What you might not know about the Declaration of Independence - Kenneth C. Davis

[@ShawnRavenfire]

All this is shown in the movie 1776. A lot of it is really accurate. One thing the movie left out, though, because they were afraid that no one would believe it was true, was that John Adams predicted that if slavery existed in the new nation, it would result in a civil war a hundred years in the future. (Smart guy.)

[@guavajui3871]

Shawn Ravenfire nah

[@pearlescent1557]

@DesertRat45 huge bruh moment

[@jlupus8804]

And Adams was the only President from America’s founding who didn’t own slaves! Nice!

[@TBadalov]

@@pearlescent1557 huge huge bruh moment

[@bladeworxgg]

The wording of the Declaration of Independence set the framework for the eventual conclusion of the practice of slavery in the US. It does not exclude those who lived a life of slavery or indentured servitude. Rather, it states explicitly that "...all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Frederick Douglass, a man who escaped the bonds of slavery and subsequently propelled himself to a life of success and influence noted that the founders were correct in the implementation of The Declaration of Independence. A pathway was alluded to and left open, to resolve the contentious issue at the time. They did this, in exchange for Unity. They had acknowledged this was of paramount necessity in the face of the greatest military force they had known. They understood after years of tyrannical oppression, unjust and undue suffering what would happen to them if they were to fail to assert their sovereignty. Armed with the fortitude of spirit that stands as a testament to the beliefs upon which this Nation was founded, that they would die on their feet before they lived on their knees. They were faced with the elucidation of the heroic challenge of David versus Goliath. The ethics of the formulation of the Declaration of Independence are easy for us to discuss in the comfort of modernity. However, had our founding fathers chosen to die upon the hill of slavery we may very well have remained under the rule of the Crown. They decided to include, a litany of injustices inflicted upon them. They even had the wherewithal to mention the Native inhabitants of this land. Noting in one such complaint, "He has incited domestic insurrections among us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions." It takes no great effort to say today that this is a crude and shallow representation. Yet, we do not have the authority of authenticity to consider their contemporary circumstances. The Native Americans and the Colonists shared in a shallowness of understanding of each other's culture and civilization. They did not have access to the expedient means of education and communication that we have today. Still they understood that they were seeking to claim their sovereignty upon the grounds of a Native peoples. Trapped between the territories of the Native Americans and the tyranny of the King; they had evaded religious persecution but found themselves still shackled to the whims of the Crown. The world is unfair in nature and people suffer the fortune of their existence. We understand that the fear of the unknown is inherent in creatures of logic. Thus we habitually erect walls and dig psychological moats to fortify ourselves against these fears. It is not uncommon to cast aspersions and maintain distance from the unknown. We quickly assign motive and allow bias to drive our thoughts, for fear is simple and understanding is an arduous task. The beauty of the Declaration of Independence is in the acknowledgement and distinction between the laws of nature and natural law. The essence of this was expounded upon decades later by Abraham Lincoln. "Nowhere in the world is presented a government of so much liberty and equality. To the humblest and poorest amongst us are held out the highest privileges and positions. The present moment finds me at the White House, yet there is as good a chance for your children as there was for my father's." --August 31, 1864 Speech to 148th Ohio Regiment In this speech we can begin to interpret the ideals of the United States of America as outlined in Lincoln's mind. A more clarion and recognizable example was this quote from his famous Gettysburg Address, "That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom - and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.” The final piece I would like to share is Lincoln's Fragment on the Constitution and the Union. "All this is not the result of accident. It has a philosophical cause. Without the Constitution and the Union, we could not have attained the result; but even these, are not the primary cause of our great prosperity. There is something back of these, entwining itself more closely about the human heart. That something, is the principle of “Liberty to all” - the principle that clears the path for all - gives hope to all - and, by consequence, enterprise, and industry to all. The expression of that principle, in our Declaration of Independence, was most happy, and fortunate. Without this, as well as with it, we could have declared our independence of Great Britain; but without it, we could not, I think, have secured our free government, and consequent prosperity. No oppressed, people will fight, and endure, as our fathers did, without the promise of something better, than a mere change of masters. The assertion of that principle, at that time, was the word, “fitly spoken” which has proved an “apple of gold” to us. The Union, and the Constitution, are the picture of silver, subsequently framed around it. The picture was made, not to conceal, or destroy the apple; but to adorn, and preserve it. The picture was made for the apple - not the apple for the picture. So let us act, that neither picture, or apple shall ever be blurred, or bruised or broken. That we may so act, we must study, and understand the points of danger."

[@AnujKumar-em8lv]

"All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others" -Orwell

[@AquinasAssociate]

That quote was about communism

[@xesolor]

+Frost_20160 that quote was about the hierarchical dictatorships that used communism as a false rallying flag, to give the illusion of equality while being the total opposite. True capitalism or true communism have never been fully achieved - land of the free where as long as you work you can strike rich? Bullshit, trickle down economics that naturally redistribute wealth, despite wage gaps and class division have been GROWING? Bullshit! I know America loves to vilify the idea of communism as if it's the same thing as autocratic totalitarianism, but really?

[@kritik2132]

Orwell nothing known about communism, that is why he described his own capitalistic reality.

[@TheLifesagardendigit]

Anuj Kumar America is a corporation

[@MonkeyBidness359]

Great Britain: First Among Equals.

[@purx8446]

is it just me or is everbody else doing this for school work bc were trapped at home bc the corona virus

[@Globoyglk]

Yesssss

[@mattthedude1878]

@Cayanan, Rhainna oi Rhainna its me Matthew in my other youtube account

[@Ishid_Anfardedd]

Doing school rn

[@mimiliu8127]

Sucksss T-T

[@ehsan6872]

RV purx yup

[@noyou6220]

“Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we fought for these ideals why should we settle for this?”

[@theoddishmushroom1534]

HAMILTON PEEPS

[@MrKajithecat]

They accepted it because by tackling the issue of slavery the southern colonies and the most wealthy of colonies, Virginia would not agree to the document and they would remain fractured.

