to make progress of resistance. to make progress on these pains described, we need to embrace this resistance. mlk said that we have a moral obligation to oppose unconstitutional laws and i also quote john lewis who said, have to stand up and make good trouble. my last line is the inaugural poem at biden's inauguration, she said the nation is not broken it is just unfinished. i think it is a fight we have to fight the fight in a nonviolent way the way the founders intended. the declaration of dependence does not say one word about taking up arms. it says how we want to withdraw host: we are back with political

and form our own free country historian and author eli merritt for white people, that is. who will be discussing his new book looking at the political host: i want to ask you, does divisions among the country's founders during the american revolution and what it can teach us about today's political polarization. the early history of the country good morning, eli. guest: good to be with you. compared to the current host: inc. you for joining us. polarized political landscape we see today and are there any what does the book focus on? lessons you think could be why did you decide to write it? applied today? guest: i think one of the guest: is based on a general themes of the book is misconception that we have and don't mess with disunion because as they feared and as we saw specifically that the american during the civil war i don't see revolution. historians have taught what the founders feared the most during the revolution was the power of any good reason for reckless the british army and navy. the book reveals that is not the case. demagoguery taking place. what they feared most about was breaking apart and the disunion so discussion of disunion is

damaging to us. that would lead to civil wars. the book tells a story about that major themes and elucidates within their own white compounds briefly a theme i discuss is you of politics, the founders practiced this virtual where look at why the founders of the united states perpetuated they interacted with one another even when passions were high and slavery. there are many explanatory models. from the perspective of civility known to us is the example of and respect and attempts to white supremacy and why they perpetuated slavery, and understand and cooperation and economic reason, and they both compromise. my biggest fear is demagoguery north and south intimately tied to a heinous economic system. and demagogues, fear mongering, my book introduces the hatemongering, bigotry and things like lies taking place. survivalists interpretation. if norton states and delegates people will lose face in the government if these are the dominant forces taking place. the future can be bright but if to the continental congress had insisted upon ending the slave trade or a gradual emancipation i had magic buttons i would turn off demagogues in government, of slaves, he would've had a secession of all southern states

even then. media and for both political parties i would turn down the that would've led to the force over finance and land. extremism on both sides. host: that is interesting. host: let's go to florida, frank we know there lots of books is on the independent line. written about the american caller: good morning. revolution. thank you for having me. why do you consider yours different? what do you hope readers may i am calling from the learn that they have not learned other places? guest: the survivalist independent line because i was interpretation, to perceiveconcg republican but i no longer recognize the republican party. we know history has a tendency to repeat itself. factor is fear. i came to the conclusion it is our history as black americans the driver of life. is clearly stated. we are seeing the return of jim i looked at the american crow type legislation all over revolution and the vast majority the nation. written about the revolution are i am curious as to what you military but this is a political think the endgame is here and history. i learned what they feared most and the consequences of that the other question i have is

fear. an overriding discovery was i that i have never seen enslaved said they did what they did to save their souls from civil wars. they made compromises, they or marginalized people when perpetuated slavery, they their freedom with anything other than bloodshed. adopted the declaration of considering the fact that independence and elected george nothing here in america has washington as the commander and chief. all of these had to do with the changed and we are digressing fear that if they broke apart it would fall into civil wars. back toward a time that america that is the conclusion that has was not a great place for black not been written before about folks to live and not that it that founding period. host: i want to been up the has ever been, what do you think phone lines and let the the real solution is, because we listeners and viewers know they can call in. are putting band-aids on things we are taking questions for author eli merritt. but something is actually you can have's -- ask questions happening. the only thing that is happening about his book or american is that it is progressively getting worse. history, particularly the it is definitely not getting american revolution. better. democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, what is your take, real world?

independents (202) 748-8002. you can also send a text message what you think is happening or is going to happen or needs to to (202) 748-8003. happen? caller: favor in the nation is we will get to those calls in just a moment. i want to read an excerpt from martin luther king. the book. we need to turn -- my favorite the title of the book is in the nation is martin luther king. we need to turn back to him. disunion among ourselves, the perilous politics of the we have forgotten what his american revolution. teachings were and his nonstop, the founding of a single united nonviolent protesting and states was hardly the easy mayor dissent. of 13 homogen liberty loving we know it is fundamental aspect states so often depicted in of democracy and pushing towards american history. a single unitedtes was not progress and safeguarding ordained or even desired as a freedoms and rights. matter of first preference by most of the founders. so lots of people are pessimists instead, the american union was an unwelcome alliance for and many things are happening. colonies in regions for the the only thing i can say is mass maintenance of internal and external surity. demonstration and protest and as mlk said, the struggle just has capturing the spirit of the early republicans, that of the to continue. i have faith that we do this and

