When Americans think back to the War of Independence, most are apt to feel that, had they lived back then, they would have been Patriots for sure. In retrospect, the decision to rebel and get out from under the thumb of British rule seems inevitable. Yet only around a third of colonists ever declared themselves as revolutionaries, and even among the country's Founding Fathers, it wasn't always obvious if they would stay loyal to Great Britain or become rebels, right up until the signing of the Declaration of Independence.As H.W. Brands, historian, professor, and author of Our First Civil War explains, the decision to align with the side of the Loyalists or the Patriots was complex, and not only had to do with the kind of policy issues we often think about in regards to the war, but also personal factors related to respect and ambition. He talks about how George Washington and Benjamin Franklin were actually very unlikely Patriots and what ultimately got them to embrace the revolutionary cause, and why Franklin's son chose differently and remained a Loyalist. We also discuss why John Adams threw in his lot with the Patriots, and why Benedict Arnold flipped sides.Connect With H.W. BrandsH.W.'s Substack: A User's Guide to HistoryH.W. on TwitterH.W.'s faculty page

Historian H.W. Brands dives deep into the historical tug-of-war between interventionism and isolationism in American politics. He draws parallels between FDR's and Charles Lindbergh's clashing views on WWII and today's debates over Taiwan and Ukraine. Brands explores the roots of the 'America First' movement and discusses Lindbergh's complex legacy, revealing lessons on humility in politics. The conversation evolves into how historical narratives shape current foreign policy, warning against oversimplifying the past in today's context.

H.W. Brands, a distinguished historian from UT-Austin, dives into his latest book exploring the clash between Franklin Roosevelt and Charles Lindbergh during a pivotal time in American history. The conversation highlights Roosevelt's gradual shift to embrace global responsibilities amid rising isolationist sentiments. Brands also unpacks Lindbergh's complex legacy, revealing his achievements alongside troubling views, particularly on anti-Semitism. The discussion draws parallels between historical foreign policy debates and today's political landscape, making it both relevant and provocative.