What you see in every country is more of this type of social intervention then we do here. If anything we move closer to some of that. At least when it comes, as robert was saying, to some of the programs that work. I that work. I think this is a positive thing. The child tax cut a, the earned income tax credit. In part because we recognize that it is bringing a political view and in part because it is bring confidence to americans to consider work and people who are [inaudible] these programs have to work to be nonporous seems fair that others should have to work as well. That is a general mindset. So, that is why at the end of the day i say if we are going to solve some of these problems, and i agree with charles that there are a lot of guys ought to be working who are not. We are to guarantee them a job. In fact. In fact, during the recession, during the recovery act we had a program, subsidized job program, we subsidize wages to the tune of 80 or 90 of the ef program, we subsidize wages in private or Public Sector jobs in the tomb of 80 or 90 Unemployed People and i thought it was a successful program. We. Weve come to the end of the time. I will close by saying that any urine which has been characterized by credible polarization, when people people have disagreed with each other it has been assumed, must hate each other, think jerrod and i have done a terrific job. [applause] [inaudible] [inaudible] cspan, created by americas Cable Television companies are brought to you by a Public Public service by your cable or satellite provider. Professor gerald, and your book a counter revolution of 1776, youre right, as the 21st century proceeds, one point is evident, the heroic a creation of the founding of the u. S. Is desperately in need of revision. What does that mean . What it means is that to the historians by and large have not done a very good job of talking about the founding of the United States of america which is striking is in history departments from the atlantic to the pacific you have specialist to create critique the revolutions, but those who critique 1776 are few and far between. Thats despite the fact that after the founding of the United States america you had more land taken from native americans clearly which met that 1776 was not necessarily a step form to the indigenous population. Then population. Then by the 1790s you had the United States as i noted in the book had taken over the controls of the slave trade in africa to cuba and by the 1840s as i said in my book the deep south after the slave trade they had taken control of the slave trade to brazil. So, it seems to me that minimally one can say that 7076 was not a greatly people forward for africans nor was it a grape great leap forward for the indigenous population. It was for many europeans to be sure. But, europeans as we will know do not comprise the entire humanity. I think what it set in motion was what we are seen in 2016, that is to say, with 1776 you had the progressive expropriation of land from the indigenous population and then that land was parceled out, oftentimes to europeans fresh off of the boat which help solidify across Class Coalition between poor europeans and more fluent europeans at the expense of the indigenous population. Of course the africans within stock that land as an slave in labor and in 2016 what skin you see a a cross Class Coalition of the republican side between the europeans of various class backgrounds. And for those who say, who think make America Great again fundamentally means make America White again, they they have a point to be made. Part of the problem is since we not had a critique of 1776 to six to the extent it deserves on it becomes difficult to understand the present. If you go to a dr. To have an illness one of the first things the dr. Will do is take a medical history, hopefully you will provide an accurate medical history that will allow the dr. To make a diagnosis and a prognosis with regard to your future wellbeing. We have not had an adequate history it seems to me of the founding, that makes it very difficult to understand the past one and in your book you write, the u. S. Had been founded on the principle of White Supremacy. Guest it goes back to what i said a moment ago. That is to say that in some ways if you look at 1776 and six and this is what i tell my students when i teach these undergraduates and introduction to africanamerican studies, that it is fair to say that 1776 in the u. S. Constitution did represent a step forward in terms of religious liberty. To to that point of course religious wars had been racking europe in particular. Protestant london with the catholic power, france and spain. Portuguese also being predominantly catholic. What happens with 1776 and i argue that i argue that in order to widen the base of support for the republican project in north america, the socalled democratic project in north america, there is a step forward in terms of religious liberty. This allowed the settler here to widen their base support against the clown in london. Therefore it is fair to say the settlers in north america led by George Washington would not prevail set for the assistance of france. This leads to the First Amendment guarantee and religiously ready. With that we know that anticatholicism prevailed in the 19th century, the burning of comments, we know that anticatholicism prevailed know that anti catholicism prevailed a century ago with the rise of the second of the ku klux klan. And also steps forward in regards to antijewish fervor and even in 2016 that particular beast continues to raise its ugly head. But generally speaking 1776 was a step forward for religious liberty