« Freakonomics Radio

290. He’s One of the Most Famous Political Operatives in America. America Just Doesn’t Know It Yet.

2017-06-08 | 🔗
Steve Hilton was the man behind David Cameron's push to remake British politics. Things didn't work out so well there. Now he's trying to launch a new political revolution – from sunny California.
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
This podcast dynamically inserts audio advertisements of varying lengths for each download. As a result, the transcription time indexes may be inaccurate.
If you'd like to listen to free economic radio without ads the place to do that is sticker premium five dollars a month and you can get a free month trial by going to stick your premium dot com and use a promo code freak. You also get access to all our bonus. Episodes and you'll be supporting our show to that sticker: premium, dot, com, promo code, greek thanks, hey they're, Stephen Donor, a brand new episode will start in a minute, but first, as you know, for economics, radio listeners are a big part of frequent mix radio. While our story ideas come from you guys like this one, dear freakin, now makes my name is solar now, and I was wondering why sugar isn't considered a drug even though its addictive and stimulates the brain, and this one, certainly in the Milwaukee area, for the past few years there have been reports of. Islands always coming up in the news that education locations,
other way. You guys are involved beside sending US ideas, you send us money, our producing partner, w and my sea is a public radio station. Whose business model relies on listener support? You can do your part at Freakonomics, dot, com donate or by texting. The word freak two hundred and sixty nine eight hundred and sixty six, the best kind of listener support is, when you become a sustaining member, that is, you make a regular monthly. Don't the average member gives seven dollars a month. It's too steep is it in return. You'll get some for economics, radio, swag,
and we will keep you in the loop of their newsletter even better right now, a generous partner of w and my sees the Tallow foundation has issued a challenge. If five hundred for economics, radio listeners sign up by June thirtieth to become members, it just seven dollars a month, the Tao Foundation will contribute an extra twenty five thousand dollars so make it rain. Shall we again go to free economic dot com slashed, donate for text? The word freak to six. Ninety six. Six! You right now await right. Ok, thanks today, unfair dynamics, radio, the story of a man whose quite famous in his native England, stave Hilton you ve, talked about democracy. Malfunctioning arose from humble immigrant beginnings to join the elite for actually met these fancy people
who became close friends with and ultimately senior adviser to. Prime Minister David Cameron are basically was responsible for the implementation of our domestic policy reform programme, a man who became disillusioned with his position. What typically happens in government is the exact opposite of how things should work, who became disillusioned with his boss, and we wanted to make this speak, and he always a great yes good eye they will do it. Would he never made that speak and who, after two years and ten Downing Street, left his job? Looking back on it that's cause? I wouldn't do my job properly. He decamped to California with his family, and I'm really have anything plan for my next move, but now he's found it new political mission. We want to end the way that big money donors dominate politics. It's a mission that includes a new tv talk, show I'd love to have Bernie Sanders untold trunk together. How amazing, without me,
It's the story of a man who cited against his old friend and boss in the biggest vote of all where we haven't been in touch since the brakes evoked soda death. I think there's not much to say beyond that, a man whose life has regularly intersected with unwanted attention. Yeah you get getting very daily mail. At this point, I think that I'm not sure this is the tone of the conversation that we should be having Let's have it anyway, Steve help the most famous political operative in America that no one in America knows about not yet at least I'm happy, from W and Y see studios. This is freakin comics radio broadcasts that explores the hidden side of everything. Here's your host Stephen Dogma
when David Cameron became Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. In two thousand ten, his administration adopted two primary missions: number one drag Britain out of the worst economic, ditch since the great depression and number to change what his conservative party and really all of government change, what stood for, especially in its interactions with actual people. The fiscal mission was largely the purview of George Osborne Cameron's chancellor of the exchequer, and it was Steve Hilton, an icon of classic former admin who steered mission number two golden essentially wanted to decentralize central government from within central government. Some of his wishes were in line with what Americans think of as conservatism fewer regulations and top down government directives. Reforming
