
Maureen Dowd: talking past our Foundering Father
Independence Day
with
Thomas Jefferson, John Adams
and
me
.
Monticello has a new tour focusing on the fond and fractious relationship of Jefferson and Adams, which culminated in an exchange of 158 letters in their last 14 years of life.
Historian David McCullough deemed this attempt of the fiery Bostonian and reticent Virginian to overcome their political feuds and understand each other 'one of the most extraordinary correspondences in American history'.
My favourite anecdote about Adams and Jefferson, who loved Shakespeare and used the Bard's psychological insights as inspiration when they conjured the country, concerned their visit to Shakespeare's house in Stratford-upon-Avon. As Abigail Adams recalled, her husband cut a relic from Shakespeare's chair, while Jefferson 'fell upon the ground and kissed it'.
READ MORE
[
Musk announces forming of 'America Party' in further break from Trump
Opens in new window
]
Our family trip to Monticello on Wednesday was suggested by Jane Kamensky, a very cool historian of the American Revolution and the president and chief executive of Monticello and the Thomas Jefferson Foundation. She thought that my Trump-supporting brother and I might appreciate the new tour, 'Founding Friends, Founding Foes,' as inspiration for 'a thoughtful dialogue across the divide'.
Kevin laughed when I told him about the invitation.
'I'm amused,' he said, 'that
we
are the example of modern-day comity and civility.' Americans are at one another's throats, living in a world of insults, coarseness and cruelty – a world where Donald Trump and JD Vance excel.
At Monticello, we talked to Ken Burns, who was giving a preview of his upcoming PBS documentary on the American Revolution. He is finishing it in the nick of time, given Trump's attempts to slash PBS' federal funding.
'The Revolution – no pictures, no newsreels, and more violent than we could possibly imagine,' the film-maker told us. 'The Revolution was not just a quarrel between Englishmen over Indian land and taxes and representation, but a bloody struggle that would involve more than two dozen nations, Europeans as well as Native Americans, that also somehow came to be about the noblest aspirations of humankind.'
A year from now is the 250th birthday party for the country. In retrospect, the odds seem impossible. When the patriot militias engaged at sunrise at Lexington Green in April 1775, Burns noted, 'the chances of the success of the operation were zero.' Then, somehow, eight years later, 'we created something new in the world. We were the original anti-colonial movement. We turned the world upside down'.
Adams and Jefferson constantly talked about virtue and what virtues would help mold our antimonarchical society.
Trump, who plays at being a king, is not interested in virtue; only in humiliation, conflict, enrichment and revenge. (The popular president of the University of Virginia, the school here founded by Jefferson, just announced that he would resign because of Trump's anti-diversity, equity and inclusion pressure campaign.)
As Trump rammed through his horrible bill, a humongous wealth transfer, he scoffed at those who suggested there was no virtue in hurting the most vulnerable to make the obscenely rich richer. He keeps insisting that no one will lose Medicaid benefits, but Republicans are cutting more than $1 trillion from the programme, so a lot of people are going to suffer. The Declaration of Independence aspired to equality, while Trump's bill deepens our inequality.
He wanted it rushed through for a flashy July 4th ceremony so he could sign this dreckitude on the same day that our soaring origin statement was adopted. He timed it for maximum drama at 5pm, with military planes flying over the White House.
I asked Burns if it was possible now to persuade anyone across the aisle of anything, or is everyone just howling into the storm?
'The best arguments in the world won't change a single person's point of view,' he said. 'The only thing that can do that is a good story. Good stories are a kind of benevolent Trojan horse. You let them in, and they add complication, allowing you to understand that sometimes a thing and its opposite are true at the same time.'
Reading the Adams-Jefferson letters, I felt that these founders were able to resurrect their relationship the same way I'm able to preserve mine with my siblings. We approach politics carefully, without venom or overblown expectations of changing one another's minds. We look for slivers of common ground: None of us thought Joe Biden should cling to office when he was clearly declining, and none of us like it when Trump belittles people or cashes in with cheesy products like his new $249 perfume, 'Victory 45-47'.
We talk about other things, movies and sports, just as Jefferson and Adams discussed wine, books and ancient Greek philosophers, with Jefferson sometimes throwing in Greek phrases.
