Joining us my name is gavin and the director of programs exhibitions and partnerships for the National Historic society. I would like to extend a special welcome to anyone who might be attending a Virtual Program for the first time. Considering the size of our virtual crowd in the geographic diversity of the people who signed up, im sure there are some people who are in for the first time. If youre not familiar with nhs we are the oldest Historical Society in america. Founded in 1791 and have been an independent Nonprofit Institution dedicated to collecting, preserving, publishing and sharing our nation and States History the past 229 years. In these days of social distancing we are taking to hosting Virtual Events we have Online Events for every week through july. Next week we will be hosting a virtual tour the tour is titled misled and a look at historic a a these include mimic houses suspicious ain a marker that denotes the side of the famous vikings bar if youd like to join the tour will be on the evening of wednesday, may 20 and you can find information about it on our website the program this evening look at the new book the loss tradition of economic wellbeing America Institute 1818 70. We are joined by the author Daniel Mandell and yielding conversation at this moment in time the United States has some of the highest levels of both wealth and income inequality this book offers interesting perspective on how we got here. Although Many Americans are concerned about income inequality many continue believe the country was founded on a persons right to acquire and control property. Professor mandel argues in his book that in fact the United States was originally being influenced by the belief that maintaining their wealth and quality of wealth was essential to cultivation on the successful republican government. Professor mandel use material from this book specifically from chapter 3 that a commentary in the Washington Post as well as material from chapter 9 for a piece in time. Mandel is professor of history at Truman State University he received his doctorate and master degree in history at the university of virginia. He also received masters degree in urban environmental policy from tesco university and a bachelors degree in history from honeywell state university. We will be in conversation with a [inaudible] him she received her phd and masters from the university of california davis and her ba from Pennsylvania State university. Before we begin, i will walk us through a quick how to on how we handle the q a sessions during our webinar. Bear with me for a second. If you have an interest in contacting abthe Public Program staff it nhs you can reach us at abyoure also welcome to support the massachusetts Historical Society in its mission to produce original programs and distribute copies to the public. I know in this time of economic downturn many people dont have the ability to support nonprofits and we are happy to provide these programs for free but if people are interested in supporting us and supporting our work you can do so at ab its also worth mentioning the National Historic society is experiencing abif youre interested in sharing the expenses you can go to our website and its pretty straightforward to find our covid19 experience site and we would be very interested to hear how youve experienced these unusual times. If you would like to ask a question during our program liz and daniel will be in a conversation for about 40 minutes then will open it up for about 15 minutes of q a at the end. At the end theres two ways you can ask a question you can use the q a function you should see at the bottom of your screen this will allow to put type your question in and we will read that and they will be able to answer it ultimately you can also use the raise your hand function click on that we will see that you raise your hand and we will be able to unmute you want to been on muted you also unmute yourself. Just a member to do that. Considering the size of the audience of this program we cant guarantee we will get to all the different people who have questions but we will do our best to get to as many people as we can. Without further ado, i would like to welcome liz and daniel to come to our program. Hello gavin, thank you so much for having me back thanks for coming, good to see you professor mandel. Hello gavin, hello liz. We are here to talk about your new book the lost tradition of economic equality in america, 16001870. Its great. Its good to be here. I wonder if we could start with native americans. Because one of the big themes that seem to me when i read your book the lost tradition of economic equality in america, 16001870 was that native americans really influenced not only this project itself but also early american ideas about economic equality. Could you tell us how native americans gave birth to this project and to early american ideas about economic equality. As you noted, this project really began with my work on the experience of native americans in southern new england. Ive always been particularly interested in the connections as well as distinctions between native peoples and their neighbors which by the 19th century that matters of class as well as race. About 2004 as i wrote in the introduction, this is abi began the study while finishing an earlier book on native americans in southern new england from the revolution to reconstruction in which among other things i delved deeply into economic concerns. The widening gulf between rich and poor in the United States is becoming a major public concern decried in a growing number of policy studies and articles and