affair in privatizing some public services, but on social issues and things like energy and the environment. Hilton, like David Cameron, was a progressive. The implicit promise, smarter, smaller government with cleaner, greener and kinder results are very you can have it all package, alas, much of Britain's having none of it either within Whitehall or beyond. The Cameroon administration had its share of victories, but it was seen as veering between new age, spin, doctoring and old fashioned government tone deafness in the press. Steve Hilton took a lot of the heat he was portrayed as Rasputin's and true believer in lost causes. After just two years in office, he took what Downing Street called a one year sabbatical, but it came permanent peace in the economist lamented his departure. It praise children's efforts to quote open up Britain's napoleonic state to people power
I found it massively intensely frustrating most of the time, and this is where I am when I reflect on it. I think that you know. Most of that was my fault in the sense that I approached it. In exactly the wrong way to understand what Hilton now considers the right way, we should start at the beginning. Yet so my parents, a Hungarian, my father at you who passed away many many years ago, but he was actually mentioning about him, was he was the I'll keep it for the Hungarian National ICE will know. Yes, he was a big sports are in Hungary he met, my mum actually in the UK, but they split up, and my stepfather is also hungarian, so my whole family background and year named for your step. Father, your father Hilton, comes from her check as it her kid check. Yes, very good research. You ve got going on that. Yes, we try but tat, but that's your biological father's name, your step.
I'm just curious eyes: biological Father's name in the main they met a made easier to say by picking Hilton, and I understand it, a pocketful that the name was chosen for the first time tell that they stated at yes, they didn't really. Yes, that's not true, I think that could involve so. You grew up in London area than you over the phone Is that really? I grew up in a chunk of bright and on the South coast of England. Him ok, so said, talk about growing up there and then you're schooling understand you did very Oh at an earlier level, one a scholarship to very good school yachts, an amazing school, logical Christ, hospital, it's a charity and most of the kids that don't pay any fees that is or charitable foundation and, in fact, are selected on the basis of some kind of social needs. So from inner city areas of various kinds of. Actually it's really weird institution, because it's a boarding school in the middle of the english countryside as far removed as you can imagine from the inner city. And yet it's going credible
Incredibly diverse, kids, you know from the different in a backgrounds and races and colors old is mixing other wearing very weird uniform that dates back to the sixteenth century. It just totally bizarre. You went on to Oxford, which lets say was probably a little bit less diverse, but I tell you what was diverse for me about it was tat. I met rich people for the first time and I was really interesting at Oxford, Hilton enrolled in the famous PPP programme, philosophy, politics and economics, the foundation of many political careers. Indeed, future conservative party heavyweights David Cameron, an Boris Johnson, where there are few years ahead of Hilton, but he didn't meet them their here's. How Hilton got involved in the conservative party one summer during university, he had such a boring job shuffling round insurance files that he applied for
print job. He saw advertised on television in the UK. You don't have political advertising. Have these needs good party political broadcasts with a political body, get free air time on the main channels, erosion of catching one and at the end there was the very posh guy who is the chairman of the conservative party? Urge you remember him saying at the end, if we want to help to conserve body right too. You Peter Brook, I've really remember me this was being about. Thirty is right to me Peter brokered conservatives and drove him. I thought you know what they have some interesting jobs. When that's how I go into that, it was completely accidental icy. So this was the conservative central office. It's called isn't right here. I think they now call it something as conservative headquarters awaits the party headquarters. Ok, so you basically land this job via the equivalent of what we would think of yours, like advertisements on a macbook rate in their job. You me David Cameron, the future.