'Lord! Lord!' Adams exclaimed with exasperation. 'What can I do, with So much Greek?'
Burns said that his half-century of making documentaries about America's wars and pastimes has taught him to embrace contradictions.
'The binaries that we set up are the biggest trap, whether they come from the left or the right,' he said. 'When you see somebody making a 'them,' you have to be careful. That's antithetical to what the Declaration is saying. I hope that what we do on the Fourth of July is try to put the 'us' into the US.' – This article originally appeared in
The New York Times
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
US supreme court lifts order that blocked Trump's mass federal lay-offs
The US supreme court cleared the way on Tuesday for President Donald Trump 's administration to resume carrying out mass job cuts and the restructuring of agencies, elements of his campaign to downsize and reshape the federal government. The justices lifted San Francisco-based US District Judge Susan Illston's May 22nd order that had blocked large-scale federal lay-offs called 'reductions in force' affecting potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs, while litigation in the case proceeds. Trump in February announced 'a critical transformation of the federal bureaucracy' in an executive order directing agencies to prepare for a government overhaul aimed at significantly reducing the federal workforce and gutting offices and programs opposed by the administration. Workforce reductions were planned at the US departments of agriculture, commerce, health and human aervices, state, treasury, veterans affairs and more than a dozen other agencies. READ MORE Judge Illston wrote in her ruling that Mr Trump had exceeded his authority in ordering the downsizing, siding with a group of unions, non-profits and local governments that challenged the administration. 'As history demonstrates, the president may broadly restructure federal agencies only when authorised by Congress,' the judge wrote. The judge blocked the agencies from carrying out mass lay-offs and limited their ability to cut or overhaul federal programmes. The judge also ordered the reinstatement of workers who had lost their jobs, though she delayed implementing this portion of her ruling while the appeals process plays out. Judge Illston's ruling was the broadest of its kind against the government overhaul being pursued by Trump and the department of government efficiency (Doge), a key player in the Republican president's drive to slash the federal workforce. Formerly spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk , Doge has sought to eliminate federal jobs, shrink and reshape the US government and root out what they see as wasteful spending. Mr Musk formally ended his government work on May 30th and subsequently had a public falling out with Mr Trump. The San Francisco-based ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 ruling on May 30th denied the administration's request to halt the judge's ruling. That court said the administration had not shown that it would suffer an irreparable injury if the judge's order remained in place and that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail in their lawsuit. 'The executive order at issue here far exceeds the president's supervisory powers under the constitution,' the ninth circuit wrote, calling the administration's actions 'an unprecedented attempted restructuring of the federal government and its operations'. The ninth circuit court of appeals' ruling prompted the justice department's June 2nd emergency request to the supreme court to halt Judge Illston's order. Controlling the personnel of federal agencies 'lies at the heartland' of the president's executive branch authority, the justice department said in its filing to the supreme court. 'The constitution does not erect a presumption against presidential control of agency staffing, and the president does not need special permission from congress to exercise core article II powers,' the filing said, referring to the constitution's section delineating presidential authority. The plaintiffs urged the supreme court to deny the justice department's request. Allowing the Trump administration to move forward with its 'breakneck reorganisation', they wrote, would mean that 'programs, offices and functions across the federal government will be abolished, agencies will be radically downsized from what Congress authorised, critical government services will be lost and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will lose their jobs'. The supreme court in recent months has sided with Mr Trump in some major cases that were acted upon on an emergency basis since he returned to office in January. It cleared the way for Mr Trump's administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face. In two cases, it let the administration end temporary legal status previously granted on humanitarian grounds to hundreds of thousands of migrants. It also allowed Trump to implement his ban on transgender people in the US military, blocked a judge's order for the administration to rehire thousands of fired employees and twice sided with his department of government efficiency. – Reuters


Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Donald Trump says pharmaceutical tariffs could reach 200 per cent
US president Donald Trump said on Tuesday he is planning to announce tariffs on imported semiconductor and pharmaceuticals, saying the rate for medicines could reach 200 per cent but that he would give drugmakers about one year 'to get their act together'. 'We're going to give people about a year, a year and a half to come in and, after that, they're going to be tariffed,' Trump told reporters, speaking at a meeting of his cabinet at the White House. 'If they have to bring the pharmaceuticals into the country ... they're going to be tariffed at a very, very high rate, like 200 per cent. We'll give them a certain period of time to get their act together,' he said. 'We're going to be announcing pharmaceuticals, chips and various couple of other things - you know, big ones,' Trump told reporters, while announcing a new tariff rate for copper. READ MORE He did not offer specifics on when the other announcements would come. - Reuters

Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
Superman review: Utterly charmless. And as funny as toothache
Superman Director : James Gunn Cert : 12A Starring : David Corenswet, Rachel Brosnahan, Nicholas Hoult, Edi Gathegi, Anthony Carrigan, Nathan Fillion Running Time : 2 hrs There is no point pretending we haven't been living in Superman's universe for the past 90 years or so. Still, it comes as a jolt when James Gunn 's sickeningly busy reboot – an attempt to launch a whole new DC Universe – throws us so unforgivingly in medias res. Superman is already an established defender of the American way. Clark Kent is already a busy journalist. He is already dating Lois Lane, and she already knows of his double life. Lex Luthor is already a scheming maniac. Sorry if that spoils the first 10 minutes for anyone who's been living in a cave since 1938. Gunn might, reasonably enough, not have had the energy for rehashing origin stories, but the effect is of arriving halfway through the first season of a television series that, on the remaining evidence, will struggle for renewal. Excising the story of Superman's arrival on Earth, his courtship of Lois and his evolution as superhero doesn't just deprive the film of useful structure; it also deprives it of vital humanity. READ MORE How is David Corenswet in the lead role? It is hard to tell. Rarely has an actor appeared in virtually every scene of a film while barely being in the thing at all. There is a lot of Superman action. Corenswet puffs and heaves as kaleidoscopic mayhem builds behind him. But there is precious little of the shy, bumbling Clark Kent with whom the late Christopher Reeve had so much fun. The similarly misused – though not exactly underused – Rachel Brosnahan has, as Lois, a modestly amusing scene opposite Clark early on. Nothing after that point escapes the deafening tumult of a rolling apocalypse. Close your eyes and you could be listening to the aural torture once directed at General Noriega. Open them and the clench of vulgar CGI further increases the dislocation and confusion. At least Zack Snyder's earlier (largely terrible) takes on Superman for the DC Universe paused for breath. One unexpectedly finds oneself yearning for Kevin Costner and Diane Lane as Clark's calming human parents in Snyder's so-so Man of Steel . You may as well try to summarise a coastal typhoon as synopsise the mounting chaos. Perfectly tolerable actors play supporting heroes called Hawkgirl (who?), Green Lantern (back again?), Metamorpho (what?) and Mr Terrific (cool name for a Mr Man). There is some – I'm guessing here – well-meaning political commentary in a subplot about a tyrannical east European dictator who, with the assistance of the tech-bro Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult, flailing), is threatening to invade a docile neighbouring country. Evil Lex uncovers a message from Superman's birth parents that seems to reveal he has been dispatched to conquer, rather than protect, Earth. Superman is eventually locked up in an ultradimensional detention area that could be an allegory for Guantánamo Bay. Fair enough. Gunn deserves some credit for the effort, even if none of these parallels does little more insightful than acknowledge bad things are happening somewhere in the real world. The tone is, as you'd expect from earlier Gunn efforts such as Guardians of the Galaxy and The Suicide Squad, endlessly larkish and sophomoric. It is nice that he clears such space for Krypto the Superdog. It is a shame the mutt's exploits are so blandly digital. One welcomes the score's occasional nods to John Williams's theme from the 1978 film. One bemoans the failure to replicate the uncomplicated heroics that fanfare once greeted. A few hilariously misguided references to 'punk rock' are (to say the least) misplaced in an enterprise that cost north of $225 million – which is to say at least €195 million. The cartoonish closing battles make it clear that, not for the first time, Gunn is striving for high trash, but what he achieves here is low garbage. Utterly charmless. Devoid of humanity. As funny as toothache. In cinemas from Friday, July 11th