The Failure of Liberal Politics

“The rise of right wing populism represents the failure of liberal and progressive politics,” says Harvard political philosopher Michael Sandel. He joins The Agenda to diagnose the failure of liberal politics, the decline of civic life, and what liberals need to know in the age of anger and populism.

Charles Murray on populism, globalization, “The Bell Curve,” and American politics today

The American Enterprise Institute scholar Charles Murray discusses our current political moment.
Chapter 1 (00:1533:22): Working Class Decline
Chapter 2 (33:2244:36): A Universal Basic Income?
Chapter 3 (44:361:00:45): From Tea Party to Trump
Chapter 4 (1:00:451:10:55): The Bell Curve Revisited
In his second conversation with Bill Kristol, American Enterprise Institute scholar Charles Murray discusses the state of American civic life and how this can help us understand the current political moment. Murray explains how the decline of communities, the effects of immigration, and the growth of anti-trade sentiment have fueled populist impulses in 2016. Kristol and Murray also revisit Murray’s prescient The Bell Curve (1994) and discuss how cognitive ability might affect American life in the future.

Yascha Mounk, “The People vs. Democracy” (w/ E.J. Dionne)

00:06
I am very excited to welcome yasha monk
00:09
and EJ Dionne back to politics and pros
00:11
Yasha monk is here to talk about his new
00:13
book the People vs democracy why our
00:16
freedom is in danger and how to save it
00:20
as the cold war drew to a close in 1989
00:24
Francis Fukuyama’s the end of history
00:27
posited that liberal democracy had won
00:30
and would be the final ideological forum
00:33
but almost 30 years later we see that
00:35
this is not in fact the case
00:38
drawing on recent examples from the US
00:41
and Europe monk demonstrates how as
00:43
liberalism and democracy come apart they
00:46
tend towards extremes of either an
00:49
illiberal democracy under the sway of
00:53
populist demagogues or an undemocratic
00:57
liberalism run by two technocratic
00:59
elites Yasha Monk is the author of the
01:02
age of responsibility and is a lecturer
01:05
Harvard as well as a senior fellow in
01:08
the political reform program at new
01:11
America
01:12
he is joined today in conversation by EJ
01:15
Dionne
01:16
a Washington Post columnist and
01:18
co-author of one nation after Trump
01:20
which we also have many copies of here
01:22
at the store so Melissa please give a
01:24
warm welcome to Yoshi McKinney javion
01:33
Thank You Isaac I asked so I wouldn’t
01:36
have to so that was very kind of him
01:39
Thanks thank you all for coming and
01:41
thanks to a lot of old friends I see
01:43
here today I just want to say politics
01:46
and prose arranges some of the very best
01:49
conversations on the crisis facing
01:51
democracy and on public problems
01:55
generally and I think if we could locate
01:57
a politics in Pro and pros in every
01:59
community in the United States and
02:01
across the democracies we wouldn’t have
02:04
a yahoo in the pad to write this book
02:06
I’m also really happy to be here because
02:09
like many of you I have become a Yasha
02:11
fan over the last several years I admire
02:15
his sharp mind and warm heart and both
02:18
of them are
02:19
and he comes at his concern for a
02:22
liberal democracy and his commitment to
02:24
a greater degree of social justice from
02:27
both personal experience and deep and
02:29
serious philosophical reflection that
02:32
earlier book is is really good too if
02:34
they have it around here today he’ll
02:37
sign them both I am sure if you care to
02:39
buy one I just what I want to do what
02:43
we’re going to do today is have a
02:44
conversation up here he and I have been
02:46
talking about this book for a while
02:48
indeed he was kind enough to visit with
02:50
my students up at Harvard where I taught
02:53
last semester and gave them an advance
02:55
look at some of the chapters of the book
02:56
and we had a wonderful conversation
02:58
there and he and I have had friendly
03:00
discussions including a couple of
03:02
arguments that I want to service here
03:04
friend very friendly arguments won over
03:07
populism and the other over the role of
03:10
young people in the future and so we’re
03:13
going to talk about that but first I
03:16
want y’all should I have a chance to
03:17
introduce the book I am going to read
03:19
every author should have a paragraph
03:21
like this in the book that very neatly
03:24
summarizes the core argument in this
03:27
case of the first half of what the
03:29
problems are so I’m going to read this
03:31
and then I’m going to ask Yasha to tell
03:33
you a bit about himself because as I say
03:36
his commitment on these issues comes
03:37
from his own background he became an
03:40
American citizen last year correct we
03:42
should welcome Yasha with a round of
03:44
applause and we are very lucky to have
03:49
him and I want him to talk about sort of
03:52
his background a bit and how he came to
03:55
write this book then we will get to some
03:59
of the issues but first my dramatic
04:01
reading once upon a time liberal
04:04
democracies could assure their citizens
04:06
of a very rapid increase in their living
04:09
standards now they no longer can
04:12
once-upon-a-time political elites
04:14
control the most important means of
04:16
communication and could effectively
04:18
exclude radical views from the public
04:20
sphere
04:21
now political Outsiders can spread lies
04:23
and hatred with abandon and once upon a
04:26
time the homogeneity of their citizens
04:28
or at least a see for a shil hierarchy
04:31
was a big part
04:32
of what held liberal democracies
04:34
together now citizens have to learn how
04:37
to live in a much more equal and diverse
04:39
democracy
04:40
welcome Yasha and please tell folks a
04:43
bit about yourself and how you came to
04:45
write this book like at what moment
04:47
after how many hours after either breaks
04:50
it or Trump’s election did you decide
04:54
well well I think what sort of
04:57
interesting surprising is what I started
04:59
to write this book before I’ve a brexit
05:01
Oh Trump happened um other people
05:03
weren’t so interested in me writing the
05:05
book at the time because they kind of
05:07
thought I was a little bit of a weird
05:08
crank when I started to to argue three
05:12
four years ago
05:13
there’s real warning sign for our
05:16
democracies not assume United States but
05:18
in big parts of Europe as well
05:20
people always accuse me of being a
05:22
Cassandra um and I wanted to respond to
05:25
I didn’t because I realized oh just give
05:26
me you know dig me even deep into the
05:28
hole Cassandra was right damn it that’s
05:30
the whole point of Cassandra that’s his
05:33
next book that’s my Cassandra was right
05:36
dammit exclamation mark there uh you
05:40
know I mean why is it that our sort of
05:41
more life to those dangers then when
05:43
some other people I think a mix of a
05:46
personal story and some academic
05:47
interest of mine I mean so you know
05:49
personally my family has had a bad habit
05:52
of being in the wrong place at the wrong
05:54
time for these free generations so I’ve
05:56
seen you know and my great grandparents
05:59
my grandparents my parents how you know
06:02
the political situation ended up being
06:04
quite differently from what they
06:05
expected and how they affect that
06:07
affected their own lives so I think you
06:09
know to me the idea that political
06:11
systems can turn and then that can have
06:14
quite tragic consequences in a very
06:15
personal way is is concrete rather than
06:19
abstract and that I think probably
06:21
anticipating a little bit what part of
06:23
our conversation might be later
06:24
separates me from many other people my
06:26
generation who grew up in United States
06:28
or other people who grew up in big parts
06:30
of Europe the other thing is where as an
06:32
academic I started to think about how
06:36
people actually feel about our political
06:37
system now what people have known for a
06:40
long time is that approval ratings for
06:44
Congress and for particular politicians
06:46
keep getting lower that participation
06:49
and former politics gets lower and also
06:51
some united states but also in Europe
06:53
that people the approval ratings for for
06:57
Congress of Supreme Court for presidency
06:59
have been sinking but forty years ago
07:01
people trusted politicians and now we
