WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:01.899
You know, usually when you think about the birth

00:00:01.899 --> 00:00:04.200
of a nation, you just naturally picture these

00:00:04.200 --> 00:00:07.160
grand, sweeping battlefields. Oh, totally. The

00:00:07.160 --> 00:00:09.640
generals on horseback, the smoke from the musket.

00:00:09.820 --> 00:00:12.560
Right. The sheer, like, physical force of an

00:00:12.560 --> 00:00:15.580
army just clashing against an empire. It is a

00:00:15.580 --> 00:00:18.640
deeply physical image, for sure. I mean, we tend

00:00:18.640 --> 00:00:21.480
to visualize the kinetic energy of a revolution,

00:00:21.940 --> 00:00:24.359
the actual pushing and shoving of history, if

00:00:24.359 --> 00:00:27.140
you will. Yeah, it's all action. But then if

00:00:27.140 --> 00:00:29.260
you look at the actual spark, the thing that

00:00:29.260 --> 00:00:31.059
really ignited all that gunpowder in the first

00:00:31.059 --> 00:00:33.259
place, suddenly you aren't looking at a battlefield

00:00:33.259 --> 00:00:35.719
at all. No, not at all. You're looking at a stack

00:00:35.719 --> 00:00:38.020
of paper. You're looking at words printed on

00:00:38.020 --> 00:00:40.859
a page just circulating through freezing taverns

00:00:40.859 --> 00:00:42.820
and cramped meeting houses in the dead of winter.

00:00:42.939 --> 00:00:45.700
It's the absolute definition of the pen giving

00:00:45.700 --> 00:00:47.859
the sword its target. Because, you know, before

00:00:47.859 --> 00:00:49.159
you can convince people to pick up a weapon,

00:00:49.200 --> 00:00:51.359
you really have to completely rewire how they

00:00:51.359 --> 00:00:54.719
see the world. Absolutely. So welcome to today's

00:00:54.719 --> 00:00:57.380
Deep Dive. For you listening, it is Friday, March

00:00:57.380 --> 00:01:01.560
13th, 2026, and today we are embarking on a really

00:01:01.560 --> 00:01:04.400
timeless exploration of a profoundly influential

00:01:04.400 --> 00:01:07.439
text. A massively important one. Yeah, the stack

00:01:07.439 --> 00:01:09.900
of sources we have in front of us today consists

00:01:09.900 --> 00:01:12.780
entirely of excerpts from the February 14th,

00:01:12.780 --> 00:01:16.310
1776 edition of Thomas Paine's pamphlet. common

00:01:16.310 --> 00:01:19.030
sense. Right and specifically we're looking at

00:01:19.030 --> 00:01:22.069
the main body of the work along with the appendix

00:01:22.069 --> 00:01:25.349
that got added to later editions and his very

00:01:25.349 --> 00:01:27.530
pointed address to the Quakers. It really is

00:01:27.530 --> 00:01:29.569
a remarkable collection of source material. We

00:01:29.569 --> 00:01:32.329
are looking at a document that didn't just suggest

00:01:32.329 --> 00:01:36.430
a minor change in tax policy. Hardly. It demanded

00:01:36.430 --> 00:01:38.750
a complete paradigm shift for an entire continent.

00:01:38.810 --> 00:01:41.510
It did. And that is exactly our mission for this

00:01:41.510 --> 00:01:45.230
deep dive. We are going to extract the raw, unfiltered

00:01:45.230 --> 00:01:47.530
arguments of what became one of the most effective

00:01:47.530 --> 00:01:49.709
pieces of political persuasion ever written.

00:01:49.849 --> 00:01:51.670
We really are. We're going to uncover not just

00:01:51.670 --> 00:01:54.150
what was argued to ignite a revolution, but how

00:01:54.150 --> 00:01:57.170
this text systematically attempts to dismantle

00:01:57.170 --> 00:01:59.790
a centuries -old superpower. all while laying

00:01:59.790 --> 00:02:01.989
out the structural blueprints for an entirely

00:02:01.989 --> 00:02:04.849
new nation, which is wild to think about. It

00:02:04.849 --> 00:02:08.050
is. But before we unpack the mechanics of that

00:02:08.050 --> 00:02:10.030
argument, we do need to establish a very strict

00:02:10.030 --> 00:02:12.479
framework for our discussion today. Yes, that's

00:02:12.479 --> 00:02:15.240
crucial. Because the text we are examining is

00:02:15.240 --> 00:02:18.939
intensely charged. It is filled with revolutionary

00:02:18.939 --> 00:02:22.539
fervor, sharp political critiques, and deeply

00:02:22.539 --> 00:02:25.520
theological arguments that are rooted in like

00:02:25.520 --> 00:02:28.419
18th century interpretations of scripture. Exactly.

00:02:28.639 --> 00:02:31.159
So here is a crucial disclaimer for you listening.

00:02:31.199 --> 00:02:34.099
Right. The political views. The revolutionary

00:02:34.099 --> 00:02:36.539
sentiments and the religious arguments presented

00:02:36.539 --> 00:02:40.819
in this text belong entirely to the author. 100%.

00:02:40.819 --> 00:02:43.840
In this deep dive, we are just going to impartially

00:02:43.840 --> 00:02:46.439
report on these intense viewpoints. Our goal

00:02:46.439 --> 00:02:48.939
is strictly to understand the source material.

00:02:49.120 --> 00:02:51.379
Right. We are not taking sides. And we are certainly

00:02:51.379 --> 00:02:53.620
not endorsing the political, social, or religious

00:02:53.620 --> 00:02:55.639
positions contained within the pamphlet. Not

00:02:55.639 --> 00:02:57.819
at all. We are here to analyze the rhetoric and

00:02:57.819 --> 00:03:00.159
the structure of a historical document, plain

00:03:00.159 --> 00:03:02.400
and simple. Precisely. Think of it like we are

00:03:02.400 --> 00:03:04.240
acting as architects. We're just examining the

00:03:04.240 --> 00:03:06.080
blueprints of the argument to see how the building

00:03:06.080 --> 00:03:08.439
was constructed. We are not moving into the building.

00:03:08.659 --> 00:03:11.120
I love that analogy. And man, what a massive

00:03:11.120 --> 00:03:14.340
structure it is. I am just immensely curious

00:03:14.340 --> 00:03:18.620
about how a single pamphlet, I mean it's just

00:03:18.620 --> 00:03:21.780
a few dozen pages, could generate such a seismic

00:03:21.780 --> 00:03:24.120
reaction. It's really unprecedented. Yeah, the

00:03:24.120 --> 00:03:26.819
sources include quotes from the era showing the

00:03:26.819 --> 00:03:29.300
impact. You have George Washington's general

00:03:29.300 --> 00:03:31.280
saying it convinced them of the necessity of

00:03:31.280 --> 00:03:34.120
separation. John Adams dreaded its popular effect.

00:03:34.360 --> 00:03:36.599
Exactly. Loyalists called it the vilest thing

00:03:36.599 --> 00:03:40.400
ever published, full of treason. So how does

00:03:40.400 --> 00:03:43.539
one writer construct an argument that just completely

00:03:43.539 --> 00:03:46.169
shatters the status quo? Well, he does it through

00:03:46.169 --> 00:03:49.169
a highly structured sequential rhetorical strategy.

00:03:49.629 --> 00:03:51.689
The author doesn't just start screaming for a

00:03:51.689 --> 00:03:53.550
revolt on page one. Right, that wouldn't work.

00:03:53.750 --> 00:03:56.490
Exactly. He builds a staircase, he starts at

00:03:56.490 --> 00:03:59.590
the absolute bedrock of human philosophy, and

00:03:59.590 --> 00:04:02.229
step by step he walks the reader toward his intended

00:04:02.229 --> 00:04:05.110
conclusion of independence. He neutralizes objections

00:04:05.110 --> 00:04:07.210
before the reader even has a chance to articulate

00:04:07.210 --> 00:04:09.409
them. He really does. Okay, let's take that first

00:04:09.409 --> 00:04:11.870
step with him. Because before the author can

00:04:11.870 --> 00:04:14.879
convince the reader to overthrow a king, He clearly

00:04:14.879 --> 00:04:18.319
realizes... He first has to fundamentally redefine

00:04:18.319 --> 00:04:21.500
what government actually is. From a purely philosophical

00:04:21.500 --> 00:04:24.040
standpoint. Right. He has to wipe the slate clean

00:04:24.040 --> 00:04:26.959
of centuries of tradition. He does. And the text

00:04:26.959 --> 00:04:30.300
begins by making a very hard, stark distinction

00:04:30.300 --> 00:04:33.019
between two concepts that people often just blur

00:04:33.019 --> 00:04:36.319
together. Society and government. Exactly. The

00:04:36.319 --> 00:04:38.220
author posits that they are not only different,

00:04:38.300 --> 00:04:41.519
but they have completely opposing origins and

00:04:41.519 --> 00:04:44.160
functions. Right. The text sets up this dichotomy

00:04:44.160 --> 00:04:46.860
immediately. It frames society as being produced

00:04:46.860 --> 00:04:49.639
by our wants and government by our wickedness.

00:04:49.779 --> 00:04:52.579
Which is a heavy distinction. It is. Society

00:04:52.579 --> 00:04:55.120
is presented as a positive force. It promotes

00:04:55.120 --> 00:04:57.959
our happiness by uniting our affections. It encourages

00:04:57.959 --> 00:05:01.120
interaction and mutual support. The text literally

00:05:01.120 --> 00:05:03.959
characterizes society as a patron. And then comes

00:05:03.959 --> 00:05:06.459
the pivot. Because government, on the other hand,

00:05:06.600 --> 00:05:09.540
is produced by our wickedness, it operates negatively.

00:05:09.660 --> 00:05:13.319
It restrains our vices. It creates distinctions

00:05:13.319 --> 00:05:17.540
between people. If society is the patron, the

00:05:17.540 --> 00:05:21.240
text explicitly labels government as the punisher.

00:05:21.660 --> 00:05:24.480
It's a rather bleak view of human nature, honestly,

00:05:24.600 --> 00:05:27.180
but incredibly compelling. Oh, absolutely. The

00:05:27.180 --> 00:05:29.680
text asserts that society in every state is a

00:05:29.680 --> 00:05:32.560
blessing, but government, even in its absolute

00:05:32.560 --> 00:05:37.089
best state, is but a necessary evil. And in its

00:05:37.089 --> 00:05:40.269
worst state, it's an intolerable one. Yeah. There's

00:05:40.269 --> 00:05:42.689
this potent imagery where the author compares

00:05:42.689 --> 00:05:45.649
government to clothing. He writes, government

00:05:45.649 --> 00:05:48.089
like dress is the badge of lost innocence. The

00:05:48.089 --> 00:05:49.990
palaces of kings are built on the ruins of the

00:05:49.990 --> 00:05:52.389
bowers of paradise. That's the line. That imagery

00:05:52.389 --> 00:05:55.089
does a lot of heavy lifting. He is arguing that

00:05:55.089 --> 00:05:57.529
if human beings were perfectly moral, like if

00:05:57.529 --> 00:06:00.230
the impulses of conscience were clear and uniform

00:06:00.230 --> 00:06:03.490
and irresistibly obeyed. We just wouldn't need

00:06:03.490 --> 00:06:05.490
law givers. We wouldn't need kings or parliaments

00:06:05.490 --> 00:06:08.550
at all. Exactly. We only surrender a part of

00:06:08.550 --> 00:06:10.889
our property, our taxes, to the government to

00:06:10.889 --> 00:06:12.829
protect the rest of it because we're fundamentally

00:06:12.829 --> 00:06:15.110
flawed. We choose government out of prudence,

00:06:15.290 --> 00:06:17.430
basically choosing the lesser of two evils. Okay,

00:06:17.589 --> 00:06:20.129
let's unpack this concept because the author

00:06:20.129 --> 00:06:22.829
uses a thought experiment to illustrate this

00:06:22.829 --> 00:06:25.410
progression. And it reminds me of something very

00:06:25.410 --> 00:06:28.709
relatable. Oh, like what? Think about a group

00:06:28.709 --> 00:06:31.519
of friends deciding to build a cabin. in the

00:06:31.519 --> 00:06:34.139
deep woods, like completely cut off from civilization.

