A History of the Republican Party: Part 1

in his inaugural address he says you know you guys are all hot under the collar about the slavery thing and by

the way I’m paraphrasing he says but no but don’t worry because you don’t have to worry because this whole issue right

now is sitting in front of the Supreme Court and they’re gonna fix it and I like all good Americans will defer

to what every day decide to do well within a week the Supreme Court hands down the

Dred Scott decision and the Dred Scott decision gives the southern large

planters everything they want it declares that the Missouri Compromise is

unconstitutional it declares that african-americans have no rights that a white man is bound to respect as Chief

Justice Roger tawny puts in his in his majority opinion everybody writes an

opinion by the way for this particular case and tawny who had until this week had a statue in

Baltimore which is where he’s from now won’t no longer a statue in Baltimore I went down this week Toni says this and

it also says something crucial it says that Congress cannot legislate in the

territories what this means of course is that Congress cannot do things like

prohibit slavery it has to leave territorial government up to the people who live there and as I said under that

protection of property what this means is that if in slavers bring their enslaved people into all this new

western territory not just the land that people are fighting about with the Missouri Compromise Act which only

covers I’m sorry with the kansas-nebraska Act which only covers the Louisiana Purchase but also everything else under that America has

taken under the Treaty of Guadalupe dalgo the whole rest of the southwest Congress can’t do anything there except

leave it up to popular sovereignty and as I said under popular sovereignty if even one person brings us enslaved

people into that land it’s going to have to be slaves to a slave state and that

of course is going to mean that the northern states are going to be overawed in the House of Representatives as well

as in the Senate and America is going to become an enslaved enslaving the nation

entirely not just in the south all right so what happens people go ballistic over the Dred Scott decision because it looks

like James Buchanan has been in on it and historians now know yes he was he pressured northern Democrats to go along

with this decision because he wanted it to look like it was not a sectional decision so going into this on

this is 57 and now in 58 we have another discussion in Congress about slavery and

this and what’s happening in Kansas and this comes from South Carolina senator named James Henry Hammond then you know

he appears a lot in my work because James Henry Hammond is kind of a poster child for how really awful the large

southern slavers are he is just a horrible man his diaries exist if you want to read them he is vile on about

his enslaved people who he treats appallingly and raping them and killing

them and assaulting them but he’s also vile about women he’s very clear that women aren’t either sexual playthings

for men or are there to bring in their their money it’s how he rises in the world is fine

marrying a rich woman whom he didn’t proceeds to abused um anyway he ends up being thrown out of Congress for a long

time because he raped his four nieces and was furious at them for ruining his political career but it didn’t road his

political career that much in that society because he gets put back into Congress in the late 1850s and when that

happens he gives his speech about what’s happening in Kansas and he says you know I’m not really paying that close attention what’s happening in Kansas

because I trust my friends to do the right things because you know we’re kind of the best people and we know how

things work but but while we’re talking about this let’s just let’s just talk

about how society should work because you northerners talk a lot about

equality and that’s just wrong I mean and James Henry had actually written a letter that we have sang you know

Jefferson Davis was completely wrong I’m sorry Thomas Jefferson was completely wrong there is no such thing as people

being equal but of course people aren’t equal people like James Henry Hammond are far better than the others and he

says you know really the way society works is it is you know most people are

dull they’re they’re not very smart they can’t plan for themselves they’re really kind of like you know the mud

sills of a building the the the beams that you hammer into the dirt in order

to support the greater stuff above them and by the way until fairly recently

in Illinois they still use the word saloons for for lower class white people

people who were driven into the mud siller’s she said they’re really the mud cell and every society has them and

they’re loyal and they’re hard-working and they got muscle but they’re you know basically just want to dance and and you

know eat and they’re not they’re not thinkers they’re gonna stay where they are there’s nothing you can do for them

but we above them we are the ones who move society forward so what you really need to do is get those people at the

bottom to produce a lot and then to take what they produce and to consolidate it

up with us because we’re the ones with the education and the connections and who know how to run things and you have