07:04
don’t anymore and majority so that was
07:06
all clear it with a colleague of mine of
07:08
metaphor we started to look at how do
07:11
people actually feel about a political
07:12
system itself so do they say it’s
07:15
important to him to live in a democracy
07:16
are they open to a foreign alternatives
07:19
to democracy and we started to see that
07:22
those attitudes had started to shift as
07:24
well but actually fewer young people now
07:28
say it’s really important to him to live
07:29
in a democracy but the number of people
07:31
who say I want a strongman leader who
07:33
doesn’t have to bubble of parliament or
07:34
elections or even I think army rule is a
07:37
good system of government has gone up
07:39
significant and so you know when we saw
07:42
that a few years before Trump was
07:43
elected we really started to worry about
07:46
what’s going on when you look back at
07:50
we’re opinion was in a lot of the West
07:54
after the fall of the Berlin Wall and
07:57
loose in his wonderful book has a
07:59
wonderful description of journeying to
08:02
the wall very excited with a bunch of
08:04
students and there was a feeling that
08:05
aha liberal democracy has finally
08:08
triumphed a lot of these problems have
08:10
disappeared and there is nothing but
08:13
success on the horizon what happened
08:17
what happened and why were these
08:20
predictions so wall what were people
08:22
missing in 1989 or did developments
08:26
afterward change yeah so the obvious way
08:30
to frame this is around Francis
08:31
Fukuyama’s argument the end of history
08:33
which said that for the first time in
08:37
living memory there was no real
08:38
ideological competitor to liberal
08:40
democracy in the 19th century that been
08:42
absolute monarchy but some degree be in
08:44
favor Christie but 20th century was
08:46
fascism and communism all of those had
08:48
failed and in 1989 though Fukuyama have
08:52
a claim for democracy was everywhere
08:54
that there would no longer be any
08:55
historical event so it’s a miss reading
08:56
what he was saying he said
08:59
yes sir he was saying look there’s no
09:03
real system that people would rather
09:05
live in people are deeply committed to
09:07
liberal democracy of the system and so
09:09
we don’t really have to worry about its
09:11
persistence now even some people who are
09:13
skeptical of Fukuyama actually bought
09:15
that cool faeces for big parts of North
09:19
America and Western Europe so political
09:21
scientists who would you know were very
09:22
empirical and counting you know numbers
09:25
and playing around and Stata and are
09:26
they
09:27
they might afford over the end of
09:29
history you know what a silly phrase but
09:31
they actually had the same belief so
09:33
there’s a famous article by someone
09:34
called Adam Przewalski’s in the 90s who
09:36
said look at all of the democracies that
09:38
have over 15,000 dollars GDP per capita
09:40
but have had at least two changes of
09:43
government for free and fair elections
09:45
well you know what all of those places
09:47
are safe you no longer have to worry
09:49
about the persistence of a democratic
09:51
system in those countries
09:55
and those reliant on the assumption that
09:57
democracy had become consolidated which
09:59
is a phrase in literature which would
10:01
mean when was the only game in town and
10:03
that’s precisely what we set out to test
10:05
and what we described what I described
10:06
with some degree in this book which is
10:08
is it still true but everybody gives us
10:10
importance to democracy is it still true
10:12
that people reject versus alternatives
10:14
to moxie out of hand and most
10:16
importantly are there any politicians
10:18
and political movements that will
10:22
actually have real power in the system
10:23
and reject the most basic rules and
10:26
norms of liberal
10:28
office for a long time that’s no longer
10:30
the case that populace had been rising
10:32
not just here and there and American
10:34
primaries where they sort of shut up for
10:37
a little moment and when crashed again I
10:39
think of all of the extreme candidates
10:41
but briefly led the pack and Republican
10:43
primary fields not just in 2016 but in
10:46
2012 and 2008 and so on so forth but you
10:50
also saw a very steady rise of populism
10:53
in Europe for a long time in a paper
10:55
with some news here today Martin Hammond
10:57
we show that the share of populist
11:00
parties in Europe has increased from
11:02
about 8 percent in mere 2000 to 25
11:05
percent more reason and so the whole
11:10
world on which we based the conviction
11:13
but we don’t have to worry about
11:15
democracy anymore after 1989 went far
11:17
beyond and I think it’s now been
11:20
challenged in ways would go far beyond
11:23
Donald Trump but a few weeks back a
11:25
Brahmin and was here to talk about his
11:27
book to fight against the age he thinks
it’s actually important that we call
this new right-wing nationalism by its
name and he believes that aim is fascism
do you agree with that or or not and how
do you analyze what is the nature of
this ideology
I disagree for up on this and and
there’s a number of reasons for that
I’m the first is that
11:56
it’s really easy to think of the
11:59
collapse of democracy as requiring
12:00
something like what happened in Germany
12:02
in the nineteen thirties
12:04
right so we’re only going to lose
12:06
democracy if lots of people give a
12:08
Hitler salute you know by riebeck ugly
12:10
black boots and ran from the center of
12:13
town of tortures right and some of that
12:16
happens some of that exists and when you
12:17
look at Charlottesville there’s
12:18
obviously people who quite openly are
12:21
fascists in our country today but you
12:24
know what despite all of horribleness of
12:26
what happened in Charlottesville that
12:27
was the only danger we faced I wouldn’t
12:30
be too concerned I wouldn’t be writing
12:32
this me what you see fo in countries
12:34
from Russia to to Turkey and countries
12:39
today like Poland and Hungary is there
12:41
as many other ways in which democracy
12:43
can come under real attack and those are
12:45
a lot much more subtle it’s not people
12:47
who say I’m a fascist I want to get rid
12:50
of democracy it’s people who say you
12:52
know what you’ve been disempowered
12:54
people have taken a real power away from
12:56
you and I’m the only real Democrat I
12:59
alone actually represent the people
13:01
I am your voice as Donald Trump said in
13:02
the Republican National Convention so
13:05
give me your votes what I can return
13:07
power to the people and that I think is
13:09
the real danger to democracy at the
13:11
moment so calling that fascist is makes
13:14
us lazy because we think well there’s
13:16
nobody in in black boots and torches in
13:18
the streets so why should we worry and I
13:20
think it makes it more difficult for us
13:23
to understand the specific nature of
13:25
populism now here we have a disagreement
13:28
as perhaps some of you saw so AJ is
13:31
excellent column and Washington Post I’m
13:32
about a week ago in which he basically
13:35
says there’s good forms of populism
13:37
now you know the word populism is a
13:39
little confusing um and and you know
13:42
there are some people who have
13:43
historically been quote populist who has
13:45
sometimes called populist now who I
13:47
think can contribute a certain
13:48
corrective to the system but the way
13:50
that I describe populism in this book
13:52
and the way that I can make sense of it
13:54
I don’t think there is such a good
13:56
fingers good and the reason the
13:58
following word is a populist at heart
14:00
it’s not somebody who says the certain
14:03
things wrong with our politicians and
14:05
some of them are corrupt and some of my
14:06
self-serving and it’s really important
14:08
that we win in order to make through
14:09
that’s a normal part of Porter’s those
14:12
Barack Obama as much as anybody else
14:13
right talk about a rigged system and so
14:15
on there’s nothing dangerous about that
14:18
but what populist s– have uniquely is
14:21
that they say only I truly represent the
14:26
people the only reason why we have any
14:29
real political problems at the moment is
14:30
the politicians are corrupt and
14:31
self-serving and I can fix all of that
14:34
because I stand for ordinary people I
14:36
manage to channel their wisdom and their
14:39
views and this means with anybody who
14:42