Prime minister in your future colleagues boss and your future wife, Rachel Whetstone, that rape the up and then there would be many many entanglements among them. The fact that, you and Rachel eventually would become godfather to his in his wife's first child who tragically died very young David Cameron would become godfather one of your children. If I have it right as it right here and there are other in governments along the way, including before you were married, that your future wife had an affair with David Cameron Father in law? I'm getting this rate is well yeah. You get getting very daily mail at this point,
yeah yeah. I think I'm not sure this is that the tone of the conversation that we should be having now she comes from what sounds to be an interesting family. Her parents were involved in politics. I understand that to Milton Friedman and if a high act would have dinner at her parents home and enough. That's true, but I'm curious to know a little bit more about her background. I think that is true: you're hurt her grandfather. Who of frozen can be assured beginning this wrong, but I think this is, I think, the stories that he was a air force pile in the Second World WAR and came back and analyse it was a business, but I think he was the person that brought sort of industrialized chicken farming to the UK, something like that. After having seen in America, interesting and you know, keep chickens in your back, don't you, although you ve, industrialized the chicken press, a very happy
not exactly but the, and he I think this is what happened. He read high tax payments, but the road to serve them and was inspired by it, and that book argues that the basically that the measures that were undertaken to win the war, the kind of centralisation of the economy and in the growth of government would inexorably led to the enslave and of society, and that the growth of of big government had to be checked. So did Rachel grow up and is not yet ready. He what he went to see. I who, at that time, I think, was teaching it s at the Alessi, long school of economics and said I read your book, I think, is great. I wanna help put these ideas into practice. I'm gonna run for parliament as a conserve them p and high except to him. If you really want to change things, don't do that because the first thing you have to win the battle of ideas, so don't go into parliament,
the better use of your time and money and if it would be to set up a think tank. So that's exactly what he did and so Rachel's grandfather set up the Institute of Economic affairs, which became the kind of power house, think tank for free market thinking in the UK and naturally around the world, and really intubated lowered the eye is that then Margaret Thatcher adopted and implemented as Prime minister, even though Hilton is talking here about his wife's grandfather, he could be talking about himself. He has come to believe that industrialization, an institutional ism, especially as a intersect with government, are essentially a drag on. Mankind. You recently wrote a book about this is called more human. We have designed and built a world that is inhuman. He writes in governments the world over political leaders preside, frustrated and impotent over vast bureaucratic systems that routine
We disappoint and leave citizens enraged at they can't control what affects their lives. Hutton complains that our food or education or health care are quote, provided by anonymous distant industrialized machines. Now, how did he come to hold these views? A straight out of college? I worked at the conservative party, but I was just a couple of years and then I left and worked it out agency searching sought. You wear it, amongst other things, a lot business,
physically and also did a lot of elections and and kind of public advocacy campaigns around the world, including an anti racism campaign in the UK? That then gave me the idea for my next move, which was to start a company called good business, which was a corporate responsibility, consulting firm that lasted another seven or eight years, and there we worked for some, the biggest companies in the world, trying to advise them on how to improve the social and environmental impact and that intersection between business and social and community issues and environmental issues. I think that really informed a lot of what I then tried to bring to the project of modernizing the british conservative party. Hilton re entry into conservative politics came in two thousand five. He wanted to run for parliament but lost
in the selection process. He was, however, offered a job by his old friend, David Cameron, known as late thirties Cameron was a member of parliament with designs on being elected leader of the conservative party, and we ran this really great insurgent campaign where his body was based on on his character, his optimism and sense that you could put together a positive account of war. Conservatism or to represent in the modern age, really understanding the problems of today but applying conserve resolutions, Cameron, one that contest and, of course, the larger one five years later to serve as Prime Minister Hilton with central to these victories any became, perhaps even more central, once Cameron moved into Downing Street You personally Steve Hilton became known at least in the media, as a figure it's really not now, not not so
