has to know that carbon has a lifetime of not less than 100 years. that means that still needs to have drastic measures even after 2040 and later 2050 as i suggest. honorable member -- honorable parliamentarians, i realize that this motion is narrow and does not consider other options. when we look at climate change not only affecting the commonwealthland but also other countries. and needs to consider energy sectors. looking at land use, land use change forestry. and cdms. which mechanisms. and forecasting and sustaining our livelihoods. lord speaker and honorable parliamentarians, climate change is not tackled now will have

adverse effect and cost in the near future. demanding our support in advocating for sustainable development. honorable parliamentarians, with substantial investment and renewable energy and favor into adaptation programs, we will ensure that we obtain emission reductions that's proposed by the progressive youthar lines. the commonwealth has its -- which is the agriculture already facing challenges brought by the issues of climate change. and surprised when the minster agriculture was calling for 60% reduction in 2040. i thought it was a little ridiculous. and we're a country -- and also agree with me that we're a country with nations that are in the -- such as maldives and we

need to take drastic measures as threatened by sea levels. and yes, lord speaker and honorable parliamentarians, we are the leaders and yes we're ambitious and also looking at the long-term effects and we'll do everything to ensure that we still survive after 2040 and probably have the chance to meet in here in 2050 because we might not be there after all. lord speaker and honorable parliamentarians, lord speaker and honorable parliamentarians, the differences that we have with the government on the motion are however small, we are a constructive party and we vote from the motion and however we still stress and maintain should be done earlier if we're to really combat climate change and achieve economic growth.

honorable speaker, what we have of course witnessed here is a view that is popular with no one but the government. despite that goal, we also -- the position as taken by the -- as the opposite side. as if those measures are even worse. and not viable. in conclurkz lord speaker and honorable members, our party is to set radical reforms, policies and ambitious target that will ensure economic growth and in addition the government approach involving -- needs to be invest and also look at public participation. climate change also involves behavioral change. thank you, honorable.

>> honorable friends and colleagues, we now come to the next part which is the voting. as i'm sure you've been briefed there will be two votes. one, content, and one not content and it will be by a show of hands. the door keepers will count. so number one, i can ask you all of those who here in favor of the motion which is to reduce carbon emissions in commonwealthland by 100% by by o put up their hands. >> really high, please. so the not contents. so those of you who do not agree with the motion to reduce carbon emissions by 100% by the year 2050, please put up your hand. >> bit higher please.

the results of the vote, you can put your hands down now. will ha laugh lau [ laughter ] . the contents number 68. congratulations. [ applause ] . thank you all so much for a really, really interesting series of arguments. i have to say, i was a little bit surprised by the outcome. but there you go. i thought most of you were trying to say that it wasn't realistic, though you do agree with the principal involved. it was wonderfully argued. i hope on the government side are well-satisfied with the results. what i'd like to do now very

briefly if i may is to call upon your distinguished visitors here and please and indeed representative from the hospitals to just say a few words about who they are and which areas they represent. and what they have done particularly in their respective jobs. >> thank you very much. >> i'm co-- this is my first te in parliament. i came in last -- a year last may. my particular interest, which is why i came here, was international development. so i'm on the international development select committee which gives me the opportunity to visit many of the places that you've come from. so it's been very interesting to hear you, hear the passion that you've argued your case with and i hope that those of you who would like a parliamentary career will continue with it, because it is the best job in

the world. and i particularly hope that the women that are here today will take it forward. because we definitely need more women in all parliaments. and especially -- [ applause ] especially in the british one. >> hello, my name is scotland. i'm baroness scotland of -- i was the former attorney general. i've been in this house since 1997. i hope none of you can do math since i'm really only 21. [ laughter ] i was the first woman in 700 years to be appointed her majesty's attorney general because we do things very quickly in this country. we definitely need more parliamentarians. i have the privilege, to come in with other guests. there was the princess royal, royal highness, princess of malaysia. she came in as the malaysian

candidate spoke. i'm afraid your name has been taken. together with the first lady of the region in nigeria. they were blown away by the wonder of listening to all of you. our future will depend on the quality of the politicians that we are able to create in the next generation if our world is going to be a safe one. i can tell you from the old crones on this side that make up -- >> withdrawn. >> thank you. >> my name is -- i'm the recently elected conservative member in west. the reason that i wanted to be here this afternoon, the reason i haven't gone back to my constituency as i normally do on a friday is i want to show the support of members of the house of commons for you and for what

you're doing. in 1922, a man called j.m. barrier, play right and novel he's, the author of peter pan, made his one and only public speech as rector of st. andrews university in the aftermath of the first world war. addressed those young people and told them that in his judgment, the time had come for young people to rise up and demand an equality in decision-making, a partnership with their elders and betters because the decisions that we take in these parliaments will more affect your lives in the years ahead than they will ours. you have that equal voice. you should have that equal voice. as you walk around this building as you leave today, you will see fingers immortalizedized in granite marble. in their day, they were confronting real decisions.