opposes me who disagrees with me is by
14:44
definition illegitimate so give me all
14:47
of the power and if the courts are going
14:49
to stand up to that because what I’m
14:51
doing is unconstitutional then they are
14:54
being an American
14:56
right if the media is criticizing me
14:59
then they’re enemies of the people if
15:01
your position is trying to use its
15:03
institutional prerogatives to limit how
15:06
much I can do then they are traitors and
15:09
this is true of populist in different
15:12
countries and of different stripes
15:14
Donald Trump and recive erawan and
15:16
Google Shabbos don’t have much in common
15:18
for example Donald Trump doesn’t seem to
15:20
be overly fond of Muslims whereas
15:22
receipe Erawan doesn’t seem to be overly
15:24
fond of anybody who’s not a Muslim but
15:27
they share this trait they share the
15:29
trait of saying the only reasons why we
15:32
have political problems as bad feelings
15:34
are corrupt
15:34
I represent ordinary people and I can
15:37
solve it but to do that you have to give
15:39
me all of the power because anybody who
15:41
disagrees with me is a traitor is
15:43
legitimate and that kind of populism
15:46
will always be a danger to the basic
15:50
principles of democracy and that’s why I
15:51
think is always going to be dangerous I
15:53
don’t want to pursue this too far
15:54
because I want yeah should I have a
15:56
chance to present the rest of his book
15:57
but just for fun I want to just take
15:59
this one one time which is in a way is
16:02
your argument about populism in
16:04
contradiction to the argument about
16:05
fascism because what Rob’s argument is
16:08
is you don’t have to wear Jack boots are
16:10
seeing the horse vessel song to be a
16:12
fascist and that in fact the danger may
16:15
be hidden from us because people are
16:17
doing it in the name of democracy and
16:19
after all the word VOC that Hitler
16:21
invoked was the people and so there is
16:25
so I just want to pursue that and then
16:28
on the populist side I I would basically
16:32
assert and we that this why we probably
16:34
shouldn’t go too long on this populism
16:36
is an essentially contested concept and
16:39
I think that there are those who see
16:41
populist more in ameri in the terms of
16:44
our old American populist movement which
16:46
was largely a democratizing movement and
16:49
I think there’s actually a difference
16:50
across the oceans on this as well which
16:53
is I think Europeans because of the
16:56
nature of the right-wing populism you
16:58
face are more likely to see populism as
17:01
anti-democratic so just take that and
17:03
then I want to just pursue a couple
17:05
arguments in the book and I want to let
17:06
this learn an audience participate as
17:09
well
17:10
so look like certainly certain
17:11
similarities between some forms of
17:13
populism in some forms of fascism but
17:15
but very essential differences as well
17:17
one of them is how openly hostile
17:19
fascism is to democracy which yes the
17:22
fact but I agree the problems covertly
17:24
hostile to to democracy but but fascism
17:27
has always been openly hostile and
17:29
that’s an important thing to understand
17:30
and so if we think is vis like fascism
17:33
we’re gonna say well Donald Trump is not
17:34
overtly hostile to democracy so why does
17:37
anybody worry we all Toronto firms as
17:39
some people have charge right and that’s
17:40
that’s a real mistake that really makes
17:42
it more difficult for us to understand
17:43
there’s also crucial difference in the
17:45
kind of forms of political regime that
17:48
those countries tend to Institute so
17:51
there was an important distinction
17:52
between dictatorships and totalitarian
17:57
regimes right most fascist systems tend
18:00
to be totalitarian regimes which is to
18:03
say that every sphere of politics on
18:06
society becomes deeply imbued with
18:10
ideological fervor you cannot have a
18:13
chess club that isn’t organized along
18:16
fascist lines right and that is the same
18:18
in communist um now I think populist
18:22
don’t tend to erect regimes like that
18:23
when you think of Turkey when you think
18:25
of Russia there are places where as long
18:28
as you don’t criticize the government as
18:30
long as you don’t pose a threat to the
18:33
dictator you get to do whatever you want
18:35
and so again I think populism and
18:37
fascism actually erect systems that are
18:40
very different as well
18:41
now look I agree with you this concept
18:43
of essentially contests that is
18:45
important right there’s no one natural
18:47
way of defining democracy there’s no one
18:49
natural way of defining populism in a
18:52
way it is a question of which definition
18:55
allows us to understand what’s going on
18:58
in the world the best at the moment and
19:00
what I would say is that for I
19:03
understand was different kinds of
19:04
movement called populist in American
19:06
history I don’t think that that is very
19:09
useful as a term at the moment because
19:11
what we need to understand is why is all
19:13
of this stuff happening around the world
19:15
why do you see erawan and Turkey why do
19:17
you see Victor Arbonne in Hungary why do
19:19
you see marine lepen in France why do
19:21
you see Donald Trump in the United
19:22
States all of the same
19:23
and the best way of making sense of that
19:26
I think is to use my understanding and
19:28
be understanding some of the economic
19:29
literature on populism because that
19:32
precisely brings out with very important
19:34
commonalities between people who also
19:36
have some important differences to each
19:37
other let’s go through some of the core
19:41
arguments of the book you talk and and
19:44
let’s sort of start with economics
19:48
versus immigration and we’ve talked
19:50
about this before one of the hardest
19:51
things I think to sort through is
19:54
whether this surge was caused by a
19:57
globalized economy economic distress the
20:01
decline of upward mobility particularly
20:03
here in the US or whether the driving
20:07
force even more than economics was a
20:10
fear of widespread immigration of
20:12
backlash against widespread immigration
20:15
on the side of the immigration the
20:17
primacy of immigration would be the idea
20:21
that some of these movements have shown
20:22
up in places like the Netherlands which
20:25
have fairly well distributed economic
20:27
growth relative to other countries but
20:32
I’d like you to sort of parse economics
20:35
versus immigration and maybe give people
20:38
a sense of some of what you talk about
20:40
as solutions to these dilemmas so first
20:44
of all in trying to understand why is
20:46
all of this happening at the moment I
20:48
took inspiration from a story that at
20:50
first has nothing to do with populism or
20:52
Donald Trump so it’s a nice little
20:53
respite told by Bertrand Russell he said
20:57
well once upon a time there was a
21:00
chicken on a farm and it led a very nice
21:03
life it was a kind of chicken we’d all
21:04
like to eat for dinner which is to say
21:06
that you know it’s got to run around
21:07
freely and do whatever it wanted um and
21:12
and but all the other animals on the
21:14
farm kept warning it and said be careful
21:16
one day the farmer is gonna come and
21:20
kill you I’m a chicken said what are you
21:22
talking about that farmers be nice to me
21:24
all of my life he’s always fed me and
21:27
muttered some encouraging words
21:28
why would things suddenly be so
21:30
different well Russell and his nice wit
21:33
says that eventually of course but
21:35
chicken
21:36
did learn but he was wrong the the
21:38
farmer came to ring with chicken snack
21:41
showing that more sophisticated views as
21:44
the uniformity of causation would have
21:45
been to a chicken’s benefit what does he
21:48
mean by that right while the most
21:50
sophisticated views of uniformity of
21:52
causation what what he meant is quite
21:53
simple that scope conditions on how the
21:55
social world works right as long as the
21:58
chicken was too thin to be taken to a
21:59
market the farmer had an incentive to
22:01
keep feeding it once it was big enough
22:03
to fetch a decent price how he behaved
22:07
was going to change now why is it that
22:10
liberal democracy has been incredibly
22:11
stable around the world for the last 50
22:13
or 60 years and now we start to see it
22:15
seemingly being less and less stable
22:17
well let’s look at the scope conditions
