The day, i am a david milne i teach at the university of east anglia in the u. K. Unfortunately, a professor cannot be with us today. It goes without saying she will be greatly missed. If you lived in the u. K. Or the u. S. , it is probably fair to say that 2016 was a challenging and distracting year. In june, the u. K. Voted to leave the european union. In november, the u. S. Said hold my beer and elected donald trump to the presidency. One group in particular remained calm and productive during this tumultuous time and i refer to the historians of the United States in the 18th and 19th centuries. In 2016, a man published his first book, the computer see the contest the conspiracy of free trade. Nicholas published his third book. 2016, Danielle Holtz asked who are the true conservatives . She passed with flying colors the following year. Matt published6, his first book with Harvard University press. Books and the dissertation were met with great acclaim. 2016 was a bad year for the rest forhe world, a great year the history of 19th century america. With aing to begin senior lecturer of history. I mentioned his first book. Titled t project is the economic war for peace, 18461946. It will be fantastic. [applause] thank you for that. Donald trump will be making an appearance for obvious reasons. I would like to begin with a quote. Freetrade means International Justice and freedom, removal of economic incentives for imperialism, security for small nations, disposal of colonial questions. Militarism, economic peace, increase production, lower cost of living, worldwide prosperity and peace. You might be thinking i know where this comes from, no, it is not economist. It is from a radical communist magazine published in 1919 in new york city. As i have also uncovered, she was an executive officer of the freetrade league. A Peace Organization based around the idea that freetrade will bring world peace. For free marxist call trade as a method for world prosperity and peace but also concludes the following call to arms. To have international freetrade incorporated in the peace treaty as recommended by president , includingothers socialists everywhere. Two years later, a daughter of the famous abolitionist William Lloyd garrison, a progressive reformer, argued as the leader of the womens Peace Society, which she founded just after the first world war, that our members are devoted to the principle of free trade and assert the right of every human to buy in the cheapest market. The impingement of this right is meaning i will also point out the womens Peace Society motto is immediate and universal disarmament, abolition of mob violence, freetrade the world over. My last quote comes from jane the most prominent womens Peace Organization in the western hemisphere and europe. 1932 radioa interview when she was asked to elaborate on the strong advocacy for free trade. The interviewer observed their argument for freetrade was not speaking from an economic point of view. You seem to believe that a lowering of tariff walls would conduce peace. You seem to believe tariffs are in some degree dangerous to peace. She replied we believe that unrestricted intercourse between nations must make for better understanding and goodwill. The trade is essential to national prosperity. One of the things i discovered was you will be hardpressed to find evening passing mention of these freetrade dimensions. History is of the u. S. Peace movement or a u. S. Foreign relations more broadly. I would suggest that this omission is because we know so little about americas overlapping and at times competing freetrade traditions. The one a one ideology, we would recognize the most, jeffersonian is him is apply to free traders across the earlier 20th century. This is quite misleading for the late 19th and 20th century. Antibritish brand of freetrade ideology that became closely tied to a defense of recentlyissing until is the arrival in the u. S. And influence of a freetrade tradition that i would argue is far more influential in shaping u. S. Foreign policy and its critics between the Second World War and the shaping of the post1945 liberal economic order that is under attack from the white house. This now forgotten transatlantic u. S. Freetrade tradition that i refer to is known as the manchester school. This british reformer who helped spearhead the overthrow of the system in 1846. It was him who connected this idea that freetrade would bring a panacea and integrate the woman world in peace and freetrade. His freetrade his freetrade ideology was exported to the United States. It had its first mid19th century subscribers. These radicals included a reverent who founded the antislavery liberty party, William Lloyd garrison, Charles Sumner, among others. These radical abolitionists, or this minority within the newly reformed Republican Party, they hoped to add to the idea of free soil, free labor, free men, they wanted to add freetrade to the republican slogan and they were not successful. They would switch from the republican to the Democratic Party and support grover cleveland. This is a different freetrade tradition from its jeffersonianism competitor. Its homes were in new york city and boston. It was tied closely to womens him,age, ab initial is International Peace movement. This is the main goal i am setting out for myself. Recover this forgotten radical, cosmopolitan position in u. S. History. I began tracing the influence on u. S. Policy. I am trying to trace this into the 20th century. Surprise, i found it became even more prevalent in cosmopolitan circles. As if the last point suggests, my study of the american freetrade movement has the added benefit of correcting the common but incorrect portrayal of the Republican Party is the party of freetrade. Williams foro w. A. Setting out this idea of the Republican Party as the freetrade imperialists. For the First Century of the gops existence, it was the party of protectionism. Noecially once slavery was longer an issue after the civil war. It is during this time that it dominated the presidency and shaped the usas economic nationalist course until the election of fdr in 1932. Fdr do Something Interesting and a man to run things. The termder this that tariff revolution, and which trade policy shifted toward freetrade, culminating in a general agreement in 1947 that became the wto in 1995. It is a creation of a liberal economic order that is now under the attack of the by the country that created it. Association tells a different story of u. S. Foreign policy as seen from the perspective of its most vocal, cosmetology and critics. Socialist, the chapters i have for the book, as well. My biggest hurdle at the moment is connecting this rich forgotten history of leftwing freetrade radicalism with what comes after 1945. The rise of another overlapping and competing freetrade tradition, neoliberalism. This has been a growing amount. F historical scholarship history has appeared traces the rise of this right wing yield liberal ideology to europe in the hopes of reacting militarism, national socialism. This right wing freetrade ideology is arising in europe at the same time Crystal Eastman and jane addams are fighting from the left in the United States. Overlap, the competition, perhaps, that im trying to make sense of. Worlde hoping to make the safe for freemarket capitalism. Multilateral trade live rise liberalization. Neoliberals were more willing to sacrifice democracy and support authoritarians. I find it difficult to square this neoliberal freetrade tradition with trump, who has already done so much to undermine the multilateral