Their works theres been on health and Education Programs will present each of the historians and guide a question and answer session toward the end. You think you might like other programs please go to our website. Now enjoy. Hi good afternoon and welcome everyone to the inaugural edition of this new guilder Lehrman Institute of history program. Book breaks brings you some of americas greatest historians they discuss their most recent books. Today will be joined by eric foners he discusses his book, the second founding. But before i formally introduce professor foner i want to go over couple rent home keeping rules. Today is mothers day so i want to wish a happy mothers day to the most important people in history past and present, our moms. Happy mothers day to all the moms were now watching. But we are going to be doing as we will first be going through some of the tech issues, some of the tech aspects for you viewers out there that introduction of myself and the rest of the team and then we will be introducing professor foners self. For those of you who are new to the guilder lehman institute of American History we focus on k12 History Education and serving the general public. We help with resources, resources and programs some of the Affiliate School program to the Hamilton Education program. We also provide the right access to a whole range of primary resources many of which are from the 70000 piece collection of the institute collection. And im going to be your moderator today, i am part of the Hamilton Education program i am one of the coordinators. Im also joined by allison and marissa. They will be helping with the q a, and any tech issues you might have. So it just for you guys out there see you know, for security reasons your microphone is muted and your cameras automatically off. We chat is disabled. I know lots of it will have Great Questions to ask, but due to the fact we will have over 1000 participants in this program we cannot do live q a unfortunately. Look at the bottom of your screen there be a little q a button there for you to submit your questions and then we will be able to pass those along to professor foner at the end of the program. I know all of you will have some fantastic questions for professor foner but unfortunately we cannot do live q a session during this program because there will be over 1000 participants in the program. If you do have a question for professor foners please submit it to the q a section you can find the q a button right at the bottom of your screen. So todays speaker is professor eric foner hes a specialist and civil war and reconstruction area and his book, Abraham Lincoln and american slavery won the Pulitzer Prize he is also the Dewitt ClintonProfessor Emeritus with history at Columbia University. Today hes going to be discussing his book, the second founding help of the civil war and reconstruction remade the constitution. So without further due, here is professor foner. In the introduction of the book you mention this really interesting review split up rights in four different ways you talk about natural rights, civil rights, Political Rights, and social rights. And how they were all kind of combined in different ways to give different meanings of citizenship. Can you expand on that a little bit . Guest one of the things understand about reconstruction why it is a Pivotal Point in history as these concepts in the wake of the civil war and the wake of the abolition of slavery, inc. Really rethought all up and down the society. I am not a lawyer actually im not a legal scholar in in a way that helps to shape the way i look at this history. I am interested in what everybody was thinking not just court cases, not just congressional debates although those are very important. The memoir said she said reconstruction was a period when the fundamental issues of democracy, quality citizenship were debated up and down the society in the classrooms, in the courthouses, and the parlors and in peoples homes they were debating these. Now before the war, if you are of a certain lineage at say theres these different kinds of rights natural rights, those are what everybody should enjoy because they are human, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, those of the natural rights of mankind according to the declaration of independence. Civil rights those of the rights you need basically to compete in the society, the right to own property, the right to go to court, things like that. Then there are Political Rights for you can be a citizen and not have Political Rights. Women could not vote anywhere at this time but there are still citizens. Political rights were regulated by society and not everybody had them. Then there was the vague idea called social rights which really did not have much of the definition. But who you associate with, who you bring into your home, things like that. Now they were cleared to refreeze and she shouldnt have people some had alright some had only some of them, but it all gets changed and reconstruction. In these public debates or we call popular constitutionalism, they come to be merged in popular consciousness is the rights of citizens, the rights of americans. Im particularly interested in African Americans in the form of slaves who were part of this debate what they would say. They said all of these rights we demand all of these rights the same as white people. No longer should blacks be restricted from voting where they were in almost every state before the civil war. Some states did not give blacks the civil rights, illinois, lincolns home state made against the law for a black person to even enter the state. Free black people cannot legally enter the state of illinois according to the law of illinois. So there civil rights were severely restricted. Now and reconstruction one of