S1: From the historic campus of Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Michigan,
S1: where the good, the true and the beautiful are taught,
S1: nurtured and honored. This is the radio free Hillsdale Hour,
S1: bringing the activity and education of the college to listeners
S1: across the country.
S2: So they'll keep voting in the people that are bringing
S2: us this squalor, because they don't blame the policies. And
S2: that's a basic divide that is very hard to overcome.
S3: This is your host, Scott Bertram. Welcome to the Radio
S3: Free Hillsdale Hour. Part of the Hillsdale College Podcast Network.
S3: That was Heather MacDonald, author of When Race Trumps Merit
S3: How the Pursuit of Equity Sacrifices Excellence Destroys Beauty and
S3: Threatens Lives. Now, in a revised paperback with a new
S3: preface by Heather will go in depth with her today.
S3: Also later on in today's show, Richard Samuelsohn joins us
S3: from Hillsdale in D.C. we'll talk about common sense and
S3: remember the ladies as we walk up to America. Two 51st.
S3: Happy to be joined now by Heather McDonald. She is
S3: Thomas W Smith, fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing
S3: editor at City Journal, and the author of When Race
S3: Trumps Merit How the Pursuit of Equity Sacrifices Excellence, Destroys
S3: Beauty and Threatens Lives. It is now available in an
S3: updated paperback edition with a new preface by Heather McDonald. Heather,
S3: thanks so much for joining us.
S2: Thank you for having me, Scott. I greatly appreciate it.
S3: We talked about the book upon its release, which I
S3: can't believe was three years ago, but I looked at
S3: the the numbers and that's that's true. Much has happened
S3: since then. We could not have necessarily counted on or
S3: anticipated President Trump being reelected to a second term in
S3: the white House. And part of what you say in
S3: the in the preface now is that we've seen President
S3: Trump attempting as much as possible through the administration to
S3: dismantle the racial equity infrastructure that had been created. So
S3: how far have we come in these past 14, 15
S3: months or so?
S2: Well, I can't fault Trump on what he's trying to do.
S2: The question is, are any of these changes going to stick?
S2: As you recall, Trump was just a whirlwind on day
S2: one when he was sworn in issuing executive orders by
S2: the dozens practically. And a very large number of those
S2: were focused on this preposterous infrastructure that we've created in government,
S2: based on the lie that America is a systemically racist
S2: country still, and that we need to engineer racial proportionality
S2: in meritocratic, high standards institutions like medical schools, law schools,
S2: law firms, corporations in order to overcome this systemic bias.
S2: So you had Democratic administrations dating back decades, basically forcing
S2: public and private sector entities to discard high standards in
S2: favor of, uh, race. And sadly, if you do that,
S2: you are guaranteeing that you're going to get people in
S2: your institution who are not competitively qualified. So Trump set
S2: out saying, you know, we're going to get rid of
S2: racial programs within the federal government. I'm going to stop, uh,
S2: federal agencies from hiring on the basis of race and sex,
S2: rather than on the basis of how much that bureaucrat
S2: knows about his field. I'm going to stop requiring that federal, uh, contractors,
S2: private firms that have contracts with the federal government, engage
S2: in these extremely burdensome demographic surveys of their workforce, itemizing
S2: a ever larger number of racial and identity based groups
S2: that are now claiming aspiring to victim status. And and
S2: so private firms had to create these massive EEOC bureaucracies
S2: that sucked up funding and time. And in April, he
S2: did what I think is the most significant executive order,
S2: which is to try to extirpate this very dangerous concept
S2: called disparate impact liability from the federal regulations. So this
S2: was all great. And of course, he tried to actually
S2: give teeth to the 2023 Supreme Court case called SFFAV
S2: Harvard that purported to ban on a constitutional basis. Private.
S2: Excuse me. Public colleges from using race in admissions to
S2: eviscerate high standards. But colleges were sort of trying to
S2: lie low and and ignore the ruling. And frankly, the
S2: majority opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts gave them a
S2: huge loophole to continue using race. So Trump came in
S2: and tried to say, no, we really mean this. You're
S2: going to have to give us your admissions data that
S2: will allow us to determine if you're still using racial preferences.
S2: This was all good. But you know, I, I am
S2: ambivalent or, or torn between whether it's really going to
S2: make a permanent difference because a lot of these, the,
S2: the most extreme and committed organizations and bureaucracies that are
S2: committed to basically the idea that white males are the
S2: biggest threat to humanity. They're still there. They're still dug in.
S2: And I would say if we don't get another Republican
S2: administration to follow up on this second Trump term, I
S2: think we're going to backslide very quickly.
S3: Heather, I want to return to April 23rd, 2025. This
S3: is the date when President Trump, uh, has this order
S3: to federal agencies to stop employing disparate impact theory. This
S3: is a big part of when race trumps merit. This
S3: discussion about disparate impact theory. Explain for us briefly, once
S3: again what that meant and what real changes we might
S3: see or have seen since the change by President Trump's administration.
S2: Well, in a nutshell, disparate impact theory substitutes phantom racism
S2: for actual discrimination because it became very difficult to find
S2: sufficient examples of of real virulent discrimination by mainstream institutions
S2: against qualified black individuals. But you had to keep the
S2: anti-racism juggernaut going. And so disparate impact theory was developed
S2: in order to do so. The original civil rights acts
S2: that were passed in the 1960s, at the height of
S2: the sort of active civil rights era, banned employers from
S2: deliberately and intentionally discriminating against qualified black applicants. So if
S2: you had, you know, if you were a business seeking
S2: a lawyer and a black lawyer showed up, who was
S2: the most qualified, you could no longer say, I'm not
S2: going to hire you because you're black, or you couldn't
S2: not hire him because he was black without explicitly saying so.
