With union. For lincoln and most republicans the union was a sort of mystical perpetual indivisible eternal thing. Stephen dug zblas whoouglas the regular democratic candidate that year stated over and over that no matter what else happens the union had to be preserved. John c. Breckenridge says the constitution and equality of the states are symbols of everlasting union. And the fourth candidate old john bell, lo ran as candidate of the Constitutional Union party didnt talk about anything else. They didnt even have a platform. Their platform was in their title. It was union. And the constitution. Union comes up so often during this century which is not peters perfect century but it is his second favorite century after the late 18th century. Lincolns vision of union rested on free labor and a voice in selfgovernment for common citizens and the potential to rise economically. Not the guarantee but the potential. Jefferson davis also believed in the union as safeguarding selfgovernment and Economic Opportunity but of course he also saw it as guaranteeing slavery in its expansion. Both men celebrated the declaration rfdeck clarollar declaration of independence. Both invoked jefferson repeatedly and throughout their years. Jeffersons ideas regarding union were complex and immensely important. They resonated throughout the 19th century on both sides of the Potomac River or the ohio, if you prefer. The United States put thomasjefferson on its 5cent stamp in 1856. Only two people preceded jefferson on stamps in the United States. Jorge, of course always would have to be one of this em. The other one was benjamin franklin. The confederacy put him on their 10cent stamp in 1861. The only person who landed on a confederate stamp before jefferson was Jefferson Davis, interestingly enough. This afternoon peter and i are going to have our conversation about jeffersons thinking about union and how his ideas were available for use or misuse by many different people in the decades between 1800 and 1880 peter. So why dont you talk for a few minutes about jefferson and union . Just a few minutes. Take as long as you want. It is rainy outside. No ones going to play tennis. Well, im a radio star so i want you all to close your eyes and suspend disbelief. Peter has not only a jefferson tie no. You got to see it. But two jefferson pins. Well gary id like to start with a quotation from jefferson and its an interesting one. Its when hes talking about the declaration of independence as hes designing a reading list at the university of javirginia. Gary and i used to teach a course, the famous 701. That reading list included the declaration, of course. Oh, i didnt write it. The American People wrote it. Im just channeled it. He said what is the declaration . We want jeffersons simple definition of what the declaration is all about. He says it is the fundamental act of union of these states. He says the declaration gave us union. Now, as gary said just before, we dont that word Means Nothing to us now. What could he possibly have meant, why did he say it. Why didnt he talk instead about all those wonderful things in the second paragraph. Oh all men are created equal. Youve heard that one. Government by consent. The american creed, as its frequently been described. Yet for jefferson there is something creedal about union. What i want to try to do is put union and his vision of republican government together because i think we and many critics in the 19th century dissociated the two. Now you say it is only referring maybe to what used to be called the Labor Movement in the 18th century, in jeffersons time and into the 19th century as people criticized the union they looked at its flaws. People like William Lloyd garrison said this is a covenant with death, with hell, this constitution. The union is associated with the constitution not with the declaration and the constitution is the beginning of american politics. When we still had political life in this country americans celebrated the constitution as this great reform caucus in action, as one author called it where sensible, realistic states men got together and they crafted the only possible miraculously, the only possible constitution that could embrace so many different states, different labor systems so much diversity. It was a compromise in other words. As garrison suggested, to have union, you had to compromise. Every good historian will tell you thats exactly the point of the union right now. Thats not what jefferson meant by union though. For him, it was the coming together of selfgoverning republics which in and of itself, the fact that the states had their own constitutions, were governing themselves, what a tremendous breakthrough for mankind, in idea of selfgovernment. And then showing their genius for union in the creation of new state governments the first peoples in the modern world who govern themselves. Then theyve built on that to create yet a more allembracing union. Union was part of the unfolding of the republican vision. There would be future unions. The union would expand. The union was dynamic. The union was processed. The union was a Movement Toward a better world because what it demonstrated weve talked about equality. We know how important that is. Were all equal. But what is the point of equality. It enables you to consent. You cant consent if youre not equal. And what do you consent to . You consent to that which enhances the welfare of mankind. Because suddenly the people are governing themselves. Theyre not under the heel of despots and pirates. Now selfgovernment. And i want to tell you this ply fellow americans im getting worked up now. You can tell. Have a sip of water. I better. Americans, youre just going to have to wait a minute. Democratic government. Hold on to your seats. Is an engine for moral progress. Im channeled jefferson. Im channeled the democratic enlightenment. Once the people rule themselves, government will improve. We will no longer have coercive despotic governments. We will be governing ourselves. You cant have a real union if theres in any oars atcoercion at all. Well come back to that. Maybe sooner than you think. Really . We may not be linear here this afternoon. It may be sort of stream of consciousness but go ahead for now. Its a process. Dont think of union as a fixed thing. Its not perfect. You heard what madison said. What they said about the constitution. More perfect. Suggesting its not most perfect. Its not perfect. Its getting better. Because we dont understand yet what natures god enjoins but were figuring it out. I dont know if anybody out there is into natural religion and acknowledges natures god unless you are a unitarian. They dont talk about natures god in unitarian churches. I know im lapsed unitarian. Can you be a lapsed unitarian . Check it out. This is what you get. From what youre saying, let me push you on Something Else right here. If this is a process and its things are going toward, with any luck something thats even better with be did jefferson think this could only be i mean the union became very much an exceptionalist concept by the mid 19th century. Is it that way in jeffersons mind . Could this happen somewhere else . There is an exceptional dimension. You know the city on the hill idea that weve heard from Ronald Reagan as he was channeled John Winthrop that idea that United States is an exemplary nation the example suggests that others can follow. But follow is the key word. They will become more enlightened in the fullness of time. Whats remarkable about the American People is these are the people who made the revolution is that they theyre all literal mostly, except in places like virginia just joking. I come from new england. I cant help it. Theyre largely literal. New england used to be important. Didnt it . Coll boy coll didnt exist. Okay . All right. Moving on. It actually did exist. New england just hadnt named it yet so they didnt think it existed. You know now why the union failed. All right. So where was i going with this . I had asked you whether jeffersons notion was an exceptionalist notion of what was happening in the colonies at that point because it became very much that. Right. And jefferson does think that the americans have a unique opportunity to govern themselves because they are literate in the broadest sense of the word. Theyre civically competent. Theres been a high degree of local autonomy and selfgovernment in the colonies and the revolution itself is testimony to the fact that americans are conscious of their rights and willing to fight for them. Because this was a peoples war. I dont believe all this but im just channeled jefferson. Lincoln called the civil war a peoples contest. And thats the important thing. Because that is the principle of republican government. We now have abandoned notions that we have little gods on earth, kings who give rule to us who are our political fathers without whom we could not exist. We have abandoned the great chain of being that suggests that some are born to rule and others are born to be ruled. What a magnificent idea. But what a scary idea in the 18th century when the people are basically considered and im now quoting Abigail Adams rubbish. I just happened to be reading her recently. But it is a common way of referring to ordinary people the scum lincoln and many other unionists in the mid 19th century would have said nothing had really changed, that the rest of the world still didnt think that ordinary people were capable of selfgoverning. I think thats a key point when we compare lynn son and jefferson on union. Lincoln sees that this is the last best hope of mankind. You might say that jefferson sees it as the first best hope for mankind. That he has this enlightenment idea that it will spread. Light will spread. Its almost a metaphor thats natural, that suggests as the day dawns and as the light spreads across the land, people can see clearly. That notion of seeing clearly is very important. And the people are capable of seeing what they need to see. What they into ed to see to govern themselves. You dont have to be, as we say now, a nuclear physicist. You just have to be a democrat no just joking. What about the notion of the union being perpetual, that was so important by mid century to people who that saw all of these qualities in union that made the United States exceptional . Thats a great point. That. Point about perpetuity. The only thing that jefferson thought should somebody perpetual were the fundamental principles or ideas on which the union was based. And let me put it this way. Were going to get into this complicated development thats really important over time. I want to introduce the key to jeffersons thinking about union. And thats federalism. Jeffersonian federalism is not what we have today. You have to understand that his conception of political authority, legitimate political authority, we talk about family values today, but for jefferson, the family was the foundational republic on which larger republics would be built. I think its important to get this down, because its going to explain i think a lot of things that happen over the 19th century. For jefferson federalism culminating in the union and perhaps in an expanding union, perhaps even a union of unions that will cover the world begins literally at home. And that Foundational Union of man and wife, the creation of a family which is the incubator of republican citizens in the next generation. Families combine together for jefferson had new england envy. Gary obviously doesnt. He wished virginia had towns. What do we have in virginia. What did we have in virginia . Counties. In which local clerks selfappointed themselves, and gave rule through parish vestrys, through county courts. The only Representative Institution was the house of burgesss. And those elections, 90 of them werent contested. And the ones that were contested were drunken brawls because thats the way you treated voters its a pretty sorry story. Jefferson was familiar with this. He said we need towns so the families, the fathers can get together. And on top of the towns, counties. And then we go to a higher level, to the states and then to the union, the federal union. Heres the key idea. Well throw this back at you. Equality is crucial. We talked before about you