You are to ask why writing about liberty at this point but i want to get to a short piece of the book. You write the need for telling the story now is what i see around me this is the most confused historical time i have lived in with a haggard establishment, and Americas National ebola what else are you saying here . Guest i am just trying to direct our attention away, for a moment, from the political mania 363 has surrounded us for days this year so far and counting. We have two more to go. Wednesday we start all over again. I want to dig a break from that id have us look at 400 flash want to take a break from that and have us look at 400 years with the engagement of the idea of liberty. My argument is that is the essence of america, our nationalism. It is the exceptional american ideal. It is something americans have been talking about, writing about, fighting for 44 centuries. For book takes fighting four four centuries. All lay down principles that affect us and liberate us today, and i want us to be proud of that. I want us to think about it. I want us to be inspired by and so that we continue to maintain it. Richard brookhiser will be with us for 55 more minutes. He is in new york and will take calls in just a few minutes. Republicans can call host you mentioned the 13 documents you review to tell this story about liberty. We will show those we wanted you to pick and choose a few of those. And why you decided to choose them. You began with the jamestown papers. You begin with the jamestown papers. Talk about these documents if you can. The 13let me go through the first is the minutes of the first meeting of the General Assembly of jamestown in 1619. That establishes the principle of selfrule in british north america. The second is the flushing remonstrance, 1647. Villagers in the town of flushing rebuking director general peter stuyvesant, the governor of new amsterdam. Forbade quakers. Not obey you. Ill we want to do under all men as we would have men do want to us. 17 30 5 1735 the minutes of the trial of john peters anger in new york, a journalist tried for the crime of seditious libel. His lawyer got the jury to acquit him even though it was jerry nullification jury nullification. This established freedom of the press in britains American College colonies. The decoration of independence, the National Birth certificate. 1785, the minutes of the new york ammunition society. , aroup found in new york slave state in order to put the state on the road to abolition. This was to close one of the gaps in americas pursuit of liberty the most serious 1 the existence of channel slavery. It would take a civil war to end it. Some of the steps begin in new york in 1785. 1787 the constitution, written in that year ratified the following year. 1823, the Monroe Doctrine. This is a Foreign Policy document. It also has a political and ideological component. We were not only telling european powers they could not colonize further in the new world we were telling them they couldnt establish their political systems in the new world. No more kings in the western hemisphere. That is what president james monroe with telling congress and the world. The declaration of sentiments of the seneca falls womens rights convention. This was a call for womens rights, including the right to vote, which would not become a constitutional amendment for another three quarters of a century, but the call for it begins in 1848. , Franklin Roosevelt text firesidet chat. Firesiden roosevelts chat. This is 1948 year before we enter world war ii. Last one, 10 my down the wall speech in berlin says a commitment to liberty there he says a commitment to liberty requires us to tell the soviet union it cannot be a permanent landmark, scar on the face of central europe, that berlin and all of central and Eastern Europe will ultimately have to be free. Those are the 13 documents. There could be another set. The gettysburg address and the constitution to be in anyones list of 13 american liberty documents, but you can have other ones also. Cu could be a b team or a team i am not saying they are junior varsity, less important. These are the 13 i picked to tell the story of liberty in American History for 400 years. Those 400 years, when you look at those documents and as we enter the year 2020, what do those documents say to this country right now its citizens, elected officials, about how to conduct ourselves, our business . Guest two it says two things. It says look at our past, the men and women over 400 years some of them famous, some of them quite ordinary. Some of them, all we know is they were there at the time when we signed or ignore step endorsed those documents. Americans have stood up for the principle of liberty and have made it real in our national life. Thisecond thing it says is is great but we have to keep doing it. It is not something that automatically replicates itself. It is not a perpetual motion machine. It is in our natural character. It is good that it is. It is certainly can be proud of and something that can encourage us. In every generation who have to be aware of it and we have to continue to work for it. That is the method i hope people would take from this book. Host we do have calls coming in. Florida,rt st. Lucie, independent color. You are on the air with mr. Brookhiser, author of give me liberty. Caller good morning. I think the average american citizen has no idea of the power and wealth that is possessed by the aesthetic community. Hasidic community, your previous caller spoke about the schools was 100 percent correct. Whichewood, new jersey, is home to the largest, i believe, in the world, they decimated the Public School system. If you want to see real power you have to look to the pardoning by president clinton of muggeridge and pincus green. The average person cannot have any idea. Do i believe in just murdering these people . Absolutely not. Been ahat might have caller hanging on from a last segment. It sounded like it, and not a very intelligent one either. Host