uncommon in american politics as well, but maybe more pronounced. You were considered brilliant occasion, They devious plenty of enemies. You spoke your mind you. You did not stand on protocol. You liked her, not wear shoes. You liked it not dress up the way that most government officials and AIDS typically dress up and behave. And you seem to have a kind of well. I mean this to some positive, a kind of ruthlessness for accomplishing an agenda. Talk about what those first couple years being in the administration were like what you felt, was going well and what you felt wasn't going well. What I think that what went well was the leadership that David Cameron, particularly provided in terms of stabilizing the economy based I think that at the time he took office in other countries already die predicament and people were incredibly anxious about what would happen, I'm pretty quickly. He establish
the sense of orderly a calm over over there. Situation- and I think achieved in a way his mango, which is which is to give the country, can a responsible stewardship. I think that's that's what he mainly saw the job as being an he absolutely delivered on that. Did you enjoy those first couple years, although it I dive, Amish Odd, to choose to foot and joy, incredibly hard work. Incredibly frustrating is an amazing privilege alone. I mean uh, that's, it sounds like a bit of a cliche, but it really is just to have the opportunity to work on problems that the real and and try make a difference in people's lives through. I think one of the best actually was something that we produce could national citizens service in the idea that was a kind of non military national service for teenagers to try and create a sense of community cohesion and
and social mixing and bring people together from different backgrounds and also to bid a personal development. So that's a specific thing where I can get. You know what that re. He was something that I conceive with David Cameron right at the beginning and sought to its implementation as oversee very rewarding national citizens service was quintessential Hilton idea that.
Government using its leverage to throw some organizational mojo back to its citizenry is part of a grand vision that he came to call big society. The argument went like this previous conservative party leaders had said in other. The enemy is big government and we need to cut back government to roll back the frontiers of the state, cut back the size of government cut spending and everything will be great and that certainly had its appeal, particularly in the UK, in the at the end of the nineteen seventy, where people felt the state really had got way, two billion out of control, but, as you went through the eighties people saw that
Finally, if you just cut back government and left it at that, people were often left behind and social problems were unaddressed, and so we try to make a more nuanced argument than just saying smaller government would say. Yes, we we want. The answer to our problem is not big government, but a big society. David Cameron, fully embraced the idea. The idea of the big society is trying to help individuals and communities and voluntary bodies to come together and find solutions to the problems that we have. Just the big idea is that you're, looking for big society, ounces rather than big statements, is among the cornerstones of big society, more power to local communities and institutions, including government and police, more volunteerism and support for all kinds of collapse and social enterprises also a push to make government radically transparent by publishing more data on paper and in Steve Milton's, mind
the phrase big society was a winner, but to the opposition and the press, it was touched to or well in, and then it became the subject of political argument and back and forth perception wasn't the only issue. There is also the need to execute what typically happens and govern is the exact opposite of how things should work instead of starting with you, the people and their needs and understanding how their lives workin, putting together programmes that are in touch with that. And what with that you go in you're in a hurry. You want to make change happen, you're just sitting at the sun during an office with the leaves of pounds, one of them Team Rowley away through, and actually that usually ends in it's a waste of money and disappointing outcomes, and that is the story, every government it seems to me, regardless of their The cold persuasions running does a lot to learn. Hilton came to be seen as a bit of a hypocrite talking of power to the people from within the ultimate corridors of power. It didn't help that he usually kept himself. Why
out of public view, and so the definite was a time when Eliza Cynicism, shadowy weird advisory Rasputin's, that's all that kind of stuff was written, and I think that during that time there was a lot of misunderstanding, and particularly, I tell you what I think, what you into that there's a portrayal of me on what one of these tv shows who are covered, that the visit the thick of it. I can't yeah what it was the thick of it I spent, Ten years detoxified, this party has been a bit like renovating an old old house. You can take out a sexist beam here, callous window there replace the homophobic its title, but after a while, you realize that this renovation is doomed because the foundations are built on what I can only describe as a solid, better
exactly what you it's funny and you know I get it and I love, but the thing that was with his reserve wrong about that was the that carriages and was entirely focused on personal presentation and how things would have. Actually, I think that for it for a long time, that was how I was foreseen rather than at you. I really care about substance and policy, exactly among the policies that Hilton cared about most whether Britain would stay part of the European Union coming up on freedom radio, is harsh difference with Cameron. On that issue I saw breaks is an opportunity for the UK to be a really dynamic, open pro enterprise country engaged with the whole world.