to give it you you have to give us the power and the control to do that because

if you actually give those people to bottom a voice they’re going to you know taking atom and what they’re producing

they’re gonna they’re gonna demand a redistribution of wealth and when that happens we’re not going to be able to

accumulate stuff and we’re not gonna be able to sit around and think great thoughts we’re gonna have to work and if we have to work we’re not going to be

able to to to move society forward so you need to preserve this new idea this

this idea of mud cellars and those of us on the top being able to move things forward because this is really the way

society moves best and I’m gonna look ahead a little bit here and tell you that is precisely what Andrew Stevens

says Alexander Stevens says in his cornerstone speech about the foundation of the Confederacy he doesn’t say we’re

going back to an old world he says we’re mounting a new world that’s gonna take over the entire globe we’re gonna be the

center of this new slave based society well this is 1858 Abraham Lincoln is

listening to all of us and he’s gotten involved in politics by 1856 and he’s listening to this and he’s saying wait a

minute you James Henry Hammond who’s famous for raping your nieces and who’s

never done a lick of work in your life and this is where you are because you you married into it you’re better than

me who’s and and he doesn’t say this I’m putting words in his mouth who’s

obviously brilliant who has worked my way from nothing and who is now you know

this this famous in an increasingly famous railroad lawyer and speaker and you

would have me have stayed in my father’s fields chopping wood my whole life and

just using my muscles which by the way as soon as he made to went into politics is a log splitter but the minute he

didn’t have to swing an axe any longer he didn’t do um you wouldn’t you think that I should be at the bottom and you

should be on top not happening and he gives this really important speech in 1859 and in this 1859 speech at the

Milwaukee Agricultural Fair he says no no there are people who think that society works best when all the money

sits at the top and they’re the ones who can move society forward but those of us

who believe in free labor believe something different we believe that society works best when government

doesn’t work for the very wealthy moving money upwards but rather works to preserve equality of opportunity because

if you preserve equality of opportunity for people at the bottom if you make sure they have access to resources and

access to education they are the innovators in the world and if you remember Abraham Lincoln is our only

president who holds a patent on something he was an innovator I’m an inventor I’m they’re the ones are gonna

innovate they’re the ones who are gonna use their ideas best they’re the ones who are gonna work hard they’re the ones who are going to come up with new ideas

and use their money and really exciting ways and they’re gonna produce more than they can consume and they are in turn

going to support a level of people above them who are going to be merchants and are going to come up with new ideas in

terms of factories and they’re kind of going to to to invent new things and

they in turn might support a few financiers but they’re going to hire beginners just

starting out and what this is going to do is it’s going to create not this world that the Southern Democrats are

holding on to where a few people have everything and everybody else has nothing this binary world of haves and

have-nots what we see is a world where if the government puts its weight into the

people at the bottom they’re going to create an updraft of prosperity that is

going to create prosperity across the country for everybody a sort of circle

if you will a web of interaction that is to lift all boats although he doesn’t

say that but it’s an interesting thing because as I mentioned before the reason his early store fails is because the

river sells him and none of the people in the town really can do enough to dig that river out and he realizes early on

if only the government had come and dug out the river which they could not do his early town would have survived

he believes governments should be helping people like him by doing things that they can’t do like dredging rivers

and building roads and putting their energies into education and helping people at the bottom so they in turn can

produce enough to move things upward through society this is the principle on

which the Republican Party goes in front of the country in 1860 and they say if

you turn the government over to us we are no longer going to use it to consolidate wealth among a few very

wealthy people who are enslaving other human beings we will use it to help people at the bottom regular Americans

who are trying to have equality of opportunity my point I want to make here as I talk about this is that the early

Republican Party is not out there talking about freeing the enslaved people they believe that enslavement

should be left in the south where it’s protected by the Constitution but they don’t talk about ending it that’s going

to come during the war what they’re talking about in 1860 is a new kind of government that helps people at the

bottom rather than helping people at the very top and in the election of 1860 the

