Firing Line

(gentle music) (gentle classical music) - Good Evening.

I'm Margaret Hoover.

Tonight, a "Firing Line" special: America at 250, commemorating the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

When 56 delegates from 13 colonies signed the Declaration of Independence, they proclaimed a revolutionary idea, that all people are created equal, and that the legitimacy of government itself depends on the consent of the governed.

(upbeat music) For 250 years, Americans have built institutions, settled disagreements, exercised democratic power, and borne the costs of defending those ideals.

To mark this occasion, I sat down with three Americans whose experiences include executive, military and judicial leadership: Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, and retired General Stanley McChrystal.

- [Announcer] "America at 250: A Firing Line Special with Margaret Hoover" was made possible by contributions to your PBS stations from viewers like you.

Thank you.

- We start with a conversation with Justice Neil Gorsuch.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, you have described the Declaration of Independence as a mission statement.

- Mm-hm.

- In plain words, what is the mission?

- What I meant by that is the Declaration has three ideas at its heart, that we're all created equal, every one of us.

And that each of us has rights given to us by God, not from government, right.

And third, that we have the right and the power to rule ourselves.

And those three ideas were really radical in 1776.

And if you look around the world today, they're still sort of unusual.

But they're inspirational.

I think they're perfect ideas for us to aim at.

And are we ever gonna maybe get there perfectly?

Hmm.

No, right?

The Constitution to make a more perfect union, to always work on those three ideas.

So yes, I think that the Declaration is our mission statement, and the Constitution is sort of the how-to manual.

- The concepts at the heart of the Declaration, you mentioned were radical ideas.

The Declaration was mocked by the British at the time.

Yet here we are 250 years later, sitting in the Supreme Court in Washington DC, in the heart of the world's oldest modern democracy.

Why have the ideals endured?

- Yeah, I was just actually talking about this with my law clerks earlier today, believe it or not.

And they asked, "What do you think the founders would make of America today?"

And I think would they ever dreamt that this would last 250 years?

And I have to say, I think they would be really proud, right?

They would be super proud of what they've achieved.

Is it perfect?

No, of course not.

But it's aimed at perfect things.

It's working on it.

And I think they would be stunned by the progress of this country.

At the same time, I'm pretty sure that immediately after being so proud of what they've accomplished, they would start bickering, right?

Because that's what Americans do.

- You have published a new book for children of all ages, "Heroes of 1776."

You co-wrote it with Janie Nitze, who's your collaborator in many of your publications.

You spend a lot of time emphasizing the humanity of the founders.

You tell stories that humanize them.

Why was that humanity an important distinction and dimension to bring on this 250th anniversary?

- Yeah, I think we're gonna have parades and fireworks, and we might remember who George Washington is and Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin.

But it didn't take just them.

It took countless men, women, and children who supported the revolutionary cause at a time of great peril.

I mean, they thought they were gonna be hung when they signed that document.

- And some were.

- And some were.

Nathan Hale, we talk about him in the book, 21 years old, right?

And "I regret that I have one life to lose from my country."

At 21.

And we just thought that maybe missing in that whole celebration and remembrance, we're gonna forget that there were real people just like us.

- One that you focus on and really admire is Thomas Nelson of Virginia.

- [Gorsuch] Yeah.

- [Margaret] What is it about his story that speaks to you?

- Well, so like many of the signers, I mean, remember, they debated, they disagreed.

Even in June and July, it wasn't an obvious thing in 1776 that they were gonna agree.

When they finally did, and they signed the document on August 2nd, the room was silent.

It was gloomy because they knew they were potentially facing hanging if they signed that document.

- They were signing their death warrants.

- They were signing their death warrant.

Thank you.

- But Thomas Nelson is your question.

And like several of the stories we tell about these human, ordinary people who did extraordinary things, there he was, legend has it, at the Battle of Yorktown.

He's in charge of the Virginia militia.

He sees that the British are occupying his home as their headquarters, and he doesn't hesitate to order his men to open fire on it.

He spent most of his fortune on the revolution, as so many of the framers did.

I mean, when they said they were pledging to each other their sacred honor, their lives and their fortunes, they meant it.

He died so poor that his body, and this isn't in the book, they buried his body in an unmarked grave so his creditors couldn't find it and dig it up to use his collateral for his debts.

And when he died, he was asked, "Do you have any regrets about it?"

And he said, "I'd do it all over again."

- Many of the founding fathers and signers of the Declaration and Constitution actually did end up, as you described, "Poorer, hunted, imprisoned, personally devastated by the revolution."

What do you think they understood about freedom that perhaps we might take for granted today?

- They understood those three things were worth fighting for.

They were worth their lives.

Life's not easy.

Right?

Only forty percent of colonists supported independence.