22:19
what was truthful is past 50 60 years
22:22
there is no longer true and it seems to
22:24
me would best three big things there and
22:26
we’re sometimes put in competition with
22:27
each other but all of the interesting
22:29
phenomena in human history have always
22:31
had more than one cause the world is not
22:33
mono causal right so the first is living
22:38
standards in the United States from 1945
22:40
to 1960 the living standards of the
22:43
average American doubled from 1960 to
22:46
1985 we doubled again since 1985 they’ve
22:50
been stagnant now that makes a real
22:53
difference about how people perceive
22:55
politics they used to say well you know
22:58
what um I don’t love politicians you
23:01
know his belt with his Washington DC
23:03
stuff you know it’s a little weird but
23:05
in the end they seem to be delivering
23:07
for me right they seem to be sticking to
23:09
their end of a deal so let’s give him
23:11
the benefit of a doubt now people are
23:14
saying I’m allowed to swear in this
23:17
bookstore yeah that’s where one since he
23:19
was a shot off my microphone um now
23:21
people are saying you know what I’ve
23:23
worked really hard all of my life I
23:24
don’t have much to show for it I think
23:26
my kids are gonna be worse off than me
23:27
let’s throw some against who won’t
23:29
see what sticks how bad can things get
23:30
how mile that is I know our country if
23:36
it weren’t for Trump would have gotten a
23:38
better reaction and now look the
23:41
counter-argument against this and this
23:43
has been reserved researched a lot in
23:45
the in the media and so on is to say oh
23:48
but it’s not necessarily true
23:50
people who voted for their own Trump
23:52
were much poorer than those who voted
23:53
for Hillary Clinton grant it but it’s a
23:56
little bit more complicated than that
23:58
that’s it’s really bad test of whether
24:00
the economic causes matter what’s
24:02
interesting is that not just in the
24:03
United States but in many parts in many
24:06
countries publicity doing very well
24:07
around the world you see a very clear
24:09
distinction between urban and
24:13
economically dynamic parts of a country
24:16
and others so in the United States
24:18
Donald Trump won over two-thirds of
24:20
American counties but something like
24:22
one-third of America’s GDP he did much
24:25
better in parts of a country where
24:28
there’s very little recent investment
24:29
where people are less educated even
24:32
where the share of jobs were the subject
24:34
to automation in the coming decades is
24:37
much higher because people there realize
24:40
I might still be doing fine but I have a
24:43
lot to fear from the future now my
24:47
second course has to do with with
24:50
culture and ethnicity and immigration
24:51
this is really stark in Europe where
24:54
most countries became stable democracies
24:57
at a time when there were more
24:59
homogeneous than it previous parts of
25:03
the history because of a tragic effects
25:04
of World War two and in which they had a
25:08
clear mono-ethnic monocultural
25:10
conception of who Rudy blocks when you
25:12
asked a German where I grew up an
25:15
Italian and a Swede in 1960 hue really
25:19
belongs to the country it would have
25:20
been obvious that it’s somebody who’s
25:21
descended genetically from the same set
25:24
of people but it certainly isn’t
25:25
somebody who’s brown or black somebody
25:27
who’s Muslim or Hindu now thankfully
25:30
that started to change over the last 50
25:32
or 60 years there has been a lot of
25:34
immigration and people have actually
25:36
started to adapt more liberal and
25:38
understandings of citizenship and of
25:40
belonging there’s also a strong reaction
25:43
against that and for either and for
25:45
Mirman condone that reaction and none of
25:48
us should I think is actually easy to
25:50
understand why that would be the case if
25:52
you say hey I may not be the richest guy
25:56
I may not have the best education you
25:58
know I may not have a most social
26:01
respect but at least I’m better than red
26:03
immigrant over there
26:04
right at least I have a high social
26:05
status with that well it now thankfully
26:07
has politicians who are immigrants or
26:10
children of immigrants you might go to
26:11
your to your work and your boss might be
26:14
an immigrant well the fact that some
26:16
people feel like they’ve lost something
26:18
there that some social standing has been
26:20
taken away actually isn’t too surprising
26:23
now the United States is both similar
26:25
and different it’s different because
26:27
we’ve always been a multi-ethnic society
26:29
there’s always been many different
26:30
ethnicities living here but it’s similar
26:33
in rep has always been a very strict
26:35
racial hierarchy which gave one set of
26:37
people big advantages and privileges
26:39
over others now again I think we would
26:41
do well to remember though we’ve
26:43
actually come a very long way in
26:44
overcoming that despite the obvious
26:47
ongoing injustice in our country it is a
26:50
much better place for minorities to live
26:52
than 20 or 40 or 60 years ago and a lot
26:56
of people have started to embrace the
26:59
idea of an equal multi-ethnic Society
27:01
but again there’s a lot of people have
27:03
something to lose from that and who are
27:04
rebelling against bet again I don’t
27:06
condone that but it shouldn’t surprise
27:07
us that that is going on alright so if
27:11
you have the anger and the basic
27:16
distrust of our politics because people
27:18
are feeling like my life is not getting
27:20
any better I’m afraid of a future
27:22
economically if that often takes a
27:24
cultural form of a backlash against
27:26
immigration a backlash against racial
27:27
equality when you add the third
27:30
ingredient social media
27:32
which makes it so much easier for people
27:35
to challenge a media consensus to
27:39
challenge the gatekeepers who used to
27:42
say what can be a part of our political
27:44
discourse and what can’t now
27:47
in some ways that’s a good thing it’s a
27:49
good thing in dictatorships because we
27:50
Democratic opposition now has a much
27:52
easier time telling a telling a
27:57
population with truth about corruption
27:59
about repression and so on it can be a
28:02
good thing in our country as well if you
28:04
think about we meet the V men’s platform
28:06
that the students at Parkland High in
28:09
Florida immediately gained after the
28:11
horrible mass shooting there and their
28:13
ability to make her voice is hurt and
28:15
engage engage the public in a push for
28:17
change on gun control but at the same
28:21
time it also obviously makes it easier
28:22
for hateful voices for people who want
28:25
to spread fake news safety here next to
28:27
common pizza that’s an obvious thing to
28:29
think about and for people who want to
28:32
organize radical political movements to
28:37
actually have a big voice in our
28:39
politics so to me it’s these free causes
28:41
coming together but help to explain not
28:45
to the rise of Donald Trump and the rise
28:46
of similar for Italian populist in so
28:48
many different parts of the world
28:50
how do people want to defend liberal
28:54
democracy not end up looking to lots of
28:58
others like they are simply defending an
29:01
establishment in the status quo and I
29:04
thought about this a lot during the say
29:07
German elections where I’m my politics
29:11
our Social Democratic but I kind of
29:13
found myself wanting Merkel to do
29:15
reasonably well I didn’t want her to
29:17
fall and in a sense there could be
29:19
nothing more status quo then rooting for
29:22
Merkel in Germany and that I think that
29:26
there’s a real danger here that those of
29:31
us who want to push back against the
29:34
dangers of democracy end up looking like
29:37
protectors of the establishment and the
29:39
ruling class how do you respond to that
29:42
what’s your sort of strategy and
29:44
approach on that today I absolutely
29:47
agree missus this is crucial so a 2016
29:50
election in my mind the United States
29:52
was a contest between a moderate
29:55
politics of a status quo and an Axman
29:57
politics of change well it turns out
30:00
that when those are the rules of
30:01
engagement the extremist parties of
30:03
change can win not necessarily because
30:06
most Americans are extremists
30:10
because they really won some promise of
30:13
a country that changes that actually
30:15