as you leave through the hall, on the right-hand side, you will see a statue of edmond burke and edmond burke said that life was a partnership. a partnership in all science, in all art and in all things. because of the nature of that partnership, it could never be achieved in one generation. it could never even be achieved in many generations. it was in fact a partnership between those of us who are living, those of us who are dead and those yet to be born. you have shown today that your generation will be equal to the challenge of that partnership. well done. >> thank you very much. my name is -- i'm a labor and cooperative member of parliament for hamilton west which is just outside in the city of glasgow in scotland. it's a great honor to be here, not only high quality of debate and contributions this afternoon but i have to say probably on

behalf of at least four of us in the front. probably the only one we'll get to sit on these benches. >> for some of the -- probably forever. [ laughter ] but it is great to be here and to hear the debate. as conrad said, it's been impressive afternoon and doi join with -- imploring those interested in politics to keep interested in it. there are so very many issues that will affect people's lives into the future. it's very important that young people are involved and engaged and that we end this young people not being interested in politics. it's about what happens in your lives, your community and the society you live in. pay great tribute to all of you who have been here today and involved in this debate. [ applause ] my thanks to the parliamentarians who stayed the course. i really truly grateful that you did so. my thanks to everyone who has

been involved in the organization of this amazing event. most of all, my profound thanks to all of you. i know that you've worked incredibly hard. it hasn't been -- you haven't had a shopping trip. it's not opinion a jurn i i know you've been working very, very hard. it shows in the arguments you've produced. i learned a huge amount this afternoon. i thank you for that. i just would like to repeat what's been said by many of the parliamentarians. keep at it. just persist. go on. you've got lots to offer. the world is a difficult, complicated, troubled place. you've been offered something. you can do politics and we'd very much like you to come back again soon or indeed certainly for the youth parliament reconvened in the not too distant future. i would like to meet you again. as i continue to meet you, you will be rising up and some of

the parliamentarians have said, not 20 or 30 years' time, in ten years' time -- >> 20 minutes. >> 20 minutes. some people will be amongst the leaders of their countries and you will have an extremely important task to carry out. which is to ensure governance and indeed you know the adherence to the millennium goals. but thank you again. i've had a very wonderful afternoon and i do hope that you have an enjoyable evening before you all return to your countries tomorrow. thank you. [ applause ] >> this is a dangerous time for britain in a time for britain's economy. the government austerity plan is failing. you can sense the fear people have as we watched the economic crisis that threatens to return.

>> with the british house of commons still in recess, and will party conferences continue in the uk. watch ed miliband's keynote from the labor party conference. and next sunday, david cameron. >> on "newsmakers" chris van hollen. [applause] >> thank you. hello, hrc. [applause]

>> thank you so much. thank you, everybody. please, have a seat. thank you so much. it is great to be back. i see a lot of friends in the house. i appreciate the chance to join you tonight. i also took a trip out to california last week, where i held some productive bilateral talks with your leader, lady gaga. [laughter] she was wearing 16-inch heels. [laughter] she was eight feet tall. it was a little intimidating. now, i don't want to give a long speech. cyndi lauper is in the house. i can't compete with that.

[applause] but i wanted to come here tonight, first of all, to personally thank joe for his outstanding years of leadership at hrc. [applause] what he has accomplished at the helm of this organization has been remarkable, and i want to thank all of you for the support that you've shown this organization and for your commitment to a simple idea. every single american -- gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual, transgender -- every single american deserves to be treated equally in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of our society. it's a pretty simple proposition. [applause]

now, i don't have to tell you that we have a ways to go in that struggle. i don't have to tell you how many are still denied their basic rights -- americans who are still made to feel like second-class citizens, who have to live a lie to keep their jobs, or who are afraid to walk the street, or down the hall at school. many of you have devoted your lives to the cause of equality. so you know what we have to do. we've got more work ahead of us. but we can also be proud of the progress we've made these past two and a half years. think about it. [applause] two years ago, i stood at this podium, in this room, before many of you, and i made a pledge. i said i would never counsel patience, that it wasn't right to tell you to be patient any

more than it was right for others to tell african americans to be patient in the fight for equal rights a half century ago. [applause] but what i also said, that while it might take time - more time than anyone would like - we are going to make progress. we are going to succeed. we are going to build a more perfect union. and so, let's see what happened. i met with judy shepard. i promised her we would pass a hate crimes bill named for her son, matthew. and with the help of my dear friend ted kennedy we got it done. because it should never be dangerous -- [applause] you should never have to look over your shoulder -- to be gay in the united states of america. that's why we got it done.