neoliberal structures i just mentioned. Has been unclear for decades. It is telling his first act as president was to pull the United States out of the transpacific partnership. It had been going on for years with obama and bush. He thought china was behind it, even though slashed tariffs and wide to replace nafta. That might not even happen now because i woke up to find more tariffs are being levied against mexico because they are not doing enough to stem immigration into the u. S. His administration is exploring the National Security clause. His administration has been supporting the dismantling of the european union. The last time i checked, the tpp, nafta, wto, i thought those were supposed to be neoliberal projects. I think trump is making it clear he is no neoliberal. Actions speak louder than words. Ownan also look to trumps words. Who does trump draw upon when defending his America First agenda . Milton friedman . A republican protectionist. One of the first things he does to draw an analogy is. 2 Abraham Lincoln being the first republican protectionist. Ago, atouple of months a cpac convention, trump went on and on about the great debate, this battle between the pharaoh pro freetrade. It as aointing to shining example of why economic nationalism work so well for america. Harrison one and he said this is what we need to do. He gave a shout out to the protectionist mckinley tariff. Tariff thatsame included a reciprocity clause. Toowed republicans turn trade reciprocity into a protectionist tool for coercive expansion. Isiprocity in this context what from has frequently said is his favorite word. He is quite clear about this. Reciprocity on the republicans became this policy rather than the multilateral freetrade program we tend to think of along those lines. In his 2018 state of the union address, trump referenced Teddy Roosevelts 1901 speech in which ofwas advocating on behalf economic nationalist policies against cuba. Trump quoted roosevelt in saying reciprocity is the handmade protection. I remember on twitter it went viral, what is this reference to . Rooseveltfted from about how the u. S. Did not need to make cuba a formal colony of the u. S. Because they could control it through this new reciprocity provision. The u. S. Forces cuba to accept this reciprocity treaty. The u. S. Can now continue to full the strings of cuban government. This is what trump is quoting. Based on his numerous expeditions on the subject, i am of the belief that trump actually thinks todays Global Trading system functions more like it does in the 19th and 20th century. That is the way he sees it. In other words, something i have been arguing since 20 16, trumps economic nationalism is not an anomaly. It is a return to the status quo of coercive reciprocity, his bilateral approach. He loves bilateral agreements. Subsidies for farmers, that has become a big deal. Trade wars with americas rivals. Study helps ushe better understand trumps economic as algae ideology. Understand better what they were fighting against. It became so entrenched. The imperialism of economic nationalism is what the Current Administration looks to emulate if you go by what they are doing what they are saying. Radicals were attempting to overturn it against the late 19th century. History reveals at least three different overlapping at a times competing freetrade traditions in u. S. Foreign policy. In theonianism Democratic Party in particular. More often than not, outside looking in, critiques of the american imperial project during that time. Lastly, we have neoliberalism. Most prominently on display between the Reagan Administration and election of donald trump. Words, coming to grips with these competing freetrade traditions, we can better understand the economic ideology of donald trump. Thank you. [applause] that was fantastic. Thank you so much. , a leaderond speaker in north American History at the university of cambridge. Among other things, nick is editing the Oxford Illustrated history of the United States and he is also a wonderful essayists. He has a splendid review, which we will learn more about. Thank you for being here. [applause] you werent supposed to mention the review. I am in witness protection right now. David and chris and danny. It is a real pleasure to be here, not just because the caliber of the contributors is so special, but michael hunts book is huge in our field and incredibly important. Getting us to think about ideology is what that book did. Ideology into pieces is our work. The fact i am not worthy to speak about that but yet i have, because i have written a little bit about John Quincy Adams and china. It is astonishing how little historical awareness there is in the country of u. K. A set of assumptions about british distinction. Students, iss of teach how americans came to understand empires by looking at other peoples empires. These students have been through three years of my institution had none of them have done any studying of this particular topic. Anything about the wider population, it just kind of crazy. One thing i would like us to do is think a lot more about china and think about chinas early placingtury history as Chinese People in a different place than where they might be later in the 19th century. Quicklyng to say very some areas in which i think the paper might point for other papers and other discussions. Just to give you an idea of what the problem is, this paper comes out of a conference i was at last year. At that conference, i mentioned i had run into john quincy said speech in which he britain is right in the war it is fighting in china. The British Empire has the righteous cause. But they said nobody agreed with adams. I said i would look into this. I was encouraged by my friend who has done a lot of work on china. Ire enough, i hope the paper have written demonstrates he was not a crank. I think this is a Pivotal Moment not just in u. S. Relations with china, but in the way americans understood spaces that were not european but could not comfortably be descriptive as outside of the severe outside of the sphere of civilization. 1839. Ium war begins in the cause is britain has been peddling opium into china illegally. Leaders have been complicit in this trade. That leads to a standoff between britain and china and that standoff in effect since on a set of frustrations that britain has had and that the United States shares about the way in which china manages its trade. One of the things china does is repeatedly refuses trade treaties that would normalize economic relations between britain or the u. S. And china. In aad it creates a fort southern chinese city and it says to the americans and british, this is where youre going to go and if you want to trade with us you have to be there. If you want to bring missionaries, they have to live there. They cant come into the city. They have to do deal with china through it a different method. Right, but the frustration surrounding this apparently undignified experience for europeans in being in the space not having the sense that could arrange this relationship in a way that suited them was building up alongside this opium. The war lasts until 1842. 200 british sailors are killed. 