00:06:34.259 --> 00:06:36.939
OK, I'm with you. At first, it's just pure society.

00:06:37.300 --> 00:06:40.120
One person can't lift a heavy timber alone. One

00:06:40.120 --> 00:06:42.839
person can't forage, build, and guard against

00:06:42.839 --> 00:06:44.959
animals all at the same time. Right, they need

00:06:44.959 --> 00:06:49.319
each other. Exactly. So necessity, which the

00:06:49.319 --> 00:06:52.180
text calls a gravitating power, pulls them together.

00:06:52.699 --> 00:06:55.120
They help each other out. The reciprocal blessings

00:06:55.120 --> 00:06:58.490
of the group make formal laws Totally unnecessary.

00:06:58.949 --> 00:07:01.129
Because the initial shared struggle binds them

00:07:01.129 --> 00:07:03.790
together. Their survival really depends on mutual

00:07:03.790 --> 00:07:05.970
cooperation. It is a state of natural liberty.

00:07:06.350 --> 00:07:08.769
Exactly. But then what happens? The cabin gets

00:07:08.769 --> 00:07:11.290
built. The immediate danger passes. People get

00:07:11.290 --> 00:07:12.889
a little comfortable. When in nature kicks in.

00:07:13.589 --> 00:07:16.990
Yep. Suddenly, someone starts taking more than

00:07:16.990 --> 00:07:18.990
their fair share of the firewood. Someone else

00:07:18.990 --> 00:07:21.689
refuses to help patch the roof. The text argues

00:07:21.689 --> 00:07:23.769
that as they surmount the first difficulties,

00:07:24.170 --> 00:07:26.870
they begin to relax in their duty and attachment

00:07:26.870 --> 00:07:29.810
to each other. And that remissness, that loss

00:07:29.810 --> 00:07:33.189
of moral virtue, forces them to create rules.

00:07:33.410 --> 00:07:35.689
Right. It forces them to appoint someone to enforce

00:07:35.689 --> 00:07:38.670
those rules. The friends have to invent government

00:07:38.670 --> 00:07:41.189
because they couldn't stay perfectly good. It's

00:07:41.189 --> 00:07:43.370
such a brilliant way to frame it. By using this

00:07:43.370 --> 00:07:46.110
specific progression, the author is executing

00:07:46.110 --> 00:07:49.399
a massive rhetorical demystification. How so?

00:07:49.540 --> 00:07:51.120
Well, think about the centuries leading up to

00:07:51.120 --> 00:07:53.600
this point. The British monarchy, and really

00:07:53.600 --> 00:07:56.279
European monarchies in general, wrapped themselves

00:07:56.279 --> 00:07:59.339
in the idea of divine right. Untouchable majesty,

00:07:59.540 --> 00:08:02.540
right? Exactly. Kings were anointed by God. Governments

00:08:02.540 --> 00:08:05.430
were sacred institutions. thought experiment

00:08:05.430 --> 00:08:08.550
just trips all of that away. Completely. By reducing

00:08:08.550 --> 00:08:11.810
the very concept of government to a mere pragmatic

00:08:11.810 --> 00:08:14.910
tool, just a necessary evil invented to manage

00:08:14.910 --> 00:08:17.970
human wickedness, he dramatically lowers the

00:08:17.970 --> 00:08:20.750
stakes of altering or abolishing it. He removes

00:08:20.750 --> 00:08:23.819
the sacred aura. Oh, I see. If government isn't

00:08:23.819 --> 00:08:26.079
holy, if it's just a tool we invented because

00:08:26.079 --> 00:08:28.560
we couldn't behave, then we can just swap out

00:08:28.560 --> 00:08:30.740
the tool when it stops working. Exactly. It's

00:08:30.740 --> 00:08:33.460
no longer a sin against God to change the government.

00:08:33.519 --> 00:08:36.820
It's just basic maintenance. That is fascinating.

00:08:36.980 --> 00:08:39.259
The text states clearly that the true design

00:08:39.259 --> 00:08:42.399
and end of government is simply freedom and security.

00:08:42.460 --> 00:08:45.179
Right. And therefore whatever form of government

00:08:45.179 --> 00:08:47.700
appears most likely to ensure that security,

00:08:47.960 --> 00:08:50.000
with the least expense and greatest benefit,

00:08:50.259 --> 00:08:53.779
is preferable to all others. He is instructing

00:08:53.779 --> 00:08:56.679
the reader. Don't be dazzled by the pageantry.

00:08:57.019 --> 00:08:59.580
Don't be deceived by the titles. Look exclusively

00:08:59.580 --> 00:09:02.100
at the utility. Which is a profound takeaway

00:09:02.100 --> 00:09:04.659
for you listening right now. Think about the

00:09:04.659 --> 00:09:06.679
systems in your own life. Yeah, that's a great

00:09:06.679 --> 00:09:08.720
point. Maybe the structure of your workplace

00:09:08.720 --> 00:09:11.539
or a large organization you interact with. Are

00:09:11.539 --> 00:09:13.700
those structures functioning as a society that

00:09:13.700 --> 00:09:16.600
unites affections and operates on mutual benefit?

00:09:16.779 --> 00:09:18.539
Or have they become a government that merely

00:09:18.539 --> 00:09:21.980
restrains vices? Right, a cumbersome apparatus

00:09:21.980 --> 00:09:24.820
that you only tolerate because it's a necessary

00:09:24.820 --> 00:09:28.389
evil. It's a lens that forces you to evaluate

00:09:28.389 --> 00:09:31.789
institutions based on their actual utility rather

00:09:31.789 --> 00:09:33.730
than just their tradition. And it's a lens that

00:09:33.730 --> 00:09:35.809
clarifies everything that follows in the pamphlet.

00:09:35.909 --> 00:09:37.970
Because once he establishes that the absolute

00:09:37.970 --> 00:09:40.210
only purpose of government is simple security,

00:09:40.730 --> 00:09:43.850
the next logical step in his argument is to examine

00:09:43.850 --> 00:09:46.029
whether the current reigning system actually

00:09:46.029 --> 00:09:48.429
provides it. And by current system, we mean the

00:09:48.429 --> 00:09:51.169
incredibly complex British constitution. Exactly.

00:09:51.250 --> 00:09:54.419
Does it actually provide that security? He asserts

00:09:54.419 --> 00:09:56.980
that it absolutely does not. He moves from this

00:09:56.980 --> 00:09:59.320
abstract philosophy of the origins of government

00:09:59.320 --> 00:10:03.360
right into a brutal, highly detailed dissection

00:10:03.360 --> 00:10:05.679
of the so much boasted constitution of England.

00:10:05.919 --> 00:10:07.980
He really tears into it. He begins this critique

00:10:07.980 --> 00:10:10.500
with a maxim drawn from nature and mechanics.

00:10:11.039 --> 00:10:12.960
The text argues that the more simple anything

00:10:12.960 --> 00:10:16.220
is, the less liable it is to be disordered and

00:10:16.220 --> 00:10:18.960
the easier it is to repair when it does get disordered.

00:10:19.159 --> 00:10:22.019
Which leads to this wildly counterintuitive point

00:10:22.019 --> 00:10:24.710
that really caught my attention. The author actually

00:10:24.710 --> 00:10:28.889
argues that absolute government's dictatorships,

00:10:29.289 --> 00:10:31.169
essentially, even though they are the disgrace

00:10:31.169 --> 00:10:34.110
of human nature, have one distinct advantage

00:10:34.110 --> 00:10:36.970
over the English system. They are simple. Exactly.

00:10:37.610 --> 00:10:39.769
He says if the people suffer under an absolute

00:10:39.769 --> 00:10:42.509
monarch, they know exactly who is hurting them.

00:10:42.649 --> 00:10:44.970
They know the cause, and they know the cure.

00:10:45.330 --> 00:10:47.950
They aren't bewildered by a maze of bureaucracy.

00:10:48.330 --> 00:10:50.389
Right. But the English Constitution, however,

00:10:50.570 --> 00:10:53.649
is presented as exceedingly complex. The author

00:10:53.649 --> 00:10:56.269
argues that this complexity hides the true source

00:10:56.269 --> 00:10:58.950
of suffering. A nation could suffer for years

00:10:58.950 --> 00:11:00.789
without being able to discover which part of

00:11:00.789 --> 00:11:03.210
the government is actually at fault. One person

00:11:03.210 --> 00:11:05.879
blames the king. Another blames Parliament. And

00:11:05.879 --> 00:11:08.000
every political physician prescribes a different

00:11:08.000 --> 00:11:10.580
medicine. The complexity itself is a danger to

00:11:10.580 --> 00:11:12.779
the security of the people. He tears the English

00:11:12.779 --> 00:11:16.279
Constitution into three component parts. He categorizes

00:11:16.279 --> 00:11:18.860
two of them as the base remains of two ancient

00:11:18.860 --> 00:11:21.379
tyrannies. Right, the monarchical and the aristocratical.

00:11:21.679 --> 00:11:25.120
Yes, you have the remains of monarchical tyranny

00:11:25.120 --> 00:11:27.940
in the Person of the King. You have the remains

00:11:27.940 --> 00:11:30.779
of aristocratical tyranny in the Persons of the

00:11:30.779 --> 00:11:33.909
Peers, meaning the House of Lords. And then compounded

00:11:33.909 --> 00:11:36.649
with that, you have some new Republican materials

00:11:36.649 --> 00:11:39.169
in the persons of the commons, the elected officials.

00:11:39.350 --> 00:11:41.870
And he emphasizes a critical structural flaw

00:11:41.870 --> 00:11:44.990
in this arrangement. The first two parts, the

00:11:44.990 --> 00:11:48.149
king and the peers, they're hereditary. They're

00:11:48.149 --> 00:11:50.570
entirely independent of the people. Exactly.

