This weekend marks the 250th anniversary of the publication of the Declaration of Independence — America’s birthday. And this year also marks the 250th anniversary of the publication of Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations. Both share much in common.

Perhaps most famously, America’s founders and Adam Smith share the view that machinery can be erected to channel the self interest of individuals into beneficial social outcomes. One of Smith’s counterintuitive arguments is that an economy shaped by the decisions of individuals pursuing their self-interest will be more prosperous than one with heavy government oversight — that the nation will be more likely to produce the right amount of food, clothing, shelter, educational services, and medical care in a free-for-all than with someone trying to make sure that enough of each is produced and provided.

Similarly, America’s founders designed a political system that assumes citizens and elected leaders will pursue their self-interest, and attempts to channel that pursuit into acceptable political outcomes that respect the will of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority.

In my latest Financial Times column, I argue that they share more than this. The Declaration and Wealth elevate the importance of individuals and families above the importance of the state. Jefferson famously argued that governments derive “their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Smith introduced the revolutionary, radical, and (small-d) democratic idea that the wealth of nations is properly measured not by the gold and treasures in the king’s vault, but instead by the goods and services consumed by all members of society.

Both Smith and Jefferson prioritize liberty. Both share a deep belief in human capacity and individual agency. In sum:

Taken together, Smith and the American founders present a formula for prosperity that is positive-sum: liberty in politics and in markets, disciplined by the rule of law and competition, will unleash the creativity and energy of people who, in pursuing their own self-interest, will make all of society thrive.

In the column, I argue that, point by point, nationalists and socialists reject the Jefferson-Smith consensus.

The ideas animating the Declaration and Wealth — the importance of free people and free markets to human flourishing — have profoundly shaped America and the modern world. Yet in the US today, commitment to them is under direct assault — from nationalist-populists on the right and socialist-populists on the left. My thoughts turn to the tricentennial, 50 years from now. Will America reach that birthday with those commitments intact?

Ultimately, my answer is yes. Check out the column for my full argument. And Happy Fourth.