[BLANK_AUDIO] >> Hello, I'm Lucas Swineford, the executive director of the Yale University Office of Online Education and Digital Dissemination. I'm part of the behind the scenes team working with professor Amar to bring his constitutional law course to students around the world, online. This course follows a consistent structure, organized by chapters in Professor Amar's two books. As the professor outlined in his course introduction, he will deliver two lecture segments for each chapter, then include a third, more interactive segment for each chapter. We've decided that this third segment won't follow just one path. We'll experiment with different approaches. Some of the segments will be live video discussions scheduled while the course is actually in session online. Others may be specific prompts to enter a discussion forum. And others yet, will be conversations between professor Amar, and a guest. Now that guest might be a current Yale undergraduate, a professional colleague of professor Amar, or simply a curious life long learner who brings a specific domain perspective outside of the law or legal studies. Now you can add me to this final camp. One of the exciting aspects of this third segment is that it will be experimental and evolving. We look forward to hearing from you what works best as the course progresses. For our first chapter though, I have the opportunity to ask Professor Amar a few followup questions from his first lecture. Professor Amar, thanks for this opportunity and for having me on segment one if you will. >> Thank you. >> Now, as someone immersed in the world of digital communications and technology, you know, I think a great deal about how news and events travel throughout the world instantly through social networks and other forms of technology. Now, in your first lecture you mentioned how this was a real pivot point in the history of the world. But now, obviously that effect could not have been felt immediately, so what was the process for the rest of the world when this happened? How did news and impact of The Constitution and this decision reverberate around the world? How long did it take and what did that process look like? >> Well eventually it will take centuries. It's really in the 20th century that the the American vision of, of democracy really turns the corner in world history. And, and, Western Europe, and Eastern Europe, and now, huge parts of, of Asia and even Africa are, are coming on board, South America, Central America. So it, it, it does take a long time, but from the beginning, the framers dream great dreams. Let's take the Declaration of Independence. It talks about. Who's its audience? It says, let facts be submitted to a candid world. We're going to try to make our case for the rightness of our revolt our, our revolution, our declaring of independence. We're going to try to make that case, not just for ourselves and our fellow Americans, but we want to appeal to the, enlightened subjects of the world. The philosophs in France, and, and, the believers in the enlightenment. So, let facts be submitted to a candid world, says Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of, of independence. In the Federalist Papers, oh, let me back up. when, George Washington has an army under his command, the Continental Army, the painter, Benjamin West, is asked, well, what will happen if the war ends? And and he's asked that by King George III of England. And, and West says, well they say he's going to disband the army and go back to his farm and George III is reputed to have replied, if he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world. because, because, before that, strongmen military figures had basically used their armies to make themselves kings, emperors, tzars. Julius Caesar Oliver Cromwell, Darius Darius in, in, in, and in American English, Xerxes. Napoleon's going to shortly thereafter take, because he's got an army, he's going to take a crown and put it on his own head and, and proclaim himself Emperor. And Washington does not do that and George III himself, maybe the most powerful monarch in the world says, if Washington does that, boy that's going to be something. So, so the world is watching. This is even before The Constitution and when The Constitution comes along, let me read to you the language of the Federalist number one. These are a series of, of newspaper op-eds, published by the supporters of The Constitution anonymously. They're written by John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison. This is the opening paragraph of the Federalist number one. Second sentence. It says, well okay, we're now deliberating your call to deliberate on The Constitution for the United States of America. The subject speaks its own importance. And then, and then, then, then, the next sentence. It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force. We, these people in the United States this, on the periphery of the civilized world, just a few million people way away from the great cities and, and, and civilized centers, this audacity. We are going to, it's going to be our example that will decide whether democracy can really be made to work. Let me read you one other framer. This is, I think I may have made reference to this in one of my early lectures. James Wilson, a man who comes over from Scotland, on July 4, 1788, The Constitution's been ratified by ten states, enough for it to go into effect formally. And thousands of people are gathering in Philadelphia to celebrate this, and here's what he says. The spectacle which we are assembled to celebrate is the most dignified one that's yet appeared on our globe. And he says, you've heard of Sparta, of Rome, of Athens, you know, but did they in all did they ever furnish to the world, an exhibition similar to that to which we now contemplate. So, these guys, they're so audacious. They, even if the world isn't following every single move in real time with rapt attention, the framers of, of, or the architects of the American Revolution and then later the framers of The Constitution, are