Story and how to tell the story of the country in a way that neither sells a short the National Greatness or whitewashes our National Sins in our politics and what may be an unusual way and this book is clearly intended to speak the gist of the moment to hear about how to approach the questions. Wilfred mcclay is a national treasure. Hes first and foremost the chair of the university of oklahoma he is admired and loved by scores of students past and present and one of the great writers of American History. His book the self and society of modern america was just the best book in American Intellectual history. Its a students guide to u. S. History and why place matters, geography, identity and civic life in modern america acted in the service of the country he served for 11 years on the National Council of humanity is which is the Advisory Board of the National Endowment for the humanities. Hes a member of the u. S. Commission which i told you in order to challenge myself to pronounce that word, the Commission Planning the official public commemoration of the 250th anniversary in 2026 graduate of st. Johns college in annapolis he received his phd from Johns Hopkins and with the latest book h hes made an extraordinary contribution to the capacity to understand ourselves. Land of hope describes itself as an invitation to the Great American story and it exists to fill a kind of gap. We will invite all of you into that conversation for questions and answers so with that, lets welcome wilfred mcclay. [applause] my first visit to the new and improved aei. Im finding my way around. Its wonderful to be here. This is an institution that i hold very dear and have for many years and i think the fact that they have appointed yuval levin to this important post is a very good sign about the future. For someone in the academy to write a book like this is a pretty insane proposition. Are we okay . It seems to me we have a problem in the profession that i am a part and made many advances. The experiences of the inarticulate of the marshall and those that have been neglected by historical studies in the past the intended result of the result has been a fragmented fractured incoherent this continuous understanding of the past and when it is conveyed to young people the larger arc of the history that you yuval levin put it or it reflects the outlook of those like elliott howard. The gist of this is that we are losing a general grasp. Now it is a broader shared it as a coherent entity to think of ourselves as citizens to prepare people for citizenship. And the rights and responsibilities but in the sense of membership of being members of the society and part of the story which america is constituted with these consequences, a great nation needs and deserves a great narrative to sustain itself and the challenges that are inevitably it goes without saying it cannot be a fairytale. Its going to be truthful to be convincing. But there is no necessary connection between a truthful account, excuse me, theres no necessary contradiction between the truthful account and aspiring one especially when the subject is American History. And we have ceased to provide that. Either one, either truthful or convincing or inspiring in our schools today. The title land of hope itself begins to convey. Im going to unpack that a little more and i hope that you will forgive me. I want to read some passages to give you a sense of the feel of it, the tone of it because that is one of the hardest things was to find the right pitch that would be accessible to High School Students because after all, they are ultimately it is the high school textbook. Im happy, delighted, amazed at the reception that its often with general readers, the adult reading public for lack of a better term. Its really meant for young people, it is meant to compete with the large and hyper expensive textbooks that are offered. So the aims of the book are clear in th the the alp the outn epigraph that ive borrowed from an essay who as you know is a great author for young people and they recommend it. He was a great radical in the 1920s. There is a vivid appreciation in this country and a profound sense of connection. By the way, this passage the title of the book is the first thing i wrote. Ive never done that before but i sort of brought this title to if you buy iit bias but i wantee and how that theyre in front of me and then the other thing i added is this, and this one is on the side propped up by a piece of cardboard bit longer. Every generation rewrites the past and it is an ornamental arc that in times of danger we are driven to the records by pressing the answers to the riddles of today. We need to know what kind of firm ground of their men belonging to the generations before us have found to stand on. Despite the changing conditions of life, they were not very different from ourselves. Their thoughts were the grandfathers of our thoughts. They managed to meet situations as difficult as those we have to face, to meet and sometimes in some measure to make their hopes prevail. We need to know how they did it. And this is continuing with those and this is the part that im especially interested in. It can stretch like a lifeline across the present and get us past the delusion of the exceptional now, n. Dot blocks the good thinking. That is like the institutions are caving and being replaced by new institutions, not necessarily in accordance with the preconceived hopes and the political thought i focus to lok backwards as well as forwards. Quite appropriate, isnt it . Note the passage that i kind of market. In connection to the living past it can be steady and