@Marissa Lopes Thanks for proving your point. He was talking about Ben Franklin mistaken for the AMERICAN president. They say Americans are stupid...because you are.
A diplomat also requires a certain obliqueness of conscience and an elastic attitude towards the truth. John Adams was not born with these gifts, nor did he ever develop them.
@@jimstanga6390 What you describe is the necessary traits for a good politician, and John Adams certainly did not have them. However, he did have integrity, conviction and ideological fervor - qualities essential to rally support among both his peers and his people. And both the John Adams type and the Ben Franklin type were needed to get the nation off the ground in its infancy.
John Adams was a great revolutionary because he took political issues personally. John Adams was a terrible diplomat and president because he took political issues personally.
I'll give you that he wasn't the best diplomat. I think he's one of the best Presidents. How he kept us out of war with France and Britain during his term is to be commended. Though the alien and sedition acts kinda tarnish his reputation.
@@christoperwallace6197 I probably wouldn't qualify the Quasi-War as keeping us out of war with France. I mean, it wasn't declared, it was limited to naval operations, casualties were very light, and it is mostly forgotten on both sides of the Atlantic today, but, for all intents and purposes, the US fought a war against France from July 7, 1798 to September 30, 1800.
@@christoperwallace6197 Seemed like a good idea at the time, I guess! Though a blot on his presidential-record, he made the call, indicating strength & decisiveness, a not undesirable quality in a president. While I can't condone the A & S Acts, I do understand their purpose at that time. The ends don't justify the means, of course, but I don't fault Adams all that much. Remember, the U.S. still was in its infancy, its continued existence hanging by a thread, foreign threats were very real, internal discord & criticism of the government's policies threatened to hinder or even bring it down. The enemy agents of foreign powers were known to be at work in this country as well. We shouldn't be too hard on Mr. Adams over this, in my opinion.
Franklin did nothing for the cause of freedom while in France, he only licked the boots of the French ministers. Adams is the one you should applaud, but then you would have to read a good bit of history.
@@stevenkarner6872 Really? Silas Deane and Arthur Lees were the ones who did the work of obtaining arms, Franklin was the window dressing by which the two gains audiences with the French Ministers. That Franklin's importance was that of being the "key" to unlocking doors was important, but his 'diplomacy' was a sham and would try to help send Adams home in disgrace. Yet Adams did far more to help gain our independence, foreign commerce, and world (at least European ) recognition than Franklin ever did. You must be reading out of the children's section.
@@martaamance4545 While your explanation could have warrented an answer and discussion ( as adults would tend to do ) your childish insult precludes such endeavors. Grow up. BTW- I believe you mean Arthur LEE.
@@stevenkarner6872 You come off with the comment that we must have read different books but yet you made no attempt to state your case. That sounds like an insult on your part. So I replay with a few facts to which you make no reply except to point out that my typing of Lee's name was in error. Then you tell me we could have had and answer and discussion but well, you feel slighted. Then you insult me again. A claim for the high moral ground, i suppose. That appears to be the whole of your argument. Now the debate is whether Franklin was such a dazzling diplomatic figure and was he acting like an aging rock star has been. You could have enlightened us with your great knowledge on the subject, assuming you have any, and countered my original comment with facets of your own. But no, you chose to be snide. We could have discussed whether the mini-series had done justice to Adams in this occasion, the problem with film is that it does not lend itself to the expansion one would find in reading about the encounter. There you have it, you could have made your case and you chose to pick a fight and then declare victory and that I must be a child. Ok Mr Karner, you win, I am a child and you remain ignorant. Enjoy your victory for what it's worth.
"When in the Course of humid events, it becomes necessary for one colon to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the septic and equal stench to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a defecate respect to the orifice of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impale them to such sepsis. " - Benjamin Franklin lol
“I am persuaded... that [John Adams] means well for his Country, is always an honest Man, often a Wise One, but sometimes and in some things, absolutely out of his Senses.” - Benjamin Franklin
I think Adams is vastly underrated even by his contemporaries. That said, Jefferson would have been a better choice as president after Washington and judging by what Jefferson accomplished I don't think I'm too far off.
@@Rockhound6165 - that little song in "1776" said he was _obnoxious and disliked_ - he was. Because he was probably the most intelligent of the bunch. And a much-needed voice. But, Franklin hit the nail on the head - Adams did not have one diplomatic bone in his body. And never suffered fools
What John unfortunately couldn't take into consideration here is the fact that the united states was far, far removed from being any kind of established power.. in fact, this was even before John worked with the dutch to establish credit as a sovereign power. Whatever was really happening within the colonies was of little concern to France other than the fact helping them raise a little hell would annoy the British and just add to their increasing rates of attrition, and even then we're lucky that the french royal court was so wildly irresponsible with money spending that their own people eventually beheaded them all, otherwise they might have not been as keen to give us the forces and resources we so desperately needed to stave off British aggression.
Sorry but your interpretation of the French Revolution is a bit off. True, the French went overboard with pride, they also honestly believed in the confused state that was France. Along with that Dog Jacques Necker, that France was incredibly solvent. That’s why so much was committed. It was less an act of irresponsibility, and more an act of fraud on certain accountants parts, one of which I mentioned was Necker. As for Louis Beheading. That is one of the saddest stories form history. There was nothing glorious about it, or civic. It was far from democracy. The French king fled basically as a refugee. Got caught. Got taken back to Paris. And the Assembly basically had a vote whether ti execute or not, where almost everyone voted along ideological lines, vs whether his “crime” warranted death. Took the French another 150 years ti get good at democracy, and their democracy is still laughed at by many around the world. The death of Louis was like the death of Simon in the lord of the flies. It was literally the breaking of the jar. After that, the Terrors started. The terrors in Paris. The massacres, arguably genocide in the Vendomè. And lots of wars.
