you are watching american history tv, all >> cato institute senior fellow tom palmer explores how the ideas of freedom law and liberty have changed throughout history. from 2100 bc through the american revolution. realizinguthor of freedom: libertarian theory, history, and practice. this hour and 15 minute long talk as part of an educational symposium on history and philosophy posted by the cato institute, recorded in early august in san diego. . now i have the very enjoyable task of setting up the stage for what we will be dealing with later which is mainly american history but not exclusively. through to take us

about 4500 years of his three -- history and about 45 minutes. -- in about 45 minutes. let me start with philosophies of history which i have mentioned, which i do consider bunk, and could in the most popular one which is presentism. everything leads up to the present and that's the only thing we should be interested in. but i do think nonetheless are things we can say about history and liberty. and the first looking at those conditions that are propitious liberty isrgence of the importance of some background of a higher law. the law isn't merely an expression of human wealth. and the philosopher and thinker leo strauss with whom i'm not generally in much sympathy about his substantive views, he

captured it very neatly. you can understand this with two cities. jerusalem and athens. withalem we associate revealed religion and there is the story, the book of exodus, about the golden calf. it's a very powerful story and moses has led the a lot of their straight -- out of their slavery in egypt. they wander in the desert and he goes up to the mountain and has some kind of interaction with god that transcends normal human understanding. i think about it in contemporary terms. he goes to burning bush.com and downloads the law. god.s an interaction with when he's up there, down below the people say where is this moses who let us out of the land of egypt? what has become of him? n, and they say

make us gods's to go before us like all the other nation. he says bring me your gold in your jewelry. they melt it and they make of it a golden calf. they danced before it and they warship it and they sacrificed before it and they say these are your gods who brought you up out of the land of egypt. godwhile on the mountain, says to moses, this is a stiffnecked people. these are the ones who are considered the chosen people. they are stiffnecked. he says let me therefore let my wrath burn hot against them that -- i totally destroy them will totally destroy them, but of you i will make a great nation with many children. but mosys does something that is unique and that makes it in some

sense a uniquely jewish story. he does something unexpected. he argues with god. he has an argument with god and says the lord repented of his decision. but there's a very important message. god is not a thing in the world. a golden calf. god is somehow transcendent. that's interesting theologically. but it also has a great significance politically. because what is it that great rulers always claim? they are gods. the pharaohs of egypt were gods. divinitydenied his own and he did not come to a good end. claim to bers divine. but there is something wrong about that in the tradition that drives -- derives from this hebrew innovation. that there is some higher law that the religious expression. when we think about athens we

can think about its expression and philosophy. philosophy trying to figure things out. understand the world. when you think about aristotle for example, one of the great philosophers, he is interested in everything. where bugs come from. how human beings walk. locomotion generally. the motions of heavenly bodies. everything. he wanted to understand how it works. and what he was interested in was the general phenomenon, to rationalize the appearances. to reduce them to something that can be understood. that's what philosophy is about. aristotle gives us some hints when he talks about nature and the foundation that later comes foundation that later comes

to be known as the natural law tradition. many different variants. he talks about human nature. and what it is to be a human being. thee a human being is to be animal the talks. often translated as the rational animal. that's a very bad translation. rationality in contemporary language means calculating. it doesn't mean that. he's the animal who can talk. who has logos. is -- to be pale or dark is accidental. whether you are pale skinned or dark skinned. he even makes a comment that is quite striking for a great. because we know the greeks divided the world into two categories. there are greeks and barbarians. barbarians are the people who when you go talk to them they say, how are you, what's up. how are you doing. they just say barbarbarb

arbarbar. they can't talk. germanvic word for translates as mute. they can't talk. and the greeks thought that was very important, this distinction between greeks and barbarians. hehe says fire doesn't burn one way in greece and another way in persia. there's fire. there's not greek fire and persian fire. with the suggestion perhaps that carries over to human nature as well. there's not greek nature and barbarian nature but human nature and we can understand it systematically. the second point is an appreciation that law can be discovered and not merely made. and that's really significant and important. those who believe that law is made typically believe that the sovereign is above the law. one important figure in this

tradition is king james the who becomes the first king of the stewart line after the tutor line is extinguished in england. king james the sixth of scotland became kim james -- king james the first amendment. that doesn't make him the seventh. it turns out king ships cannot be added up. he wrote a book in 1598 called the true law of monarchies. he says as the king creates the law so he is above the law. because if he were to create a law that were inconvenient for him he can make a new one. so the king is always above the law. this philosophy persists to this day. the idea that the president or the state or the congress or the parliament or somebody is above the law. because they make the law and you can see the logic of that. the law wouldn't apply to me if i have the power of unmaking it. make a new one. but there's another tradition.