20,000 chinese are killed. It is an asymmetrical finish. Britain ends up with a treaty that effectively creates an unequal treaty. Relationships, that they can effectively govern themselves. Horrible. One of the cornerstones for a certain kind of british imperialism that would get late get used to, why on earth would John Quincy Adams come out in 1841 in boston and defend this . Why would he tell a crowd actually, it is britain that has the righteous cause. In the paper, i get into all the fascinating reasons for this. One of the major reasons is that John Quincy Adams imagines the chinese are violating a world order he sees as being related to civilization or notions of belonging in an international community. One of the key points of departure for John Quincy Adams is the chinese, because they are not christian, should not be allowed to exercise the same power as europeans. They should not be given the same kind of equality. There are critics who say this is a terrible thing, why is he defending britain . Whole bunch of old people are like, that is interesting. China is bullying us by deciding how it wants to trade with us, so maybe britain is right by trying to create a new order based on equality. Equality meeting we tell them how we want to trade with them. Historians have not talked about the political efforts to send u. S. Master to china, which then produces a u. S. Version of the treaty. It gets even more prerogatives, even more concessions from the chinese. John quincy adams with the speech and his politicking behind the scenes is a central figure as a china coast of having its own selfdetermination to a place where effectively these unequal china in ance imperialist space. Pick up a few things that come from the story. One of them, it is something mark said earlier, we have to think about americans is not simply constructing their own ideology. We have to think about americans has adapting, borrowing, endorsing or cheering on other powers. Effectively, thinking about the ways americans configure the world to figure out who was us and them. There is a way you can read michael hunts book to say United States is the us and the rest of the world is them. In the 19th century and even now, there are a number of different ways you can draw the line between us and them. One might be to think about white people versus nonwhite people. The chinese confused that a little bit because they appeared to be civilized. Another might be civilized and savage. The chinese are an awkward presence there. One way John Quincy Adams try to structure the world was to think about the americas as a hemisphere look different from the rest of the world. In terms of thinking about how americans imagine what is going on, world order in the 19th century, it is important we remember theyre not just producing ideas but consuming ideas from other places and that the boundaries in terms of thinking about who is like us, who is running this world order, move around. I want to mention legitimacy. In michael hunts book, one thing yes to say about National Greatness is in a way americans are reassured by the notion of National Greatness that they are better than other countries. Why we are better than other countries is what ideology teaches us. I dont think it is true to say americans in the world of the 19th century expect that will have a lot of traction in every place to go. What i think is fascinating about John Quincy Adams is the way he uses international law. He tries to make the claim china is behaving badly. Rather than going to china and sing our National Greatness means we can get an unequal treaty with you, it is carefully constructed around the way the chinese have broken the law of nations. I think law is a crucial terrain and fascinating in a way a lot they do not believe you have to be a christian nation to have access to a national standing. John quincy adams argues you do. John quincy adams is playing his own role of trying to move the goalposts and what your legitimacy requires. How quickly ideas change. To go back to thinking about ideas about how ideology works, an idea of a paradigm shift seems to be absolutely appropriate and thinking about how quickly american thinking changes on china in the early 1840s. ,anny said this morning thinking about ideology is a struggle over what is obvious. I think that is a terrific way to think about what happens with John Quincy Adams and his speeches in 1841 and 1842. He tries to flip things so his vision seems like common sense. T we dont see is a grand it is almost like it flips 180 degrees. Things turn around medially. It is interesting to think about how ideas can change fast. Things, race and civilization, it is important we think about those terms as plastic and mobile. Ifhink it is so interesting you come at the idea of Chinese People from a race theory perspective in the late 19th century, especially in the american context. You would see a different landscape where chinese political power, National Independence and commercial independence, too, really doesnt sustain a series of lazy ideas about the chinese being inferior to white people. I think that is something John Quincy Adams is anxious about. Is not civilized in the way the United States is, so want to do with the rhetoric. In the paper, i go into detail about native americans and africanamericans and the native American Vision for the american concert at that americans would happily sacrifice their culture to become members of the United States. Obviously, that does not happen for all kinds of reasons. Adams does not have another set of ideas he can apply to native americans so his thinking in that respect is interesting. I he gets older and older, it becomes more desperate. That is the last thing i want to say. The disadvantages of living a long life. [laughter] sometimes we think about figures being around 70 or 80 years. Being around for a long time is a bad career move intellectually , very often. John quincy adams is born in 1767, the french revolution is a big event in his life. 1848, the day they are overthrowing their king again. It is a fascinating span of this act clinical thinking. He had a lot of ideas about the idea that in effect, all human people could become equal. Europeanual, he meant and white. Those ideas are being crowded out in the mid 19th century by harder thinking about race, john stuart millsthinking about you can beat people up if the ends justify the means. Those thoughts were coming to John Quincy Adams. What is the left with . Ideas he finds hard to abandon. Person who plays a pivotal role and an important shift, if we look closely at adams thinking, there are so many anxieties there. Whether it is about native americans, mexico, or the possibility latin america can withstand an expanding slave power. What John Quincy Adams slept with his anxiety, frustration and fear. Thank you very much. [applause] wonderful. Thank you so much. Our third speaker, danielle fellow hereesearch at oregon. Phdis working to revise her into a poke, which will be an important one. She is working to revise her phd into a book. [applause] david, for that amazing introduction. You, chris, for basically everything. I am going to briefly describe what led me here and give you guys a sense of what i am doing and then turn it over to questions i am dealing with in this project and then in my larger thinking about the 19th century and 20th century. Support of his policy, we are jumping right into trump. In support of his policy of separating children from their families, the zerotolerance policy, last year, trump tweeted out democrats are the problem. They do not care about crime, they want Illegal Immigrants no matter how bad they may be cheap or into and infest our country. They cannot win on their terrible policies, so they view them as potential voters. Them being the immigrants. For obvious reasons, this reminded me of the antebellum congressional record. Who would not remember the 1845 debate over floridas