Another twenty, thirty percent were very much against it.

They were loyalists.

And the rest stood on the sidelines.

And what we're hoping to convey to kids is, life's not easy, okay?

It's gonna be hard.

Realizing the Declaration's promises in your own time is gonna be your job soon.

The torch is passing to your hands.

Don't drop it, please.

- Beyond the founding fathers, you also tell the story of heroic women who were involved.

I lament that I did not know the story of Mary K. Goddard from Baltimore, Maryland.

Her name was often published at the bottom of a newspaper she published as 'MK' so people didn't know she was a woman.

- Yes.

Yes.

So when the framers of the Declaration first decided to publish a document with their names attached to it.

And again, remember that, it is one thing to say we're declaring independence, it was another thing to show the names.

They were marking themselves.

And they were in Baltimore at the time.

Why was Congress in Baltimore?

Because the British had taken over Philadelphia.

That's how things were going.

And they turned to a local printer there, local patriot printer, M.K.

Goddard, who always, as you say, put at the bottom of the newspapers "published by MK Goddard".

But when it came to the Declaration, she did something different, she put her whole name, "published by Mary Katherine Goddard."

- [Margaret] Just like the signers.

- Just like the signers, marking her.

I mean, that was an act of treason, what she did.

Think about the bravery of that.

- You and your colleagues have over the years, of your tenures at the Court, published hundreds of books, scores of books for children.

- Yes.

- And on the 250th anniversary, I wonder if you feel there is a part of teaching the successes of the American experiment to the next generation.

- I hope so.

I mean, when I, I mean, the reason why I really got into this is I've been concerned about the state of civic education in this country.

Thirteen percent eighth graders are proficient at grade-level on American history, according to some reports.

Twenty two percent on civics.

Adults aren't much better.

Six in ten of us might pass the citizenship exam, right?

Think about that.

I helped my wife study for it.

It's not that hard.

- Justice Breyer, your former colleague, used to say, "The only answer to this was to restore 12th grade civics."

- Yes.

And this is one thing, if you put all of us in a room, all right, we disagree about how to interpret the law.

One thing all of us could agree on is the need for civic education in this country.

And I do think young people, when they're exposed to these ideas, when they're exposed to these heroes in our past, will find inspiration from them and can do great things because of them.

- You make the point also, that there is no common religion or cultural heritage of Americans.

That we are a creedal nation.

Creedal because we believe in the creed, we believe in those three founding ideals which you mentioned previously.

That sentiment, particularly as expressed by you, has received some criticism from conservative circles and drawn backlash where people have said how wrong you could be about this.

And I wonder, how do you respond to those who argue that America did have a common cultural and religious heritage?

- Well, first of all, did you know that there is a Catholic signer on the Declaration of Independence?

- Right.

- Charles Carroll.

Right?

And we were founded, a lot of our colonies, for religious pluralism, right?

And the opportunity to practice your own faith in your own way.

And we were never supposed to be a nation that was about one race or one religion.

It was about those ideas.

Those things are perfect ideas that speak to every human heart and that unite us all.

- Is there a revisionism in, as we tell our story now, saying we've always been a white, Christian nation.

- I just don't see it that way.

I mean, America is supposed to be about those ideas.

And America is available to each and every one of us.

And it's up to each and every one of us to see that those ideas continue to flourish.

- But you refute the idea that we came from the same heritage and the same religion.

- I mean, we have a First Amendment, for crying out loud.

No established religion.

Everybody has the freedom of religion.

Everybody has the freedom of speech.

We are all equal under law, okay?

Now, you can not believe in those ideas.

Fair enough.

Then we have a problem.

- Right.

- But those three ideas are something all of us can unite behind.

- Polls have found that Americans, particularly young Americans, are losing their faith in self-representation in democracy.

Too high a number of young people don't believe that democracy is necessarily the best form of government.

- I agree with them, it is not the best.

- But it's better than all the others?

- But what are your alternatives?

- Exactly.

- Okay.

And I just ask you where, to young people, I think they're the luckiest people in the history of the planet.

Where else would you rather be born, and what other time in history would you have more opportunities?

This country has never been wealthier or freer compared to other places in the world.

You've been given a great gift.

Is it perfect?

I'm not here to tell you it's perfect.

I'm here to tell you there's a lot of work to do to make it a more perfect union.

And it's for you to do it.

But what an opportunity you've been given as a young person in this country.

- We confront a major revolution in the course of human history, in the new technologies of artificial intelligence.

These three ideals that you have articulated have sustained us until now from the agricultural revolution through the industrial revolution.

- And they will sustain us through what comes next, too.

- Even through the robots?

- I don't think you can make, I don't think you can aim a country toward any other ideals that are better.