national publications. Few, however comments consider the history of the issue and those that did at best went back to the gilded age for which the writers assumed was the origin of concerns over economic inequality in america. Such ignorance was unfortunate as i knew from that past research that during the revolution and for decades afterwards americans believed widespread Property Ownership was essential to republican government and they worried about the corrupting influence of concentrated wealth. I also knew congress during reconstruction had rejected the egalitarian landforms while extending the vote to freedom which seemed to mark a substantial ideological shift. I research into how and why that shift occurred led to this book. When i got started on this i also knew from the start, from past research that i needed to dig into two extremely relevant elements that related to native americans. First, literally beginning with columbus indigenous americans became for europeans the living example of an egalitarian people and egalitarian society. Europeans already had this longstanding tradition of a physical wild man, but a bigfoot character who lived in dangerous wastelands between villages and towns wearing animal skins, lacking refinement and lacking civilized hierarchy. Some accounts of indian echoed the dark side of that. Savage, irrational, cannibalism. But others essentially criticize their own contemporary european societies by praising indians as egalitarian innocents who shared everything. In the review going back to the notion of the garden of eden with indians being the adam and eve in the garden became particularly prominent during enlightenment as political philosophers from john law to Jeanjacques Rousseau try to figure out the origins of government for some decided as locke wrote that in the beginning all the world was america for private property simply cannot exist. That was also about the same time when native americans and growing numbers in these delegations began to visit england and europe. But their appearance and supposed virtues lavishly described and widely circulated newspapers and periodicals. Occasionally some of those visitors are even quoted as being astounded at their hosts terrible extremes of poverty and wealth which made me wonder about the subversive effect if not purpose of these published accounts. I hope to find in some angloamericans during this period similarly embraced this systemic view of native equality. Alas, i did not. Although occasionally groups of colonists later new yorkers would adopt the costume and pretense of indians as wild men when using force to resist legal claims by landlords to land where they had squatted. Ironically often taken from natives. This brings up the other critical view the other Critical Role of native americans that is the vast lands of resources taken by americans allowed the british and American Congress to become for europeans the most equal Civilized Society on earth. Some recent studies by economists actually kind of confirm that this is really the case that in reality even if you look at include enslaved peoples the gap between rich and poor was narrow in the callings the 18th century than elsewhere in europe. Which meant that sense in england the right to vote to produce great and have a political voice rest in our Property Ownership that right was far more widespread in englands american colonies then back in the mother country. And here in america one could experience the reality of the democratic republic if you are white of course. Then after the war for independence the lands continue to serve as a safety valve for the nation and the idea of economic inequality remade embedded in the workings of American Democratic republican policy. Theres this deep irony in our history that indigenous americans became for enlightenment writers symbols of the quality while euroamericans approached a rough economic equality largely by taking their land and resources. Its fascinating that a lot of these ideas of economic equality came from native americans in terms of native americans noticing that people in europe didnt really have the sense of equality they had back in north america and as the way that early americans reviewed them not necessarily as an equal society but as bringers of equal society if only they could be parted from the land. Were native americans the only source of ideas for early american ideas about economic equality . Probably my greatest surprise in the study was that the american ideal of economic equality, the idea that concentrated wealth ab ironically, this egalitarian ideology the wealth as well as political power should be widespread and its roots in the medieval assumption is the opposite that all forms of power are concentrated for centuries that idea had been used to justify autocratic authority that people, men, who had wealth should also have all the political power as well and that thats the way a hierarchab coming from god down to human beings and that was necessary and fundamental structure for Civilized Society. However, the notion of a godly hierarchy was undermined by the renaissance and challenged by during the 16th century. By a strain of protestantism that insisted unitary nature of gods creation made hierarchy sinful. About the same time dutch and english protestants discover the jewish technician as they were translating old copies of the talmud of the jubilee, the great sabbath held every halfcentury. Theres a piece of it in deuteronomy, all debts are canceled, all slaves freed and all land returned to its original owners. This is forming the tide radicalism that explodes