[@ClaymoreLinx]

+MrKajithecat Liberals don't recongize facts anymore, they just grunt "SLAVERY BAD"! "Founding Fathers Bigots"!

[@gigijbijbj]

+ClaymoreLinx but the founding fathers were bigots that's a fact

[@pigeater4587]

@@gigijbijbj how so?

[@beemer9108]

Goosebumps. Jefferson was just a great writer, I love it.

[@juliannichols3610]

I might use this short, lively, concise video for my friends studying for US Citizenship Test. Better than straight memorizing of 128 questions!!

[@fwhot]

Who else is in school rn and there teacher told them to watch this

[@Marissa_Acotto]

Me

[@MinecraftPony155]

🇩🇪🙋

[@Fizzybone]

me TwT

[@hi4y]

me

[@sealcatgamer]

Also me

[@lshanacobey5047]

John Adams dance though 😂😂

[@imdahooman0371]

😂

[@-_-hi-_-9308]

😭😭😂😂

[@sampielouw]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👍

[@socal3154]

The Dance of Liberty 🤣

[@kaeljenkins433]

@@socal3154 lol

[@jimweaver3315]

Saving this for my granddaughter to use when writing about our Independence.

[@carolinaherrera4544]

How old is she now?

[@yusofaziz619]

@@carolinaherrera4544 35 I guess 😂😂

[@skinnyqueen5914]

i wonder if he ever showed this to his granddaughter…

[@phasmatodea_]

maybe.

[@omgaminah2388]

it took 9+ years to tell her

[@Heligoland360]

I find it funny that George III looked unhappy at not being a slave driver.

[@elirchi9214]

I know, maybe it's because that George portrays what Jefferson wanted him to be

[@clarisolelizondo1586]

I D G A F San loo

[@johnb6723]

People misrepresent history all too often. King George III was famous for his gardening skills.

[@philipdavis5050]

Samuel Adams, a signer, is reported to have stated "...there will be trouble one hundred years hence; posterity will never forgive us." Very prophetic.

[@henkwaterlander3038]

All men are created equal, and when I mean men, I mean adult men. And when I mean adult men, I mean white adult men. And when I mean white, adult, men, I mean rich, white, adult men.

[@andymcevoy7822]

This video simplifies a much more complex argument. When they say Congress didn't want the mention of slavery in the Declaration, it almost leads one to believe that that was a unanimous decision. It needs to be explained that this was a huge argument between the northern and southern colonies. Removing slavery from the Declaration was a concession by the north in order to insure ratification from the south.

[@8191-m8t]

Click pray study pray wol.jw.org/en/wol/binav/r1/lp-e

[@eostyrwinn5018]

It's Ironic that this went up on Canada day.

[@SaraBezanson]

Let's hope the Canada one goes up on Independence Day.

[@mr.geniuscock8853]

Sara Bezanson now that's irony lol

[@JaysonCarmona]

To think that the Founding Fathers did not understand the immoral nature of slavery is to not have done the research and studied what the Founders actually said about slavery. The Founding Fathers did not solve the slave question then because they needed the southern states to ratify the declaration of independence. Not adding that bit about slavery was a compromise. Also, the King of England was responsible for keeping the slave trade going. There were laws in Virginia that made freeing slaves illegal and thus Washington was not able to free his slaves until after his death. The law changed before Jefferson died and he was only able to free some of his slaves. Washington, Jefferson and many of the other Founding Fathers wanted slavery to be abolished. Here is the text from Jefferson's original draft (I find it crafty that the text is not shown in the video): He [King George III] has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere. . . . Determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce. - The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Adrienne Koch and William Peden, eds. (New York: Random House, 1944), p. 25. George Washington wrote in a letter to Robert Morris: I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery]. - Letter to Robert Morris, April 12, 1786, in George Washington: A Collection, ed. W.B. Allen (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1988), p. 319. I would most ardently wish to become a member of it [the anti-slavery society] and . . . I can safely promise them that neither my tongue, nor my pen, nor purse shall be wanting to promote the abolition of what to me appears so inconsistent with humanity and Christianity. . . . May the great and the equal Father of the human race, who has expressly declared His abhorrence of oppression, and that He is no respecter of persons, succeed a design so laudably calculated to undo the heavy burdens, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke. - William Livingston, The Papers of William Livingston, Carl E. Prince, editor (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1988), Vol. V, p. 255, to the New York Manumission Society on June 26, 1786. In "The Founding Fathers and Slavery" by David Barton, unpublished paper, p. 5 Jefferson on slavery and its consequences: The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. . . . And with what execration should the statesman be loaded, who permitting one half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other. . . . And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever - Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia (Trenton: Wilson & Blackwell, 1803), Query XVIII, pp. 221-222

[@alvinjones6856]

+Jayson Carmona True..but I read that jefferson became less anti-slavery as he found he could make a good income from it- Washington knew that it would end and wanted to be on the right side of history so freed the slaves (really his wifes...) in his will.

[@JaysonCarmona]

Jefferson still freed 5 slaves upon his death. He might have freed more, but he could not because they were collateral for his debts, 130 slaves (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manumission#United_States) were sold to pay his debts. Manumission laws also had certain limitations on what types of slaves could be manumitted. It seems he would have freed more if he hadn't been in a rough financial situation. We have to judge people according to their own times, not according to what is obviously is right. This whole idea of "the right side of history" is hogwash. The Founders had similar ideas of Judeo-Christian ethics and morality. Jefferson was on a committee of three that proposed that slavery should not be allowed to spread into the new western territories: "That after the year 1800 of the Christian era, there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the said States, otherwise than in punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted to have been personally guilty." Journals of the Continental Congress, Volume XXVI, pp. 118-119, Monday, March 1, 1784. In 1805, Jefferson bemoaned that slavery would not be abolished in his lifetime: "I have long since given up the expectation of any early provision for the extinguishment of slavery among us. [While] there are many virtuous men who would make any sacrifices to affect it, many equally virtuous persuade themselves either that the thing is not wrong or that it cannot be remedied." Jefferson, Works (1905), Vol. X, p. 126, to William A. Burwell on January 28, 1805. Before he died he said this about slavery: "On the question of the lawfulness of slavery, that is of the right of one man to appropriate to himself the faculties of another without his consent, I certainly retain my early opinions." Jefferson, Writings (1904), Vol. XVI, pp. 162-163, to the Hon. Edward Everett on April 8, 1826. The man was human and imperfect, but he was not far ahead of his tome.