[applause] i met with janice langbehn, who was barred from the bedside of the woman she loved as she lay dying. and i told her that we were going to put a stop to this discrimination. and you know what? we got it done. i issued an order so that any hospital in america that accepts medicare or medicaid - and that means just about every hospital - has to treat gay partners just as they do straight partners. because nobody should have to produce a legal contract to hold the hand of the person that they love. we got that done. [applause] i said that we would lift that hiv travel ban -- we got that done.

we put in place the first comprehensive national strategy to fight hiv/aids. many questioned whether we'd succeed in repealing "don't ask, don't tell." and, yes, it took two years to get the repeal through congress. we had to hold a coalition together. we had to keep up the pressure. we took some flak along the way. but with the help of hrc, we got it done. and "don't ask, don't tell" is history. and all over the world, there are men and women serving this country just as they always have -- with honor and courage and discipline and valor. we got it done. we got that done.

all around the world, you've got gays and lesbians who are serving, and the only difference is now they can put up a family photo. no one has to live a lie to serve the country they love. i vowed to keep up the fight against the so-called defense of marriage act. there's a bill to repeal this discriminatory law in congress, and i want to see that passed. but until we reach that day, my administration is no longer defending doma in the courts. i believe the law runs counter to the constitution, and it's time for it to end once and for all. it should join "don't ask, don't tell" in the history books. [applause]

so, yes, we have more work to do. and after so many years -- even decades -- of inaction you've got every right to push against the slow pace of change. but make no mistake -- i want people to feel encouraged here -- we are making change. we're making real and lasting change. we can be proud of the progress we've already made. and i'm going to continue to fight alongside you. and i don't just mean in your role, by the way, as advocates for equality. you're also moms and dads who care about the schools your children go to. [applause] you're also students figuring out how to pay for college. you're also folks who are worried about the economy and whether or not your partner or husband or wife will be able to find a job. and you're americans who want this country to succeed and

prosper, and who are tired of the gridlock and the vicious partisanship, and are sick of the washington games. those are your fights, too, hrc. [applause] so i'm going to need your help. i need your help to fight for equality, to pass a repeal of doma, to pass an inclusive employment non-discrimination bill so that being gay is never again a fireable offense in america. and i don't have to tell you, there are those who don't want to just stand in our way but want to turn the clock back, who want to return to the days when gay people couldn't serve their country openly, who reject the progress that we've made, who, as we speak, are looking to enshrine discrimination into state laws and constitutions -- efforts that we've got to work hard to oppose, because that's not what america should be about.

we're not about restricting rights and restricting opportunity. we're about opening up rights and opening up opportunity -- and treating each other generously and with love and respect. and together, we also have to keep sending a message to every young person in this country who might feel alone or afraid because they're gay or transgender -- who may be getting picked on or pushed around because they're different. we've got to make sure they know that there are adults they can talk to, that they are never alone, that there is a whole world waiting for them filled with possibility. that's why we held a summit at the white house on bullying. that's why we're going to continue to focus on this issue. this isn't just "kids being kids." it's wrong.

it's destructive. it's never acceptable. and i want all those kids to know that the president and the first lady is standing right by them every inch of the way. i want them to know that we love them and care about them, and they're not by themselves. that's what i want them to know. [applause] pffnow, i also need your help in the broader fight to get this economy back on track. you may have heard, i introduced a bill called the american jobs act. it's been almost three weeks since i sent it up to congress. that's three weeks longer than it should have taken to pass this common-sense bill. this is a bill filled with ideas that both parties have supported -- tax breaks for companies that hire veterans, road projects, school

renovations, putting construction crews back to work rebuilding america, tax cuts for middle-class families so they can make ends meet and spend a little more at local stores and restaurants that need the business. now, you may have heard me say this a few times before -- i'll say it again. pass the bill. enough gridlock. enough delay. enough politics. pass this bill. put this country back to work. hrc, you know how congress works. i'm counting on you to have my back. go out there and get them to pass this bill. [applause] let's put america back to work. now, ultimately, these debates we're having are about more than just politics. they're more about -- they're about more than the polls and the pundits, and who's up and who's down. this is a contest of values.