anything you want to say about what he had to say . Guest well, he could read chapter two of the book, the flushing remonstrance, 1657, almost 400 years ago. There were 30 men in flushing, a Little Village outside of what was then new amsterdam, and they were told by their governor, who they had no power over, there was nothing elected about him or around them around him. They were told no quakers in my colony. Anyone who host them in my home, that is a crime. They sent him a remonstrance an official town protest saying we cannot obey this directive because all religion teaches us not to. They were not quakers sticking up for themselves. Who pute ordinary men their names to a document that said our faith would have us do on two all men as we would have. Hem do unto us it is a milestone in americas religious history. I would want the last caller, everyone listening to this comment to be aware of this document and the moment. Six of them could not sign their own names. They made their marks on the letter to the director general, but they lay down a marker. Going to we are not obey you on this because our faith tells us not to. That is the beginning of a principle we continue to enjoy and we ought to remember these brave men, honor them for that for it. Host j. Independent caller for Richard Brookhiser. Caller two are for taking my call. You do, of course, recognize that all those documents do revert to connecting the human belief that ishe in an environment of domestic intouility that we advance the infinite capacity of Natural Science knowledge, but while Ronald Reagan was making that hadch in germany, he already initiated an Economic System in this country that was social darwinian in nature, and we are now at a point where the levels of animalistic competition in our society are so extreme that they almost reached a level of a flood of greed, jealousy, fear and anger, and i am not sure that can be stopped with all do i am just so distressed about it. Thank you. Mr. Brookhiser . 11, theook at chapter cross of gold speech. Given to winpeech the democratic president ial nomination in 1896. He was hoping to stampede the convention in his favor. He succeeded. This was a 20minute speech followed by a 30minute ovation. People who were in the hall after he finished they said the applause, they compared the noise to artillery or niagara falls. It is known as the cross of gold speech because his final line is you will not press down on the labor, this crown of thorns, crucify america on the cross of gold. The big issue is whether america should be on a Gold Standard or a free coinage of silver standard. He was sticking up for the letter, but he said the best paragraph in the speech was not the closer, the line that gives the speech its name, which he had used in speeches before, but he said the best paragraph was when he had written the night before specially for the occasion. The reason i put the speech in the book it is the opening sentence of that graph and it gets your attention. He is speaking to his rivals, enemies. He says you have defined businessman to narrowly. The man who works for wages who is as much a businessman as the man who pays him his wages. That is a principle and a point we always have to keep in mind. In our Economic System there are people who win a lot, people who win a very little, people who walked out. There are people who are born with advantages, people who are not. There are people who havent made, people that have to make it all. Have it made, people that have to make it all. They are all equal participants. This because bill gates, Saoirse Ronan are multimillionaires, sergei brin are multimillionaires, it does not make them more worthy of honor than the people who work for them with the people who temporarily are not working at all. The man who earns wages is as much a businessman as the man who pays him his wages William Jennings bryan, 1896. Host , mr. Brookhiser economic equality, that has been a topic in the democratic president ial debate to a certain extent. It makes me want to ask you about this years cycle. What your observations and the way we are doing politics in 20192020 . Guest i gave up predicting. We hadot see the result four years ago, three years ago 2016. I am not going to give you any predictions now. Interesting times. I will say people are wringing their hands and saying politics itself, which it is. I hear people saying we are in a cold civil war. About. That term bandied that distresses me because we had a real civil war in this country and 750,000 men were killed. We used to think it was 620,000, but the figure was up a few years ago. I met the historian who raised it. He is a demographic historian, and he did it by looking at census returns. He said we are missing 130,000 men. He realized that 130,000 more men had been killed in the real civil and we previously thought. When people say we are in a civil war now it shows a lack interest in history, knowledge of history. I am old enough to remember 1968. That was much worse than now. You had Martin Luther king jr. Assassinated, Robert Kennedy assassinated, riots in american cities. He had a terrible war that seemed to be going nowhere. You had a ride in the a right at the democratic convention. That was much shakier than anything we are having now. I wish people would get off their social devices, maybe even turn off cspan sorry, paul, for recommending this. Down, chill out not chill out. That back. I am not trying to turn you into californians. Dont be so frantic, despairing, so unreasonably excited by all the excitement and madness you, because it has been worse in American History, in my lifetime. , authorchard brookhiser of the book give me liberty a history of americas exceptional idea. Walk through the book and other issues. John. Independent caller. Guest national and caller you forgot the preamble to the bill of rights. Guest it is in there. The declaration of independence. The preamble to the declaration of independence. Chapter four. Caller my question is the