[@prvtcaboose]

I just want to thank you for setting the record straight. I am a history teacher and can't stand the modern revisionist tactics that try to make out or founders to be evil men who wanted slavery to remain in place forever! I appreciate your work in digging up those sources! I am surprised how many people don't realize that they took out that slavery clause because they needed support from the southern states. I thought that was at least still taught. But apparently not... Thanks again!

[@maryannhope8276]

Thank you for the interesting info. Godspeed

[@maryannhope8276]

@@prvtcaboose Thank you for being a teacher! 🙋

[@eyespelegode]

I thought we allowed slavery because if we didnt then the south was threatening that they would severate from the north and we needed the south so we accepted it for the time being. That's at least based on my knowledge.

[@guillermog3870]

That was the problem later on though. But the US didn't want to end slavery, it just wanted to stop it from spreading to other states. The Civil War was mostly based on the state's rights to succeed which they didn't have. So yeah you're right in some areas.

[@eyespelegode]

Oh, thank you for informing me.

[@partingofways]

You two are pillars of the youtube community. I wish everyone would act like this.

[@CT_Taylor]

Actually, they did not want it in the beginning mentioned(because they needed the support of ALL the Colonies to fight the British.) Once the war was won, we created the Articles of Confederation. A very loose and bad government system. When time came around again to create the Constitution, the 3/5ths compromise was required in order for the South to ratify(and become of) the new government. Which was very crucial that they did. Many of the founders did not want slavery, but it was the only way to get the South on board. Along comes the civil war. The civil wars main reason for fighting in the first place is obviously slavery. The person above was not 100% correct in how he said it. The states were choosing to succeed because there was heavy debate, and largely winning, in Congress to end slavery. And the national pressures were urging just for that. Slaves were escaping to the north, people were helping them escape, etc... Also under the Articles of Confederation, there was the Missouri Compromise(this was under the constitution) and the Northwest Ordinance(which stayed in effect under the constitution). The NWO prohibited slavery(many people still brought slaves and called them indentured servants.) and the Missouri Compromise established a line which was 36-30 on a globe which made slavery illegal above it and legal(if the state public elections, if it were becoming a new state, or state legislatures approved of it). This further divided America into North and South, because only southern states could have slavery and only northern states couldn't. Later the Compromise was declared unconstitutional by the supreme court. So this all spun up the issue of state AND slavery rights. Since the fed. govt was trying to tell the states how to run and that they could not have slavery(which was vital to the feudal economy there). So once the war starts, the southern states succeeded because of government over reach, pressuring them to end slavery, and taxation.(there was a tax, I forget which one it was, that got South Carolina to succeed in the 1830's I believe. Andrew Jackson got POed by them doing that. Lol.) So yeah. To say the CW was ONLY about slavery is not correct, but saying it had hardly anything to do with slavery is also a lie. And when it comes down to it, the South favored the flawed Articles of Confederation-type government(states have the power) rather than the Constitution type government.(the federal has the power)

[@guillermog3870]

Very interesting, Thank you!

[@romanbap6842]

I noticed you took out endowed by their CREATOR from the clip.

[@garrettsasser4565]

There's a lot left out so they could fit slavery into it, but that was the whole purpose of this video.

[@Breathingdeeper]

It always bothered me that Jefferson wrote that all men are created equal when he owned a squadron of slaves himself. Not to mention had however many swirlie kids with them. The vanilla chocolate kind

[@adonyz666]

Thats why actions ALWAYS speaks louder than words

[@MarcianusImperator]

Augustus Ceasar AVE AUGUSTUS CAESAR! ROMANUS IMPERATOR!

[@jar54817]

It might sound weird an almost disgusting to us, but many people, including Jefferson, did not see them as truly people and therefore did not see the hypocrisy. And everybody today acts like they would be one of the very few the truly did treat blacks the same as whites, but I would argue that you would be one of those people who saw them as property because it is so easy to be brainwashed, when you are told from childhood that blacks are not equal to whites and that is all you know.

[@lornaduwn]

Jefferson did not have kids with "them". He had one long term relationship with one woman, Sally Hemmings. He was so in love with his wife that when she died young he vowed never to marry again. Sally was his wife's half sister and was 1/4 black. Interracial relationships were a big taboo back then, so their relationship took place behind closed doors. It was not a case of the master abusing his slave, but rather a white man having to keep his interracial love a secret.

[@Breathingdeeper]

lornaduwn fuck dude I think you're right. Sally Hemmings does ring a bell

[@gabeross515]

Text Of The Declaration Of Independence When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and, accordingly, all experience has shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature; a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing, with manly firmness, his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands. He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers. He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies, without the consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to the civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation: For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us; For protecting them, by a mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states; For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world; For imposing taxes on us without our consent; For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury; For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses; For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries, so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these colonies; For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments; For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection, and waging war against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow citizens, taken captive on the high seas, to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions. In every stage of these oppressions, we have petitioned for redress, in the most humble terms. Our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred, to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends. We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that, as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

[@LittleGobliin]

Thomas Jefferson firmly opposed slavery calling it a “moral depravity” and a “hideous blot,” he believed that slavery presented the greatest threat to the survival of the new American nation. Secondly he was actively involved in legislation that he hoped would result in slavery’s abolition. If you care to talk about "the lesser known facts" please be sure to include them all. "But, as it is, we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. - Thomas Jefferson

[@themarissasofia]

Kenneth, you explained this topic in a way that allowed me to easily understand such a broad topic! Karrot Animation, I thought this animated video was very well put together! Wonderful job to you both. 👏🏼 Happy Fourth of July! 🇺🇸

[@Canoopy]

Rizzer Tax

[@Mchezz]

The southern delegates would not have voted for independence if the section about slavery was left in the deceleration.