the key stories here is how this concept of different rights gets merged into a new idea of just the rights of americans. That all people ought to enjoy. That is part of the impulse that leads to the rewriting of the constitution. Stu and if you wouldnt mind could you go through these three amendments . Talk a little bit about them, how they were intended to be at the time theyre put into the constitution . Also how they have been reinterpreted and used through American History up to the present day. Guest that is a big question but of course thats really what my book is about. You know let me say before restart. When you say what they were intended to do, thats a totally legitimate historical question. Im trying to figure out the people he wrote them and ratified them have in mind . Or did they try to accomplish . How did they think this would change things . But when you get into legal feelings and the word intent is often use original intent lets go back to the original intent of the founders. No historian takes that idea seriously theres no important document that has only one original intent. These amendments were compromises theres all sort of input into them. Theres changes in wording all the way through until ratification. Theres a lot of intent and a lot of different intent. A lot of different possibilities and understanding the meaning of these amendments. So what are they . The 13th amendment ratifies enacted in congress in early 1865 ratified by the end of 1865 irrevocably abolish slavery through out the entire country. In the process of doing that, to put the word slavery into the constitution for the first time the original constitution used a Persons Health labor, other persons, slavery was in their is protected but not in the word. Now in abolishing it in his name to the constitution. Why do we need that . Hadnt lincoln freed all the slaves in the emancipation proclamation . Well no actually generally first 1863 did free little over 3 million slaves, there is still another three quarters of a million to make did not apply slaves in the four border states, missouri, delaware were in the union they had not succeeded that well over half a million slaves. There is still in unions of the proclamation was a military measure against and it did not apply to them. There are points of the confederacy as well. Moreover, what you really need to was slavery as to abolish all the state laws. Slavery is treated by state laws those laws are still on the books when the emancipation proclamation is enacted. Freeing people is not quite the same thing as abolishing slavery. The 13th amendment eradicated slavery throughout the entire country and has a second section which isnt extremely important basically says congress will have the power to enforce this amendment with appropriate legislation. What is it mean to enforce the h amendment, enforce the abolition of slavery . Obviously no one can be bought and sold anymore. Slavery includes all sorts of things, denial of education, denial of the right of marriage, all sorts of rights are taken away when you are a slave. Does abolishing slavery restore those rights to everybody . What about the racism that is essential to slavery in this country . The ball thing slavery abolished racism and give the federal government the power to attack racism as a relic or residue slavery . Nobody quite new. The simple act of abolishing slavery comes much more complicated the more you think about it. Very soon after ratification, Congress Passed the Civil Rights Act of 18661 of most important laws in our history. Based on the 13th amendment to guarantee to africanamericans the basic civil rights short of voting. All of the other civil rights to go to court, sue, have property have the law apply equally to you as to others. That is part of the abolition of slavery thats defining what it means to be a free person in america. Now you have 4 million free people who are slaves just a few years ago. And soon after that an 1866, Congress Goes further to reprove the 14th amendment. The 14th the memo the most important amendment, and our history after the bill of rights certainly, the longest amendment through all sorts of things together in terms of just settling the issues of the civil war. There are things in there about confederate debt, something southerners will never get compensation monetarily for their slaves that have been freed, the core is the first, the key part is the first section which begins by declaring anybody born in the United States a citizen. You might say whats the big deal . Well, before the civil war that was not the case. You could be born in the United States as a free person and not be a citizen thats with the Supreme Court said in the dred scott decision. Only white people can be citizens. No black person can be a citizen of the United States born here or anywhere else. Citizenship and race were closely tied before the civil war because of slavery and how influence the the whole structure of society and politics. Thats now abolished, this is whats called birthright citizenship. Still controversial because there is debate whether it applies to the children of undocumented immigrants . We are on mothers day today a mother a woman who is here illegally undocumented gives birth to a child in the United States. What is the status of that child . That child is obviously a citizen. Anybody born in the United States it doesnt matter what your parents are, they could be bank robbers that does not affect the status of the child as a citizen. The only exception is native americans. At that time they were considered citizens of their tribal sovereigntys not the United States is not until 19204 that all native americans become citizens of the United States. It mass majority has citizenship for the first time a uniform definition