Funny enough, he was one of the youngest ones there too. I believe only Jefferson was the only one closest to him in age. Where everyone else was in their 30s or 40s, Ruttledge and Jefferson were in their 20s when all this happened. Afterwards, Ruttledge would go on to server the US with distinction in SC, often times noting how the Virginia Convention was his most informative experience in politics. He would even write about his great admiration for his rivals at the time such as Adams and Lee.
Rutledge was 25 I think in real life -- and note how men here are terrified of looking young. Is there a single founding father whose natural youthful hair we are shown? Adams is 34 (skinhead + wig) when the series begins, and only takes his wig off 20 years later when he's bald enough and grey enough to be seen in public.
@@ianinkster2261It might have something to do with being taken seriously. On Mad Men, even in the early 60s you have these young men in their early 20s REALLY dressed up looking much older.
@@dovbarleib3256 How right you are... it breaks my heart. I wonder if the Founders ever imagined what would happen if the MSM in this country was ever taken over by a corrupt, self-serving power with nefarious intentions.
The lesson here is that everything is better when the politicians' necks are the ones' on the line. It really makes for some patriotic, determined public servants. It's amazing how fast things get done when the politicians might die if they're wrong, or even if they're right. All of a sudden gridlock just evaporates like a ghost on some dumb late night television show.
@@JoshIdstein Democracy is overrated. I prefer a Constitutional Republic. The difference is immeasurable. While a democracy focuses on the group, this Republic focuses on individual rights.
@@kennymonty8206 unless and until monied interests cause those elected representatives to ignore the rights of the people. As republicans are showing us today.
One thing I like about this is that, while John Adams and those in favor of separation from Britain are clearly the protagonists in this and the side you're expected to cheer for, the opposition makes perfectly sound reasons for NOT separating from Britain, like how are they supposed to fight the British - then the most powerful nation in the world - when they don't have any real army or navy? They aren't being stupid or stuck-up jerks, they are stating legitimate problems that will have to be overcome if they want to survive separating.
True, but the inhabitants of the colonies will not have the opportunity to build an organized army if the British tighten their control over them and the Congress more or less led them to war anyway when the king declared all his members traitors in response to the demands of the Congress to improve the rights of the colonists
@@GrayNeko with great difficulty and part of the victory due to the fact that the French agreed to assist them when they could just as well have let them face the British alone
Zeljko Ivanek, the actor playing John Dickenson, has always been a genius. He was absolutely incredible in this role. I also found Stephen Dillane as Thomas Jefferson to be an excellent casting as well.
@@antonbruce1241 Ivanek is one of the very best "bad guy" actors around. But he plays Dickinson interestingly....VERY different than how Dickinson is played in 1776....it truly is his Quaker values speaking here...not aristocratic arrogance. And yes his accent....I guess it is a "Quaker accent" is intriguing. Stephen played this a few years before he played Stannis Baratheon so he wasn't quite as well known yet. The fact that Adams and Jefferson....along with Charles Carroll of Maryland were the last 3 living signers of the Declaration in 1826 50 years later (and that Adams and Jefferson both died that very day) is just epic....
Franklin: "Given the choice of going what is right and doing what is not right, HIs Majesty's government will take the latter corse every time." Nearly two centuries later. Churchill: "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing after they've exhausted all other options"
I wish young Clancy O'Connor ('Edward Rutledge') would be cast more. He more than holds his own among these veteran actors (Giammatti, Wilkinson, Ivanek). That can't be said for some of the other actors who share scenes with the bigger names in this series. Nearly all the grown Adams children, for example.
@@maestroclassico5801 I can imagine; he was well-versed in the art of practice. Incidentally, Maestro, I hope President Jefferson favored the onlooking crowd with a violin solo on his inauguration days. Perhaps you composed a piece for him to sample?
All our children should be taught that these men had NOTHING to fight with, and that if they lost they all would have been hung from their necks until they were dead. They gave us quite literally, EVERYTHING.