[@k-w-2666]

Michael Sanchez bingo, list to Mr Sanchez people. It was get it done or be stuck under British rule indefinitely. Slavery was (still is) awful, but it wasn’t going away over night.

[@indiana6941]

Exactly

[@abhishekvanenooru2869]

i know i will not step foot on america but i still watch cause i have a optimism

[@fire_tower]

I hope one day you will. There are Americans by choice and those by circumstance. You sound like the former.

[@stpetejohnny1]

They left out Samuel Adams who also had a major say in the writings of the Dec of Ind.

[@videoarchiveman]

yes, if it wasn't for him I'd still be drinking Budweiser. lol

[@eleanorligon7941]

The most accepted reason for cutting out slavery was because the men who agreed with Jefferson believed that they needed all the help they could get and that there young week nation was too small that if they brought up a hard subject like slavery it would divide there new nation (which it eventually did) this would intern devastate the people. Many of our founding fathers and yes many held slaves believed that they would need to stop slavery but that was not the best time to declare it. Just thought I should bring that up something that was neglected in this wonderfully presented video

[@RedTheBible]

Thomas Paine, not mentioned once? Really?

[@graciephelps7318]

this made me understand history more thank you

[@nathanbrown1699]

Interesting, you're one of the best informative channels Ted-Ed!

[@kailee4791]

Why is part of the original wording left out in the beginning? “All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” That is the full context, and I find it saddening that such a critical part of the quote is left out. Similar to how some like to remove “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. This nation was founded on the declaration of “in God we trust” and will, and is falling and becoming more broken by the day without that rock of faith to stand on.

[@phillip3495]

Seeking honest discussion on this. God is indeed mentioned a few times in the documents, but it is not specified "which" god. For example, "Natures God" is used as well as the vanilla "God". "The god of Abraham" is not a phrase used, I believe. Natures God is an allusion to pagan, or deist leanings. While the general term "God" is vague. How are we to know which god? Could a Muslim party arise and claim that the US is a nation of Islam, and use these phrases as its proof? One nation under Allah(God)?

[@TheBroddha]

I read the Dec recreationally, simply because it was so amazingly written.

[@shiverarts8284]

All of the balance of powers ideas, separation of material, stolen from French and 6 nations peoples. Native Americans contributed a lot to this constitution, Duely because most native tribes had their own Constitutions.

[@0901강민재]

독립선언서에 대해 우리가 모를 수도 있는 것에 대해서 배워보는 시간이 되었습니다. 아것으로 미국의 역사에 대해서도 간접적으로 배워보았습니다. 정말 재미있는 시간이 되었습니다. 감사합니다.

[@SpiritofSix]

Interesting. Any such document that focuses on defining the rights and liberties of people always begins at the mental level: a change in how people think and what people desire is the catalyst for changing and achieving new-found rights and freedoms. I find that often times the initial step is to think philosophically--to consider things as deeply as possible, at the most human level. Once we realize that beyond the human condition, the majority of the problems and issues we must deal with are merely parts of how we see ourselves and one another. Fighting starvation is one thing, but fighting racism, intolerance, hypocrisy, corruption, apathy, etc.. these things stem from the human experience, the conscious experience of the world. I try to talk about precisely these things to spark a bit of the philosopher in all of us. Check it out if you're interested:) Good day to you all!

[@Alan.Endicott]

Created equal. Created, not maintained. It is circumstance that makes individuals unequal. What they sought, and we seek still, is to be equal under law, not in circumstance. Some develop skills I don't have. Some possess talents I don't have. Some receive opportunities I don't have. Some are more industrious than I am. Some pursue their happiness differently than I do. We were all created equal. Circumstance makes us unequal. The most we can hope for or expect is that the law treats us equally, regardless of circumstance.

[@rg0057]

This recording sounds early-20th-century to me. What you're looking for is perhaps a (live) string quartet.

[@samtheman9002]

Slavery was put to the side and tabled because the founders knew that the issue would divide them. What they were focused on during the revolution was victory eventually slavery could no longer be ignored and then the civil war happened. America, simply put, was fighting for survival in being recognized as a country even up to the war of 1812 and beyond but after time as we grew more powerful we had the strength to abololish slavery.

[@jaytee9084]

Yooo I remember watching this vid in 8th grade...the memories😅

[@rockshanashireen9679]

U have more rings than lebron

[@bubblehummm4591]

haha I'm watching this for my 8th grade Georgia studies hw rn

[@devinslife]

@@bubblehummm4591 same! that's what I'm doing this for in MA, sharon middle school 8th grader!

[@Devildog2856]

The Article in the Declaration of Independence having to do with slavery was struck down by South Carolina and Georgia. The document needed to be unanimous. Please get your facts right. Also July 2nd is the date of the Lee Resolution our document that separates us from Great Britain the declaration of Independence is why we did

[@kit-rg7ib]

we hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal and when i meet thomas jefferon (HUEGH) ima compel him to include women in the sequel WORK

[@m4ck_s]

don't forget that he also said that all WHITE me are created equal in the first version of the declaration

[@allisonpurcell771]

look around look around at how lucky we are to be alive right now

[@HowardFarranDDS]

Thank you Kenneth C. Davis for this very informative lesson. Howard Farran

[@_STNML]

The question of slavery is actually quite simple - 1. You can't judge their time with today's moral context, as slavery was an accepted practice all over the world at that time. 2. Real life decisions had to be made, that affected real life people. People weren't going to bankrupt themselves (mostly inheritance), nor did they think it was responsible, to the slaves, to free them as they had no idea how to function and succeed in a free society. 3. The Founders knew slavery was wrong, spoke about it, some released their slaves, and believed the time of slavery would eventually come to an end. Plenty of quotes to support that. And....probably the most important reason.... 4. The goal was to preserve the Union. Outlawing slavery outright would eliminate any chance of keeping the Union together. BUT, the Founders decided to insert "road blocks" to slavery into the Constitution, to aid in eliminating slavery when the practical time came. Imagine for one second, the South as it's own separate country. How much longer would slavery had lasted? How many more people would have been enslaved? How many more states would have been allowed to implement slavery?