00:11:50.990 --> 00:11:53.710
Therefore, the text argues in a constitutional

00:11:53.710 --> 00:11:56.370
sense, they contribute absolutely nothing to

00:11:56.370 --> 00:11:58.389
the freedom of the state. OK, but wait, I have

00:11:58.389 --> 00:12:00.549
to push back here on behalf of the 18th century

00:12:00.549 --> 00:12:02.330
reader. Oh, please do. Let's hear the counter

00:12:02.330 --> 00:12:04.990
argument. The entire pride of the English system

00:12:04.990 --> 00:12:07.309
at this time was its balance. Aren't checks and

00:12:07.309 --> 00:12:09.029
balances supposed to be a good thing? That's

00:12:09.029 --> 00:12:11.129
what we're taught, yeah. If the commons can withhold

00:12:11.129 --> 00:12:13.750
supplies from the king, doesn't that prove the

00:12:13.750 --> 00:12:16.190
people have the ultimate power? How does the

00:12:16.190 --> 00:12:18.509
author get around that constitutional fail -safe?

00:12:18.730 --> 00:12:22.169
Ah, well what's fascinating here is how he identifies

00:12:22.169 --> 00:12:25.929
what he considers a fatal logical loop in that

00:12:25.929 --> 00:12:29.509
exact argument. A logical loop? Yeah. He dissects

00:12:29.509 --> 00:12:32.759
the idea of these three powers reciprocally checking

00:12:32.759 --> 00:12:35.539
each other, and just dismisses it as versical.

00:12:36.100 --> 00:12:38.580
He argues it is a flat contradiction in terms.

00:12:39.279 --> 00:12:41.679
How does he break down that contradiction? Well,

00:12:41.740 --> 00:12:44.100
the text points out that to say the commons is

00:12:44.100 --> 00:12:47.299
a check upon the king presupposes two fundamental

00:12:47.299 --> 00:12:50.259
things. First, it presupposes that the king cannot

00:12:50.259 --> 00:12:52.480
be trusted without being looked after. Okay,

00:12:52.559 --> 00:12:54.720
that implies that a thirst for absolute power

00:12:54.720 --> 00:12:57.340
is the natural unavoidable disease of monarchy.

00:12:57.580 --> 00:13:00.539
Right. And second, it presupposes that the commons,

00:13:00.779 --> 00:13:03.720
by being appointed to watch the king, are either

00:13:03.720 --> 00:13:06.860
wiser or more worthy of confidence than the crown

00:13:06.860 --> 00:13:09.570
itself. That makes logical sense. You don't hire

00:13:09.570 --> 00:13:11.250
a babysitter unless you think the baby needs

00:13:11.250 --> 00:13:13.610
watching. Exactly. And you assume the babysitter

00:13:13.610 --> 00:13:15.769
is more responsible than the baby. Right. But

00:13:15.769 --> 00:13:19.330
here is the fatal flaw that text exposes. That

00:13:19.330 --> 00:13:21.950
very same constitution, which gives the cons

00:13:21.950 --> 00:13:24.450
the power to check the king by withholding supplies,

00:13:24.929 --> 00:13:26.929
also gives the king the power to check the common.

00:13:26.950 --> 00:13:28.909
Oh, because the king can reject their bills.

00:13:29.470 --> 00:13:32.529
Yes. So the Constitution supposes that the Commons

00:13:32.529 --> 00:13:35.210
is wiser than the King to keep him in line. But

00:13:35.210 --> 00:13:37.429
then it turns around and gives the King the power

00:13:37.429 --> 00:13:40.629
to veto the Commons. Which supposes the King

00:13:40.629 --> 00:13:43.629
is somehow wiser than the people who were just

00:13:43.629 --> 00:13:45.850
appointed because they were wiser than him. Ah.

00:13:46.330 --> 00:13:48.929
It's an endless loop. It's eating its own tail.

00:13:49.029 --> 00:13:52.629
It is a paradox. The text synthesizes this by

00:13:52.629 --> 00:13:55.950
calling the entire system a mere absurdity. It's

00:13:55.950 --> 00:13:59.100
a house divided against itself. He points out

00:13:59.100 --> 00:14:01.460
the inherent ridiculousness of a system that

00:14:01.460 --> 00:14:03.899
shuts a king away from the world, excluding him

00:14:03.899 --> 00:14:05.799
from the normal means of gathering information

00:14:05.799 --> 00:14:07.700
like a common citizen. Right, they live in a

00:14:07.700 --> 00:14:11.159
bubble. Exactly. But then empowers him to act

00:14:11.159 --> 00:14:13.740
in cases where the highest judgment and worldliness

00:14:13.740 --> 00:14:16.139
are required. He calls it a fellow de se, which

00:14:16.139 --> 00:14:18.820
is a legal term for suicide, a system inherently

00:14:18.820 --> 00:14:21.860
destroying itself. Wow. He argues that in any

00:14:21.860 --> 00:14:24.000
machine, all the wheels are put in motion by

00:14:24.000 --> 00:14:27.029
one primary wheel. So the central question is

00:14:27.029 --> 00:14:29.429
which power in the Constitution has the most

00:14:29.429 --> 00:14:31.629
weight? Because that one will eventually govern.

00:14:31.990 --> 00:14:35.460
Yes. The others might clog it or check its speed,

00:14:35.899 --> 00:14:38.159
but eventually the primary power will have its

00:14:38.159 --> 00:14:41.379
way. And he asserts unequivocally that the crown

00:14:41.379 --> 00:14:44.360
is the overbearing part. It derives its consequence

00:14:44.360 --> 00:14:47.019
merely from being the giver of places and pensions.

00:14:47.440 --> 00:14:49.740
Exactly. He notes that while the architects of

00:14:49.740 --> 00:14:51.980
the Constitution were wise enough to lock the

00:14:51.980 --> 00:14:54.940
door against absolute monarchy, they were foolish

00:14:54.940 --> 00:14:57.320
enough to put the crown in possession of the

00:14:57.320 --> 00:15:00.840
key. Ah. By controlling the wealth and the appointments,

00:15:01.080 --> 00:15:03.480
the king can easily buy the loyalty of the commons,

00:15:03.679 --> 00:15:06.679
rendering the check completely void. And he actively

00:15:06.679 --> 00:15:09.220
challenges the national pride of the English

00:15:09.220 --> 00:15:11.820
reader. He says people think they are safe because

00:15:11.820 --> 00:15:14.539
of the Constitution, but really, the will of

00:15:14.539 --> 00:15:16.799
the King is just as much the law of the land

00:15:16.799 --> 00:15:19.539
in Britain as it is in France. The only difference

00:15:19.539 --> 00:15:21.620
is that in Britain, it's handed to the people

00:15:21.620 --> 00:15:24.000
under the formidable shape of an act of Parliament

00:15:24.000 --> 00:15:26.639
rather than directly from the King's mouth. It's

00:15:26.639 --> 00:15:29.519
tyranny by committee. He brings up Charles I

00:15:29.519 --> 00:15:31.539
to prove this point, which is a really fascinating

00:15:31.539 --> 00:15:34.299
historical anchor. He says the fate of Charles

00:15:34.299 --> 00:15:37.679
I only made kings more subtle, not more just.

00:15:37.899 --> 00:15:39.600
Yeah, that requires a bit of context for the

00:15:39.600 --> 00:15:42.320
listeners. Sure. Charles I was the English king

00:15:42.320 --> 00:15:45.080
who was actually overthrown and executed during

00:15:45.080 --> 00:15:49.179
the English Civil War in 1649. The monarchy was

00:15:49.179 --> 00:15:52.100
temporarily abolished. Right. But the author's

00:15:52.100 --> 00:15:55.299
point is that executing the king didn't fix the

00:15:55.299 --> 00:15:57.860
underlying structural issue of the Constitution.

00:15:58.559 --> 00:16:00.799
When the monarchy was restored, the kings just

00:16:00.799 --> 00:16:03.139
learned to be quieter about their tyranny. They

00:16:03.139 --> 00:16:05.259
learned to use parliament to do their dirty work.

00:16:05.440 --> 00:16:08.120
Exactly. System itself was still broken. Which

00:16:08.120 --> 00:16:11.279
sets up his next rhetorical move perfectly. because

00:16:11.279 --> 00:16:13.440
he's proven that constitutional mechanics are

00:16:13.440 --> 00:16:16.899
broken. But to truly sever the tie, he has to

00:16:16.899 --> 00:16:19.200
go after the moral authority of the system itself.

00:16:19.440 --> 00:16:22.200
He transitions from attacking the paper constitution

00:16:22.200 --> 00:16:24.799
to attacking the bloodline of the king. The takedown

00:16:24.799 --> 00:16:27.809
of monarchy and hereditary succession. This is

00:16:27.809 --> 00:16:30.549
where the text moves from political theory into

00:16:30.549 --> 00:16:33.190
historical and biblical critique. He starts by

00:16:33.190 --> 00:16:35.570
establishing a baseline, which is that mankind

00:16:35.570 --> 00:16:38.029
was originally equals in the order of creation.

00:16:38.330 --> 00:16:41.009
You have rich and poor, certainly, but the distinction

00:16:41.009 --> 00:16:44.389
of men into kings and subjects is entirely unnatural.

00:16:44.789 --> 00:16:46.929
Right. He says male and female are distinctions

00:16:46.929 --> 00:16:49.470
of nature. Good and bad are distinctions of heaven.

00:16:50.049 --> 00:16:52.929
But how did a race of men get so exalted above

00:16:52.929 --> 00:16:56.500
the rest like a new species? He turns to historical

00:16:56.500 --> 00:16:59.519
and biblical arguments to answer that. And his

00:16:59.519 --> 00:17:03.179
interpretation of scripture here is intensely

00:17:03.179 --> 00:17:05.980
anti -monarchical. He argues that government

00:17:05.980 --> 00:17:08.859
by kings was originally a heathen invention and

00:17:08.859 --> 00:17:11.180
that the children of Israel essentially peer

00:17:11.180 --> 00:17:13.359
-pressured themselves into copying the custom.

00:17:13.559 --> 00:17:16.119
In his words, it was the most prosperous invention

00:17:16.119 --> 00:17:18.579
the devil ever set on foot for the promotion

00:17:18.579 --> 00:17:20.799
of idolatry. We really have to remember the audience

00:17:20.799 --> 00:17:23.019
he is writing for here. This is 18th century

00:17:23.019 --> 00:17:26.119
America. The Bible is the ultimate authority

00:17:26.119 --> 00:17:29.180
in almost every household. By framing monarchy

00:17:29.180 --> 00:17:31.900
not just as a bad political system, but as a

00:17:31.900 --> 00:17:34.539
literal sin against God, he is utilizing the

00:17:34.539 --> 00:17:37.119
most powerful persuasive tool available to him.

00:17:37.279 --> 00:17:39.299
The language he uses is just incredibly sharp.

00:17:39.859 --> 00:17:42.039
He points out how heathens paid divine honors

00:17:42.039 --> 00:17:44.960
to deceased kings and the Christian world improved

00:17:44.960 --> 00:17:47.299
on the idolatry by paying divine honors to living

00:17:47.299 --> 00:17:50.380
ones. There is this one quote that is just blistering.

