Hello and welcome. I'm Martha Jones from Johns Hopkins University, and I'm thrilled to be hosting this conversation today at the National Archives and Record Administration. I want to welcome our special guest, Professor Matt Clavin from the University of Houston. We're here to talk today about his brand new book out on Monday, the symbols of freedom, slavery and resistance before the Civil War with NYU Press. Professor Clavin is a prolific historian. This is his fourth book, a specialist of the history of slavery in the Atlantic world and emancipation. And I'm really thrilled to be here with you today, Matt. Welcome to the National Archives. Well, thank you, and thank you to the National Archives. I'm very honored to be here and especially honored to have you available to have this discussion. So I'm very appreciative. Thank you. Sure. Well, it's always a treat, isn't it, to get a preview of a book before it hits the stands, as we used to say. And this one is especially aptly timed to coincide on Monday with Juneteenth, our national holiday, and then just around the corner of the Fourth of July. And I know we're going to talk about both of those occasions and how they fit with this book. But first, let me just say thank you for symbols of freedom. And I thought I'd just start by asking you if I could to take a few minutes to set up our conversation and introduce the book. I have lots of questions. I'm going to encourage folks to post their own. But maybe you could set up the conversation for us. Thank you. This book is years in the making. Probably 20 years ago I came across while I was in graduate school when I was in Washington, D.C. I'm a Baltimore native. And so I was always very interested in Maryland, D.C., Baltimore history still in. And as I was in grad school, I was already writing my dissertation on one topic. And just in the archives, as we often do, we stumble upon things. And I came across this account of dozens of enslaved men from Southern Maryland who decided to make a break for slavery and to get to Pennsylvania and freedom. They had to get through the nation's capital. They didn't make it. Most of them did not make it. They were eventually stopped near Rockville, Maryland. There's a big gun fight. Several are killed. Most are re-enslaved. Some are sold to the Deep South. Two or three actually made it to freedom, which is pretty incredible. But what really was shocking to me is this happened over fourth of July weekend. And when you, you know, unfortunately, and I've done the research, we don't have any of the words and the voices of those enslaved people, those fugitive slaves. We have no documentation of their motivations. All we know is that over that weekend they escaped. And I was fascinated by that. And what was also fascinated by war was that all the Southern accounts of this very, it becomes known as a fugitive slave rebellion, so it's fugitive slaves who are armed and they eventually fight their potential oppressors. But what was interesting, all the Southern accounts, white Southern accounts, did not mention that coincidence of them escaping over fourth of July weekend. Whereas abolitionists, they took the ball and ran with it. And they have one famous writer and William Lloyd Garrison's liberator. He referred to these fugitive slaves as the disciples of the declaration because he assumed they must have heard the declaration over fourth of July weekend and took off. And so I was very fascinated by the different receptions. And then ever since then I've just scoured newspapers, pamphlets, correspondence, and have been just shocked. And then after a while I'm not shocked anymore. How many slave escapes, how many revolt attempts, how many slave plots, how many slave suicides. I mean, anything you can imagine, they occur on fourth of July or fourth of July weekend. And then this became a much bigger project. Clearly these enslaved people understood the fourth of July. They understood the rhetoric of the Declaration of Independence. It's an idea that all men are created equal. And I found that it wasn't just the fourth of July. It's the American flag. It's the US Capitol building. It's the rhetoric of the revolution like Patrick Henry's great quotation, give me liberty or give me death. And I have found countless examples of enslaved people literally fighting through the death and they exclaim, give me liberty or give me death. And these are enslaved people in Virginia and Louisiana in the 1800s. And so that's really the root of the whole project. And as it became a book project and as I started writing it, this really speaks to our conception of not just patriotism, but nationalism. And that's a very heavy term today. And I do get into those ideas and these large historical philosophical even issues, but at the root of it is slave resistance and also the abolition movement. And these people enslaved and their free allies, they are demanding before the civil war that the United States stop being so hypocritical, stop talking about freedom and equality and let's realize it. And so that's that I'm so inspired by the story of these people that I had to write the book. And I'm just really happy I've had the opportunity to do just that. Well, you're already, I think, giving us a sense of how gripping some of these stories are including that of the Rockville rebels out of Maryland that you feature in here. But I want to ask you if I could to spend a little time with you on this and how you use the concept of nationalism. Because when I encountered the word and the idea here in this book, I couldn't help here. If you will kind of 21st century right 2023, where the term nationalism is fraught in many contexts, we would even say I think pejorative, but you really want to I think if I could put it this way, you want to rescue the term and restore it historically and put it in the minds in the hands in the thinking in the actions of anti-slavery activists, but also enslaved people themselves. Tell us a little bit more about why we want to hold on to the idea of nationalism even here in 2023. And I think early on in the project, I looked up the word nationalism in Webster's 1820s dictionary, and it's not in there. Patriotism is in there. So that's how new the term was. That's how new the whole idea of a nation state was early 19th century. And so whereas today we have 200 years of history and a lot of it ugly. World War I, World War II. And I could go on and it's really not me. I'm borrowing from a lot of other historians of recent years, but also not so recent. And they have made this argument, you know, Jill LePore comes to mind that we may not appreciate and like the look and feel and smell of nationalism today for obvious reasons. But it's still number one, it's a powerful historical force. And we can't ignore it. We have to reckon with it. But then there's also this idea in the literature that, you know, when it comes to the war, nationalism meant different things. But I think just in general, the way I see it is. Patriotism is love of country. Period. Whereas nationalism is more love of country. And either a feeling of superiority to other peoples, or maybe just a dislike or disdain for other people rooted in sort of that self pride. Today we call it American exceptionalism. And I find in the early 19th century that the word and again, I'm borrowing this from another smarter person is this idea of aspirationalism. And so it's sort of this idea, Frederick Douglass, William Lloyd Garrison, so many other leaders at the time, they feel that the United States has incredible potential. And I think they would argue it has way more potential than any other nation on earth because of the declaration's proclamation of equality, you know, because of the idea of freedom and equality. So the United States is born in blood, it's born in revolution, but it's also born in freedom. And clearly before the Civil War, freedom does not belong to everybody. But I think in the minds of a lot of these enslaved people, these escaped slaves who become abolitionists, abolitionist leaders, and we're talking black and white, male and female rich and poor, they in their heart of hearts really do believe that the United States has exceptional potential. And so they have a real love of country, but it's not critical. It's not, you know, it's not, what's the word? Help me out, Martha, when you love somebody, no matter what they do to you or no matter what you do to them, it's not unrequited love. It's called unconditional love. Yeah, it's like there are conditions. And the condition is, keep rid of slavery, spread quality and freedom. You know, on the 4th of July, I think the Americans are critical because they're not. And so I think what is inspirational is the word, but probably what is inspirational to me is that these people who are, you know, they're just, their whole lives revolve around opposition to the institution of slavery. Yet they find in America's core, an exceptional ideology that they embrace. And, you know, we've seen this throughout American history, how frequently and in great numbers, African Americans will enlist in the military, they will die for the flag, despite being treated so poorly at home. And, you know, just one of the paradoxes of American history, the black role, the role of black people in the U.S. military, it's still underappreciated. And this is kind of related to that. Here's a love of country, but it's conditional. And until you get rid of slavery, you know, we'll love them. And you hear Douglas and Garrison and so many others, they sometimes exclaim, they don't love America. Or William Lloyd Garrison's great motto is, my country is the world. But on other occasions, you hear them very explicitly saying, they love America, this is their country, they're not leaving, they're going to fix it. So it really is an incredible story that absolutely, I think needs to be told and understood by the public today. I think it will help us understand some of the issues we're dealing with today. And it will help us, I think, with a puzzle that you, I want to get to Douglas, but I first want to ask you about many, many of the lesser known, unnamed enslaved people who really animate this book. There's a puzzle, I think, for us about how it is that folks are