into englands civil war in this 1840s. Beginning with the levelers a group of london intellectuals and artisans who gained sway among Parliament Army during the english civil war in then more radical form by the true levelers as they call themselves to set up communes and condemned private landholding is literally original sin. They pointed to genesis and said this is why we were kicked out of eden because people started wanting private property and owning it so they created these communes to share everything equally. The figures were quickly squashed from a lever level became apposite what gets repeated and used in the 18, 19, ive seen even in the 20th century. This a egalitarian vision survived in england and the american colonies in some ways the most fascinating source was James Harrington aba novel published in 1656 between the time of the civil war and the restoration in 1660 James Harrington in this novel reflected on roman history roman gary and ideas and wrote about he envisioned a prosperous republic grounded on the constitution that gave land to all and placed a limit of wealth 2000 pounds a year i believe the wealth generated by the land it envisioned if one owned any more than that one had to get back to the government. Who would redistribute it to others who work out not quite so fortunate. Three decades later john lockes two trees of garlic government argued that the levelers that all men by nature are equal and argued that government rested on involuntary contract with men contract among men that it was labor day gave value to land. Not one is titled ability. So that those who work the land had the best rights to it. Thats a fundamentally egalitarian argument. The lock in turn shaped the 1720s. The publications collectively known as catos condemned the increasingly prominent role of wealth in the british politics all the sources would be hugely influential among americans in 1760s through the end of 18th century. In fact, that conservative revolutionary would point to parenting book emphasizing the property and power interwoven and if you go to archive. Org and you look for oceana harringtons oceana at least one of the copies adams from the Boston Public Library collection of John Adams Library he actually signed the inside its really cool. His cousin sam adams published in the late 1740s. For artisans and laborers that quarter from catos letters to the number killed several weeks published. One of them i quoted in the book on the notion that if you men gain to much wealth. Even the notion of the great sabbath that every 50 years all property should go back to the original owners when occasionally mentioned or talk about in early america into the early republic for example in 1787 connecticut assemblymen told his fellow Assembly Members that a great thing to put into the countries in the states laws. The best way to avoid oppressive extremes. When the start of construction rumors spread throughout the community ordering the jubilee not only with freedom with all who would been held as slaves but in the generations with no rewards. I did go into some detail of theres influence of english, scottish, irish radicals in the mid19th century. Continuing to english ideas the chartists, the labor radicals and so on. A very significant role. Socialism. Robert owen the idea creating a socialist utopias for workers in factories brought them to the United States in the early 19th century there was another side emphasized and that was the idea comes from england and embraced by Many Americans in the first half of the 19th century. That Society Needs the ability and the wealthy deserve to have their authority. Chapter the book about childrens literature and how much of the childrens literature that sprinted in america by american publishers through 1820a830, a lot of its being written by English Writers for the children of gentry for the children of laborers and emphasized the need for instability and the need to recognize and privileged wealth and to state that one is born into. Im not sure the American Revolutionaries were quite understood. Or accepted. Theres also the increasingly extreme ideology that comes from David Ricardo and thomas small who argued that it was inedible workers and laborers would become poor and the wealthy would become richer. And a number of american writers embrace that by the mid19th century. In england and Great Britain is a source of ideas both sides of the quality quest is really to theres so many of the ideas from great iron and you will hear his receivers in early america the colonists come over they come up with these great english ideas and adapt them to their own environments and own circumstances will and whether they can tell us how american stickiestook these ideas and adopted them in north america. As i was outlining, there is this tension that develops during startup during the early republic and then becomes significant in the early 19th century this tension between the idea of the need for stability the need for some kind of social hierarchy and power in the United States even in the republic. That exists for a number of decades between that develops during the war for independence these ideas about democratic republic about the quality that all men are created equal and all men should be able to vote and participate in politics and have natural right to rights, liberty and property. Those two ideas are intentioned increasingly between 1780 in the early 19th century bc the shift in american paradigms shifting toward the embrace of stability. There is always tension theres always conflict. Its not that the egalitarian is the egalitarian