delivers more for them and so what we
30:18
need to do among people who are more
30:21
politically moderate is to offer the
30:24
vision of the real politics of change to
30:27
show how without embracing a populist
30:29
mind frame how without sacrificing the
30:33
rights of minorities sacrificing
30:34
varieties of immigrants and so on we can
30:36
actually promise people a real vision of
30:39
of a better society and to me the great
30:42
failings of Angela Merkel and the grand
30:45
coalition that is now in power again in
30:46
Germany is that they’re not using the
30:49
big parliamentary majority they had and
30:51
still to some degree have in order to do
30:54
that but they aren’t actually saying hey
30:56
we are in favor of globalization and
30:59
free trade and all of those good things
31:02
but we’re really going to fight to make
31:04
sure that rich individuals actually pay
31:06
the tax in Germany or the United States
31:07
but corporations actually pay a fair
31:10
amount of tax in these countries that we
31:14
make it much easier for productivity to
31:18
grow in our countries because that’s one
31:20
of the main drivers of middle-class
31:22
incomes by investing a ton more money in
31:25
education that we are actually making
31:30
sure that people don’t have to keep
31:34
spending more and more money on the most
31:36
essential goods from housing to
31:39
education to health care now in all of
31:41
these countries visa huge problems and
31:43
the establishment parties aren’t
31:45
actually fighting for that we’re not
31:47
actually saying here are some ways to
31:50
radically change the way we run things
31:53
the way that we have public policy in
31:55
order to ensure that we have a better
31:58
distribution of against from
32:00
globalization and by the way much more
32:02
productivity growth much more growth in
32:04
incomes as well without thereby you know
32:08
giving in to the puppets all of these
32:09
things are possible those ideas out some
32:12
of them and even particularly
32:14
far-fetched employing four or five times
32:17
more people at vis to look after people
32:20
who are hiding the money in tax havens
32:22
is a no-brainer
32:23
it’s really easy to do and it pays for
32:25
itself tenfold so why aren’t we doing it
32:29
if I would suspect if Hillary Clinton
32:32
were here or Martin Schultz of the SPD
32:34
were here they would both say that’s
32:37
pretty much what we were suggesting in
32:39
the campaign and yet no one noticed that
32:41
that’s what we were suggesting is that
32:43
would they be right or wrong or half
32:45
right they’d be half right at best so
32:48
when you look at the advert compaines I
32:50
don’t think but they have a radical
32:52
measures on on any of those things but
32:55
it’s also a matter of how you actually
32:57
talk about those things and salvers so I
think one of the failings to me over
Hillary Clinton campaign was that it
never actually set out a vision for
America it basically said he is a good
fix on this and he’s a good fix on this
and he has a good fix on this and he is
something that I’m giving this could be
something that I’m giving that group
it’s not saying here are the ways in
which we’re going to make America work
for everybody and make it fair to
everybody and hear the ways in which yes
some things are working but there’s also
lots of things but really aren’t working
instead the message was you know America
is already great I’m gonna disguise the
fact that I have two questions to ask by
turning my two questions into one
question with us with the semicolon and
then if people want to start lining up
please feel free I’d like you to talk
about young people because you
especially if you look at the United
States and you acknowledge this in the
33:53
focus especially if you look at the
33:54
United States Americans under 30 or
33:57
Americans under 45 really promise to be
34:00
the drivers for change in a I think
34:04
positive direction in our country I’ve
34:07
told my kids that when my generation is
34:09
gone you guys will make things fine
34:12
except I want to be around to see it so
34:14
there’s a kind of contradiction there
34:17
the and and yet you have some more more
34:21
worries about young people more in
34:22
Europe than here so I’d like you I’d
34:26
like you to talk about that and then
34:29
secondly I would like you to talk about
34:33
sort of in in hopeful terms do you
at the response to what you write about
in the book in Europe or in the United
States and see anything coming together
that might actually be successful in
pushing back against the war on liberal
democracy or are you still more in Akos
and/or a mood so so starting with with
young people I mean I think so so look
but the thing is are quite stark right I
mean I’ve alluded into a couple of times
may as well say my loud so you know you
ask people how important is it to you to
live in a democracy among older
Americans born in 1930s 1940s over
two-thirds say absolutely important
among Millennials born since 1980 less
than one-third – when you ask people
about whether they think army rule is a
good system of government and a lot of
these figures are in the book twenty
years ago one in 16 Americans said
that’s a good system of government now
one in sixty and among young at a fluent
Americans is actually going up from six
to 35 percent nearly a six-fold increase
the counter argument against this for
pushback when I get is oh but all of the
people who voted for Donald Trump were
old people so of a political
manifestation of this actually is is
much more hmong older people and younger
people now the first answer to that is
what I’m hearing here from the left
which is not true right actually there
was a lot of young people who did vote
for Donald Trump among white people
under the age of 30
48 percent voted for Donald Trump and 43
percent for Hillary Clinton which is
which is a very worrying thing the
second thing I would say is that Donald
Trump didn’t really try to appeal to
young people right I’m he’s himself a
very you know an old guy and that’s just
not what his campaign was was designed
to do now you could easily get forms of
a proton populism where they’re on the
right where there’s clearly a quite
vibrant young or dried scene and so on
or for that matter on on on the left the
does try to tap into the deep systemic
discontent with democracy
that you see among a lot of young P and
the third point is well go and look at
Europe and you see with young people are
some of the strongest supporters of
populist movements on both the left and
the right in the French presidential
elections in the first round over 50% of
young people over 50 percent of young
people voted for Ivor marine lepen the
far-right populist all jean-luc
mélenchon the far left populist in Italy
37:18
you see that not only did nearly 2/3 of
37:22
your overall Italian electorate go for
37:24
iowa’s Silvio Berlusconi over far-right
37:26
league or the the five star movement
37:30
which has strong connections to Russia
37:32
and has run by people who believe in
37:34
9/11 was an inside job but the only
37:36
demographic among which there was less
37:39
vacays was the oldest people among young
37:41
people something like 80% verge for his
37:43
parties so so absolutely this fred is
37:46
among young people as well as all of you
37:49
now to a second question of how well are
37:51
we standing up against this I think
37:56
that’s roughly three scenarios for
37:57
what’s going to happen in the next years
37:59
the United States the first is that
38:03
Donald Trump does such a terrible job
38:06
and ends up being repudiated so broadly
38:11
losses so disastrously in the midterms
38:13
you know wins one and a half states in
38:16
2020 there’s a real moment of coming
38:20
together and a real recognition of how
38:22
dangerous it is for people to to flower
38:26
most basic rules of our political system
38:27
and not as a recognition that this
38:29
particular guy failed but that similar
38:32
kinds of movements are all dangerous
38:34
nothing that’s possible but I I’m not
38:37
holding my breath foot
38:39
the second scenario is V inverse it is
38:43
that like Edwin has done in Turkey like
38:47
Auburn is succeeding in doing and hungry
38:49
like it looks like the Polish government
38:51
may be succeeding and doing in Poland
38:54
Donald Trump actually manages to expand
38:56
his base to deliver for some of his core
38:58
constituency to undermine independence
39:03
titude sly for the pattern of justice
39:05