Federal Reserve determines how and wealth i have and they are not even elected. They have so much power much mon my pocket. Host thank you for calling. Lets hear from brian. Somerville, pennsylvania. Republican. Good morning. Caller good morning, gentlemen. I have a copy of the patriot act in my library. I have not looked at it for several years. I seem to remember when i got the copy of it most of it was redacted. I am wondering what your guest thinks about the patriot act, how in my opinion it opened in a row of unsurpassed surveillance ip ofthe private citizensh our country nsa, monitoring phone calls. You mentioned about the civil war and comparing it with modernday stuff, and you mentioned 1968. I would like your opinion on the attacks nonreligious in this country on religious in this country. It seems to be on the uptake. I will hang up, thinking, and listen to your response. Host the people being attacked i caught the guest the people being attacked lastcaught the end of the muncie, sydni was before that, and of course this is terrible, awful. 1968 was worse, im not trying to say bad things that happen now are not bad. Goes, as the patriot act in wartime in times of war, rights get clipped. Passed. Laws get is rate of habeas corpus suspended. Yes, that is in the american record. That is something that always has to be washed. Watched. Lincoln himself compared it to a man taking medics during the disease. When the disease is over when the man continued to take them because he likes them . Of course not. We will stop it once the disease , but it is something that always has to be watched. The comparison is a very good one. It is ludicrous, painful. It is something we dont like. Happenedhor for what is very on point. Yes, this is something that has happened and something we have to be mindful of. Host we have a little bit more than a half hour left with Richard Brookhiser who is in new york. Dont talk about the connection between liberty and nationalism. I will read again from the book. Nationalism is a given in human society. Host tell us why you write about nationalism . All theationalism is rage. Everyone is talking about it sometimes in worried tones, sometimes in excellent reason. The Trump Presidency is thought up anderms of an nationalism. There are maligned examples of it all around the world. Im not going to spin the globe, but just think about it well, let me take one example burma, myanmar and the expulsion of the rohingya by a nobel prize she turns out to be a genocidal monster. Nationalism is out there and can take bad forms. My argument in this book is that the essence of Americas Nationalism, what makes it distinct from other nationalism, our neighbors nationalism, is our concern with liberty. This is something we have had before we were a country. Three of the four instances that i cover were before american independence. Let me just tell a story that. Nds the book this involves a meeting that Ulysses Grant had after he was president. He left office after two terms in 1877. Then he took a tour of the world. Reporter of the New York Herald accompanied him and wrote up the things he saw, said, and did. He met the chance to the chancellor. He had Ulysses Grant, who crushed a rebellion in the Worlds Largest republic, and bismarck, who had created a new a new german nation. They have a little chat in berlin. Grant calls on bismark. Bismarck knows english. And, they do not have a lot to say to each other because they have never met before. So they talk about current events, they talk about people that they know in common. Then bismarck says, a terrible thing about your civil war is you are fighting your own people. That is always the worst thing to do. Grant said, yes, but it had to be done. Bismarck said, of course, to save the union. Grant said, to save the union and to end slavery. Bismarck said, but of course saving the union was the main thing. Grant replied, we thought so at first. But as soon as the flag was fired upon, we realized the union could not be saved without ending slavery. That men and women could no longer be bought and sold like cattle. Then bismarck says, it was a great victory and im sure it will be a great peace. Here you have these two figures, and it is almost like a railyard or a subway yard where you have two train tracks going along together, then they are starting to split. Bismarck is saying what nationalism means is unity. What grant is telling him, american nationalism means unity, but it also had to mean ending slavery, because it also means liberty. We finally realized it. We had to make this right, we had to rectify this. It cost 750,000 lives, but it had to be done. That is an important moment. That is the one i chose to end this book on. I think it is food for thought. Host next call. It is ed. Independent caller. Thank you for waiting period thank you for waiting. Go ahead, please. Caller i would like to ask mr. Brookhiser, according to me, history is according to the man that writes it. Is that true . Guest well, yes, the short answer is yes. But, you know, if you write something that is so offthewall that no one will believe it, then the answer is no. Your account has to match what your readers know. What your readers may know to be true. Of course, that leaves a lot of wiggle room. People know a lot that isnt so and writers can confirm them in their mistaken notions. But over time, you have to stick to the record. You are not the only one writing. There are going to be other people coming along, theyre going to be looking at your judgments, theyre going to be correcting your judgments. History is always being modified. We hope it is always being made more clear, better understood. It is a process. We write about dead people, they are not going to do anything new anymore. In a way they do, because we understand them better later. We learn more things about them. We discover more about their motives, or their blind spots. So, i am talking about what i do, what my books are about. That process is, it is a restle