@@elyastoohey6621 Yeah. The Directory ordered the beheading of the royal family because sad Louis was conspiring with Austria and Prussia to reinstall the absolute monarchy. Most likely Robespierre would have ended guillotining him anyhow.
@@elyastoohey6621 also the king didn't fled like a refugee. He was placed under house arrest, yet he escaped. Disguised himself as a woman and got caught on the countryside. That's not even a contested statement of facts amongst historians. Yet, we are supposed to believe that the fall of Haiti and the massive public spending on the American adventure didn't ruin France's finances...
@@igunashiodesu he had officials and guards killed and the mob paraded their heads in front of the royal family’s quarters. That sounds like a refugee fleeing. The statement that his flight was illegal is also predicated that the vague provisional government was legitimate.. Louis never really committed any crime, other than being the figurehead of a system that limited the ambitions of a bunch of power hungry men, a system which was also oppressive to the lower classes though. Most of the men who would later form up the DA were grasping and in it off themselves. Louis’ execution was purely ideological and political. The absolute removal of the king was what many of them wanted, and it in turn would give those men more power. I find unfortunately it’s people who romanticise the French Revolution, typically those with an repulsion to monarchy (I don’t like monarchy, but you can’t judge them from a Marxist perspective) they glorify and exalt Louis’ execution as some grand gesture of freedom. The irony is, Louis execution was a blatant representation of anarchy and tyranny. Where every person who could would make themselves a petty king, and Deal out death. I think France would be a better place today if it kept a degree of constitutional monarchy.
Ben Franklin was a Charmer. He was intelligent as hell too. I read his autobiography, and I still admit I don't know enough about him to say this is an accurate depiction of him.
This is more interesting the more you read up on it. Adams was described as being blunt and a little socially awkward whereas Franklin was the heart of the party. Franklin was good at interacting with people and could work his way up to amuse the host while Adams couldn't really interact with extroverts. Both were amazing
Same with Washington, Jefferson and Madison. All were quiet and soft spoken men. Thomas Jefferson only gave 2 speeches to congress because he was that socially awkward. I also believe he had mild autism and that didnt help out
He didn't own him in this scene, he simply gave him a reality check. Although, if I were in John Adams position, I would have been doing the same thing. Too much time BSing and drinking cocktails instead of getting shit done, I could never be a diplomat.
Sometimes you need to BS and be needlessly formal, other times you get to the point and be very blunt. A good diplomat or any good official who has to negotiate and make deals has to know who and when to do what.
France just bluntly viewed the US as beneath them, a bunch of backwoods country bumpkins and nor did they think the 'rebels' at the time would succeed. It should be noted that Adams was frequently blocked from doing anything very much because of his attitude and really wasn't getting 'shit done'. Franklin meanwhile realized this, and really it was about getting noticed. You had to get noticed to get invited, then to hope that you could get the ear of a noble who wouldn't be annoyed by you. Otherwise you simply got locked out and met all of no one. Franklin in every sense in France was the one that got it done.
I'd say John Adams gives every bit as good as he gets by Franklin in this scene and this is actually one of my favorite scenes in ANY movie/series. Adams makes a very profound statement here and asserts real American independence. Something Franklin should have considered. Franklin was an AMAZING figure, but every toolbox needs its hammer.
The thing I find most interesting is that these two men, at their heart, wanted very much the same things but their background and way of thinking were very different. It is amazing how you can see the passion in both men but how that passion for country is displayed and acted upon very differently. Wonderful acting here!
That’s the thing about early American history, no American was ever 100% correct in their thoughts and ideas. Everyone had to give a little and get a little
What's fascinating is how their careers influenced their diplomatic styles. Ben Franklin was a writer and editor, and had learned how to charm and entertain an audience with his wit and humor. John Adams was a lawyer, and learned how to win over a jury by directly arguing against and discrediting the opposing side. Thus Ben Franklin's style of diplomacy was much more based on flattery and charisma, whereas John Adams' style of diplomacy was based on argument and debate.
@@creamychoclatelobsterwarri979 It was only feasible due to circumstance and distance from the European powers, and even then Britain managed to sack and burn the White House in 1812. I think Franklin had the right idea- as a small nation, one's best option is to play larger powers off each other to one's own advantage. Ally with at least one, and you not only remove the threat of an enemy, but employ its strength in your stead
There were good reasons to ask John Adams & Jefferson to serve as ambassadors during the Constitutional Convention. Both were difficult to deal with. Adams butted heads with near everybody and Jefferson surreptitiously backstabbed those he disagreed with. Neither understood or were capable of compromise. Adams was an overt ass... Jefferson was worse... a sneaky bastard who had others do his dirty work while he pretended friendship. Both had great qualities, but with feet of clay.
they're both right really. Adams had his heart in the right place. but Franklin knew his abrasive manner wouldn't accomplish what they both wanted. like Franklin said, politics is (unfortunately) the art of the possible
It's so funny to me that people think Adams comes out looking good in this exchange. he sounds ill tempered and impatient, and Franklin has the long game in mind. some things never change
@Matt Horkan He didnt. They went with Franklins plan and did not end up being a pawn of the French anyway. Had Adams gotten his way there would have been no help at all.
@@johanlassen6448 That the French Kingdom would have had a much greater political stranglehold on the USA than you let on, we may very well have been a pawn. As you see later on in the show that even the French revolutionaries claimed that the Americans were bound by contractual duty to support their cause. Remember the French still had the Louisiana territories. If not for internal decay and instability on their home front and the King not getting his head cut off we would have been involuntarily involved with the French and their foreign conflicts. Would the French had even given up their territory’s bordering the US if they had a rebellion? If the French had held onto those territories for another hundred years there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that-that would upend political stability between these two powers, even with minds like Alexander Hamilton… America’s eventual plans of expanding west of the Mississippi.