@@donthaill7210 your right except if you’re an American you haven’t contributed shit and your 2A “check against tyranny has failed and I may not be able to judge a fish by its ability to climb but I can judge people and ideologies based on what they do and what said ideologies lead to and it’s been nothing but destruction in the case of liberalism and the American people have done fucking NOTHING to stop it
@@Saber23, without us...Russia might have fallen to the Germans in 1942. What world might that be? Without us, Indonesia and China would certainly have fallen to Imperial Japan by 1943. What world might that be? Is the US a righteous superhero? Absolutely not. The current state of mess in Africa, South America, and Western Asia is DIRECTLY the fault of the US.
And we're now giving it away lol I blame Ike. Yes, he warned us but he could have been a little more pointed with the message but then again maybe he knew he would get JFK'd. I'd love to know what Ike thought when he got the news about Kennedy.
The guy from SC asking who would ally us was perfect...like the guy from NY said who wants to exchange the light yoke of GB for the heavy dominion a catholic absolute monarch like France
Ha, goof starting at 03:09. Watch Rutledge as he gets up, strides past a desk with hands open aaaaand knocks a candlestick on the desk over which he then frantically goes to grab.
Virginia instructed its delegates to the Continental Congress to introduce a motion for independence. This was done on June 7, 1776 by Richard Henry Lee.
Not that ironic. Most of the southern states south of Virginia were basically just sparsely populated by farmers, many of which made their money selling their crops to the British, who then turned around and made finished goods with them. The South had pretty close ties to Britain at the time (and even up to the Civil War).
I like how when Dickinson (very correctly - although the show-makers had him do it in a slightly sneering voice) points out that "the people" had not been consulted and had not expressed in any verifiable manner a desire to break away, Adams just arbitrarily says "the people wait for us to lead the way". If you read the minutes (notes) of this session in real life, Adams goes on to say that "the people's" majority support could be deduced from the "murmurs" in certain states which "proved" they were in the majority, but he does not cite any specific census, survey, plebiscite, or referendum to support this. Which is extra ironic because he knew, while saying that, that any voicing of opinions AGAINST the revolution was discouraged by the patriots by threats of imprisonment, death, mob violence, seizure of property, being stripped naked and covered in hot tar and feathers and forced to parade around, etc etc. so... of course the loudest "murmurs" would be pro-war, because if you openly expressed the opposite you'd be punished! Well played, Adams and Jefferson. Well played. I always thought that was interesting. Continental congress, which itself was made up of many delegates who hadn't even been elected by the people of their state (some apparently were elected in some sense, but it's hard to find data on this, but others were simply appointed by "committees"), that same continental congress, made the decision... on behalf of a population they had not consulted... to subject that population to a decade of war and suffering, and around 100,000 dead (around 1% to 4% of the population) so that the very prosperous colonists wouldn't have to pay their tiny 1.5% taxes (dwarfed by the 7% taxes paid in Britain) and so they could enforce ideals like the right to free speech (except for loyalists and slaves) and right to property (unless you're a loyalist or a slave) and right to fair legal proceedings and due process (unless you're a loyalist or a slave). There's usually hypocrisy on both sides of any conflict, and it's not necessarily proof that a side is "wrong" overall, but I've always found it interesting that these aspects are rarely discussed or acknowledged. History, as a subject, should be transparent. Warts and all.
Very good points. Turned out great in the end, didn't it? Not considering all of the social ills we are actively bringing about to destroy what we inherited.
Most rural people, being the overwhelmingly vast portion of the population, didn't care less about government or who was in charge. It didn't affect their lives. The only government they saw was an army protecting them against Indians on a larger scale than just local raids, but any government's or tribal leader's policies generally helped trigger the wars between Indians and colonists.
Thank you for the informative post, I also was slightly shocked by Adam's dismissal of consulting the population. What was the scale of the Pro-Independence "reign of terror?" Did it vary by region? any evidence it had financing from abroad or moneyed US interests that would benefit from independence (John Hancock the smuggler comes to mind).