reassuring in the great upheaval and in that sense the connection can free us from the aleutian. It is another times to be completely without precedent from the aleutian of the past had nothing whatsoever to teach us. We are trying to think of this way and ou in our present timese steady flow of dramatic and unsettling events and Technological Innovations rendered the past irrelevant. Young people i think are especially tempted to think this way because frankly they have less experience and that means that they have nothing but the present as a comparison. But us past this prodigious are viewed as an idiot delusion. We would say idiotic but he calls it an idiot delusion and recommends that its something necessary and not merely desirable. It should add the way these observations to tell you of the year in which he wrote these words come in 1941. This was a truly frightening moment in the history of the world, the western world particularly. Hitler and control of the european continent, the fate of the civilization seemed to hang by a thread. He could have been forgiven by thinking and this time the past in the midst of the precedent or that the past had nothing to teach such a moment tha but that isnt what he said and part of the point of looking backwards as he counsels us to do. We learned to free ourselves from the mental imprisonment in the present. In this conviction that they have that what we are seeing and experiencinexperiencing and deby represents the pinnacle of Human Knowledge and possibility for the inevitable state of human beings. We enrich our imaginations even as we become far less susceptible to the idiot delusions. Instead it reaches back to it and seeks to recover the roots of the great story and presents the story in the fullness not in its coarse brutality and failure although not neglecting those things either, then its triumphs and grander and world historical importance. In the achievement of the common goal and the common good it needs to teach us how to balance criticism with appreciation. Taking into account the challenges of statesmanship as well as the conditioning role of circumstances and the context and the making of the law and politics. Above all it needs to understand historical knowledge is an element in the life of the citizens. A knowledge not only of the institutions and the rights, but a sense of membership of those belonging and obligation. In addition, the book is unusual in the extent for the meaning of the past it tries t pastor triem how to think historically how to understand its not just in inner account of indisputable and the selfexplanatory details. Instead it is a reflective task for the depths of the humanity. It doesnt tell us what to think about the past and almost never presents us with a simple morality play. It means learning to appreciate complexity, nuance and context. The circumstances within which historical actors are constrained. It means asking questions and asking them again and again. It causes stres fresh questionso arise in our minds. And let me talk now about some of the books more specific distinctive. It is a tangible physical object rather than a collection of pixels. It is a handsome book and one that i hope people continue to have in their personal libraries of the future for the family collections. By taking a stand with the permanence of the print is a growing tendency of the School Systems to rely on digital materials for money at to find d the reading to be ever more omnipresent screens. As you will see this as a matter of no small social significance. Digital text can be altered in the blink of an eye. The permanence of a printed book and the ability of the subject that it addresses. Also land of hope wasnt written by a committee although you are looking at the committee. Thence to please different constituencies and groups a at a stakeholders and Political Action committees and all of the other local interested parties. Typing up the way in my attic without the graduate Student Research assistants that has been simplified and i take pain to make it as approachable as possible and i will let you be the judge whe then i read some passages. Many of the distinctive star in the title. First there is the another word land. America is the land. Its not only an idea. True it is in some respects the expression of an idea or ideas about liberty, equality, selfrule and other such things and it initiated the liberty in the nations of the world. Its the worldwide influence of the declaration even unto todays protest in hong kong. The history means its particular triumphs and sufferings sacrifices come in our memories of these things are important factors that draw and hold us together precisely they are the sacrifices and sufferings and victories bought of all humanity that of ourselves. It is commanding the devotion not only because the american idea but because of the brave countrymen some of whom are our fathers and brothers and relatives. Second there is the third word in the title, hope the concept of hope and this is a part of the argument from the outset. Most willingly one great exception to the Common People who came in bondage but most willingly restless exploratory unwilling to settle for the conditions of which they were born drawn by the prospect of the new beginning. The space to pursue their ambitions in ways the respective world did not permit. Hope is a powerful world in america. It has material meanings as well as spiritual ones. It has existed in abundance in america and in fact nothing about america better defines the character and the ubiquity of hope. The sense that as they were initially given to us