and not tradition is the idea of a higher law that applies to everyone, that no one is exempt from it. we can think about it in the sense of the laws of physics which are analogous. we think that for example -- sir isaac newton isaac noon discovered the force that the twoodies bodies attract each other with a force that is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. and that will generate the elliptical orbits that have been carefully sketched out by tycho brahe and kepler. but it would not follow that he was exempt from them. that if he was shot into space he would have some really interesting orbit around the earth. different from other things. you can discover the law and still be subject to it. there's a tradition of law as discovered. not only philosophically but

also in the common-law traditions, in the old roman law tradition. the jurists discovered the law. they didn't just invented or impose it. and if law can be discovered as well as made, the discoverer may very well be subject to it. and that's a very important part of the liberal tradition. that no one is above the law but that the law is supreme. the question of liberty is how to limit power. to go through some of the important episodes of discovering limits on power. i'm going to skip very lightly over the surface. lawant to bring power under or substantive government by law for mere power and violence. and i'm going to start the story in ancient samaria and go on to judaica and then europe and beyond. oldestt with one of the

texts available to us, the epic of gilgamesh. picture thisom the is the great king gilgamesh. you can see what his holding in his hands. these are not house cats. these are lions. this is a propaganda poster to show how powerful he is. and as it says in the epic, powerful superb knowledgeable and expert gilgamesh would not leave the young girls alone. the daughters, warriors come the brides of youngman. this is not unheard of among holders of executive authority. this is the earliest statement of the me too movement. and the gods often heard their complaints. there was a principal you have heard about in popular culture that the king had the right on the wedding night to sleep with the young bride. and since everyone here is an adult we can be quite frank.

he did not sleep with them. he didn't say, i'm so sleepy. let's sleep together. he raped these young women. this is rape. it's an exertion of manly power over them. humiliation of the whole society. below him. the people don't like this as you can imagine. and they prayed to the gods and one of the gods creates an equal match for gilgamesh. gathers some clay and grass out in the field and creates this man who goes to the city and he challenges gilgamesh. at the father-in-law's door. and he would not allow him to enter. fightecause -- -- they because lots of other things. it's a very important story. me isat's important for

this is the first story of the idea of checks and balances. but if you are subject to some power you need another power to counter it. -- that if you are subject to some power you need another power to counter it. to take the kind of libertarian interpretation at the end, after dies,dventures and he gilgamesh comes back to the city and the walls have grown taller and the city richard in the absence -- richer in the absence of the king. and i suspect there is something interesting going on there. i don't want to overly interpret this text. you have the first story of checks and balances. king subject to arbitrary power is unbearable. and you need some power to counter it. we can move forward a bit in the and look at the

first expression of the idea, the written expression of liberty. in any language. inscriptionform discovered by french archaeologists. this is a very interesting word. it is used in this description -- whoreforms of established property rights for everyone, security of property, eliminated monopolies and made the markets free. and this word is very interesting. it comes, i went to the department of sumerology. i had a tattoo made of this. i didn't want to accidentally tattoo ancient sumerian for kick me or something like that. i went to the department in budapest and i asked them, i want to make sure this means liberty. they said, yes. absolutely.

a very modernn sense we would understand. individual freedom. it's a compound meaning return to the mother. speculationr best but we don't know is because it was a matrilineal society, if you are enslaved you left your family. and to become free you could return to your family. because it was matrilineal unlike most contemporary , iteties are patrilineal meant to return to the mother. they said this is speculation. in the context it clearly means individual liberty. -- is the first libertarian reformer of which we have written evidence. we can move forward again in the same general region not far away. and the people of israel in the first book. were the sons come to him -- the

people come to samuel and say your sons do not walk in your ways. he was a judge. and his sons were corrupt. they say, give us a king like all the other nations. prays toaised -- god. god says to them the ways of the king who will rule over them. he will take your sons and appoint them for himself or his chariots. he goes on and on. he shall take the 10th of your produce. and you shall be his slaves. 10%. and you will cry out in that day but the lord god will not hear you because of the kick you have chosen. very powerful warning about monarchy and about power. and this is quoted over and over for thousands of years and indeed it forms a very important part of thomas payne's book, common sense.

which called on the american colonists for independence from britain. this is a very powerful passage. . warning about power and the description of daughters also. he will take them to be perfumers, cooks, maids, white house interns. it's a very clear warning about power. we can skip forward a bit more. highlight.t of the the discussion of liberty in greek civilization. the city of athens in particular reaches a very high level of personal freedom and wealth through trade. look at the greek coastline. you can see why people go to the sea increase -- in greece. because there are so many inlets and the soil is not that great for growing things. you have to engage in trade area -- in trade. athens achieves a high degree of personal freedom including a

high degree of liberty and independence for women compared to other societies. i don't want to overly romantic ties it. the bulk of the population were slaves. there's no question about it. among those who were free they had a much higher degree of personal freedom and independence than in other civilizations of the time. twice by theaded persians. the stories are really quite powerful. we have a great deal of written evidence from the period. and twice they defeat them. had submittedes to the persians. in the persians offered reasonable terms in the context of the time. if you submit, there will be some very minor taxes. easy to understand. we will put a military garrison in your city. and you're cool. everything's ok.