@@skipads5141 can you cite any specific sources for the idea that rural colonists didn't care what government they were under or whether the country rebelled or went to war? Most of history, especially, English and American history seems to indicate the opposite. A huge number of rebellions (if not most) are the result of rural people having desires about their government, whether due to laws, religion, taxes, economics, political or national identity, etc etc. Not only was the revolutionary army manned primarily by rural patriots (and many if not most of the political leaders were rural or agrarian themselves) but rural people are smart enough to know how a war would affect them and their families and whether they want one to happen. These are all examples of rural people caring a lot about government, laws, religion, who's in charge, and decisions to rebel or go to war: Britain: Peasant’s Revolt Western Rising English Civil War Pre-Revolution America: Bacon's Rebellion War of the Regulation Post-Revolution USA: Whiskey Rebellion Fries's Rebellion Anti-Rent War American Civil War
In fact, this wasn't how it happened at all. The VRs argued that the British couldn't tax the colonies, not that they should break off completely. Henry was accused of treason and started back-stepping, apologizing for his comments.
If you watched the show much of the first few episodes they do not talk about breaking off completely. They even say God save the king a few times in the congress. This is later and is true to history. They did talk about breaking off completely. If they did not America would not exist at all.
Except these men mostly died penniless after years of suffering. They risked death and squared off against the strongest empire of the day. Today, they pay off the government to keep the poor angry, divided, and dependent.
You wouldn't find a working man in that room. All were of the colonial elite. Educated either in England or in the Universities established by crown charters.
You're not technically wrong, though their lives were also on the line should the Continentals have lost. They would have been executed, unless they might have been able to escape somehow.
This show is a masterpiece by HBO. While NETFLIX chooses to shove wokeness down our throats and insists on making shows showing men with their tongues down each others throats HBO continues to make quality shows like this one.
![[ TEASER ] เงาะป่า - วงL.กฮ. | TMG RECORD](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/M4ObdFfcPww/mqdefault.jpg)
South Carolina's Representative is such a dramatoc Queen. "Not now... Not EVER!" *SWISHES AWAY* 💅🏼
Funny enough, he was one of the youngest ones there too. I believe only Jefferson was the only one closest to him in age. Where everyone else was in their 30s or 40s, Ruttledge and Jefferson were in their 20s when all this happened. Afterwards, Ruttledge would go on to server the US with distinction in SC, often times noting how the Virginia Convention was his most informative experience in politics. He would even write about his great admiration for his rivals at the time such as Adams and Lee.
@@blackfox4138 Good I am glad he grew to understand he was mistaken and was able to reflect upon his mistake
The handwave dismissal at 4:39 always cracks me up
Imagine if limp wrists like that had their way…
One of the very few memorable decisions in this miniseries was Clancy O’Connor’s choice to portray Edward Rutledge as a sort of Founding Fancy-Lad
@@jalefkowit Edward Rutledge was as dandy as they came.
Rutledge was 25 I think in real life -- and note how men here are terrified of looking young. Is there a single founding father whose natural youthful hair we are shown?
Adams is 34 (skinhead + wig) when the series begins, and only takes his wig off 20 years later when he's bald enough and grey enough to be seen in public.
@@ianinkster2261It might have something to do with being taken seriously. On Mad Men, even in the early 60s you have these young men in their early 20s REALLY dressed up looking much older.
I'm literally sitting 4 blocks away from where this happened.
Before 9/11, I used to walk my dog in the park right behind Independence Hall. I could see into this room.
What an honour
Too bad the great experiment is winding to a close.
@@dovbarleib3256 How right you are... it breaks my heart. I wonder if the Founders ever imagined what would happen if the MSM in this country was ever taken over by a corrupt, self-serving power with nefarious intentions.
Am I wrong or did the Franklin actor portray Cornwallis in the patriot?
You’re not wrong Tom Wilkinson played both Lord Cornwallis AND Benjamin Franklin. Always found it a bit funny and a credit to his acting range
Yep .Cornwallis was spying as ben Franklin gathering information lol
Bring me my horse blanket.