S2: And the federal government said, that's just not that that
S2: sort of deliberate discrimination is not compatible with our understanding
S2: of equal protection and civil rights in this country. So
S2: it the civil rights laws banned intentional discrimination. Well, like
S2: five years later, seven years later, most employers had stopped
S2: doing that. They were not trying to exclude qualified blacks.
S2: The problem. But and yet you still saw workplaces that
S2: didn't have 13% black representation, if they had any kind
S2: of selective test for admission. So, for example, fire departments
S2: may not have been 13% black firefighters because those departments
S2: Administered a very basic elementary test of reading and math
S2: skills to firefighter applicants on the assumption that if you're
S2: going to be a firefighter, you need to be able
S2: to read an instruction manual on how to use this
S2: or that fire retardant. You had to understand how to,
S2: you know, read chem about chemicals. And so they would issue,
S2: they would administer these tests. And, and what happened was
S2: black applicants would disproportionately fail because they didn't have an
S2: even elementary level of reading skills. And so the, the
S2: workplaces remained insufficiently diverse from the perspective of government bureaucrats
S2: and the civil rights establishment. And so what what the court,
S2: the Supreme Court came up with. And this idea had
S2: been batted around in law schools for a while. Was
S2: the idea that even if an employer did not intend
S2: to discriminate against blacks, all he wanted was to have
S2: the most qualified applicants, and he'd be happy if his
S2: entire workplace was black, if he administered some kind of
S2: test or had a certain expectation of of reading skills,
S2: of writing skills, of math skills. If he if that
S2: test had a negative impact disproportionately on blacks, that that
S2: test would is, was itself racist. And so you had
S2: all sorts of, of institutions throwing out perfectly constitutional, perfectly
S2: colorblind tests based on what is called disparate impact. And
S2: that was what started a very serious decline in meritocratic
S2: standards in medical schools and law schools in, you know,
S2: flight training, you name it, any. And the sad fact
S2: of the matter is, Scott, because the academic skills gap
S2: is so wide and it has been intractable, you cannot
S2: administer a meritocratic test without having a disparate impact on blacks.
S2: You can either have diversity in the workplace or you
S2: can have meritocracy. You cannot have both.
S3: Heather McDonald is with us. Her book is When Race
S3: Trumps Merit How the Pursuit of Equity sacrifices excellence, destroys
S3: beauty and Threatens Lives. Heather, you mentioned how it shows
S3: up in science and medicine. That's a part of when
S3: race trumps merit. Just recently, as we had this conversation,
S3: the Department of Justice concluded an investigation into UCLA's medical school, uh,
S3: which I think we talked about the first time we
S3: chatted three years ago, so the investigation has taken a while,
S3: but it found the school's admissions process unlawfully discriminates based
S3: on race. Their process has been focused on racial demographics.
S3: Demographics at the expense of merit and excellence. So we
S3: talk about real world impact of these policies on everyday Americans.
S3: What this means is UCLA is not being the best
S3: and the brightest, the people who are going to be
S3: the best doctors, but they're more concerned about the racial
S3: demographics of the of the potential doctors that are in
S3: their programs. That eventually affects the health and well-being of
S3: all of us down the road.
S2: It's just outrageous. Scott. Um, anybody who has a white male, straight,
S2: white male son or grandson has either discovered this or
S2: will discover it, that that straight white male is going
S2: to be the last admitted to selective colleges, to selective
S2: graduate schools, to professional schools and to law firms. Government
S2: science positions, you name it, and students experience this daily.
S2: I was at an event last night and a very
S2: left wing mother had to admit that although her son
S2: had very good Mcat scores, he was right in deciding
S2: that he would never be admitted to medical school. And
S2: so he went to Palantir instead. Now that's hardly the
S2: end of the world. But nevertheless, we have lost potentially
S2: a groundbreaking medical scientist. And this is happening all over.
S2: And what's going on is the medical schools have had
S2: completely different tracks of admission Mcat scores and and grade
S2: point averages, Mcat to the medical college admissions test. They're
S2: the standardized, colorblind neutral objective tests of the types of
S2: skills that you need to succeed in medical school. There. The.
S2: The medical counterparts of the SATs. In many places, if
S2: the Mcat scores and grade point averages in college, that
S2: would be automatically disqualifying if presented by a white or
S2: Asian applicant to medical school are an automatic admit if
S2: presented by a black or Hispanic student. So you've got
S2: almost non-overlapping, uh, bell curves of who's getting admitted to
S2: medical school. And so what happens is, and this is
S2: true for any institution that practices racial preferences, when these
S2: less qualified, underqualified blacks are admitted to medical school. And
S2: let me just put in a little aside here, opponents
S2: of racial preferences like myself are not saying that blacks
S2: should not go to college. We're not saying that blacks
S2: should not go to law school. We're not saying that
S2: blacks should not go to medical school. All we are
S2: saying is they should go to school on the same
S2: basis as everybody else admitted to schools for which they
S2: are competitively qualified, not catapulted outside of their comfort zone,
S2: outside of their skills zone into schools for which they're
S2: not qualified. So if you're a black student and you'd
S2: be qualified to go to Boston College, it is not
S2: doing you a service to be admitted to Harvard Medical School,
S2: where the students there are the absolute top of the
S2: of the academic skills curve to the extent they're admitted,
S2: you know, and not not kept out to make places
S2: for racial preference beneficiaries. So the black students are are
S2: admitted into schools that they're not ready for. They do
S2: very poorly there at the bottom of their class, and
S2: the pressure is then on to lower standards further. And
S2: that has gone on with the first stage of the
S2: medical licensing test, which got rid of grades and went
S2: to pass fail in the hope of passing through more
S2: blacks into the hospital residencies of their choice in their
S2: second year of medical training. And the pressure is on
S2: to do similar things to part two of the medical
S2: licensing exam. And sorry guys, skill matters, intelligence matters, capacity matters.