shotgun wedding. it is the new southern states fight against demagoguery. that have chosen to walk away from the union of 13 and they would have had wars raking out. i think we can overcome this difficult time. if they have led shed, i hope it i know we have been talking about this perspective as far as will be the type that took place preserving the union, but can in the 1960's in the civil rights movement. you give us more of a lay of the it did happen but the premise land where was the country, of was not bloodshed but sometimes in the nonviolent protests mlk the disputes between the colonies and founders as they began to focus and play out was organizing, there was some during those times of the american revolution. guest: you had a great summary bloodshed by white supremacists. of the book. what i will try to do particularly since we are so near the fourth of july is i if we succeed at some point i will say a word or two about how and why all of the 13 colonies don't think it will happen in the next decade or two. adopted the resolution for i would say let's study the independence on july 2 and two american revolution where we days later agreed unanimously to

say, we just want out of this to the declaration of independence radical government and we are on july 4. going to separate and form a the situation was combustible in government based on equality and the month of june. for all of that month, the union fundamental rights. i'm not predicting that. counties and most of the southern colonies had been i would say this fourth of july pay attention to the right of waiting a long time to declare independence. revolution and right of the middle colonies and south resistance best embodied by mlk. host: i want to ask you a carolina, looking at the situation of the middle colonies. question we received on twitter from steve who asks, was aaron on june 7, they said the time is burr the type of character are founding fathers feared most? come, i am proposing a guest: i wrote a piece about resolution for independence. the next day, thomas jefferson amber because alexander hamilton said the middle colony from south carolina is in the center , aaron burr was going to become of the continental congress in president and could have if which they said, if this move alexander hamilton had supported him. aaron burr was not necessarily a forward without approval we will secede from this union. demagogue but he had a personality that i think would be correct to say could tilt that is the dynamic they were experiencing at the time. that was a situation too hot to into authoritarianism.

handle. they were not going to back down they had some political so they said let's give it more rivalries but if a personality time and we will formerly vote like aaron per had reached the for independence on july 1 was the date. even on that date the presidency, -- aaron burr if he pennsylvania and south carolina voted no. new york abstained and delaware split its vote. had reached presidency, i think so why did those little colonies it would've been a very dangerous person. ultimately decide to join into i am not an expert on him but the independence movement the that is what i would say. next day? host: norma in las cruces, new if you envision the map, we have new england and to the north of mexico, republican line. the middle colonies, virginia caller: thank you for taking my and those to the south. middle colonies were squeezed in the middle and in a desperate military situation. they were either going to have call. to fall into civil war against i am 78 years old and it is a the pro-independence southerners shock to me all the sudden that and new englanders or they would have to join in. people think this is the worst they realize this because the country in the world that super majority voted for exists.

independence, select the theme of do or die, on july 1 they i have a degree in history in decided to join in. one of the best examples of the book of i shotgun wedding. 1984. things have changed a lot in the -- of a shotgun wedding. way history is taught. host: you talked about the fact every country in the world can go back and look at mistakes that have been made, but this that preserving the union meant country has tried, regardless of what others inc., two rectify preserving slavery to avoid civil war, but we know that 100 the issues that existed back years later there was a civil war and my question to you is, when the country was founded. do you consider that something my family came to this country inevitable that something they in 1912 from italy and they were were able to delay it or what are your thoughts that there was very happy to come here. eventually civil war at the they wanted to work, get a job, founding fathers feared. guest: what is most remarkable let their children's have an and reveals more is in fact this education, and they were not of means at all. fear. they had to have a sponsor and learn english and go through all the rules, and they did. even though they left their

there would be the fear of a birth country of italy, they were very happy for the secession and there were considerations. even that was not a problem for opportunities that america has given. my one question is, as far as them. reparations go, i reject the many thought it might be better to form separate confederations. idea that every person alive till now is responsible for the they were convinced they would fall into civil war. at the time the fear was not civil war and slavery. civil war over slavery but the my people weren't even here then. fear was that there was civil so i'm going to absolve myself war with 400,000 enslaved people from that issue because there a would rise up and join them. lot of sides, my father was in there was a sense of continuity. the marine corps and served with the survivalist interpretation a lot of different people. of a shotgun wedding, the civil war started in 1774 and the first continental congress and what was done to the japanese persisted all the way to the civil war. americans citizens during world war ii under fdr confiscated whether or not the civil war was inevitable, and away if there