Yup
Your right my man
The lesson here is that everything is better when the politicians' necks are the ones' on the line. It really makes for some patriotic, determined public servants. It's amazing how fast things get done when the politicians might die if they're wrong, or even if they're right. All of a sudden gridlock just evaporates like a ghost on some dumb late night television show.
Zelensky might agree
Doesn't sound like a sustainable way to run a democracy tho.
@@JoshIdstein Democracy is overrated. I prefer a Constitutional Republic. The difference is immeasurable. While a democracy focuses on the group, this Republic focuses on individual rights.
@@kennymonty8206 unless and until monied interests cause those elected representatives to ignore the rights of the people.
As republicans are showing us today.
@@reallyhappenings5597 lol nope
One thing I like about this is that, while John Adams and those in favor of separation from Britain are clearly the protagonists in this and the side you're expected to cheer for, the opposition makes perfectly sound reasons for NOT separating from Britain, like how are they supposed to fight the British - then the most powerful nation in the world - when they don't have any real army or navy? They aren't being stupid or stuck-up jerks, they are stating legitimate problems that will have to be overcome if they want to survive separating.
This is how it works when politics isn't all about identity.
But they won, didn't they? ^_~
@@GrayNeko
They did but not just on guts but smarts.
True, but the inhabitants of the colonies will not have the opportunity to build an organized army if the British tighten their control over them and the Congress more or less led them to war anyway when the king declared all his members traitors in response to the demands of the Congress to improve the rights of the colonists
@@GrayNeko with great difficulty and part of the victory due to the fact that the French agreed to assist them when they could just as well have let them face the British alone
Dickinson's accent is amazing.
Quakerish
Zeljko Ivanek, the actor playing John Dickenson, has always been a genius. He was absolutely incredible in this role. I also found Stephen Dillane as Thomas Jefferson to be an excellent casting as well.
@@antonbruce1241 Ivanek is one of the very best "bad guy" actors around. But he plays Dickinson interestingly....VERY different than how Dickinson is played in 1776....it truly is his Quaker values speaking here...not aristocratic arrogance. And yes his accent....I guess it is a "Quaker accent" is intriguing. Stephen played this a few years before he played Stannis Baratheon so he wasn't quite as well known yet. The fact that Adams and Jefferson....along with Charles Carroll of Maryland were the last 3 living signers of the Declaration in 1826 50 years later (and that Adams and Jefferson both died that very day) is just epic....
Franklin: "Given the choice of going what is right and doing what is not right, HIs Majesty's government will take the latter corse every time."
Nearly two centuries later.
Churchill: "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing after they've exhausted all other options"
That would be a powerful rebuttal… had the United States joined the axis powers
Franklin's observation is generally true of all men, and so a safe one to append to any government or institution or body of people.
On this day -June 7th - in 1776. Thank you, Mr. Lee!
I wish young Clancy O'Connor ('Edward Rutledge') would be cast more. He more than holds his own among these veteran actors (Giammatti, Wilkinson, Ivanek). That can't be said for some of the other actors who share scenes with the bigger names in this series. Nearly all the grown Adams children, for example.
Ruffles and wigs. Oh, breeches! Comeback? May it be so!
Jefferson deep in thought.
Afflicted with a stutter and a lisp, Jefferson respectfully abstained from public speaking on countless occasions.
@@bcdside I've seen his 2 inauguration speeches....he at least managed a few times.
@@maestroclassico5801 I can imagine; he was well-versed in the art of practice. Incidentally, Maestro, I hope President Jefferson favored the onlooking crowd with a violin solo on his inauguration days. Perhaps you composed a piece for him to sample?
As usual
All our children should be taught that these men had NOTHING to fight with, and that if they lost they all would have been hung from their necks until they were dead. They gave us quite literally, EVERYTHING.
And you’ve given the rest of the world NOTHING
@@Saber23 Everyone contributes in their own way. You can't judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree.