[@philipnorris6542]

It's highly unlikely, in my opinion, that the South would have lasted indefinitely as a separate nation; if the Confederacy had won the Civil War I am inclined to think that reunification would have come about in the end, although I wouldn't like to say exactly how and when.

[@maheshhardasani787]

America is the most free nation in the world. In this nation one can bring any sorts of reforms because the platform has been already set by the founders.

[@turalrahimli3935]

American Revolutionary leaders could not mention slavery in nation's founding document, because they knew well that it was imposibble to keep on fight in two front at the same time. If they also tried to ban slavery they probably would fail against England. Everything happens for its time and if civil war happened at 1774-1783 years U.S.A would never born. American Revolution has two impacts on history: first one is peacuful transition of power that made by George Washington, and second one is transition of power by elections that made by John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.

[@leonremmen3174]

Also fairly unknown: some passages from the "acte van verlatinghe" (1581, the Netherlands) which can be translated as " Act of Abandonment" were used in the Declaration of Independence. Not surprising, because the dutch founded New Amsterdam, better known as New York. And the dutch supported the war of Independence as well.

[@kaichen6682]

Thanks, that helped me a lot for my 5th grade social studies career

[@ChronDoc024]

same lol

[@BrendaMacin]

I have a test on the Declaration of Independence and I understood nothing from my book! Besides the fact that reading is boring haha. But your video was really understandable and really good! Thank you!

[@dont.ripfuller6587]

You might look into dopamine detox if reading seems boring.

[@omgaminah2388]

@@dont.ripfuller6587 the book could just not be on her level

[@johngurnhill4633]

Thank you from England didnt know this before until now

[@onekerri1]

It's wrong, so forget it. King George was a monster and it should have been kept in the document.

[@JJaqn05]

@@onekerri1 troll

[@bulbinking]

Here is the thing, they were talking about Independence from GOVERNMENT influences (mostly totalitarian oligarchy's, autocracy's, and monarchy's). It wasn't saying ALL PEOPLE should be free, because that would mean imprisoning criminals was also wrong. When they talk about "people" they mean a population first and individual second. The "people" weren't free to rule because they had no say or control over how their government worked or what laws were passed, this is what they were fighting against. Now one could argue that those sold into slavery were results of bad choices or being on the losing side of a war, and nobody seems to talk about the booming white slave trade that was happening in the middle east (and yes, even in some parts of africa) Is slavery wrong? Sure. Was the Declaration of Independence talking about slavery? No. It was talking about GOVERNMENTS and the "people's" RIGHT to choose for themselves (meaning a democratic government, not individual singular person choice) something which pretty much no other major government was doing at the time.

[@dummydummy1493]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them._ He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies: For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments: For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends. We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. *God dammit, I accidentally commented the Declaration of Independence again.*

[@amandad1245]

I like your music it reamindes me of Disnyland!

[@marcoperez8935]

In case anyone is curious as to why our founding fathers kept slavery out of the document it was because of the southern colonies who used slavery the most. The congress were worried that if slavery was abolished it might prevent the south from joining the fight against Britain.

[@dominicbuckley8309]

Highly unlikely. The growing anti-slavery movement in Britain was one of the prime reasons why colonial landowners (i.e. slaveowners) were in favor of Independence: two-thirds of the signatories of the Declaration were slaveowners.

[@johnc1014]

I find it interesting that Kenneth Davis left out "by our Creator" in his paraphrase of the Declaration of Independence. All men are created equal and we are endowed [by our Creator] with certain unalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. At least he left in "created."

[@jamiemaster101]

our creator refers to god but to atheists it means your mom n dad

[@johnc1014]

Gassy Goddess Well, it doesn't refer to your parents. So, atheists are wrong.

[@kentbacatan]

John C the writers most likely meant the word creator as in a deity, but if one chooses not to believe in a god, they would probably attribute the word creator to their parents. This may not be the original meaning of creator in the Declaration of Independence, but the idea the word holds, as well as the total idea of the Declaration still holds true if one considers his creator to be his parents, unless it is a line about being created as brethren under a common father (deity)

[@johnc1014]

Das Jackal Firstly, no, they didn't "most likely [mean] the word creator as in a deity." There is no question that they meant the word to mean a deity. They specifically meant Yahweh, the God of the Bible. You don't get to reinterpret a term to mean anything other than what the founders intended it to mean. Secondly, you are flat out wrong regarding the attribution of the term to their parents. We are not endowed by our parents with any rights. We belong to our creator. While you are technically correct that your parents can grant you certain rights, this is only within the context of God-given rights. First, and foremost, I belong to my heavenly Father. Secondly, I belong to my Earthly parents. They can certainly grant me liberties or place restrictions upon me as I am under their authority. However, their authority comes from God. It is secondary to his authority.

[@kentbacatan]

You see, you missed my point entirely. Read my comment better. I clearly stated "but if one chooses not to believe in a god, they would probably attribute the word creator to their parents. This may not be the original meaning of creator in the Declaration of Independence" See, I did not reinterpret the term, I merely stated some people [and not me] might. I am a Christian myself, but I am just viewing this objectively. You, however, are letting emotions get in the way of actually understanding what I have to say.

[@arthurzadrozny8343]

Not very much new here. No one has hid the fact that Jefferson was part of a committee and the fact that slavery was not addressed as part of our founding doctrines has been well discussed. Had this compromise not been reached slavery might still be alive in the south.