because historians miss for religious liberty because historians miss the flip side of the coin. That the socalled republican project did mean that religion took a step backwards. It also meant that monarchy took a step backwards. But substituted for the aristocracy of ancestry and heritage, and lineage, as was prevalent in london, you have to add aristocracy of race quite frankly which the country still wrestling with. In fact you can make the argument and i have, that project of aristocracy of race did not begin to retreat until the 20th century with the rise of the class project. The rise of thriving trade unions, the rise of socialist countries and National Liberation movements etc. This may begin to give assistance to those who are suffering under the lash of racism of White Supremacy which forced a retreat in 1954 with the brown versus board of education decision. In the 1964 with 64 with Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights act. As that International Assistance and pressure began to wither in the latter part of the 20th century and the first decade or so in the 21st century you begin to see a reassertion of some of these uglier aspects of White Supremacys is represented with this incredible please shootings in san diego, tulsa, chicago, milwaukee, the list is too much to mention. Part of the dilemma with the black community in particular was that as a result of brown versus board of education and the retreat of white the premises, a tradeoff was made. That is to say the more international as leader of the black community who are willing to make these global alliances were marginalized, isolated, demonized, et cetera. So now it is said repeatedly whenever there is a microphone in my face, and 2016 despite the fact that you have these major crises, ukraine, north korea, syria, to mention a few, there are few black intellectuals and leaders that have anything credible or meaningful to say despite the fact that any of those crises inevitably, or perhaps inevitably could lead to something worse. Up to and including extension perhaps. So this is this is where we stand in 2016. Host doctor horn, 2,500,000 people resided in the u. S. In 1776. What was the role of african americans, of slaves the role of africanamericans, of slaves during the revolution, if any . Well, we told in our classrooms who somewhat have that he was the first person to lay down his life for liberty photo. Although he is defined as black, another country may have been defined as native american given his ancestry. But that we are not told of course generally speaking is about the africans who fought against the founding of the United States. I was just watching the second part of roots, called the first version came out back based on the book in the 1970s and took the nation by storm. I was watching the second version which just came out this year. They do a credible effort in terms of trying to illustrate the last point that i just made that is to say that since britain was on a faster track of abolition of slavery the black population had reason to believe that their interest would be better served if the settlers were defeated. Thats thats a difficult point for people in the United States to grapple with. I might also say that there is another tv miniseries that you can find easily, i wont mention the sources, but bet television and the canadian South African production they do the best job yet in terms of film and cinema, in terms of presenting an accurate betrayal of the black role during the 1776 war. In any case, enslaved africans were bonded laborers and that tells a story if youre trying to understand 1776 you six you should try to understand 1688. And that was in england where the wings of the monarch are clipped by the rising merchant class. To that point the World African company which had been under the son of the monarch was the major force in terms of the african slave trade. With the clipping of the wings of the monarch there was a deregulation if you would like, of the african slave trade. And merchants to numerous to mention were able to enter the commerce, feeling too africa, and handcuffing every. [inaudible] dragging them across the atlantic to work in the tobacco field. Of course in the caribbean which up until the 18th century they thought was more valuable to the north american mainland. Of course the story should be told in terms of 1776 in conjunction with the caribbean because the africans outnumbered the europeans sometimes at the rate of 10 1 or 20 1 leaving Fertile Ground to the rise of favorables which is not only jeopardizing the investments but jeopardizing the lives of the slaveowners and their families. This of course leads to some kind of retreatment on the mainland where the ratio is a much more favorable to slavery. That does not necessarily save the settlers because in 1779 have a revolt in a 1712 you have a 12 you have a revolt in the manhattan. O 1739 South Carolina spearheaded by who cannot only speak portuguese but many were roman catholic. They were trying trying to get the spanish florida, florida at that time was controlled by spain. There is a direct collaboration between spain and the enslaved africans in South Carolina to overthrow the settler class in South Carolina. So so what happens 51776 1770 was the spanishamerican war. Theyre going to suggest that the french were assisting in manhattan in 1712. That is a very successful effort, the 77 years war. You know that today as we speak, canada, Quebec Quebec in particular has predominantly f french speaking population. Even, london prevails, they want to tax the settlers because the war has been to their benefit and this is a traditional