00:17:50.480 --> 00:17:52.779
Oh, which one? He writes about the impious title

00:17:52.779 --> 00:17:56.420
of sacred majesty being applied to quote, a worm

00:17:56.420 --> 00:17:59.019
who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling

00:17:59.019 --> 00:18:02.740
into dust. Wow. That is a total demystification

00:18:02.740 --> 00:18:06.309
of royal authority. It really is. To prove that

00:18:06.309 --> 00:18:08.549
the Almighty expressly disapproves of government

00:18:08.549 --> 00:18:11.789
by kings, the text relies heavily on two major

00:18:11.789 --> 00:18:14.049
narratives from the Old Testament, the stories

00:18:14.049 --> 00:18:16.809
of Gideon and the prophet Samuel. Let's explore

00:18:16.809 --> 00:18:19.430
those because the text dedicates a significant

00:18:19.430 --> 00:18:22.009
amount of space to them. How does he leverage

00:18:22.009 --> 00:18:25.109
the story of Gideon? The text details how the

00:18:25.109 --> 00:18:27.329
Israelites, after a massive military victory

00:18:27.329 --> 00:18:30.089
led by Gideon, wanted to make him king. They

00:18:30.089 --> 00:18:32.369
offered him not just a crown, but a hereditary

00:18:32.369 --> 00:18:34.430
one. They said, rule thou over us, thou and thy

00:18:34.430 --> 00:18:37.410
son and thy son's son. Exactly. But Gideon refuses.

00:18:37.769 --> 00:18:40.750
The text quotes his reply. I will not rule over

00:18:40.750 --> 00:18:42.970
you. The Lord shall rule over you. The author's

00:18:42.970 --> 00:18:45.109
interpretation is that Gideon isn't just humbly

00:18:45.109 --> 00:18:47.970
declining in honor. He's explicitly denying their

00:18:47.970 --> 00:18:50.309
right to give it. Right. Charging them with disaffection

00:18:50.309 --> 00:18:52.569
to their proper sovereign, the King of Heaven.

00:18:52.970 --> 00:18:54.809
And then he moves to the situation with Samuel,

00:18:54.890 --> 00:18:57.910
which is even more dramatic and occupies a huge

00:18:57.910 --> 00:19:01.509
chunk of this section. Much more. About 130 years

00:19:01.509 --> 00:19:03.950
after Gideon, the people come to the prophet

00:19:03.950 --> 00:19:06.450
Samuel demanding a king so they can be like all

00:19:06.450 --> 00:19:08.869
other nations. Meaning the surrounding heathen

00:19:08.869 --> 00:19:11.650
nation. Exactly. Samuel is displeased and prays

00:19:11.650 --> 00:19:14.829
on it. According to the text, God tells Samuel

00:19:14.829 --> 00:19:17.069
they haven't rejected Samuel, they have rejected

00:19:17.069 --> 00:19:20.349
God. Right. But God tells Samuel to listen to

00:19:20.349 --> 00:19:23.470
them. yet solemnly protest and show them the

00:19:23.470 --> 00:19:25.730
manner of the king that will reign over them.

00:19:26.009 --> 00:19:28.789
And the text meticulously lists out what that

00:19:28.789 --> 00:19:31.390
manner is. It's basically a prophetic laundry

00:19:31.390 --> 00:19:34.109
list of oppression. Oh yeah, it's bleak. The

00:19:34.109 --> 00:19:36.750
king will take your sons for his chariots. He

00:19:36.750 --> 00:19:39.490
will take your daughters to be cooks and bakers,

00:19:39.690 --> 00:19:42.130
which the author notes describes the luxury and

00:19:42.130 --> 00:19:44.390
expense of kings. He will take your fields and

00:19:44.390 --> 00:19:46.569
your vineyards and give them to his servants.

00:19:46.910 --> 00:19:49.349
Proving that bribery and favoritism are standing

00:19:49.349 --> 00:19:51.339
vices of kings. He will take a tenth of your

00:19:51.339 --> 00:19:53.299
sheep, you will be his servants and you will

00:19:53.299 --> 00:19:55.759
cry out and the Lord will not hear you. That's

00:19:55.759 --> 00:19:59.140
brutal. And despite this explicit, terrifying

00:19:59.140 --> 00:20:02.339
warning, the people demand a king anyway. So

00:20:02.339 --> 00:20:04.640
Samuel calls into the Lord and the Lord sends

00:20:04.640 --> 00:20:06.640
thunder and rain during the wheat harvest as

00:20:06.640 --> 00:20:09.579
a punishment. The people are terrified and admit

00:20:09.579 --> 00:20:12.200
they have added to their sins this evil to ask

00:20:12.200 --> 00:20:14.779
a king. The author uses this entire narrative

00:20:14.779 --> 00:20:17.380
to conclude that the Almighty entered a formal

00:20:17.380 --> 00:20:20.200
protest against monarchical government. He even

00:20:20.200 --> 00:20:22.539
brings in the concept of popery, which was a

00:20:22.539 --> 00:20:24.900
highly charged term for Catholicism at the time,

00:20:25.420 --> 00:20:27.240
suggesting that keeping the anti -monarchical

00:20:27.240 --> 00:20:29.880
scripture from the public was a tactic of kingcraft,

00:20:30.299 --> 00:20:32.599
just as much as priestcraft. He's basically saying

00:20:32.599 --> 00:20:34.779
the kings have been hiding the true meaning of

00:20:34.779 --> 00:20:37.380
the Bible from the people to maintain power.

00:20:37.599 --> 00:20:39.880
Having established that monarchy itself is a

00:20:39.880 --> 00:20:42.380
degradation of human dignity, he argues that

00:20:42.380 --> 00:20:45.079
society added something even worse to it. Hereditary

00:20:45.079 --> 00:20:48.450
succession. Yes. If monarchy is a degradation,

00:20:49.009 --> 00:20:51.970
hereditary succession is an insult and an imposition

00:20:51.970 --> 00:20:54.769
on posterity. This is where he dissects the logic

00:20:54.769 --> 00:20:58.210
of inheritance. He argues that even if a populist

00:20:58.210 --> 00:21:00.809
chose their first leader, they have absolutely

00:21:00.809 --> 00:21:02.789
no right to give away the rights of their children.

00:21:03.109 --> 00:21:06.410
You might say, we choose you for our head. But

00:21:06.410 --> 00:21:09.789
you cannot legally or morally say, your children

00:21:09.789 --> 00:21:12.049
and your children's children shall reign over

00:21:12.049 --> 00:21:15.289
ours forever. His reasoning is that such an unwise

00:21:15.289 --> 00:21:18.150
compact might put the next generation under the

00:21:18.150 --> 00:21:20.960
government. of a rogue or a fool. This is what

00:21:20.960 --> 00:21:23.500
the text refers to as the ask for a lion argument.

00:21:23.740 --> 00:21:26.839
Yes, exactly. One of the strongest natural proofs

00:21:26.839 --> 00:21:28.900
of the folly of hereditary right is that nature

00:21:28.900 --> 00:21:31.380
herself disapproves of it, frequently turning

00:21:31.380 --> 00:21:33.799
it into ridicule by giving a remarkably wise

00:21:33.799 --> 00:21:37.180
parent an incredibly foolish child. And he completely

00:21:37.180 --> 00:21:39.640
dismantles the romanticized mythic history of

00:21:39.640 --> 00:21:42.140
how kings came to be. He really does. He says,

00:21:42.380 --> 00:21:44.599
if we could take off the dark covering of antiquity

00:21:44.599 --> 00:21:47.019
and trace them to their first rise, we'd find

00:21:47.019 --> 00:21:48.980
the first king was probably nothing better than

00:21:48.980 --> 00:21:51.160
the principal ruffian of some restless gang.

00:21:51.640 --> 00:21:54.359
Someone whose preeminence and subtlety or savagery

00:21:54.359 --> 00:21:57.079
got him the title of chief plunderer. They weren't

00:21:57.079 --> 00:21:59.359
anointed by God. They were just the best thugs.

00:21:59.579 --> 00:22:02.519
He applies this directly and bluntly to the English

00:22:02.519 --> 00:22:05.140
lineage. He points to William the Conqueror,

00:22:05.279 --> 00:22:08.140
the first Norman King of England. The text doesn't

00:22:08.140 --> 00:22:12.720
mince words. It labels him a French bastard landing

00:22:12.720 --> 00:22:15.940
with an armed banditi. Establishing himself as

00:22:15.940 --> 00:22:18.619
king against the consent of the natives, he calls

00:22:18.619 --> 00:22:22.460
it a very paltry, rascally original with no divinity

00:22:22.460 --> 00:22:24.819
in it whatsoever. He traps the reader with a

00:22:24.819 --> 00:22:27.079
simple logical question regarding the origins

00:22:27.079 --> 00:22:31.039
of kings. How did kings come at first? By lot,

00:22:31.500 --> 00:22:34.940
by election, or by usurpation? Right. If by lot

00:22:34.940 --> 00:22:37.349
or election, That establishes a precedent for

00:22:37.349 --> 00:22:40.369
the next leader, which naturally excludes hereditary

00:22:40.369 --> 00:22:42.470
succession. You can't elect the first one and

00:22:42.470 --> 00:22:44.349
then say the bloodline takes over forever. And

00:22:44.349 --> 00:22:47.089
if it was by usurpation, like William the Conqueror,

00:22:47.109 --> 00:22:49.329
then the whole lineage is illegitimate. He draws

00:22:49.329 --> 00:22:52.210
a fascinating theological parallel here, comparing

00:22:52.210 --> 00:22:54.250
hereditary succession to the doctrine of original

00:22:54.250 --> 00:22:56.650
sin. Oh, that's a clever move. Yeah, just as

00:22:56.650 --> 00:22:59.809
all of mankind sinned in Adam, all men obeyed

00:22:59.809 --> 00:23:02.809
in the first electors. In one, we were subjected

00:23:02.809 --> 00:23:05.799
to Satan, in the other, to sovereignty. Both

00:23:05.799 --> 00:23:09.140
disable us from re -assuming our former uncorrupted

00:23:09.140 --> 00:23:11.920
state. Beyond the philosophical absurdity, he

00:23:11.920 --> 00:23:14.579
focuses on the practical, everyday evil of it.

00:23:14.900 --> 00:23:17.160
Men who are born to reign grow insolent. Their

00:23:17.160 --> 00:23:19.359
minds are poisoned by importance from an early

00:23:19.359 --> 00:23:22.339
age. They live in a bubble that differs so materially

00:23:22.339 --> 00:23:24.680
from the real world that they have no opportunity

00:23:24.680 --> 00:23:27.279
to know its true interests. Thus, when they succeed

00:23:27.279 --> 00:23:29.359
to the government, they are frequently the most

00:23:29.359 --> 00:23:31.799
ignorant and unfit people in the entire Dominion.

00:23:31.920 --> 00:23:34.019
Not to mention the vulnerability of the throne

00:23:34.019 --> 00:23:37.279
falling to a minor, like a child king or an aged

00:23:37.279 --> 00:23:40.059
king entering his dotage. In both cases, the

00:23:40.059 --> 00:23:42.420
public becomes prey to miscreants and advisors

00:23:42.420 --> 00:23:45.480
who tamper with the regent or the king. The power

00:23:45.480 --> 00:23:47.740
is wielded by unaccountable shadows behind the

00:23:47.740 --> 00:23:50.079
throne. The author also tackles the absolute

00:23:50.079 --> 00:23:52.420
primary defense of hereditary succession used

00:23:52.420 --> 00:23:54.750
at the time. Which was what? The claim that it

00:23:54.750 --> 00:23:56.750
prevents civil wars. The argument was that if

00:23:56.750 --> 00:23:59.329
you know exactly who is next in line, people

00:23:59.329 --> 00:24:01.250
won't fight over the throne. And how does he

00:24:01.250 --> 00:24:04.390
respond to that? He calls this the most barefaced

00:24:04.390 --> 00:24:08.210
falsity ever imposed upon mankind. Wow. And he

00:24:08.210 --> 00:24:10.789
brings receipts. He definitely does. He cites

00:24:10.789 --> 00:24:13.109
the history of England since the Norman conquest.