application for statehood. Racistorida submitted a constitutional provision in 1845, barring free people of color from immigrating to the state, proslavery politicians defended it has literally existential. Georgiator from insisted that every prospective state must have a constitutional right to exclude persons whose presence is considered dangerous to its safety, including people of color. Every community had a natural right to protect its own existence. I am going to use a lot of quotes. It is estimated that community is unquestionably whites. Right tomental implement these conservative laws to secure the safety and wellbeing of its white population. Floridas admission to the union would be a suicidal act. They believed colored men threatened their state with insurrection and murder. They were told to treat them as if they were carrying yellow fever or the plague on board. They argued free people of color could not be granted the presumption of innocence because being black itself cause damage. They argued anyone of these people might be a Foreign Agent from santo domingo. Southerners assert this seemingly boundless power, their whiteness shielded them. Matter on they alone could have expertise because of their peculiar organic makeup. They treated it as an aggressive attack on them. It was suggested a political act of questioning a states right to protect itself did more to endanger the nation than any racial exclusion ever could. Argued thisrs doctrine advocated the people of the state might not guard themselves from conspiracy and murder. You have the same charge. A defense of the right for selfpreservation against these infecting against the biological danger of infectious bodies. You also have the argument that the opposing party is letting these people in is because they will vote for them. Thinking about trumps Foreign Policy and how often it resonates with not just content, but the language of it resonates 1850se 1830s, 1840s, debates over territory, i got to thinking about white culture. Increasing control. We have seen that a lot. The march of the strong, aggressive u. S. Estate. This narrative has a problem that a lot of people have pointed out. This narrative he applies a single genre of argument that advocates for u. S. Expansion and empire. It argues for position of american strength and uses on a trajectory of u. S. Dominance worldwide. Such a thorough international saturation of u. S. Values, institutions and norms as to effect the same result. Because it was the driving aim of u. S. Foreign policy historically, that often as an end projects it. The debate over the policy pivoted on expressions of insecurity and selfpreservation. To me that suggests the form power took of the 19th century were informed by white strength. In contrast with the spread eagle tone about territorial acquisition, congressional was about anxiety of White American weakness and the fear of mortality. Historical record that white. Eople face dangers when the applications for missouri and florida statehood stalled, it was insisted that such provisions were necessary because of the unique danger posed to acks proslavery politicians and their allies, the only thing more dangerous than free blackness was talking about it in congress. This was the other aspect of white fragility. Sense, i amnd drawing on the understanding of white fragility from a sociality of dominance toward White Supremacy and provides them a chance for total control. In this sense, white fragility is not just about the projection of risk onto bodies of color or discourse, is about protecting something that requires complete erasing of its procare ready to exist. This form of white fragility, the attempt to completely eradicate the danger posed to white people on the floor of congress, that they can only continue to exist if it is completely evacuated from all of north america and eventually the world. Fragility,f white the seemingly pathological incapacity of successive legislatures to talk about race without evolving fundamentally into a sense of white privilege. Ultimately in politics, white fragility works itself out in the form of a taboo. Sociologists and , who write about the intersection of race and medicine. I move toward my larger project. Land,hey debated southern in their estimation, free black people brought a biological danger. Where enslavement might not take root naturally, either because they presumed the land was not conducive to transit labor, it became dangerous to allow white settlers to decide their territories. State, it proslavery is dangerous to interfere. In either case, the people in danger were white southerners and their property and enslaved people. Time, the trajectory i am looking at is the 1820s to the 1850s. The danger to white people increased but the nature of the danger changed. When missouri applied for admission in 1820 with a constitutional provision, the Senate Debate consistently turned from the salient question of Racial Discrimination to the right of white southerners to legislate against free blackness. When california reached the without the members talking about danger to the union. Insured territorial policy hinged on the protection. This is the larger frame, the framework of organic nationalism. Thinking through the intellectual history and tying these moments of political expression to these larger intellectual and political movements that are happening, that is my larger project. The organic nationalism, these ideas of white fragility are deeply invested in ideas of organic nationalism. In germany with natural philosophy. These are all generating a sense of an organic nation that naturally coheres and this occurs at the same time that racial theory is developed. Organic nationalism advances an ideal statehood in which each nation achieves sovereignty. Natural divisions between nations. It generates a Divisive Political classification based on physiology of the proper body, which is formulated by these 18thcentury. 18thcentury people. Privileges the white male christian body. Consequence, organic nationalism creates racism as is evidenced by the record. Its policies produce the differences within its population the biological theories racialized. By the bid 19th century, members had categorized these differences between groups. Can say who belongs to them. This transformation change the agenda for statehood. States are no longer fundamentally decided by their geographer all boundaries. I want to make one last broad gesture and add a question. Has led me to think two things. One is there is a possibility that whiteness is defined by as raceive we think of having content. Constructed in a linguistic dynamic, that is a dynamic expressed in language. But if the content that is put on people in racialized bodies has certain attributes, what is left is this negative space and the desire to protect that negative space of whiteness becomes an allencompassing move for selfpreservation. The other is a question i would like to put out about integrating intellectual with the popular expression of ideas. I have all of these intellectual history work and i have all of this congressional work. I dont know. To get at that is one of the central problems of my work. It is a problem i fear coming up a lot. I would love to hear more on that and i thank you all very much for your time. [applause] thank you so much. Day inal paper of the the final speaker sorry, not the day, of the panel, is matched. I mentioned his book published in 2016, which one most of the prizes for which it was eligible, including the john dunning price from the historical