[@Midironica]

I love how everyone loves to laugh at our founding fathers and hold them up to some 21st century code of ethics. Yes, it was ironic and hypocritical that they created the declaration while owning slaves but the fact of the matter is that they lived in the 18th and 19th centuries, when culture, science and religion still did everything it could to validate slavery. Scientists tried to make claims about African's intelligence. Philosophers about their mental predisposition towards servitude and so on. They were still creating something radical by the days standards. That all men, regardless of social status, birth, class, what have you...were created equal was an amazing ideal for a country to uphold.

[@paulinotou]

+Midironica thats true its easy for people to judge in hindsight, Slavery was wrong but it was almost key to the southern economy at the time and very normal. the founding fathers figured that the nation will eventually deal with the slavery issue, not to say that it wasnt wrong, but the founding fathers had independence from England in mind, not slavery. Adding his slavery bit might have cost the cause a lot of need allies in the colonies. Kinda like how we look the other way knowing that the around the world, people in developing countries are working/slaving in bare condition so companies can acquire resources like gold, oil, diamonds, silver, copper or working in dismal sweatshops/workshops in a city so polluted you cant see more than 100 yards into the smog. Instead of going to school kids are in workshops assembling i-phones. Most of these things by the way are manufactured and make their way to the 1st world countries where we consume them without a thought in the world. My point is mainly to Tiana c: , btw. Theres no point in pointing out the moral flaws that have already been corrected over a century ago, when we got just as much fucked up things going on now.

[@alisilcox6036]

Precisely. However, the US's ridiculously rigid political system has ended up regarding the document as sacred, and rarely touches it. Therefore something that WAS revolutionary and wonderfully liberal is now an immovable bastion of backwardness. The world wouldn't view the founding fathers that way if America hadn't bluntly refused to move on. After a major constitutional crisis, the US just about managed to cut out the part that said slaves were 3/5ths human.. Revolutionary or not the founding fathers built a constitution that was unable to change- and that was more important than writing one that made sense, frankly. And still, you basically deify them.

[@paulinotou]

+Ali Silcox I just did a paper for my federal government class and it talked partially about loose and strict construction. So there are a lot of changes to the government even though the constitution has remains practically the same, only 17 amendments ever since the bill of rights. Its called loose construction.

[@alvinjones6856]

+Ali Silcox The system was set up to be hard to change..if it was not God alone knows what it would have morphed into by now...can you imagine if Lincoln had been able to keep ruling by decree or Bush 2 had made it legal to torture confessesions out of US citizens? "to keep you safe..."?? Or FDR could have just had the S. court arrested for throwing out parts of the New Deal? While things go wonkey in a crisis at least after the big panic america gets back to something like normal- if they could change the consitution anytime they liked you can be sure things would be not so nice by now...

[@optimusmikey]

+Harry Howlett All Americans could vote

[@maame4592]

Awesome job! It learned a lot about America from this video

[@herdiantobasudewo6133]

Imagine if thomas is hand wounded when declaration of independence almost complete

[@LaytonSwenson]

One key 🔑 thing to remember here is that the founders knew that they had to be UNANIMOUS in their Declaration of Independence or it would be more likely to fail. Two of the thirteen colonies were in favor of keeping slavery and that my friends was a main factor in the declaration being dramatically altered.

[@Mrdestiny17]

Yes this is true, and what a lot of people gloss over is that the wording "All men are created equal" was worded specifically to allow the possibility of a free nation in the future, as the northern states were already working on abolition already. Pensilvania abolished it in 1780 by birthright, meaning anyone born in Pennsylvania was free, and Massachusetts did so as well in 1783 but they did it completely

[@myvids1415]

There were 11 colonies on the mainland that didn't join the revolution, and many more in the caribbean. It was not unanimous.

[@myvids1415]

@@LaytonSwenson What proportion of people in the 13 colonies were loyalists? From what I have read it was a very divisive issue (it was in Britain) and even the decision to declare independance took a great deal of debate and heartache, afterr many appeals to the British government.

[@TobyKral007]

"This country was founded by a group of slave owners who told us that all men are created equal." George Carlin

[@ag7dragonfly]

@Kosmos de Kosmopoliet He's spreading truth, he is a white person who can handle the truth. Not a fragile wet blanket like you who has to brainwash himself with lies just to sleep at night.

[@slashingsparrow9790]

John Adams, Samuel Adams, and Thomas Paine never owned slaves.

[@gabem.5242]

The slavery bit is so wildly wrong that's baffling: NOT A SINGLE NOTHERNER liked slavery one bit and they wanted the slavery be denounced in the Declaration of Independence. That bit got stopped because: 1) Virginia and the rest of the South were economic powerhouses (say whatever you want about NY, but it was Virginia making the dosh back then) when compared to the rest of the Colonies, 2) They thought that, with industrialization and newly granted freedoms, slavery would've died out naturally in a decade or two, so it wasn't an essential point to contest in a Nation that was really fragile back then. You can read Washington's memoirs about that to confirm that, even Franklin's letters confirm so.

[@ganigaergrandia9086]

Does this "Declaration of Independence" gave the USA the right to change English spelling

[@krim7]

+Ganigaer Grandia Spelling reform was actually really popular at one point.

[@mitwhitgaming7722]

It was actually largely the British that changed thier version of English, to distance themselves from the United States after the Revolutionary War. (I don't have a source on that so take it with a grain of salt)

[@Jamedia66]

The end of slavery in Western Civilization was a direct coefficient result of the formation of the U.S. as a merging nation, as it’s ideologies were being codified in moderation. The end to MOST of the world’s slavery was then a direct result of how Western Civilization’s comprehensive metamorphosis was attained, stemming from the birth of the U.S., who in these initial stages, was not in a position not had the proper resources to end slavery until the proper foundations were put in place. Britain, did on the other hand, have the needed resources to make the first move, and although it was a mutual ideological decision, the end to slavery was by in large a result of the birth followed by the maturation of the United States. The new aged, post modernist ideology in our education systems today, that aims to convince the next generations to come that our nation was formed ON and IN Slavery, is merely an instrumentation of history that is utterly false and deliberately non specific. This is not a matter of perspective, nor an opinion. It is a fact, while rhetoric is a socially constructed idea. Lastly, please do all of yourselves a HUGE FAVOR and look up the works of Dr. Thomas Sowell. You will be set free by his illuminating empirical findings.