you get to be part of the persian empire. , we willu don't utterly destroy you. we will tear down your gods and destroy your city and your civic identity. person wepe every want to. we will kill the adult males or send them to die as slaves in the mines. then your sons and daughters will be enslaved as sex slaves, eunuchs for the persian elite. and yet the greeks of the mainland thought. the question that comes out after these invasions is why? what were they fighting for? there's a great efflorescence of great civilization -- greek civilization culture of what is culture, what is law. what islamabad, what does it mean?

about, what does it mean? there's also great conflict between two of these important cities, sparta and athens. most philosophers throughout history have favored the spartans including athenian philosophers like socrates and plato. anti-athenian and very important ways. it's always irritating when i run into very conservative intellectual is to say the greeks believed accent why. i say really, which ones? how many? what they always mean is plato leaves that. that's all they need. and plato was one guy. one especially brilliant person. and a great philosopher. but one person. he's always what the greeks believe. and he was very alienated his society.

so it's a bit like in 3000 years someone says we have found these movies of michael moore. this is what the americans believed. someone who is quite alienated from his society. but i don't want to make it any other comparisons between plato and michael moore. these two cities go to war with their leagues. it's a complex interesting story. war thereoponnesian is a powerful statement. the funeral oration of pericles who was the demagogue in athens and he contrasts the spartans with the athenians. it's a clear statement of freedom. we do not deport people. this is quite relevant in the united states. our city is open to the world. we do not tell people to shut up. we believe in free and honest debate.

we are not afraid to discuss things before we make the decisions. and every one of arsonist is able to show himself the rightful lord and owner of his own life. it's a very powerful statement of freedom. freedom that we can understand today. , wen i want to caution don't want to overly romanticized. this is not a free society as we would want it today. but by the standards of the day very much so. in contrast to sparta which was essentially a slave society. the spartans rolled over the helots who were the most degraded slaves of the time. tell a tree, the term is the worst kind of slavery. rulers of the virtually declared war on the helots every year. they were at war with them. they were enemies and to be enslaved and exploded in every

possible way. andrew colson, late colleague at ono wrote a wonderful book education. we should think about their contributions to human civilization and weigh them from the athenians. tragedy, comedy, poetry, astronomy, arithmetic, geometry architecture, metaphysics. add some more. spartans we get the names of a lot of american high school football teams. they were warriors. that was what they did to their contribution was war. and that's why most philosophers like them. they were very orderly. and not disorderly like the commercial athenians. who more or less did what they wanted and didn't have a state educational system. it was all private unlike the spartans. move forward to rome.

i will just say a of quick things about rome. one could talk for many years about it. is importantublic for lots of reasons. one of them is the roman constitution. there's a very complex body of offices and principles and laws that in effect make it difficult for any person to establish absolute and arbitrary power. othernsuls who check each elected every year. the tribunes of the people who may not be physically touched or imputed to anyone from the consular class. offices andfferent different ways of electing them that came to have a very profound and powerful influence on the idea of limiting power. that republic is destroyed. and the suicide of cato the

younger, the last free and independent men in rome is the best way to date the actual end of the republic in 46 bc. institutehom the cato is very indirectly named, he was a hero of republican liberty. cato in london was a huge hit. it was george washington's favorite play. johnhomas gordon and trencher, two independent journalists in london assigned their essays in the newspapers cato after the cato of the play. and then the american founders all read cato's letters. and when you see them saying as cato has shown, they are referring to his letters and the cato institute is named for that. suicide to avoid being pardoned by caesar. because he knew caesar would do that and therefore co-opt him

into the regime and he would not allow that to happen. and he dies the last independent men in rome. now the roman empire in the west continues on for quite some time and achieves even new heights of glory. but it also collapses. roman legions are withdrawn. it very complex story that contemporaries -- contemporary historians are still hashing out. what led to the fall of rome. was there a fall of rushing and what led to it. book that wonderful came out a year ago that i highly recommend. he argues that rome did in fact all -- fall. the last roman is booted out of rome by one of his german generals. but there was a roman empire in