it cannot be the final word about them and we can never settle for that. Few qualitie qualities are moren thaamericanfan base and it is al quality above all else. An aspirational policy that cannot possibly be adequately accounted for and merely in material terms. Of course hope and opportunity are not synonymous with success. In the land of hope it sometimes means the land of disappointme disappointment. Its unavoidable in the nation that professes such high ideals makes itself vulnerable to the criticism when it falls short of them. Sometimes very far as we have done but we shouldnt be surprised by this. Many heroes turn out to be deeply flawed human beings. All human beings are flawed as are all human enterprises. Enterprises. To believe otherwise is to be naive and much of what passes for cynicism in our time is more naivete and deep disguise. America, hope is to persistent and compelling of the force to be defeated for long by such passing sentiment. And then finally theres also the title of story. America has a story and it is important that our young people be acquainted with that story. Its how we organize the world. We organize them around stories that are constituents of our social existence. We are at our core remembering a story making creatures into that in chief ways we find meaning in the flow of events that we call history of literature into a basic human need and then pulls. Now it is especially important and yet problematic in our view of the american past. Perhaps the single most sensitive subject in the present day history is the place of slavery in the nations past. The challenge in the subject is one of balance. Without enduring its significance there is a tendency among the young to imagine that slavery was a uniquely American Institution but this of course is a profound misconception. The United States didnt create slavery, didnt create racism or resold prejudice. Iits as old as history and the default position of human nature absent some strong moral force that the United States while having a history that is touched by these evils and having participated in them is also a country that has a larger history of which can be proud of seeking to overcome such things. To deal with the problem decisively at the time of the countrys beginnings. It has become deeply enmeshed in the economy despite all the ways its existence and stood in the glaring contradiction in the nations commitment to equality and selfrule as expressed in the declaration of independence. Hence in the famous how is it that we hear the loudest yelp for liberty among the drivers of negroes. How we wonder today could such otherwise enlightened men as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves a practice so contradictory to what they stood for and as i write in the book there is no easy answer to such questions but shortly part of the answer is each of us is born into a world we did not make an ended h the greatest effort that offered a great cost. The sensibilities are not static. They develop over time and develop a moral progress that is very slow. Part of the history involves the training of the imagination learning to see and act in their own time and learning to see even our heroes with the added noble qualities. People like us who may become strained by circumstances beyond their control. Continuing here the ambivalence regarding slavery built into the structure of the constitution we are almost certainly unavoidable in the short term in order to achieve an effective Political Union of the nation. What we need to understand is how the original compromise no longer became acceptable to increasing the numbers of american debate of america especially in one part of the union and why the ubiquitous institution in Human History came to be seen not merely as an unfortunate evil but a simple impediment to the Human Progress sustained upon the whole nation. We live today on the other side of the great transformation and moral sensibility. The transformation taking place. It would be profoundly wrong as some new the United States was founded on slavery, no it was founded on other principles entirely on the liberty and selfrule that have been discovered and defined and enshrined through the tempering efforts through the centuries of european and british and American History. These foundational principles would win out in the end not without much a struggle that is driving with the bloodshed and the United States enjoyed the miraculous birth that wasnt the product of the deception and delivery. And the publication of the New York Times 1619 project which i suspect you are all somewhat familiar with which does in fact exist. Its to promote the idea absent countervailing argument there is now a genuine danger that its part of the makeup and the dna and the metaphor. Its a blessing that woul lessot only be false but pernicious. A related lesson of history is thus dates they often may be less than obvious to contemporary observers precisely because only the leader is in the position to understand all of the essential forces that are at play. Being a great leader requires courage and imagination especially when the outcome seems doubtful and the public is leaning in a different direction or is simply afraid. The displeasure of the multitudes accepting unpopularity as a result. The book contains many examples of this lets take the case of lincoln. We are so accustomed to thinking of lincoln and heroic terms that we forget the depth and breadth of his unpopularity during virtually his entire time in office. Few great leaders have been more comprehensively disdained, load and underestimated. Of course