association. History atfessor of princeton university. It is great to have you back in oregon. [applause] i dont have anything on trump, sorry, guys. I am sure will find a way to get him in there. What i thought i would do today is frame and introduce the piece that i shared as part of the project i am working on today then briefly marching through some of the big arguments to refresh your mind. I know all of you were up late reading it last night. Just some thoughts prompted by and my ownsion absorption of the papers about how this work might fit or not fit with the rest of this project on ideologies and u. S. Foreign policy. First, to Say Something about what i am up to now, my first book was about slaveholders and u. S. Foreign policy. It was basically in the 20 years between 1840 and 1860 before the civil war. For me, and some ways it underlined spending a dozen years with Jhansi Calhoun and Jefferson Davis and underline how radical the emergence of this mass antislavery party, the Republican Party, was in the 1850s. How transformative was it was in the formal party system in the United States but on a deep level, how it represented a radical break. Coming at the republicans from proslavery eyes, it frames my own intellectual journey and how i see i am approaching the Republican Party in the 1850s. That is the book i am trying to arrive right now. Write right now. It is an attempt to dig into how we see the emergence of this major antislavery party, partly in light of other developments of the last 20 years or so. For better or worse, this book has been focused on domestic struggles. Instead of thinking about slaveholders in brazil and cuba, i have been mostly thinking about antislavery politicians in ohio, wisconsin and so on. I agreed to this conference because, even though i was like i dont think i have anything to say about Foreign Policy anymore, these guys were not in the government. That is the whole point. They were outside of things. They did ultimately take over the government and run it for quite some time. I am hopeful that this experience will push me to think outside of my National Frame on antislavery. Andguiding idea of the book what is relevant for the paper, too, is basically a lot of historians of antislavery politics focus on questions of antislavery politics, sometimes antislavery policy, what did parties, activists or thinkers approach the question of slavery in the u. S. Constitution. Of slave politics, et cetera. My focus is less on policy and coming up with an analysis of republican policy and more on antislavery as a popular stick politics. Rhetoric of depicting a country between slavery and freedom. And thissouth seceded, begins with my read on the south. When mississippi seceded from the union in 1860, itd not just do so because Abraham Lincoln was elected president. Seized the popular mind of the north, texas said the same thing. What was dangerous about the republicans was not because they had this and that on their platform about what they would or would not do toward slavery, they had roused millions in the north to view slavery with contempt and fear. In that sense, the republican achievement was something we shrewdjust attribute to political operators or virtuous activators activists, but to the majority of the people of the north, who had determined to overthrow the slave power. What im trying to do is concept of theld abolition democracy, his word for the alliance between northern republicans and freed slaves in the south during reconstruction that accomplished the unfinished revolution of reconstruction and the american south. I think it began, as he also notes elsewhere, with the origin of the Republican Party in the north. Before you were preconditioned to the civil war and the radical transformation of emancipation, it was republican clinical victory in the north. Americanooks at antislavery and that transformation in a comparative perspective to some extent. Focusing on what is distinctive. What is distinctive about the American Experience of basically abolition and emancipation. If you think about the United States abolition, even in comparative terms, it is quite striking that it is the only place that in a sense abolition was achieved through mass democratic politics. Every step of that process was ratified through nasa political activity, including elections and reelections and ratifications of amendments and so on. It is very different from the usual course of emancipation. Even in britain, where there was a degree of mass mobilization, it still took shape in an aristocratic government, or a small percentage of the population could participate in politics. In the u. S. , it is limited to white males. In large parts of the north, there are a lot of black people voting. Even with those limits on democracy, it was much more popular in the sense that it infused the body politic in a much larger way. In that partisan way. Not to say that there were not ,ass politics involved in haiti for instance, but they were a different kind of mass politics. This leads me to explore antislavery ideology. Its true that antislavery ideology, free labor ideology, as many have argued and several papers here argue, did journey toward expensive free or what others might call imperialist friedman freedom. Sexton gives a version of that in the frame of his paper. I do not mean to sunder the connections, but i think its also true that popular ideology helps explain why the u. S. Civil whyera unfolded as it did, the second American Revolution was so revolutionary and o so distinctive. This favors the rhetoric of republican politicians in the 1950s. It is not lincoln, but seward. We can talk about seward or not. It does not explore directly the voices from the grassroots. This is mostly elite sources. But still, in assessing the impact of republican leaders, i want to approach them not as topdown constructors of ideology, but conduits of a populist antislavery ideology. There is a moment in the paper where seward, the architect of all of this, jokingly says this, i do not believe what i say, but the people love to hear this antislavery stuff. That was recorded by jefferson wife. This can benk completely understood as topdown rhetoric or even minority activist rhetoric. It was incredibly powerful in politics and his opponents recognized this. Someone like Stephen Douglas recognize this. Two main features we highlight free labor, i talk about that, but not simply as a the boers why capitalism of the 1850s, but in some ways, the language thegeois capitalism of 1850s, but in some ways, the is important. The rhetoric of class, of class struggle, of capital and labor, in some form of inherent conflict or conflict that needs to be mediated somehow or a conflict that is out of balance is all over republican speeches in the 1850s. Amous are a couple f labor ism lincoln dependent on capital. Very extensively in oregon here in the 1910s, but no, lincoln was not a socialist. He did talk a lot about capital and labor. So did seward. So did a lot of republicans. Capital founded on labor slide away so ferociously. Critique of slavery was the critique of a capitalist class, a capitalist ruling class, and also an aristocratic capitalist ruling class. I do not have time to do into of deep a critique capitalism was here. But that is a big question for me. The second thing, antislavery olympics and democratic politics. I am not concerned with a tragic inextricable it he of american democracy and slavery. Which is the mode most american historians have operated in since edwin morgan, the american era ducks, the way that these two