the east. typically called the byzantine empire. but no one who lived there called it that. they lived in the roman empire. you would ask them in a poll, where do they live. the roman empire. disappears.est, it you get the emergence of new forms of social order to deal especially with incursions of tribes from the east, the north and the south. so feudalism is established as a decentralized military defense. and it created new kinds of property relations along the way. it was contractual and voluntary initially. a great warlord would say i would give to you this land to farm on condition when i call on

you will bring three armed men with horses and weapons. because there are no more roman legions and when they get rated they have to have a military defense system. creates new forms of property. it becomes hereditary over time in a process of negotiation with those lords who granted it. those lords who granted it. initially it was not. once you died it came back through this was very inefficient. people would use it up for they would die. they wanted to leave it to their children. sothey wanted to leave it to thr children. so over time it becomes hereditary. over more time it becomes oppressive again. it's a foundation of the kind of property relationship. at about the same time, a new form of governance emerges. for the catholic as we now call it a church. it was just called the christian church at the time. this brings together people who

are not related. unrelated persons who take vows of obedience and poverty and chastity to engage in complex economic endeavors. that is very important. socialeate new kinds of relations based on agreements. the modern corporation and association is rooted in the interim people are not members of the same families and we don't have those kinds of loyalty. get together and say how are we going to organize things. they have bylaws and rules to govern themselves. abbots.ct their and similarly for the convents. this is extremely important and it spreads all throughout europe. one of the things that happens is the church becomes very wealthy. because these hard-working monks are making beer and wine which is really important. not only for the reason that comes to your minds of so the only -- sociologist.

it does that. but also it's the only liquid you can drink without getting sick. the alcohol kills all the bugs. so you can have now urban agglomerations again of people coming together drinking water because you would pour wine or beer into your water and the alcohol kills all the scary bugs. and everyone is tipsy a little bit all the time. but they don't die and this is very important. they don't die. so. and wine are very important for civilization in lots of ways. when you don't have clean drinking water it sterilizes it for you. but they are creating lots and lots of wealth. and this wealth attracts people who want to take it. and it also can be endangered by violence. this is the contemporary abbey that's been revealed -- rebuild. so the peace of god movement.

the church organizes people to swear not to fight. they send out priests and bishops and they take oaths publicly. these are really robust social agreements. they get everyone together and say look, god says we shouldn't fight and we should love each other. so let's all agree that on sunday's we won't fight. anyone who wants to fight on sunday, why don't you go stand over there. we would like to know who you are. of course that means they're ostracized. this creates a real social contract in the most robust ends of the term. we all agree to it because we see everyone else's agreeing to it. and this leads to a general diminution of violence. violence declines. random violence. this has been documented very well in steven pinker's book, the better angels of our nature, which i very highly recommend also. generalized reduction

in violence based on social agreement. not just fear. but social agreement as well. ok. notn't hit you if you agree to hit me. that seems like a good deal to most people so they agree to it. the church is undergoing a great reformation. these are many things happening about the same time. it's hard to say which one is primary. historians -- there are many causes. complex facts have complex causes. these things are interacting with each other in various ways. this is one of the most important that distinguishes western europe from all of the other political systems of the eurasian landmass. intense 23 a german monk becomes pope. gregory the seventh. and he initiates what is now .alled a gregorian reformation there are many reformations of the church.

1075 the famous dictates of the pope. very complex document. it's not clear what it is. it's a list of claims. and they are very powerful. but the roman bishop alone is to be called universal. that he is the one whose feet are to be kissed by all princes. has the power to absolve subjects of their loyalty to unjust rulers. so very powerful claim for political and legal authority based on the spiritual authority. remember that the reformation of the roman empire had taken part in a very partial bishopthe year 800 and of rome had been kicked out of room by the local people. friended on a very dear

who was quite loyal to him. in man named corollas madness which is a very noble sounding name. it's just latin for big charles. it's like big tony or something. he's a warlord but we know him as charlemagne. madness manyrollas times for a thousand years, it will sound like charlemagne. and he comes to his rescue with an army. a frankish army. and in exchange the pope offers him a small token of his gratitude which is he makes him emperor of the world. lodgeurns to his hunting in the capital of the empire at that time with the population smaller than the rancho bernardo inn. that begins the foundation of what later is transformed in various stages into the holy roman and are german nation to destination.