so ill-regarded by the state, by the Constitution, by American courts and more, still develop this sense of nationalism, as you describe it, conditional perhaps, but a powerful sense of nationalism. Help us understand that a little bit better. Maybe an example that from the book would help us to appreciate that really complex and almost puzzling equation. Yeah, and I think what I have found is, there's a literature on this, but before the Civil War and the Southern slave states, the meaning of the Fourth of July changes, where it was originally intended to celebrate, obviously, American independence, but at the same time, the ideology that all men are created equal, the language of the Declaration, and it becomes very concrete over the years how white Southerners, they start to intentionally, explicitly, alter the meaning of the Fourth, to just become a party, barbecues, foot races, anything you can imagine that's apolitical. And they really try to depoliticize the holiday because they understand how subversive those ideas are in a slave society like the antebellum South. So at the same time, and there's discussions of how can we keep black people away from the Fourth of July. There are recommendations that this should be a whites-only event, you know, keep the slaves at home. It doesn't happen. In many parts of the South, blacks are in the majority. So I have found just multiple examples of enslaved people who are participating in Fourth of July celebrations. They are in an audience listening to politicians, great orators, you know, re-read the Declaration of Independence. They hear discussions of the Fourth of July, all these political ideas. So even if you are illiterate, if you are, if you can access a Fourth of July celebration in which they recite the great American idea that all men are created equal, that's going to have a powerful impact. So again, from Louisiana to Baltimore, you know, far west to Kentucky and Tennessee, enslaved people are fully aware of these ideals and the United States' shortcomings. And William Wells Brown is the best example, although there's many. William Wells Brown is enslaved in, you know, sort of Kentucky and Missouri. He's in St. Louis as a teenager. And at one point he hears a U.S. senator read the Declaration of Independence and give this great oration on the Fourth of July. And later on, his daughter writes a biography of her father and she quotes him as saying, from the day I heard that oration, I was going to become free. And he really does try for a couple of years and eventually he makes his way to freedom. And so white Southerners, they didn't do a very good job of keeping these ideas from percolating across the antebellum sound. And one thing I've learned in my decades now of research and teaching, you know, enslaved peoples in the United States for certain is as isolated as they may have been geographically, they were still connected. You know, they got word of things from the Caribbean. They heard about things in Europe. They knew the British were coming during the war of 1812 before they came, you know, things of that nature. And so these, and I've written books, I've written articles about how so many of these global ideas, global revolutions, the information trickled down to enslaved Americans. And I think, and I even wonder looking back, did on occasion, I forget that there were also these revolutionary ideas at home that also percolated and spread across the South. So I don't think of this book as an intellectual history, but it is a book about ideas.  And so you can go to the Fourth of July celebration, you can read the declaration and ignore it and go back home and continue practicing inequality and bigotry and all these things. Or you can like the people I study, the enslaved people, their allies, they are taking the declaration literal. More importantly maybe arguably, they're taking Patrick Henry at his word. And when he says, give me liberty or give me death, that's not rhetoric. You know, that's not a joke. That's not nothing to be scoffed at. He's being literal. And like I said, I found enough evidence to show that there are a lot of, of enslaved people and they are willing to die for liberty. And there's nothing more American than that. You know, you really show us, I think how enslaved people, as I think of it are really breathing meaning, right? Into that text, right?  But let me ask you about a moment. And I want to, because I want to come to Douglas. I think some readers will have encountered Douglas is what to the slave is the Fourth of July. And if they hadn't, that is reason alone, your wonderful chapter on that speech and its significance, that alone is, is, is worth picking up this book. But what I didn't know was how prior to that, as Douglas came back from Britain, now fully fledged as an anti-slavery or an anti-slavery orator and activist, he was branded a traitor. He was someone who for a time was regarded as un-American. I think today we think of Douglas as sort of the quintessential American, certainly the quintessential 19th century American. What was going on there that led people's minds to change about Douglas? Oh boy, I could talk for hours and thank you for your kind words about the chapter. Anytime you write about Douglas, it's intimidating because so much has been said and written about Douglas. And I definitely stand on the shoulders of really incredible thinkers and writers who have said a lot about Douglas. But two things I'll point out before I get to this third thing to answer a question. Douglas loved America. And his name originally from his mother, his birth name was Frederick Augustus Washington Bailey. And three of those names we know the origins, we don't know where Washington came from. And I like David Blight, one of Douglas, certainly Douglas's most prolific biographer, think that this has something to do clearly with George Washington. Washington is the most popular African American surname. It still is. So they're right there. So from his birth, there's a connection to him and a founding father. Another great story most people know about when Douglas escaped and ultimately freeze himself from slavery. He's in Baltimore and he dresses as a sailor. And a lot of free black men worked on the waterfront and on the water at this time. So he had a friend who was a sailor and he borrowed his sailor's outfit.  But most importantly, he had a certificate, a seaman's protection certificate. It was called as an early sort of passport idea, if you will, to protect American sailors from being harassed and impressed abroad. But what's really neat about this whole story, and at the National Archives they have, I've seen them, some of these seaman protection certificates, and they're the coolest documents to look at.  But what is really cool is this American eagle that is imprinted on top of the document. And sometimes it's a little tiny eagle. Sometimes it's a third of the certificate is this American eagle. And when Douglas is riding a railroad car through Baltimore, he's, you know, conductor comes by, asks for his, I guess, ticket and his identification. And Douglas shows him this passport, or this protection certificate. And almost with an attitude, I would say, he says to the guy, something like, I have a paper with the American eagle on it. I can go anywhere I want. And it's him sort of saying like, this eagle really represents something. This document clearly does. But in his mind, America, its symbol is this bird and it represents freedom. And when he gets possession of that, he's a free man. So, so I think from the beginning, Douglas just has this affinity for the United States. And again, it's, it's conditional. He'll be as critical as any American of the United States's, you know, laws and its policies regarding black people and equality. But to answer your question by the 1850s, he does a switch. He pretty much turns his back intellectually on all of his abolitionist mentors, garrison at the forefront. He becomes a champion of the U.S. Constitution. And so prior to him making the switch, most leading abolitionists, they sort of did not appreciate the Constitution. They were very critical of it because the Constitution is, in fact, a pro-slavery document. It's sanctioned slavery. It sanctions the slave trade for at least 20 years. It does all these things. You know, troops can be used to put down slave insurrections. So what most abolitionists would celebrate and talk about and champion and promote was the declaration. They said, that was our founding document. The Constitution is a pro-slavery text. I mean, it infuriated them. But Douglas finds in the Constitution pro-slavery, I'm sorry, anti-slavery tendencies. Doesn't use the word slavery. Because the founding fathers didn't want to, you know, make it concrete permanent. Doesn't use the word Negro or African-American or any reference to a slave like that. It's legal jargon. It does refer to enslaved people as persons. And for Douglas, that is the biggest thing. And so as by the 1850s, he starts to argue that the Constitution, although flawed, can be read as an anti-slavery text. And so when he is invited by a group of women in Rochester, an anti-slavery sewing club, they invite him to sort of give this 4th of July oration to announce publicly or to explain to all of his newfound critics why he's changed his opinion on the Constitution. And if there's anything I love about Douglas, and I just love people in general, like Iconoclast, and he's willing to challenge his best friends, his mentors, if he believes the opposite. Like he backs down from nobody. He will challenge President Lincoln during the Civil War. You know, he challenges garrison. He challenged his slave owners and overseers.   