economics the idea that they should have access to property of some sort, dies, its just that theres a shift in how people, which one dominates, which side dominates the debate. There are a lot of developments in american economy, the american politics of course that shape this debate. One of the more interesting ones i found during the American Revolution is that there is the increasing importance of capital as a source of wealth as opposed to land. Before 1775 everyone thought in terms of land with a concentrated on wealth and therefore power. As the old european tradition going back to the evil ab times. The crops that were then sold to england during the American Revolution stays well in the National Continent look to fund the war by issuing promissory notes. That created the Capital Market for Capital Investment and speculation. For the very first time. So the very first time american, during the war, americans had to think about wealth about capital and speculation and capital as a source of power, as a source of wealth. Americans were concerned about this you see this in the American Revolution during the war itself some writers and newspapers pointed to this speculation award that as a threat warning that if you wealthy bankers, merchants, farmers would buy up this debt and have a few pennies on the dollar and then later on demand that taxpayers, i. E. Your average farmer, average artisan, shopkeeper, would have to pay back the full value to those who already held all this while. Thats indeed what happened in the 1780s. Thats why we had things called gary and uprisings. Thats one of the things that begins to shape how these old ideas from england get reworked by americans based on the circumstances they face during the revolutionary war. And then after the revolutionary war is all that concerns about creating, establishing, a nation that is very weak in the world that is at war. European nations expected this experiment in democratic republic ideal to fall apart any minute. So a number of noticeable number of american leaders wanted to try to increase the power of their nation and people like Alexander Hamilton said one of the best ways you could do that is by linking this new United States to financiers, to bankers, to powerful people who have money in europe. So thats what they did. Thats one other reason why you see the shift in how americans start to view economic and equality during the American Revolution. It was an ideal, it was an opportunity, by the time you get to 1810s, 20s, it is something completely different. I think one of the things that really surprised me when i read your book the lost tradition of economic equality in america, not only the ideas of economic inequality baked into the declaration of independence and constitution in terms of the founding documents but the thing that really surprised me was there was a relatively small wealth gap before the revolution. People werent as wealthy to as George Washington people as poor as the poorhouse. There was a gap in wealth but not as big of a gap that happened to emerge in the mid to early to mid 19th centuries. What if you could tell us what happened in the United States economy to american ideas. Its all the snow that we close you come into this gap of the 1830s 1840s. Because americans do not like texas is an irony that after the war ended, taxes actually went up on americans compared to what they had been in the 1750s and 1760s. And so public services, and outside of new england, the taxation was accepted. Corporations played a growing role getting bridges built. In the later on, canals. But americans were in opposition at the same time. In the increasingly 11 corporations. Liz dan, can you move the mic away from your beard a little bit. Yes. Thank you. Daniel how is that. Liz this sounds much better. Daniel my introductio internetn is probably working a little better. So wealth becomes increasingly concentrated as well and corporations and other mechanisms. In driving the development of the american sprint at the same time get, there is opposition and concern about this. As i said at the very beginning, there is this fear that this wealth would emerge this astrophysicist wealth, at the americans at the end of the revolution, very proud that youre referring to. But they see what is going on in the recognize that the increasing role of capital and the need for corporations to change that. The various ideas, are proposed to deal with this. Limits on the redistribution of wealth. Some proposed compensating excessive amounts of property. Actually in one of the library and justice, to confiscate a certain amount of wealth and redistributed in the form of a certain something given to every man and woman when they reach 21. In the also an old age pension plan as well. Their plans flooded to create universal education programs. So again, that requires taxation. In all of these ideas founded the the problem that there was no generally recognized and accepted system of taxation. This was completely foreign to america. Its really only later late 19th century, post civil war as you start to get income taxes read so one of the things he begins to happen is wealth becomes concentrated over the generations. In the 1780s and 90s, the americans actually were aware of this possibility. At the end of the American Revolution, many states in fact every state that prima janitor, this if you died without a will, all of the property would go to the eldest son is the english tradition. All of the states changed the loss. 1900. Laws because if you died without a will, the property would be divided among all of the sons or all of the