I think anything that you'd change in those three ideas would be a retreat, not an advance.

- What responsibility does the Supreme Court have to protect and preserve American democracy for the next 250 years?

- Yeah, so our role is limited but important, right?

Our role is not to make the laws.

It's not to change the Constitution.

That's up to you.

We the people, right?

But my job is to make sure that when you come to court, you have a disagreement between each other or with the government, that somebody's gonna look at the law as written and neutrally apply it to the cases and controversies that the courts hear.

That's it.

It is an important job, but it's a limited one.

- How does it protect and preserve democracy?

- Yeah, by making sure that the laws, once they are duly enacted, are fairly applied to everybody, okay?

And that's the genius of the Constitution, right?

I mean, Madison knew men are not angels, right?

And so if we're going to aim at those three ideas, you don't wanna give anybody the power to do whatever he wants to realize those ideals.

You have to balance power.

- At the end of the book, "Heroes of 1776," you and Janie reflect and say, quote, "The torch is now in your hands."

So as America approaches our 250th birthday, what do you most hope the next generation of Americans will inherit?

And I don't mean materially.

What do you hope they will inherit morally and civically?

- Yeah, I hope that they will explore some of the virtues of the past, of some of these men and women and children.

Virtues of courage and sacrifice.

The efforts they made to improve themselves.

I mean, George Washington wrote out "the 110 rules of civility and good behavior."

Ben Franklin kept a list of twelve virtues that he worked on and a little calendar until someone suggested, maybe he add another one, like humility.

(Margaret laughing) And he said, "Yeah, I need to work on that one."

- Yeah, I suppose.

(laughs) - Right?

So these are people who really worked on themselves because they knew that the only way to carry forward a republic, the only way to keep it, is to be worthy of it.

And Jefferson said, you know, "If you want an ignorant people to remain free, that's something that has never happened in history and never will."

And so I hope they reflect on the virtues of these people and the things they can learn from them, and then find the inspiration to figure out the Declaration's next chapter.

Just as Lincoln did in the Civil War when he condemned slavery and said, "Look at the Declaration, all men are created equal."

Just like the women, Seneca Falls, all men and women are created equal.

Just like Dr.

King did at Lincoln's Memorial down the street here, saying the Declaration was a promissory note come due.

It's up to them, just as was those people, to realize the Declaration's next chapter.

- Justice Gorsuch, thank you for joining me on "Firing Line."

- It's a real pleasure.

Thank you, Margaret.

(gentle music) - Now, a conversation with Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

Governor, the Declaration of Independence rests on the proposition that the government derives its power from the consent of the governed.

250 years later, how would you assess the state of the American experiment?

- Largely a success.

I mean, you look at, around the world, we are the only democracy that has been consistently a democracy for 250 years.

But certainly there are challenges, there have been, and it can feel very heavy at times and very precarious.

But largely, I think the American system of government has been a success.

That being said, we cannot ever take it for granted.

We cannot ever assume that because we've been here for 250 years, we will be here for the next 250 years.

- You said earlier this year in an interview that you are, quote, "absolutely concerned about our democracy."

What concerned you?

- I think the recent events that have really focused on undermining our institutions, that have held up this democracy, the rhetoric in this country that can feel so dangerous and violent.

And we've seen people resorting to hurting people who disagree with them as opposed to having robust debate that the founders envisioned.

You know, we're a raucous country.

We have robust debates.

They can get heated.

But at the end of the day, we are to live by the rules that we are all equal, that is the... Making this a more perfect union was the goal of our founding fathers and we've got more work to do to live up to that.

- Yeah.

In his farewell address in 1796, the first president of the United States, George Washington, warned against what he called, quote, "the baneful effects of the spirit of party."

He said, "The spirit of party agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection."

250 years into the American experiment, are political divisions threatening our capacity for self-government?

- I certainly don't think that George Washington would recognize the America that we all inhabit today from the one that the founders envisioned when they created the Articles of Independence.

- Why not?

- I think it is, you know, we are polarized.

We do not have that sense of community that I think George Washington helped us create when he was the nation's, you know, first president.

When we look at the founding fathers.

The average age was 44.

There was 21-year-old, you know, Alexander Hamilton and 70-year-old Benjamin Franklin, and everyone else was somewhere in between.

And I think about young people today and the numbness that many of them describe, that it doesn't matter who your leader is because everyone's in their political corners and no one's really focused on solving problems or finding common ground.

And I think that's where we've got so much work to do.

Yes, we've got political parties and maybe that's not how President Washington envisioned it.

But even within political parties we can still do that work.

But it takes leaders who are humble, who recognize not one of us or not one political party has all of the answers, that we have to have American solutions.

It's not Republican solutions and Democratic solutions, but American solutions.