He's an American, true and true. And so he earns a lot of disdain from a lot of respected anti-slavery folks. And so that 4th of July oration, which he gives on the 5th of July on a Monday, is really his opportunity to explain why he now sees the Constitution as an anti-slavery text. So you mentioned the 5th of July, and I'm going to take that as an opportunity to ask you about that day, because we expect, I think, to you to tell us a story about the 4th of July, a day that we still mark as a national holiday in ways that are substantive and perhaps nationalistic in a sense. And on the other hand, that are those other traditions about barbecue and three-legged races and things like that. But here, I think readers will be surprised, I think, to encounter the importance of, say, the 5th of July or August 1st. And so what of these other dates? How do they surface on the calendar in anti-Belma America? And what do they tell us about this struggle over the meaning of freedom? And I think some readers will be very surprised to find out. And as historians, sometimes we have to sort of summarize and almost generalize and oversimplify. And so there's definitely the time, the era that I'm talking about, the 30, 40, the decade between the War of 1812 and the Civil War. It's an era of supranationalism. But slavery disappears from the north and it only grows in the south. But you'd be mistaken if you don't appreciate that racism is national. So there's slavery and white supremacy in the south. In the north, there's no slavery, but there's plenty of white supremacy. And one of the darker chapters of American history is throughout this anti-Belma era, the 4th of July is a very dangerous day for black people in the northern United States from the east coast to the Midwest. I mean, you would think this would be a day of all days for black people to feel that maybe they can enjoy citizenship. And no, this is complete opposite. As you can imagine, white supremacists, some of these people are immigrants, some are native-born Americans, some are probably good people and they get drunk on the 4th of July.  There are innocent black people just celebrating the 4th of July, sometimes inside of a church for goodness sakes. And a white mob, a raging mob, violent mob will break into the church, break into the theater, break into the home and attack, beat, and in some cases kill people. And so as you can imagine, for free black northerners or their white allies, this is a sickening turn of events. And then, so you would imagine Philadelphia where there's a huge riot, New York, there's multiple riots. Who wants to acknowledge, you know, the greatness of America the next 4th of July? And the answer is not a lot of these people. And so what they sort of do is, and this happens early in the 19th century, is they start to find alternative days to celebrate American independence and the idea of equality. Just not the 4th of July. So a lot of people, they will do the 5th of July in many cases. A lot of free black northerners sort of like this. It's like the next day, they will take to the streets in New York City and Boston and Philadelphia and really make an assertive show of their, you know, their collective strength or solidarity. They're Americans, but this is a new protest tradition. But without a doubt, across the north for black and white northerners, August 1st really does become the preferred day for a holiday summer celebration. And August 1st in the 1830s, Britain does away with slavery in its colonies in the Caribbean and the West Indies. And I always in many historians have found this so fascinating how free black Americans, they really come to appreciate and love Britain at this time. You know, fugitive slaves, people working the Underground Railroad, the goal is to get escaped people to Canada, which by the 1830s no longer has slavery. You know, something after the 1820s, get them to Mexico, get them to another country, another colony, another part of the world that doesn't have slavery. And these people that I study, despite their great affinity for the United States is founding ideals. They still oftentimes will say explicitly their actions show that they also have love for other nations, if they embrace freedom, if they embrace abolition, if they embrace emancipation. So I found and not just in, you know, in the antebellum era, but people have multiple identities at the same time. You can be a Northerner proudly, and you can also be a proud American. You know, you can be a Philadelphia Eagles football fan and love the Boston Red Sox. Doesn't happen often, but it does happen. I've seen it. So you know, I think these people have multiple identities, and anything that promotes the end of slavery, they have an affinity for, be it Britain, be it, you know, Spain, be it the Netherlands, France, it doesn't matter. And when in the Civil War, the United States government finally comes around embracing emancipation, then they're full throttle behind the United States of America. Finally, we're getting rid of the great cancer that has, you know, dogged us since the 18th century. And on this point, I think, I think you see things differently when it comes, for example, to August 1st celebrations. I think some historians have regarded that as evidence of a black nationalist or a pan-African political worldview. And your answer is no. Say just a little bit more about that. David Walker comes to mind.  What Haiti represented. And for the listeners who may not know, you know, Haiti is the result of the largest, most successful slave revolt in world history, beginning in the 1790s, you know, during the French Revolution. Santo Domingo is a French colony. Hundreds of thousands of slaves rise up rebel and eventually they establish an independent black republic. It's the second independent nation in the western hemisphere beyond the United States.  He encourages violent upheaval, anything to get rid of slavery. So Haiti holds a special place in his heart. Like he just loves what those enslaved people were able to do against all odds. And I would never say he doesn't identify with those people. He does as a black American. He identifies himself with these black Haitians. They're black people. It's very important to him. But I think what I have found that other historians have overlooked is that if you read his pamphlet, he keeps citing the declaration and he keeps talking about America's founding fathers. He keeps talking about the founding generation. And he's talking about the white founders, actually.  So I would say, you know, Walker is all of his, you know, biographers that say he's a black nationalist, but I would add to that. He's also a United States nationalist. And I think that's sort of the new, my way of looking at it, which is kind of innovative and original. And it's not to take away from his black nationalism, but it's to say he can be more than one thing at the same time. And I guess I think I hear important echoes there of, of course, the great W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. W. So let me, let me take us away a bit from the symbol that is the fourth of July To some others of the symbols that also animate this book and I want to especially ask you about the American flag. Last year I had an opportunity for the Philadelphia Enquirer, and to get their guest editor Aaron Haynes to write an essay reflecting on the meaning of the American flag for back Americans. And of course it's an extraordinary saga as you really help us appreciate that has powerful roots in the anti-bound period. But let me ask you about something adjacent to that before I come back to the flag and I want to come back to that scene that you introduced the book with at the US Capitol in the wake of the War of 1812. But before that I wanted to ask you about companion symbols that again I think we may have forgotten about Liberty poles and Liberty caps. What are those and why are those in your book companions to the flag as folks in a sense make manifest their ideas about the nation about freedom and Liberty belonging and more. Well the Liberty cap specifically dates back to the Roman Republic and I was teaching a class recently and I stopped and show images and I show how in the early American period Liberty is always portrayed or typically portrayed as a woman, Lady Liberty and we get 100 years later the Statue of Liberty. There are Americans in general and at least the educated portion of the population who studied ancient Greek and Roman, I mean these symbols were very familiar to them, it wouldn't be familiar to us today. And so there's an incident I find I found in Savannah, Georgia, in the early 1800s, and a US soldier who had fought in the war of 1812 he was from the north, and he ended up moving to the south after the war. He had a big commotion one morning I guess he didn't realize the Fourth of July stumbles out of bed. He gets dressed and he goes to the town square. And as part of this tradition in Savannah, Georgia, they erect this big Liberty pole and that there's a big tradition in the American Revolution to have this huge Liberty tree or Liberty pole, very symbolic it just it's a focal point a place to organize and to gather for resistance, or to just to celebrate for great speech, a reading of the American Revolution. And so these symbols, even if they're ancient anything that represents freedom, they're basically appropriating them and trying to make them or they see them as American symbols you know the United States in their minds is the great inheritor of the ancient idea of freedom or political freedom.  There's usually a Liberty cap on top. And all of a sudden this veteran realizes that the only people being used to lift this pole, and to put it in a place are enslaved Americans, black people. And he's just, you know, he's disgusted by this. So everyone else is celebrating this this party, this this, you know, acknowledgement of American freedom at the same time enslaved people are working to lift this pole. And so he makes sort of this comment under his breath like you know this is kind of crazy.  But this day I don't know if it was an actual friend who said that it was just sort of nudging him, or if it was a complete stranger who said hey listen guy, we don't talk like that here. But boy that is a stark reminder of how different this country was hundreds of years ago. You know, enslaved people in Georgia, being forced to lift this Liberty pole and so the word I use constantly thought the book is just a mockery it's a mockery of freedom. It's not.  