S2: These things cannot be fudged. You cannot play around with
S2: seeking the best possible candidate and lowering standards and think
S2: things are all going to come out okay. They won't.
S3: Heather MacDonald is with us. We'll talk more about when
S3: Race Trumps merit. The new paperback version, available now but now,
S3: is an opportunity to make plans for May 31st, June 1st,
S3: or June 2nd. That is when Revolutionary America is in theaters.
S3: The very first big screen production from Hillsdale College. You know,
S3: our founding generation risked everything for the freedom our children
S3: enjoy today. With 250 years on the line, make sure
S3: that they know the story. Introducing the first documentary about
S3: the American Revolution that you can trust from Hillsdale College.
S3: Go to hillsdale.edu/film to find a theater near you and
S3: get your tickets for Revolutionary America. It's in theaters for
S3: a limited run. May 31st. June 1st. June 2nd. Make
S3: your plans now hillsdale.edu/good for the whole family. hillsdale.edu. We
S3: continue with Heather MacDonald, author of When Race Trumps Merit.
S3: That book, now available in paperback with a new preface
S3: by Heather MacDonald. Heather, on this subject of educating doctors,
S3: is there an argument or is there any evidence that
S3: by enrolling and accepting doctors who might be slightly lower
S3: achieving in their career, it's still a net benefit because
S3: those doctors could serve areas that otherwise would not have
S3: any access to medical care whatsoever. Is there any evidence
S3: that that is taking place?
S2: What when the first case was decided called Baccy versus
S2: the Regents of the University of California, and this was
S2: in fact a medical student, uh, a white Jewish guy
S2: who applied to the medical school at the University of,
S2: of California at Davis and had competitive Qualifications, and he
S2: was not admitted because at that point, the University of Davis,
S2: University of California at Davis had an explicit set aside
S2: program for, say, 100 blacks to come into the medical
S2: school who had the usual very low scores. And Barkey
S2: sued all the way up to the Supreme Court. This
S2: was a public university, so it was obligated to abide
S2: by the constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the laws.
S2: The opinion that was the plurality opinion was written by
S2: Justice Lewis Powell, and he considered various rationales that may
S2: be justified, would justify racial preferences under what's called in
S2: constitutional law, a strict scrutiny test, which is a high
S2: level of review. You have to have a very strong
S2: reason to use race as a category, as a government entity.
S2: And he Considered among the rationales compensatory justice. Blacks have
S2: been screwed in the past, so we need not have to,
S2: you know, help them now, he said. That doesn't do it.
S2: Not a good enough rationale. And he considered the argument, well,
S2: blacks will be more likely to go out and work
S2: in the so-called community. They'll be more likely to do
S2: health clinics that are not so elite. And in places
S2: where there insufficient number of doctors. And Powell said then
S2: there's no evidence that that's the case. Um, and he's right.
S2: There's still no evidence of that. So, you know, I
S2: can imagine a viewer thinking, well, but maybe there's a
S2: balance there. So you have maybe not as quite as
S2: competent doctors, but if they're filling needed gaps in the
S2: medical system, maybe it's worth it. But I just want
S2: to say that rationale doesn't apply either.
S3: Heather McDonald with us. Your book, When Race Trumps Merit.
S3: Speaking of colleges and universities, once you get there, you, uh, Previously,
S3: I've dealt with dye programs all over campus on many
S3: colleges and universities across the country. The president, the administration
S3: have have instructed colleges and universities to stop those programs.
S3: And it appears, based on evidence and hidden cameras, that
S3: many places are simply renaming departments, trying to do their
S3: best to keep those programs intact while staying under the
S3: radar of the federal government. So do you think they're
S3: going to get away with that, to simply try to
S3: to wait out the Trump administration?
S2: Yes, I do. Let's just state that this is a
S2: a bureaucracy based on an outright lie. And that's bad
S2: regardless of its consequences. It's bad if a university embraces
S2: untruth because it's supposed to be dedicated to the truth.
S2: The D, e I bureaucracy and colleges across the country
S2: is based on the fiction that colleges remain hotbeds of discrimination,
S2: and that to be a female or so-called underrepresented minority
S2: on campus, which means basically blacks, uh, Hispanics, and a
S2: minute number of American Indians that to be one of
S2: those unfortunates is to be subject to unsafety. And you
S2: need allies to survive. This is all preposterous. Uh, there's
S2: no more welcoming environment in human history than a college
S2: campus to the groups that are now deemed marginalized and victimized.
S2: So these bureaucracies, it's just sucking up tuition dollars. It's
S2: making the colleges get more and more expensive. And it's
S2: and it's teaches students to think of themselves as victims.
S2: It is dedicated to that proposition. And it uses these bureaucrats,
S2: the vice provost of diversity and belonging. They use every
S2: opportunity to tell students why they should think of themselves
S2: as victims rather than as the most fortunate people on
S2: on earth in human history.
S3: Whether the issue of crime. You wrote a piece at
S3: City Journal a couple of weeks ago. Rude but right
S3: on crime, referring to Donald Trump and the crackdown in Washington, D.C.