- Recently you said that "Being an American," quote, "carries an awesome responsibility to make our union more perfect, however we can."

Where in your view has America most succeeded in fulfilling that promise?

- Well, I look at a lot of the victories that we've had just in the last 20 years, right?

Whether it is the ability to marry who you want to marry, it is the more women in office and taking the reins in, you know, positions of power.

Certainly the biggest one still eludes us, but I think we have made great strides, and that is real.

We also know, though, that as fast as some of these rights can come, there's also efforts to take them away.

And in this country right now, there are a lot of people who are left behind who are struggling, who cannot live their version of the American dream.

And that's what I think where we've got an incredible amount of work to do as a country.

- Where are state governments helping to fulfill the promise of the American dream?

- Well, I think by creating opportunity.

It is the ability and success that I love about this job the most.

The state government I do think is the laboratories of democracy, right?

But it's also where you can see what you do and how it impacts people.

I think about, you know, women got the ability to make our own decisions about our healthcare and our bodies, and then we saw a massive setback in the last few years.

And then people at the state level have gone back to reclaim that.

I do believe that- - You're referring to Michigan, what Michigan has done.

- Michigan, Kansas, Ohio.

We've seen it in many states that at the state level we've voiced our opinions and we've secured these rights in our individual constitutions.

But I still believe that the American people deserve that right.

And I believe that the arc of history will continue to trend in that direction, but certainly a big setback recently.

- There are fits and starts.

- Yes.

- In your book, "True Gretch," from 2024, you wrote that, "Over the first quarter of the 21st century, you have watched as," quote, "the arc of our politics has bent uncomfortably toward incivility and strife."

Why do you think that is the case?

- There are a lot of things that I think contribute to that.

And I don't wanna say it's all about social media.

But social media, I certainly think foments that.

When there are leaders who want to win elections more than solve problems, when there are people who are seeking power and influence as opposed to leading our country forward and creating a better life for people.

Recently I was at an event in Grand Rapids where Presidents George W. Bush and William Jefferson Clinton were on the stage together.

I had a few minutes with them backstage before they took the stage.

But it was one of the most heartening conversations.

Because here you have two people who've absolutely had very different worldviews, very different political priorities and agendas, are sharing a stage because they love this country.

They recognize that they can have different opinions and still agree on the fundamentals.

And it gave me hope.

It was kind of the shot in the arm that I need.

And I think Americans everywhere can benefit from not turning away from what is happening, but rolling up our sleeves and getting in it.

- You've made it a point that you'll work with anyone from the people Democrats despise the most, to people that Republicans despise.

You've taken a lot of flack from Democrats in your party for going to the White House to try to get things done for Michigan.

Why is it, in your view, that one can receive so much criticism for trying to do what you're saying, which is work together and get things done despite different perspectives and points of view?

- Part of it, I think, is we're all talking to people who see the world the same way, and not enough with one another.

I was raised in a household where my father was a Republican, you know, very traditional Republican.

My mother was a Democrat.

And so it's not foreign to me to work with people who see the world differently.

In fact, I know I don't know everything.

And I make better decisions when I've got lots of different points of view, and I benefit from hard arguments even, make for better informed choices.

So I think that that is a part of it.

We have a tendency to go to our own and only talk to one another.

- The founders disagreed ferociously.

But it seems that it feels different today.

Is it different?

- I think the tendency to pull others into the argument and threaten one another is different.

- It's the jump to political violence that concerns you.

- It is, and when you see that public sentiment that, kind of an acceptance of this.

And I think that's what's so scary to me.

The America that my kids are growing up in looks very different than the one that I did.

Their whole existence has been this, you know, two parties that the violent rhetoric and the ugliness has become normalized for them.

And I can tell them it's not normal, this is not how things are, that this is an aberration.

But this has now been their experience for 12 of their 22 years on the planet.

And so that's what I think about, how do we get to a place where, yeah, we can have knock down, drag out arguments, verbal arguments, without it ever getting personal, and certainly without it ever resorting to violence, and pulling others in, inspiring others to take up violent means against one another.

- How do we do it?

How do we transcend this moment?

- I think we need to understand history, and that's why I'm really glad you're doing this program.

I think that there is a lack of understanding that we have been through tough things as a country: a civil war, a civil rights movement.

I mean, all the different challenges over time, and we've gotten through them.

But it takes leaders who put the country before themselves, who stake out a vision where everyone is welcome, even if you disagree, maybe especially if you disagree.

Recognizing that makes us stronger.

- Tonight the shocking plot to kidnap a governor thwarted by the FBI.

Several militia members accused of conspiring to abduct Michigan Democrat Gretchen Whitmer and overthrow the government.

- In 2020 you were the target of domestic terror.

