In his final lecture — “Our Founding Fathers: Whose Side Were They Really On” —  in a three-part Thoughtful Thursday series at UNC Asheville’s Reuter Center, Bob Wiley began by noting, “Today, we’re going to explore the tea partiers claim that the Founding Fathers would have been on their side.”

Addressing about 45 attendees of his July 12 presentation at the North Carolina Center for Creative Retirement at UNCA, Wiley, a lecturer, repeated the disclaimer from his two previous lectures — that UNCA does not endorse his conclusions.

He then asserted, “Today’s tea partiers claim they are on the same side as the Founding Fathers,” citing their backing of the Constitution combined with their belief in God.

“Four thousand four hundred words — and God is not in one of them ... God is simply not in the Constitution.”

He then asked, rhetorically, “How did they (the Founding Fathers) feel about God?” In answer, Wiley said they saw enigma as laws of nature and nature’s God, as expounded by Jewish-Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677), who saw God and nature as synonomous.

Founding Fathers Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton “sparred over the wording of the Constitution,” he noted. In a reference to earlier claims by the tea party movement, Wiley said, “No special group should claim ownership of the Constitution” — and that reality should “not be tampered with for partisan purposes.”

He added that, “on the other hand, the Founding Fathers were quite clear on what they” intended in the Constitution.

For instance, Wiley cited the phrase, “We hold these truths to be self-evident ...” that “among these (rights) are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ...”

“While they claimed these rights came from God, they didn’t count on God to establish those rights,” Wiley said. “They depended on ... not God, to defend these rights ... but rather Congress — and that’s a very important distinction ... Government is instituted by man ... It’s government’s responsibility that its citizens are able to pursue happiness — not God’s.”

Wiley emphasized that, “unfortunately, the Founding Fathers never really spelled out exactly what they meant by ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’”

 Wiley also noted that the Constitution talks about promoting “the general welfare. “To those who feel the general welfare only refers to the taxing power of Congress, I’d suggest they think again.” He said of the general welfare, “Could it even have included a single-payer health system?”

 If Congress “can supply money for the general welfare,” such as education or regulation, “all could be called, if the Congress pleases, provisions of the general welfare,” Wiley said.

 He then defined “life,” “liberty” and “the pursuit of happiness,” based on his study of the Founding Fathers.

 Regarding “life,” he said it could mean “the proper role of government,” such as providing medical services.”

 “Liberty,” the prof noted, has its limits and “certainly nobody has the liberty to do whatever they want to do.” For example, he said nobody has the liberty to rob a bank.

 As for “happiness,” he said, “there are those who would say one cannot be happy without some leisure ... One could say education is critical to our being happy.”

 At that point, Wiley said, “Traditionally, the Founding Fathers have been associated with the ideas of John Locke.” However, the professor said Locke’s view “was quite narrow — more freedom from government than anything.

 “It’s my contention that the Founding Fathers” progressed beyond Locke in their thinking ... Locke once wrote that government has no other end than to protect or preserve property. He was wrong.’’ Wiley said that both Founding Fathers Ben Franklin and Jefferson felt government had a more expansive role.

 He listed two Franklin quotations that could be interpreted as advocating income distribution.

 Wiley also quoted Noah Webster, who said in 1787, “A general and tolerably equal distribution of property is the whole basis of natural freedom ... the very soul of a Republic.”

 He presented a quotation from the Cumberland Gazette in 1786 that “equality of property is the life of a Republican government ....”

 A man in the class interjected, “That’s socialism.”

 A woman triggered laughter when she responded, “Does that mean Republicans are scoundrels?”

Continuing, Wiley quoted Jefferson as writing in 1776, “Every an without property is entitled to 50 acres of public land upon reaching adulthood ....”

The professor said, “Going through all of this (the writings of the Founding Fathers), I was surprised — and it’s consistent.”

Wiley said that, while it might be comforting to libertarians to believe the Founding Fathers shared their conservative views, based on the evidence, it simply was not true.

 “(John) Adams, Jefferson and (James) Madison understood that tyranny could arrive from the accumulation of too much welath and influence, as from too much political power.”

He quoted Adams as saying, in 1792, that “The republica would be well-served by laws that reduce extreme wealth ... and raise extreme indigence toward a state of comfort.”

 Regarding the aforementioned Adams’ statement, Wiley said, “Government redistribution of wealth? You bet. Some of our Founding Fathers though it was a good idea.”

 A woman in the class interjected, “We’re seeing just one point of view. Are you saying all the Founding Fathers agreed? We’re not seeing the other point of view. I could pull out quotes (of the Founding Fathers) with the opposite view.”

 In response, Wiley said, “It’s up to you to draw your own conclusion. There was no unanimity of opinion there.”

 A man prompted laughter when he quipped, “Did they (the Founding Fathers) believe in trickle-down economics?”

 Another man said, “It’s important to take these statements in context.” He also said that Wiley’s explanation of the Founding Father’s interpretation of “happiness” was off-base because they were writing about “the pursuit of happiness” in the Constitution.

Someone asked, “despite what everyone just said, what ended up being in the Constitution?”

Shaking his head, Wiley asserted, “All I’m trying to do” is show that if someone tries “to claim that all of these  guys (the Founding Fathers) were on your side, you’re on shaky ground.” For instance, he said the Founding Fathers were talking about taking “an active role in the welfare” of the people.

A man triggered laughter when he asked, mischieviously, “Are you saying they were all Democrats back then?”

Staying on topic, Wiley asserted, “The tea party’s claim that they (the Founding Fathers) were all on their side ... I’m trying to say they weren’t.” He added that various Founding Fathers believed in the redistribution of wealth and a graduated income tax — “even Thomas Jefferson.”

Based on his research findings on the Founding Fathers, Wiley said, “I don’t know if you’re surprised; I was surprised.”

He championed Hamilton over Jefferson repeatedly, noting that the former favors big government, while Jefferson favored the smallest-possible government.

He then gave an example of a fictional headline: “Congress passes government-run health insurance,” adding that “the year: 1798.”

The headline he made up actually summarizes the strange-but-true story about the first govnerment-run health care system.in the U.S. — a policy for sailors in the maritime service.

“In those days, legislation was short, to the point and did a lot of interesting things,” Wiley said. “This government-provided health care system was not optional. If a sailor want to work, he had to pay up ... This was not the only in United States history” that this occurred.

A man interjected, “People weren’t required to pay this tax, but only if they wanted to work as a sailor in the maritime.”

Wiley agreed, noting that he was just trying to note that “this was the first step in a U.S. government-run health system.” Further, he asserted, “The moral of the story is that the political right wing has to stop making the claim that the Founding Fathers” were in harmony with their viewpoint. 

After a break, Wiley said, “OK, as we’ve seen, Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers said many things that would cause today’s tea partiers to blanch.”