[@curt3494]

Arrgh!!! The colonists didn't win their independence from England......They won their independence from Britain!!!!

[@curt3494]

***** But the US didn't win its independence from England.......it won its independence from Britain (or more correctly, the UK).

[@thirteenguage]

curt It was Britain (which is England, Scotland and Wales).

[@curt3494]

thirteenguage The Kingdom of Great Britain.

[@frederickkreuk5460]

curt The UK did not exist before the Acts of Union of 1800, which united the nominally separate Kingdom of Great Britain and Kingdom of Ireland into the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Though these two kingdoms had been ruled by the same king since the Crown of Ireland Act of 1542, they were two separate sovereign nations. Thus before 1800 the colonies in British North America were colonies of the Kingdom of Great Britain and after 1800 of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

[@curt3494]

Rick Kreuk Yes, you're right. The colonists won their independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain. I shouldn't have said 'the UK'. But they certainly didn't win their independence from England lol. As soon as I hear someone say 'England', I just assume that they don't know what they're talking about.

[@ronidoka1581]

Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness

[@nadineebada6557]

we fought or these ideals we shouldnt settle for less these are wise words enterprising me quote em dont act surprised you guys cause i wrote em

[@WhoisSupernerd]

Abraham Lincoln is my idol!

[@StupidPeasant]

How would you rewrite the Declaration of Independence to help avoid the pitfalls that came? Would it have been fought for by the people of the day?

[@plexpopper8763]

Other founders: "remember guys, if we lose the war, everyone who signs their name will be killed, so make sure to make your signatures small so the king can't read them." John Hancock: "LEROOOOOY JENKINS"

[@avery2585]

Im watching the video for school and realized that the dream smp is inspired by so many things lmao

[@avocadotutoriales1557]

I'm here to do my english project

[@jamestaylor2721]

Growing up in Washington state and many years before the Scholastic Rock After School Specials KING TV station broadcast an animated black and white musical PUBLIC SERVICE blurb. I think the LYRICS were as follows. what is a good American? what do you have to do? am I a good American? and by the way ARE YOU? I STAND UP FOR MY RIGHTS! but do I stand up for yours? There were two or three other verses which I can not recall. I firmly believe this film should be broadcast often.

[@edwinmerks2567]

FYI Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence inspired by the text of the famous Dutch document ''Plakkaat van Verlatinghe'', issued in 1581, to justify the Dutch revolt against the Spanish rule. He wrote the Declaration of Independence on paper of the Gerrevink papermill in Egmond aan den Hoef, The Netherlands. The first declarations were printed with watermarks Honig, Rogge and Blauw in Zaandam, a town north of Amsterdam. : )

[@powerfulstrong5673]

The United States Declaration of Independence was actually inspired and influenced by the widespread publication of the famous pamphlets of "Common Sense" by Thomas Paine! Before the publication and widespread circulations of "Common Sense", No one openly advocated Independence of the Thirteen Colonies from British Empire!

[@Quantum8588-z8w]

Ted ROCKS!!!

[@bR-jn5fo]

Honestly, I know I'm late but u can't judge someone in the past by modern day standards, women's rights wasn't a thing at the time and the way they thought of enlightenment was that only those who own property should vote and slavery was a hotbed that divided even them.

[@arthursparks-topic860]

I think one thing that this video missed was that one person greatly influenced the creation of the Declaration of independence. His name was John Locke and people know him well as the "founder of liberalism". He was a philosopher and numerous of his ideas made it into the declarationn of independence, like "each person has the right to life liberty and property", however Jefferson simplified this to, "each person has the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

[@Magoonski]

Do yourselves a favor TED Ed...get your narrators decent microphones so they don't sound like crap.

[@bessburkhardt2093]

Let’s add up the casualties of the revolutionary and Civil War. I wonder if we could have one both at one time? But I don’t even know the population during the wars. Anyone know?

[@-gemberkoekje-5547]

Plakkaat van verlatinghe V2

[@sebradfield]

The only source for Adams' reasons for recommending Jefferson is Adams' letter to Timothy Pickering, written in 1822. In other words, we only have Adams' word for that conversation, written forty-six years after the fact. Despite this, all the references I've seen quote it as "fact".

[@danielafreedman]

Thank you for clarifying that the American Declaration of Independence was actually signed on July 2, 1776 and not on Jully 4th. A commitee of five was formed several months before and they drafted Thomas Paine to write the Declaration. He did so, and delivered it to the Continental Congress where John Hancock and the Secretary signed and approved it. Both Jefferson and Adams made a copy of it. Subsequently about three hundred copies were made in what we call the Dunlop Copies with the July 4th date and distributed to the other colonies for their approval. A note from John Adams has recently surfaced which reads: "A beginning perhaps- Original with Jefferson- Copied from original with T.P.'s (Thomas Paine) permission." Also computer analysis has proved that Thomas Paine and not Jefferson was the true author of this most important document.

[@philipnorris6542]

Actually, it probably wasn't signed on either day. The vote was taken on the 2nd and the Continental Congress ratified it on the 4th. Some historians think the signatures were added four weeks later. The full details are a bit fuzzy; nonetheless, the 4th is the correct celebratory day.

[@carterdreyer2655]

They didn't push slavery at this time since it would cause a great divide among them. They needed to be unified to gain independence.

[@The_Big_Dawg]

The sooner the rebels are put down, and the colonies rightfully returned to Her Majesty's possession, the better. Damn traitors!

[@DonAntonio6]

You wish

[@georgekacharava5517]

Lol you're such a troll.

[@Bob-mh1vi]

Agreed!

[@West_Kagle]

MrDenizen OK............but that's like aborting a 23 year old child. It's a little too late at this point.

[@georgekacharava5517]

Like seriously, do not believe what this guy is saying. He's just trying to get a reaction because he's bored.