There were a group of men who plotted to kill you after kidnapping you, to blow up bridges, kill police officers, even burn down the Capitol with the legislature locked inside.

This has diminished a mere kidnapping plot, but it was a serious plot for domestic terrorism.

Since then, political violence has gotten only worse in this country.

There was a very high profile assassination of a young conservative activist, Charlie Kirk.

Donald Trump, the president himself, has endured three assassination attempts.

There was of course the high profile assassination of the state representative of Melissa Hortman in Minnesota, the attack against Nancy Pelosi's husband, Paul Pelosi, in his home, threats against election administrators.

When I think about the Declaration of Independence, it isn't just a celebration of liberty, it is also an attempt to define the conditions under which political violence is justified, and, by implication, a larger set of circumstances under which it is not justified.

What distinguishes vigorous democratic engagement today from political extremism?

- If it is contained to language that is hard and strong and in a debate, that's one thing.

If it is encouraging people to take action and act violently toward one another, that's another.

I mean, I don't think that it's as complicated as people, you know, pretend that it is.

There are some things that are absolutely not acceptable, and no matter who the violence is waged against.

When the assassination attempt against the candidate for president, President Trump at the time, happened, I took to social media to call on everyone to bring down the temperature, to lament what had happened, to wish him the best, because I recognize that even though I think sometimes people are encouraged by his words, I don't want anyone to take up arms and hurt another person who is out in the political sphere, saying things that I don't agree with.

Still, there should not be that kind of a fear.

We want good people to take on these roles.

And in this moment, you can understand why reasonable people might want to turn away.

And that would be the worst thing for our democracy.

- Last fall, the Harvard Institute of Politics published a poll that found nearly forty percent of Americans under 30 believe political violence is acceptable in some circumstances.

What do you say to Americans who have watched a dysfunctional, polarized political system and have come to the conclusion that the government is failing to address their concerns and their only next turn is to political violence?

- Well, it makes me incredibly sad.

I saw that statistic too, and it makes me really sad to think that so many Americans feel like our government doesn't serve them, that it is okay to hurt people that disagree with you.

It is a sad reality in this moment.

But it is a moment, and I do believe that.

There are, you know, continue to be people that call us to our better angels, if you will, that remind us who we are and what makes this country, what really makes this country great, and it is the ideals that we were founded on.

It is the hope and opportunity that is created for everyone who's lucky enough to have been born here or has come here to make a life and to live their version of the American dream.

We cannot, we cannot throw our hands up.

We can't bury our heads in the sand.

There is a lot of work to do in this country.

But in this moment I think is a stark reminder that it is on all of us to play that role.

Every one of us.

When we wanna change the culture, you can't mandate that.

We all play a role in that.

- Governor, why do you believe the ideals of the American Declaration have endured for 250 years?

- You know, it's a sloppy system.

It can be painful.

It can be a whirlwind.

And certainly there are better chapters than others in this story of the American existence, but at its heart, it was a brilliant way to structure government, and it still works.

It still can work if these institutions hold and they are respected and they play the role that they're supposed to.

Congress being a check and balance on the executive branch, the judiciary not being persuaded by a conversation that's happening, whether it's in the halls of the Capitol or in the Oval Office.

- What does the promise of equality mean in 2026?

- That's a great question.

There are so many invisible hurdles for so many people still, and that's why I say we have work to do, a lot of work yet to do.

But I believe that at the end of the day, no one American, no matter who you are or what your stature is in life or your status is more important than any other.

And that is what I truly believe, is what the founding fathers envisioned, even though they certainly didn't practice it.

(chuckles) - Assess the state of the American dream.

Is it still alive?

Is it thriving?

Is it on life support?

- I think it's harder now than it was 50 years ago.

50 years ago, people came to this state for an opportunity on the line at one of the great auto companies.

You could come right out of high school and get into the middle class.

You could buy a second home up north on a lake somewhere in Michigan, and you knew that your retirement would be secure and that you were gonna be paid a fair wage.

And, by the way, those union workers knew whether you were Black or you were female or you were Arab, you were going to get paid the same.

That was a beautiful American dream that was a reality for so many people and really happened in this state and benefited everyone else.

Today, that's not the case.

Today we've got such wage discrepancy.

We see the growing wealth gap in this country.

We see people who are feeling more nihilistic about who we are as a country and what the future is, and I'm thinking a lot about young people like my kids who are looking around and wondering, how can I ever afford to live here, much less, start a family, or buy a second, you know, little place up on a lake somewhere in northern Michigan?

And that's, I think it threatens the core of what we've come to expect and believe is a right of every American.

And I think that in and of itself makes this democracy a little more fragile.

- Yeah.