-- the german nation. his successor claim to have the power to appoint bishops in germany. this pope says, that's my responsibility because they are of the church. this sets a great conflict between them called the investiture conflict. thehas the right to a point land and their keys of authority. the german emperor henry the fourth of saxony says, that's my job and i represent god on earth. this pope says, you are wrong. and youe a great debate might think, who's going to win that? the german emperor who has castles and nights and infantry or the pope with belgian monks and nuns on his side? emperorturns out the goes to beg forgiveness of the

pope and readmission into the church. story becauseplex there happens to be a norman army camped nearby. they were hiking in europe at the time. and the pope had called in the his predecessor's the norman claim to the english throne and they kept lists of who owed what. the normans supported them militarily. but what was important was the establishment that power was not a full space filled by the power of one agents. but it has a crack in it. there's the power of the church and the power of what later is to be called the state. the royal or kingly power. and you can be subject to both. and that means if one is oppressive to you you go to the other. and if that one is oppressing you, go to the former. the consequence of this is competition. competition to provide governance.

and from this crack in the plenum of power other cracks the emerge. so important for european history because europe becomes one of the most decentralized and legally complex areas of the entire eurasian landmass. jurisdictions and multiple systems of law that overlap each other. this is very powerful and important. competition rather than just a unitary power giver. emerges isthose that the rediscovery of the roman law which have been drawn up in the year 530 on the request of the emperor justin in of his great lawyer cervone and. you writehy don't down what has happened the last thousand years of roman law. and he codifies it. it's an astonishing compliment. it creates what is called a codex. the law was written on scroll

the four legal decisions and your stick opinions. they're very hard to look up things on scrolls. and the codex has leaves made skin ofellum, animal wood with wax. not highly recommended in hot climates, by the way. it means you can leave through it. we get that word from it. and that allows you to look up what do i do in this case or that case. all these legal principles. what do i do in such and such a case. and there are two principles in it that are established. that become the slogans of two great parties in europe. law was of the roman this great law of the roman empire and it is rediscovered and they begin to teach it as the law. what touches almost be approved of by all. which is actually taken out of context from a chapter on say ifations which is to

you have an orphan and there are two guardians of a property you have to have both guardians agree to what will happen to the property. this was taken out of context and becomes a political print book. and this reverberates throughout the ages. and people inscribed it on their battle shields. it has many formulations. redress before supply. and no taxation without representation. which is effectively drawn from this. the other one you can guess who likes this one. what pleases the prince is the force of law. this is actually taken from the introduction to the introductory text on the teaching of law. not from part of the classical roman law. like thats and kings one. and the people who believe in decentralization and consent and liberty like the first one. and the lines are drawn from

this principle. arrangementstional is the growth of the independent communes from which we get civil society. this is a gap of medieval cologne originally and romans the but the romans abandoned it. somes an archbishop and cows. and merchants came to this area and began to set up tables to sell things. more merchants, or customers. more customers, more merchants. they built a palisades. it's very interesting to go to the archaeological excavations in cologne. there, one ofseum the best museums of roman germanic relations. and out of this they build a wall and they found really a new city of cologne. and build a wall around them. which isprinciple

happening all across europe, city air makes you free. this powerful motto after a year and a day. you run away from your feudal lord, you get into us. you are there for a year and a day could you go from one or books to another. and at the end of a year and a day you are a free person. unsolved of any obligations you had before to your feudal master. that is a very powerful message and by the way, those of you who know recent european history -- what did the national socialist at on the death camp auschwitz? at auschwitz? work will set you free. it's important to understand that the national socialists were masters of symbolic humiliation. exultation of themselves and humiliation of others. forcedwhen the jews were to march over the broken

headstones of the vandalized jewish cemeteries, they destroyed all of them except one which was in prague. they kept it as a museum. they destroyed all of the jewish cemeteries and use them as paving stones and forced people slogan in under this which mocked them. it was mocking them. work will set you free. not city air. this is powerful reverberations in european culture. he became a member of the commune by taking a public oath. they would gather together all the citizens and hold hands and publicly of room to each other that they would come to the defense of the city. they would defend each other and they would not engage in acts of violence. cities were places of peace. government was provided by agreement among voluntarygoverny agreement among voluntary groups. the weavers and the carpenters

and bakers and so on. associations of guild. they were fundamentally men of peace. this is very important to them. you want to be violent, go live outside the city. the most important punishment in most cases was not corporeal. if you did a bad thing and you were violent they would say, go live outside. people.th the violent here we are peaceful. they didn't burn you alive. they said just get out. we are peaceful here. great field ofhe the cato university in this tradition. the communes were typically governed by the associations of merchants and craftsmen. you can go to the city of london and guildhall. the 12 great livery companies. there are 110 of them still. the city of london is a medieval corporation. it predates london. it protects parliament.