had not been an american their property and put them in revolution and had not formed the united states of america we camps. should assume, based on the many of those japanese-americans history of great britain, that went to fight in world war ii for this country, even though slavery would have ended in 1838 their property was taken and when britain ended slavery. businesses were confiscated, they did not get reparations. for those who don't know, that as my father use to say, he was is conjecture. the reason the civil war took a 30 year marine veteran, when place is human beings, namely you are fighting in a war, it doesn't matter who or what you southerners, they fell into are, we all lead the same -- sectarian politics with one another and there was a concept bleed the same. they needed to protect their host: i think we have your point. property. host: ray is first up in aurora, let's let eli respond. guest: so glad you know all of colorado, on the independent line. this history but i want to caller: thanks for taking my encourage you that when you run call. i am a registered libertarian into people, encourage them to study history. and i wanted to touch upon your i don't necessarily have an answer but i will say the idea mention of fear.

i personally fear the idea of a of complex history for me central state in size and scope provides an answer. we a founding period, the mirkin that they would have complete revolution, what we discover is control over its people. i was wondering if you could comment on that and if you could the glory of it, which is the name some of the people during encouragement they had to that period who shared those accomplish what they accomplish they took on the might of the kinds of concerns. guest: i think you said of fear british army and took on extraordinary dangers of this war. of two large of a federal government? caller: basically, central we had the tragic part and they power. guest: you hit the nail on the are both deeply real and i believe we need to accept both. head. that was the dominant fear for we need the ability to seek most of the founders. multidimensional history. independent colonies went on to be independent states and they it can be hard to take that in. weren't sure whether they were forming 13 republics, which each psychologists talk about cognitive dissidents. of the state would be there when there are two contradictory concepts we tend to ignore them. republic and they would

confederate with other states the way as people mature as a society is we stay with it and let the truth of the past melt away our cognitive dissidents so the concept of state sovereignty we knew, more complex and we can was overwhelming and they were say two things are true at the extraordinarily fearful from same time and take the either or approach. host: sam in glencoe, illinois, taking power from the state into a central government. that is one of the reasons by it democratic line. took six or seven years to get caller: this is the first time i our first constitution and the articles of confederation torn have ever called into the show. ratified to 1781 was the best i didn't realize the middle they could do because of this state issue going on. but the time spent writing the fear of centralized power. so the question today is do we constitution and establishing the federalism aspect of our fear centralized power? government, when we had the i think we have to have checks civil war, i hate to talk about and balances and separation of power. what could have happened if abraham lincoln would have lived the states do act somewhat as a , but don't you think at the end check on federal power. of the civil war it was time for

a constitutional conference whereby a lot of the things that we have a unique system where i brought about the civil war were think states do have too much power. host: let's go to the democratic the powers of the smaller states. line, carolyn from stroudsburg, pennsylvania. caller: i would like your guest equal senators or the electoral college, these are things that give advantage to the smaller to take it one step further. we can understand fear states and detract from true generating their actions, what democracy. motivated the fear, was it not as long as we have a handful of greed that they wanted to hold senators in small states that can control everything, on, they had vast new land that including the supreme court, we seem to have fallen into a state of tyranny of the minority. they wanted to hold onto. they couldn't do it without i was just wondering if you slavery and they couldn't do it thought the civil war really as individual colonies. never ended.

we just ended slavery but we didn't end our system of think people gating factor was government that allow that to agreed. happen for so long a true guest: want to agree with you on that, as there might be many powerful motivating factors. representative government. greed is one. i would say that my first area what i like is what i think of of interest is the american as complex history. we have a problem with revolution but i have two areas of great interest in the work i oversimplified history and that do. one is the founding period and there is over -- only one also the period called the critical period. interpretation. my other greatest area of i find if you only adopt one interest is actually democracy view you miss a lot of and what happens in democracies opportunity for intellectual depth but also for us to mature when there is too much democracy. we are at a point in history as people and as a nation. where i hear frequently more this idea of greed and economic democracy, more democracy. a part of me agrees but i do interpretation is 100% correct want the maximum democracy but but i also think the white we can't forget there is something else in a democracy as supremacist interpretation is

correct and the survivalist important and that is checks and interpretation is correct. balances on all forms. one of my most important reasons if you take the history of for feeling disappointed at the democracy back to athens and the reaction to the 1619 project is the all or nothing thinking. roman republic onward, what was created in 1877 and ratified was it is important to look at the origin story of the african-american in this country a system of government that was not democratic enough but had , 1776 july is the origin story. explicitly imposed checks and balances. that is an example where we i am not certain at this point could have one and one origin story in the united states. i love complex history and i the senate has a check on the very democratic house of agree with you plus other interpretations on top. representatives but that was the original intent. host: next up is joel in idaho, i do believe we have to be very independent line. caller: there's always been a careful with expanding democracy, democracy and one example is, in the early 1970's we decided we were going to debate over whether the civil democratize the primaries. war was due to slavery, it seems we would not only have the