Also, we learn the unlikely sight of children's political reawakening spectacle. The disco d stands for design. We find out ways up to these days and how is new tv show is a response to recent political events. That is a show that is going to focus on what I'm calling positive pop. Also not forget about the listener challenge we have going on five hundred a view become sustaining members of w, and my c by June thirtieth. The towel foundation will kick in an extra twenty five thousand dollars to go to for economics, dot com, slashed, donate or text toward Freak nine eight six thank you were speaking today with Steve Hilton. The former chief strategist for british Prime Minister David,
Cameron. What's he doing now, I am the c o and co founder of crowd pack, which is a political tech, start up based in California, I am also the host of a new show on Fox NEWS on Sunday evenings called the next revolution, and that is a show that is going to focus on what I'm calling positive populism. How we deal with the issues that arisen as a result of the populist uprisings we ve seen around the world, particularly in the UK, with breaks it in here. In Amerika, with Donald Trump selection, in a positive way talking to Helen, you begin to sense that these popular views on government aren't so different from his own views, although his really intensified, while serving in Downing Street, you left number ten after couple years, moved California with your family. According to the Washington Post at least you lift Downing Street quote after becoming disillusioned with Cameron's progress and the lack of boldness. I have no idea.
That's true or not. What did she tell us? I mean the immediate reason was: was a family one in the sense that rich, my wife, she's head of government relations and pay off a google, and she was committing a lot basically to London to California, which is pretty tough and then once a second some was born. I just got really so we decided to move. That was the immediate reason, but, frankly I I think that description, then that you read out it is, is correct. But if I look back on it, I think that really it's, it was my fault in the, in the sense that I hadn't really figured out how to deliver
fool David Cameron, the kind of revolution that we had promised and to actually do that in a way that worked with with the institutions, with the bureaucracy that we inherited rather than just sort of relentlessly attack them, and I think that that that's my full, so I deafening felt disillusioned at the time Hilton and his wife, Rachel Whetstone, had been a very high profile power couple in England in California. Not so much I mean that's, not we love love. California thing is just the best place in the world. Whetstone was head of communications and public policy at Google for several years and left for a similar position at goober, but she left that job quite abruptly, and it was revealed soon after that. A british watchdog agency was investigating whether her old friend, David Cameron had improperly lobbied on goobers behalf. Hilton meanwhile had met some people at Stanford and from that
rose the opportunity to teach their in various parts of the university and, most importantly, at a place called the DE school. The d stands for design is the Institute of Design at Stanford, and that really was for me a transformational experience, transformational, but also bitter sweet. If I'd have had the benefit of that experience. Before I had the privilege of working and government, I think I would have been a hundred times more effective because we adopted in government was taught us that these good Human centred design or design thinking, it's really simple. You start any project with an intense focus on the user. Who are you designing for who is supposed to Bennett from this and let's really understand their light, then you generates ideas, and if we do anything you test them out, you turn them into a very cheap prototype that the EC enable you to get feedback before you go to the expensive building anything worth. If the palace,
If we actually start spending real money on implementing a programme, we actually tested out with people, get reactions and that process of rapid low cost, prototyping and testing is totally absent from the way government operates, and if that was present, I really believe you would save so much wasted money and have so much more effective government programmes. I guess where the parallel between Let's say, designing consumer products and designing policy seems to break down. Is the following when you're affirm trying to come up with the right product for year? Consumers are your event, for consumers. You can do that kind of. You know in your garage without a lot of scrutiny when