If I remember right, they removed Adams from his diplomatic position in France when they cut it from 3 diplomats to just Franklin. But they didn't tell Adams to come home either, so he went to the Netherlands, set up an embassy and started negotiating with them. All on his own initiative.
Being an honest and forthright man is NOT a good trait for a diplomat. Especially not when you are trying to get another country to support you in a war. France didn't owe the American colonies anything. If they were to help, then OF COURSE it would be for their own benefit. Why was that a hard concept to understand?
And because being honest and forthright isn't consider a good trait in the US, we're left with bastions of corruption, doublespeak, fakeness, and moral absence.
In fact France was becoming too powerful and arrogant but it did not have the navel power to support America… the Brits would soon cut the frenchies down to size a few decades later… 😏
Adams knew that, but there’s still CZcams comments that think America is under serfdom for France’s 18th century gesture. That’s what he wanted to avoid.
Benjamin Franklin was right though. He understood how diplomacy worked and he was able to win the French over. On the other hand the French disliked John Adams.
Excellent show!!!! I highly recommend this show to everyone. I actually disagree with the title. I have seen this and ALL of our founders were under a stress many of today could never endure. Not to mention this is a prime example of taking something out of context.
John Adams was anything but practical. He was the pure idealist. Even Jefferson ended up proving to be more practical when he became president. Which isn't a direct criticism of Adams, but rather to say his integrity and moral fiber aren't cut out for the career of a successful politician. He was greatly tamed by his colleagues such as Ben Franklin and his wife Abigail, without whom he would have failed miserably many of his great accomplishments. I think the show actually did a great job depicting that aspect, too.
Adams memoirs also made it abundantly clear that his 'common man' brotherhood only went as far as not wanting to be an English subject, beyond that he quite believed himself as deserving of aristocratic title. This was a common theme with the founding fathers. "The King calls me common when I know myself a Baron without the recognition and dignity of title. I have land and tenants. No other pedigree or writ can speak such as that."
This is how it is done. Under the auspices of consultation, your adversaries overhear you loudly discussing the meaning of "ABK" with your own compatriot.
This behavior can only be explained by understanding that Adams was at heart, a curmudgeon. He was from New England and the region has a reputation as being full of people who aren't afraid to speak their mind. Unfortunately, Adams took this a step further and actually started insulting those he couldn't bend to his way of thinking. He does learn though. When he is sent to the Netherlands he finally develops some tact and actually succeeds in convincing the Dutch to loan the United States some money to fight the Revolution. Later, as President he would again become the irascible curmudgeon and end up offending people when he should have been seeking harmony and understanding. It contributed to him serving only one term in office.
The problem that Adams had as a diplomat--and as a politician really--is that he was too honest and he thought that agreements were solemn promises that had to be kept. In all politics, diplomacy included, agreements are only meant to be kept as long as they are beneficial and you can extricate yourself from them when they no longer are. Franklin knew that the US wouldn't keep its promises to France, but Adams thought they were morally obligated to do so and so didn't want to enter into an agreement that was, on its face, disadvantageous to the US.
Paul Giamatti as John Adams was without equal, with the one obvious exception being Laura Linney as his wife Abagail. Could watch this series a dozen times, and have.
Danny Devito did a great job playing Ben franklin and hats off to Steve Buscemi as John Adams I love when 2 actors come back and just really show you how good they still are bravo gentlemen bravo!
If Adams had hung around in Paris, with Franklin, and not gone on to obtain smaller, immediate support from the Dutch, there might not have been a Revolution for the French to assist in.
The difference between the two men is that Benjamin Franklin had long learned how to move within the circles of Paris to endear himself to them as a welcomed guest and even friend, and while it would take a long time, eventually he could lean upon those friendships for help and support of his cause(es)... John Adams, while an exceptionally keen mind for problem-solving, was simply too direct and aggressive of an instrument for the courtiers of France to take a particular liking to and thus give him the help he was asking from them. Adams misunderstood the standing of the United States in the eyes of France at the time, being little more than a newly formed rebel state, so it took a lot of finesse to persuade France into helping a rebellion against a monarch even though that very same idea would VERY shortly come back and ravage France as well...
@Wyatt Howe I think it just shows their different personalities. Benjamin Franklin was a superbly multi-talented man that we owe our heritage to. John Adams was a fine lawyer, president, and idealist. But, as we can see here, his Puritanical convictions alienated him greatly from France. His weakness was that he was blunt, short-tempered, and would double down in tense situations. Sometimes that proved to be a good idea; here, he would be transferred to a more suitable assignment.
Benjamin Franklin: Nor would I, were I given the full rights of an Englishman. But to call me one without those rights is like calling an ox a bull. He's thankful for the honor, but he'd much rather have restored what's rightfully his. John Dickinson: When did you first notice they were missing, sir?
The US was a pauper nation in it's infancy. Imagine having to borrow and beg for aid and on top of that,paying taxes to ,and having to engage militarily with the British.
What I like about this scene (among others) is that it shows that despite this miniseries being about John Adams, the show's creators did not whitewash his character. John Adams was truly a great man (among a generation of great men), but he was a deeply flawed man as well, otherwise he would not have signed the Alien and Sedition Acts into law during his presidency. His biggest flaw (as shown throughout the series) is that he was a distinctly thin skinned man who never took slights to his character lightly, nor was he shy about letting others know it. He failed to understand that in politics as well as diplomacy in order to accomplish something great sometimes you must eat some dirt (especially if you're working with the French), all the while smiling and shaking the hand of the man who force fed you that dirt.