[@jonahbarnes5841]

Finally someone is asking about slavery in the Declaration of Independence. I thought no one would ever ask, after my kindergarten teacher, all grade school teachers, every debate team coach, College admissions essays, every humanities class Coast-to-Coast, and every newscaster and media person talks about it incessantly

[@Twiggy163]

and those 5 men copied the Dutch declaration of independence. That took 5 men to do?

[@lexrunner408]

Answer to the last question is because the contential congress also wanted the support of the slave holders in their cause against the crown of england. If they did state something against the rights to hold slaves, then they believed that the slave holders in the South would not join in their cause and maybe even fight against the contential congress rather than fight for them

[@rodrigopm13]

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. America refers to the whole continent.

[@Gone._.]

I never know that John Addams was a good dancer

[@borntogazeintonightskies]

That dancing John Adams kills me.

[@cybercoder5598]

Thanks For This Educational Video

[@angeldax1441]

When you watched too much Hamilton and is now HamilTrash

[@genebuttler5563]

It was Jefferson who signed the law abolishing the African slave trade in 1807 after he gave a speech to congress to draft legislation putting an end to it.

[@realigiousrayne]

So that's why I can't get to sleep that day, and the street is littered with fireworks trash.

[@SwordVirtue]

John Adams predicted that war would break out over slavery in a hundred years or so and he was correct! Smart men!

[@seandafny]

shout out my nigga John Locke

[@closetglobe.IRGUN.NW0]

Life LAWFUL liberty and the poh

[@Popeful]

"What you might not know..." if you've never seen 1776

[@andrewwelham8633]

You say 'Congress didn't want' like Congress is an individual when it isn't. There was enough support from enough members of Congress to vote that out. Additionally it's not the declaration of freedom and equality, it is the declaration of independence. You can only do things a step at a time, no matter how much you want to do them all at once with a wand from Ollivander's. If you have to move 50 boxes that each weigh 100 pounds by hand, you don't try to pick them up all at once because you simply cannot do it. You carry them one at a time until they are all moved. It's a process. "We will relentlessly pursue perfection, knowing we will never achieve it. But, in our relentless pursuit of perfection, we just might catch excellence." - Vince Lombardi.

[@samuelz7344]

oh please, not another one of these....jeez. times were different then. If you were property then you were property end of that. but if you weren't property then what right did someone else have to impinge upon you. we really have to stop judging our history from the perspective of the 21st century.

[@EccentricGentelman]

As a British citizen I'd like to point out a problem with this video. The British flag shown at 0:29 is accurate for the time. The red cross is from the English flag, the diagonal white cross and the blue comes from the Scottish flag. When the two kingdoms were joined to form the United Kingdom of Great Britain, the two flags were combined to represent the union. At 2:35 however, despite that fact it's still set in 1776, the British flag is shown as it is today. With the diagonal red cross that came from the Northern Irish flag when they joined the UK in 1801. I've seen this happen a few times in American media, it's misinforming about history and it's not really that hard to get right. If Pirates of the Caribbean can get it right for their film you can do it for a short documentary. You don't see the BBC making documentaries showing the revolutionary flag with 50 stars do you?

[@forestfeller]

At 0:11 they skipped right over "by their Creator". Historical revisionism! Ugh.

[@marissakleinhans]

And they left out 'unalienable,' omg ughh! It's called paraphrase, not revision.

[@michelleniinisto3413]

It's a TED Talk...not a textbook. Not revising history, just summarizing it.

[@mohammadarumbinang3961]

Hi, this video was amazing and I like it very much! I really want to make a video like this also. I wonder what program that you use to make this amazing video? Thank you!

[@StupidPeasant]

Slavery had been the norm in most of human history. Though some societies did not do it; they were too weak or self-concerned to stop it. It was the words and reports of religious abolitionist of America that convinced enough people that it is so inhuman and immoral that it is worth fighting to the death to stop.. England changed before America, but England is not where the movement started. Slavery still goes on today in some parts of the world. Those that enjoy pointing out Americas faults are putting down the best hope the world has to stopping the rest of it while being mostly silent on the perpetrators.

[@BucyKalman]

An often overlooked fact, despite being flat out mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, is that one of the main reasons behind the American Revolution was the actually the refusal of the British Crown to sanction the American colonists' expansion into the West at the expense of Indian rights. It is hardly surprising then that many native Indians sided with the British in the Revolutionary War as the United States, as they feared, proved to be a far more hostile power to them than the Crown.

[@phillip3495]

To look at this subjectively as many today seem to like to do, the situation could look very different. The British crown cared not for the well being of its own colonists, so to say that Britain denied expansion out of the deepness of love that it felt for the native population is suspect. Many natives sided with the British, because the British were an "Empire holding large valuable assets", or in other words, slick rich. The practical minded Brits, simply approached some tribes, offered modern weapons, horses, and luxuries in exchange for a military pact. These natives by objective definition would normally be called "mercenaries". One must wonder too, about what the natives thought of the fact that Britain was the reason for colonists landing on this continent in the first place. Like many attempts to sum up the happenings of US expansion, which btw took over a century, into quick easy to digest convenient passionate self-hate fuel, this one must remain generalized lest the clarity of resolution one gets reading the situation as a long term event, or process, would render the idea obviously misleading, and noticeably evasive of facts that do not fit into the generalization. Many tribes "Sold" land for goods, hunting weapons, gear for better survival, or education in advanced agriculture techniques. While one can say that they, being more philosophically primitive, could in no way consent to a fair trade due to their own ignorance, this is to be chauvinistic at best. While the true state of the matter is always much more mundane and non-exploitative. Like, ungentlemanly decisions were made on both sides of the deal, while some colonists may have been cruel "native hunters", some natives were, objectively "Scalp taking savages". This tension between trade relationships and antagonistic relationships, was exacerbated by the natives' fragmentary confederacy and lack of unified front or representation. Very complex, and evidence rich historical situation that ultimately ended up being for the better for everyone alive on this half of the earth, and may as well say the rest of it as well. Also: Slavery is not about race.