@@donthaill7210 your right except if you’re an American you haven’t contributed shit and your 2A “check against tyranny has failed and I may not be able to judge a fish by its ability to climb but I can judge people and ideologies based on what they do and what said ideologies lead to and it’s been nothing but destruction in the case of liberalism and the American people have done fucking NOTHING to stop it
@@Saber23, without us...Russia might have fallen to the Germans in 1942.
What world might that be?
Without us, Indonesia and China would certainly have fallen to Imperial Japan by 1943.
What world might that be?
Is the US a righteous superhero? Absolutely not. The current state of mess in Africa, South America, and Western Asia is DIRECTLY the fault of the US.
And we're now giving it away lol
I blame Ike. Yes, he warned us but he could have been a little more pointed with the message but then again maybe he knew he would get JFK'd.
I'd love to know what Ike thought when he got the news about Kennedy.
The guy from SC asking who would ally us was perfect...like the guy from NY said who wants to exchange the light yoke of GB for the heavy dominion a catholic absolute monarch like France
Many Poles came to fight on the American rebel’s behalf.
Ha, goof starting at 03:09. Watch Rutledge as he gets up, strides past a desk with hands open aaaaand knocks a candlestick on the desk over which he then frantically goes to grab.
Funnily enough, there was also a candlestick toppling in 1776 during the Vote Yes/Sit Down John segment.
such a great series!
What series is this? I cant find it anywhere
Virginia really heard the call.
The wig game was on point
This isn't the VA resolves, this is the Declaration of Independence.
The VA resolves were in 1799.
The title is referencing the opening dialogue of the clip.
Virginia instructed its delegates to the Continental Congress to introduce a motion for independence. This was done on June 7, 1776 by Richard Henry Lee.
That's the Virginia Plan. Not the same thing
The irony that the South Carolina delegate didn’t want independence….
Not that ironic. Most of the southern states south of Virginia were basically just sparsely populated by farmers, many of which made their money selling their crops to the British, who then turned around and made finished goods with them. The South had pretty close ties to Britain at the time (and even up to the Civil War).
@@danlorett2184the irony he’s referring to is that SC was the first state to secede from the union.
I half-expect some of these scenes to break out into a full-on WWE cage match. The theatrics and flourishes are shockingly similar.
Yeah, they didn't had Air conditions back then
I like how when Dickinson (very correctly - although the show-makers had him do it in a slightly sneering voice) points out that "the people" had not been consulted and had not expressed in any verifiable manner a desire to break away, Adams just arbitrarily says "the people wait for us to lead the way". If you read the minutes (notes) of this session in real life, Adams goes on to say that "the people's" majority support could be deduced from the "murmurs" in certain states which "proved" they were in the majority, but he does not cite any specific census, survey, plebiscite, or referendum to support this. Which is extra ironic because he knew, while saying that, that any voicing of opinions AGAINST the revolution was discouraged by the patriots by threats of imprisonment, death, mob violence, seizure of property, being stripped naked and covered in hot tar and feathers and forced to parade around, etc etc. so... of course the loudest "murmurs" would be pro-war, because if you openly expressed the opposite you'd be punished! Well played, Adams and Jefferson. Well played. I always thought that was interesting. Continental congress, which itself was made up of many delegates who hadn't even been elected by the people of their state (some apparently were elected in some sense, but it's hard to find data on this, but others were simply appointed by "committees"), that same continental congress, made the decision... on behalf of a population they had not consulted... to subject that population to a decade of war and suffering, and around 100,000 dead (around 1% to 4% of the population) so that the very prosperous colonists wouldn't have to pay their tiny 1.5% taxes (dwarfed by the 7% taxes paid in Britain) and so they could enforce ideals like the right to free speech (except for loyalists and slaves) and right to property (unless you're a loyalist or a slave) and right to fair legal proceedings and due process (unless you're a loyalist or a slave). There's usually hypocrisy on both sides of any conflict, and it's not necessarily proof that a side is "wrong" overall, but I've always found it interesting that these aspects are rarely discussed or acknowledged. History, as a subject, should be transparent. Warts and all.