we're doing it in government. You have intense and constant scrutiny, both from the opposition party or parties and the media, which makes it harder to do things like rapid prototyping and experimenting because you're always worried about You know the reductive form of your idea, getting released to the media and being ridiculed are being shot down by someone else to talk to me for a minute about whether you really think that model can work as well in society in politics as it can for something like designing, whether its user experiences for a company like Goober or Google, to firms your wife has worked for or or something else government can do. This can really thought to work out how better to address these problems in a very, very small and Loki Way, literally with United in a couple of hundred people need to spend a fortune on. Some big pilot
programme announced in the media and then scrutinised, but actually there's another point I want to make, which is your so right about this? The way that the media climate, which is inevitable by the imo complaining about it, is just a fact of life means politicians and government officials are really risk of us when it comes to trying to bring forth innovations or even let experiments happened that you can learn from and one of the things that the really needs to happen is to try and change that culture. Our member, we we tried to wait for years. In the run up to the twenty ten general election, we tried to persuade David Cameron to make a speech where he would explicitly say, though he is our agenda for reform it includes
trying lots of new things out, innovations that will bring forward new ways of dealing with problems. Inevitably, when we do that things will go wrong, there will be failures as well as successes. We can't get it and we wanted to make this speech to set up the fact and to give ourselves space for that kind of experimentation, and he always agreed. Yes, good idea will do what he never made that speech- I mean I can see why you want them to do it, and I can also see why it would be hard for him did, of course, and so they do get that there's a desert, there's room risk of it. Also you git you just not gonna get the innovation that you really need to solve some. These intractable problems have been around for decades and don't seem to be getting any better. Will let me ask you this, so your book
you address. You know all the major realms politics and governance and health care and education in the food system and so on, and you make the argument that they ve all become to inhuman, too, were to distanced from the production of things that bosses are too distant from what their workers are doing, that consumers are too distant from what producers are doing so and saw the central. I guess paradox, it strikes me is that the way you talk about something being inhuman is often it strikes me as a synonym, essentially for being large went institutions become large, that's what happens to them, and so I just wonder if you could talk about that paradox. For a moment when you have systems and institution
including governments. Inevitably, there are many layers, there's bureaucracy which seems to be your chief villain. How can you have both we d? You don't want to get rid of you. No ninety percent of the people on earth and NGO small scale. That would be a little bit cruel. So how can you have both yeah? That's a great great analysis, and I think that what you described is exactly right in the sense that if I was disable, what is this thing that ties together the the lack of humanity in the way government operates in the way businesses operate the private sector in the economy and social institutions? The thing that I keep coming back to is that I think that we ve seen over the last few decades, far too great a concentration of power, both in government where, into the progressively removed from local institutions and going more more to central institutions at national level and even at the international level, with institutions like the EU, but also an economy where you see the way that companies
merged in a quiet and got bigger and bigger, and then you end up with these kind of ruthless global entities. That in many ways do great work another I'm very much a pro business person. But the way that they just become so big and and the power so concentrated operates against the public interest. And individual interest, so I think we need to break up this concentration of power. Now I dont presented as the absolute answer to every single problem, but I do think that we go far too much in the other direction in the economy. For example, we need a far greater. Much more aggressive, anti trust policy like we used to have many many years ago and over the last few decades is just got completely blown apart and in government. We need to decentralize power We know, let's see how we can try, make the default unit of governments actually the neighborhood, where people actually know each other and can relate to each.