What do you think the responsibility of American leaders is to keep that dream alive?

- I think it's on all of us.

But certainly elected leaders are... I am reminded frequently, I think about the oath that I took when I became Governor of Michigan.

After the last presidential election, I got to tell you, I was surprised by the outcome, very disappointed by the outcome.

But I also was reminded, the oath I took was to serve the people of Michigan, no matter who's in the White House.

My oath was not to a political party.

It was not to myself.

I come second to the people of Michigan and so does my political party.

And I do think more leaders in elective office need to remember who their oaths are too.

It's to the people.

And the people are the ones that decide who we are as a nation.

- Governor Whitmer, thank you for joining me for this special episode of "Firing Line."

- Thank you.

(gentle music) - Finally, a conversation with retired General Stanley McChrystal.

General Stanley McChrystal, you have described character as, quote, "the most accurate and last full measure of who we choose to be."

How do you think the ideals of the Declaration have shaped America's character over time?

- I think it's important first to understand how we interpret the Declaration, because much of the Declaration of Independence was a series of grievances.

But at the very beginning when it said "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," that was the idea that this was a place where if you were willing to work hard, if you were willing to cooperate, if you were willing to be part of the solution, that you could be almost anything you wanted to be.

It was never completely true because we've always had class and economic things, but the mindset was so critical because if people believe they can do something, the likelihood that they'll accomplish it goes way up.

And if you believe that other people ought to have the same opportunity that you do, then suddenly you're open to giving them chances that they otherwise wouldn't get.

- Your long career in the military has been dedicated to upholding the ideals of the Declaration and the U.S.

Constitution.

What role has the military played in sustaining constitutional government?

And what are the limits of that role?

- I think the military has played an important role all the way back to the days of George Washington when he turned down the opportunity to be a dictator, although he was encouraged by many people, some in the military to do that, and he instead bowed to civilian power.

Throughout our history, the military has had a pretty good track record of being subservient to civilian leadership.

Now there have been political military officers and there have been fits and starts, but generally, the military has been apolitical.

During my entire service, when you were with your peers, you never talked about politics.

You didn't know what officer was a Democrat or Republican or whatever they might be, 'cause it wasn't considered appropriate to do that.

And so we were an apolitical organization.

And that was sacred, because what you don't want is a military that is identified as supporting one part of a political faction or another, because then they become part of the equation.

And the military actually should be separate and aside.

They should be there to protect the nation and then policymakers should make policy.

- Why is civilian leadership so important to our armed forces?

- Civilian leadership's important because in reality if you let the military run themselves, they wouldn't do a very good job.

- Why not?

- Military leaders focus on their interests.

They're incentivized to produce the best Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force that they can.

They're not bred to be political policymakers.

They are bred to see things in a fairly binary way, in many cases.

And that's why best military advice is expected to be thoughtful, but also, when necessary, decisive.

Policymakers should be one step away from the military.

It's like owning a very strong dog.

And if you just let the dog off the leash all the time, there'll probably be problems.

But you don't want a weak dog when there's a fight.

So it's really important to have that balance.

But it's really based on a deal, an agreement.

And that agreement is military leaders and the entire military agree to stay out of politics, to stay apolitical.

But it's based on the understanding that policymakers will respect that and keep them out of politics, not politicize the military.

Once that agreement is breached, on either side, then this very careful balance is in danger.

We only have to look around the world and see nations where that hasn't worked, where the military takes over the government to protect the democracy.

And as soon as we start to confuse that separation, I think we'll have similar problems.

- America's founders were flawed men, but they defied an empire, built a new nation that is now the longest serving democracy in modern history.

What can we learn from them, their character, and their leadership?

- I think it's a great point that you made, Margaret.

The founding fathers were flawed people.

And so when they created the Constitution and argued over its creation, and the Federalist papers are a really good window into that, they built the entire system upon the recognition that it's gonna be made up of flawed people.

There will be people who when opportunities to do the bad thing, or bad things come up, will be tempted to do that.

And so they created this check and balance system that was almost like rules of the game.

The problem is you need those rules carefully protected.

As soon as the role of the Department of Justice or the military or any other part of our government isn't following those carefully crafted rules, then you have problems.

- In terms of the founders' character, are there founders that you look to?

I mean there are, by the way, George Washington of course was a general, but there are about a dozen US presidents who have been generals.

Are there lessons in leadership and character in our founding fathers?

- I think there are.

I mean, in the moments of sacrifice, most of the founding fathers paid an incredible price for their participation in the revolution and in the years that followed, both loss of personal position and wealth, but also in some cases, lost their lives or went through really painful years in politics.

I think we are looking for leaders today who are willing to make that sacrifice, but not for reasons of personal aggrandizement.