of citizenship. In the amendment goes on to say first of all, no state can deny to any one of these citizens the privileges or immunities of citizens here we get back to the question of intent what was the original intent of saying or referring to the privileges or immunities of citizens . There is a tremendous array of opinions on that. Some people including the Supreme Court but they really didnt amount to very much most of your rights came from the states not the federal government sipping a citizen of the United States did not amount to anything. Other said no, privilege and immunity with the public goes all sorts of things the right to an education for example. All sorts of rights and over the course of comments interesting just recently there is a Federal District court case coming out of michigan where they ruled that literacy is a fundamental part of being a free american. Its a 14th amendment decision saying the schools of detroit is so terrible that people are being denied a basic right of american citizenship. Thats the right to be educated. The state has to do something about that. Thats the 14th amendment decision. Oversee with the states doing in there guaranteeing a full range of rights of privileges for all americans. The 14th amendments being debated right now as we sit here at many levels of the judicial system no state can deprive any person puts equal into the constitution for the first time in any meaningful way. The original constitution mentions what happens is two candidates get equal number of electoral votes thats different question. Now suddenly, all persons in the United States are to enjoy legal equality. Again you might say whats the big deal . That was not true before the civil war or immediately after a black laws, black codes, that apply only to africanamericans, the ways white people were not punished deprive them of things that white people objected to said they can no longer do that the state level, equal protection of the law and finally to jump into the 15th amendment which goes even further and seeks to guarantee the right to vote to all black men in the country. It says that no state can deny any citizen the right to vote because of her race. But it is a limited amendment in that sense it leaves open other grounds for denying people the right to vote. For example the womens Rights Movement was extremely angry about this because it left open to deprive women the right to vote thats not discrimination on the basis of race. You could have property qualifications, poll taxes, literacy tests long they were not racially configured. And in fact later on in the 19th century the right to vote was taken away from africanamerican men in the south the constitution was nullified basically down there in the south in the late 19th century. Not by loss and black people cant vote anymore. By laws supposedly nonracial basically to limit the black vote makes them equal citizens its an amazing transformation, ten years after slavery was the most important Economic Institution in the United States. Now, the former slaves are elevated to this condition of equality. Thats one of the reasons i say to such a fundamental change in the constitution. Im going to stop right there ive given you a long, long answer. That was absolutely fantastic. Before we get ready to transition to the q a part of the program, the kind of final question i wanted to ask is the reconstruction period, the second founding. Which is really as you bring out in your book is so critical in the history of our country. It is someways not as well known we go from the civil war that we skip over two already the start of the 20th century and someways. If you could talk a little bit about why you think that is, and also how this reconstruction how has the historical interpretation of it changed over the decades as well customer. Well, i have devoted a lot to study reconstruction but i have to agree with you is often not very well known or understood. I think there is a lot more recognition of its important nowadays than lets say when in school and college. But for reconstruction of my mind is critical to Understanding America today the issues of reconstruction are right on our front pages maybe they been pushed off for the moment because the Public Health situation we face. But who is a citizen . That is being debated every day at our border. Who ought to have the right to vote. The ought to vote is being suppressed in many states people thrown off the voting rolls for trivial reasons who should vote is a reconstruction issue very much live today, terrorism reconstruction was a period of home grown american terrorism not on what some of bin laden planned but the ku klux klan were groups that kills more americans and bin laden ever managed to do. How you deal with terrorism how do you can bet it is a reconstruction question. The relationship between economic democracy and political democracy its a period where at least men not women there is a level Playing Field of Political Rights. And yet economically of course the former slaves were at a tremendous disadvantage. They came out of slavery with no economic wherewithal, they were not giving 40 acres and a mule that many thought were there right coming out of slavery. And so you have a vast inequality economically coupled with a tremendous stride toward political democracy politically. That is not unlike our situation today in this country we have had such an increase in inequality. Thats been in the last generation or so. Another thing is, for many, many years we go to historiography at great length, many, many years reconstruction was seen as the lowest point in the american political drama. In other words its a period of corruption, mrs. Government and corn to the scholars of the early 20th century many came out of my university,