narrative kicks in. The settlers did not want to pay the taxes which is a familiar scene in washington d. C. To this day. That leads to the revolt againss ritters rules in collaboration with the french in particular against want and which brings u. Back to the constitution and religious liberty of the First Amendment, et cetera. Host who was lord dunmore and what was his role in the revolution . Guest lord dunmore, i was at a conference in new york about a year ago and a leading historian started out making what he thought was a cynical commentore about the pair between lord dunmore, the last British Colonial governor in virginia in 1775 and Abraham Lincoln. He thought it was a cynical comment i thought comment i thought he was going to Say Something i agreed with. That is to say lord dunmore was very upset shall we say with the fact that settlers led by George Washington and Thomas Jefferson wanted to overthrow british rule in virginia and north america generally. So he tried to cut a deal with the africans. This was represented in second version of roots that i was making reference to. And the turn for liberty or the enslaved, they would fights with the redcoats. This is not when dunmore amongst the settlers to put it mildly he became notoriouslylymi unpopular. But this leading historian when he was trying what he thought was a parallel between lord dunmore and Abraham Lincoln i think he was making a pointur unintentionally which is the emancipation proclamation, to 13 january 1, 1863, in some measure as i say in my book was a military measure. Enl in terms of trying to free the enslaved population that the United States does not have jurisdiction over its the Confederate States of america, that was a turning point for the war. It allows for the enlistment of more black soldiers as depicted in the film glory. Y. And then the the u. S. Couldver e prevail over it did not work in 1775 for various reasons including the fact that theres criticism of lord dunmore that he didnt go for enough. That that he should have been trying to offer a freedom of the enslaved loyalists. Those that did not defect from that union, from london, but in any case lord dunmore is a very important figure in the foundation of the United States of america. If you were to write a general history book for schoolkids today what would be the first line in that book . Guest im not sure. But im giving a talk in a few days at the association for the study of africanamerican life and history founded by woodson, a, leading black historian over a century ago. In that talk i amce taking off n important seminar that was held in washington d. C. In may 2016. In the runup when it was first initiated to the opening of the National AfricanAmerican Museum in washington which has publicity for understandable reasons. At that seminar in washington in may 1 leading historian asks, number of historians asks if we need a new interpretive for the framework. One historian said, it is fromor slavery to freedom popularized by franklin is that still ae valid framework or august and elliot, from plantation to ghetto. Another said what we need is a new interpretive framework for u. S. History. So what im going to sandof richmond and a few days and the answer to that question is yes, it should be from settler colonialism to u. S. Imperialism. As i tell this audience, thattco will allow to incorporate more effectively the present dayy diversity of the black American Population in houston for example, where i teach, the black American Population has been enriched by immigrants from nigeria. People think of a basketball i star who goes on to perform with the Houston Rockets and in new york city for example for at least a century if not longer. There has been a title wave of migrants from jamaica, t, barbados and miami. A significant number number black population has roots in haiti. For various reasons the traditional narratives on and able to account for their diverse city. That is why thinkh we need this new interpretiveat framework so that we can account for the actual reality on the ground. Of the l host you mentioned earlier Paul Robinson from your new book, paul robison the artist is revolutionary, youre right, you cannot fully appreciate how the jim crow system came to an end without an understanding of the life of Paul Robinson. Robinson pioneered the struggle against jim crow throughout the 30s and 40s. Guest that is true. Despite the the fact that i wrote it. That is to stay that Paul Robinson, black american born born in new jersey in 1988 passing away of philadelphia in 1976, leading scholar as an undergraduate of rockers university where he starts in the gridiron at stars as a baseball catcher. He leaves there and goes to Columbia University graduates. He was on the fast track of becoming a lawyer but is diverted, although i should say that he also was an early performer and professional football. His career is diverted and he stumbles into performing. Becomes a leading actor, a kindr of precursor of denzel washington, and will smith if you like. Not only like. Not only on the screen but also on stage, a fellow is his signature role. A good deal of his stardom is created in london where he lives in the early 1920s into theti late 1930s with intermittent e theres a digression we could engage in now and how so many black americans over the decades and centuries have been treated much better abroad than in the place of their birth which leads to themselves for living overseas. But a turning turning point comes when he visits newly fascist germany in the early 1930s and comes facetoface with the rising tide of fascism. He also goes on to moscow where he encounters another