and is still governed in this associational fashion. at the same time, all throughout but alson cities blundered and the low countries, the huns the article he begins to form. associations of cities. in the cities are associations of companies and citizens. and these cities associate get rid of piracy on the high seas. and they do. they eliminate the threat of piracy. they are very important in the formation of what is today the international commercial. it is the law all over the world. if a korean and a kenyan and the canadian do business, they are governed by this law that emerges out of these associations. it's not created by governments. it's created by business people. by merchants. generates a high degree of

voluntary governance and you get called the movement from status to contract. instead of being born into a position that determines your life you can create the life you want i'm making agreements with other people. this is extraordinarily important distinction. it's happening in the world today. india is undergoing this movement so rapidly from being born to a cast that determines your whole life. people are using the market to make the lives they want to have. this movement happened earlier in europe but it's unfolding in front of our eyes. there's a documentary i was involved in making called -- on pbs called india awakes. there's a very powerful story of the impact of the market economy on the dalit people, formerly

called untouchable. low are the lowest of the in the caste system. dalit's brahman and a shadow touches mine, i'm polluted and he is going to bear the consequence is. it's a really awful system. and they are escaping that through the market economy. we work our partners with a lot of leaders in india. this is an ongoing contemporary process of using agreement to make the life you want to make. to create yourself and not have it dictated by circumstances of birth. this led also to a dramatic civilizational change. norbert alias, a great sociologist wrote extensively on this. the way in which people externalize norms of self-control. we can control because government gave dictates to us.

says that can't be right and he began his research by looking at books of etiquette. good behavior. and how they changed over time. look at the ones going back not that long ago. they said things like it is not meet to spit across the table when dining with friends. ok. i don't do that. i feel good about myself. i do not spit across the table. not blow your nose on your hand and then shake hands with people. ok. i think everyone understands that. but there was a time when adults had to read books. and the list is really gross. things that if small children did this today we would be other early -- utterly horrified and shocked. but we internalize these norms. that's part of the civilizing process. to achieve greater self-control. not control external to us why the king or the rulers but to internalize control into ourselves. that's a very important part of

the civilizing process. it creates a legal and social equality among persons that even highborn people could be shamed in front of low born people. that's a very important development that creates an authentically civil society. now getting to civil society, we can think about this emergence in europe. ashave two words in english an advantage over some other languages and we have freedom and liberty. most languages don't have that german and spanish and so on. have just one word. but in english because it is two languages squashed together after 1066, norman french and anglo-saxon. vocabulary and a very simple grammar. interesting mix. english is fairly easy to learn at a basic level but has lots of

complexities and nuanced because of the huge vocabulary. but we have two terms that come to us from latin civil. and that word refers to the city, not as a place. english again lacks the sophistication in this regard. when i say the city of new york it's not clear if i mean the place or the city government and the laws. in latin that is very clear. greek, similar. civil has this powerful sense of civility. to be a civil person. it means to show respect to other people. it doesn't mean you love them. family.re in the same it means respect. it's how business people treat you when you come into the store. ofause cities are places

commerce. train you.s people your first job. very important things. don't kill the customers. be respectful to them. contrary to what we see in hollywood movies where businessmen spend all day saying, how can i kill off my customer base? of directors board and the ceo says, how come we are not poisoning more of our customers? i want more industrial affluence in our products. that's not a real business works. you respect people. you want to provide value for them. but then from the german burg which means a strong fortified place, we get hamburg, pittsburgh, hillsboro. the boroughs of new york and the word bourgeois because of the french. french people have difficulty pronouncing german words for some odd reason.

and that comes into english with unfortunate liaise somewhat negative connotation because of the influence of carl marx. but bush love. and remember the first colonialists where the house of burgesses. and about the same time written charters of privileges. these are very important. we think about magna carta. from which much of the american constitution was derived. particularly article 39 from which we get the principles of due process of law and trial by jury. they are not just directly translated. but these were the inspirations for it. contrary to what english nationalist might tell you, these are not uniquely english. there are happening all over europe. only a few among hundreds of these charters that limit power. they are contracts with the king

or the baron to say you won't do all of these things. if youy importantly, want money from us you have to ask for our permission. and we will discuss and debate it. you can't just come and take it from us. a little digression. russia which is the outlier in this way. richard pipes who has passed away, great historian on russian civilization says, russia is unusual in this way. there's no evidence of law. and i think this is actually because as i mentioned last night, the mongol conquest did extend into russia and when the mongols retreated they did leave a very important group called the golden horde. and the golden board used the local princes as tax collectors and one consequence of this was a did not develop recent prosody between rulers and rolleston

that -- rules that developed in europe. if you didn't pay your taxes, the prince of muscovy would say, ok. i'm calling in the golden horde and they will kill everyone in the village and not in a nice way. so russia does not develop this civilization of law. with one major exception. novgorod is the most interesting case study established in the next century. they have their own magna carta before magna carta. they fired their prints. they had been elected executive like a president who was not allowed to own property or land in the city. they had a system which persisted in some parts of russia. these are assemblies that people come together to discuss things. i was talking with our colleagues from switzerland.