Democratic Party splits dramatically between the people who believe in concentrating wealth at the top and a

number of northern Democrats who rally behind Stephen Douglas the same one who started this whole problem in 1854

behind Stephen Douglas who and who say you know we don’t really like the idea of concentrating wealth we would like to

move away from the slave power the Democratic Party actually splits in two and when that happens there’s also

another party that rises I want to tell you about when that happens the extreme southern Democrats organizing the deep

south most of the rest of the Democrats organized in the north of the middle of the country and they split their vote

and Abraham Lincoln wins the election 86 1860 by a plurality of the vote

slightly less than 40% of the American vote and therefore takes this concept of

free labor the idea that this new Republican party needs to protect equality of opportunity into the White

House with that so much material and so

many more great stories I could tell you I’ve hit an hour and I’m gonna leave that here now and next week pick up and

I’m gonna do this to begin the stuff I really like which is the Civil War and

and possibly its aftermath thank you very much I hope this was useful if it

was I’ll see you next Thursday to continue with the history of the Republican Party and as always I will do

the Tuesday 4:00 o’clock sessions on the relationship between history and modern

politics and who knows what next week’s gonna bring thanks a lot for being here

I’ll see you next week

Is Asperger’s syndrome the next stage of human evolution?: Tony Attwood | Australian Story

Professor Tony Attwood believes the “out of the box” thought processes of people on the autism spectrum will solve the world’s big problems. He is credited with being the first clinical psychologist to present Asperger’s syndrome not as something to be “fixed ” but as a gift, evidenced in many of the great inventors and artists throughout history.

But while Professor Attwood has reached the top of his field, he reveals in this episode of Australian Story the personal cost of a missed diagnosis in his own family. Early in his career, he didn’t see the signs of Asperger’s in his son Will. The consequences were devastating for everyone.

Ray Dalio: History Teaches us that Inequality is Dangerous

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ca9uu36w_Vo” frameborder=”0″ allow=”accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture” allowfullscreen></iframe>
the references you make here goes to 30s
and referencing cow you know the top 1%
in the 30s versus today you know you
showed this that the top 1% in the 30s
versus today you know top 1% income
share has the same amount as the bottom
90% in the last time it was like that in
the authorities are you kind of
suggesting that we may be facing what
happened in the 30s years or no yes I’m
saying you so that is why I’m saying
there are three major divisions okay
three major forces and that force which
i think i emphasized the opportunity gap
not just the wealth gap but they both
matter if you look at history across
countries across timeframes
and you say when there’s a large income
and wealth gap and you have an economic
downturn you have a dangerous fight on
your hands you have a dangerous set of
circumstances history has taught us that
you said in April income inequality is
the biggest crisis we have in America on
60 minutes and I think in recent a
couple months ago you said wealth
inequality those are the two main things
that we ought to become I’m not saying
an even more fundamental those are the
outcomes and even more fundamental is
opportunity in quality and production
inequality because at the end of the day
just like you said we have to find how

Let Trump Destroy Trump

The Democratic nominee, whoever it turns out to be, should use the president’s contortions and carrying-on against him.

The person most capable of defeating Donald Trump is Donald Trump. If Democrats are smart, they will let him do the job.

President Trump thrives on outrage and resentment. He seethes with it, stirs it in others and mines it for his own political profit. His political project relies on driving Americans to their cultural and ideological corners. He is Pavlov. We are the dogs.

Mr. Trump’s serial assaults on the decency and the decorum upon which civil society depends are enraging — and meant to be. It is only natural to respond to his every provocation with righteous indignation.

My advice to the Democratic nominee next year is: Donʼt play.

Wrestling is Mr. Trump’s preferred form of combat. But beating him will require jiu-jitsu, a different style of battle typically defined as the art of manipulating an opponent’s force against himself rather than confronting it with one’s own force.

Mr. Trump was elected to shake things up and challenge the political establishment. And to many of his core supporters, his incendiary dog whistles, bullhorn attacks and nonstop flouting of “political correctness” remain energizing symbols of authenticity.

But polling and focus groups reflect a growing unease among a small but potentially decisive group of voters who sided with Mr. Trump in 2016 but are increasingly turned off by the unremitting nastiness, the gratuitous squabbles and the endless chaos he sows.