things are tied at the ied at the ankles. For a number wary of reasons, but what is striking is that in the 1850s, very few antislavery,re they simply averred that any waseholding society antidemocratic for obvious reasons. In some ways, as it emerged, it was an exclusionary, especially democraticclusionary politics, especially to the Indigenous People of north america, and that should not be forgotten. It needs to be integrated into this narrative. But its also a vision of antislavery as a struggle for democracy, i do not think it can great white man apology of four empire as seward ultimately became because it was empowered in large part i black activists at the time, most notably frederick douglass. They black activists at time, most notably frederick douglass. John mercer langston, william williamrts of nell, all sorts of figures that worked collaboratively with republicans and generally embraced this rhetoric of being part of an antimonarch asked slaveholding power. What is key here . Its notable i guess my closing reflection is what is the place of the u. S. Civil war . I amnot think that professionally obligated to think this, but it is still the most important event in American History. I could have brought in trump here. Whats the relation between this policy . Nd u. S. Foreign i think its notable that it i thinkow up in is notable how little it shows up in all of the papers here, except for jays. Intoes not fit so well longue duree histories. It is dismantling continuity, eother mode or employment mplotment. In thinkinganalogy about u. S. History begins with frederick douglass. Progress,le, not with but the possibility of progress. It begins with conflict. ,ith forces contending different ideological outcomes at play. And i do not want to accuse theres been a lot of that in these other papers, too, but i ee story do a longue dur that yields a different story. From the standpoint of matt of paper, indigenous history, it is not that we want to be static in the way that matt said hunt was, but the scope of that and the rhythm is different if you start thinking of the civil war and the struggle against slavery. Or from the standpoint of whiteness. Paper, its a different perspective. I dont know. We do leave it there. Intellectually, just the air we the air wein breathe within our subfields of history and the way that in flex our in stings when sketching a grand narrative is something worth attending to among ourselves. Thank you guys. [applause] ok, that was fantastic. We have four fascinating, rich, sweeping papers, and im sure we are all looking forward very much to the q a. Before we begin, just a reminder to wait for the microphone to come to you before asking the question, and then also questions yay comments boo [laughter] lets proceed on that basis. Right, at the front. How would you see the overlap in the ideologies you are talking about . All four papers are a chronological moment of the United States emerging into a larger world in dealing with the longstanding problems of labor and capital, in one way or another, right . And yet you have four very different takes that are valuable and persuasive unto themselves. Im wondering if theres an underlying ideology and in particular, an ideology of about late 19th century capitalism and the way that labor is defined in the way that race is defined, the way that National Power is defined . Ideology story often of capitalism emerging in this moment, and you feel that that is a fair characterization for your papers . I will just start very quickly. I think it might be more say we are looking at ideologies of power and how in theunctions and United States that is often expressed through political economy. So, looking at capitalism or free trade, and thats also a conversation i would like to have with you guys, that there od notsion in this peri just between freetrade and andavement, but freetrade capitalism. They are situated in society. I do not want to reduce what we are looking at two different theologies of capitalism. Mark, did you have i just figured these disagreements within the Republican Party in the 1850s. I have a question for you guys. When you get into some of these aspects, and i guess i would say its not about the of capitalism. Its the ideologies of capitalism. We use the blanket term capitalism, but theres nuance. Theres capitalism within the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, and i think thats one of the things im thinking about, too. They are very much working at the last thing, with yours, the opium wars, which is a really useful one. The person most responsible for the treaty was john bowring from where i work, exit or, in the u. K. In this is one of those rare exceptions where he was a free treat freetrade capitalist and forced it on the chinese against the will. One of the best articles no one reads anymore, an article on 1962. Rade from one of the things he does a good theof is differentiating policies of freetrade and the true ideologues who are often on the outside looking in, extremely critical of the opium wars. It gets to these ideologies within the capitalist system. Great question. I think it is a mistake to think of John Quincy Adams as only capitalistested in order. I think that is much more a general concern for adams. When he looks at britain, he looks at britain, hes not only thinking of its ability to affect markets. Hes thinking about illegal slave trading. He is thinking about a bunch of different things. Mind, what is his this new World Community going to look like . In some ways, i think he was not down with the concept of empire. He was not someone who would into or a colonial system or colonial establishments. But at the same time he was not just super comfortable with, but grateful to britain for its work turn the opium wars. I think thats an issue, whether it is about civilization or capitalism. Where is the United States going to take it stand . This on . Is thinking about capitalism as ology and material reality you get different narratives. The argue i always i was he gives anake, opening to it and i think it often gets lost this way, the basically slavery in the united becomes anislavery ideological fig leaf. I think what we miss, and James Houston has a good book about forwardlooking, but how backward looking the 1850s free labor ideology really was. Its about small farms. Its about very Smart Manufacturing establishments. And is the justification think that that is a programmatic ideological move that swept in on the heels of the Antislavery Movement that paved the way ideologically. I am with jay. Even though i disagreed with the framing of your piece, i think the story you tell about how that materially transforms american capitalism, and the eye doll ideology follows. Rise ofpens after the wall street, real industrial capitalism was a different ideology. In that sense, i dont actually think ideology led the way for capitalism in the american case. In some ways that the material forces led the way. Yes. Can you wait for the mic . Yes. Thanks for a really, really wonderful panel. To connect three papers and go back to danny a posse of question about danis question, your sense im getting the phrase wrong the whiteness. Periled i am thinking of not turner, the it throughovement, people into a defensive mode. I was wondering across these seeing theseou referenced . Whether it is a dime novel, a template, the newspapers, free soil ideology . What kind of registers are you looking at . Im really curious. This was a revelation to me. Their slaves to work in the opium wars i was like, wow, i didnt know that. How