it is to be expected and it was shared in the north, to. As it was put, his associates often a simple susan, a baboon, and aimless joker abolitionist Wendell Phillips called him a huckster of politics. George mcclellan, his opponent in the 1864 election openly disdained him into such wellmeaning baboon. I rather hold a candle to that but he was convinced it was good reason that he was doomed to lose with incalculable consequences for the future of the nation and all that he had done and all that he had sacrificed to that end. We need to remember that this is how history happened. Its very much directed towards young people but i think all of us can benefit. We need to remember this is generally how history has been. It isnt like a hollywood movie in which the background music swells and the crowd in the room applauds an athletes to their ft as they dispense the words and the camera pans the room full of smiling faces. In the real history background music doesnt smile. The trumpets do not sound into the critics often seem louder than the applause. They have to wonder is he acting in vain, or the criticisms of others in fact true welltimed judge him harshly and will his sacrifice count for nothing. Few great leaders have more comprehensive than lincoln can i do this with other statesmen to try to get people to appreciate what its like to be in the shoes of someone, to be the man in the arena as roosevelt said. Let me also suggest something the land of hope relates to the story of the end of the civil war in april of 65 in a way that might hold lessons for the fellow countrymen today that seemed to regard the past with contempt and here is how i describe thdescribed the scene. This is a somewhat longer passage. April 9 after the last flurry of resistance they arranged a brick home at the courthouse to surrender his army. But the surrender of the army would trigger the surrender of others and so represented at the end of the confederate cause. It was a poignant scene dignified and restrained. Not seen in nearly 20 years we arrived first wearing the uniform soon to be joined by the code. They showed one another a defense respectful courtesy and he saw they keep their side arms and take them home for the spring planting. Four days later when the men marched in, chamberlain of maine, the hero of gettysburg was present at the ceremony. It was reflecting on the soldierly respect for the men before and those that only before had been his foes and here i quote from chamberlain. Before us and proud humiliations to begin body mint of manhood. Men who neither toiled or suffered an effective death or disaster or hopelessness could bend from the resolve standing before us now in famished. But the memories that bound us together as no other bond wasnt such to be welcomed back into the union so tested and assured on our part to sound dot the cheer with a word or whisper standing again at the order but at odds this tome is and Breath Holding as if it were the passing of the dead. That was chamberlains observation and it picks up from there. Such deep sympathies. Having generated at least 1. 5 million casualties on the two sides combined, including 620,000 or som so people estimae far more than that, the equivalent of 6 million men in todays American Population wanted for soldiers that went for ththrough the war never retn home and one in 13 returned home with one or more missing limb. For decades to come in every village and town i they have planned one could see men bearing such lingering reminder of the price they and others had paid. And yet his words suggested there might be room in the days and years ahead for the spirit of reconciliation, disputed that he called for in his second inaugural speech. The spirit of caring for the afflicted and buried and then moving ahead together. It was a slender hope but one Worth Holding we all know that it didnt turn out that way thanks in large part to John Wilkes Booth the assassin of lincoln, but the story i think is illustrative nonetheless. If chamberlain and his troops could find it in their hearts to be that forgiving, that generous, that respectful to men that had only been days before their mortal enemies, we are to be able to extend a similar generosity towards a far more distant past. We can be encouraged in this disposition by lincoln himself who said something similar in a Cabinet Meeting on april 14 the very day of his assassination. I hope there will be no surprise addition to no persecution. There has been too much of a desire on the part, some of our good friends to be masters to interfere with a dictate and to treat the people nothey treat ts fellow citizens. There is too little respect for the rights and i do not sympathize in the ceiling is. Perhaps the hopes were unrealistic. Perhaps such an outcome is impossible and perhaps there would have been too many concessions. We can never know for sure but given the high regard in which hes highly held by most americans and most of the worlds greatest leaders, it would be a mistake not to Pay Attention to the statesmanlike example. Not only the understanding of the past in which he lived, but the present in which we live as well. Lincoln never lost sight of the facts of the war that consumed his presidency and finally his life would be a failure if it were not in the end of the war of the reunification and reconciliation and bought a war of conquest intentions. We will fear far better in the internal conflicts of how we can recall the same thing. Finally, another act of statesmanship, one that wasnt all that controversial at the time, but it has become highly controversial in the years to send, president