They have 2030 40 enslaved people men women children, infants chain together oftentimes, and you know someone at the front is forced to carry an American flag. And so it's bad enough to have slavery in a nation rooted in freedom at least nominally, but it's really I find like these white southerners because slavery has become controversial it's become sectional, you know, even internationally it's become a problem. I think they really take joy, if you will, or pleasure and sort of using these symbols and mocking them. And again, certainly they would say we believe in Liberty for white Americans we believe in freedom for white Americans, but for the black population.  And so what I do find is abolitionist then they fight to reappropriate those symbols through their speeches their writings a lot of the images that they produce the posters the handbills, they use the flag they use the US Capitol building they use the Liberty cap, usually they use the Liberty pole and they try to bring that symbol back to what they argue what I believe it was intended to represent, which was actual equality for all people, not just white Americans. You're in the book and in this explanation. You really affirm, you know, partly where I landed in trying to write about the flag over time, which is that it's very difficult to hold stable or to render the meaning of the flag. It's a sustained way over time that it is a lightning rod, if you will, for controversy, but I think for us as historians the place to look for understanding about the conflicts that are roiling through cities. Like Savannah, like Washington DC and more, and you open the book with this extraordinary example of the slave coffle in the nation's capital in the wake of the war of 1812 in front of what is, I guess really the shell of the capital. And we discover through your rendering how they are 200 plus years ago. The flag is a controversial symbol being appropriated and reappropriated, struggled over in real time in early America. And I can't help but think. And I know you invite us to think in this way about how, in our own time, in our own moment, we have seen some version of a replay of that very contest. I'm not going to draw you too much in the present but I, I do think that because this is where you begin the book. You want us to, I think use this history to some degree, as a useful lens on the present. Am I right for sure and I have special affinity for the US capital I lived in Washington DC for multiple years I lived on East Capital and I used to jog up the steps of the US capital you can't do that anymore, but this was in pre and post 911. And so I really did it's a beautiful building the whole downtown areas incredible. And so the scene at the beginning of the book this coffle is marched in front of the US capital as it happened frequently, far more frequently than we would like to imagine. Today, one of the chained men, he kind of pauses in front of the building he faces the building he lifts his chained hands, and he begins to sing loudly. What was then considered the national anthem, a song called Hail Columbia. And I find it very poignant that the last line of the original lyrics is a death or liberty, or some variation of that so it's a very, you know, it's a, it's a call to action call to revolution it's a song that was supposed to honor the founding father the Revolutionary War soldiers who fought and won American freedom. So that capital building meant a lot to a lot of people back then. But I think the important thing about my book is that it shows it meant a lot to enslaved people as well. I talked about earlier, and we don't have none of their commentary survives, but can you I can only imagine what they were thinking as they marched up seventh street in southeast and northeast Washington DC, they could see the dome to their west. And I imagine they took you know they were already tired they were hungry, and they saw that thing and they said we're justified in doing this. We have all the justification, we need to, you know, to do what we're doing to in that building over there. And then certainly today you see the US capital that the US that the riot.  And so like that capital building. It's the quote unquote temple of freedom. And so here's a building, and yes it's used for a lot of very important things inside of it but it's also just a symbol, like the flag, like the eagle. It represents American freedom, and people have been fighting over it. They've been fighting over that for very, very long time. And so yeah, my book is just totally rooted in the antebellum and Civil War eras, but it absolutely has resonance today. And I'm not afraid to say and I think you know freedom and democracy are in peril today. There's no doubt about it since the capital riot. I mean it's there's no escaping that fact. And so it's we're at a really important point right now. And I just do think it's time to sort of reevaluate our symbols, our values. And then we have to ask ourselves the question, is this the time where we're finally going to secure equality for all people, or are we going to keep limiting it to certain groups. And I think if we would listen to the voices of the men and women I studied will now is yet another opportunity to, to really stop doing things rhetorically and on paper. And make it real concrete change. Let's remake you know let's let's let's make the capital the temple of freedom. Again, let's make the flag the symbol of freedom the eagle, all of that stuff and you know this is this is the moment. And so I hope, I hope the book helps people wrestle with some of these really important contemporary issues. Perfect segue to my last couple of questions. And one of them is about violence and how violence figures in this story. I thought that I heard echoes of our colleague historian Kelly Carter Jackson, who has really emphasized to us the ways in which black abolitionists squarely forthrightly intentionally incorporate violence into their repertoire. And I think that's one of anti slavery. I heard. I think I read you suggesting that white abolitionists to an important degree, follow their lead. And this means I think you know that even the, the valence of violence is more complex than I think we might sometimes allow for. Understanding you. I think so and I think a lot of people today under appreciate the violence of the institution of American slavery and for, you know, many abolitionists are escaped slaves themselves several I've mentioned already you know Harriet Tubman also comes to mind. People know in their heart of hearts that that you're not going to convince slave owners through moral suasion or anything else like that to get them to get rid of this lucrative institution and it's not only important economically but socially culturally all sorts of ways. And as Dr. Jackson Manisha sin ha many historians have pointed out, you know the abolition movement is is the pioneer of black Americans, and white abolitionists play huge role there's no denying that, but black abolitionists are not only at the forefront. They're pushing it in a more radical direction. And certainly by the 1840s and 1850s I found even in the 1830s, you have black abolitionists saying you know what moral suasion sounds great. I'd love to be patient.  Dr. Jackson says use force, and you know violence is not preferred it's not the preferred way but you know that the recommendation is made if you're escaping, take a gun with you take a knife with you. And if you need to you fight liberty or death. And so eventually certainly after the fugitive slave law, even the time even leading pacifist abolitionist white and black, they come around and if not they don't promote certainly violent resistance, but they recognize that it's not it's a viable option by the 1850s. And so another thing I think my book does just underscores, not only the role of black people in abolition, but their militancy, and their tendency towards violence as the as the years pass and as the government seems to go more and more to this pro slavery direction as it leans further and further to the south. I think you see black and eventually white abolitionists try to correct course by force, you know, using using violence or any other tactics necessary. I can't imagine a more apt book for this season, these upcoming holidays, Juneteenth, the fourth of July, and more August 1 and more. And I can't urge folks enough to preorder indie bookstore, your favorite local bookseller, but please take time to find symbols of freedom and let it really infuse these holidays on with the long, deep and powerful meanings that they have long held in this country.  I do have to ask, because I know what a prolific scholar you are that you've got something else already in the works. So what's next for you what can we look forward to. Sometimes these projects, your next project has nothing to do with the previous project and sometimes it's an absolute natural outgrowth. Well that is the case in this case. And as I've sort of just mentioned in so many of these encounters. There are lethal weapons at play. And one thing I have discovered is that America's gun culture is not new. It has been around for a long time. And so what I'm looking into now in the next book will be on the role that guns and also like the buoy knives that the governor has fancied the role that these guns and knives played not only in the oppression of African American, you know, people, but also slave resistance. And so these weapons in many cases in the south are intended to obviously support slavery, and to keep African Americans in captivity, but just as often they are used for the opposite reason. And slave people who have access to these lethal weapons are not hesitant to use them. And then of course there's the abolitionist as that movement grows more and more towards violent abolitionism. There's a lot of embracement of violent armed resistance. And so it's it's a natural outgrowth and it's a siting project and I'm knee deep in it already so it's it it'll be in a couple years but it'll be out soon. I look forward to the chance to talk to you about what promises again to be important and provocative work. And with that I'm going to thank our audience on behalf of the National Archives. Thank you to our archivist of the United States, Colleen Shogun, and a special thanks to our guest today, Professor Matthew Clavin. Thank you Martha and thank you to the audience and to the National Archives, it's been my honor and pleasure. Sincerely. Goodbye everybody.