S3: we've seen murder rates plummet in D.C. we've seen some
S3: public transit agencies across the country actually enforce the law
S3: and go after fare evaders, and crime has fallen. Vandalism
S3: has fallen in those particular locations. And yet we still
S3: sort of see this couched as some sort of racial animus.
S3: If you want to enforce the law and racial animus,
S3: if you want to keep some of our larger cities safe.
S3: Will the evidence that we see in some areas, including
S3: right there in Washington, D.C., change the minds of anyone
S3: who's who's looking at that at that topic?
S2: I've sort of given up on changing minds, Scott. I, I,
S2: and I'm sure the left says that about us as well. I'm, I'm,
S2: I'm acutely conscious on a minute by minute basis that
S2: both sides have similar rhetorical techniques that they use against
S2: the other. And both sides are equally capable of violating
S2: neutral principles. That having been said, I can I can
S2: hold two contradictory ideas in my mind at once. I
S2: believe that, and yet I also do believe that I
S2: have the facts and I'm not deluded, but. But nevertheless,
S2: I have to admit that the the left thinks we're
S2: totally out of touch with reality. I would just make
S2: one little emendation to what you said. Yes, things are
S2: looking better in Washington, D.C. after Trump in August of
S2: of last year, bracingly sent in the National Guard and said,
S2: we're not going to take this any longer. You know,
S2: this is not acceptable. There's a very high crime rate here.
S2: Disorder is out of control. We want to be a livable,
S2: beautiful city, and we're not going to excuse this any longer.
S2: That was a great, great moment. He called it. It
S2: was the second liberation day after the tariffs. This was
S2: a more important one, in my view. But recently its
S2: summer is approaching and we're getting the youth flash mob
S2: season coming upon us, where you have large groups of
S2: children raised predominantly by single mothers. They are overwhelmingly black
S2: that gather in urban centers, having announced a sort of
S2: a mobbing event on social media. And they they rampage,
S2: they raise hell. And there was one recently in Washington, DC,
S2: in the Navy Yards area. So I would say we
S2: need more National Guards. But crime is another area where
S2: you have disparate impact theory at work, just as it's true.
S2: And again, I may also say I'm speaking about averages here.
S2: I am not speaking about any individual white, Hispanic or
S2: black person. There are thousands of blacks who are overperforming
S2: whites and Asians in academic skills. There's thousands of blacks
S2: who are far more law abiding than white and Asian
S2: gang bangers and thugs. But the averages, the data do
S2: not lie. And it is the case that black crime rates,
S2: on average, take in the group as a whole. I'm
S2: not talking about any given individual. Uh, are so much
S2: higher than other groups in society that if you apply
S2: the laws against turnstile jumping against robbery, against aggravated assault, uh,
S2: you will have a disparate impact on black criminals, not
S2: because the laws are racist, but because the crime rate
S2: is so high. And, and so the criminal justice system
S2: under progressive leadership has said, well, if if we enforce
S2: laws against shoplifting or turnstile jumping. We will be putting
S2: a disproportionate number of black juveniles in jail. Maybe. Although
S2: if they're juveniles, they get a free pass immediately, immediately.
S2: But even if we apply these laws against people that
S2: already have ten crimes in their background, we will have
S2: a disparate impact on black criminals. Therefore, we'll stop enforcing
S2: the law because it has a disparate impact that's been
S2: going on. And that's a more difficult thing for Trump
S2: to get at, because these are generally local, state and
S2: local decisions. And the federal government has limited authority over
S2: those decisions.
S3: So let me actually probably end there, which is since
S3: the last time we've talked, New York now has a
S3: socialist mayor. Chicago essentially has a socialist mayor, Seattle has
S3: a socialist mayor. It seems some of our big cities
S3: are leaning into democratic socialists or just flat out socialists
S3: in office. What kind of levers do they then have
S3: at the local level, at the city level, and some
S3: of our biggest cities in the country to try to,
S3: in their, in their parlance, restore equity in those areas.
S2: They have a lot of leverage. There's a long standing
S2: battle in New York City over what are called test schools.
S2: These are specialized high schools that are public. They're free
S2: that use academic skills tests to admit students. This is
S2: fairly rare, although they exist like Virginia has one. San Francisco, Seattle,
S2: and they've been the crown jewel of the public education
S2: school in New York City. The most famous one is
S2: called Stuyvesant High School, and it's down in the lower Manhattan.
S2: And at this point, it is so overwhelmingly Asian. Whites
S2: are underrepresented. Asians are way overrepresented based on their population
S2: in New York City. Why? Because they're whooping everybody's ass.
S2: The parents are riding their children with extraordinary attention to study,
S2: to not run the streets at night, to do their homework,
S2: to learn, to pay attention to their teacher, to respect
S2: their teacher. And it's paying off. And these schools, because
S2: they are, have very few black and Hispanic students, have
S2: been under pressure for decades from the various race hustling
S2: advocacy groups to get rid of the exams and and,
S2: and do admit by race and mandate the the left
S2: wing mayor of New York czar mandate has been ambiguous
S2: about that. It's not clear which way he's going to go,
S2: but he. And it is fortunately controlled by the state legislature. Nevertheless,
S2: he's feeling the political momentum. And I could imagine, uh,
S2: that that effort to reward academic merit will be torn down.
S2: They can bring pressure on progressive prosecutors not to further
S2: enforce the law. Uh, and God knows they can certainly
S2: screw up with the economic situation. So it's really astounding.