that's what's at stake here. this is a fundamental debate about who we are as a nation. i don't believe -- we don't believe -- in a small america, where we let our roads crumble, we let our schools fall apart, where we stand by while teachers are laid off and science labs are shut down, and kids are dropping out. we believe in a big america, an america that invests in the future -- that invests in schools and highways and research and technology -- the things that have helped make our economy the envy of the world. we don't believe in a small america, where we meet our fiscal responsibilities by abdicating every other responsibility we have, and where we just divvy up the government as tax breaks for those who need them the least, where we abandon the commitment we've made to seniors though medicare and social security, and we say to somebody looking for work, or a student who

needs a college loan, or a middle-class family with a child who's disabled, that "you're on your own." that's not who we are. we believe in a big america, an america where everybody has got a fair shot, and everyone pays their fair share. an america where we value success and the idea that anyone can make it in this country. but also an america that does -- in which everyone does their part -- including the wealthiest americans, including the biggest corporations -- to deal with the deficits that threaten our future. we don't believe in a small america. we don't believe in the kind of smallness that says it's okay for a stage full of political leaders -- one of whom could end up being the president of the united states -- being silent when an american soldier is booed. we don't believe in that. we don't believe in standing silent when that happens.

we don't believe in them being silent since. you want to be commander-in- chief? you can start by standing up for the men and women who wear the uniform of the united states, even when it's not politically convenient. [applause] we don't believe in a small america. we believe in a big america -- a tolerant america, a just america, an equal america -- that values the service of every patriot. we believe in an america where we're all in it together, and we see the good in one another, and we live up to a creed that is as old as our founding -- e

pluribus unum. out of many, one. and that includes everybody. that's what we believe. that's what we're going to be fighting for. i am confident that's what the american people believe in. i'm confident because of the changes we've achieved these past two and a half years - the progress that some folks said was impossible. and i'm hopeful -- i am hopeful -- >> fired up! >> i'm fired up, too. i am hopeful -- [laughter] [applause] i am hopeful -- i am still hopeful, because of a deeper shift that we're seeing, a transformation not only written into our laws, but woven into the fabric of our society. it's progress led not by washington but by ordinary citizens, who are propelled not just by politics but by love and friendship and a sense of mutual regard.

it's playing out in legislatures like new york, and courtrooms and in the ballot box. but it's also happening around water coolers and at the thanksgiving table, and on facebook and twitter, and at pta meetings and potluck dinners, and church socials and vfw halls. it happens when a father realizes he doesn't just love his daughter, but also her wife. it happens when a soldier tells his unit that he's gay, and they tell him they knew it all along and they didn't care, because he was the toughest guy in the unit. it happens when a video sparks a movement to let every single young person know they're not alone, and things will get better. it happens when people look past their ultimately minor differences to see themselves in the hopes and struggles of their fellow human beings. that's where change is happening. and that's not just the story of the gay rights movement. that's the story of america --

the slow, inexorable march towards a more perfect union. you are contributing to that story, and i'm confident we can continue to write another chapter together. thank you very much, everybody. god bless you. [applause] ♪ ["stars and stripes forever" playing]

♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ >> on "newsmakers," chris van hollen, the ranking member of the house budget committee, talks about how the joint committee is doing with this task of identifying $1.2 trillion in deficit cuts. "newsmakers," sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern on c- span. >> you should always start with the assumption when a politician or ceo is saying something, they are not telling you the truth.

now they may be telling you the truth, but the burden should be on them to prove it. >> his an eagle scout, held a brief stint as an editor of mother jones magazine, produced three of the top 10 grossing documentaries of all time, and his memoir. sunday, your chance to call, e- mail, and tweak michael moore. >> next, local scientists melissa harris-perry talks about the history of race relations in america. at tulane university, she had a new institute focused on the study of race, gender, and politics in the american south. this is an hour and 15 minutes. [applause] >> joining us today is melissa

harris-perry, previously on the faculties of princeton university and the university of chicago, she is currently professor of political science at tulane university where she is the founding director of the cooper project on race and politics in the south. her belief in the classroom has -- as a critical space for democratic reflection is reflected in the fact that she has taught students from grade school through graduate school. her interest are in the study of african american political thought, black religious ideas and practice, and social and clinical psychology. perth writing frequently appears in many scholarly journals and newspapers. she also writes a monthly column for "the nation." she is a frequent contributor to msnbc. in 2009, she is the youngest

scholar to deliver the the w.e.b. dubois lecture. in that same year, she is the youngest woman ever to deliver the where dexter. she is the author of the book "barbershops, bibles, and b.e.t. -- everyday talk and black political thought." donna brazil has described her most recent book, "sister cinema," as insightful and provocative. a must read for those interested in learning more about american politics. the title of her lecture today is "reconstruction lessons -- current u.s. racial politics and the lessons of the civil war." please welcome melissa harris- perry. [applause]