children. They also eliminated intestate law. Thank you. Lots of intel. That put restriction on property across the generations with the idea of being that one person would die having large amount of property and generations of the children would divide this up so one person managed to get a lot of property and they wouldnt be able to keep it throughout the generations. It would be like in england work in these huge estates as jane austen depicted in her novels. Growing generation by generation. As of that power would not, that will would not happen. And at the same time, event of wealth being generated by capital not just by plan. And so even those measures were not successful in preventing the accumulation of wealth over the generations. Liz another point that i noticed and the lost tradition of economic equality in america, 16001870 during the 17th and eight century there seems to be really close connection between politics and economic equality that spun that their economic equality in some ways by political participation. By the 19th centuries Economic Economic equality really becomes divorced from politics. One of you could tell us how economic equality became divorced from politics. And what is the ramifications what they were with this divorce. Daniel i would argue that it did not become divorced from politics pretty. Liz interesting. Daniel it is perhaps is a mainstream element in the debates among political parties. He gets brought up over and over and puts his head up during critical times. In american history. Because marginalized from political debates by 1910 perhaps. Is that you had the rise and shift of labor and increasing property, the decline in Property Ownership as men are increasingly vertically in the northeast, are becoming wage laborers and so problems developed in this question of whether those. Property will be able to vote. As we started out talking, getting the votes was always in english tradition and connected to owning property. But as a growing number of americans recommend, no longer owned property, this raises a fundamental issue. One thing that does happen in 1810 in the 1820s, there is a wave of these divisions of constitutions in which property, the requirement to own property to be able to hold office gets removed from his constitutions. That says it does get stripped from politics because you dont need to own property to be able to vote. At the same time you think of politics more broadly in terms of debates over laws. It is very much part of the political arena. In the rise of working men in the 1820s and 30s. They urged laws that will ensure the corporations play less of a rule and that property the wealth is more fairly divided. 1940s, you have the rise of workingmen creating the National Reform association the slogans vote yourself a farm. Pulling together the Communitarian Movement received perhaps distance from politics if any of them are closely connected to political people who are active in politics. Connecting those folks with labor organizations and a movement urging american other things and all the federal lands be divided fairly equally and only among people who are allowed to create arms. He had to be an actual settler and natural partner to have the claim a maximum 160 acres. And in course in 1962, becomes homestead act excep except it ws enacted by the Republican Congress during the civil war, did not put that limit on the land ownership. It is safe in claim up to 160 acres for only a small filing fee. So essentially it is free. The National Bar Association and this larger ideal, was that enough of the need to be a limit on the amount of land that any individual develops. So the economics and the idea of property on her ship being one spent the danger of concentrated wealth is very much part of politics. Just not necessarily part of the debate among political leaders and parties. Liz i know we talk about this home alone when you have one last question for you he will return the silver into audience question answer session. We talked about James Harrington, and john adams. We talked about the workingmen party, and the economic equality not include women in early america. Daniel yeah. Great question. And because it is a fundamentally political idea, even when property will be stripped from participation in politics, women are still explicitly denied a voice in politics. The same wave of constitution writing, in 1810 and the 20s, it took away new jersey. The right of women Property Owners to vote. The prostitution is all said, you need to be free, white, male, and 21 to be able to vote. You dont have to own property. The becomes the new norm. From the beginning, to see some stirrings perhaps in the 1830s and 40s. As women began to play more of a prominent role in labor, the labor market rate begin to come of those it issues of divorce and all. Steve started to some rumbling the wives and unmarried women perhaps should be able to have property. And play a role but is clearly not part of the mainstream of house at this point. Speech of so anything audience. Sometime for the q a and lets hear your questions about economic equality. Vernonhost i see that we have a couple questions. Thank you both for your conversation. Quite open to economic equality. Those ideals considered by that group. Daniel among puritans. They actually, they did. He believed in hierarchy. A social hierarchy. Godly hierarchy. They came over with us in fact, one of the most famous new england puritans statements of the beginning of massachusetts settlement john winthrop, his sermon. It sometimes referred as the city up on the hill sermon. Explicitly, but we are