Adams and Franklin each brought something different to the table. It was good to include them and eventually Jefferson to work towards getting French assistance
Was Ben Franklin a double agent working for Britain? Apparently, that’s what I’m hearing based on supposed unclassified British documents. Anyone hear about that?
@@tomjaap2933the fact that this, let’s call it “French politicking” got most the people in that room beheaded within a few decades speaks volumes more about Adam’s Germanic, stubborn, honest and true politicking over any Machiavellian plan of that Freemason Franklin scheming in his back rooms like an old coward. The fact that people in this comment section are more moved by the feigned reaction of some actors acting as a room full of silent and “petrified” French nobility says everything I need to know about the worth of the opinions of this crowd.
![Eminem - Houdini [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/22tVWwmTie8/mqdefault.jpg)
To this day, Ben Franklin is absolutely REVERED in France and many French still incorrectly assume he was a president of ours.
@Marissa Lopes Thanks for proving your point. He was talking about Ben Franklin mistaken for the AMERICAN president. They say Americans are stupid...because you are.
@Marissa Lopes They also think the US has 52 States. People don't always learn about the intricate histories of other countries.
Lol many Americans think he was a president
@@1984isnotamanual he may be the President-then Governor of Pennsylvania but he isn't the POTUS. 😆😆
@@CHEESYHEAD684 Oh look, a third worlder attempting to insult America. 😂
"A Good Diplomat observes much, acts little and speaks softly"
Advice taken
Ben Franklin… a true politician man
Translates to 🤫
@@SuperImmunologist Talk is silver, silence is gold. It's not called lying but discretion.
A diplomat also requires a certain obliqueness of conscience and an elastic attitude towards the truth. John Adams was not born with these gifts, nor did he ever develop them.
@@jimstanga6390 What you describe is the necessary traits for a good politician, and John Adams certainly did not have them. However, he did have integrity, conviction and ideological fervor - qualities essential to rally support among both his peers and his people. And both the John Adams type and the Ben Franklin type were needed to get the nation off the ground in its infancy.
John Adams was a great revolutionary because he took political issues personally.
John Adams was a terrible diplomat and president because he took political issues personally.
I'll give you that he wasn't the best diplomat. I think he's one of the best Presidents. How he kept us out of war with France and Britain during his term is to be commended. Though the alien and sedition acts kinda tarnish his reputation.
@@christoperwallace6197 I probably wouldn't qualify the Quasi-War as keeping us out of war with France. I mean, it wasn't declared, it was limited to naval operations, casualties were very light, and it is mostly forgotten on both sides of the Atlantic today, but, for all intents and purposes, the US fought a war against France from July 7, 1798 to September 30, 1800.
Character qualities are always a double-edged sword depending on the circumstances.
King George III: *violates peoples' inalienable rights*
John Adams: And I took that personally.
@@christoperwallace6197 Seemed like a good idea at the time, I guess! Though a blot on his presidential-record, he made the call, indicating strength & decisiveness, a not undesirable quality in a president. While I can't condone the A & S Acts, I do understand their purpose at that time. The ends don't justify the means, of course, but I don't fault Adams all that much. Remember, the U.S. still was in its infancy, its continued existence hanging by a thread, foreign threats were very real, internal discord & criticism of the government's policies threatened to hinder or even bring it down. The enemy agents of foreign powers were known to be at work in this country as well. We shouldn't be too hard on Mr. Adams over this, in my opinion.
Franklin is the old man in every anime who presents himself as the crazy harmless old kook, but is a badass when forced to reveal his true power.
Franklin did nothing for the cause of freedom while in France, he only licked the boots of the French ministers. Adams is the one you should applaud, but then you would have to read a good bit of history.
@@martaamance4545 We must have read different books.
@@stevenkarner6872 Really? Silas Deane and Arthur Lees were the ones who did the work of obtaining arms, Franklin was the window dressing by which the two gains audiences with the French Ministers. That Franklin's importance was that of being the "key" to unlocking doors was important, but his 'diplomacy' was a sham and would try to help send Adams home in disgrace. Yet Adams did far more to help gain our independence, foreign commerce, and world (at least European ) recognition than Franklin ever did. You must be reading out of the children's section.
@@martaamance4545 While your explanation could have warrented an answer and discussion ( as adults would tend to do ) your childish insult precludes such endeavors. Grow up.
BTW- I believe you mean Arthur LEE.
@@stevenkarner6872 You come off with the comment that we must have read different books but yet you made no attempt to state your case. That sounds like an insult on your part. So I replay with a few facts to which you make no reply except to point out that my typing of Lee's name was in error. Then you tell me we could have had and answer and discussion but well, you feel slighted. Then you insult me again. A claim for the high moral ground, i suppose. That appears to be the whole of your argument. Now the debate is whether Franklin was such a dazzling diplomatic figure and was he acting like an aging rock star has been. You could have enlightened us with your great knowledge on the subject, assuming you have any, and countered my original comment with facets of your own. But no, you chose to be snide. We could have discussed whether the mini-series had done justice to Adams in this occasion, the problem with film is that it does not lend itself to the expansion one would find in reading about the encounter. There you have it, you could have made your case and you chose to pick a fight and then declare victory and that I must be a child. Ok Mr Karner, you win, I am a child and you remain ignorant. Enjoy your victory for what it's worth.