democratic vote in the general election for president but also like you lean toward states rights. the democratic vote that led to i would like to get your, on the nominations for both parties. where you think the civil work i know on the face of it that sounds wonderful, but if the belongs. guest: the civil war, what we find is the essential history parties had been in charge of choosing the candidates, we would have not gotten our first going back to the 16th 19 was slavery. if that had not been divided the demographic -- demagogue as country, almost 250 years we president, and that was donald trump. would not have had civil war. the checks and balance would the question of estate stop demagogues and sovereignty was important to authoritarians from getting into them but i do think slavery, the office. host: next up is rich in ohio, number one cause and there was distention with regard to state republican line. caller: great conversations sovereignty. it is important to remember and going on. it is interesting on defending deepen our sense of history of people's rights. what happened leading to the civil war and that is that in the civil war we went to war abraham lincoln was elected and that caused worry and fear about for people's rights.

right now we are flipping over the determination of the republican party to end the expansion of slavery in the to superior rights. country. so they seceded and then civil are you going to start a war so war came about because secession you can have superior rights over me. was determined on this basis of when you start to say, i am going to give you superior the need to unify the country. rights over me by going to war. so if slavery is the number one cause the driving factor we it gets liquid and also part. on rights, we don't talk about should look to how we can try to responsibilities. other factors such as state when you drive, you have a right sovereignty. host: let's go to salisbury, to drive in wreck a car every north carolina, lewis is calling five minutes. i am wondering in the civil war on the democratic line. caller: top of the morning to when we could avoid it, it could you. have been different if we had i have a comment and question. had people who could argue better. we know the slave owners used guest: you said a number of things and i speak to the one money because they had to free that seems most important to me that you emphasized, and i would the slaves and reimburse.

say it 99% of the time when what do you think about people talk about rights and duties of democracy they don't reparations that the blacks mention the word duties. haven't received. we do have a rights and we have if the blacks could have duties to safeguard our received some type of democracy in order that it will continue to give us rights. reparations, we wouldn't need his student loans, housing, social service anything the at together some of the things discussed is how do we overcome government is fighting against for black people to receive. antidemocratic measures and push for a true multiracial my question is, do you think the white governors and mayors of democracy. the southern states are going to it is nonviolent but i think of alexander hamilton's musical crt your book in the future? that says rise up, open your eyes, rise up. guest: i appreciate that we need to do that nonviolently. question. it brings to mind what did it is our job to fight back against tyranny. happen in the british empire our job is if the officials about slavery in 1838, they did aren't doing their job we have -- should've been compensating to protest and throw them out. the enslaved people but compensated those who were

freeing the slaves. we are rising up nonviolently against oppressive measures. about reparations, my deepest we have a moral obligation to belief is that our country has oppose unconstitutional laws. so much to do to reconcile with if i could press another button the history and the harms and i would establish say 10,000 mlk the intergenerational nonviolent protest training centers throughout this country. transgressions passed down to i think that might help get us there. host: we are running out of time the african-americans from 1619. but i want to ask you, you i believe in terms of the value they would give. talked about the rhetoric and toning it down. what would you do to tone down the political rhetoric of today? i am not sure where i come down on that but i think i am more guest: a great question. we look at twitter. interested in the symbolic and technology is implicated in the problems we are having. emotional and apology that may we do not want to restrict free take lace in association with reparations. i am in favor of that. speech but another thing i have written about is we have lost i write a weekly newsletter on a

our center in ethics, what we call democratic norms and ethical leadership. sub stack account called juneteenth. one possible solution could be how do we once again insist, i decided that the day we take the media that they operate celebrate the image patient -- the emancipation of slaves is the most important. i wrote that essentially it is like how they were under rush limbaugh. july 4, i don't want to downplay the code of ethics, is with the importance of it because i everyone's time is the npr handbook of ethics. value it hugely but there are 1.59 people oppressed someone, it will warm your heart but also and tolerated at the martial inspire you to see. law. let's compare the harm and they are striving for the code of ethics. oppression that ethical behavior and electing african-americans have suffered folks who are ethical. since 1619. at the time the emancipation that is a tough things because we are passionate voters. proclamation at the time of juneteenth there were 4 million host: we are going to stop it slaves in the united states. i'm comfortable in saying the there. eli merritt, historian at