S2: You know, I was in New York City in the
S2: Giuliani mayoralty, and it was an extraordinarily exciting moment. He
S2: took on the welfare industrial complex. He took on the
S2: the criminal industrial complex. He restored high standards. He brought
S2: accountability to government. It's all gone. New York looks filthier
S2: than ever. There's more danger than ever from mentally ill
S2: vagrants that are allowed to roam the streets without being
S2: committed for mental illness. Um, so, you know, you and I,
S2: people like us scratch our heads and say, how do
S2: people keep voting in these left wingers? And the reason
S2: I have come up with is like, when it comes
S2: to street vagrancy, otherwise known as homelessness, which is a
S2: complete misnomer. The left thinks that that so-called homelessness is
S2: a fact of nature. It's it's created by unfair economic conditions,
S2: not by public policy choices. I see it street vagrancy
S2: as completely a policy choice. People have decided that we
S2: want the vagrants on the streets. We're going to get
S2: rid of the means to get them off, which is
S2: moving people along for vagrancy, for, uh, and and committing
S2: people involuntarily if they're psychotic. Uh, the left thinks it's
S2: just a matter of we're not funding enough social services,
S2: so they'll keep voting in the people that are bringing
S2: us this squalor because they don't blame the policies. And
S2: that's a basic divide that is very hard to overcome.
S3: Heather MacDonald is Thomas W Smith, fellow at the Manhattan Institute,
S3: also contributing editor at City Journal and the author of
S3: the recent book When Race Trumps Merit The Pursuit of
S3: Equity Sacrifices Excellence, Destroys Beauty and Threatens Lives, now available
S3: in paperback with a new preface from Heather MacDonald. Heather,
S3: thanks so much for joining us here on the Radio
S3: Free Hillsdale Hour. Up next, Doctor Richard Samuelson from Hillsdale
S3: in DC. We'll talk about common sense and also remember
S3: the ladies letters between John and Abigail Adams. I'm Scott Bertram.
S3: This is the radio free Hillsdale Hour. Welcome back to
S3: the Radio free Hillsdale Hour. I'm Scott Bertram. Be sure
S3: to find more Hillsdale College audio on Hillsdale College Podcast Network.
S3: Older episodes of this program, plus The Larry Arnn Show,
S3: the Hillsdale College Online Courses podcast, and more. podcast.hillsdale.edu. We're
S3: joined by Doctor Richard Samuelson. He is associate professor of
S3: government at Hillsdale in D.C.. Doctor Samuelson, thanks for joining us.
S4: Thanks for having me on. It's great to be here.
S3: Good to have you back. As we continue our discussion
S3: and walk up to July 4th of 1776 as we
S3: approach now America 250. We've had a couple of conversations
S3: in the past. You can find that in the archives. Uh,
S3: today we're going to talk about two things common sense.
S3: And remember the ladies. Before we do that, Doctor Samuelson,
S3: tell us a little bit perhaps set the scene. What's happening, say,
S3: from the beginning of 1776, up until around April or so,
S3: where our discussion takes us today?
S4: Well, just go back a little before remember when the
S4: second Congress met? They sent the people wanting reconciliation, sent
S4: the olive branch petition to the king. It arrived, or
S4: hopefully the same time the king said, nope, I'm not interested.
S4: You guys are out of my protection. And there's a
S4: struggle in Congress in the last part of 75. But
S4: what do we do about that? Including in December, people
S4: were coming to John Adams. What do we do if
S4: we have bills or not from the King? Just say
S4: from the colony of blah, blah, blah, he said. But
S4: they had to think about that. And in late December
S4: of 76, the king said, basically American trade and in
S4: American on the colonial ships is forfeit to the King.
S4: And so the King is gradually pushing them and pushing them.
S4: And that's the context in which Paine's common sense takes place.
S4: There is a turn. All along, the colonists have been saying, well,
S4: we want the good patriot king to protect us from Parliament.
S4: And what's happening now. They realize they're starting to realize
S4: the king is part of the problem. And when you
S4: get the declaration in July, it's always he hath, he hath,
S4: he hath. Because the king was the only legal connection
S4: they had to Britain, they did not believe they were
S4: subject to parliament's authority, perhaps on the high seas, but
S4: not as soon as you got inside the colony. And
S4: so that's the context in which you get common sense.
S4: And it hit like a firecracker in the start of 76.
S4: Paine drops common sense or publishes common sense anonymously, and
S4: it spreads because he is a first in a high
S4: profile way to take it to the king.
S3: Mhm.
S4: To say the problem is the king is not looking
S4: out for your interests. The king is not working for you.
S4: He's working for someone else, perhaps himself, perhaps Britain, but
S4: not for the colonists.
S3: So at that time, as common sense hits with the
S3: with the force of a firecracker as as you say,
S3: is it generally a population that they feel perhaps independence
S3: is inevitable or is still hoping for reconciliation? And where
S3: does common sense enter that mix?
S4: They're still hoping for reconciliation among many people. Right. John
S4: Adams thought and others thought. Once the sword is drawn,
S4: throw away the scabbard. That is after Lexington and Concord
S4: in the spring of 75. It's just not happening. But
S4: most people weren't thinking that way. We think we've had
S4: we've worked out these things before. We'll settle it again.
S4: And it takes time for people to realize the king
S4: is not going to be there to save us. We're
S4: going to have to go our own way. And people
S4: who've always lived under the king in a British world,
S4: and they love being British, because to be British was
S4: to be connected to the freest people in the world,
S4: and the people who kept defeating the French. That's always
S4: good if you're British, of course. And so it was
S4: a big deal to repudiate their identity as British and
S4: their king. So Paine, with his brilliant rhetoric, remember, he'd
S4: only show up in, I think, late 74 from from England.