>> thank you for that lovely introduction. it is very kind. let me start by telling you a story. i am from the south. i grew up in charlottesville, virginia and richmond, virginia. i went to college and graduate school in north carolina. i live now in new orleans. at some point, maybe six, seven, or even longer months ago, i got the invitation here. it came through the woman who handles my lectures. i heard her say it on the phone. i typed and to my googol -- into my google calendar, "chattanooga lecture." [laughter] this made perfect sense to me because it was about the civil war. it was related to the colonial

williamsburg foundation. my daughter started fourth grade yesterday in new orleans. i thought, no big deal. i will pop up to tennessee, give the talk, and i will be home before the end of the evening. when she called me two weeks ago and said, "you have to book your flight to new york." i said, "new york? where am i going?" [laughter] i spent two weeks learning about this place. i am honestly a little nervous at the moment because i did not realize the stage to which i had accepted an invitation -- and i am truly, truly honored to be here, although surprised not to find myself in tennessee. [laughter] in addition to being a southerner, i amatpolitical -- i

am a political scientist, not a historian. in addition to the things that made me somewhat nervous about today was looking at the speakers from this week. the speakers who have been here this week are the sort of thing one would get in a year or in a semester, but certainly not in four days prior to my lecture. and so, what i want to be clear is i will not be offering a great deal more on our original historical insight on the moment of the civil war. my particular vantage point as a contemporary political scientist is to make use of history, to take the work of architects and -- archivists and historians who are telling stories about our past and make

them part of the analysis of our current political moment the -- current political moment. the very first time this happened for meat was actually in graduate school. my best friend then and today is, herself, a historian. when we first met she asked me, "what do you study?" i studied african american politics. she asked a question that changed my life. "you studied black politics when?" [laughter] that question just asked me to make something hysterically -- specific. ly to ask "when" has been an incredibly important to the work i do it in political science. we are always looking for the models of how the world works and not necessarily thinking about the historic contingencies of those models. but even as a political scientist, i can say that i believe our contemporary political environment cries out for an urgent collective

emersion in accurate american history, including its complicated intersections with race and racism. i have a fantasy where i imagine a quarter hour of every cable news program being devoted to a study of american history. [laughter] [applause] i can hear the ratings plummet. that only gets applause here. [laughter] but indulge this fantasy for just a moment. what would happen if you were engaged in thinking about american history? what might happen if americans understood revolutionary war history? it might be considerably more difficult for the tea party to argue that their anxieties about a president elected with 53% of the popular vote by an electorate that enjoys universal adult suffrage is just

like or just at the same as the concerns of colonists who decried taxation without representation under the role of an absolute monarch. just to that small distinction -- [laughter] i honestly also think that no sustained engagement with the federalist papers could allow us to continue such narrow simplistic assertions about what the founders believed. the paragraph that i wish we were talking about in this political moment is that the american founding was "contested." it was, itself, a political process. it was not a divine revelation that came down with agreement from all of the founders. the very thing we hold up now as our constitution is, of

course, a political document that included all of the nature of politics, which is to say "compromise." [laughter] i think the ability to deploy the symbols and language uprear -- of patriotism in the ways they are currently deployed requires deep and broad ignorance about american history. [laughter] [applause] i want to be really clear -- i do not mean that if we read the federalist papers or thought more closely about the revolutionary war that we would find that, in fact, all of the founders were secular, liberal, humanists, of course, progressives and would watch msnbc. that is not what we would find. but i do think a recognition that there has been

confrontation even from the beginning would help to set our current political crisis in some context. although i think we suffer from a deficit of historical knowledge in general, we seem to be particularly uninformed about the histories of marginal people -- black americans, non- white immigrants, women of all races, workers, and, of course, gay americans. i also, by the way, suspect that if we had a clear understanding of those marginal histories that secession would seem like a less reasonable response to political disagreement. but if we carefully had a conversation, even for just 50 -- 15 minutes on the evening news, about the civil war, we might be better equipped to recognize and appreciate the consequences of the racial angst currently directed at president obama's administration.