and and the FBI to corrupt the process
39:10
of elections more and more and that he
39:12
essentially becomes a form of dictator
39:15
of a course over the next six or eight
39:16
years now again I think that’s possible
39:20
but in part because Donald Trump has
39:23
actually been very incompetent at
39:24
following the PlayBook of a vote for a
39:27
town leaders around the world in part
39:29
because he hasn’t been very good to
39:30
delivering for his base in part because
39:32
he’s not very strategic in his attacks
39:34
on institutions but it’s always obvious
39:35
but it’s naked self-interest in part
39:38
because even his rhetoric always seems
39:40
to be a little bit more about himself
39:41
and about setting up that essential
39:44
contra contours putting himself and the
39:47
people and so on I’m hopeful that’s not
39:50
going to happen and in part because
39:51
where’s the great resistance movements
39:52
of Americans actually heating and taking
39:55
seriously those people who are once
39:57
called casandra’s and going out to to
40:00
resist Donald Trump and all kinds of
40:02
concrete ways my big fear now when I
40:04
talk about this in the book is the third
40:07
scenario what I would call the Roman
40:09
scenario but which I had in mind the
40:11
late Roman Republic but given the
40:14
elections a week ago I guess I’m a owes
40:16
to be talking about Rome today which is
40:18
that you have a populist figure like the
40:22
kuraki in Rome were like Sabha
40:23
Berlusconi in Italy for that matter that
40:26
exploits deep discontent of a political
40:28
system and comes to a political stage
40:31
crew creates a huge constitutional
40:33
crisis and after a bunch of years is
40:36
thrown out of a system again Chimaera’s
40:38
Krakow’s was killed Silvio Berlusconi
40:41
ended up resigning in disgrace in 2011
40:46
but because the underlying reasons for
40:49
this discontent aren’t being tackled
40:51
because we’re not doing a good enough
40:52
job of making sure that ordinary people
40:54
actually get an improvement of a living
40:56
status because we’re not creating an
40:57
inclusive patriotism but emphasizes what
40:59
unites us across racial and religious
41:02
lines rather than what what divides us
41:04
um you you have this similar kind of
41:07
energy coming back six years later like
41:11
now in Italy ten years later has
41:13
happened with with Jewish crocuses
41:16
younger brother and so over the course
41:18
of perhaps 20 perhaps 40 perhaps 60
41:21
years you slowly get such an erosion of
41:25
a political system that you wind up that
41:28
to me is the biggest fear that this is
41:30
not a matter of dealing with it in 2020
41:32
of dealing with in 2018 it’s something
41:35
that we’re gonna be fighting not just
41:36
for the rest of your lifetime each day
41:38
but for the rest of the lifetime of a
41:40
few young people in this crowd as well
41:41
[Laughter]
41:52
but we go but that doesn’t mean you can
41:54
look it up on Google and not buy the
41:55
book
41:58
can you introduce yourselves when you
41:59
ask a question is the mic working yes
42:02
okay yes I’m Jeremiah reamer this is not
42:06
a plan DJ asked me to ask a provocative
42:09
question earlier but but I just thought
42:11
it up my my question has to do with you
42:16
have a a term I’m not completely
42:19
satisfied with to talk about the the
42:23
opposite of the Democratic populist you
42:27
call them I think is it undemocratic
42:29
liberals and I guess my question goes to
42:32
whether they’re really undemocratic or
42:35
incapable of making a democratic
42:37
connection because I actually think a
42:38
lot of these people want to be
42:40
democratic but they’re unable to make a
42:43
kind of a connection to electoral
42:45
politics and to the kind of successful
42:48
model where they we’re sort of their
42:53
expertise their professional knowledge
42:56
was consulted and valued and
42:59
big tent party political leaders were
43:01
able to use that but I think they want
43:04
to be democratic you know there’s a
43:07
tendency to view technocrats is just bad
43:09
but I think there are good Technic rats
43:11
and bad techno I think Mario Draghi is
43:13
kind of a good technocratic along with
43:15
Janet Yellen and Ben Bernanke they did
43:17
some good things so my question to you
43:20
is and by the way this is related to
43:23
another observation I made about the
43:25
Trump reaction to Trump among the most
43:28
aggrieved people about the Trump
43:30
election are people who are professional
43:34
civil servants who feel they have
43:36
professional expertise it’s not just the
43:37
fact that they’re cosmopolitan hipsters
43:39
living in by coastal cities they also
43:41
feel their professional knowledge useful
43:44
for government is being completely
43:46
ignored how can those people how do you
43:49
think the good technic ratso to speak if
43:51
you agree with my my term can can remake
43:55
a connection I mean obviously yeah yeah
43:58
so yeah go ahead yes 14 being so I think
44:08
the short answer is very termos and
44:11
democratic liberal robin anti-democratic
44:12
liberals so in essence I agree but just
44:15
just to explain that time a little bit
44:17
to people who haven’t read the book so
44:18
one of the arguments I make is that you
44:20
know we need to think of our pokel
44:22
system as having these two elements
44:23
liberal democracy the liberal has
44:25
nothing to do with liberal and
44:26
conservative it’s not you know brock
44:28
obama as george w bush it is a
44:31
commitment to invent rights to to the
44:35
rights of minorities to the rule of law
44:37
to the separation of powers and amah
44:39
cracy in my mind when becomes actually
44:41
translating popular views into public
44:43
policies unless we’re actually managing
44:45
to make sure that our political system
44:46
is responsive to what people want it
44:49
doesn’t seem to me very democratic now
44:51
what i think is happening in the world
44:53
is two things on the one side for a long
44:56
time we’ve had a system of rights
44:58
without terribly much democracy of a
45:00
undemocratic liberalism which is to say
45:02
a system in which yes we do a reasonably
45:05
good job at protecting individual rights
45:07
and minority rights and the separation
45:10
of powers but we’re not doing a great
45:12
job
45:13
often shirring that we’re actually
45:15
translating what people think into
45:17
policy and that’s the case because of a
45:19
huge role of money in politics it was a
45:21
revolving door between lobbyists and
45:22
legislators yes because of a certain
45:27
elite class but doesn’t have much
45:29
circulation of ordinary people but also
45:32
because a lot of bureaucratic and
45:34
technical institutions that do do a
45:35
great job take lots of issues out of
45:38
democratic contestation so that lots of
45:40
decisions are made by the Supreme Court
45:43
by an independent central bank and by
45:45
international organizations are
45:46
precluded from politics through trade
45:49
treaties and you take all of those
45:51
things together and it’s not surprising
45:52
when lots of people say no between
45:55
listening to me right now we need to
45:58
understand that to understand part of a
46:00
populist instinct which is the inverse
46:02
it’s not rise for democracy it’s
46:04
democracy vaad rights it’s saying we are
46:07
gonna speak for a majority and actually
46:09
put forward all of the politically
46:11
incorrect ideas that people actually
46:12
like now often unfortunate side is
46:15
really our popular when you look in
46:16
Switzerland whoever was a referendum as
46:19
a result of which the Swiss Constitution
46:21
now reads I quote there’s freedom of
46:24
religion in Switzerland the building of
46:27
minarets is forbidden she doesn’t make
46:30
much sense that shows that actually a
46:33
majority of Swiss people did want to
46:35
restrict the rights of a Muslim minority
46:37
well now the problem with that is that
46:39
eventually a liberal democracy rights
46:41
democracy overrides degenerates into
46:44
straight for dictatorship because once
46:46
you’ve taken away separation of powers
46:47
once you have put your own people in the
46:50
courts in the electoral commission as
46:52
this happened in Hungary in the media
46:53
the position along it has a real chance
46:56
of getting rid of so you know between
47:01
those two evils I think I know which one
47:02
I would pick but in order to deal with
47:06
the underlying drivers of his populist
47:07