S4: And he wound up writing and he really had developed
S4: a terrific pen. And he writes common sense that says
S4: the problem is the king. And the problem isn't just
S4: the king. The problem is monarchy. So it's not just
S4: that you're staying connected to Britain. It is that it
S4: is absurd to have a king, and it is absurd
S4: for an island to rule a continent which addresses the
S4: second element, the imperial dimension. So people are still they're ambiguous,
S4: they're getting frustrated with the king, but all they've known
S4: is being British and being British is connected to the
S4: liberties they want to preserve.
S3: Doctor Richard Samuelson with us talking about common sense. We'll
S3: discuss remember the ladies and the atoms in just a
S3: few minutes. In common sense pains. Using biblical imagery, using
S3: moral language constantly. How important was was that? How important
S3: was religion to the revolutionary argument?
S4: Well, this is a very this is a Bible reading
S4: people and fairly religious people, mostly Protestant or dissenting Protestant
S4: than establishment Protestant. But. And so the images really hit.
S4: John Adams actually asked Paine about this. He said, yeah,
S4: I use that because it appealed to the people and
S4: the sermons. By the way, if you track the element
S4: parts of the Old Testament can be used in sermon.
S4: You're turning to the parts that pain quotes or Samuel says, don't.
S4: Don't go for a king Israel. That's not what God
S4: wants from you. Right? And that's mean. It's a punishment.
S4: You don't want to be like every other nation that
S4: has a king. They'll just take stuff from you, right?
S4: And so pain uses that very effectively in that Bible
S4: reading culture and Bible listening culture. By the way, still
S4: an oral culture to take the argument that it's absurd
S4: to have a king, right? And so he's hitting the
S4: right force the right way at the right time. People
S4: are trying to figure out what to do. And he's saying, God,
S4: we don't want you know, the problem is the king
S4: and you're starting to have this turn against the king
S4: and the turn against Britain. And remember, in their constitutional ideas,
S4: their only connection with Britain was the king. They were
S4: not subject to Parliament's jurisdiction, and they kept hoping the
S4: king would step in and stop it. And they're starting
S4: to realize that the King will not. And Paine helped
S4: move public opinion to the recognition that the King was
S4: not going to be there for them. And his turn
S4: to biblical imagery and biblical language was part of his appeal.
S4: He was using language that was familiar to the colonists
S4: to get them to think through this on moral and
S4: biblical terms that would appeal to them.
S3: Mhm. Let's step back for a minute. Just to give
S3: a little context. Look, common sense, uh, spreads through the colonies.
S3: And these days you think, well, you pick it up
S3: at the corner store or it's online or it's very
S3: it's very easy to access that sort of thing. How,
S3: how literally physically does common sense spread among the people
S3: back in 1776?
S4: In a few ways. Right. Um, it was published and
S4: there's a second edition in July, I think it's February
S4: 14th as a date of Paine's introduction already. and to
S4: have 800 000 copies in a population of, what, 3
S4: million ish? And that's half the population is under 16.
S4: And it's excerpted in newspapers. And there were 2025 newspapers.
S4: And often this is an oral culture. So you'll hang
S4: out in the tavern or the pub, and people will
S4: read aloud extracts from common sense, and then they'll discuss
S4: it and talk about it, maybe ask to repeat the
S4: founding in the on the stage. This is an age
S4: where the popular where the people in the early 19th century,
S4: they demand encores, do that scene again. So I can
S4: imagine they would say, read that passage against the King again,
S4: where you call him the Royal brute, right. Or what
S4: he calls the, um, the, uh, the William the Conqueror,
S4: a French bastard and an armed banditti, you know, is
S4: the ancestor of of your king. This is the guy
S4: you Revere, right? And so it spread both through print
S4: and through sharing in before hearths and fireplaces and in taverns.
S4: And maybe as people are traveling on stages. So those
S4: who did so. It's just it's everywhere. Insofar as something
S4: could be everywhere at the time.
S3: Doctor Richard Samuelson with us talking about common sense as
S3: we walk up to America. 250 was was Paine admired
S3: by the founders? Did they did they like the work
S3: that he was trying to accomplish? Was he. Was he
S3: too much for some. Was he dangerous, unsettling for others?
S4: Well, it depends who you ask. Right. The John Adams
S4: said he has a better hand at tearing down the
S4: building up his theory of government than he does have
S4: the idea of. Essentially, we get together and we create
S4: a new government. He kind of almost has a. It's
S4: a religious ceremony. You take the king, you take the
S4: new law, you immolate it, and that's. You put a
S4: crown on it. The law is king, right? But he does.
S4: He's not much for checks and balances when you get
S4: into his actual political theory. And of course, he tried
S4: to get the French Revolution. His rights of man would
S4: be controversial here. There'd be different opinions about how sound
S4: his theory would be. And so it depends who you ask,
S4: just how much or. But one other thing to look
S4: at in common sense. He makes a radical distinction between
S4: society and government, and he thinks society is. When we
S4: come together naturally to pursue our goods and government has
S4: to exist because of our wickedness. People misbehave. And because
S4: of that, we got to we all got to suffer
S4: and have a government.
S3: Mhm.
S4: And the purpose of government is security, maybe safety and
S4: maybe freedom. But what does the declaration say? Safety and happiness.
S4: Happiness in the sense that is a life well lived,
S4: fully realized. Whereas Paine puts that in society outside of government.