cant have consent without equality. And every you cannot have coercion. No. Every level of union, whether it be on the town level the union of families or the county level, the union of towns, those unions exist to preserve and perpetuate the equality of their constituent units. Do you follow me . Thats pretty straightforward. The legitimacy, the value of the union of the town is that all families will be treated equally and have an equal voice in their own government. And you move up the ladder that imperative remains. And that is union depends on preserving equality of constituent units, because otherwise, some are benefiting at the expense of other thats another way of saying that some are ruling others. You know, the great problem with unions throughout our periods is the fear that its going to be captured by the bad guys. And one thing americans produce in great abundance is bad guys. This problem, though of equality within the union, did you have another did i step on your bunch line there . No, i was waiting for a big response. Oh, okay. Are you going to respond . I dont think theyre going to. One thing that for example john c. Calhoun wrestled with, how do you maintain what he would have called equality, equal treatment in all the ways that matter, within a union where demographics were tilting power toward the nonslave holding states. Thats, of course, the great nightmare of the slave holders. And their need to control, in fact to capture which is precisely what they did, because the federal government was dominated by slave holders throughout its existence up to the civil war. So much so that by the time lincoln comes along, and says, maybe we should agree not to let the area of the slave states expand, then thats too much. Thats violating the basic idea of union. Heres the problem i think its what we would try to reconcile as we talk about the problem of union, how can you have equality or liberty you might put it, autonomy independence and union . Is there attention between them . Thats what i mean by and where do whats the line between compromise and coercion, they would have argued about that too. You say im compromising. What im going to suggest to you, im going to try to channel jefferson here the way we resolve such quarrels is that Public Opinion becomes progressively more enlightened. And thats whats so hard for us to believe in an era in which Public Opinion doesnt become more enlightened. Thats the idea of an organic developing union too. Thats going to right, it will expand. And the idea that expansion means balancing free and slave states, thats insane. Because jefferson honestly believes that slavery will eventually disappear. And why is it going to disappear, not because of economic forces and market forces. Its going to disappear because people are going to see that its wrong. Remember the revolution was against authority and jefferson doesnt have a great record right now. He does equality, coercion slavery, contradiction between a republic of slave holders is going to become too striking too conspicuous, and americans will see its in their best interest. Will he have argued for equality among the white citizenry or would he have included everybody . No, he wouldnt. The short answer on this as you know is that for jefferson the idea of the way he thinks about slaves is as a captive nation, held unjustly, this is important. Slaves dont deserve to be slaves, theyre not naturally slaves, they are slaves because of what jefferson would like to blame george the third and his predecessors because we have them. But it is an evil institution, its unjust. The solution is to end the state of war that is slavery. It is a state of war, its a cold war of a violent coercive institution. His big concern about slavery is that young men in virginia will grow up in a world of slave holders and that will be their school. They dont have Public Schools in virginia in the antebellum period. Instead theyre going to learn to school slave holders. People as old as we are because of race privilege, because theyre white, thats horrible. He needs to break this down. He would see a union down the road where black people would have been removed . They would have been removed. This is in the best of all possible worlds. And jeffer soons a patient guy. It could take generations. Its not going to happen in his lifetime. He keeps pushing the date off. Eventually people will see the light and emancipate slaves and send them he doesnt know where, maybe the west indies maybe west africa. In the best of all possible future worlds. The former slaves, the freed people will govern themselves, and then as an independent selfgoverning people, they can form unions. The union among the enlightened republican nations of the world we can divide black and white so that one day we can unite. Lincoln embraced colonization as well . Yes. Until deep into the civil war. Didnt go over until 1812. The depth of race prejudice i want to suggest the way race and nation are synonymous terms and hes jeffersons really thinking geo politically about warring nations and all the things he says about slavery grow out of his wartime experience. Slaves are dangerous to the fut turt of the republic, because theyre a fifth column, because when they have the opportunity and this is how slavery is ended throughout the world, in wartime, they will seize it. Nothing is more nothing destabilizes swlavry the way a war destabilizes slavery. Whether its the revolution or the war of 1812 along the chesapeake or the civil war where the armies are great engines of emancipation. Its the worst thing that can happen to a slave holders world. Jefferson does believe in the separation of races for native americans, they can become civilized they can become white in other words and they can adopt farming ways and become effectively whites. After all, all good virginians, we probably have a few in the room youre all decendents of pocahontas if im not mistaken. Im a 19th century guy i have no idea what was going on with pocahontas. Thats so early. Many people as we move through the 19th century would use Thomas Jefferson in the sectional debates to but res