creating a commonwealth airplane if youre expecting to come over to make money and get ahead. Forget it. Its not what we are doing here. And when there was one wealthy merchant. Robert keynes, who overcharged a little too much. I dont remember the details. He was taken down a few pegs and had to apologize. For misbehaving. And he had to do it publicly. He had to apologize to the entire community. It was not uncommon in england at the time to put limits on basis. For necessities like bread, beer, and other fees if you are staying the night, stable fees, things like that. Most of the colonies including new england did continue to put these sorts of measures into place. They were reached perhaps often. But everyone knew that they could be reimposed if necessary. Host jerry has raised his hand brightest the jury if you want to unmute yourself. Guest can you hear me. What comment the rise of capitalism in the early part of the 19th century, as inequality. I was wondering if you cant comment on the role of technology. I think its also relevant today. Technology ennobles the catalyst to both control production and friendly control people without using people. I think to some extent, theres power in those days, and a lot of Technology Things today, give rise to inequality. Daniel so the question is to what extent does technology play a role in this growing inequality the decline of this tradition . Guest i dont think technology necessarily does that. For one thing, which labor, nonpermanent wage earner, people that would work for during seasons for example. That was not dependent upon technology. As a great book like john, chance democratic. He goes into how even before there were factories, there were sweatshops in new york. Same thing was true in philadelphia for workers word unskilled, and the unskilled labor, some linked garments doing similar things. That was not dependent upon any technological change, just an organization of labor. So the organization of labor that tended to create a growing community of people without property. Anchoring gap between the rich and poor. It happened before the shift to factories and that kind of thing. There is no doubt however you start having to pay for the machines to create factories, that dictates searches labor system that exasperates that situation brutus was a factor but it is not the only one. Host social mobility or oppression. Daniel could be either. It could be both. When not. It certainly seems to fit. If the servants coming over to say, eastern pennsylvania in the late 18th or early 19th century, and his opportunity to get land pretty can say the same thing about the servants coming over to virginia in the early mid 17th century. The high death rate in all kinds of problems and issues that they faced. As a form of oppression was also an opportunity to get land read while these different societies are still and economies are still very much in development and in flux. So it is both reed. Host nina, has a question. Youre welcome to talk if you want to unmute yourself rated. Guest i did ask a question actually i would prefer to go back to the question at the end, around the property requirements for the boat being removed. Note that in england, by 1940, in new england all of the states that had allowed free blacks to vote and removed explicitly denied the vote to freed blocks at least predict some wondering if you could comment on how tied to the removal of property requirements for the boat is to the explicit removal of suffrage particularly for freed blocks. Daniel is clearly connected. Nationally, is accurate to say the period of the first half of the 19th century is the emergence of the white mans republic. Because the boat gets, need to own property gets stripped from the right to vote and instead, the right to vote gets explicitly linked to being white male and 21. Host theres a questionthe said how does the early introduction of slavery into the english colonies qualify a story of economic equality. And normas scale by the time of civil war. Daniel it is my deal and deal of equality to these concepts of republicanism pretty can in fact exist simultaneously with slavery unfortunately. And does. Something the people of the time didnt recognize that this is an issue in the did. American slaver and the muck and freedom purdue out that it seems like a paradox when it actually makes an unfortunate sense. It is also true at the same time, and it becomes apparent by the time of the American Revolution that slavery is a system that is oppressive. And it creates inequalities. Its actually one of the reasons why. Limit and some of those New England States were concerned about joining constitution because the constitution did not end slavery. One of the fears expressed by some of the state leaders and some of the New England States was joining this constitution, the system of unions, would result in slaveowning states getting more power. And also getting more wealth and subverting the new calendaring ideals in bedded into the new england culture. Host liz would you like to add anything to the questions. Liz i just struck by these answers as well as information in this book. About how there always has to seem to be like an inequality to have some measure of people have equality. No really have an answer but even chewing on this for days. Because it really does seem like you cant have any form of equality unless someone has some sort of inequality. Daniel that is a good issue. Its a good thing to think about. I tend to be glasses half full person. An optimist. I see points when the ideal is reinserted. In places and in times square slavery is pretty