prevalent is that . Much broader, a kind of Global Political economy , and i am curious as to what matt thinks about this. I think you are right. Person. The a century i never think the civil war should i am at the a century person. I never think the civil war should disappear. I think a lot of people are thinking it thinking of it in terms of empire. Theres all of these complicated ways. People imagine a very different future for slavery. Not go into the particular politics youre looking at, but just curious, how people are thinking about those registers. Thank you. It was wonderful. My head is back in the 19th century in gratitude. I think it is true if you what you its sort of are following. If you follow the ideas, i dont think theres a clear trajectory. I think theres the effect of the antislur antislavery revolution, but if you dont follow the idea, if you follow, save the soldiers or the officer class, yeah, you follow them not howard, you know oliver who headed up the freedmens bureau, also check tracked down chief joseph. You follow them out of the west, the same generals in 1871 there. They are putting down strikes. ,f you follow the forces theres continuity and that is important. But some muscle that gets the during the war. Radical reconstruction starts pretty early. That muscle does not go into a revolutionary democratic project. It goes into a capitalist imperial project. That dont think it means theres not continuity across those years. If i gather, your first question is really a sources and methods question [indiscernible] events like haiti [indiscernible] [laughter] first, the way i approach the bigger project, also this project, i had the same challenges with the digital humanities approach, doing searches. Iran most of the congressional record and when i located the key debates around these questions i went out into books, tornals, newspapers, letters give it context and in the. Ctual project i really focused but these are ideas that are pervasive top to bottom. Time, what i would really like to do is figure out. He dynamic are expressings ideas that will proliferate across the country. How do those ideas function is an open question for me and they are absolutely referencing everything. Found is continuous is continuousat white power. E of they are almost always white power. One of the big debates after oregons application for statehood, theres this whole fear about communism and the last 21 days of the debates the uprising happens. They consider enslavement as a solution. Its interesting to think of opiumhing of the wars. They are written as these people the americans are desperate to keep out of the u. S. We lost that sequencing. Its kind of interesting. It says something about this act of getting. Its fascinating to think of pop culture as being to encompass and contain contradictions than other kinds of geopolitics. Not actually, if you are running a missionary magazine or a periodical with a travel there good. In it, thats but you can sell some copies of in 1841,but with adams he feels the need to resolve this. He says these guys need to get in the queue. They need to be tutored in civilization. Openness may be more re. Sible to sustain their yes. A question at the back. In the 1830s, the trade , but theas so bad british made products that were sold to china. Andhere was a great deficit it looked like the reason was important in pushing for the. Nly product for the chinese also, i think you mentioned the were close to civilized but when william taft traveled to china, to the east and asia, he was given the that theon already japanese are the ones and they , and as longlped as they stay away from the philippines, this is more the japanese, who roosevelt help expand in the neighborhood, and some people claimed that it went to a number of wars in the 20th century. Thanks is very helpful points. First of all, to your point, britain had nothing that china wanted. Which is why it is such an entertaining moment with exit brexit. Do not knowhat we what happened last time suggest we need to learn more and the u. K. Fascinating about John Quincy Adams, in the end, the idea the chinese needed to be wrought to look is they are the ones promoting this vision of superiority and failing to recognize the natural quality of nations, which he calls a christian equality. Now, again, if you think about the later 19th century, things shipped. Imeague in cambridge speaking about the japanese, the ottomans, the chinese they are in a really fascinating racecraft. R as that is what is so important, by 218g about 1935 and 34, 18 35. These are not always linear projections. Yes. Question. Thank you. I loved all for papers, but i have a question for dani. Been doing a lot of work on the southwest, arizona, new mexico particular, going from territories to statehood. I wonder if you have spent time unpacking the claims at the territorial level. From the perspective of the people within the territories . There was all kinds of congressional resistance. But they are facing this and they pushed back on congress. Both of those territories take on how toapproaches address that problem and how to claim status. A lot of this is tied up with White Supremacy and fragility and so forth. The southwest for me, this project basically goes up to the compromise of 1850. , i do not havees contextual on the ground sources at the National Level and the transNational Level. ,he argument being made arguments quoted on the floor by senators, whose voices can count , that is something you see over and over again. Afraid that does not quite answer your question. I think that kind of speaks to this need to take the National Level story, the transNational Level story and find a way to meet it up with these more grassroots, from the ground up positions. I think thats interesting in terms of what kind of activism and the extentd nature ofhe contested the space will be organized institutionally. Thats a pretty contentious debate. The way that they position themselves is strategic. I think thats a fascinating question. We can talk later. Marc, do you [indiscernible] danirry, this is a question, too. This gunboat diplomacy is amusing. Andconcept of light security, its interesting. I am reading this and i am and its about the book it is rage, insecurity driving over time and as you got to that, why that one . Were there others in contention . Question also. T i think of white fragility as a way of working through this. My book is on conservatism. Its demonstrating that conservatism has a contextual basis that can only be understood with nationalism and it relationship to the organic body. Something kept bothering me. Historian in the 20th century and theres all this discussion about white rage and anger. Is a lotve witnessed of fear, a lot of fragility, the that it is in answer to some kind of need. The ways that they define safety and security, the kinds of structures that white people in the 19th century demand to feel safe or secure and the way that those commands change over time. Whats necessary for a group of the 20thple all in century. It is less intense. Looking for a constitutional amendment to protect a certain vision of whiteness. Was in some more withs working the crowd and erasure. Foreclosed, by the are alloweds that to be had. What is a trigger word in the , saying those intense reactions, violent reactions as Joanne Friedman and has. This does not read like strength to me. For caret he. But theyre not precarious. Andd research on fragility that got us to hear. Thank you for that. This also pertains to carols wonderful book. Sure. We can always