i am company that a serious -- and i am confident that a serious study of labor history would make us more sober in our conversation about stripping workers of their right to collectively organize. and i have no doubt that young women would feel more urgent about protecting their reproductive rights if we were having more public conversations about the struggle for women's equality. there is no single historical truth that will lead all americans to conclude the same things about our future. history is, in many ways, the collective project of making meaning out of the events of the past. but history is more than an academic exercise. i think the texas textbook committee is very clear about how important history is while they were to sanitize it. bridges which is why they work so hard to sanitize it. the tea party is incredibly

aware of how powerful historical discourse is, which is why they point to a historic moments like the boston tea party or vague historic enemies light hitler and socialism. in short, i think the results of our collective historical ignorance are profound and that those with political polls on -- goals the left or the right might well invest their resources on accurate discussions of history just as much as impressing for particular public policies. so it is in that context, that feeling about history, that i am excited, despite the fact that i am not a historian about the civil war, to have an opportunity to discuss the lessons of the 19th century for our contemporary political moment. for i want to consider. -- four i want to consider.

there is no way i can do justice to all of these. my goal in this portion is to just be a bit provocative about how we might imagine these four aspects of 19th century history impacting our current moment and, hopefully, engage in conversation. i have been told the "q&a" here is often quite robust. [laughter] here are the four points of light to make. -- i would like to make. first is about the continuing structural, political, and economic legacy of our unresolved anxieties about federalism. i want to talk a little bit about federalism to the extent that federalism is the core civil-rights moment that we are -- excuse me, civil war moment, although it is a civil rights moment -- that we are continuing to work with. the second is about the power of confederate nostalgia in american political culture. yes, i am going to talk a little bit about "the help." [laughter]

third is about the civil war and reconstruction's legacy for black voting and how it is difficult to understand african-american's voting and political behavior. within a context it goes back to reconstruction. finally, the fourth, the lingering racial anxieties of the american south that find themselves into a broader american political culture, which is also connected with confederate nostalgia in general. let's start with structure. the two immediate precursors of the civil war place the issue of slavery squarely within federalism. it is impossible to suggest that the civil war is only about one of these issues. it is obviously at all times both about the question of intergenerational human chattel bondage and about the relative

autonomy of the american states relative to the national government. the two, of course, that bring the final decade of stress that breaks apart the union or the fugitive slave act of 1850, which allowed an slavers to pursue formerly enslaved women, men, and children into free states and return them to servitude. the second is the compromise of 1850 that allowed territories to enter the union as slave or free state, which, of course, set up violent lobbying. it turns out people did not just get to make these choices, but, in fact, there was lobbying and organizing with these potential new states. one might suggest that the bloody battles of the civil war resolve these questions -- the

question of 1850 through the fugitive slave act and through the compromise of 1850 once and for all, but once lincoln and the union when, once the union is preserved, it is clear we have established the primacy of the federal government. i think there are reasons to read post-1865 american history in a way that does demonstrate the growing authority of a centralized national government. at a minimum, a recognition that, in fact, that government will be the primary site of citizenship identity. but it would be a mistake to think that those questions were resolved with the final truth. our contemporary politics reflect the continuing anxiety rooted in this 19th century question about the

appropriateness of federal government policy. let's just take the current debt ceiling debate. let's take just that moment. we can go back and do lots of others, but let's take the recent debt ceiling debate and look at it as a moment a civil war knowledge. remember that the civil war was the first time our country took on massive federal debt. i know it sounds nuts, but the president decided it was worth spending money we did not have in order to preserve the union. [laughter] seriously, look at that. i just want to pause for a moment. to preserve the union, it was worth going into debt. this notion that debt itself is not inherently evil, is not inherently bad for the state, but is actually a reasonable choice for responsible leaders to make under the circumstances of the need to preserve the union. the civil war is also the moment of the imposition of the first federal income tax in 1861.

that to fight a war, one might need to impose a tax. [laughter] [applause] where have we come to in america where you all would applaud "to fight a war is a need to impose a tax?" of course, the third that we heard so much about during the end of the debt ceiling debate, is that the great civil war amendment, the 14th amendment emerging in the spirit of reconstruction which established the american citizenship rooted in due process and equal protection. i think in a lot of ways, the end of rationalizing the 14th amendment both because of the context in which it emerges, but also because of the use to

which it was put in the 20th century. the fact is the 14th amendment provides a national citizenship definition for all americans in a critical way for the first time. as we have learned and the recent debate, it also established the full faith and credit of the united states in this clause that the validity of the public debt shall not be questioned. it was that phrase that many suggested meant that president obama had the authority, if he wanted to come not to simply and the debt ceiling fight, raise the debt ceiling limit as a result of the requirement of the 14th amendment that the validity of public debt shall not be questioned. i want to pause here because these moments, the willingness to take on debt, the imposition of the first federal tax, and the question of whether or not the president has a right and