John Adams tweets in all caps.
relatable if twitter was made in 1775
@@afellowartist3713 CAPS LOCK is cruise control for cool!
cringe
Lmao
"Don't believe everything you read in the CZcams comment section" - Abraham Lincoln
R.I.P. Tom Wilkinson 1948-2023
Just a friendly reminder that they didn't want Ben Franklin to write the Declaration because they were afraid that he'd put fart jokes in there.
lmfao that would of been legendary XD
"When in the Course of humid events, it becomes necessary for one colon to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the septic and equal stench to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a defecate respect to the orifice of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impale them to such sepsis. " - Benjamin Franklin lol
@@leesmith6866 "We hold these poops to be self-evident"
The original shitposter
@@animationfanatic2133 LITERALY! 🤣👌
“I am persuaded... that [John Adams] means well for his Country, is always an honest Man, often a Wise One, but sometimes and in some things, absolutely out of his Senses.”
- Benjamin Franklin
I was just gonna post that quote.
“Hear, hear.” - Abigail Adams probably
True of many people I know.
I think Adams is vastly underrated even by his contemporaries. That said, Jefferson would have been a better choice as president after Washington and judging by what Jefferson accomplished I don't think I'm too far off.
@@Rockhound6165 - that little song in "1776" said he was _obnoxious and disliked_ - he was. Because he was probably the most intelligent of the bunch. And a much-needed voice. But, Franklin hit the nail on the head - Adams did not have one diplomatic bone in his body. And never suffered fools
I LOVE American history, and I'm so glad they had cameras back then to record all of this. Otherwise, no one would know. 🎥📹🇺🇸🇺🇸
You poor fool, this is clearly a recreation. The real footage was in B&W as color did not yet exist in the 1700's.
@@kilroy2517 You poor fool, this was clearly a joke:)
By the way, photography did not exist until the 1800's at all
@@julianholzer4106 OMG. You sit and think about this for a while, and then you can come back and delete your comment.
@@kilroy2517 Please enlighten me....
@@julianholzer4106 😂woosh
It’s ironic that the same actor who plays Benjamin Franklin also played General Cornwallis
Was just thinking the same thing.
Corn Wallace
Franklin and...General Lord Cornwallis .... beat me to it!!!!!! The algorithm brought me here one day late!
I literally just noticed that myself.
More of a coincedence.
What John unfortunately couldn't take into consideration here is the fact that the united states was far, far removed from being any kind of established power.. in fact, this was even before John worked with the dutch to establish credit as a sovereign power. Whatever was really happening within the colonies was of little concern to France other than the fact helping them raise a little hell would annoy the British and just add to their increasing rates of attrition, and even then we're lucky that the french royal court was so wildly irresponsible with money spending that their own people eventually beheaded them all, otherwise they might have not been as keen to give us the forces and resources we so desperately needed to stave off British aggression.
There's a reason, Uncle Sam's Misguided Children wear french colours, on their "getting laid" uniforms.
Sorry but your interpretation of the French Revolution is a bit off.
True, the French went overboard with pride, they also honestly believed in the confused state that was France. Along with that Dog Jacques Necker, that France was incredibly solvent.
That’s why so much was committed. It was less an act of irresponsibility, and more an act of fraud on certain accountants parts, one of which I mentioned was Necker.
As for Louis Beheading. That is one of the saddest stories form history. There was nothing glorious about it, or civic. It was far from democracy. The French king fled basically as a refugee. Got caught. Got taken back to Paris. And the Assembly basically had a vote whether ti execute or not, where almost everyone voted along ideological lines, vs whether his “crime” warranted death.
Took the French another 150 years ti get good at democracy, and their democracy is still laughed at by many around the world.
The death of Louis was like the death of Simon in the lord of the flies. It was literally the breaking of the jar. After that, the Terrors started. The terrors in Paris. The massacres, arguably genocide in the Vendomè. And lots of wars.
@@elyastoohey6621 Yeah. The Directory ordered the beheading of the royal family because sad Louis was conspiring with Austria and Prussia to reinstall the absolute monarchy. Most likely Robespierre would have ended guillotining him anyhow.
@@elyastoohey6621 also the king didn't fled like a refugee. He was placed under house arrest, yet he escaped. Disguised himself as a woman and got caught on the countryside.
That's not even a contested statement of facts amongst historians. Yet, we are supposed to believe that the fall of Haiti and the massive public spending on the American adventure didn't ruin France's finances...
@@igunashiodesu he had officials and guards killed and the mob paraded their heads in front of the royal family’s quarters.
That sounds like a refugee fleeing.
The statement that his flight was illegal is also predicated that the vague provisional government was legitimate..
Louis never really committed any crime, other than being the figurehead of a system that limited the ambitions of a bunch of power hungry men, a system which was also oppressive to the lower classes though.
Most of the men who would later form up the DA were grasping and in it off themselves.
Louis’ execution was purely ideological and political. The absolute removal of the king was what many of them wanted, and it in turn would give those men more power.
I find unfortunately it’s people who romanticise the French Revolution, typically those with an repulsion to monarchy (I don’t like monarchy, but you can’t judge them from a Marxist perspective) they glorify and exalt Louis’ execution as some grand gesture of freedom.
The irony is, Louis execution was a blatant representation of anarchy and tyranny. Where every person who could would make themselves a petty king, and Deal out death.
I think France would be a better place today if it kept a degree of constitutional monarchy.
I don't care what Jim says, that is not the real Ben Franklin. I am 99% sure.
Ben Franklin was a Charmer. He was intelligent as hell too. I read his autobiography, and I still admit I don't know enough about him to say this is an accurate depiction of him.
@@paulinotou I think that’s an Office reference. One of the characters dresses up and pretends to be Ben Franklin
lol
Because you were there?
@@sebastiannemeth-ramirez2160 Indeed it's is.