go back and say we have a horrible, violent history. Theres tons of racism. Becomes, i think this is a danger of a study. Is being made and remade and always being challenged. Of robin kellys amazing book. Why do we get blackwhite alliances in the populist movement. It would not have been predictable. I do not think that theres a platonic rage under the rug waiting to come out. And who remade it in this circumstance because there was not straight continuity with their families. How does this rage get. I think it has to be made and remade and each moment. It seems like you are looking at that. How is this being passed around. Houses being published. Its the racist novel, its the movie that keeps replaying. The clash of civilizations or the congressional speech. We have to push back against analyses that demand that kind of tight causation with layers of analysis does say this is all there and we can then see it. Its got traction because people are saying it. They are acting on it. Thats a very historical kind of study. Its like trump. A continuity from all things. We have to say exactly how it happened. Yes, anyway. Dr. Holtz i agree. [laughter] you were called out earlier on. Glad to see your hand up. [indiscernible] i thinklne yeah, setting the panel on each other is a good idea. The first question, how all of these Work Together and what is really happening in the midst 19thcentury, however we are defining it chronologically. Organizers fore using ideology as a plural. Three things appeared in all of the papers. Irst was the civil war is the civil war a moment of change or is it not . There are cases on both sides. Second, the presence of british power. This is forcing new ideological questions on the knighted states. The third one did not really, some of but this is the one i wanted to ask about your it of course, the old way of thinking would be to put changes in communication and transportation at the heart of the story rather than political innovations and save the introduction of steam power is absolutely central in the midvictorian period, improvements in postal communications, and on and on and on. I guess i would invite the panelists to think about that. That occur ats the moment of all of your papers, is this central to the changes in ideology . Marc, do you want to go first . Yeah, theres, three things there, arent there . Opiume i did along the wars, this british hegemonic role from the mid19th century but i personally think it is extremely important to understanding the changing of technology in the United States. Is about thehat transmission of knowledge. Transatlanticthe region is crucial. But more broadly, the context in which american capitalism and imperial expansion of occur very. Ifferent i think we would do ourselves a disservice we tend to not think about it, but we have gone over this stuff. By notmissing out engaging more, despite the differences in the American Economic development. That does not mean these things are not still in way. Something i did not write of john the paper, one quincy adamss anxieties about caughtit was about being up in all of the stuff you mentioned. It had such a strict attempt to control information and people it could not be vulnerable to all of those developments, right . That organic sense of the way it would reshape, that notion of china behind the great wall, that is a consistent one, right . On the concept of the civil war, i agree with matt. John quincy adams is a good example. I dont think john Lindsay Adams thinks of his way out. Thinks there is a way out. When he dies, he very pessimistic. I actually agree. The challenge, and especially the continuity is to try to conflict withas a ideas of racial belonging. This is a crucial responsibility. These are not necessarily the politics of racial belonging and that is a problem for us. Its a problem for america, writes . Thats one of the central problems of this period. Dr. Holtz very quickly newspapers. Ation of there is no way that people are finding out about haiti or not turner or russia or paris or austria except there is and iture being published think one of the reactions that people arebecause getting increasing amounts of generatesn and that. His kind of anxiety even antislavery and prints culture emerged at the same time but with the explosion of rent in and the amount of daily newspapers all over the north, its stunning. Estimates that charles against the climb kansas on before floor of was probably printed a million times. Thats probably more column inches devoted to some antislavery argument in that season alone than all s. The abolitionist track one of every four people who voted in that election bought copy of uncle toms cabin. He puts aside the deeper economic changes. I do think i do not go all the way out with the lake economy. Economyh developed an so it could kill slavery. Thats not totally true. But it was happening. The northern economy to feel less connected which allowed these more radical politics to flourish. There is also this push to move past, physically pass technology. Its not just industrialization, but the physical technologies the they are bound by in northeast. Matt . , i just wanted to ask nick this is desperate. It needs to be asked now. For me, i guess i have the. Pposite reaction i came across this speech when it was cited by ian elliott. It says john adams has an essay and John Quincy Adams admits we have a difference law it is assigned very clearly by race. He said it and its true. And of course it should apply to why we should reopen the slave trade with africa. But there was substantial what is more surprising, there was not substantial opposition to him in the first place. What was the lineage of that . My question is, especially thinking about what is the next big u. S. China advents event, you may know more about this, but the guy who challenged preston works to a dual after he beat up Charles Sumner thats always depicted as kind of a much more egalitarian kind of treatment. It opens the u. S. To chinese immigration. We want chinese workers. He ends up resigning as minister to serve as a liaison for the chinese government. Speaking of being controlled it sounds like a plot. Barnstormingg speech. That does not seem to follow. How you look at these competing stories. This is a fate is sealed moment for china. I think theres all kinds of different continuities. I think the trend line is through the 19th century. For the people booing and John Quincy Adams is more to himself. I do not expect anyone is going to throw things. One of the ways that you can resolve the problem of many, isy different legal regimes finding a christian legal regime. Itt part of the speech does not resolve these speech in that way. The conclusion is going the other direction. Not to legal pluralism. The papers past and future are following interview, i think. On international law, its part of the kicks kitchen sink tools to find subjugate and to dominate, which is fantastic. I would like to thank our panelists for an excellent session. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] you are watching American History tv, all weekend, every weekend and cspan3. This weekend, American History tv joins our spectrum tv partners to show kees showcase the history of missoula, montana. To learn more, go to cspan. Org citiestour. We continue with our look at missoula. Robert missoula is located in the western part of montana. We would probably payment to be the largest city inside the rocky mountains. We have a branch to the east and the branch to the west
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.