Harry Trumans decision to use the atomic bomb to bring thduring the war againo an end. Whether to use the weapons against japan and if so how to use them. In todays debate over morality of using the new fearsome weapons, we had an unfortunate tendency to attribute the decision apart from its context for without reference to the way the responsibility with the National Leader like truman had to fulfill under the circumstances. I tried to counsel readers and they try to counsel my students against such weightless moralizing, heres my description in the book of trumans decision. Truman was a blunt and straightforward indecisive man who did not agonize over his choices. They quickly decided it would be imperative to use the new weapon as something that would save lives particularly in light of the horrendously bloodied experience and what it pretended for conventional invasion and occupation of japan. But how best to use it. Given the fact the only two bombs were then available in the very real possibility of failing to explode properly did not make sense to announce a demonstration explosion in some uninhabited area to prove the weapons often powered the detonation might fail. Entirely and make american threat look hollow. Even if a demonstration, exploded why not have the desire to effect anyway. How can truman possibly justify to the world his declining us useless weapon. At that declining resulted in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths. He concluded the only realistic choice open to him was to demand japanese surrender the starkest in most threatening terms with the deadline attached and when the deadline attached to drop the bomb without warning. On a valuable japanese target and thats what he did. There was a warning on july 262 surrender or face the grim reality with the alternative prompt and utter destruction when there was no surrender forthcoming on the morning of august 6, loaned the 29 bomber dropped the first bomb unannounced on the port city of hiroshima, a major naval and war industrial center. A few words in closing and then i welcome your questions and discussion. Come back to lincoln again, one always does this. It was lincoln who articulated in his first in our girl address the hope that what he called the mystic chords of memory in the course of union at a time when the prospects for union staying together. He was appealing in a moment of Great National crisis to great market story and the generation of 76 the patriots who created the nation and all of those others who sacrificed so much to make the nations grand experiment in democracy into a success. As we know lincolns great speech did not succeed in preventing a war in his time. But that does not mean his prescription was the wrong one for other times including our own. We to live in a fractious period of disunity bullet disturbing tour tends which there is loose and responsible talk of civil war. But we also have an even longer and more illustrious National History to appeal to now. Even in our current time of national discontent and strife. Put it this way, we have an even more impressive orchestra of mystic chords to hear in hed, linking to point back to washington and lexington to the miracle of philadelphia that produced the constitution. We have so much more, gettysburg, promontory summit, ellis island, her here shima, ds of other places that serve as markers for the progress of the american spirit. But we cannot draw effectively and a history that we have forgotten or worse have never known at all. Such comprehensive ignorance and abject of the past is no longer hypothetical danger but a clear and present one. In that sense i hope that land of hope can be a small but helpful contribution to the much larger project of national restoration. I thank you. [applause] the alligator in there. [laughter] thank you very much bill, wonderful overview of the book. It is just fantastically of what jumps out from the book itself which is a sense that our history can be our source of unity, i wanted to start by asking you about that particular. There is a way in which our politics now is using history as a source of division whether that is through the american story as rooted in sin so in expression of oppression or whether to draw out of the american story and proof that the other side is betraying the american tradition. Has our history been used of a source of unity traditionally, is this division in fact something new were a danger that is inherited of history itself. I think it is going to danger. And i think we have history that has been contested certainly to go back to the civil war. And ive spent so much time on it but there were debates in their interesting debates, not without intellectual merit, the meaning of the constitution was at the compact, was that the reestablishing the states on a different basis so they sacrifice their sovereignty as a southerners increasingly insisted they did not. The debates are feel my interest in historical debates always are. Nobody ever engages in a historical debate for completely disinterested way. But their legitimate issues. I often feel in teaching about the development of American Institution, you really have to see a dialectic between an opponent an example of an antifederalist debate, there is so much in the antifederalist in the constitution that was sensible and valid at the time but its been worn out into course we have the bill of rights among other things thanks to the bogus antifederalist. Even though we tend to look to the federalist papers when were in a period of constitutional appeaser must be have been lately. The antifederalist, maintaining