In my graduate seminar this summer based on Thomas Jefferson, of course the topic of the Declaration of Independence is approached. That time was last night. In order to discuss the topic, our professor used Garry Wills's Inventing America: Jefferson's Declaration of Independence along with a companion article, from Daniel Walker Howe entitled, "European Sources of Political ideas in Jeffersonian America" (Reviews in American History 10, December 1982). In the book, Wills breaks down the ideas of Jefferson's subjectivity of his proclamation.

The most shocking to many of us was the drastic changes that Congress had made to Jefferson's document in order to make it official. Jefferson's original writing made it incredibly passionate, and those exclusions change the entire meaning of the document. Congress rejected TJ's theory of expatriation, as well as excluding an entire section that TJ intentionally meant to target: the people of Great Britain.

For most of the American people, we are familiar with the Preamble, which is usually recited at some patriotic event, usually at the Fourth of July. However, the Declaration of Independence was an entire statement and declaration incited with passion about how angry the American people were with the broken relationship between the colonies and the King of England. What had once been a harmonious and virtuous social contract was met with an uncooperative group of colonies because of the forceful tactics used in taxation and military protection. The colonies felt that they would be better off as independent without the betrayal of the King, and independence would provide foreign aid from other nations if possible. 

It's amazing to think that TJ's Declaration was established upon the beliefs and concepts of that of the Scottish Enlightenment, based on equality of love, affection, and benevolence of society, and not on legal contracts. Of course, everyone still debates TJ's concept of what he meant about his phrase "all men are created equal…" and it is still debated among historians. I'm sure TJ meant it to be vague, just as the writers of the Constitution meant to write the Bill of Rights, which continue to be debated to this day. They must be culturally relevant, which is a concept that Jefferson really understood… which is probably why he wrote what he did.