In this video, we're going to be talking about Chapter 3, Constructing Conditions. From the book, Thinking about Social Problems, we'll be reviewing concepts from the chapter that will be on the exam. So to begin with, I want to do a little exercise that requires you to observe the following slides. And you're going to see a word in a slide.  And then after a couple of seconds, I will show you a picture. And I want you to think about whether or not the picture I show is similar to the picture you envisioned in your mind. So let's get started. Poverty, Wealth, Disabled, Older Adults, Youth, Children, Professional, Worker. So there is a very good chance that as you went through those slides and looked at those words, the picture that you had in your mind was very similar to the pictures that I showed you. They may have been slightly different because of your cultural background or your own personal experiences. But even if they were different when I showed you the pictures, you probably went, yeah, that works. That's what typifications are. Typifications are shortcuts that we have in our communication that allow us to kind of be on common ground with each other. You probably have heard of stereotypes. Stereotypes are a category within typifications. So stereotypes are typifications, but not all typifications are stereotypes. These are important in claims making because the better that you can do the shortcuts, the more you can keep your audience's attention. So we're going to talk about what typifications are and then we're going to talk about how they work with audiences in making social problems claims. So because typifications are essentially useful in communications, typifications come in the basic forms of communication. So verbal, we use words and these particular words evoke a common image in our mind. Also graphics visual. You can see on the slide alone that we have at the bottom right thief and or burglar would come to mind at the bottom center you probably think disabled or handicapped the bottom left savings. Pinching pennies to the left of the words here the speaker, you probably can think freedom of speech or voice or being heard, or just speaking. So all of these pictures do evoke and communicate kind of a shortcut for an idea that behaviors also are important. When we observe other people doing ritualistic kinds of behaviors like gestures. We shortcut communication on that. If you see somebody raising their left fist up high, you probably think resistance or power.  So, all three of these are sources of typifications, and they make communication easier and shorter, more concise. So in using typifications and social problems claims making, you are essentially ensuring that the audience will see the same answers to questions that you are trying to get across to them. So, the more you can use typifications the quicker you can get your audience's attention. Now, why is this important. Well, first of all, I want to clarify that low ski is not talking about this, because she is trying to prescribe a successful way to make a social problems claim. She is really talking about this because she has observed social problems claims and this is what they have in common. And so, then she is asking the question, well, why do they have this in common. And one of the answers that she came up with is that audiences can only take in so much. We have so much information flowing in our society now, and even more so than when low ski wrote this book. And so you are when you are trying to make a case to a particular audience about a social problem when you're trying to make that claim. You have to keep in mind that you are competing. You're not, you're competing. First of all, just with all the things that are going on in a public arena. So, every time you tweet, every time you say something on Facebook type something on Facebook. Every time you put something on a blog online. Every time anybody talks about something on television. That has to do with a social problems claim. Audiences are not only looking at the social problem that you're talking about. But they're thinking about things like the Kardashians or what's the latest Tom Hanks film or what's going on on tick tock. You know, all of these things are competing with the message that you're trying to get out. In addition to that, there are a lot of social problems. So you're making claims about one area of social problems like maybe the environment that you're competing with people who are talking about poverty. Or who are talking about Black Lives Matters or we're talking about crime, we're talking about all these different other issues. So you not only have to get your audience's attention and competition with more or less serious items that you're also competing with people who are giving serious messages. And then of course within your claims. So if you're trying to talk about environmentalism. You may be talking about the need to recycle that somebody else may be talking about holding corporations accountable.  So you're not just competing with other social problems claims and with less serious stuff that are in the public arena that you're also competing with claims about the same social problem that you're dealing with. So this competition makes that concession of typifications more important because you want to get to your point and get their attention quickly. Get them to understand what you're talking about quickly so that they don't have too high of a carrying capacity with what you're trying to talk to them about. And they lose interest or they get distracted by these competing things that are buying for their attention as well. So in making an argument. The use of typifications comes in the way in which people are grounding their arguments for their, the conditions that they're trying to construct. So how do you ground your argument? Well, you begin, most social problems claims begin with objective realities. So we are, we have been talking or continue to talk about social construction that that social construction is not the opposite of objectivity. Objective realities are simply facts. This is an important point that I want you to pay attention to not just because it'll help you understand what Loski is talking about in the chapter, but also because you have an assignment called issues background in this course. That assignment is where you go and examine the facts that are part of this issue. The facts don't change no matter what kind of social problem you are or solution you are constructing no matter what claim you are making, you will have to deal with this objective reality. But the facts only present part of the problem. You have to interpret these flat facts in such a way as to make your case. And one of the things that is required and making this case is you have to look for where things are harmful. And this may sound a little strange, but you're not going to have a problem if you can't demonstrate harm is being done. It can be a tricky construction because if you are too good at this, instead of capturing your audience's imagination and getting them to think about solutions, they may be overwhelmed and feel helpless. So you need to construct something that creates a kind of panic because you're trying to get people to make a change that you don't want them to panic so much that they give up and they feel like it's just too big of a problem to deal with, or it's just way beyond their control. So you're taking these objective facts and you're looking to point out the ways in which these, this reality is harming at least a small group, at least a group of people. And then the final thing that you have to bring in in order to demonstrate that this is a social problem and not a personal problem is the scope and size of this harm. So you need to show that a group of people who are getting harmed and that this is a problem that will grow in size if we are not going to address it. So you can see that the constructing of these conditions are always going to be a little on the negative side. They're always going to be creating a problem or constructing a problem as urgent, as harmful, as something that ought to make you panic a little bit. But there are slightly different ways to frame that construction of conditions, and this is what Lowsky gets into in the chapter. We're going to talk about two of these three forms of framing and then the third form we're going to talk about later in chapter five. So framing just means sort of what you emphasize what becomes the focus of your argument. So we're going to talk about diagnostic framing diagnostic framing focuses on what type of problem and is and who cause who or what causes the problem. So you know diagnostic we're making a diagnosis, the diagnosis is this is a problem of a particular type, and this person or conditions help cause this problem. We're also going to talk to in this chapter about motivational framing now this instead of emphasizing the problem emphasizes. So it will motivate the audience to do something. So it's trying to convince the audience that they should see this condition as intolerable, meaning something has to change. And then the third way that we're going to the third framing that we're going to talk about later in chapter five is what is called prognostic framing prognosis is looking at what the future is going to hold. So prognosis is looking at the past and saying what the problem is prognostic frame is referring to the prognosis, what should be done in order to correct this problem. So let's talk about diagnostic frames first. Lowsky points out that a lot of times in diagnostic frames what we're really looking at or what sociologists call structural factors or social forces. So, you've heard many people use the word systemic in the past. When referring to particular issues and problems. So, probably the one that's most popular in the news in 2020 is systemic racism. So, the diagnosis is that there is something not just wrong with individuals and their prejudices, but there's something wrong in the way things are structured. The way organizations are made that lead to a reproducing of this discrimination against particular groups. So part of diagnostic framing often emphasizes structural or social factors that are contributing to the to the conditions that you're trying to construct while you're making your social problems claim. So prognostic frames tend to be simple. You know, you know, most social issues are very complex. And, you know, since we're using the term diagnosis and talking about medical stuff. Your doctor loves it when you have an acute illness. So you come in, you have a cold.  You caught the cold because you have a virus. You know, 14 days of rest, you're going to be over the cold. It's a very simple. Here's, here's what caused it. Here's what's. Here's what will make it well. And we're done. And those kinds of problems are more comfortable for doctors. If you come in with a chronic illness that doesn't have a clear cause and may be triggered by a number of different events at different times and changes symptoms from day to day and overlaps with a lot of other symptoms and other diseases. And you have to take a long time to try to figure out, is it a or is it B or is it C. That makes it very, very difficult for a doctor to do their job. Well, the same is true when you are trying to diagnose the social problem. And so the more simple you can make it, the more you will engage your audience and get them to think about the conditions that you are constructing in your argument. Another part of this diagnostic framing is familiarity. What we mean by this is the more you can and this is where typifications also come in. The more you can hook into an existing ideas about social problems, existing ideas about these conditions, the better chance you have of getting your audience because the audience is familiar already with a particular, the particular framing with a particular diagnosis. So a couple of examples of this that she talks about. She talks about something called piggybacking. So a perfect example of piggybacking is the social problems claims that have gone on about texting while you are driving. So Mothers Against Young Drivers, we've mentioned several times and we'll mention multiple times in discussing social problems claims. Mothers Against Young Driving was a very successful campaign. By the end of the 1980s, people, it was part of the culture, you know, they, the, the idea that you don't drink and drive was no longer a debatable thing. It was pretty much a lot of everybody knew it. Everybody knew what you meant when you said it. Most people sanctioned other people when they were drinking. It was common within parties and so forth to take the keys away from somebody who had been drinking a lot to arrange to make sure that people had alternative rides home. All of these were changes in the culture and is, you know, the 1990s and partying was very different from the 1970s and partying. So when texting while driving became a big deal, they began to piggyback on that idea of don't drink and drive. And so you have these mottos and advertising and PSAs that say don't text and drive. They use the exact same language because what they are trying to do is get across the same idea by taking something familiar and saying, see, this is just like that. So piggybacking is an excellent way to create and expand a diagnostic frame because people are already and socialized