Addison Moore

On Wednesday evening, students were joined by Professors of Government Paul Franco and Andy Rudalevige in Moulton Union’s Main Lounge to talk about the lasting significance of the Declaration of Independence.

The most recent installment of the What Matters conversation series, the lecture was organized by the McKeen Center in partnership with the Bowdoin College Museum of Art (BCMA). The “USA @ 250” exhibition is currently on display in the BCMA where the Dunlap Broadside, one of the first printed versions of the Declaration of Independence, is set to be displayed in October.

Franco began the discussion by identifying the principles highlighted in the Declaration: first, that all men are created equal, a concept that had been put forth by John Locke nearly 100 years prior. Thomas Jefferson, later in his life, elaborated on what he meant by equality in the Declaration.

“In this letter [from 1826], [Jefferson] gives a bit of a gloss on the equality of human beings, he says, ‘The mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately by the grace of God’ … We aren’t born with somebody having been designated by God to rule. We are all equal,” Franco said.

Grappling with the notion of equality and the contradictory existence of slavery during this period, Rudalevige mentioned the Dred Scott decision of 1857.

“[The Dred Scott decision] is a declaration, effectively, by the Supreme Court, that the Declaration of Independence’s claims of liberty have no legal standing at all. After all, the Constitution says something different,” Rudalevige said. “[To this, Lincoln] says, the authors of that notable instrument meant to include all men. They meant to set up a standard maxim for a free society, something constantly looked to, constantly labored for, and even though never perfectly attained, augmenting the happiness, the value of life to all people of all colors everywhere…”

The pursuit of happiness, one of the Declaration’s three inalienable rights alongside life and liberty, was also a key ideal.

“Locke says that in the state of nature, the inalienable rights of human beings consist of life, liberty and estate, which is to say, property. And the big change that Jefferson makes is omitting property and substituting this amazing phrase ‘the pursuit of happiness,’” Franco said.

Happiness, however, did not simply mean hedonistic self-interest.

“[Jefferson] clearly does not associate happiness with the pursuit of subjective pleasure.  Happiness is something much more exalted than that, and involves in some ways, exercising your capacities in the service of virtue,” Franco said.

On the other side of these ideals, Rudalevige explained the Declaration was also a strategic document.

“We [needed a Declaration of Independence] in part because … we’re in a broad balance of powers global system where different European powers are struggling against each other … and the U.S., as it suddenly is, has an opportunity to provide a bargaining chip … against England,” Rudalevige said. “And if [the European powers] are going to form a treaty with us, obviously we’re going to have to be an independent nation … so part of this is a legal justification. Very little of it, really, is a grand claim to human equality.”

Reflecting on the Declaration’s contemporary significance, Franco explained that the Declaration, with its evocative language, has become an “American Scripture,” something that binds the U.S. together as a “creedal nation.”

“In that respect, the Declaration [played] this incredibly important role in the past, and my guess is that it will continue to play that role in the future,” Franco said.

Rudalevige explained the document’s dual purpose in terms of political culture—a foundation of how a government should operate—and, quoting Lincoln, a sort of “electric cord” linking Americans together.

“[Lincoln] says it’s the electric cord in that declaration that links the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving men together,” Rudalevige said. “[The political culture] serves, I think, as a way of preventing policies from tipping too far over from their basic tenets over the long term.”

The professors’ conversation was followed by small-group discussions between students. Mitra Hu-Henderson ’28, an attendee, reflected on her group’s discussion, which revolved around the tension between the pursuit of happiness and property.

“I think the fact that the pursuit of happiness is in the Declaration of Independence is kind of like this beacon of hope for America,” Hu-Henderson said. “We were talking about how that plays out with immigration and how [the Declaration] is very different from the Constitution, where it [talks] … about property rather than pursuit of happiness. I think that was super interesting [to think] about how those two documents serve, as different people have perceived the ideals very differently.”