that debate and that dialect intention is part of our understanding of the past. It is very important. By the way we want to remark on them that it is interesting i try to be evenhanded from a partisan standpoint but this wont be a very evenhanded statement. How people are quite willing to dispense with the constitution are tinkered with it radically when we have times of National Crisis in really Critical Issues that go to the foundation of our institutions. Why dont they always come back to the constitution of the federalist papers. For legal scholars who testified not long ago for the house, they were talking about the federalist there is a way in which those documents and the documents for which they serve as a commentary are the anchor that we always come back to even though its a contested anchor, the constitution is not a simple document that yields the truth to any casual reader everything it has been sough thought over d will continue to be. You talked about the extraordinary quote that you start with, what jumped out at me, the history is the grandfather of our thought. I love that too. A wonderful way to think about how to get over the tension between us and our fathers and learn from the past. Im glad you caught that because every time i read that notice he says grandfather, my father because you think about the difference in the relationship of grandparents and grandchildren saying theres Something Special about that, theres an inheritance that leads over and follows in children and over that dialectic to a less friction more i want states disinterested but it is a more generous less conflictual transposition or transfer of sentiment and knowledge. I think you are right, it does take us out of the sense that we have to do things exactly the way our fathers did it. We are operating within a paradigm that may be broader in the specific things that our fathers did. It may embody values and aspiration that are more broadly and deeply part of the story. I will open it up to people in the room, you mentioned that you chose the cover art, the image on the cover is the hamiltonian idea of america. Is that the hope inherent in america isnt that kind of a material commercial urban promise, this couldve been a wheat field. Can i tell you the story about this, they had a magnificent designer, i cannot think of his name now but he was a wonderful freelance person that he hired and he did a version of this using a grant would painting that was beautiful for landscape and actually from a design standpoint it was fabulous. And i said yeah i like this but we cannot do this. We cannot do this, its bad enough that its going to be called land of hope but if i put the conclusion that people will draw, this is all about american passion that ever was in dealing with america and agrarian society, i want to find something that is and has an urban feel but has the upward feeling that you get when you walk into a cathedral. So the staff in town are very helpful and we looked and looked and looked for weeks and finally i stumbled on this. Ive never seen it before, it did seem that has the upward thrust, the sense of ambition. I was not thinking in these terms of americas commercial republic but i was thinking it of the land of aspiration and of opportunity of bustling energy. In a peaceful landscape. Theres lots more to get into but i want to bring people into the room so raise your hands, will get to the microphone, i only ask that you tell who you are and try to ask a question, if there are questions, theres one in the back right there. My name is harry, thank you very much for this magnificent book. And thank you to the American Enterprise institute for this occasion to hear your remarks you spoke about land and land of hope and you spoke about hope, you spoke about story, you did not say anything about the invitation and i want to ask you about that. Another high school text about the american story, less attention seems that is paid to the 17th century english context and i would say the religious divisions are not treated with the seriousness in which you treat them and they wonder whether you intended an invitation to the background in europe of religious strife and whether the invitation is nearly an invitation to american story but the invitation to the story that proceeds at story into the grandfathers of the grandfathers. Was that intentional. I want to say yes, i want to take credit. Heres what i had, two things in mind, one was i wanted to make it clear, im not pretending to produce the descendent to, this is not the same meal morrison following, its longer than i wanted to be to tell you the truth, cannot make it any shorter. I wanted to be sure, compact, acceptable to young people and i did not want to strive for definitive. So that is part of the invitation, the invitation for the party is not the party. That leads to the other thing, i do feel for a lot of people, young and old, this is a story that either they dont know, theyre free to go into too much because they have a sense that they will be dragging and theres nothing much to be proud of and i think the young people in particular have a sense that the american past isnt in this perception of confederate flag. So to speak. And avoid having to apologize for that which i think is absurd but it is what it is, it is where we are. Is that your students expectation when you teach it, you been teaching this for a while, this is distinctly a time where people expected to be taught about race, first and foremost into think of American History and the procession all. I have a way of formulating it that i think is absolutely correct. Anna