And there were some founding fathers who were as ambitious as anyone else, but there was a normative pressure that came both within the founding fathers and in society to expect more of people and to demand more of people.

And I think that that would serve us well now.

- The founders, as you referenced, signed the Declaration of Independence, pledging their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.

What do you most hope the next generation of Americans will carry forward?

- I hope the next generation looks at what they've seen in previous decades, recent decades, and they decide to reset.

And they try to say, we are going to focus on character.

When we look at a political candidate, we are not going to start with their position on a certain issue, we are gonna start, are we electing the right person?

And I think that's a smart move because we never really know what a president's gonna face, but we do know that if we get the right character that they will bring that into their decision-making.

I think that this next generation needs to demand that of themselves and they need to demand that of each other.

We've had an era in which we celebrate individual achievement or wealth or celebrity.

In many cases, it's really against the best welfare of society, but we've said that's a smart person because they've been able to navigate the system and beat the odds, play the system.

And I think what we've got to do is make that not something that people can be proud of, make that, they should be ashamed of it.

- Yeah.

Why is character the most important quality in a president?

- Because it guides what they do.

At the end of the day, character is reflected in what we do.

It may be based on our values and the discipline we have to follow it.

But at the end of the day, it governs your actions.

And so a president, if they are faced with many different options to do something, if character is the lens that they look through, now, they'll also consider other information, but if character is that lens, we know we're gonna get a decision that's as good as that person is capable of making.

It'll never be perfect because you're choosing between two bad options in many cases.

But we know that it is for the right reasons.

And that's really important.

- There are a lot of presidents who make decisions that ultimately can lead the country into quite tragic circumstances.

And there are other presidents, perhaps with less character, who have made reasonably good calls and seen a degree of success.

And it would seem that success in a presidency does not actually rest on the character of the person in the office of the presidency.

- There's certainly room for making an argument that Abraham Lincoln was a political conniver and he was willing to dissemble to get what he wanted.

But if you step back and look from a distance, character drove the arc of what he did, and his behavior.

Annie Duke, the poker champion, has a great reminder.

She says, "Don't judge a decision by the outcome."

And so if a leader makes a decision for the right reasons and isn't negligent in considering factors, I'm willing to accept an imperfect outcome.

Because if they do something for the wrong reason and they just get lucky, over time, that doesn't portend well.

- What responsibility does the military have to protect and preserve American democracy for the next 250 years?

- I thought a lot about that, because the American military performed several roles.

One is obviously in the world.

If there's a threat to us, to our security, the American military is the appropriate tool for that.

Internal to the United States, I'm very uncomfortable when the military is used for law enforcement or shows of force or anything.

But at the same time, I think the American military has a role as an example.

Even in peace time, I think the military, you can put your daughter or son in the military, you see them grow up, you see them do something hard, and then you see them come back and do something else in life.

I think the American military has a place to play in helping shape generations.

- It's been 52 years since Richard Nixon ended the draft.

You have been a supporter and a leader about the need to implement a form of national service.

- Well, it's important to understand, I never thought about national service beyond military service until about a year or so after I got out of the military.

And then I'd been asked a question of do I believe in a military draft?

And my answer said, "Well, I actually believe in a wider idea of service, that every young American ought to be given the opportunity to do at least a year of full-time service when they're immersed in the experience."

And here's why I believe.

It's not to have them pick up trash or to build trails or to do other work.

It's not the work they do.

The outcome or the output is the citizens we create.

And if we think about being a citizen, it is this idea of responsibilities, embracing them.

And if you are an actual investor in something, you care more about it.

If you're invested in the nation, you take more interest in it.

And so I think that what we've done is we've shrunken down the opportunities, the grand ideas for the Peace Corps.

There was a comment at the time said, it will never really make a difference until it's a hundred thousand young Americans.

And it, of course, has never achieved that, but now it's a fraction of that.

Teach For America, VISTA, AmeriCorps, City are all great programs, but they don't touch enough Americans.

So what we need is an opportunity, and I'm of course a believer that opportunity ought to be mandatory now, where once you've done this, you may not enjoy it in the moment.

It's like the military.

You don't wake up every morning whistling zippity-doodah.

But when you've done it for a while, you take this sense of satisfaction that says, I didn't waste my time.

I made a difference.

And we have a lot of Americans who never have the opportunity to have contributed.

For a lot of young people, they're never going to step back from something, I built that, I did that.

- Yeah.

- We need to give them that opportunity, and then I think they'll feel differently about the whole- - In recent decades you have visited the Battlefield at Gettysburg more frequently than any other destination.

Why?

- It's a quiet place, and I love history.

It makes me think.

As I think more about it though, I think there's a duality to Gettysburg.

On the one hand, the Battlefield is now beautiful, and there are monuments to heroism and sacrifice.