This is more interesting the more you read up on it. Adams was described as being blunt and a little socially awkward whereas Franklin was the heart of the party. Franklin was good at interacting with people and could work his way up to amuse the host while Adams couldn't really interact with extroverts. Both were amazing
Same with Washington, Jefferson and Madison. All were quiet and soft spoken men. Thomas Jefferson only gave 2 speeches to congress because he was that socially awkward. I also believe he had mild autism and that didnt help out
Just needs a “GOOD DAY TO YOU, SIR!” at the end for perfection.
He didn't own him in this scene, he simply gave him a reality check. Although, if I were in John Adams position, I would have been doing the same thing. Too much time BSing and drinking cocktails instead of getting shit done, I could never be a diplomat.
Thats how shit gets done though. Why would someone want to help you if you aren't their friend?
Sometimes you need to BS and be needlessly formal, other times you get to the point and be very blunt. A good diplomat or any good official who has to negotiate and make deals has to know who and when to do what.
You can't go to France and just start making demands. Franklin knew this and played the long game.
France just bluntly viewed the US as beneath them, a bunch of backwoods country bumpkins and nor did they think the 'rebels' at the time would succeed. It should be noted that Adams was frequently blocked from doing anything very much because of his attitude and really wasn't getting 'shit done'.
Franklin meanwhile realized this, and really it was about getting noticed. You had to get noticed to get invited, then to hope that you could get the ear of a noble who wouldn't be annoyed by you. Otherwise you simply got locked out and met all of no one. Franklin in every sense in France was the one that got it done.
Well BSing and drinking cocktails is how you get successful diplomatic moves
I'd say John Adams gives every bit as good as he gets by Franklin in this scene and this is actually one of my favorite scenes in ANY movie/series. Adams makes a very profound statement here and asserts real American independence. Something Franklin should have considered. Franklin was an AMAZING figure, but every toolbox needs its hammer.
The thing I find most interesting is that these two men, at their heart, wanted very much the same things but their background and way of thinking were very different.
It is amazing how you can see the passion in both men but how that passion for country is displayed and acted upon very differently.
Wonderful acting here!
That’s the thing about early American history, no American was ever 100% correct in their thoughts and ideas. Everyone had to give a little and get a little
The first thing is to get that French fleet to help you win your revolution. Then figure out the rest later.
I surely dont see how Franklin owned Adams in this scene. If anything its the reverse.
SCREAM AND CARRY A MACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What's fascinating is how their careers influenced their diplomatic styles. Ben Franklin was a writer and editor, and had learned how to charm and entertain an audience with his wit and humor. John Adams was a lawyer, and learned how to win over a jury by directly arguing against and discrediting the opposing side. Thus Ben Franklin's style of diplomacy was much more based on flattery and charisma, whereas John Adams' style of diplomacy was based on argument and debate.
Charisma wins over arguments 80% of the time
Immediately came here after learning of the passing of Tom Wilkinson, a great actor
Just rewatched the series and this scene always sticks with me. Two polar opposites trying to obtain the same thing. A new nation.
@Danny Tallmage gone native or perhaps he was a pragmatist who understood how things really worked?
The idea of revolting against the strongest military in history is not a pragmatic idea yet it was done
@@creamychoclatelobsterwarri979
It was only feasible due to circumstance and distance from the European powers, and even then Britain managed to sack and burn the White House in 1812.
I think Franklin had the right idea- as a small nation, one's best option is to play larger powers off each other to one's own advantage.
Ally with at least one, and you not only remove the threat of an enemy, but employ its strength in your stead
Imagine what those French guys are thinking. 2 angry British colonists yelling at eachother in the Kings Palace.
FOUND YOU ABE
Who gives a fuck what they’re thinking
@sneksnekitsasnek oh ok
John Adams then forcefully adds "I said good day, sir!"
Ha! Just once in my life I'd like to say that.
*Perfect actors for Ben Franklin and John Adams*
RIP Tom Wilkinson
This is why Benjamin Franklin is on the $100 bill.
Yep, it’s used to bribe officials as AOC will testify…😂😂
I came to watch this in tribute to Tom Wilkinson
John: "The time for talk has passed! An enemy is an enemy
Ben: Do not forget that the enemy of my enemy is a friend.
I really like when Mr. Giamatti raises his voice to that level, you know something heavy is going down!
Mr Giamatti? What is he a NY mobster?
And now, Tom Wilkinson is with the real Benjamin Franklin.
RIP Tom Wilkinson
There were good reasons to ask John Adams & Jefferson to serve as ambassadors during the Constitutional Convention. Both were difficult to deal with. Adams butted heads with near everybody and Jefferson surreptitiously backstabbed those he disagreed with. Neither understood or were capable of compromise. Adams was an overt ass... Jefferson was worse... a sneaky bastard who had others do his dirty work while he pretended friendship. Both had great qualities, but with feet of clay.
I am literally the Ben Franklin of my family.
You would not believe how many times I basically have this conversation a week
These 2 actually once shared a bed together at an inn and argued over whether to keep a window open.
RIP.
It's the other way around really.
Indeed.
they're both right really. Adams had his heart in the right place. but Franklin knew his abrasive manner wouldn't accomplish what they both wanted. like Franklin said, politics is (unfortunately) the art of the possible
But is it really?
Just shows how Adams was the wrong choice to go to France.
that's the way I look at it !
It's so funny to me that people think Adams comes out looking good in this exchange. he sounds ill tempered and impatient, and Franklin has the long game in mind. some things never change
@Matt Horkan He didnt. They went with Franklins plan and did not end up being a pawn of the French anyway. Had Adams gotten his way there would have been no help at all.
