openpolitics.com

Timothy Snyder, “On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons From The 20th Century”

13:42
there are very different ideas there are
still very different ideas the hypnosis
of the end of history is something that
we have to break ourselves out of the
fist thing that I think I’ve understood
is that the catalyst or if you want the
lubricant of regime change is mistrust
right the sense of uncertainty the sense
that nothing is real or nothing is true
if you are having that feeling now as
many Americans are you are right we’re
Russians were about a decade ago okay
they’re much further along now right
there they’re in a different place now
as people say but if you have that sense
that you don’t know who to trust as
journalism real as history real you know
should I listen to white men wearing
ties actually the answer is generally no
right and make it but but make an
exception right make an exception oh no
no I think I feel I feel like Sean
Spicer has totally ruined this look for
me but but i but i don’t know where else
to go so like maybe you know maybe you
can help you out afterwards anyway that
that mistrust is the rubric mistrust
makes it happen right because if you
don’t think anything’s true and you
don’t trust anyone then the rule of law
can’t work and if the rule of law can’t
work then democracy is going to fall
right democracy depends on the rule of
law rule of law has depends on a certain
basic level of trust that basic level of
trust it’s not that we agree about
everything but that we agree there’s a
world in there facts in it if you lose
that then you lose rule of law then you
lose democracy right and the people who
are going after trusts the people who
are tweeting random things at 5:30 in
the morning right they are consciously
ripping out the heart of democracy it’s
not the skin right it’s not the muscle
that’s going to resigned it’s not the
bones it’s going right for the heart
it’s skipping the step of democracy
right it’s going right for the heart
it’s ripping out the thing which makes
democracy possible the final thing the

 