And there's a clarity to the leadership decisions that I find fascinating.

These people did an amazing thing under great pressure.

But there's the other side of it.

We had about 150,000 Americans try to kill each other in the worst way they could, and there were more than 50,000 casualties.

Every building in Gettysburg was full of wounded after the battle.

So I think we need to remember that on the one hand, war and Gettysburg are something we should look at and we should pull the best lessons from it, but we should use the other half of it as a cautionary tale, that war, even civil war is never as far away as we like to believe.

- You describe yourself as intensely patriotic, but not overly patriotic.

What makes you most proud to be an American?

- I think it's the idea that America does have a set of values and morals and demonstrated willingness to live up to those that I want to be a part of.

And of course that exacerbates the frustration when you see shortfalls, when you see us not being what we should.

You wanna believe in your team.

I wanna wear the jersey.

I wanna cheer for us.

But I'm frustrated when we knowingly aren't the people we either claim to be or know we should be.

- Is that why you're not overly patriotic?

- Well, I think that- - You say you see danger in reflexive, unquestioning patriotism.

- Yeah.

- Why?

- Because I think if you don't think about it, you just automatically run to the banner.

If somebody raises the banner, it's because you are this group or you are that group, or you're an American.

I think that's dangerous because we start to get arrogant with that.

And I think that in recent years, people have used patriotism almost as a political club: flag pins and flags and talking about, you don't love America because you believe something different than I do.

America is a pretty big idea.

It's got a spectrum of views, and it's designed to be that way.

And the day we stop having a spectrum of views, spectrum of religion, spectrum of all the things we have, then I don't think we're the country that I grew up to believe we are.

- General, you open your memoirs with a poem about Horatius.

Who was Horatius?

- Well, he was a Roman soldier who went out to defend the city when it was being approached by an invading army.

And he went out with a very small group of people to hold a bridge knowing that it would cost him his life.

- [Margaret] Will you read the poem that starts your book?

- Absolutely.

I remember this from when I was a child because it talks about sacrifice.

It talks about courage.

"To those who kept the bridge.

With weeping and with laughter still is the story told, how well Horatius kept the bridge in the brave days of old."

And then I dedicated the book to those who kept the bridge and those who made it possible.

- Why did you choose that for your dedication?

- When I was young, my mother used to give me books about knights and Greeks and Romans in the days.

And many of them had a lot of moral content in them.

They weren't religious, they were more history.

But I became sort of hopelessly romantic about the idea that if I would serve, that what I did, maybe with courage, maybe just on a daily basis, would make a difference.

And Horatius is one of those examples that says, when it's time to do that, you need to stand up.

- One word that has permeated the conversation is the word sacrifice.

How much do Americans rely on sacrifice in order to continue for the next 250 years?

- The entire history and premise of America as a democracy is based on sacrifice, because you will have to give up at times things, sometimes your life, to make the whole work.

And so without sacrifice, it's just a flawed system.

But we sometimes confuse sacrifice with the service member who throws themselves on a hand grenade, which is incredible sacrifice.

A lot of people dedicate and sacrifice their lives to their nation one day at a time.

- Yeah.

- We think about a teacher, one day at a time, makes a lot less money than they might make because they've decided to give up other opportunities to make a certain difference.

Every part of our society's got that.

We need to celebrate that.

We need to worship that, because without that, it just doesn't work.

- I ask you about sacrifice, and I would be remiss not to mention that just over your shoulder is Arlington Cemetery, the burial grounds for America's soldiers, airmen, sailors, and marines who have made sacrifice made the ultimate sacrifice for this country.

And it is so clear that we wouldn't be here at 250 without those white headstones just over your shoulder.

- And it's not headstones, it's people, names and stories on those headstones reflecting lives.

My father and mother are on a quiet hillside.

And about 30 feet away are my wife's father and mother, both career soldiers.

We buried them on a Tuesday and a Wednesday, the same week.

And so when you see so many names there, it's instructive to stop and look at them and then stop and think every one of those people did something.

- Yeah.

Yeah.

General Stan McChrystal, thank you so much for joining me for this special episode of "Firing Line" for America's 250.

- My honor, Margaret.

Thank you.

- Thanks.

(gentle music) Thank you for joining us tonight on this special "Firing Line" broadcast, commemorating America at 250: in reflection of the ideals of the Declaration of Independence.

As we approach July 4th, may we prove worthy of the inheritance we celebrate and the responsibility we share.

Good night.

(gentle music) - [Announcer] America at 250: a "Firing Line" special with Margaret Hoover was made possible by contributions to your PBS stations from viewers like you.

Thank you.

(upbeat music) (upbeat music continues) (upbeat music continues) (bright music)