He didn't "look good" but he was right. Franklin didn't own anything
@@johanlassen6448 Except for the fact that if it weren’t for the French Revolution we WOULD have been indebted to the Kingdom of France.
@@denniswilkerson5536 And if it had not been for French support the US could well have lost the war, so what's your point?
@@johanlassen6448 That the French Kingdom would have had a much greater political stranglehold on the USA than you let on, we may very well have been a pawn. As you see later on in the show that even the French revolutionaries claimed that the Americans were bound by contractual duty to support their cause.
Remember the French still had the Louisiana territories. If not for internal decay and instability on their home front and the King not getting his head cut off we would have been involuntarily involved with the French and their foreign conflicts.
Would the French had even given up their territory’s bordering the US if they had a rebellion? If the French had held onto those territories for another hundred years there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that-that would upend political stability between these two powers, even with minds like Alexander Hamilton… America’s eventual plans of expanding west of the Mississippi.
As a Massachusetts Man, I totally sympathize with Adams. This is how we roll.
If I remember right, they removed Adams from his diplomatic position in France when they cut it from 3 diplomats to just Franklin. But they didn't tell Adams to come home either, so he went to the Netherlands, set up an embassy and started negotiating with them. All on his own initiative.
I will not VOLUNTARILY PUT ON THE CHAINS OF FRANCE WHILE I AM STRUGGLING TO THROW OFF THOSE OF GREAT BRITAIN!
good day sir!!
Being an honest and forthright man is NOT a good trait for a diplomat. Especially not when you are trying to get another country to support you in a war. France didn't owe the American colonies anything. If they were to help, then OF COURSE it would be for their own benefit. Why was that a hard concept to understand?
And because being honest and forthright isn't consider a good trait in the US, we're left with bastions of corruption, doublespeak, fakeness, and moral absence.
In fact France was becoming too powerful and arrogant but it did not have the navel power to support America… the Brits would soon cut the frenchies down to size a few decades later… 😏
Adams knew that, but there’s still CZcams comments that think America is under serfdom for France’s 18th century gesture. That’s what he wanted to avoid.
Franklin may have owned Adams. But Adams tore Franklin a new one on his way out. Lol
Agreed!
And yet when he talks to King George III it is Adams who adopts Benjamins advice. Who has the last laugh now?
@@rainyvideos3684 I mean by the time he met George, Adams was no longer trying to win a war of survival. I'd be more chill then as well.
@@christoperwallace6197 So was Franklin and his patient approach payed off where as Adam's couldn't get the Dutch to do anything.
Benjamin Franklin was right though. He understood how diplomacy worked and he was able to win the French over. On the other hand the French disliked John Adams.
To send John Adams on any diplomatic mission was either insanity or pure genius in disguise...the man was never diplomatic, lol.
He would learn French just to insult them
Excellent show!!!! I highly recommend this show to everyone. I actually disagree with the title. I have seen this and ALL of our founders were under a stress many of today could never endure. Not to mention this is a prime example of taking something out of context.
Paul Giamatti is brilliant.
So glad that Grandma Pirate is no longer the accepted attire.
This series was amazing. Need to sit and watch it all again.
Seems to me that Adams had the final word here, and Big Ben was left behind.
What a great mini-series!
Two great minds can disagree but they are still both great minds
So that's what the Penguin would've looked like, if he had become mayor of Gotham City
Ben Franklin: "Observant diplomat."
John Adams: "Practical diplomat."
John Adams was anything but practical. He was the pure idealist. Even Jefferson ended up proving to be more practical when he became president. Which isn't a direct criticism of Adams, but rather to say his integrity and moral fiber aren't cut out for the career of a successful politician. He was greatly tamed by his colleagues such as Ben Franklin and his wife Abigail, without whom he would have failed miserably many of his great accomplishments. I think the show actually did a great job depicting that aspect, too.
Insulting your most powerful ally is hardly practical
Adams memoirs also made it abundantly clear that his 'common man' brotherhood only went as far as not wanting to be an English subject, beyond that he quite believed himself as deserving of aristocratic title. This was a common theme with the founding fathers. "The King calls me common when I know myself a Baron without the recognition and dignity of title. I have land and tenants. No other pedigree or writ can speak such as that."
Perhaps a practical thinker, but not a practical diplomat
John Adams: Diplomatic suicide
This is how it is done. Under the auspices of consultation, your adversaries overhear you loudly discussing the meaning of "ABK" with your own compatriot.
The title seems a bit misleading, Adams seems more than capable in any situation.
Good day sir!!! That was all that was missing.
I said GOOD DAY!!!!!
This behavior can only be explained by understanding that Adams was at heart, a curmudgeon. He was from New England and the region has a reputation as being full of people who aren't afraid to speak their mind. Unfortunately, Adams took this a step further and actually started insulting those he couldn't bend to his way of thinking. He does learn though. When he is sent to the Netherlands he finally develops some tact and actually succeeds in convincing the Dutch to loan the United States some money to fight the Revolution. Later, as President he would again become the irascible curmudgeon and end up offending people when he should have been seeking harmony and understanding. It contributed to him serving only one term in office.
The problem that Adams had as a diplomat--and as a politician really--is that he was too honest and he thought that agreements were solemn promises that had to be kept. In all politics, diplomacy included, agreements are only meant to be kept as long as they are beneficial and you can extricate yourself from them when they no longer are. Franklin knew that the US wouldn't keep its promises to France, but Adams thought they were morally obligated to do so and so didn't want to enter into an agreement that was, on its face, disadvantageous to the US.
"What are you thinking of? A good Diplomat observes much, acts little and speaks softly...."
This miniseries was off the charts good!