Very good points. Turned out great in the end, didn't it? Not considering all of the social ills we are actively bringing about to destroy what we inherited.
Most rural people, being the overwhelmingly vast portion of the population, didn't care less about government or who was in charge. It didn't affect their lives.
The only government they saw was an army protecting them against Indians on a larger scale than just local raids, but any government's or tribal leader's policies generally helped trigger the wars between Indians and colonists.
Thank you for the informative post, I also was slightly shocked by Adam's dismissal of consulting the population. What was the scale of the Pro-Independence "reign of terror?" Did it vary by region? any evidence it had financing from abroad or moneyed US interests that would benefit from independence (John Hancock the smuggler comes to mind).
You don't need a survey to see a Don''t Tread on Me Flag, dummy.
@@skipads5141 can you cite any specific sources for the idea that rural colonists didn't care what government they were under or whether the country rebelled or went to war? Most of history, especially, English and American history seems to indicate the opposite. A huge number of rebellions (if not most) are the result of rural people having desires about their government, whether due to laws, religion, taxes, economics, political or national identity, etc etc. Not only was the revolutionary army manned primarily by rural patriots (and many if not most of the political leaders were rural or agrarian themselves) but rural people are smart enough to know how a war would affect them and their families and whether they want one to happen.
These are all examples of rural people caring a lot about government, laws, religion, who's in charge, and decisions to rebel or go to war:
Britain:
Peasant’s Revolt
Western Rising
English Civil War
Pre-Revolution America:
Bacon's Rebellion
War of the Regulation
Post-Revolution USA:
Whiskey Rebellion
Fries's Rebellion
Anti-Rent War
American Civil War
In fact, this wasn't how it happened at all. The VRs argued that the British couldn't tax the colonies, not that they should break off completely. Henry was accused of treason and started back-stepping, apologizing for his comments.
Christopher Oehrli the uploader mistitled the video. This scene was about the Lee Resolution.
I'm here for the hand wave.
You are thinking about something different.
If you watched the show much of the first few episodes they do not talk about breaking off completely. They even say God save the king a few times in the congress. This is later and is true to history. They did talk about breaking off completely. If they did not America would not exist at all.
That's Richard Henry Lee making the motion. Patrick Henry was not a member of the Continental Congress, and his big speech came years earlier.
I really do not care who played. Who and what movie this? In my opinion, by far is the best movie ever made And I wish they would make more of these
This is a clip from the HBO miniseries John Adams (2008).
@@iamdunat0s795
I know I've seen this a few times it's a very good series.
Stannis jeffratheon
How can I watch this show. I want to watch the West Wing too but impossible to find
West Wing is fiction. This is real. You might learn something.
Send them Rocket Propelled Grenades, Milan and Drones. And don't forget Silensky and Putin.
#MakeAmericaBritishAgain
Rich men voting for poor men to fight and die for the interest's of the richer. The wheel keeps on spinning
Except these men mostly died penniless after years of suffering. They risked death and squared off against the strongest empire of the day. Today, they pay off the government to keep the poor angry, divided, and dependent.
I mean that has been a thing since the first civilzations of man. That time period or in any time period is nothing new. It just is.
You wouldn't find a working man in that room. All were of the colonial elite. Educated either in England or in the Universities established by crown charters.
You're not technically wrong, though their lives were also on the line should the Continentals have lost. They would have been executed, unless they might have been able to escape somehow.
Cowardrly internet trolls stirring up attention with lies.
The loyalists ( true Americans ) weren't wrong.
What other way would they achieve independence if not through war?
Can someone explain the stupid hair
Wigs. They were the fashion. Fashion has never been reasonable, don't ask for an explanation of that.
I see no such thing to explain.
This show is a masterpiece by HBO. While NETFLIX chooses to shove wokeness down our throats and insists on making shows showing men with their tongues down each others throats HBO continues to make quality shows like this one.
God was with them or no way they ever defeat most powerful nation on earth.