S4: Maybe there's more room in the mainstream American political thought
S4: for the old notion that man is political by nature.
S4: Hence the citizen's engagement in politics is a good. It's
S4: not just a necessary evil, and in Paine's account it
S4: looks more like a necessary evil. So there's some lines
S4: of distinction there, but Paine. Of course, did yeoman service there,
S4: and of course, his great crisis essay right before the
S4: Delaware campaign. These are the times that try men's souls.
S4: He did an invaluable service to the public and moving
S4: public opinion against the King and for independence.
S3: You mentioned this earlier in the conversation, but pain in
S3: common sense is attacking the monarchy itself, and not just
S3: King George. How radical did that idea of attacking not
S3: one person King George, perhaps, but the monarchy, monarchy itself?
S3: How radical was that in 1776?
S4: That was it was a change. It was something they
S4: were working with. What's interesting is British nationality, of course,
S4: is bound up with the King. Britain to be a
S4: British subject. You're born a king soil. You essentially belong
S4: to the king. You can't cease being his subject without
S4: his explicit consent. Hence, signing the declaration was a bold
S4: act of defiance, because it's all the evidence you need
S4: in your treason trial. And so pain is attacking that
S4: whole concept. It's bound up your identity as a Briton.
S4: I love my king. I'm attached to my king. It's
S4: how you're raised. And so he's not just attacking that,
S4: attacking the root of monarchy and he mocks it. He
S4: says it's unbiblical. He says it's absurd and he's attacking.
S4: But it hit because it was time. It was timely.
S4: It wouldn't have hit a year earlier. Maybe the people
S4: were ready to think. They're thinking through this and think,
S4: what happens in, well, spring, early summer of 76. They've
S4: all long been fighting for the rights of Englishmen or
S4: the rights of Britons. The problem is they can no
S4: longer enjoy them so long as they are English or British.
S3: Mhm.
S4: And what I do in the blackboard I write rights
S4: of Englishmen. I cross out the word English, and they
S4: become the rights of men. Right. And so you're moving
S4: the move against monarchy and not just against George the
S4: Third is very much in line with that move. Once,
S4: in order to enjoy the rights of Englishmen, you have
S4: to stop being English. You also have to move against
S4: not just the king, but against monarchy itself. Or at
S4: least that's what they do. And Paine was invaluable that
S4: he hit the right people at the right time, the
S4: right way to make that argument against monarchy.
S3: So many conversations happening in this walk up to July
S3: of 1776, and we transition to another conversation between a
S3: husband and wife in March of 1776, this letter from
S3: Abigail Adams to John Adams, where she says this phrase,
S3: remember the ladies set up this moment for us, Doctor Samuelson.
S3: Where are Abigail Adams and John Adams when this famous
S3: letter exchange happens?
S4: John's in Congress. He's the leading advocate of independence. He's
S4: probably the first man in Congress on. You know, I
S4: don't know how many committees and in charge of most
S4: of them, but incredibly busy. And Abigail doesn't write enough.
S3: But, um.
S4: You know, he shows he begins the letter. It's March 31st, 76. Now,
S4: note this is about two weeks after Boston was evacuated.
S4: March 17th of 76 is when the British were forced
S4: out of Boston by the movement of cannon from captured
S4: Fort Ticonderoga with. Engineering of Henry Knox, who had been
S4: just a bookseller who studied military engineering. They used sledges
S4: in the winter to get these cannon across the state.
S3: Right.
S4: Before I-90, and they mounted them on on Dorchester Heights.
S4: And the British had to bug out, and that was
S4: a big deal. So now things look a little different
S4: than trying to where are they going next? But he's saying,
S4: and Abdul begins by saying, I wish you would ever
S4: write letters to me as half as long as I
S4: write you. And we don't know where the fleet's gone.
S4: But she begins with that. But then she says, I've
S4: sometimes been ready to think. The passion for liberty cannot
S4: be equally strong in the breast of those who have
S4: been accustomed to deprive their fellow creatures of theirs. And
S4: she's talking about Virginia and slavery, so she's thinking more
S4: largely about the implications of liberty. And it's interesting she
S4: turns from there in this letter though we facilitate ourselves
S4: for Boston being free. Well, I've longed to hear that
S4: you declared independency, by which the new Code of laws
S4: by which you will inevitably. You need to create, necessary
S4: to make. I desire you would remember the ladies, and
S4: be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors.
S4: Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of
S4: their husbands. Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could.
S4: So those two parts of the letter are very much connected.
S4: This notion that the. The tyranny of slavery and the
S4: tyranny of men over women in which there is equality. Remember,
S4: this is a world of coverture. Women do not have
S4: a separate identity from their fathers when their children, from
S4: their husbands, when they're married. And of course, there's also
S4: the right of a husband to beat his wife. Abigail's
S4: pushing back against that, and probably to a certain degree,
S4: for the notion that she can hold property herself now
S4: that she's running the farm, say, why can't I legally
S4: manage the property as a reality. And so she's thinking
S4: about what? To whom? How does equality apply? It applies
S4: to women too. And she quotes she says all men
S4: would be tyrants if they could, quoting John Adams, her husband,
S4: back to himself. So women, the wives always do to us, right?
S4: So she's very much thinking, how far do these rights go?
S4: Once you open up the question of liberty? It applies
S4: to new situations. And, you know, as you move from
S4: the rights of Englishmen to the rights of men, what
S4: would truly be a free country? What's it going to
S4: look like as you're thinking about founding a new country
S4: that's no longer simply British?