much over and gone. In northern and northeastern cities and villages. In the 1830s and the 1840s. Where it goes along with ideals of other forms of social reform. And so i would hope that is not necessary rated i think it is an ideal that you can never have absolute economic equality. Even the people at or during the revolution and in the early republic who who argued that we had to be where of excessive wealth because that would corrupt United States read it wd not say, all property has to be evenly distributed. Point is you dont want the extremes. Thats what endangers the democratic republican i think that is an ideal that we need to remember. And we need to, you dont have to have any quality pretty dont have to have slavery. We dont have to have oppression to remember that. Keep that in their debates. That is something that isnt ideal for nation is otherwise we went up with the situation we have today. We have forgotten that ideal. Host mimi has raised her hand. Did you have a question. A. Guest yes, i do. I question we have different rules of immigration. The concept of dcom economic equality, has different meanings. So course you can go for chinese art different ways. So even the way. Inaudible. So can you tell me a little bit more how this immigration has went into this idea of economic equality. It also plays a role. Daniel absolutely. Culture never stands still. Its always evolving read is like societies people. Immigration clearly shapes this ideal. We talked already about the role that english immigrants in the irish and scottish immigrants played the 19th century and chafing. And my phone and sisters, flank grandparents came over from eastern europe. They brought with them some of the socialist ideals that they had learned of her there in ukraine. In russia. In the added those to the existing ideas of american democracy, american republicanism. At the same time, it fits. Socialism existed before my grandparents showed up. They added to hold right into equality. Some new variations on that. Wheres fundamental core i think still pretty and that carries through. Host theres a question typed and. Wondering if you found certain who held out longer to the economic equality. And those who did not predict actually promotes the wealthy. While secular progressives people would like to redistribute wealth. Daniel 25 groups. Im sorry. Host protestant groups. Daniel interesting i would say that radical evangelicals during the great awakening, i thought ten almost absolute egalitarian terms. Many of them dead. Theres market done by doug, his marvelous book recently published the helen to some of that. And it highlights erotically egalitarianism of evangelicals during the 1740s. In the 1750s. I think it continues. During the revolution come easy radical evangelical protestant. Im thinking actually of People Living in the hills baptists. And then later on will form some of the backbone becomes the shakers. They bring to the table some radical ideas about the economy. And economic justice. So that is something that is certainly a threat than earth read the runs into the early republic of through almost of the civil war. Host there two people with her hands race and we will take as a as our last two questions. Susan, you should be able to unmute yourself to ask the question. Guest actually does my husband ed who has the question. You mentioned the impact of the 18 hundreds and the corporations and more powerful force read im interested in how we got from there to Citizens United where somebody maybe came personal. Daniel when corporations were created, and going back to in the earliest times, they had this interesting existence. For years we deal you that they were fictional people. In the entities existed outside of legally outside of the people who owned stock in corporations. That was kind of the fundamental start. But things involved and i would say what we are looking at the prickly also but we will be case, similar. At earlier ideas of them being fictional people some have more power today in more rights than individuals do corporations do. His hobby lobby is a corporation and Supreme Court in its decision said corporations can have religious beliefs. They can institute rules that dictate to the people who work in the corporations who may not share the same beliefs pretty for those individuals can and cannot do. Similarly the idea that corporations not just citizens, but the same thing with the united that the idea the money is political speech to be protected. In that corporations can use money and political speech. Prickly the founders wouldve been horrified at this. This almost the very definition of wealth, corrupting wealth. Corrupting concentrated wealth because the more money, the louder the speech. That is the explicit and result of an so i really think what we see today, when horrified the founders of people involved in creating the corporations. That was the furthest thing from their minds. Host the last question from elisabeth. Guest i would like you to talk a little bit about how these different notions of the quality against each other so that can for example, canadians tend to believe that you need an equality of circumstances for americans to do believe that you needed me quality of opportunities. So there is this political equality from a access to the boat pretty much of these other expressions of equality used to mask for inequality and hemorrhage in the United States, the challenge against and is really exasperating anxiety about the distributions. Daniel different forms equality are very important. Certainly the 17th 19th century in america, and the early United