anger we need to find ways to make our
47:10
political system more responsive to what
47:13
people want and even for a lot of
47:14
technocratic institutions do a great job
47:16
I think we need to recognize that they
47:18
have problematic aspects to them well
47:22
you kind of
47:23
answer some of the questions I have but
47:25
let me just make this statement and let
47:28
you comment the Democratic state has to
47:32
rein in the forces that are trying to
47:34
destroy it
47:35
those are very various like the Romani
47:41
corrupt press the preventing people from
47:44
voting not educating them to the point
47:48
that they vote for the man wants to be
47:52
dictator if we don’t do that we have to
47:56
be to watch be watchful canter and we
48:00
know what happened in Germany what
48:03
happened in other kinds of each to me
48:05
they are not becoming democracies they
48:08
are losing their freedom and and people
48:12
just let that happen you know and if we
48:15
don’t we are not alert what is happening
48:17
why do we believe what we hear in some
48:21
radio or television station why is that
48:24
allowed to happen
48:25
lying everyday to people so one of the
48:30
things what I think is really important
48:31
is to actually you know educate people
48:33
about the values of our political system
48:35
and how our political system works one
48:38
of the reasons why there’s more and more
48:41
information online is because the rise
48:43
of the Internet and of social media and
48:44
so on but I think it goes beyond just
48:47
the existence of Facebook and Twitter
48:49
things can spread because people don’t
48:51
trust the government and we don’t trust
48:52
the government because a we don’t really
48:55
know how it works because we barely
48:56
teach civics anymore in high schools
48:58
right and be because even insofar as we
49:02
do you know how it works they only see
49:04
the negative things in our political
49:06
system this is something that I say that
49:10
could have it where I teach and my
49:11
faculty colleagues aren’t too pleased
49:12
with me for it
49:13
which is that we need to actually tell
49:16
people what’s good about our political
49:17
system as well now that doesn’t mean
49:19
that we should be uncritical doesn’t
49:21
mean but we shouldn’t also be upfront
49:23
about the shortcomings of our political
49:25
system and ways in which people continue
49:28
to suffer injustice and discrimination
49:30
but if we only talk about those things
49:32
and never say about explain how it what
49:36
it is but
49:37
makes our political system and why it is
49:38
but living related states for all of its
49:40
problems it’s still a lot better than
49:41
living in Russia or Iran or China or
49:45
Venezuela then we shouldn’t be surprised
49:48
that people are willing to throw all of
49:50
that away and so I think you know one of
49:53
the things but we can all do with our
49:56
[Music]
49:58
children with our siblings with our
50:00
parents with if you’re a teacher of your
50:02
students if you’re a writer a journalist
50:04
with in your articles is to actually
50:08
recommit people to those political
50:11
values from Plato to our startled and
50:13
from whose thought to the founding
50:15
fathers all of the great thinkers about
50:18
self-government knew how crucial it is
50:20
to transmit our political values from
50:22
one generation to the next and we might
50:24
have paid a little bit of lip service to
50:25
that in the last 30 40 years who stopped
50:28
taking it seriously and that’s a big
50:29
problem I’ve been thinking that the last
50:32
14 months are brought to you by Joni
50:33
Mitchell you don’t know what you got
50:36
till it’s gone and could I bring in I
50:38
could the folks at the store tell me
50:41
when we should shut down a called a
50:43
Dogma yah
50:45
actually I will take two more questions
50:47
and then was that all we have yeah sorry
50:54
actually can I amend that if people are
50:57
briefed let me just take four questions
51:00
fast all at once and then Yasha can give
51:03
a very compact answers because he wants
51:06
to sell books so four quick thank you
51:09
my name is Don greenhouse from the
51:12
Chautauqua Institution in Chautauqua New
51:15
York where EJ has lectured a number of
51:18
times when we invite you all to come and
51:21
hear some discussions just like this
51:23
very quickly I can’t remember her name
51:26
an author recent book called strangers
51:30
in their own land a hotel and she uses a
51:33
metaphor so I’d like to you to think
51:35
about it in terms of micro rather than
51:38
macro sense of these we’re all lined up
51:41
back from the pot of gold and we’re all
51:44
standing quietly in line and our liberal
51:47
democracy keeps bringing people into
51:50
the line in front of us the blacks the
51:53
gays etc etc and this is causing this
51:57
angst and populism I wondered if you
52:00
might comment
52:01
hold that thought thank you sir Stewart
52:04
Schulz I’ll try to make this really
52:06
quick and condense it but you’ve
52:08
identified populism you know there’s
52:11
lack of agency this lack of Economic
52:14
Opportunity threat to cultural identity
52:16
as the major threats of liberal
52:17
democracy and I can’t speak to the
52:20
international situation but at least
52:21
domestically Trump ran on all those
52:24
things but his actual administration has
52:26
nothing to do with any of that message
52:28
it has to do with advancing corporate
52:31
interests and it’s it seems to me that
52:33
the the real threat to liberal democracy
52:35
is not in these issues which are real
52:39
but in the forces that use those issues
52:43
to advance agendas that are more
52:45
dangerous to liberal democracy I mean
52:47
what’s the role in capital in all of
52:49
this so it’s clear that Donald Trump is
52:53
a symptom of fraud or underlying causes
52:55
as he undermines institutions are we
52:58
doing a good enough job to deal with the
53:01
underlying causes or are we just saying
53:03
he’s undermined this institution there
53:05
for Donald Trump’s about sorry for the
53:10
rest yeah my name is avery James I’m a
53:15
sophomore at American University quick
53:17
question you mentioned how we need and
53:19
you actually end up at new york times on
53:20
this as well this new nationalism this
53:22
new patriotism I would just ask how is
53:24
that in any way unique from what Marco
53:25
Rubio won in 2013 how was that in any
53:27
way unique from what Jeb Bush who was
53:28
bankrolled by the Republican Party
53:30
basically Mitt Romney but he’s fluent in
53:32
Spanish this time I mean how is that any
53:33
different from what the people who had
53:35
the power to make decisions the
53:36
Republican Party wanted and ended up
53:38
with what we have I mean that how is it
53:40
non-unique right yeah that’s question I
53:41
really have is how does that change the
53:43
current trend Thanks all right
53:46
I might need some some reminders but but
53:49
I’ll try and get through these four
53:50
questions quickly and then say something
53:51
inspiring at the end there we go that’s
53:53
my task so yes so please that’s so so
54:02
the cutting in line metaphor I think
54:04
it’s
54:04
quite powerful and and and and but
54:06
that’s how a lot of people think about
54:07
it right that that they’ve been they’re
54:10
frustrated we’re not getting what we
54:12
want we’ve been promised a pot of gold
54:13
they’re still sounding a line for it and
54:15
now why are the people doing well like
54:17
for me that precisely explains the
54:19
lunacy of pretending that cultural
54:22
factors and economic factors ah it’s
54:26
either one of y’all this is the way in
54:28
which it’s connected but if people feel
54:30
like I’m getting a fair shake and I I’m
54:33
a lot wealthier than my parents wear and
54:35
my kids are gonna do better than me I
54:36
know what that guy over there is doing
54:39
fine too good for him you know he’s not
54:41
like me he’s an immigrant or he’s
54:42
whatever right but but I’m doing fine
54:45
nice what he’s doing fine too when
54:47
people start to feel you know what I’ve
54:50
been taking advantage of all my life and
54:51
politicians are we delivering for me and
54:53
my community is falling apart in all
54:54
kinds of ways and there’s an opioid
54:57
epidemic and and our incomes are
54:58
stagnating and because union jobs are
55:00
gone and now why is that guy over there
55:02
doing fine it’s easy to scapegoat and
55:05
blame right and so one of the ways of