under the impression, maybe they're delusional, that what they do will matter for all time and for the entire planet. That they're going to either you know, approve or disprove the fundamental reality the workability of, of democratic self governance. Now as a practical matter, here's what happens immediately. So it takes time for any news to disseminate. You know, weeks or months to cross the Atlantic in, in ships. We don't have the internet or even telegraph or telephone. Okay, but news does disseminate. The French stage a revolution shortly after the American Constitution. It's, it's lead in part by people like Lafayette, who have spent time in America. It tries to do some very democratic things. I think it, it fails pretty quickly, and, and we result and the result is an absolutist monarch Napoleon, who, who, it, has reigns in an authoritarian way. So that project fails, but it's inspired in some ways, by the American experience. There are democratic reforms in the 1840s in Europe and, and they largely collapse in 1848. As late as the Civil War, Lincoln is basically saying, listen, if we can't get our acts together here in the United States, then the project of democratic self-governance will perhaps be seen as delusional What does Lincoln say? You know, we are the last best hope of Earth. It is up to us here in America to prove the government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth. So, you know, as late as the 1860s, the Civil War, the success of the American project is still in the balance. Only when American project, I think, conclusively succeeds with the Civil War does it become pretty clear that democracy is here to stay, here to stay on a big scale. And then, in the 20th century you've got World War I, you know, which it claims to be a war to make the world safe for democracy. World War II, in which the democratic powers basically prevail against the authoritarian powers. And that's partly because this project of we the people of the United States, succeeds in its military ambitions and its democratic ambitions. So it takes a long time, but, but they believe that the world is watching from day one. Maybe they're a little delusional on that. They have a, too much of a sense of their own importance. On the other hand, it turns out they were right about all that. >> I have to say that I love the fact that implied in that question, is how citizens of the world are using personal technology to access and share information. And the first thing you did was pull up some information on your smart phone. >> Oh, exactly. >> But that's fantastic, and we did not plan that. >> No. >> That's excellent. so, there was something else you mentioned in here. Now of course, in today's political climate, we've almost gotten conditioned to and used to this idea of the comeback kid. That politicians can make what we think, maybe at the time, are huge mistakes, and somehow come back from that. But there are still some, some things, some events that go on, even in contemporary society, that when a politician makes a misstep, your immediate thought is, well that's a career ender. And you mentioned one that seemed that way to me. James Monroe, I believe, opposed the Constitution, one of a number of politicians who did. He then went on to become president. How did that happen? Thinking through the lens of today, I cannot see you being on the wrong side of history, such a big decision, and coming back. How did that happen? >> So, there are some things from which some huge political blunders from which no comeback is possible. And in 1776, when America declares independence, basically you either are on the right side of history or not. And, if you oppose The Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution in the mid-1770s, basically you're cast off the island. You're not, you're never heard of again, politically. No one who opposes independence in 1776 who doesn't sort of quickly change his mind, there are a couple people who change their mind in 1777, 1788, while, while the, the war still hung in the balance. But no one who was a diehard loyalist, a supporter of George III, ever goes on to be an important political figure in independent America. So that one, we're in a war. This is life or death. You're either with us or against us, and, and if your against us, then, you know, screw you, you know. You're, you're, you know, there's no redemption from that. No second chance. That's 1776. And what's so interesting is that's not 1787, 88. There are people who fiercely oppose the Constitution. Not just James Monroe, becomes president, Elbridge Gerry who becomes vice president, George Clinton, who becomes vice president, Samuel Chase, who is the supreme court justice. so, how do these people, they oppose The Constitution, they're anti-federalists, how do they make a comeback? Here's my claim. In 1788, it's a time of peace, not war. We can have a, a, a conversation in which maybe we might disagree, but there's more mutual respect. This is not quite life or death. And I'm going to read actually, again from, I read you again from the opening paragraph of Federalist One. That was written by Alexander Hamilton. I'm now going to read you language from the Federalist Two, which is written by John Jay. So these are the opening, and there are 85 of these op-eds overall. These are the opening passages of, of, of, of these op-eds. And here's what, what John Jay says. He says, basically Providence has been pleased, God has been pleased, to give this one connected country to one united people. A people descended from the same ancestors. Not quite true, you see, there are actually, you know, people from many different countries here in the United States. Speaking the same language, that's not quite true. A third of Pennsylvanians speak German as their first language. Professing the same religion? Well not quite. We've got Catholics and Protestants and among the Protestants, Anglicans and Congregationalists and Baptists and Quakers. And you know, so attached to the same principles of government? Yes. Very similar in