Paul Giamatti as John Adams was without equal, with the one obvious exception being Laura Linney as his wife Abagail. Could watch this series a dozen times, and have.
Name of the series please?
I remember my middle school American history teacher showing us a couple episodes of this
Gotta admit that last line from Adams is a Hell of a mic drop.
Adams said calmly.
The casting on this shit was so out of the box and fecking amazing
The first casualty of passion is reason.
Things were so simple back then.
Yep, anyone who cocks a snook at the French is all right in my book..😂😂
Danny Devito did a great job playing Ben franklin and hats off to Steve Buscemi as John Adams I love when 2 actors come back and just really show you how good they still are bravo gentlemen bravo!
Ah Tom Wilkinson, played General Cornwallis and Benjamin Franklin. He was on both sides of the war
He tried to school him.....and....FAIL!
If Adams had hung around in Paris, with Franklin, and not gone on to obtain smaller, immediate support from the Dutch, there might not have been a Revolution for the French to assist in.
Franklin didn't need politics, but was revered by most politicians
As Bismarck said, in every treaty one side is the rider and the other the horse. Franklin didn't mind being the horse.
Franklin was absolutely livid with Adam’s style of diplomacy.
Here we see Lord Cornwallis disguised as Ben Franklin arranging for the French fleet to capture him in the "Patriot"...
That title is hilarious!
No one owned anyone in this scene. Two brilliant but radically different personalities trying to keep a country together.
Yep. Adams was far more adjusted to the formalities of British Court vs the frivolousness of French Court
The difference between the two men is that Benjamin Franklin had long learned how to move within the circles of Paris to endear himself to them as a welcomed guest and even friend, and while it would take a long time, eventually he could lean upon those friendships for help and support of his cause(es)...
John Adams, while an exceptionally keen mind for problem-solving, was simply too direct and aggressive of an instrument for the courtiers of France to take a particular liking to and thus give him the help he was asking from them.
Adams misunderstood the standing of the United States in the eyes of France at the time, being little more than a newly formed rebel state, so it took a lot of finesse to persuade France into helping a rebellion against a monarch even though that very same idea would VERY shortly come back and ravage France as well...
And John Adams didn't drink f***ing Merlot either!
@Wyatt Howe I think it just shows their different personalities. Benjamin Franklin was a superbly multi-talented man that we owe our heritage to. John Adams was a fine lawyer, president, and idealist.
But, as we can see here, his Puritanical convictions alienated him greatly from France. His weakness was that he was blunt, short-tempered, and would double down in tense situations. Sometimes that proved to be a good idea; here, he would be transferred to a more suitable assignment.
Both men had legitimate points here, but Dr. Franklin better understood the French.
Franklin was right, naturally. Everyone hates politics, but a political officer MUST mobilize political support. It’s just part of the job
A excellent essay on the three generations of the Adams family, starting with John Adams, was written by Gore Vidal. It makes for good reading.
“Benjamin Franklin savagely owns John Adams!”
-“You keep using that [phrase]. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Fun Fact: The actor playing Ben Franklin played General Lord Cornwallis in The Patriot.
Can't believe till now
I never connected that he played Cornwallis in The Patriot as well.
Adams should have kicked a pedestrian as he did that Mic drop walkaway from Benjie
Adams behaved like petulant child in this scene
Benjamin Franklin: Nor would I, were I given the full rights of an Englishman. But to call me one without those rights is like calling an ox a bull. He's thankful for the honor, but he'd much rather have restored what's rightfully his.
John Dickinson: When did you first notice they were missing, sir?
The title is misleading.
It’s a battle of equal wit.
Didn’t seem like Ben owned him too hard there.
Franklin: A Good Diplomat observes much, acts little and speaks softly.
Adams: And keeps his pants on.
Would have loved to be a fly on the wall listening in on conversations with men like these.
The US was a pauper nation in it's infancy. Imagine having to borrow and beg for aid and on top of that,paying taxes to ,and having to engage militarily with the British.
What I like about this scene (among others) is that it shows that despite this miniseries being about John Adams, the show's creators did not whitewash his character. John Adams was truly a great man (among a generation of great men), but he was a deeply flawed man as well, otherwise he would not have signed the Alien and Sedition Acts into law during his presidency.
His biggest flaw (as shown throughout the series) is that he was a distinctly thin skinned man who never took slights to his character lightly, nor was he shy about letting others know it. He failed to understand that in politics as well as diplomacy in order to accomplish something great sometimes you must eat some dirt (especially if you're working with the French), all the while smiling and shaking the hand of the man who force fed you that dirt.
The Adams movie was brilliant
King George: "All I'd have to do is say his name."
Adams and Franklin each brought something different to the table. It was good to include them and eventually Jefferson to work towards getting French assistance
I think John Adams put Ben in his place with that last comment
Was Ben Franklin a double agent working for Britain? Apparently, that’s what I’m hearing based on supposed unclassified British documents. Anyone hear about that?
I still think that John Adams was exactly what the fledgling country needed. Totally underrated as one of our forefathers.
R.I.P Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
You do realize that Adams owned Franklin in this scene.
no
@@tomjaap2933the fact that this, let’s call it “French politicking” got most the people in that room beheaded within a few decades speaks volumes more about Adam’s Germanic, stubborn, honest and true politicking over any Machiavellian plan of that Freemason Franklin scheming in his back rooms like an old coward. The fact that people in this comment section are more moved by the feigned reaction of some actors acting as a room full of silent and “petrified” French nobility says everything I need to know about the worth of the opinions of this crowd.
Looked like old Ben was the one who got owned for wanting to "be beholden to the french"😊
This enraged John Adams, who punished him severely