00:24:13.589 --> 00:24:16.269
30 kings and two miners, during which time there

00:24:16.269 --> 00:24:20.240
were eight civil wars and 19 rebellions. He specifically

00:24:20.240 --> 00:24:22.740
details the contest between the houses of York

00:24:22.740 --> 00:24:26.059
and Lancaster. Yes, the Wars of the Roses. Exactly.

00:24:26.579 --> 00:24:29.380
A multi -generational conflict over the hereditary

00:24:29.380 --> 00:24:32.259
right to the throne that laid England in a scene

00:24:32.259 --> 00:24:36.779
of blood for 67 years. Twelve pitched battles.

00:24:36.920 --> 00:24:39.440
Instead of making for peace, hereditary succession

00:24:39.440 --> 00:24:42.279
destroys the very foundation seems to stand on.

00:24:42.599 --> 00:24:44.740
It guarantees conflict every time there is a

00:24:44.740 --> 00:24:47.599
weak air or a disputed lineage. He sums up the

00:24:47.599 --> 00:24:50.140
business of a king in England with just dripping

00:24:50.140 --> 00:24:52.559
contempt. He writes that a king has little more

00:24:52.559 --> 00:24:55.259
to do than make war and give away places which

00:24:55.259 --> 00:24:57.599
impoverishes the nation and sets it together

00:24:57.599 --> 00:25:00.000
by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man

00:25:00.000 --> 00:25:03.000
to be allowed 800 ,000 sterling a year for and

00:25:03.000 --> 00:25:05.359
worshipped into the bargain. He concludes that

00:25:05.359 --> 00:25:07.960
one honest man is worth more to society than

00:25:07.960 --> 00:25:10.539
all the crown ruffians that ever lived. So if

00:25:10.539 --> 00:25:12.880
we trace the architecture of the argument thus

00:25:12.880 --> 00:25:15.970
far. The ideological foundation of government

00:25:15.970 --> 00:25:19.130
is stripped to mere utility. The constitutional

00:25:19.130 --> 00:25:21.910
mechanisms are exposed as broken. The monarchy

00:25:21.910 --> 00:25:24.769
itself is delegitimized morally, historically,

00:25:25.049 --> 00:25:27.789
and biblically. And the text must now pivot again.

00:25:28.190 --> 00:25:31.269
It has to anticipate the emotional and economic

00:25:31.269 --> 00:25:33.769
pounder arguments. Right. Because the reader's

00:25:33.769 --> 00:25:36.329
probably thinking, okay, the system is flawed,

00:25:36.750 --> 00:25:39.329
but why leave the country that birthed and protected

00:25:39.329 --> 00:25:41.809
us? Hasn't America flourished under the British

00:25:41.809 --> 00:25:44.369
connection? The text calls that argument completely

00:25:44.369 --> 00:25:47.029
fallacious. The author uses a great analogy.

00:25:47.589 --> 00:25:49.269
He asserts we might as well say that because

00:25:49.269 --> 00:25:51.789
a child has thrived upon milk, it is never to

00:25:51.789 --> 00:25:54.109
have meat. Or that the first 20 years of our

00:25:54.109 --> 00:25:56.690
lives is a precedent for the next 20. He states

00:25:56.690 --> 00:25:58.789
roundly that America would have flourished as

00:25:58.789 --> 00:26:01.730
much, and probably more, had no European power

00:26:01.730 --> 00:26:04.490
had anything to do with her. He argues that the

00:26:04.490 --> 00:26:06.769
commerce by which America enriched herself are

00:26:06.769 --> 00:26:10.190
the absolute necessaries of life. As long as

00:26:10.190 --> 00:26:13.190
eating is the custom of Europe, American provisions

00:26:13.190 --> 00:26:16.069
will always have a market. They aren't buying

00:26:16.069 --> 00:26:18.250
American goods because they are British subjects.

00:26:18.329 --> 00:26:20.289
They are buying them because they are hungry.

00:26:20.990 --> 00:26:23.529
But what about the protection argument? Britain

00:26:23.529 --> 00:26:25.690
defended the colonies during the French and Indian

00:26:25.690 --> 00:26:28.670
War, right? Doesn't America owe Britain for that

00:26:28.670 --> 00:26:31.990
protection? The text concedes that Britain defended

00:26:31.990 --> 00:26:35.430
the continent, but it viciously attacks the motive

00:26:35.430 --> 00:26:38.609
behind that defense. How so? The author asserts

00:26:38.609 --> 00:26:41.349
that Britain's motive was interest, not attachment.

00:26:42.130 --> 00:26:44.089
She didn't protect America from American enemies

00:26:44.089 --> 00:26:46.710
on America's account. She protected America from

00:26:46.710 --> 00:26:48.930
British enemies on Britain's account. Ah, here's

00:26:48.930 --> 00:26:50.690
where it gets really interesting. This is where

00:26:50.690 --> 00:26:53.390
the geopolitical mechanics of mercantilism come

00:26:53.390 --> 00:26:56.160
into play. It's like a toxic friendship, or maybe

00:26:56.160 --> 00:26:58.539
like a mob boss offering protection to a local

00:26:58.539 --> 00:27:01.079
business. I like that analogy. Right. The mob

00:27:01.079 --> 00:27:03.470
boss says, look. I kept those other gangs from

00:27:03.470 --> 00:27:06.269
burning down your shop. You owe me. But the only

00:27:06.269 --> 00:27:08.150
reason those other gangs wanted to burn down

00:27:08.150 --> 00:27:10.190
the shop in the first place is because the mob

00:27:10.190 --> 00:27:13.190
boss is using the back room to run his operations.

00:27:13.630 --> 00:27:16.410
That is a perfect encapsulation of the text's

00:27:16.410 --> 00:27:19.230
argument. The text points out that France and

00:27:19.230 --> 00:27:22.509
Spain never were and never will be America's

00:27:22.509 --> 00:27:24.910
enemies as Americans. They are only enemies because

00:27:24.910 --> 00:27:27.509
America is subject to Great Britain. Exactly.

00:27:27.829 --> 00:27:30.170
If America threw off the dependence, they would

00:27:30.170 --> 00:27:32.509
be at peace with France and Spain. Spain. The

00:27:32.509 --> 00:27:35.349
author is completely reframing America's place

00:27:35.349 --> 00:27:37.950
in the world. He attacks the phrase parent country

00:27:37.950 --> 00:27:41.130
or mother country as a low, pepistical design

00:27:41.130 --> 00:27:43.890
meant to gain an unfair bias over credulous minds.

00:27:44.029 --> 00:27:46.690
He declares that Europe, not England, is the

00:27:46.690 --> 00:27:49.190
true parent country of America. Because the New

00:27:49.190 --> 00:27:51.509
World had been the asylum for the persecuted

00:27:51.509 --> 00:27:54.109
lovers of civil and religious liberty from every

00:27:54.109 --> 00:27:56.329
part of Europe. They fled not from the tender

00:27:56.329 --> 00:27:58.829
embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty

00:27:58.829 --> 00:28:01.299
of the monster. He points out that not Even one

00:28:01.299 --> 00:28:03.440
-third of the inhabitants of Pennsylvania were

00:28:03.440 --> 00:28:06.180
of English descent at that time. So calling England

00:28:06.180 --> 00:28:09.940
the mother country is demonstrably false, selfish,

00:28:10.420 --> 00:28:12.900
narrow, and ungenerous. And he emphasizes that

00:28:12.900 --> 00:28:15.880
staying connected to Britain forces America into

00:28:15.880 --> 00:28:18.779
endless European wars. It is the true interest

00:28:18.779 --> 00:28:22.029
of America to steer clear of European contentions,

00:28:22.170 --> 00:28:24.349
which she can never do while she has made the

00:28:24.349 --> 00:28:26.710
make -weight in the scale of British politics.

00:28:27.170 --> 00:28:29.349
The text argues that America's true protection

00:28:29.349 --> 00:28:32.569
is its commerce. A free port will secure the

00:28:32.569 --> 00:28:35.029
peace and friendship of all Europe because it's

00:28:35.029 --> 00:28:36.970
in Europe's economic interest to trade there,

00:28:37.069 --> 00:28:39.769
unhindered by British monopolies. He even points

00:28:39.769 --> 00:28:42.509
to geography as divine evidence. The distance.

00:28:42.609 --> 00:28:44.269
Yeah, he says the physical distance at which

00:28:44.269 --> 00:28:47.269
the Almighty place England and America is a strong

00:28:47.269 --> 00:28:49.650
and natural proof that the The authority of one

00:28:49.650 --> 00:28:51.930
over the other was never the design of heaven.

00:28:52.250 --> 00:28:54.930
And the time of its discovery preceding the Reformation

00:28:54.930 --> 00:28:57.849
was as if the Almighty meant to open a sanctuary

00:28:57.849 --> 00:29:00.450
for the persecuted in future years when home

00:29:00.450 --> 00:29:02.410
should afford neither friendship nor safety.

00:29:02.789 --> 00:29:05.710
Having addressed the economic ties, he then targets

00:29:05.710 --> 00:29:09.309
the emotional ties. He paints a grim, terrifying

00:29:09.309 --> 00:29:11.789
picture of what reconciliation would actually

00:29:11.789 --> 00:29:20.970
look like. The inhabitants, once affluent, were

00:29:20.970 --> 00:29:24.130
now starving or begging. endangered by the fire

00:29:24.130 --> 00:29:26.670
of their friends and plundered by the soldiery.

00:29:26.950 --> 00:29:28.930
He actively challenges the passive tempers who

00:29:28.930 --> 00:29:31.569
still hope for a peaceful reconciliation. The

00:29:31.569 --> 00:29:34.230
emotional appeal here is intense. He doesn't

00:29:34.230 --> 00:29:36.890
just make a logical point. He asks the reader

00:29:36.890 --> 00:29:39.589
directly. What does he ask? He says, have your

00:29:39.589 --> 00:29:42.329
house been burned? Has your property been destroyed

00:29:42.329 --> 00:29:44.970
before your face? Are your wife and children

00:29:44.970 --> 00:29:47.430
destitute of a bed to lie on or dread to live

00:29:47.430 --> 00:29:50.009
on? Have you lost a parent or a child by their

00:29:50.009 --> 00:29:52.970
hands? That is powerful. If you have and can

00:29:52.970 --> 00:29:55.390
still shake hands with the murders, you are unworthy

00:29:55.390 --> 00:29:57.630
of the name of husband, father, friend or lover.

