKER_01 23:40

Yeah, I think that's one of the biggest things that I get. I mean, it's just this feeling of the the significance of it feels greater than it did to me. You know, because you know, you we we take it for granted, but you know, there's something there's a it's a big it's a big bell that's getting sung. It is.

SPEAKER_00 23:59

Yeah, it's it's very important historically. Um I I I think for me, one of the things that I've I've been thinking about is thinking about the risks and dangers that the people who wrote this document were undertaking. You know, so like the very last sentence we haven't talked about, it says and for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we get another religious reference they threw in. Uh we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor, and then they sign their names. Yeah. Right? Come and get it. Yeah, and and yeah, so like that's not hyperbole or exaggeration. Right? So if you think about think how this goes, right? They end up winning the war, and they, you know, end up being uh, you know, honored as founders of a new nation. But if they had lost the war, many of them would have been executed, thrown in prison, their property confiscated. And there was no hedging of bets. There's there's no sacred honor. You know, if you if you what typically happens, if you lead a revolution and you lose, right, uh you're branded as a traitor, right? You know, you're you're given a term of dishonor rather than honor, right? And so, you know, as they're doing this kind of appeal to heaven, I think they feel the weight of this decision that they are making and realize the risks that they are taking. Uh, you know, that if this doesn't turn out, uh, they really have put everything on the line, right? And um are putting their whole selves in. And so I think there's a sense of a kind of camaraderie. Yeah. You know, it's it's you know, when you see everybody else signing and it's your turn to walk up there, uh, there's a sense in which you're saying, like, which which team am I on?

unknown 25:54

Right.

SPEAKER_01 25:54

Well, John Hancock's not leaving anything to the imagination. That's right.

unknown 25:58

That's right.

SPEAKER_00 25:59

So, yeah. So the so the that that whole idea though, there's a sense in which, you know, there's this kind of oath or pledge that they're making to each other uh, you know, to see this uh see this revolution through to the end.

SPEAKER_01 26:12

Yeah. That's amazing. Yeah. Well, thank you for walking me through that entire thing, Alex. My goodness. Um, let's just say there's a season two. Yes. What would we be looking at? I mean, we just hit this giant right.

SPEAKER_00 26:27

Crescendo. Oh my goodness. Yeah. So uh we'll kind of see how uh how interested people are in this, and and we can figure out if we are we're gonna do a second season. But if if if we do one, uh one possibility is we might uh you know turn from the declaration to the preamble to the constitution, right? It's it's this kind of like grand statement of the like the values and principles of what the American Constitution is intended to accomplish. And so I think there could be a lot we could do kind of going through and looking at, you know, where some of those ideas about, you know, justice and domestic tranquility and you know, the liberty and so forth, you know, where those ideas come from, what they understood by them. Uh, but maybe also talking a little bit about like what went wrong with the Articles of Confederation, right? And and and and why does this set of values kind of articulate uh some of what they hope will be better under the new Constitution.

SPEAKER_01 27:20

Yeah, great.

SPEAKER_00 27:21

Well, thank you. Yeah, thanks, Barrett. The views expressed on this podcast are those of the speakers and not necessarily those of Iowa State University. Thank you for listening.