Both Jill Lepore and Newt Gingrich argue that the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence matters deeply — but they imagine that importance very differently. How does each author define what is at stake in the Semiquincentennial? What do they believe the commemoration should do for the nation, and what kinds of historical complexity does each author foreground or sideline in making that case?
Semiquincentennial Question 2
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Newt Gingrich views the 250th anniversary as an important moment that serves to emphasize the importance of “American exceptionalism”. Gingrich also mentions how the 250th anniversary is a perfect time to reiterate how important understanding the freedom that comes with being American is, and this freedom can be an example for others around the world. He believes the celebration should bring the public together around the concept that rights are granted by a Creator. By bringing about national pride and identity through celebration of the 250th anniversary, Gingrich argues that there would be enough “entrepreneurial drive” to advance beyond places like China that limit freedom of its citizens. By pushing this unified narrative, Gingrich ignores the potential contradictory origins of our nation’s founding. He disagrees with the 1619 Project and other attempts by institutions like the Smithsonian to highlight non-white American experiences by referring to them as “anti-American narratives”. It seems as though Gingrich believes that if the commemoration fails to inspire unshakeable patriotic pride, that the nation weakens itself from the inside out, disconnects Americans from one another, and infringes upon the global spread of freedom.
Jill Lepore takes a different stance and argues that the 250th anniversary needs to address the “meaning of the American Revolution”, in terms of whether our nation’s founding ideals, like the ‘law being king’, still hold true today. Lepore believes that instead of buying into the simple common narrative that Gingrich argues is essential for national healing, the anniversary should force a discussion about the nation’s “unfinished revolution”. Lepore emphasizes the historical complexities of 1776 and our nation’s origin story by highlighting the contradiction between the idea of liberty and the reality of slavery as well as all of those who have been denied equality like women, Black Americans, and Native Americans. Lepore decides to fault the government for spreading the origin stories of “American greatness, military valor, and exceptionalism”. Ultimately, Lepore argues that excluding narratives of those who were not treated with liberty and equality and adopting this narrow minded origin story robs the anniversary of the democratic values it is trying to instill.
**Split into two paragraphs here, not sure why it did not format like that the first time**
Newt Gingrich views the 250th anniversary as an important moment that serves to emphasize the importance of “American exceptionalism”. Gingrich also mentions how the 250th anniversary is a perfect time to reiterate how important understanding the freedom that comes with being American is, and this freedom can be an example for others around the world. He believes the celebration should bring the public together around the concept that rights are granted by a Creator. By bringing about national pride and identity through celebration of the 250th anniversary, Gingrich argues that there would be enough “entrepreneurial drive” to advance beyond places like China that limit freedom of its citizens. By pushing this unified narrative, Gingrich ignores the potential contradictory origins of our nation’s founding. He disagrees with the 1619 Project and other attempts by institutions like the Smithsonian to highlight non-white American experiences by referring to them as “anti-American narratives”. It seems as though Gingrich believes that if the commemoration fails to inspire unshakeable patriotic pride, that the nation weakens itself from the inside out, disconnects Americans from one another, and infringes upon the global spread of freedom.
Jill Lepore takes a different stance and argues that the 250th anniversary needs to address the “meaning of the American Revolution”, in terms of whether our nation’s founding ideals, like the ‘law being king’, still hold true today. Lepore believes that instead of buying into the simple common narrative that Gingrich argues is essential for national healing, the anniversary should force a discussion about the nation’s “unfinished revolution”. Lepore emphasizes the historical complexities of 1776 and our nation’s origin story by highlighting the contradiction between the idea of liberty and the reality of slavery as well as all of those who have been denied equality like women, Black Americans, and Native Americans. Lepore decides to fault the government for spreading the origin stories of “American greatness, military valor, and exceptionalism”. Ultimately, Lepore argues that excluding narratives of those who were not treated with liberty and equality and adopting this narrow minded origin story robs the anniversary of the democratic values it is trying to instill.