00:29:57.809 --> 00:30:00.289
You have the heart of a coward and the spirit

00:30:00.289 --> 00:30:02.950
of a sycophant. It's a forceful push to sever

00:30:02.950 --> 00:30:05.970
the emotional ties of loyalty. He argues that

00:30:05.970 --> 00:30:09.089
reconciliation is a fallacious dream. As John

00:30:09.089 --> 00:30:12.369
Milton wisely expressed, never can true reconcilement

00:30:12.369 --> 00:30:14.829
grow where wounds of deadly hate have pierced

00:30:14.829 --> 00:30:17.529
so deep. Any future connection would be forced,

00:30:17.809 --> 00:30:20.109
unnatural and end in a relapse worse than the

00:30:20.109 --> 00:30:22.440
first. He argues that the business of governing

00:30:22.440 --> 00:30:25.079
a continent is simply too weighty and intricate

00:30:25.079 --> 00:30:28.299
to be managed by an island 3000 miles away. In

00:30:28.299 --> 00:30:31.420
no instance have nature made the satellite larger

00:30:31.420 --> 00:30:34.059
than its primary planet. I love that line. It's

00:30:34.059 --> 00:30:36.420
a great one. America and England belong to different

00:30:36.420 --> 00:30:39.859
systems. England to Europe. America to itself.

00:30:40.099 --> 00:30:42.759
So the ideological scaffolding is dismantled.

00:30:43.240 --> 00:30:45.599
The constitutional flaws are exposed. The monarchy

00:30:45.599 --> 00:30:47.819
is delegitimized. The emotional and economic

00:30:47.819 --> 00:30:51.180
ties are severed. But a crucial, highly pragmatic

00:30:51.180 --> 00:30:53.279
question remains for the reader, and the author

00:30:53.279 --> 00:30:56.019
knows it. Can this seemingly ragtag continent

00:30:56.019 --> 00:30:58.380
actually win a war of independence right now

00:30:58.380 --> 00:31:00.200
against the greatest military power on earth?

00:31:00.339 --> 00:31:02.119
This is a vital pivot. Because it's one thing

00:31:02.119 --> 00:31:04.819
to want independence. It's another entirely to

00:31:04.819 --> 00:31:06.640
actually afford it and survive the conflict.

00:31:07.119 --> 00:31:09.339
Right. The reader might be convinced of the philosophy,

00:31:09.759 --> 00:31:12.140
but terrified of the reality. And the author

00:31:12.140 --> 00:31:15.240
addresses this fear head on with an argument

00:31:15.240 --> 00:31:17.980
about the urgency of the present moment. He doesn't

00:31:17.980 --> 00:31:20.579
want people waiting for some perfect future moment.

00:31:20.920 --> 00:31:36.700
He says, He also makes this really fascinating,

00:31:37.160 --> 00:31:39.519
counter -intuitive argument about debt. Oh, the

00:31:39.519 --> 00:31:42.240
national debt argument? Yeah. We usually think

00:31:42.240 --> 00:31:44.319
of national debt as a terrible burden, something

00:31:44.319 --> 00:31:46.980
to avoid before starting a new country. But the

00:31:46.980 --> 00:31:49.920
text says, debts we have none, and whatever we

00:31:49.920 --> 00:31:52.220
may contract on this account will serve as a

00:31:52.220 --> 00:31:55.079
glorious memento of our virtue. He argues that

00:31:55.079 --> 00:31:57.460
a national debt is actually a national bond.

00:31:57.799 --> 00:32:00.480
If it achieves a settled form of government and

00:32:00.480 --> 00:32:03.359
an independent constitution, the purchase at

00:32:03.359 --> 00:32:05.619
any price will be cheap. He goes further than

00:32:05.619 --> 00:32:08.319
just abstract economics. He gets incredibly empirical

00:32:08.319 --> 00:32:10.720
here to prove his point. He addresses the primary

00:32:10.720 --> 00:32:13.440
terror of the colonists, the British Navy. Right.

00:32:13.680 --> 00:32:15.799
To prove that America can afford to rival it,

00:32:16.079 --> 00:32:18.579
he actually calculates the total cost of the

00:32:18.579 --> 00:32:21.700
British Navy line by line. He uses calculations

00:32:21.700 --> 00:32:25.240
from Mr. Burchett. secretary to the Navy, detailing

00:32:25.240 --> 00:32:28.819
the exact cost of building ships of various gun

00:32:28.819 --> 00:32:31.619
rates. He lists the cost of a hundred -gun ship

00:32:31.619 --> 00:32:35.539
at about 35 ,000 pounds sterling, a 20 -gun ship

00:32:35.539 --> 00:32:39.180
at 3 ,700 pounds. He totals up the entire British

00:32:39.180 --> 00:32:42.519
fleet from its greatest glory in 1757, factoring

00:32:42.519 --> 00:32:45.440
in guns, rigging in stores, and concludes the

00:32:45.440 --> 00:32:47.460
whole thing is worth about three and a half million

00:32:47.460 --> 00:32:50.160
pounds sterling. And he immediately contrasts

00:32:50.160 --> 00:32:52.200
that 3 .5 million with Britain's national debt

00:32:52.200 --> 00:32:55.440
of over 140 million pounds, for which they pay

00:32:55.440 --> 00:32:58.279
4 million just in annual interest. He argues

00:32:58.279 --> 00:33:00.819
that for a mere 20th part of the English national

00:33:00.819 --> 00:33:03.759
debt, America could have a navy twice as large.

00:33:04.519 --> 00:33:07.180
Furthermore, no country on the globe is so internally

00:33:07.180 --> 00:33:09.660
capable of raising a fleet. Right, because America

00:33:09.660 --> 00:33:12.859
natively produces tar, timber, iron, and cordage.

00:33:13.039 --> 00:33:15.599
We don't need to go abroad for anything. We are

00:33:15.599 --> 00:33:18.160
standing on the raw materials. He compares this

00:33:18.160 --> 00:33:21.019
to the Dutch, who make large profits hiring out

00:33:21.019 --> 00:33:23.640
ships, but have to import most of their materials.

00:33:23.940 --> 00:33:26.559
He frames building a fleet not just as a war

00:33:26.559 --> 00:33:29.740
expense, but as an article of commerce, the natural

00:33:29.740 --> 00:33:31.890
manufactory of the country. If we don't need

00:33:31.890 --> 00:33:34.029
the ships after the war, we can sell them and

00:33:34.029 --> 00:33:36.210
replace paper currency with gold and silver.

00:33:36.549 --> 00:33:38.769
He also dispels the myth about manning a fleet.

00:33:39.430 --> 00:33:41.630
People thought you needed a massive population

00:33:41.630 --> 00:33:44.470
of lifelong trained sailors to operate in Navy.

00:33:44.690 --> 00:33:47.869
He uses the example of the terrible privateer

00:33:47.869 --> 00:33:50.029
commanded by Captain Death, which stood the hottest

00:33:50.029 --> 00:33:52.430
engagement of the last war, despite having fewer

00:33:52.430 --> 00:33:55.109
than 20 seasoned sailors among a complement of

00:33:55.109 --> 00:33:58.390
over 200 men. A few able sailors can instruct

00:33:58.390 --> 00:34:00.450
a sufficient number of active landmen on the

00:34:00.450 --> 00:34:03.289
job. But wait, let me step in as the skeptical

00:34:03.289 --> 00:34:06.369
18th century reader again. Go for it. Isn't being

00:34:06.369 --> 00:34:09.530
a young developing nation, an infant state, a

00:34:09.530 --> 00:34:12.030
massive disadvantage in a war against a global

00:34:12.030 --> 00:34:14.909
empire? Wouldn't it be safer to wait 20 or 50

00:34:14.909 --> 00:34:17.309
years until the population is larger and the

00:34:17.309 --> 00:34:20.150
economy is more established? The author anticipates

00:34:20.150 --> 00:34:23.170
exactly that objection. And his response is another

00:34:23.170 --> 00:34:26.699
brilliant reframing of reality. He asserts that

00:34:26.699 --> 00:34:29.179
youth is actually a massive advantage. How so?

00:34:29.280 --> 00:34:32.139
He argues that a larger, more crowded population

00:34:32.139 --> 00:34:34.900
might actually be less united and less willing

00:34:34.900 --> 00:34:38.199
to fight. He observes historically that the more

00:34:38.199 --> 00:34:40.579
a country is peopleed, the smaller their armies

00:34:40.579 --> 00:34:43.380
tend to be. He argues that trade and commerce

00:34:43.380 --> 00:34:46.300
absorb men's attention. Commerce diminishes the

00:34:46.300 --> 00:34:48.659
spirit of both patriotism and military defense.

00:34:48.780 --> 00:34:51.199
Exactly. With the vast increase of commerce,

00:34:51.420 --> 00:34:54.170
he argues, England lost its spirit. He cites

00:34:54.170 --> 00:34:56.750
the rich of London submitting to continued insults

00:34:56.750 --> 00:34:58.889
with the patience of a coward. Because the more

00:34:58.889 --> 00:35:01.570
men have to lose, the less willing they are to

00:35:01.570 --> 00:35:03.510
venture into conflict. The rich are generally

00:35:03.510 --> 00:35:06.510
slaves to fear. By contrast, the colonies are

00:35:06.510 --> 00:35:08.909
young, less crowded, and currently possess nothing

00:35:08.909 --> 00:35:12.090
but liberty. They are uniquely united by misfortune.

00:35:12.369 --> 00:35:14.250
And he puts a very specific ticking clock on

00:35:14.250 --> 00:35:17.409
it. He warns that if they wait 50 years, it might

00:35:17.409 --> 00:35:19.550
be impossible to form the continent into one

00:35:19.550 --> 00:35:21.960
government. The vast variety of interests caused

00:35:21.960 --> 00:35:24.179
by increased trade and population would create

00:35:24.179 --> 00:35:27.480
confusion. Colony would be pitted against colony.

00:35:27.659 --> 00:35:29.940
Furthermore, the military experience they gained

00:35:29.940 --> 00:35:31.980
in the French and Indian War would be totally

00:35:31.980 --> 00:35:34.380
extinct. They wouldn't have a single general

00:35:34.380 --> 00:35:37.260
or military officer left with combat experience.

00:35:37.460 --> 00:35:39.699
So the present time is the perfect intersection.

00:35:40.119 --> 00:35:42.280
They have the military experience from the last

00:35:42.280 --> 00:35:46.159
war, a growing but still culturally united population,

00:35:46.519 --> 00:35:49.539
and the raw materials to build a defense. The

00:35:49.539 --> 00:35:52.659
imperative to act now is logically established.

00:35:53.039 --> 00:35:54.920
But tearing down a system leaves a dangerous

00:35:54.920 --> 00:35:57.960
vacuum. People fear anarchy more than tyranny.

00:35:58.019 --> 00:36:00.679
That's very true. The text must transition from

00:36:00.679 --> 00:36:02.780
the rhetoric of rebellion to the architecture

00:36:02.780 --> 00:36:06.139
of a new society. It has to outline what must

00:36:06.139 --> 00:36:09.139
replace the crown to prevent chaos. Which is

00:36:09.139 --> 00:36:11.360
exactly what he does. He doesn't just say, let's

00:36:11.360 --> 00:36:13.920
rebel and figure it out later. He offers concrete

00:36:13.920 --> 00:36:16.400
hints on how to structure the future, starting

00:36:16.400 --> 00:36:18.639
with a proposal for a continental conference

00:36:18.639 --> 00:36:21.820
to frame a continental charter. Yes, a new Magna

00:36:21.820 --> 00:36:24.460
Charter for America. He outlines a detailed,

00:36:24.780 --> 00:36:27.219
highly structured representative system. He suggests

00:36:27.219 --> 00:36:29.760
assemblies be annual, with a president only.