how important that is in switzerland. a bottom-up organization. the swiss were real pioneers of liberty in my opinion. and underappreciated for this. local solutions to local problems and substantially voluntary. we have a problem. we form a community to solve the problem. we don't have to go to the king or someone with power. unfortunately something very bad happens to them. tsarsere overrun by the of muscovy because of a bad military strategy and in particular a bad winter that froze the marches. the armies were able to march right up to the walls of the city. the bills were melted. very important symbols of liberty. also up to the american revolution. the liberty bell. bills meant freedom because they were how the city was governed. we think of a bell as just ding.g dingding

had complex forms of communication. the city is under attack. there will be an election. everyone knew what those bills meant. they didn't have twitter or text messaging. this is how they govern themselves. and to melt the bells was to make them totally subservient to a powerful ruler and then ultimately five in the fourth killed everyone who lived there. the attempts to put the king , the otheraw important heroes revolt against their king philip of spain. charles the fifth had given his son philip a gift when he reached the age of maturity. today you graduate high school. maybe you get a motorcycle or a trip to europe or something. at that time you got the netherlands. he gave him the netherlands. theme wanted to modernize because the dutch were very

backward and medieval. to bring you going up-to-date. modernize you. and that meant new taxes. and we will have a resident inquisitor. and the dutch said, very catholic at the time. is that the spanish inquisition, because we've heard about that. and they didn't like it. some of you have seen the monty python skit on the spanish inquisition. it is well worth looking up on youtube. nobody expects the spanish inquisition. well, the dutch did and they didn't like it. there's a famous petition of the merchants of antwerp to the king. it says, euros worshipful king. we love you. you're great. please do not do this to us. so many heretics come here to trade. it will utterly ruin us. that the firstow thing you learned in business school, don't burn your customers alive. you miss the second sale. so don't do that.

and they knew that. you can't do business when people are being burned and flayed alive and executed right next to where you are trying to negotiate with them. over a price. the revolt and they defend first middle class bourgeois free society and they are pioneers of so much. limited government, tax reform, freedom of trade and religious toleration. for which the dutch are very very important pioneers. they have a big impact across the water in england. they are pretty close and the english are going back and forth. and when english intellectuals are escaping they would often go to the netherlands. john locke is a very important figure in this. english put law above the king. they do this several times. a very important figure, sir edward coke who defended the

common law above the power of the king. i mentioned earlier king james the sixth and first. also can charles the first who was as the english shea -- say, shortened. because he had rebelled against the law. the people had not rebelled against him. and this tradition was very powerful and reverberates in the modern age. , the first really self-aware self identified clear libertarians in history. who didn't have just bits and pieces of the ideas, but they put it all together. freedom of religion, freedom of trade. freedom of conscience. the rule of law. the right to trial by jury and so on. these people were remarkably bold and brave people. john wilburn, we owe so much to him.

and he refused to submit to the trial by star chamber. a private judicial procedure. he said, this is unjust. he was tortured. he suffered terribly. he later after victory was offered compensation by parliament and he refused it. he said it's just money stolen from other people. and he would not accept it. and from him we get the persistence of the jury trial. from john wilburn. and as he said to his wife elizabeth, this is one thing that enraged the other side. care to speakld out publicly on political matters. but there were women levelers and they believed in the quality of rights between men and women. he said i shall read this testimony behind me that i died for the laws and liberty of this nation. and law and liberty were very important to them. they were so radical in their libertarianism. really extreme.

in somethingieved that even to this day may be controversial. they believed that even irish people have rights. i know this is a bit cutting-edge for some. but levelers in the army refused to invade ireland. cruelaid we will not wage war on persecution over matters of conscience. you can see where they were executed, lined up against the , andh walls and shocked also on the baptismal font in 1649. these people said, you cannot force us to do what is unjust. it is unjust to do that to the men andnd we are free responsible for our actions and you cannot make us do it. so they went to their deaths rather than do that. a bigideas had influence on john locke.

john locke never cites the levelers. ellers. there is a letter to a nephew recommending them as excellent of politicalstudy science. he does not quote them, but you can see the parallel language tracts,ious leveller that he was deeply influenced. and this notion that every man has property in his own person. that is an important concept. it came to have an influence on many throughout europe and the american colony. that practice continued in the revolt of the american colonies. again, it does not quote anyone, between thellels --

two treaties and the declaration are so striking, this is not accidental. it's not the same as the revolution. there was the revolution and ofn there was the war independence. they are often confused. one followed on the other. they created a country they believed were predicated on basic civil rights. "we hold these truths to be self evident." the text in a different context was applied by figures such as frederick douglass to demand freedom for the enslaved africans. promised there. it does not say "all people like you." it says all human beings.