has to do with the two defaults, when i started teaching in the 1980s, late 1980s and until they make in history survey, i give essay questions on one of those types because i dont think the other kinds of questions have anything, part of which are dealing with in history a sequence, narrative and with connections between ideas and events so i occasionally do it the other way. You get a simple question, why did Andrew Jackson feel so strongly about the bank of the United States so you get someone who says i have no clue, Andrew Jackson johnson, i dont remember. So you get this answer, default number one, 1980s and Andrew Jackson was a Great American and he cared about america, he thought the bank of United States is not good for america because america was the greatest nation in Human History and did not need to have a back. In the Stars Stripes forever conclusion and pulled my heartstrings a little bit and i give it a d. The default was its not necessarily what they believe, its what they thought i wanted to hear and that would help them get out of the jam with a minimal amount of damage to their grade. Now default number two is an apology too, Andrew Jackson was a bitter, malicious violent man who actually shows more knowledge than i for wanted it to. And he was a racist and imperialist and so on and so forth. And he was opposed to the bank of the United States because america is an imperialist and racist and it had to do the bank of the United States as anybodys guest. And this is what they think the teacher want you to stay say. So i think we switch from default number 12 default number two. Neither one is worth a hill of beans if i may put it because they both received from ignorance, the book posturing, theyre both reflecting in a complete absence of historical knowledge or interest in historical past, it is interesting that the fallback, the default to say america has been arrogant, i think that was obamas favorite whereas default number one was a Stars Stripes forever. That tells you something, the crude major buddy tells you something about the set of expectations that were up against and they did find this when meeting people, my daughter was dating someone and i said how do you deal with that, the first question and thats an important subject. Again related to jackson. But it is not the only subject, good grief. We have marginalize the scent of American History and our interest in better understanding the margins which are real, i dont want to put people down in my profession who many have done very good work and particularly in the field of slavery. You may have noticed that several leading historians of slavery have came out against the 1619 project in general the profession has been very quiet about it. I think people know. Even a very leftwing historical profession people are not willing to go that far. Pick another question back here. It may be that you dont cover this. But you said there was dozens of other places that serve as markers for the process of the american spirit. I wondered what youve got for that in the period since 1970. I didnt think about that, i have to think about that for a minute, no. That does not jump out of me saying full of heroes. But what i do do in the 70s that you might find kind of interesting and im trying to get everybody to buy the book of course. I talk about let me talk about the 70s. I talk about watergate defeat in vietnam in the general sense of adding of American Power reaches a combination of the Carter Administration but i also talk about the extraordinary role of the bicentennial celebration and the tall ships and some of us are old enough to remember the tall ship in the east coast, what are tremendous, this is broadcast on television, watched by millions of people and it was a most interesting effect because bicentennial nearly dodged, they spent ten years working on it, verily nearly did not produce anything, things like this came along and moran berger trying to help it rescue in the tall ships stick in many peoples mind out of a up of amazing, what does that have to do, it was historic of a sense of national promise, possibility and they did so by drawing on the past and drawing on the magnificent ships, and very favorable to Ronald Reagan to answer your question. Not completely uncritical but unfavorable to him. After the end of the cold war the sort of intensive narrative stops and what i ended up doing with the last chapter is arguing that in fact from the standpoint of writing a textbook, we are still dealing with it come with the end of the cold war and we are not completely resolve them. I really feel that the closer that you get to the president the harder it is to avoid partisanship. I do present reagan in a very positive way except for deficits. Im a bit of a deficit in this book. That last chapter on american since the cold war, the cold war ended 30 years ago, a book of American History wrote in 1960 probably would not have stopped in 1930. Theres a sense in that chapter that we have not found our way. I am talking about all the polling data in the distrust of her institutions and across the board and are 22 trilliondollar debt and so on. I do end in a less than happy way but the sense that these challenges are not beyond us to look at the things that we have surrounded in the past. I inquired you added that the 70s were tough. I dont have a lot of good things to say about the 70s but the 80s i do. Lets take another question right there. Thank you, im with the cato institute, professor, you opened your remarks by eluding to the state of teaching American History today in the colleges and universities, im wondering