their manners and customs? Well, to some extent, slavery is a very different custom in different parts of the country. Here's the key. And who by their joint councils arms and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobley established their general liberty and independence. We fought together. That's what has made us united. And yes, we might disagree. Some are us are for the Constitution, some of us are against it, but we are all Americans because we all fought together. The National Security idea, that's what formed this. James Monroe fought in the American Revolution right with George Washington, and so that's what gives him credibility. Here's the next sentence from, from, from, Jay, or the next sentence and a half. He, he refers to Americans as a band of brethren. Now where's he getting that idea from? You know, from Shakespeare, Henry V. We few, we happy few, we band of brothers, for he that sheds his blood today with me, shall be my brother. Be he ne're so vile, this day shall gentle his condition. And gentlemen in England, now abed shall think themselves accursed they were not here, and, and, hold their manhoods cheap, while any speaks that fought with us upon Saint Christmas day. So, if you fight with me, you know, on my side, in a war of a life and death war of a national liberation independence, you're my brother. James Monroe is a loyal American. He proves that in, on the battlefields of the American Revolution. So 1776, listen, you're either on our side or the Brits and, and if you're on their side then no, you're never going to be a political leader. >> That's it. >> But if you're on the, the right side of the American Revolution, it's okay to be on the wrong side, so to speak, of the Constitution because we're all in this together. And by the way, you know, maybe you were right about some things. Maybe that Constitution wasn't perfect. Maybe we do need a Bill of Rights. And so very quickly the Federalists are reaching out to the James Monroes of the world, the, the Elbridge Gerrys, the George Masons, the George Clinton's to try bring them in. And that, we call that process The Bill of Rights. So, I think we see in that the importance of national security and, and loyalty. James Monroe becomes presidential because he fights with George Washington even though he opposed Washington's Constitution. >> So I would change the perspective a bit from an individual to a, to a group. And I really liked your description of this idea of the world's largest corporate merger, of bringing all the states together. And there were two states that you mentioned in particular, Rhode Island and North Carolina, that were not in the corporate merger at first. So can you talk a little about that process? How did did they change their minds? Were there some specific events or people who stood up and really lead them to join, join the merger if you will? >> It's the perfect segue from what we just spoke about. The biggest objections of the anti-federalists are twofold. One, Congress is too small, to be really trustworthy and, and, and representative. And two, there's no Bill of Rights. So what does the first Congress do immediately? They basically propose a series of amendments. Actually one of the amendments is about congressional size. It doesn't get ratified, but it promises a bigger congress, and even without that amendment, Congress very shortly says, oh we're going to have a census and as soon as we have a census, we will have a bigger House of Representatives. So, check, you, you, you had, you had that criticism. That's valid. We're addressing that. You said in North Carolina, you said in Rhode Island, you wanted a Bill of Rights. And by the way, a lot of, of people in the States that said, yes, the dissenters, the, the anti-federalists, the James Monroes of the world, he's from Virginia. Virgina said yes, but there are a lot of people like James Monroe in Virginia who said, where are the Bill of Rights? So what does the first Congress do? It proposes a bill of rights and then it's giving the skeptics, the critics, in Rhode Island and North Carolina, but also in other states. the, the James Monroes of the world is, is letting them save face. Okay, you oppose this constitution. You made some criticisms. We've heard you. We've tried to address those criticisms. Now, this is your constitution too. You are kind of founding fathers with us. You are the authors of our first set of revisions. So now come join us. We, we heard what you said. We were, kind of, we voted yes, you voted no, but you know, we were closer, than that might indicate because even though we voted yes, we heard you that the version isn't perfect. We heard that you wanted a bill of rights. We heard you wanted a bigger house of representatives, and we're moving in that direction. Now you know, Peter, we're reaching out our hand. Why don't you take it? And this is brilliant. This brings the James Monroes, you know, back onto the island. and, and, and Rhode Island and North Carolina have now saved face. They can say, okay, and even before the Bill of Rights is ratified, it's been proposed by Congress. It's for out in the states and Rhode Island and North Carolina can say okay, that's enough of a signal that, that this system is not going to be tyrannical. It's going to be sort of open to, to our criticisms. They heard us. >> Seems there. >> We won. >> Seems like there are lessons in working together that we can apply, even today. >> Abs, absolutely. The, the way in which, the winners have to win, and it's simple majority rule in, in the individual states. So majorities have to rule, and ultimately, minorities have to acquiesce, otherwise. But, minorities won't acquiesce if they don't feel that they've been heard they've been listened to. So I think there are some interesting lessons for us today. >> Absolutely. Well Professor Amar, thank you so much. I feel like we can go on for quite some time, but we are going to stop here and allow the students to move onto the next section. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. [MUSIC]