55:07
dealing with hat is to make sure that we
55:09
actually deliver on the American dream
55:11
for people in a way that that we
55:13
promised um on inclusive patriotism I
55:17
mean I think that there is a deep store
55:19
of inclusive patriotism in in American
55:22
political history
55:23
um I think often people didn’t
55:26
necessarily act on that so you know in
55:28
the end though I agree with some what
55:30
Republicans had perfectly decent metric
55:32
around it Muslim weren’t willing to
55:34
actually vote in those ways and and and
55:37
and ensure that we take those issues on
55:39
the table through some kind of
55:40
comprehensive deal where we come to a
55:42
decision about that I also think that
55:45
there is a little bit of resistance to
55:47
it on on parts of left-right so what we
55:50
have at the moment is a riot politically
55:54
who says let’s talk about nationalism
55:55
over time but let’s talk about it in
55:58
exclusive ways basically the kind of
56:00
form of white nationalism of which I
56:01
would argue our current president is
56:03
guilty but then on the Left I think best
56:06
instinct but I know quite well because I
56:07
grew up with it wishes to say hey
56:10
nationalism can be so destructive and it
56:12
was so destructive in 20th century why
56:15
don’t we actually move beyond it
56:18
leave nationalism behind in the century
56:20
which is so cruelly shaped and that you
56:25
know allows us to be Cosmopolitan’s it
56:26
allows us to not have any strong
56:28
collective identity whatever that’s one
56:30
kind of approach the other approach is
56:32
to say we’re going to celebrate every
56:33
form of collective identity at the
56:35
sub-national level and religious group
56:38
every ethnic group every sexual root and
56:40
so on but we’re not going to celebrate
56:42
the nation because a nation is bad and
56:45
has this very bad history and the other
56:47
things are under now I agree that we
56:49
need to defend every group from attack
56:52
and discrimination that is ongoing but I
56:55
also think that the nation can actually
56:57
be a great stew of solidarity but it can
56:59
be precisely the thing but allows you to
57:01
see why you should care about somebody
57:03
who doesn’t have the same skillet
57:05
doesn’t have skin color doesn’t have the
57:06
same religion and so on and we’re
57:08
emphasizing that an inclusive manner is
57:10
a way to build social solidarity and
57:13
fight discrimination rather than a way
57:15
to advance so to meet nationalism as a
57:18
half domesticated animal and instead of
57:20
leaving it on its own to be stoked and
57:22
prodded by the worst kind of people I
57:24
think though we need to domesticate one
57:26
nice way of doing that in a political
57:28
speech and I have many disagreements
57:30
with him and other things is what Amanda
57:33
McConnell said in Marseille on the
57:35
campaign trail he said when looking to
57:38
his audience I see people from Mali in
57:40
the Ivory Coast and and Algeria and
57:43
Italy in Poland who what do I see I see
57:46
the people of Marseille what do I see I
57:48
see the people of France look here
57:50
ladies and gentlemen of horn as you know
57:51
the far-right party of my underpin this
57:54
is what it looks like to be proud to be
57:56
French that to me is a nationalism that
57:58
actually makes sense and and having
58:00
parts of right could fight for it most
58:02
strongly living parts of a life could
58:03
also fight for it more strongly there’s
58:06
two questions but I’m missing here
58:11
and one one alright so um okay so the
58:20
question about corporation look I mean I
58:21
think that
58:24
liberal democracy works when democracy
58:29
in capitalism and balance I don’t think
58:31
the answer is to abolish capitalism
58:33
because there is no democratic country
58:36
but it has ever existed on the face of
58:38
the earth without capitalism and while I
58:41
get right-wing critiques of
58:43
globalization because we standard of
58:45
living of steel workers in Michigan but
58:48
he hasn’t improved that much over the
58:49
last thirty years and most because of
58:50
our political choices Robin makes
58:52
globalization but at least I get it I
58:53
don’t really understand certain forms of
58:56
left-wing critique of globalization
58:58
because if you actually say that you
59:00
care about the well-being of poor people
59:02
in the world and you look at the fact
59:04
for two billion people have been lifted
59:06
out of dire poverty in India and China
59:07
over the course of the last twenty or
59:10
thirty years people didn’t have
59:11
electricity you didn’t have food to eat
59:13
we didn’t have medication who now leads
59:16
middle-class lives I think we need to
59:19
recognize what all some positively power
59:21
it has but we need to also make sure
59:24
that we actually use those fruits in
59:27
order to deliver for ordinary people
59:30
now some kindness have done much better
59:32
than this than other countries and it’s
59:34
not because the more or less capitalists
59:35
it’s because we’ve pursued policies but
59:37
I actually directed to helping ordinary
59:40
people and that’s in part because money
59:43
had much less of a hold on their
59:45
politics when it does in our culture so
59:47
this is not rocket science it’s solvable
59:49
but we need to fight to solve it it’s
59:52
going to be hard to solve it
59:56
I’m gonna end with you know I’m
60:00
sometimes told that when I talk or you
60:05
know when people read my articles but it
60:06
can be a little depressing so so thanks
60:10
for coming out to get depressed on a
60:12
Sunday afternoon with lovely sunny
60:14
weather but but I actually genuinely
60:16
think and I think your book
60:19
One Nation are trumped prints without
60:20
really beautifully as well EJ but this
60:22
is a moment to be inspired the spine
60:25
will be ugly this now apologies when I
60:27
grew up politically when I came away
60:29
pull it came of age politically it
60:32
seemed like what we would do wouldn’t
60:33
matter that much because yes there’s
60:36
some policies were better and some
60:37
policies there were worse or some
60:39
ongoing discrimination and injustice but
60:41
in the end we sort of knew what the
60:43
world was gonna look like 30 or 35 years
60:45
from now right now we don’t know that
60:48
and it’s up to how we act to ensure how
60:52
that’s going to look so yes that’s scary
60:54
and yes it’s easy to get depressed by
60:56
that but it’s also easy to get inspired
60:58
by that because it means where we can
60:59
actually act um the best picture image
61:03
for this in my mind comes from our
61:04
mizar’s
61:05
who says has a huge fire burning and
61:08
each of us only has a little glass of
61:10
water in the hand and and it can seem
61:13
hopeless if I go to the water and I dump
61:16
my little glass of water on it on the
61:17
fire that’s not going to change anything
61:19
the fire is far too big well but thanks
61:22
for coming out everybody there’s a lot
61:23
of people in this room and if each of us
61:26
takes our glass of water and I’m set on
61:28
fire then together we might just be able
61:29
to extinguish it now the way to do that
61:32
is to fight for real change in our
61:35
system not just to defeat Donald Trump
61:36
it’s to actually make sure that our
61:39
political system delivers forward many
61:40
people again is to make sure that people
61:41
see what’s valuable in our political
61:43
system again and if you agree with some
61:45
of my descriptions and diagnosis today
61:48
you’ll have an idea of what you can go
61:50
and do at home if you disagree when you
61:52
have your own ideas but but the
61:55
important thing is that unlike people in
61:58
Turkey and like people in Russia and
62:00
like people in Venezuela we still have a
62:02
freedom to go and fight and organize and
62:04
mobilize politically and argue and so I
62:07
think it’s our duty to do that
62:09
Inuyasha for Congress pack will be
62:12
collecting signatures up here I want to
62:21
read just the last words of the book
62:24
with what Yasha said he said nobody can
62:27
promise us a happy end but those of us
62:29
who truly care about our values and our
62:31
institutions are determined to fight for
62:34
our convictions without regard for the
62:37
consequences though the fruits of our
62:39
labor may remain uncertain we will do
62:41
what we can to save liberal democracy
62:44
thank you all for coming out and yes we
62:46
will sign the bus
62:58
you