most important event that has ever happened in our history is vanderbilt university and author the emancipation of enslaved of the book disunion among our people, no matter when you want to pick the date. selves let's just stick with juneteenth which is now a federal holiday. host: i was going to ask you about juneteenth. you wrote on your sub stack and i appreciate you mentioning it. you can find his essays and posts about juneteenth. the headline is why juneteenth matters far more today than the fourth of july. let's go to the phone lines. as a reminder, democrats you can call and have a question or comment for eli merritt. the number is (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001,

independents (202) 748-8002. you can ask him about american history also the author of a book titled disunion among ourselves, a perilous politics of the american revolution. let's hear from tom in vermont on the independent line. caller: good morning c-span and thank you for a wonderful show. host: what is your question or comment this morning? caller: you do a great job. i would like to talk about our history with corporations and when we first came over 100 years at least before 17 76.

they were the founding fathers. they came over with corporations and the royal marines. in the indian company and others , they had poor whites from the 17th hundreds they treated as slaves. they also had bounties on indigenous tribes. they still have up until 40 years ago, the marines were protecting corporations and now we outsource to people like blackstone and others. it is just the money that runs the world and we have done a horrible job of it. there was a book 10 years ago with the economic hitman and there was a wonderful book by

walter mosley, man in my basement. i better stop. host: go ahead, eli. guest: i am also in vermont right now near lincoln. i would say an answer to your question, it is so important. if you look back at these interpretations we discussed in regard to slavery, i think what she meant to say it was capitalist greed. the problem we have is is obviously not capitalism. problem we have is extremism of any kind. i think you could also say when capitalism becomes too extremist

and there are not checks on capitalism and if i could pick my favorite form of government it would be a mix between a capitalist society and a european-style socialism where we are not at the whims of power-hungry and greedy people. it is a critical piece of our history and stability, but i do believe we have a bit of capitalist extremism in our politics. host: let's hear from michael: from boston on the republican line. caller: thank you. i definitely have a couple of things i want to say. i called on the republican line

because i am a republican. people forget in 1954 the republicans basically came democrats when lbj and barry goldwater basically stole the republican party. the second point i want to make, he mentioned 1619. the united states had different ports. slaveowners burn to death based on their color. it captured the atlantic slave trade captured by pirates and

brought to the u.s. coastline as indentured servants. indentured servants is a seven year sentence. in 1631, that all changed. when he says black people have been suffering here since 1619, have to remember there was one point of import of enslaved people. he had him of the northeast coast and imported it down in the south. they were imported in, the first, as indentured servants. it turns out they work extremely successful. host: i think we got your points. i want to let eli get a chance to respond.

guest: i think what you have done is added texture to the early history and the period surrounding 1619, which is appreciated. you are obviously a a student of history. what you commented on captured my attention is that you are at republican and we will all agree that we have unfortunate polarization and specific ways of doing labels and party affiliations of others. it wouldn't be a problem if we had more parties. but most important is that all of us put the u.s. constitution and the rule of law and democratic norms and democracy and voting rights above self but above party.

being a constitution loving publican, we need to keep reminding citizens of what our duties and obligations are when it comes to the country in relationship to political parties. host: our next caller is and who not calling from philadelphia on the democratic line. caller: what i would like to say is the beauty of history cannot be changed. the united states when they talk about history, especially if they are not black, to try to tell us how we should feel and the simple truth is that through history passed down through generations, we can only rectify what is the cause and effect of slavery.

we can no longer foundation only continue to be humble and be constantly disrespected as far as you rectify the effects of slavery. you can't keep pushing it back. there is a gentleman who is really at the catalyst for reparations and that is jason blake. thank you for always keeping us in perspective. we always show our resilience and strength. we are not simply, as far as reparations go we know what the definition is, but the government continues to keep that on our backs. instead of saying we apologize,

the jewish people, datum american people, asian people. when it comes to us, it keeps planning to be a fairytale. i agree with the lady saying it is greed. it could be nothing else. all of the contributions black people made that were stolen. you really can't price on 400 years. the scale let you even up. host: weight got your point. let's let a light to the comments. guest: i agree with what you have said. the thing that gives me a sense of optimism is the nation's history has been based on

progress towards greater rights and freedoms for all people and i am dedicated to the proposition that progress is essential to a democracy. we have to keep moving forward and we are moving towards a democracy based on the quality and equal justice and equal opportunity. i will say that i have a favorite sonic that is going to come out and the title i gave to it is 1776 and the right of revolution. i just briefly want to say that essentially the declaration of independence was embracing this concept of the right of revolution but it means the right of resistance.