00:36:30.179 --> 00:36:32.800
He emphasizes the critical need for large and

00:36:32.800 --> 00:36:35.469
equal representation. dividing colonies into

00:36:35.469 --> 00:36:37.949
convenient districts. He proposes sending at

00:36:37.949 --> 00:36:42.750
least 390 delegates to Congress to ensure a broad

00:36:42.750 --> 00:36:46.130
base of voices. And to ensure absolute fairness

00:36:46.130 --> 00:36:49.170
and prevent any one populous colony from dominating

00:36:49.170 --> 00:36:52.469
the others, he proposes this intricate rotating

00:36:52.469 --> 00:36:55.610
lottery system for choosing the president. Walk

00:36:55.610 --> 00:36:57.989
us through that. How does the lottery work? When

00:36:57.989 --> 00:37:00.909
Congress meets, one of the 13 colonies is chosen

00:37:00.909 --> 00:37:04.550
by lot. Then the whole Congress votes by ballot

00:37:04.550 --> 00:37:07.449
for president from that specific colony's delegates.

00:37:07.969 --> 00:37:10.510
The next Congress, the lottery excludes that

00:37:10.510 --> 00:37:13.150
first colony, picking from the remaining 12 and

00:37:13.150 --> 00:37:16.570
so on until everyone has had a turn. That's incredibly

00:37:16.570 --> 00:37:18.849
methodical. It's designed so that he that will

00:37:18.849 --> 00:37:21.369
promote discord under a government so equally

00:37:21.369 --> 00:37:23.570
formed as this would have joined Lucifer in his

00:37:23.570 --> 00:37:26.030
revolt. But the text doesn't just offer bureaucratic

00:37:26.030 --> 00:37:29.409
mechanics. It addresses the symbolic and psychological

00:37:29.409 --> 00:37:32.989
void left by the absence of a king, he asks rhetorically.

00:37:33.650 --> 00:37:36.309
But where, says some, is the king of America?

00:37:36.989 --> 00:37:40.179
I'll tell you, friend, he reigns above. But to

00:37:40.179 --> 00:37:42.539
satisfy the human need for earthly honors and

00:37:42.539 --> 00:37:46.119
solemnity, he proposes a dramatic crowning ceremony.

00:37:46.340 --> 00:37:49.199
It is a highly theatrical proposition. I love

00:37:49.199 --> 00:37:52.599
this imagery. He suggests a day be solemnly set

00:37:52.599 --> 00:37:55.360
apart for proclaiming the new charter. It should

00:37:55.360 --> 00:37:58.000
be brought forth, placed on the divine law, the

00:37:58.000 --> 00:38:00.619
word of God. A crown is placed on the law, declaring

00:38:00.619 --> 00:38:03.280
to the world that in America the law is king.

00:38:03.460 --> 00:38:05.500
Because in absolute governments, the king is

00:38:05.500 --> 00:38:08.460
law. In free countries, the law ought to be king.

00:38:08.710 --> 00:38:11.110
And then, at the conclusion of the ceremony,

00:38:11.349 --> 00:38:14.250
lest any ill use arise, the crown is physically

00:38:14.250 --> 00:38:16.650
demolished and scattered among people whose right

00:38:16.650 --> 00:38:19.309
it is. It's theatrical, but it serves a profound

00:38:19.309 --> 00:38:22.409
political purpose. This raises an important question.

00:38:22.889 --> 00:38:25.530
Why is a formal declaration in a written charter

00:38:25.530 --> 00:38:27.789
so critical structurally at this exact moment?

00:38:27.889 --> 00:38:30.190
Well, the text warns that without a legally occupied

00:38:30.190 --> 00:38:32.110
seat of government, the tottering situation of

00:38:32.110 --> 00:38:34.349
things will tempt a desperate adventurer to seize

00:38:34.349 --> 00:38:36.510
power. He references Massanello to illustrate

00:38:36.510 --> 00:38:39.929
this danger. Yes. Masonello was a fisherman in

00:38:39.929 --> 00:38:44.150
Naples who in 1647 stirred up a massive popular

00:38:44.150 --> 00:38:46.610
revolt against the oppressive taxes of the ruling

00:38:46.610 --> 00:38:50.369
Spaniards. In the space of just a few days, this

00:38:50.369 --> 00:38:52.750
charismatic fisherman essentially became the

00:38:52.750 --> 00:38:56.230
absolute ruler, the king of Naples. He wielded

00:38:56.230 --> 00:38:59.289
terrifying unchecked power before being assassinated.

00:38:59.570 --> 00:39:02.210
The author uses this specific 130 -year -old

00:39:02.210 --> 00:39:05.349
Italian reference. for a very deliberate reason.

00:39:05.690 --> 00:39:08.030
He warns the people opposing independence that

00:39:08.030 --> 00:39:10.530
they are opening a door to eternal tyranny by

00:39:10.530 --> 00:39:13.190
keeping the seat of government vacant. They think

00:39:13.190 --> 00:39:15.449
they're preserving peace by waiting, but he says,

00:39:15.909 --> 00:39:18.369
you know not what you do. A Massanello could

00:39:18.369 --> 00:39:21.449
lay hold of popular disquietudes, rally the desperate

00:39:21.449 --> 00:39:23.670
and sweep away the liberties of the continent

00:39:23.670 --> 00:39:26.570
like a deluge before a proper government is formed.

00:39:27.010 --> 00:39:28.969
Alongside this political framework to prevent

00:39:28.969 --> 00:39:31.630
a dictator, the text takes a remarkably strong

00:39:31.630 --> 00:39:34.289
stance on religious freedom. He states it is

00:39:34.289 --> 00:39:36.670
the indispensable duty of all government to protect

00:39:36.670 --> 00:39:39.389
all conscientious professors of religion. And

00:39:39.389 --> 00:39:41.710
he frames religious diversity not as a problem

00:39:41.710 --> 00:39:44.650
to be solved or managed, but as a divine feature

00:39:44.650 --> 00:39:48.590
of a free society. He says he fully and conscientiously

00:39:48.590 --> 00:39:51.409
belives it is the will of the Almighty that there

00:39:51.409 --> 00:39:53.710
should be a diversity of religious opinions among

00:39:53.710 --> 00:39:57.789
us. It affords a larger field for Christian kindness.

00:39:58.409 --> 00:40:01.940
He compares the various denominations to children

00:40:01.940 --> 00:40:04.639
of the same family, differing only in their Christian

00:40:04.639 --> 00:40:06.900
names. It is a surprisingly liberal principle

00:40:06.900 --> 00:40:09.500
for the era, but that principle of religious

00:40:09.500 --> 00:40:12.219
tolerance is severely tested in the final sections

00:40:12.219 --> 00:40:15.019
of our text. Because despite the thorough logical

00:40:15.019 --> 00:40:18.239
breakdown of why independence is necessary, the

00:40:18.239 --> 00:40:21.079
text still has to contend with active domestic

00:40:21.079 --> 00:40:24.579
dissent. Specifically, pacifist religious groups,

00:40:25.059 --> 00:40:28.039
primarily the Quakers in Pennsylvania, were publishing

00:40:28.039 --> 00:40:30.530
testaments against the rebellion. Right. The

00:40:30.530 --> 00:40:32.309
address to the Quakers. This is where the author

00:40:32.309 --> 00:40:34.750
really turns the rhetorical swooze. The Quakers

00:40:34.750 --> 00:40:36.829
had recently published a piece renewing their

00:40:36.829 --> 00:40:39.570
ancient testimony with respect to the king, essentially

00:40:39.570 --> 00:40:41.769
urging the people to submit to the British government

00:40:41.769 --> 00:40:43.989
and stay out of the revolutionary commotions.

00:40:44.309 --> 00:40:47.389
The author begins this address by stating, he

00:40:47.389 --> 00:40:50.090
isn't attacking their religion. He is addressing

00:40:50.090 --> 00:40:53.030
them as a political body that is dabbling in

00:40:53.030 --> 00:40:55.710
matters which the professed quietude of your

00:40:55.710 --> 00:40:58.980
principles instruct you not to meddle with. He

00:40:58.980 --> 00:41:02.179
scolds them for mingling religion with politics.

00:41:02.400 --> 00:41:05.480
And he constructs a highly effective trap using

00:41:05.480 --> 00:41:08.280
their own doctrine against them. He quotes their

00:41:08.280 --> 00:41:11.079
testimony, which explicitly says that the setting

00:41:11.079 --> 00:41:13.800
up and putting down kings and governments is

00:41:13.800 --> 00:41:16.320
God's peculiar prerogative. And that it is not

00:41:16.320 --> 00:41:18.480
their business to have any hand or contrivance

00:41:18.480 --> 00:41:20.820
in it. So the author says, okay, if you really

00:41:20.820 --> 00:41:23.940
believe that, why aren't you abiding by it? Why

00:41:23.940 --> 00:41:26.519
don't you leave God's work to be managed by himself?

00:41:27.059 --> 00:41:30.119
Exactly. If it is truly God's prerogative to

00:41:30.119 --> 00:41:32.440
set up and put down governments, the author argues

00:41:32.440 --> 00:41:34.460
that the Quakers should wait with patience and

00:41:34.460 --> 00:41:36.980
humility for the event of all public measures.

00:41:37.340 --> 00:41:39.800
By publishing a political testimony, actively

00:41:39.800 --> 00:41:42.280
supporting the king, and condemning the revolution,

00:41:42.480 --> 00:41:44.460
they are interfering. It proves that either they

00:41:44.460 --> 00:41:46.860
don't believe what they profess, or they lack

00:41:46.860 --> 00:41:49.320
the virtue to actually practice it. He points

00:41:49.320 --> 00:41:51.579
out the historical absurdity of their position.

00:41:52.260 --> 00:41:54.639
If God is making a change in government and you

00:41:54.639 --> 00:41:56.519
believe it's God's work, you shouldn't be trying

00:41:56.519 --> 00:41:59.309
to stop it. He brings up Charles I and Oliver

00:41:59.309 --> 00:42:01.369
Cromwell again. He says, Oliver Cromwell thanks

00:42:01.369 --> 00:42:03.769
you. Because if setting up and putting down kings

00:42:03.769 --> 00:42:06.769
is God's work, then Charles I died not by the

00:42:06.769 --> 00:42:09.150
hands of man, but by the will of God, according

00:42:09.150 --> 00:42:12.210
to Quaker logic. He says, what a slap of the

00:42:12.210 --> 00:42:14.929
face is here. The men who claim to passively

00:42:14.929 --> 00:42:18.010
resign the disposal of kings to God are suddenly

00:42:18.010 --> 00:42:20.250
recalling their principles to put in for a share

00:42:20.250 --> 00:42:22.690
of the political business. He also attacks the

00:42:22.690 --> 00:42:26.090
hypocrisy of their stance on violence. If bearing

00:42:26.090 --> 00:42:29.329
arms is a sin, he argues, then the first going

00:42:29.329 --> 00:42:31.949
to war, the unprovoked invasion by the British

00:42:31.949 --> 00:42:35.190
Army, must be infinitely worse than the unavoidable

00:42:35.190 --> 00:42:37.989
defense by the colonists. Yes, he challenges

00:42:37.989 --> 00:42:40.909
their moral courage. If you preach from conscience,

00:42:41.170 --> 00:42:44.010
go prove your sincerity by publishing your doctrine

00:42:44.010 --> 00:42:47.480
at St. James's right in the King's face. Preach

00:42:47.480 --> 00:42:50.440
to the commanders in Boston. Preach to the admirals

00:42:50.440 --> 00:42:53.219
piratically ravaging our coasts. He quotes a

00:42:53.219 --> 00:42:56.280
historical Quaker, Robert Barclay, who famously

00:42:56.280 --> 00:43:00.170
spoke hard truths directly to Charles II. He

00:43:00.170 --> 00:43:02.269
tells the current Quakers to have the honest

00:43:02.269 --> 00:43:05.130
soul of Barclay and preach repentance to the

00:43:05.130 --> 00:43:07.250
royal wretch instead of spending their partial

00:43:07.250 --> 00:43:09.809
invectives against the injured and insulted victims.