number 19

22:03

is the one about patriotism in general

the ones towards the end of the book are

meant to come later but you know

sometimes events outpace you or catch or

catch you up as Vic and I like to say

catch you up be a patriot set a good the

generations to come they will need it

what is patriotism let us begin with

what patriotism is not it is not

patriotic to dodge the draft and to mock

war heroes and their families

it is not patriotic to discriminate

against active duty members of the Armed

Forces and one’s companies or a campaign

to keep disabled veterans away from

one’s property it is not patriotic to

compare one search for sexual partners

in New York with the military service in

Vietnam that one has dodged it is not

patriotic to avoid paying taxes

especially when American working

families do pay it is not patriotic to

ask those working taxpaying American

families to finance one’s own

presidential campaign and then to spend

their contributions in one’s own in

one’s own companies it is not patriotic

to admire foreign dictators it is not

patriotic to cultivate a relationship

with Muammar Gaddafi or to say that

Bashar al-assad and Vladimir Putin are

superior leaders it is not patriotic to

call upon Russia to intervene in an

American presidential election

it is not patriotic to cite Russian

propaganda at rallies it is not

patriotic to share an advisor with

Russian oligarchs and is not patriotic

to solicit foreign policy advice from

someone who owns shares in a Russian

energy company it is not patriotic to

read a foreign policy speech written by

someone on the payroll of a Russian

energy company it is not patriotic to

appoint a national security advisor who

is taking money from a Russian

propaganda organ it is not patriotic to

appointed Secretary of State an oil man

with Russian financial interests who is

the director of a Russian American

energy company and has received the

order of friendship from Putin the point

is not that Russia and America must be

enemies the point is that patriotism

involves serving your own country the

president is a nationalist which is not

at all the same things a patriot a

nationalist encourages us to be our

worst and then tells us that we are the

best a nationalist quote although

endlessly brooding on power victory

defeat revenge wrote Orwell tends to be

quote uninterested in what happens in

the real world

unquote nationalism is relativist since

the only truth is the resentment we feel

when we contemplate others as the

novelist bunnyville keys put it

nationalism quote has no universal

values aesthetic or ethical a patriot by

contrast wants the nation to live up to

its ideals which means asking us to be

our best selves a patriot must be

concerned with the real world which is

the only place where his country can be

loved and sustained a patriot has

universal values standards by which he

judges his nation always wishing it well

and wishing that it would do better

democracy failed in Europe in the 1920s

1930s and 1940s and it is failing

not only in much of Europe but in many

parts of the world today it is that

history and experience that reveals to

us the dark range of our possible

futures a nationalist will say that it

can’t happen here which is the first

step towards disaster a patriot says

that it could happen here look that we

will stop it thank

41:03

I don’t I don’t have a silver bullet for

that but I do have some ways of trying

to get one’s mind around it the first is

that is is technological I mean it just

it just turns out that the Internet does

not open the broad you know the broad

sweep towards the positive globalization

that Al Gore was dreaming of right in

the 1990s that just isn’t true just like

it wasn’t true with a book which brought

us the Wars of Religion right just like

it wasn’t true a radio which brought us

fascism all of these new I mean not

alone right but all of these new

technologies are extremely unpredictable

for some like transition period that may

last a hundred years right there they’re

very unpredictable so art like our kind

of and this is something this is a

bubble that I think Hillary Clinton

herself was caught in her campaign was

caught in people on these coats were

thought and people did not realize what

the internet actually was right what it

was actually doing and this is I mean

there’s an empirical thing here there’s

a technical thing here the empirical

thing is people just did not realize how

how siloed off we had become I didn’t

realize it until I actually started

talking to real took when I was

canvassing and talking to Trump voters

in the Midwest and then I realized like

this is so dumb but it was at that

moment that I realized just how

different my facebook feed was from

other people’s because if you hear from

what seemed to be 25 independent sources

that Hillary Clinton is a murderer and

you’ve been hearing it for six months

you might well believe it

all right I mean that’s not surprising

which is the technical thing not enough

people again really a Clinton campaign

whatever realized that

Donald Trump actually had a campaign

advantage right we talked incessantly

about being a ground game ground game I

saw the ground game you know it’s like

it’s twice all agree I what the ground

game in the AK in the ground game which

is below the ground game right and what

the Russians called a psycho sphere

Trump had a tremendous advantage how

much of that was actually is campaigning

how much there was actually the Russians

I don’t know but in terms of the bots in

terms of the technical distribution of

the false news at the generation and

technical distribution he had a huge

advantage and what turned out almost

certainly be a decisive advantage these

are things that we have to understand

and get our mind around now in terms of

what we can do I mean obviously like you

know Zuckerberg can do a lot and people

who are in charge of news distribution

can can do a lot there are two little

things I mean one is kind of just a

declaration I think 2017 is already and

is going to be a heroic year for

journalism I mean and I be absolutely

mean heroic like if this is going to

turn around it’s going to be because of

people pursuing old fashioned stories

and old-fashioned ways and printing and

publishing very often in print journals

who can afford or at least try to try to

afford to be able to do such things and

and I mean it’s also generationally like

there are a lot of really interesting

young people who now see journalism as

edgy and they’re right right like the

whole threat like that the phrase

mainstream media that’s not like what’s

mainstream is the derision of the media

that’s the mainstream right being a

journalist is now edgy and dangerous and

interesting right and I think maybe

historically meaningful and you know the

little thing I say in the book which is

obvious I’m sure you all do it is that

we need to pay for a bunch of

subscriptions because if everybody pays

for subscriptions that will actually be

enough to subsidize investigations right

and that I mean even we know that people

like us often don’t do that right and if

we all did it that would make a huge

difference and then finally there’s like

there’s the internet self policing which

is it we have to think we have to

remember that we are all now publishers

right and so therefore we all every

every individual makes a difference in

terms of what is actually being

distributed right if we think about it

that way then each of us can make us

feel better to write like if you picked

reporters from the real world follow

their work

get to know them as it were and then

distribute their work online then you’re

being a publisher who’s doing a little

bit of good so let the day-to-day level

that’s something that we can do thank

56:19

that the cleat and actually the question

we just had the cleavages are going to

change they’re already changing and in

Europe they’re it’s further along than

than here because certain things are

further along in Europe and here but I

think the real dividing lines are fact

and post fact and and

anti-authoritarianism authoritarianism

and I think the anti I think I agree

with your premise the anti-authoritarian

case is unfortunately a case that has to

be made right it can lose but I think

that’s the case that has to be made and

it goes back to how one wins also the

anti-authoritarian z– have to include a

good deal of my view conservatives

people who vote Republican right people

who people who think there should be a

Constitution although they would have

they would disagree about policy you

know perhaps with me right the

anti-authoritarian camp is gonna have to

include a lot of folks like that as well

so so so my answer is that of course

you’re right I mean the Bill of Rights

is there for the reason you give that’s

why the Bill of Rights is there it’s not

there because it’s popular it’s there

because it would be unpopular right who

wants to separate church and state it’d

be so much more fun to have my you know

my church right I mean who’s not tempted

by that right few people okay so like

okay I was going to list all I want a

favor anyway there are a few

denominations who have maybe not beats

but in general like we you belong for

rare tradition if you belong to a

tradition which has never try to take

over the state at some point or found a

state right so how is dividing church

and state popular it’s not meant to be

popular it’s meant to be sensible these

things are not meant to be popular and

so that means they have to be defended

precisely but I think I think there is

enough of a consensus around

Constitution that one can at least start

there as a way of shaming people or

gathering people but I mean my basic my

basic notion is that you get yeah it

goes on very deep it’s whether you’re

going to authoritarian or

anti-authoritarian and the people who

are trying to change things already know

they’re authoritarians right so here we

just one of the comments when Hillary

Clinton stated at the time that Russia

was taking over Crimea and invading rule

and she compared it to sedating land

takeover and everybody scoffs better she

had to pull it back but I don’t know

whether you thought that was more apt

than some B’s well I mean on and

Elizabeth who was a very gifted and

conservative Russian historian made the

same comparison and lost his lost his

job for it no of course it’s apt right

so here’s like here’s how Americans join

you with history the Americans deal with

history as though history were an mp3

and if it doesn’t sound exactly the same

when you punch the button as it did the

previous time then you think something’s

wrong right that’s what American says if

it does if it doesn’t repeat perfectly

so if Americans will say oh well there

no there no swastikas so no jackboots

I’m changing the channel I’m afraid like

that’s our Nats our national response to

the history this whole taboo thing about

the 1930s is a way of saying well in the

in the naive view and the naive view

it’s a way of saying okay we don’t know

anything about history that’s fine right

because no analogies can be perfect

I mean Crimean sedate land is actually

an extremely good analogy it’s a very

close analogy right but none is going to

be perfect right and so saying oh that’s

just an analogy or that’s a way of just

not thinking about history and once you

don’t think about history you’re done

you’re finished because history is the

only thing which teaches you how people

have successfully resisted it’s also the

only thing we teaches you how

institutions are constructed right so

the moment you say oh no comparisons

you’re done forget it right it’s over so

it’s a very it’s a very dangerous very

dangerous move and in the dark version

the non naive version in the dark

version it’s quite deliberate you know

you say well I you know I am NOT exactly

like Hitler and therefore it’s okay

right and we’re getting to that point

right you know they’re nothing is wrong

I’m overstating this slightly but not

much

nothing is wrong because they’re on

concentration camps yet no no no no you

know and there weren’t you know the

wrong concentration camps in in January

1933 either right okay