Turn human waste that see if we can really decentralized in a very radical way, so that people feel that they in control of the stuff that really matters to them or to that end. In two thousand fourteen Hilton launched a for profit, company called crowd Pack whose mission he says is really to democratize. Politics, give politics back to people to make it easier for anyone to participate in politics, particularly on the sort of financial side. Of that we want to end the the way the big money donors dominate politics. The way that the party infrastructure means that you
very hard to run for office independently, if you're, not part of the establishment and the party system and prepared to take the money from the big done, as we want to change that and make it easier for anyone to raise money, support candidates that they believe in Rome for office just participate in politics organise get involved without the traditional ways of doing that, switch on open it all up crowd, packs non partisan platform seems designed to foster a new, less agitated form of populism. Then we ve seen in politics last few years. The sort of populism that led to the stunning breaks it vote. Last year I mean I've. I was always in favour of leaving the European Union, so dry did actually argue for that to be our policy. Why was Hilton in favour of bricks? It was to me it's a consistent application of what I have always believed which in in a phrases, ratification, but that the phrase will be people power, that people should have more control,
the decisions that affect them and one of the big things have gone wrong? Is this centralisation of power and the EU is a great example of that there are so many things that we came up against. When were you turn around domestic policy in the UK? Where were you can't do that? Because the EU rules of directive stop you from doing and all sorts of areas where there is really no need for that to be a centralized function in many ways. You know that the position of a member state of the EU is that they have less autonomy, Then a state within the USA has, but the differences, at least in America Ivan complains about Washington. The federal government to release the president is elected. At least Congress is
acted in when the EU situation, if you ve, got a centralized bureaucracy that is really driving policy. People point to the European Parliament and so on, and the fact that representative elected governments sit on the Council of Ministers that make decisions. May you that's true, but the driving force of policy initiation in the EU is the European Commission, which is an appointed body and so to me, there's a sort of fundamental objection, which is. This is not democratic, and that means it's wrong. Even if the outcome
May from time to time be good, doesn't matter is not democratic. It's wrong, and I am all in favour of a single market, which is the initial sort of idea that Britain signed up to that's good and helpful, but when it turns into as it has a move towards a european government, but one that is not democratically accountable, then I cannot support that, regardless of its actual impact, because the printed abjectly on principle, they want a United States of Europe run from Brussels. Britain doesn't and therefore you gotta just accept that reality leave. It was David Cameron, who called for abreks it vote to be put to the british people, but he urged them to vote against it, I believe we are stronger, safer and better off inside a reformed european. You and that is why I will be campaigning with all my heart and soul to persuade the british people to remain. As we all know, written voted for breaks it.
And Cameron summarily stepped down as Prime Minister, so you came out in favour of during the referendum and from what I understand it. The relationship between the two of you was to some degree fractured. What's this shape and state of your relationship with David Cameron, now where we haven't been in touch since the bricks of vote so death, I think there's not much to say beyond that beer. Do you wish you would plead that differently? Do wish that you would had consulted him differently or stood against him differently? No, I think that them. I said what I believe, and it was a very different images, that it was a campaign and I had a pretty minor Roy limit, although somehow you being the british, the former government guy living in the states and coming back, seemed it seemed ass, though the british media treated, you treated your voice.
More significant than than the people who had been there all along. Maybe maybe it was that you know you felt it important enough to come back to talk about it. Now, but it seemed ass, though your voice carried an awful lot of we in that debate. Don't you think I tell you what I was I was hoping to do, which is to put forward what Does anyone have a missing from the debate, which is a positive, optimistic argument for breaks it right and not the You know we don't want foreign is here. We don't want any immigration. We want to provide that. The exact opposite I saw breaks is an opportunity for the UK to be more open, more open to the whole of the world, not just the countries on the. Case doorstep to be a really dynamic, open pro enterprise country engaged with the whole world and a common global engaged Britain not just a year
why set of engagements, and so I wanted to make that positive arguments, as I felt that that wasn't really being heard in the campaign enough- and you know, I think there are some really damaging ideas floated which thankfully haven't been implemented, but one in particular that I read very negatively to which is the idea of forcing british companies to make lists of foreign workers and publish them. You know about that kind of thing. I just the direct opposite of what what I thought breaks. It would have been all about you wound up supporting Donald Trump and the twenty sixteen election you ve spoken admiringly Bernie Sanders had sanders been the democratic candidate who'd. You have supported what I shall make something really clay. I know it's a sat together, the bit of circle of semantic distinction, but I think, is an important one. I would never describe myself a supporting trump. I would the way I used to put it was that I supported his supporters in the sense that I thought he really articulated the problems that were affecting a really
Big part of the american population that had been ignored for too long, and I really thought that was a useful service, and I also think thought then and think now that some of the specific things that he was arguing for all the right solutions to some of those policies, but I never thought that he had, if you like, a clear agenda for solving the problems that he correctly identified. But, as you say, I also thought. Bernie Sanders did a great job of the evening together. Those two candidates really shown a spotlight on problems that have been hit. For too long yeah head Sanders been the democratic candidate. Would you have gotten behind him only way more more firmly than trump? On the on the Republicans, I look. I think that its difficult, because I run a business that non partisan, so any any kind of intervention in politics at all is tricky and sought ending. I would have gotten vote puzzling to directly, but I think that Bernie Sanders from the minutes that he lost his campaign. I thought you know what he's these talking.