if you could say more about that, the source of it, what is to be done apart from the adoption of your book. You have to read it. The sources of it and how it is that that may change i will answer your question as you asked but i think at that point i was talking more about high school in the fact that young people are not getting a sense of the past but anything is equally true the colleges and universities, one of the things that nobody in the History Department wants to do is teach the survey course, American History, european history, nobody wants to do that. And of course part of the reason that any time spent away from a specialty and resources is wasted. It is actually the hardest course to teach because it involves constantly trying to integrate fresh insight so theyre coming all the time as a result of research but yet keep in perspective, i think one of the things that we lost absolutely about her history is a sense of perspective and i was thinking of her first question and one of the problems, not only that young people dont know American History but they dont know the history of the world so when i tell students this, the teacher of virtually all human societies in Human History until fairly recently, they think i am crazy that im making this up and im a lunatic. They have no idea what the history of the war looks like and the way to study American History without studying the larger context in which it appears is to fail to see what a light and a great deal of darkness that history is. But back to your question, i think the historical profession places a high premium on specialization and specialization in nevermore recognize fields that dont feed into a strong sense of the public meaning of history. And theres a lot of very good historians who point this out, they dont seem to realize that the way that they do things is a big part of the problem. You need to come to the subject was some kind of a hole in story within these elements of Research Take on their meaning. I think theres an ideological element, one of the things i want to reckon with, i worked with 25 or so other books and what i expected to find was an ideologically driven white hats black hats character, youll actually find another textbooks, the real problem, they are so badly written, so convoluted, i can prove into a hostage note in all these things were inserted to appease various groups that are going to influence the texas textbook community of textbook publishing and texas. And other states that have textbook selections. Yet these utterly incoherent i read this and said how can we expect young people to read this. This is horrible. I cannot read it. So i actually think in the end of ideology is less than a problem, it does become a problem after 1964 including 1964, from that point on even the very best and theyre not the best though not all that good but they make the textbooks become so clearly and transparently, ideological that i would not want to use them but for a long time i published a little book 20 years ago almost, or call the student guide to u. S. History and it was published by isi books, a lot of circulation but people rowan said i know you have a bibliography and all this but you dont have a textbook. I said thats not because theres a textbook i recommend. I would email people saying Paul Johnsons book when i came out was the least thought, after a while i felt guilty about the fact, why dont you write the textbook. And i thought forget it. And guilt can be a good thing, it can do the things that we ought to do. Thats why broken into this. Its better to light a candle than curse the darkness although it may be more painful sometimes. Are we still in the land of hope are you hopeful about teaching americans about the history . Yes, i am. I think of the problems that we face now are sort of first world problems. Problems of all humanity, how are we going to figure out the appropriate limits on their will on nature and is it bioethical, environmental things that are going to preoccupy us in the years to come, what is it mean to be human. In the world in which we have the capacity to transform so much about what we are in the biological and the complement that is given to us thanks to leon cast of course. [laughter] that is all the same on that. Thank you very much, you can find the book outside, please help me too think bill mcclay for a beautiful evening. [applause] youre watching a special addition for book tv area now during the week while members of congress are in the district due to the pandemic. On tuesday we look at foreign affairs, first ambassador william discusses his life and career from the book hope and history. And then the dragons and the snakes by David Kilcoyne likes it Hostile Forces that adapted to the way that u. S. Likes wars. And Andrew Bradford on the power and influence on the european it union. Enjoy book tv now and over the weekend on cspan2. The president just released and pop paperback by public affs biographies from every president organized by their ranking in the much cited president ial historian survey. Visit our website, cspan. Org thepresident. Order your copy today, wherever books are sold. Next erica entered erika lee at the university of minnesota looked at xena phobia throughout American History, her book is america for americans. Erika lee teaches American History at the university of minnesota where shes a regents professor, a distinguished mcknight professor, the rudolph j chair in immigration history and the director of immigration History Research center. She is the author of three awardwinning books in u. S. Immigration. In American History and