to think in that particular way. The other thing that she talked about is something she called domain expansion. So that's basically where a social problem has already been accepted as a problem. And you're saying this is part of that too. So you're essentially like inserting a new idea into an existing argument and saying, okay, so you accepted that this is part of that. Probably a good example of this is talking about climate change where there were a number of people who understood pollution, understood environmental impact in the 70s after the passage of the EPA and after the environmental movement began and began to have effect. There were laws that changed. There were ideas and culture that changed around the idea of clean air and clean water. And then you come along in the 90s and early 2000s and people are talking more fully about carbon emissions and about global warming and these kind of things. And they hooked into that previous idea about pollution. So so much so that there even began to be a debate about whether or not the EPA should be paying attention to carbon emissions. When carbon emissions were not really part of what they thought about when they thought about pollution in the past. So, you know, not all carbon emissions create pollution, but they expanded the idea that if you care about the environment then you need to care about carbon emissions by expanding the domain of addressing environmentalism to include global warming to include climate change. It's very important though with the diagnostic framing that you can go too far. If you put out a message that says, you know, I guess the best way to put this is that when you are trying to get across the idea that something is pervasive that something is that a condition is something that needs attention that it is something bad and you're trying to get across in that framing that this is important. This is urgent. You're perilously, perilously close to conspiracy theories. So you can make it sound like, you know, like, for instance, when you talk about how, and again we're using environmentalism here, when you talk about what companies that pollute are doing. It's one thing to make a case that there is this side effect of industrialism that creates pollution that needs to be controlled and so forth.  And it's so, you know, we're talking about don't go too far. Again, the other reason for this is that you don't want to make a sound when you're constructing these conditions that there's nothing that could be done about it. If you convince your audience that it's so bad that they can't do anything, they lose interest, because you know what, what could I do and that's the end of the conversation. So, diagnostic framing has to be kind of a delicate thing and you have to be careful not to go over that line. You want to make sure that you get across that this is a problem, and it is a problem that needs to be addressed and it's urgent, but you don't want to go so far as to convince people that nothing can be done about it. So, let's turn to motivational frames. So, keep in mind that diagnostic framing very often is a very logical argument, a logical presentation that relies very often on data and is, you know, trying to convince the mind as much as the heart or maybe more than the heart that there is something going on that needs to be addressed. Motivational framing is more emotional. It's more trying to get you to feel that you need to do something. The idea of intolerable means that you can't accept the way things are, and that is a way to motivate you to do something to change it. Oftentimes, because you are trying to evoke an emotional response, the framing includes what we've talked about before with cultural themes. Now, cultural themes are kind of typification often. If you use these words like individualism, nationalism, capitalism, family, fair play, religion, all of these evoke very specific typifications that help evoke that emotion that you're looking for to motivate people to do something about the problem that you're trying to get them to pay attention to. So, the strategies are often varied, you know, are doing more than one thing as it were.  You also want to tap into what Lowsky calls popular worry, meaning these are things that people talk about that they think are a big problem. So if you can, if you know that most people are talking about like for instance here in 2020 when I'm recording this, a very popular worry is the pandemic, of course. So you will see, and I have seen and observed people who are also talking about other issues than the pandemic will use, you know, if you're worried about people going to, who are going to die from COVID, you're going to also worry about people who are going to die from global warming. You'll see stuff presented that said more people die from blah, blah, blah, them from COVID. Right. And the reason that people are talking about this and that way is they see this in popular discourse, this popular worry. And by tapping into that worry, you can say, okay, you're worried about this, you should also be worried about that. And then the other strategy is to show that conditions are symbolic. What she means by this is that if you are tapping into a particular condition, you want to get across that it symbolizes something bigger than just the thing that you're talking about. So you may talk about global warming, creating more hurricanes. So this year has been tremendously bad in terms of hurricanes. We actually went through the alphabet of all the alphabet names, which is 26 storms, and then we went further into the Greek alphabet. And I think the last count that I heard was something like 32, 33 forms named storms this year. Okay, so yes, we know from people who have made arguments about global warming that more hurricanes are a particular sign of this global warming that, you know, different severe weather events are. So then you can shortcut that, if you will, and make hurricanes a kind of symbol of that global warming. So when people talk about now, oh my God, there were so many hurricanes this year in the Atlantic, you have made that connection. So the next thing that most people then talk about is, was this from global warming was this from climate change. So this condition itself, you know, here's the facts, here's the thing that we have demonstrated as part of the problem part of the conditions.  And those strategies that she outlined are what she has observed have been successful in creating this motivational framing of that social problem. So let's talk about strategies a little further. So in all framing, you are going to use typifying stories and we're going to talk in later chapters about this idea of a formula story. Here's the, there is some problems with using typifying stories. As we talked about, we are simplifying this. And because we are simplifying it, we're going to pick the presentation of facts that support our ideas support the panic that you want to evoke support the motivation that you want to create. So we're going to leave out things that might work a little bit against that. And by leaving out those facts, you are essentially shaping the story or constructing the story in a particular way. And that can be okay if you're trying to convince people to support you but later on when you're actually trying to create a solution that can come back to bite you, because people think the solution ought to be simple, but most social problems don't have simple solutions and have complex solutions with very nuanced ideas. And if you get lost in your own stories, you very often are not going to be successful in addressing the issue because you forget to bring back those facts that you left out and convincing your audience to pay attention. And another strategy that is, you know, part of it is to go to the most extreme of circumstances. And by going to those extreme circumstances, you risk your credibility like we talked about before where you kind of start sounding like a conspiracy theorist, instead of somebody who's reasonably arguing for policy. And then you also have reduced the complexity of the problem. Most problems are not as simple or as extreme as the stories or the conditions that are constructed in those stories suggest. The other thing is that most of these strategies work, not because the arguments are strong, or because the strategy has been successful in the sense of you've won the hearts and minds of people. But oftentimes the success of these strategies is dependent upon the right time, end quote. And the right time is kind of, well, shall we say, not the best of times. So disasters are very often followed by people making social problems claims, you know, the hurricanes that we talked about before, a good example. Climate change almost always comes up after a major hurricane has hit the continental United States. Also, you know, anytime something horrible happens in the news, people go and take that real life experience and start hooking onto that. You saw this with George Floyd's murder. And how that prompted people who had been protesting about police brutality for a long time and have been on the streets before, but because this real life example of severe extreme police brutality occurred. They're able to motivate their, the people who care about this issue to go back out into the streets and start protesting again. So these real life examples are taken advantage of probably rightly so. Because they keep the, the audience in this case, the audience is the public, it moves your issue into the public's mind. This is especially true if these disasters or these examples create what is called a moral shock. In other words, people are just sure that this is wrong. That's what we mean when we say moral, we're not really talking about any kind of religious creed or anything like that. People construct morality differently. But basically what we're talking about is right and wrong, what people think is right and what people think are wrong. So the quote unquote right time often is that moment in public discourse when people are shocked into feeling that something is very, very wrong. So the last concept in the chapter that we want to talk about is something called social problems ownership. This is the goal. This is what makes a social problems claims successful. So I want to make sure that you understand that success doesn't equal we solved the problem in low skis. So in her, her, in the theory that she is presenting in this book, social problems success is how successful, how successfully a social problems claims maker has gotten their audience to own the social problem to understand it as a social problem, you want to do something about it. And that is what makes a social problems successful. The, the more successful social problems claims become a way for people to, to think from that moment forward about those problems. So she brings up mothers against drunk driving in the chapter and this is a very good example of how the diagnosis that they made is now taken for granted. So when mothers against driving began their work in the late 1970s, their first audience were police officers and judges. And they went in and said, you know, the problem is enforcement. So that was their diagnosis. There are laws on the books against drunk driving, but when somebody gets caught for it. They oftentimes are not arrested, which is where the police came in or if they are arrested and go to court. They are not prosecuted to the full extent of the law, because before mothers against drunk driving. Most people thought of drunk driving as, you know, that thing you do sometimes when you're not your judgment is low impaired but you know everybody's done it. So, you know, why would we be upset with people who make that little mistake every once in a while. Well, of course, to the family members who lost somebody to a drunk driver. That was a very cavalier attitude. So they go to these police officers and these judges and they demonstrate to them through their testimony and their data and so forth. This is a problem. And this problem is causing people to be injured and die. Now people think that that diagnostic frame that they created is now taken for granted. And you really all you have to do is just watch television cop shows in the 1960s and 70s and see how cringe worthy they are now because you see how they treated drunk driving as comic relief. Oh, haha, that guy got drunk and now we got to put him in jail overnight he'll sober up and then we'll send him on his way kind of thing. Whereas if you look at, you know, police shows in the 80s and later, you know, drunk driving is this very serious thing and you see a lot of shows in the culture that, you know, the bad guy is somebody who drinks and drives. So that is now taken for granted. It seems silly to us that it never was a thing, you know, that it wasn't always a thing that there was a time when people didn't think it was bad to drink and drive. And social problems ownership, then if you successfully create this taken for granted aspect of it, that's probably, you know, a social problem that has been owned by its audience is probably going to be the social problems that are piggybacked on. So she's saying, you know, this is these successes lead to other successes to the extent that people can build on these successes. And one of the signs that you have successfully created social problems ownership is that other people are piggybacking on it.