responsibility to raise the debt ceiling were all core questions 15 minutes ago. 15 minutes ago what we were talking about were questions of the 1860's. that despite the fact that they have been resolved, are clearly not resolved at all, are very much up for debate about whether or not the country of three primary responsibility is to get out of debt or to preserve itself. whether or not the federal government should be appropriately bringing in more tax revenue and whether or not the president has certain kinds of authority under the 14th amendment relative to the economic power of the nation. the incompleteness of reconstruction means that the tension of states' rights

remains. localism is, of course, the painful consequence of this. before the debt ceiling debate, the central debate around localism and the power of the federal government has been the health care reform act, maligned as "obamacare." renewing the anxiety of nullification and the power of the federal government to act as the preeminent policy making body. i want to be careful as we think about nullification because i want to suggest that northern states, free states, were actually engaged in a nullification of their own. their refusal over and over again to abide by the fugitive slave act of 1850, the resistance against sending back formerly enslaved persons, where the kind of localism that said "you cannot come here into this free territory, into this

restate, and take people away and back into slavery." it was, in fact, the confederates, despite the language about localism, who insisted that the power of the federal government be imposed on the local choices of three states not to respect the fugitive slave act. there is not just sort of "southerners like localism" because they are yokels and those yankees in the free states like government, but just like we see today, there is the waxing and waning about the power of the central government to act in one interest. issues of marriage equality, abortion, and other social issues demonstrate that often those who make claims on states' rights and on localism are actually very willing to use

the power of the federal government to impose a single set of ideas nationally when those ideas are consistent with their ideology. that is certainly true on both sides. the war between the states, the war of northern aggression -- [laughter] -- is not the war that settled once and for all the question of federalism. we continue to be in that conversation today. the second is less structural and more cultural. it is a question about confederate nostalgia. again, i grew up in the u.s. south, which means i know the confederate flag very well. and i want to be very clear

that the confederate flag truly does have multiple meanings. my husband is the most aggressive civil rights advocate i know personally. i know there must be others in the world, but personally, the one i know, who spends his time working to bring about questions of racial justice. but he is also an eagle scout. he and i camp. not in these shoes, but he and i camp. [laughter] we camp mostly in the south -- mississippi, louisiana, and the florida panhandle. my husband has a camping outfit and it includes the shorts that i try to burn on every

[laughter] florida panhandle. my husband has a camping outfit and it includes the shorts that i try to burn on every camping trip, but it also includes a hat. the hat has a pit bull and a confederate flag on it. [laughter] i have many pictures of him in this hat. i tell him if he ever runs for office again, i am going to put it out on the internet that here is a civil rights guy wearing a confederate flag. we are keenly aware of the history of the confederate flag, but we are also keenly aware of other things. wearing this hat makes us safer in southern camping locations. [laughter] [applause] that is absolutely true. there is a way in which it signals a "i am not mad at all. it is fine. we are just here to have a good time."

>> but the other thing is it actually does have a kind of resonance for our childhood. we really did watch the "dukes of hazzard" growing up. we really did listen to the band alabama. we really are southerners. we are not something else. we are both black and southern at the same time in a way that does not necessarily always cause double consciousness. that said, the effort, the work of trying to get african- american southern stories back into the center of our stories of what it means to be southern are blocked play a continuing refusal in confederate nostalgia to recognize the roles that african-americans played. i take no where with the power of this confederate nostalgia clearer than when governor macdonald declared april confederate history month in

virginia. in his declaration, the better macdonald called on the virginians to "understand the sacrifices of confederate leaders, soldiers, and citizens during the period of the civil war." leaders, soldiers, and citizens. by focusing on these three categories -- leaders, soldiers, and citizens -- the governor refuses to acknowledge the existence of black people in the south. sure there were some black soldiers that fought for the confederacy, but the vast majority of african-americans contributed to the confederate effort through violently and forced unpaid labor, which was part and parcel of the experience of dehumanizing intergenerational bondage. macdonald and seems to think that particular history is unworthy of remembering.

it is a kinda erasure of black life, suffering, and struggle. on my father of three side, we have traced our family tree as far back as we could to a black woman sold on the street corner of churchill in richmond, virginia. my father and his siblings grew up in that neighborhood. they attended racially segregated schools and despite being nearly starved for school resources by the state, my father and his twin brother went on to become college professors. my dad becoming the first dean of african-american affairs right there at the university of virginia. [applause] when i grew up in virginia and attended school in the late 1970's, my teachers still referred to the civil war as the "war of northern aggression" and the "war between the states."