S3: Mhm. Now, John's response to this is playful and somewhat
S3: dismissive at the same time. How should we? Well, I
S3: guess tell tell our listeners how he responds. And then
S3: how should we read his tone?
S4: He says, you know, he calls her tone saucy. Now,
S4: your saucy letter, right? He says, well, we knew was
S4: we were going along, knew people would rise up and
S4: demand liberty. Right. But now a new tribe has arisen.
S4: The most dangerous of them all. Right. And he says,
S4: you you know very well that you run everything. We're
S4: really you're really in charge. You kind of give us
S4: the illusion of being in power. He plays the henpecked husband, right.
S4: And there's some truth to that. Suppose in their marriage.
S4: But not entirely right. The law allowed it. And she.
S4: He planned. She's being saucy. He knows that. But she's
S4: also being serious. And she's a little frustrated that he
S4: didn't take her more seriously. Mhm. But if you read
S4: John Adams writings for the rest of his life, every
S4: now and then, he'll say, yeah, there's a serious question
S4: here about the rights of men and the rights of women.
S4: In what senses are men and women different? Therefore, law
S4: should be somewhat different. And in what senses are there
S4: they're equal, and therefore the law should be the same,
S4: say perhaps the right to vote. Adams thinks no. He
S4: thinks the family is a natural unit, but he understand
S4: one of his grandchildren just dismisses it and laughs it off. Says, no, no,
S4: this is serious question. We have to engage it. So
S4: on the fly in 76, he says, well, he kind
S4: of dismisses it, but long term, he knows this is
S4: a very serious question to raise as you move towards
S4: independence and towards equality. As we understood and outlined in
S4: the declaration, the question of equality of men and women
S4: as human or equally human adult, that's going to be
S4: raised and that's there. So note both slavery, equality of black, white,
S4: and the question of equality of men and women is
S4: all on the table. In the spring of 1776, those
S4: ideas already logically identified as coming out of the ideas
S4: that are part of the movement towards independence as you
S4: move against monarchy and for the rights of men. This
S4: is man, to use a shorthand in the Genesis one
S4: sense God created. This is, in English at least, male
S4: and female. He created them. God created man. In Genesis two,
S4: there's a dumb man and then Eve woman. So it's
S4: a sense that man is male and female. We're equal
S4: in some senses and different in some other ways. And that,
S4: added John and Abigail. They definitely raised that. And of course,
S4: John is a leading figure in Congress, and Abigail is
S4: pushing him to think about some of the more deeper
S4: implications of this move towards independence. She's a pretty serious
S4: thinker herself.
S3: She is. Is she expressing concerns and questions that that
S3: many women of this time in 1776 are perhaps asking
S3: privately or sharing amongst themselves? Or is this a woman
S3: that is clearly ahead of her time?
S4: Well, a certain number of women are she's friendly with mercy.
S4: Otis Warren, the Warrens, the Adams were close friends until well,
S4: until there's some conflicts about future politics. But not not
S4: that many. It's hard to tell because, um, we don't
S4: have the written records for women as much as do men.
S4: But women, remember, are very involved in the movement because
S4: to the degree that they were responsible for the boycott
S4: or as one joke in class, the girlcott of goods
S4: in the 1760s, they were the ones not buying British goods.
S4: When we stopped from. In order to protest the Stamp
S4: Act or the, um, the entire blocks or the, uh,
S4: the Townshend acts. And so they were involved in the movement.
S4: They're seeing themselves get involved in politics. But one thing
S4: to keep in mind is throughout history, when men go
S4: to war, women assumed duties on the home front. And
S4: some don't like the change when they get back. But
S4: in the American revolutionary era, you have the idea of equality,
S4: which gives you an argument for why you should keep
S4: some of the changes that have been made as opposed
S4: to simply, well, we temporary war happened. Yes, we have
S4: to step up, but we can go back to the
S4: way things used to be. And so that is one
S4: of the key elements of the story of the American Revolution.
S4: The question not of And so for what? To what degree?
S4: How does the principle of the equality of men, equality
S4: of humans apply in your new law? And remember, John
S4: Adams had written partly in Response to pain and others
S4: as pamphlet Thoughts on Government coming out in April of 76.
S4: How should we create a new government for a state,
S4: colony or state and not officially states yet? And he
S4: says when he checks and balances, we need separation of power.
S4: And he says we are living in a time when
S4: the greatest lawgivers of antiquity wish to have lived. So
S4: he's thinking about, we're making a whole regime like Lycurgus
S4: and Solon of the ancient world.
S3: Mhm.
S4: And so Abigail's pushing him, you know, think about this
S4: more deeply, John.
S3: Doctor Richard Samuelson talking with us as we walk up
S3: to America. 250 common sense. And remember the ladies. He
S3: is associate professor of government at Hillsdale in DC. And
S3: the next time we talk, we'll discuss the May 15th
S3: Revolution and the Lee resolution as we inch closer to
S3: July 4th. Doctor Samuelson, thanks so much for joining us
S3: here on the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.
S4: Thank you very much. It's been great to be here.
S3: That will wrap up this edition of the Radio Free
S3: Hillsdale Hour. Our thanks to Heather MacDonald, author of When
S3: Race Trumps Merit, and Doctor Richard Samuelson from Hillsdale in DC. Remember,
S3: you can hear new episodes every week on this station.
S3: You also can find extended versions of some of our interviews,
S3: like with Heather MacDonald, or listen any time to the podcast.
S3: Find it@podcast.hillsdale.edu or wherever you get your audio. Until next week,
S3: I'm Scott Bertrand, and this has been the radio free
S3: Hillsdale Hour.