You know how I said I'm gonna make 300 people either millionaires or at least six figures and people think I'm joking But I'm not I flew Jaden in from Chicago. He had in the social media program How to start your own social media marketing agency? What'd you get in two months ago? Yeah day one He was on the first people got in the test group. He wasn't cynical He got in and how much have you made in the last two months 32,000 32 grand in two months How old are you 21? 21 They don't believe us if you're cynical you always block your blessing some people you could give them a 30,000 our car and they wouldn't take it if I counted how many people I've made millionaires But didn't have time to verify.  You want a living nine-to-five job or you want a fortune? consistency beats Duration so a lot of people don't go to the gym because they're like I don't have an hour and a half It's better to go every day for 15 minutes It's better to do this right here what they're doing if you don't even have a gym The box you should throw if you should do a little shadow boxing every day Because duration every duration is not as important as frequency and consistency Oh He said he didn't fear the man who practiced a thousand kicks Who who I practice a thousand kicks in one day Wilson He feared the man who practiced one kick a day for a thousand days That's guys gonna be way better and so you but you made your money back right away Yeah, how'd you convince them to pay you up front because usually I recommend one to two to grand a month charge people But you got them to pay you 20 grand that's actually a really funny story I think it was Joe Soto in the video He was talking about how you should really analyze your competitors so that you can learn how to fill the gaps that they're not targeting for a competitive advantage and When I went to talk to the doctor it was actually a week before I actually got to sit down with it and Really pitch him and show him the value of what we do. Mm-hmm I I went back a week later on Wednesday I met with him from 11 to to noon Okay, he was supposed to have a lunch from noon one and then from one to two apparently he was supposed to be meeting with another Oh, and then stacked up man, and that marketing firm was the 11 million dollar competitor Okay, and so I think he was actually writing that check for that person Oh, but you convinced but I convinced him to go with me because I was before so what happened early bird gets the worm So true so true, but I said I was wondering from the best in the industry and This person is going to not only help me customize your business But we're going to build your brand story and that's going to be communicated in the most efficient and effective ways Right so that your clients don't have to shop at this house. You do not know what you're ever gonna get Say hello everybody This is our daily Say hey, yeah, and yes I think it's like a minute and ten seconds. Yeah, that's right All right, which car is the best you like a Ferrari How many people know that you do all those things and he said well usually I have to get the patient to come in for one Of the things and I tell them about yeah, I was like, why don't you just brand yourself for all three? Yeah, and then save yourself the time and then the time because that's one of the things that I teach in the program Yeah, you create what's called a brand story like you have to a lot of people's marketing is oh that helped That's so that is absolutely to sell because if you watch my snapchat or any of my social media YouTube You can tell that my life is kind of like a story like when I'll meet people on the street They'll come up to me and they're like, oh, we already know about Zach and we know about your grandma We know about the cars. We know like what you know, you do jiu-jitsu So the same thing if you can do that for a doctor's office or a pizza restaurant or a Landscaping company and you help them build their brand all of a sudden they'll stand out from their competitors And then they'll start getting clients and the more clients they get paying them because let's say this doctor that does Cosmetic surgery a lot of times he's making five or ten grand per client Yeah, so it's they'll gladly pay you a grand a month if you bring in three clients a month That's 30 grand you're making them and they're paying you a couple grand You can eventually charge more be charging two to ten thousand dollars. So Sometimes I mean people you can just get one business, right? People don't realize how much business is spent on marketing. Yeah, it's just not that many of you are good I'm glad you learn not that many people know the brand story thing. I'm one of the only people I'm the only person teaching it like that. Yeah in the world and it really works It's and if you don't believe it works just look at my social media. Yeah, it works You're never gonna be poor my goal for this program is learn how to get six-figure income, okay? And it's a variety because six figures is a hundred grand a year to 999,000 figure how to make six figure And enjoy your life and keep the balance of you know other stuff And then you can figure out how to make seven figures So my goal for people is like learn to make ten grand a month Then learn how to make I call the rule of ten then make a hundred grand a month Then a million a month then you try to make ten million a month


I sent in a suggestion of two possible case studies without thinking too much about it. How to actually evaluate the value of information with regard to the cases. But this is one topic that I think is quite interesting in many respects. Most of my slides are basically on the background of this topic. And as the title says, it involves the effects of soil structure interaction on the excitation response of buildings, subjected to near and far field strong motion. And just for repeated information, I think I have showed you this some time before. But Iceland is pulled apart by the Eurasian and the American plate. And in the south of Iceland we have a transfer zone where we have fairly strong earthquakes. So we have the South Icelandic seismic zone as you can see there. And in the past 17 years we've had three big earthquakes in this area. In 2000 we had two earthquakes, approximately 6.5 in the eastern part and then the middle part here. And then in 2008 we had a 6.3 magnitude earthquake in just east of Queragalli. And of course when these earthquakes occur it's not a single event, it's a multitude of events. So you have one main event and then you have post events that may go on for a year or longer. So we have quite a bit of data available. But in 1999 this building was instrumented and it's instrumented in the basement with a triaxial accelerometer. And then on the top floor, the third floor just there we are measuring the north-south motion and the east-west motion. And this is basically the only building that is instrumented for response measurements in this seismic region except power plants are on the outskirts of the seismic zone and therefore not as sensitive. So what we discovered when we compared the response of the building in the June 21st earthquake which was about 15 kilometers away and then the response in the 6.3 earthquake on May 29th in 2008 which was 5 to 8 kilometers away from the building was that we had very strong dissimilarities in the structural response for these two events. And the response factor don't show that maybe two clearly but still we can see that the response for the latter event in 2008 has a very strong peak in the sort of about 0.5 second period which is not as strongly seen in the previous event. And the damage to the building was fairly limited. There was some cracking to be seen in 2008 but not that severe. There were some damage to interior because of high acceleration levels but this is actually in the basement of the building recently installed book rack. But when we looked at the response in 2000 the earthquake was further away and we had a horizontal peak ground acceleration of 13 and 11 percent G in each direction and then we had on the third floor we were measuring up to 36 percent of G. So we had about three times larger accelerations on the third floor than in the basement. However in 2008 the horizontal PGA was 54 and 33 percent G in each direction but on the third floor we had 72 percent of G and in general we had only about 1.4 times larger response on the third floor than in the basement which was surprising because you would expect this on a step foundation to be at least 2.5 times magnification from basement to the third floor. And when we looked at the spectral information these are just power spectral densities of the relative acceleration between basement and top floor. Then we see that basically the frequency content has shifted down in frequency from what we saw in June 2000. So what's the reason, what lies behind this? And it took us a while to sort of come up with a hypothesis but what is traditional in soil structure interaction studies is to use study or look at the horizontal vertical spectral ratios and when we evaluate those we see that in 2000 we had a very strong response at approximately 8 hertz but then in 2008 we had a very strong response at about 2 hertz and this is just a demonstration of analysis that I did in 2002 or 2003 where I was looking at the main events and post events from those previous earthquakes and there basically in all the data the 8 hertz frequency was very strong and the actual natural frequency of the structure was not as dominant but it's around 6 hertz the first natural frequency. So the reason or our hypothesis is that we are fairly confident that the fact is that during the Ice Age several interglacial periods occurred and then we had sea level rising up to about 100 meters above the present coastline. So a large part of South Iceland was under sea accumulating sea sediments on top of the rock foundation and