to her go in and's great supporter of the american revolution and corresponded with them, required for them to --uce to the smallest number a very clear statement of limited government and it is implicit in the language of the declaration and the constitution. shall belative powers invested in the congress of the united states, which tells you clearly, some powers are not granted herein. it is a very clear and concise document of limited government. so, i am going to end with that because our next speaker will pick up the story. my goal is to give you some of the background. we have a little bit of time for

discussion and we have microphones. if anyone does not feel sufficiently mobile, do not worry. you can raise your hand and my colleagues will bring the mic to you. thank you for your attention. and by my watch, we have 11 minutes for discussion. would anyone like to raise anything? >> i just want to say that was a great talk. i really enjoyed that. just as a theme, it's getting so late, but i'm a big wikipedia fan. i think i have seen this general subject discussed on wikipedia in terms of the social contract.

is that in general the theme of your talk here? the mechanism would be covered under the social contract? >> it's a very rich and deep question. social contract is a term used in radically different ways by different thinkers. -- rouseeau.usso radically different, absolutely different ideas. moreocke, i think the classically oriented of those three hated individual liberty like a personal enemy. he was a great enemy of libertarian or liberal ideas.

-- more complicated. for him, there is not a social contract. establishedontract the authority of a particular governing structure. this was criticized very effectively by david hume. i do not remember the exact title, as not achieving what locke wanted. he argued it could be a case for tyranny. think the social contract idea is worth retaining because history is full of voluntary

but that is not the same as establishing the state as such. the state did not start that way. it started by a warlord conquering people. >> as you mentioned early on, in philosophy, it's kind of what happens. establish this from john rolfe. to him, it is a hypothetical thing. if we could just hang out with him in a faculty lounge, what would we agree to? he would say, i do not require people like robert nozick. aly people who will come to reasonable agreement.

robust social contracts and i think that they becauseimportant role people came to agreement to be governed by certain rules. hume'sld be aware of criticism. it does not mean we give away all of our rights. my condo association could not forgive me, for example. it has a limited set of hours. i think the social contract is a robust tool for -- >> i will move on. here, look up social contract on wikipedia. >> yes, sir? is whatestion principles led to the american

revolution being a successful and injuring movement and what would be a contrast with the french revolution, which led to the returning of tyranny in a matter of decades? >> ok. i have six minutes. [laughter] very difficult point. we can talk about the american revolution and the american war for independence as one thing without great violence to the record.al this is not true in france. there is a multitude of events that get clumped together and are called the them -- the french revolution and i think that's a mistake. there were important changes at ae beginning, and i recommend careful reading of the debate between edmund burke and tom paine. i think burke makes some very important criticisms.

the first was the leading figures who established the is simply exempted themselves from eligibility. this is a egg mistake because it means the big liberal minded people say we cannot run again. was they did not religious heritage and liberty. there were two did want to point to french communes and legal traditions in the various cities and there were others who said, no, get rid of all of it. we will break with the past. i think that burke was correct. this was a terrible mistake. burke was a pretty good economist. he criticizes economists, but he

has something else in mind. whenderstood what happens you about -- when you abolish the monetary system. wasmistake that was made when the french king called the estates general together, it was to deal with the indebtedness of the french monarchy. they had massive debt. and then you have these awful tax collectors. someone else has the right to collect those taxes and pay you cash for that. if you are ever a king, don't do this. all these debts. they call them together. this sets off a chain of events. one mistake was not to repudiate

that. burke suggests it was because of shadow we financial interests. i think that is not well substantiated. of there are consequences and in anticipation , they have a new monetary .olicy exchanging anyone who knows monetary economics knows this is not going to end well because of gresham's law of markets. there is no restraint on printing. they just print more and more. paid in the future. they just printed money like add -- like mad.

they came to understand it. misunderstood.s when you have parity with the gold coin, you spend one and keep the gold. bad money drives out good. law.am's this leads to a disaster. what happens when prices are rising? price controls. what happens when you put price controls in an inflationary economy? shortages. what you do when there are shortages of bread? execute the bakers. there's a very good book on the economics of the french

revolution and he points out that bakers are substantially overrepresented. it was an economic terror. this is part of why the revolution turns out so badly. i don't agree with those who say .t was just doomed i think that is mistaken. we can look into it and see key decisions that were made that were really catastrophic. burke has an important part of the picture. this is a topic i incurred you to look into. 10:15, and i promised i would stop and i will. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.

visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] >> you're watching american oftory tv, 48 hours programming on american history on c-span3. >> next, u.s. military academy history professor robert mcdonald talks about the major events and figures of the american enlightenment, the period leading up to the american revolution. this hour and 15 minute long session was part of a symposium on history and philosophy hosted by the cato institute's cato university. [applause] everybody -- thanks, everybody. thank you, tom. it is great to be at cato university. it does not get much better than this. like a college campus, but much, much, much better, and you know,