i did not hear the words civil war until college. my interracial family experienced harassment and abuse during the decades we made our home in the commonwealth, but va is also the place where i made lifelong friends, found spiritual communities, and was educated by many tough and loving teachers. i have seen political consciousness in virginia. i recall many of the phrases of doug wilder's inauguration address as the first african- american governor. and my favorite moment in 2008, just moments before obama was elected -- virginian turned blue. [applause] i share this personal history i cannot because it is exceptional, but precisely

because it is not exceptional. we are, african americans, southerners. data shows we are increasingly, once again, southerners in the kind of reverse migration that has been happening in the last decade. va at history is my history, but when the confederate nostalgia emerges from governor mcdonnell, it propagates and profits to from a history that is recognizably alien to me. a narrative of virginia that laments the end of slavery, that romanticizes traitorist actions against the state and sedition. my problem with the confederate flag is not about racism. it just is not. i have seen the confederate flag flown in indiana. i s in the confederate flag flown in michigan.

i guess in the confederate flag flown in upstate new york. i have seen the confederate flag flown in california and the kind of places that have nothing to do with the civil war in the context of being former confederate states. my problem with the rebel flag is that we have decided that it is an equally patriotic flag to fly as the american flag. the issue here is not about racism. the issue is about a willingness to allow a revisionist history about secession to be part of our profound american understanding so that to fly the akaka confederate flag is to make a claim towards a history that is about breaking the country apart, yet we continue to think of it as an equally

patriotic choice. [applause] i think we do this because we were in a rush at the moment of reconstruction to seal the fissures of the country. the civil war was exceptionally painful. one of the key elements of that feeling was to allow former confederates to tell the stories of the former past of slavery in a way that recognized them as the center of those stories. "gone with the wind," " birth of a nation," these are the remembrances that affect our understanding of what priest- civil war america was. the moonlight and magnolias. the version of southern history

that erases black suffering in order to tell the story about a time when things were simpler, better, and when black women made us pancakes. [laughter] mammy and her various formations as aunt jemima remains madison avenue's most powerful marketing tool in all of history. it is aunt jemima. it is mammy. her ability to sell domestic products by recalling a time when the white domestic sphere was undergirded by faithful black women who contributed

their magical capacities to make sure that white households and families were supported. now, mammy did not exist. she is not real. yet, it was almost true that she would have been standing right next to martin luther king on the national mall. just a few years after women got the right to vote in the 1920's, the daughters of the american confederacy proposed a mammy statue to be erected in the shadow of the lincoln memorial. it was a tribute to all the black mammy's -- let's be clear, these women saw themselves as creating a tribute to the sacrifices of the african-american women, the

maid, the help -- who served them. this statute, they suggested, would be erected there in remembrance of all they had done. the senate, which had repeatedly refused to pass the anti-lynching bill, in the exact same sentence was willing to appropriate funds for the purpose. when it got to the u.s. house of representatives, african- american leaders, press, church, and individuals stopped and kept it from happening. it is possible that enshrined in granite right at this moment, there could be a mammy statue on the u.s. small and it would be right there next to king. i try to think about because insult i would experience at that existed, how i would feel about going into washington d.c..

one of my favorite runs is the national mall. the idea of what it would need to run by a statue, not of an actual person - let's be very clear -- mammy did not exist. but she existed in confederate nostalgia that even at this moment, "the help"-- first the book i tried to pretend was not happening and now the film that is hailed as a reconcile of racial angst, continues to reproduce this notion that african-american women are, primarily, sort of magical creatures capable of not only simultaneously solving the problems of women who have far

more resources than them and, without question, always loving the white children who are their charges, and never experiencing sexual violence or violation by the white man for whom they work, and always embodied in bodies that could never invoke sexual anxiety of any kind, and capable of ultimately walking off triumphantly into the jim crow south unemployed, and we applaud. that is what happens in "the help." a woman walks off unemployed in the jim crow south in a maid uniform and the audiences go wild. this is the core of our

unreconciled anxiety about the end of the civil war. the third -- contemporary african-american politics. i will move quickly through the next two so we can be in conversation. when barack obama was elected to the united states presidency, he was elected with about 95% of the african-american vote. that means that about half of black americans who typically vote for the republican party showed up and voted for barack obama. it is typically somewhere between 87%-9% of the african- american vote goes to democrats. i totally think condoleezza rice and shelby steele voted for president obama. [laughter] i am pretty sure colin powell told us that he was planning to. this is a story about african- americans desirous of