Plenty of attention has been paid to the historic shift in suburban areas Mr. Trump narrowly carried in 2016 but that broke decisively with his party last fall. That revolt was led by college-educated white women, who overwhelmingly turned against Republican candidates.

But what should be of even greater concern to Mr. Trump is the potential erosion among the non-college-educated white women he is counting on as a core constituency. Those women gave Mr. Trump a 27-point margin over Hillary Clinton in 2016. Yet in a recent Fox News poll, Mr. Trump was beating former Vice President Joe Biden by just four points in that group.

If I were sitting in the Trump war room, this number, more than any other, would alarm me. He won the presidency by the slimmest of margins in three battleground states. With little place to grow, even a small erosion of support among these women could prove fatal to Mr. Trump’s chances. While they are inclined to many of his positions, the thing that is driving these voters away is Mr. Trump himself.

And one thing we can be sure of as the election approaches: Donald Trump is not going to change.

Given that Mr. Trump’s approval rating has been hovering around 40 percent throughout his presidency, his obvious and only strategy is to turn his dial further into the red. He will try to raise the stakes by painting the election as a choice between himself and a radical, left-wing apocalypse. He will bay about

  • socialism,
  • open bordersand
  • “deep state” corruption

and relentlessly work to inflame and exploit racial and cultural divides.

But as Mr. Trump seeks to rev up his base, he also runs a significant risk of driving away a small but decisive cohort of voters he needs. His frenetic efforts to create a panic over the immigrant caravan in the days leading up to the 2018 midterms may have stoked his base, but it also generated a backlash that contributed to major losses for his party.

With everything on the line and nothing, to his mind, out of bounds, the same dynamic will be in play in 2020, and this creates an opportunity for Democrats — if their party’s message allows Trump defectors to comfortably cross that bridge.

There is a legion of arguments on moral, ethical and policy grounds for Mr. Trump’s defeat, and that’s leaving out the sheer incompetence. But the most effective question for Democrats to get voters to ask is simply whether the country can survive another four years like this.

Can we continue to wake each day to the tweets and tantrums, the nasty, often gratuitous fights and the ensuing turmoil that surrounds this president? Can we make progress on issues of concern to the way millions of people live their lives with a leader who looks for every opportunity to divide us for his own political purposes? And is a Trump freed of the burden of re-election really going to be less combative and more constructive in a second term? Um, no.

Each time Mr. Trump lashes out, as he will with increasing ferocity and frequency as the election approaches, these questions will gain more resonance. Every erratic escalation — every needless quarrel, firing or convulsive policy lurch — will provide additional evidence in the case for change.

Mr. Trump’s impulse is always to create a binary choice, forcing Americans to retreat to tribe. He wants to define the battle around divisive cultural issues that will hem in his supporters, and it would be seductive for Democrats to chase every tweeted rabbit down the hole. The president would welcome a pitched battle over lines of race, ideology and culture.

But while Mr. Trump’s thermonuclear politics may rally both his base and Democrats who slumbered in 2016, it is the paralyzing disorder and anxiety his bilious behavior creates that is a distressing turnoff to voters at the margins who will make the difference.

To win, the Democrats will have turn Mr. Trump’s negative energy against him without embodying it themselves.

Malcolm Gladwell Explains Why Human Potential Is Being Squandered

Highlights from a PopTech Talk by Sociologist Malcolm Gladwell, author of “Outliers: The Story of Success.”


The capitalization rate is the percentage of capable individuals that realize their potential.

The rate at which a 6’10” man is given an opportunity to play basketball.

Most of the hockey players have early birthdates (50% cap rate).

McConnell on ‘resistance’ op-ed, Kavanaugh hearings

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell praises ‘productive’ Congress, says Democratic calls for more Kavanaugh documents is a ‘smokescreen.’


If your an American right of center, there hasn’t been a more productive congress.

These opportunities (full republican control of the government) don’t come along very often.

Is the root of this administration amorality?

I want to focus on the results (what we accomplished)

We are transforming the courts.