Interviews

Your thesis is that the Zeitgeist of the founding era was not about a minimalist government as current originalist political conservatives believe, but actually the opposite—and that the Declaration of Independence shows a political sensibility embracing an activist government. What do you mean, exactly?

Many American politicians defend their own preferences for small government by asserting that the Founders believed government to be, at best, a necessary evil. In fact, they shared a similar conviction with the British Patriot Party—that government played a fundamental role in promoting the happiness or welfare of citizens. The Founders wanted powerful activist government.

Can you point to a part of the Declaration that articulates the notion of a more robust relationship between citizens and the government?

The authors of the Declaration complained bitterly that the British imperial government after 1763 did too little to promote the development of the British American colonies. The Founders concluded the Declaration by calling for the new government to 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.” The Declaration was America's first constitutional document.

What do you want your readers to take away from this book?

Politicians frequently have mistaken conceptions of America's founding document. Instead of calling for a minimal government, the authors of the Declaration wanted a government that would support immigration, intervene to promote commerce, and put an end to the slave trade. America's Founders in 1776 called for a state that would stimulate the economic development of the newly independent republic.