States, can both equality of opportunity. An equality of the term used. All of quality of circumstance. They had equality of opportunity because there are all kinds of opportunities to get ahead more. Lets get ahead but to create a business and pass it on to your sons. That began to change. One of the things that happened during the revolution in the early republic was this increasingly significant liberal idea individuals should have the right to own their own property free of Community Parents and free of government control. This may begin to see debates over this quality of opportunity and push for universal education emphasized opportunity. And it so that becomes increasingly significant. Its not in it doesnt completely push out id for equality of circumstances as we will see in the 1820s and 30s and 40s with these other filaments that i find it too. Clearly liberal in the control of property is along with dominance of the idea of equality of opportunity. He also asked them a question about the vote. Guest 20 get universal mass some rich in the 1830s, you dont have to have any property. Some people argue that the boat is compensation for lack of wealth. [applause]. The name another kind of equality in exchange for an economic inequality. In the equality of having them write to political participation. It seems to me that one of the things happening with the issues around the vote in political speech right now in the United States is there is a concern that even those gestures of equality are disappearing. Daniel that certainly is a concern. Going back to the deal that you spoke of, a call that kind of the dark side of this universal white male in of suffrage. We know, widely known that when went along with that was race. And gender. But normally this is celebrated because more people could devote and run numbers. After these constitutions were change. But now the property is no longer closely connected to having a political voice read no longer that important whether property might be held or not can vote regardless. Whiteman can vote regardless. Today i think this is one of the reasons why we are so concerned and part about the votes because the boat was the run remaining element if you will of this deal. I think theres also an hes her unease about rising inequality at same time. One reason i wrote the book i think that is something that goes along with the issues of voting as well. The idea that one can buy political speech i think that is causing a lot of grief as well in the United States. Host think you both very much. I thought i was a wonderful conversation and i encourage everyone to buy the book as well as check out the podcast. Thank you all for coming. As we exit, i would just like to share with you if you enjoyed this program and you would like to purchase a copy of this book, you can get a 30 Percent Discount from john hopkins press. And also if you have enjoyed this program and you would like to supports the Historical Society and hard work, you can visit the website. And to show your support. Heres a look at some publishing and news, Jonathan Karp has been named the new ceo of shamanistic and trenches are pretty enjoyed the public publisher in 2010 previously the publisher of the companys adult publishing division. He succeeds maritime reports are busier than usual publishing season the addition of books from the spring that are delayed due to the coronavirus pandemic. They expected titles have many publishers concerned about Media Attention and sales. Publisher waited saying on the decisions we make our guesswork. None of us know what we are doing. For a wall street journal reporter turn young adult author Karen Blumenthal died at the age of 61. She was the author of several nonfiction books for children which included histories of title ix, role versus wade in 1929 stock market crash. Also in the news mvps books and reports that sales were up 11 percent for the week ending may 23rd. Adult nonfiction sales 2 percent of the week and remain down 8 percent for the year. In the library of congress has announced due to the coronavirus pandemic, this Years National book festival will take place virtually from september 24th 26th. It will include talks like others such as john, and Melinda Gates to name just a few. In book tv will continue to bring you new programs and publishing news and you can also watch all of our archived programs anytime apple tv. Org. Here are some of the current bestselling nonfiction books according to the wall street journal. Memoirs, untamed, and former first Lady Michelle obamas becoming. Bestselling book of 2018. After that is judys thoughts on medical community and plague of corruption. That is followed by fox news host, pete thoughts on the Trump Presidency in the future of the country and american crusade. If the wrapping up look at some of the bestselling nonfiction books according to the wall street journal. The splendid in the vial, historian will study of Prime MinisterWinston Churchill leadership during the london blitz. Some of these authors have appeared on tv and you can watch them unwilling apple tv. Org bov. Org. Biographies of every president organized by the ranking, by noted historians from best to worst. And features perspectives into the lives mr nations chief executives and leadership style. Visit our website, cspan. Org the president. To learn more about the president and historian feature. Order your copy today. Wherever books and ebooks are sold. Host good evening virtual audience and welcome. Thank you so much for joining us tonight. My name is kate and behalf of Harvard University division of science in the bookstore and the