00:43:10.130 --> 00:43:12.949
Call not coldness of soul, religion, nor put

00:43:12.949 --> 00:43:15.449
the big O in the place of the Christian. It is

00:43:15.449 --> 00:43:19.030
a masterful rhetorical neutralization. By turning

00:43:19.030 --> 00:43:21.789
the Quakers' own passive theology into an argument

00:43:21.789 --> 00:43:24.210
for why they must stay out of the revolutionary's

00:43:24.210 --> 00:43:26.929
way, he removes a major political obstacle in

00:43:26.929 --> 00:43:29.670
Pennsylvania. If they won't help. Their own religion

00:43:29.670 --> 00:43:31.730
dictates they shouldn't hinder. Which leaves

00:43:31.730 --> 00:43:34.489
the text free to conclude with an appendix that

00:43:34.489 --> 00:43:37.670
outlines four final purely pragmatic reasons

00:43:37.670 --> 00:43:39.710
for an immediate declaration of independence.

00:43:40.030 --> 00:43:42.190
These aren't philosophical points. These are

00:43:42.190 --> 00:43:44.530
the final geopolitical steps required to move

00:43:44.530 --> 00:43:47.070
from a state of rebellion to a recognized nation.

00:43:47.489 --> 00:43:49.909
This appendix is essentially a master class in

00:43:49.909 --> 00:43:52.349
international relations. The author recognizes

00:43:52.349 --> 00:43:54.590
that the colonies cannot win this war in a vacuum.

00:43:54.909 --> 00:43:57.059
They need international help. But the current

00:43:57.059 --> 00:43:59.480
legal status of the colonies prevents any help

00:43:59.480 --> 00:44:01.820
from arriving. He breaks this down into four

00:44:01.820 --> 00:44:03.679
points. Let's walk through the strategy here.

00:44:03.739 --> 00:44:07.239
Point number one is about mediation. Yes. He

00:44:07.239 --> 00:44:09.760
argues that while America calls itself the subject

00:44:09.760 --> 00:44:13.219
of Great Britain, no foreign power can step in

00:44:13.219 --> 00:44:15.920
to mediate the peace. It is an internal British

00:44:15.920 --> 00:44:18.980
dispute. International law prevents France or

00:44:18.980 --> 00:44:21.260
Spain from interfering in the domestic affairs

00:44:21.260 --> 00:44:23.659
of another sovereign nation. Which leads directly

00:44:23.659 --> 00:44:27.159
to point number two. securing alliances. It's

00:44:27.159 --> 00:44:29.099
unreasonable to suppose that France and Spain

00:44:29.099 --> 00:44:31.920
would give military assistance or supplies if

00:44:31.920 --> 00:44:34.599
America only meant to use that help to repair

00:44:34.599 --> 00:44:36.920
the breach and eventually strengthen their connection

00:44:36.920 --> 00:44:38.880
with Britain. Because France and Spain would

00:44:38.880 --> 00:44:40.960
suffer from that outcome, why would they spend

00:44:40.960 --> 00:44:43.099
their treasure to help Britain resolve its domestic

00:44:43.099 --> 00:44:46.119
dispute and emerge stronger? They will only help

00:44:46.119 --> 00:44:49.119
if the end goal is a permanent separation, which

00:44:49.119 --> 00:44:52.019
weakens their rival, Britain, and opens up American

00:44:52.019 --> 00:44:55.039
ports to French and Spanish trade. Point number

00:44:55.039 --> 00:44:57.940
three is about international optics. He argues

00:44:57.940 --> 00:45:00.519
they must stop being viewed globally as mere

00:45:00.519 --> 00:45:03.139
rebels. While they profess to be subjects in

00:45:03.139 --> 00:45:06.199
arms, it creates a dangerous precedent for foreign

00:45:06.199 --> 00:45:09.059
nations. Kings do not like helping rebels because

00:45:09.059 --> 00:45:11.440
it encourages rebellion in their own territories.

00:45:11.800 --> 00:45:15.539
To unite resistance and subjection requires an

00:45:15.539 --> 00:45:18.219
idea much too refined for common understanding.

00:45:18.760 --> 00:45:21.139
They have to declare themselves a sovereign state

00:45:21.139 --> 00:45:24.579
defending itself, not subjects throwing a tantrum.

00:45:25.139 --> 00:45:28.099
And finally, point number four, to formally publish

00:45:28.099 --> 00:45:30.659
a manifesto to the world detailing their grievances,

00:45:31.159 --> 00:45:33.500
the peaceful methods they ineffectually use to

00:45:33.500 --> 00:45:35.699
resolve them, and their necessity of breaking

00:45:35.699 --> 00:45:38.380
off connections while assuring all foreign courts

00:45:38.380 --> 00:45:40.760
of a desire to trade peacefully. This is the

00:45:40.760 --> 00:45:43.940
ultimate synthesis of the entire pamphlet. Under

00:45:43.940 --> 00:45:46.219
the denomination of British subjects, the colonies

00:45:46.219 --> 00:45:48.739
cannot be received or heard abroad. The custom

00:45:48.739 --> 00:45:51.059
of all international courts is against them.

00:45:51.420 --> 00:45:53.500
Independence isn't just a philosophical preference

00:45:53.500 --> 00:45:56.679
for liberty. It is the absolute necessary legal

00:45:56.679 --> 00:46:00.039
key to unlock international diplomacy, foreign

00:46:00.039 --> 00:46:02.849
aid and global trade. He argues that sending

00:46:02.849 --> 00:46:04.829
such a memorial to foreign courts would produce

00:46:04.829 --> 00:46:06.929
more good effects than if a ship were freighted

00:46:06.929 --> 00:46:09.309
with petitions to Britain. The author acknowledges

00:46:09.309 --> 00:46:11.710
that these proceedings may at first appear strange

00:46:11.710 --> 00:46:13.909
and difficult to a populace used to thinking

00:46:13.909 --> 00:46:17.090
of themselves as British. But he assures them

00:46:17.090 --> 00:46:19.329
that like all other steps they have passed over,

00:46:19.769 --> 00:46:22.590
it will in a little time become familiar and

00:46:22.590 --> 00:46:24.630
agreeable. The legal fiction of being British

00:46:24.630 --> 00:46:27.050
subjects must end for the reality of American

00:46:27.050 --> 00:46:29.920
survival to begin. I want to ask you listening

00:46:29.920 --> 00:46:32.119
to reflect on the architecture of what we've

00:46:32.119 --> 00:46:34.559
just journeyed through in this deep dive. That's

00:46:34.559 --> 00:46:36.920
a lot to take in. It is. We didn't just review

00:46:36.920 --> 00:46:39.760
a pamphlet screaming for a revolution. We watched

00:46:39.760 --> 00:46:43.400
a writer sequentially dismantle the very philosophy

00:46:43.400 --> 00:46:45.579
of government. We watched him expose the structural

00:46:45.579 --> 00:46:48.519
flaws of a boasted constitutional system. We

00:46:48.519 --> 00:46:51.260
saw him shatter the mythology of hereditary leadership.

00:46:51.500 --> 00:46:54.460
using the audience's own sacred texts. We watched

00:46:54.460 --> 00:46:56.780
him carefully untangle the emotional and economic

00:46:56.780 --> 00:46:59.800
ties of a populace through the mechanics of mercantilism.

00:47:00.119 --> 00:47:02.699
He neutralized religious dissent using its own

00:47:02.699 --> 00:47:05.239
doctrine, and then he didn't just walk away,

00:47:05.619 --> 00:47:08.739
he provided a practical naval budget, a geopolitical

00:47:08.739 --> 00:47:11.820
strategy for securing French alliances, and a

00:47:11.820 --> 00:47:14.519
structural blueprint for a new republic to prevent

00:47:14.519 --> 00:47:17.119
a dictator from taking over. It is a complete

00:47:17.119 --> 00:47:19.900
ideological ecosystem. It leaves the reader with

00:47:19.900 --> 00:47:22.320
no logical retreat back to the safety of the

00:47:22.320 --> 00:47:25.420
status quo. To leave you with a final thought,

00:47:25.579 --> 00:47:28.239
I want to draw on a specific haunting metaphor

00:47:28.239 --> 00:47:30.699
the author uses right at the end of the text.

00:47:30.860 --> 00:47:33.639
Oh, which one? He compares the delay of independence

00:47:33.639 --> 00:47:36.539
to a man who continues putting off some deeply

00:47:36.539 --> 00:47:39.300
unpleasant business from day to day. This man

00:47:39.300 --> 00:47:41.460
knows it must be done, he hates to set about

00:47:41.460 --> 00:47:44.000
it, he wishes it over, and yet he is continually

00:47:44.000 --> 00:47:46.440
haunted with the thoughts of its necessity. Wow,

00:47:46.579 --> 00:47:49.199
it's the ultimate articulation of political procrastination.

00:47:49.449 --> 00:47:51.989
It is. The text actually begins with the famous

00:47:51.989 --> 00:47:54.969
line, time makes more converts than reason. The

00:47:54.969 --> 00:47:57.750
author spent dozens of pages providing the absolute

00:47:57.750 --> 00:48:00.349
maximum amount of reason possible. He laid out

00:48:00.349 --> 00:48:02.869
the path forward with a highly structured argument.

00:48:03.070 --> 00:48:05.409
I want you to ponder that in the context of your

00:48:05.409 --> 00:48:08.769
own life and the systems you exist within. If

00:48:08.769 --> 00:48:11.090
reason has clearly laid out the path forward

00:48:11.090 --> 00:48:14.289
for you, how much of your own hesitation in making

00:48:14.289 --> 00:48:17.809
massive necessary structural changes is simply

00:48:17.809 --> 00:48:19.849
you waiting for time to do the heavy lifting

00:48:19.849 --> 00:48:22.550
that reason has already justified? That's a powerful

00:48:22.550 --> 00:48:25.010
question to sit with. Time makes more converts

00:48:25.010 --> 00:48:26.909
than reason. Thank you for joining us on this

00:48:26.909 --> 00:48:27.349
deep dive.