then in after the Holocene after the glacial or the Ice Ages then we had a lot of volcanic activity in Iceland and in 8500 years ago there was a big lava flowing over a large portion of South Iceland and therefore flowing over the soft sediments. So and then of course these lavas which are even though it's 8500 years old it's not really a very old rock in the geological sense and that is also has different compositions. So we have a compound lava and we have scoria lava which have different characteristics. These are much weaker than the compound lava layers. And so this is a hypothetical rock soil profile based on information from a borehole near to the building and then we have a compound layer on top. So when people are building the structures they think they are building on solid rock. Underneath the compound lava there is scoria lava layer and underneath the scoria lava layer there is sediments gravel, sand and clay. And then below that there is older rock 1.5 billion years old. And this has been studied based on ground motion data from other areas such as Quiragirli where we have a seismic array and then it has been seen that we have to split up and identify two peaks in the data and about between two or three birds and then around eight birds. So this is fairly well established. So we are going to skip these. This is a ship tower that I did a very simple platform for considering the lava structure and I put the two peaks with the measured natural frequency from post events. And so the outstanding questions are how to distinguish between foundation frequencies and structural frequencies and how to properly evaluate the natural frequency of a structure and its position on such complex foundation layers. And the fact is that in the building in question the foundation actually acted as in my opinion as a seismic isolation. So I think the building would have been similarly damaged if it actually had a magnification of a factor three rather than 1.4. But of course if in a different type of building, a more high rise building with the natural frequency towards two birds and of course the magnification would have been even stronger. So there are several things to consider. And I'm not pretty proposing to study this case in detail. I think it's more sort of suitable to consider a simplified scenario that is reflecting reality as I said. So we could select quick action layers, levels, different applications of distance. We could look at different foundations, distance. For instance reflect these two cases where we have a stiff foundation as a reference or an 8 hertz stiff or foundation system with an 8 hertz natural frequency and 2 hertz natural frequency. And that would affect the hazards for a particular building. And then we could maybe study different building types. Low rise, medium rise, high rise and evaluate the response. And based on that we did risk. And then the value of information would basically be the difference in risk because if we don't have any monitoring nobody would know about this. So we can either say it or we can either underestimate the risk or for instance high rise buildings or we are overestimating the risk for low rise buildings. And then of course we could provide argumentation for the monitoring or further information coming up. Thank you very much. I think buildings are very important and it's the first building and the classical monitoring of a building in case of earthquake. Is it the purpose to have a class of buildings here? So medium rise, high rise buildings. To evaluate the value of information for a class of buildings for different. Is it another approach, not approach, another case study just to say only as a mark, not as a mark? Yeah, I think it's not practical to analyze or for this for the post-action I think it's maybe not practical to analyze the building and the local conditions in too much detail. I mean that might be from our scope of interest here but to do a sort of parametric type of study that would reflect the issue. Maybe I'm not, but you could select the limit state like the intra-story drift between two stories as a limit state and look what would be with and without the monitoring. I don't know. Yeah, well basically it stops a method without monitoring. If you don't have monitoring, you don't know about the effects. So it's not monitoring. Everyone assumes that the foundation is still. And then you build your buildings and you do your risk evaluation for instance insurance purposes. The value of monitoring is the highest for the foundation assessment. Yeah, it's basically that's the value. You know more. You understand better the real risks than you would without monitoring.


A week left before you guys break camp what has struck you about this team with with six weeks of spring training under your belt? well Couple things I think I put on it before in the interviews the depth we have on this team Up and down through our rotation our relievers Even our lineup, you know, we got five or six outfielders quite a few infielders all guys that you know should be You know caliber of you know starting somewhere starting on this team starting, you know on 29 other teams and That's what you want. You know, especially going in the camp and fighting through spring training You want that competitive atmosphere of you know guys fighting for jobs. So it's you know the depth of this team and You know guys just coming ready ready to go from the jump, you know, that's one thing too You know with you know uncertainty of last year with the season everything and they come in this year If it's gonna be the same thing We're gonna start on time or they're pushing it back a month Man guys, you know came into camp in shape, you know ready to go and you know ready to compete from day one Uh glaber was in a while ago talking about his Relationship with dj lamehiu and how that that's grown and and benefited him and I was just wondering What have you seen of glaber of the last few years? Has he grown as a more inquisitive player? A guy seeking advice and being open to suggestions about his game Yeah, pete that's one thing I actually noticed early on in glaber's career and even in uh 2018 You know as a rookie coming up, you know, we were this might have been a month of this season We were playing in houston and he was kind of asking me about you know, hey, how do you? You know, how do you sit? How do you hit the breaking pitch? You know, how do you drive that?   So it's uh It's been fun to watch Aaron with the season just 10 days away How driven are you overall to win a title and How did the past postseason disappointments fuel your fire? Yeah, I'm Bruce I'm as fired up as ever You know every year I know I say come in here and you know say that's our goal To win a championship, but You know for us, you know the first thing to do is we got to win our division and that starts with game one, you know and Starts with game one and we're gonna have a tough opponent with Toronto at home But you know we got to knock off the rays first, you know, that's a team that won the division last year Got all the way to the world series, you know beat us in the division series Um, you know, that's our first first goal That's the first goal for me is you know to continue to let guys know that hey You know, we're playing even though we're playing 162 games It's not a sprint like it was last year every game still matters because I know every year You know starts come down to the end in September and also it's like oh It's a couple games from either a wild card or you win your division and we don't want to be in that predicament You know we want to go out there and you know win our division and put ourselves in a good position the postseason You know with this depth with the pitch and we have Um with this lineup, you know to put us in the you know the right position to go out there and win a championship Aaron it seems uh each of the last You know three four years here the depth of your lineup has been tested by injuries As you're getting ready to start this season. Have you guys started to talk about the idea Of of what you know really what kind of maybe what a first inning looks like against the starting pitcher and what you guys can do I mean we spent so much time talking about You and john carlo and how teams approach you guys, but you haven't been able to be in the lineup together a whole lot Have you have you guys started to talk about the idea of of getting off to a good start with a healthy lineup?  So, you know, we're looking forward to you know, keeping everybody healthy and Seeing what this lineup can actually do The way teams bullpens are constructed now It seems getting a starter out after four or five innings Isn't necessarily the same advantage that it used to be But is a first inning Maybe, uh, you know trying to get them out after two or three Is that kind of more of the goal now and the way your lineup is constructed with the patients that you're talking about? Yeah, you know, I've always been you know about trying to get that starter out because it's not really about the game You know tonight, you know, it's kind of about the whole year You know if we're playing the rays, you know blue jays and if we're able to get to those starters early And say we got a four game series against these guys You know that third and fourth day, you know, that bullpen's gonna be kind of wearing it If we're able to get to the starter and kind of have them use their big guns You know how to pin early, you know, it's going to kind of help us down the road You know, so that's all I've always looked at is you know a lot of these teams around the league have You know some pretty some pretty good bullpum bullpen arms coming out of there You know throwing, you know 100 miles an hour some great breaking pitches But you know if we can just wear those guys down, you know, and over the course of a season 162 games That's gonna you know help us in the end