Exactly the right language and knows what's going on in this country. And I had a lot of sympathy for much of what he said on very strongly of the view that the systems that we have all completely broken and its it and its structures. I think, of the party system, and particularly the financing of all of that that mean that when people are elected to office, particularly at the federal Levelling- and you see this in Congress so trapped by the way that they got there by the commitments they have made along the way to raise money to play the party game that they find it really difficult to actually break free of that and work together, as people really want to see to do so. In a practical, pragmatic solutions to the very real problems we have. Reading your book and knowing that you're launching this tv show, I think I'd be foolish not to at least enter
team of thought that you may want to run for office Sunday. Do you well. I think that if I had stayed in the UK, I probably would have done that already, I basically yes, I don't have a specific plan to do that, but I don't it. Dodge your question. You can get anything but president here you know that a very nice that get well maybe it looks like yet, but I just don't know when how where and when there is no plan now that you ve crossed over at least once a week, into the fourth estate or something resembling the fourth estate. With your new show, I'm curious to know: do we see, for instance, Bernie
Saunders and Donald Trump on your show preps together. Do we see your old boss, David Cameron, on your show, talk about that from an I'd love to have Bernie Sanders untold trumped together? How amazing, without be idle, I'd, love to focus on the areas that they agree about and see if we condemn put together a plan for positive populism by definitely want to try and avoid, if I can, the kind of predictable algae body back and forth kind of yelling at each other than that, you that, I think, is right. You know, look partisans, love that and in his kind of entertaining well, that's what they're paid to do and that's what they're trained to do so they really. There is a much more they yes, exactly salute that! That's fine! But looking at once a week, just
How can we please tell us something a little bit more constructive and positive that with Steve Hilton, the tv show? The next revolution is book, more human, his attitude cautiously optimistic I'd, say coming up next time on for economics, radio well at its core Spurgeon editing technology is now giving human beings the opportunity to change the course of evolution. Yes, there's room problem ism on this too, but obviously tons of caution. I mean you know phenotypes or for hookups, but China type is forever and I realized what this horror and I can feel it
right now, is I'm telling you the story, I feel is chill in my body. You know that I realise that it was Adolf Hitler, the science that economics, even the ethics of the gene peddling revolution, that next time and freedoms, radio economics radio is produced by w unless you studios and donor productions. This episode was produced by Gregg Zawoiski are staff also includes Shelly Louis Christopher Worth Merit Jacob Stephanie, Tam, Eliza, Lambert, Alison Hockenberry, Emma Morgenstern, Harry Huggins and Brian Gutierrez. You can and should subscribe for economics, radio on Apple podcast source teacher or where we get your pack ass. You should also check out our archive and for economics, dot com. You can stream or download every episode we ve ever made. You can also read the transcripts and you can find links to the,
underlying research. We can also be found on Twitter, Facebook, etc, etc, or email at radio at for economics. That thanks are listening.
Transcript generated on 2021-01-23.