« Making Sense with Sam Harris

#49 — The Lesser Evil

2016-10-26 | 🔗

In this episode of the Making Sense podcast, Sam Harris speaks with Andrew Sullivan about the 2016 presidential election.

SUBSCRIBE to listen to the rest of this episode and gain access to all full-length episodes of the podcast at samharris.org/subscribe.

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Well, this is another election related podcast. This might be my last swing at this ball. As many of you know, I've come out strongly against Donald Trump And the only way to really do this is to support Hillary Clinton. But what I want to do in this podcast is attempt to reach those of you who view any criticism of Trump as partisan, so I'm gonna spend a long time here, speaking very critically about the lesser evil. Hillary Clinton, about both Clinton's. In fact, because they come as a pair of enlisted Andrews Sullivan to help me in this cause, because he certainly knows what's wrong with both Clinton's. Most of you know him. Of course, Andrew, has been a very prominent journalist and editor. He ran the new republic for many years and has written for more or less. Everybody is a frequent political commentator,
And the fact that gay marriage is now legal in this country is largely the result of his work. He was also one of the first prominent bloggers which he did for fifteen years at the daily dish, he has now contributing editor at New York magazine and rights, great long form pieces, there he's published several books, including the conservative soul, which I blinked two on my website, and what we attempt to do in this podcast is sympathise with those of you who hate the Clinton's and don't want to see them return to the White House, and we do this for a good long. While I am worried that if you only listen to half of this podcast you'll go vote for Trump, I dont think you ve heard two people who support Hillary Clinton do this I certainly have it and then we go on to argue that the lesser evil is still in this case, the only good you can do, and now I bring you
Andrew Sullivan. So I'm here with Andrew Sullivan Andrew thanks for coming on the Pike S thanks SAM for having me some of listeners will be aware of our connection. But for those who aren t you and I have debated each other twice in print and that the first time was about religion well over a decade ago. At this point- and the second was about the events in Gaza and both of those exchanges are on my blog, so people can find them, but one of the great things about our debates from my point of view, is that they were fairly hard hitting though the first one in particular, if I recall, was pretty barbed, or at least I was pretty barbed and yet they really became the basis of a friendship and Emma you. I dont see each other that often were not enough in the same city very much, but I certainly consider you
friend- and in my experience that doesn't happen all that much in public debates? I really is very valuable to me that our communications, whilst we started out very far apart on certain issues, really work in the aggregate, totally civil and and better than civil emitted- a really became the basis of a real connection, which is fantastic. I feel exactly the same way. Samite I've I voice, however, I disagree with you- have always respected and enjoyed what you had to say and I think the someone with religious faith. I think that your challenges have been important and certainly not not ones that any believers should shrink from I think that the things that we should consider and think about- and I am grateful for it and I've always unit always detective you on an openness to dialogue, of everything else? That's.
Increasingly as I get older, the more valuable. That is your lot and ungrateful too. And also, I must say, as you know, on your side, port. For my my What I would call my spiritual development, I don't quite what label you put on it buddy you were very helpful for me to understand better what meditation is. And what Buddhism has to offer even why had some encounter with for your encouragement and your example has definitely help my life and I hope, help my thinking process. So I'm grateful
so yeah. I definitely want to get into that. I really view this conversation is being into parts and and there's a connection between them, but I want to talk about why it is becoming so difficult or seemingly so difficult to communicate, effectively on important issues and and the two parts of conversation to the first is his politics, which, as you know, is about as toxic as it has ever been in our lifetime and the second I want to talk about what you just alluded to now is just basically what what the internet is doing to us and. And this could in some measure explain why our politics have become so toxic, and I won't talk about how you stepped away from your online life a while back and and this this article, you wrote in New York magazine entitled. I used to be a human being, which is really a wonderful article which all linked to on my blog lust get into that and spiritual practice and the kind of contemplative issue
use you have around. You know what the internet is doing to the human mind, will do that in the second half and let's start with politics, maybe just take a moment to describe your political background and and leaning so people, we're coming from well, I young I was- I grew up in England in the seventies and eighties And was a a thatcherite? Not was I thy thatcherite right? I must have it I was. I wasn't must have been. I asked he was the only boy in my my high school in England, to have a Reagan. Eighty button and. So I really was on a third member of the right in good standing in the seventies and eighties and and to a great extent, the nineties You know I supported Clinton and ninety two at a time when it was possible, I think, to be interested
ideas and arguments about free markets about the sclerosis of the The european welfare state our government ownership of the economy, Direction of the economy and so was kind recruited is not been coming right. Wing, intellectual as it were- I went to Oxford on where I owned. Some of those thoughts on that I might might study at Oxford was in history and free literature. So I wasn't a political major, but I did that in coming to Harvard, when I did a Phd in political science said government departments. Am I supervisor my dissertation was Harvey Mansfield A around Strauss in still or now, drastic amazingly, are, he seems, to have completely, are avoided
We sort of aging he's done some deal with that. More time he's gonna need somewhere he'd facilitating someone, but he's he's a real character and I bet I Roma dissertation, not on Strauss, but on the english political philosopher also understood to be a critical influencing twentieth century small, see conservatism, Michael O shot, and that's my that was my dissipation. So I come from what I still regard myself as an oak shawty and in that sense, inasmuch as they have suspicion, Neuf of government control of a to bigger state sector, a respect for tradition. How a society evolves organically on four pragmatism in politics and for scepticism in intellectual life
my recitation without you upon an implicit, esoteric, religious doctrine in Michael Ocean. So that's where I came from and then going into America. I supported Reagan in eighty four sporty bush in eighty eight, but supporting Clinton and ninety two on the grounds that, while I do believe that it was important to correct for some of the overreach of the left, in the seventies and eighties, my core commitment is to a civilised and open society, and that requires two parties that share. In the responsibilities of government and and take turns in power, in order to correct the abuse,
is in difficulties and overreach of each other, and so it's important for me as a small, see conservative that, for example, the damage Party come back to the centre and regain power. This is this. Is the moment when really my first trip from the right began. The idea that I could support Clinton over Bush Emperor, on the grounds that he was more in touch with the ninety two, an emerging algerian society that, with more diverse, more forward, looking younger and obviously on the question of gay rights, at least before he was elected, relatively hopeful and different position, and so I think I placed myself in that sort of liberal Republican slashed conservative Democrat mould, and when I edited the New republic in four ninety one to ninety six, I was definitely regarded as a conservative.
Influence on that magazine. Even though that magazine was at that point, I kind of black, of NEO liberalism and NEO conservatism? I I so defended that magazines core liberal ethos, even though I didn't fully share it. Because again, I felt a responsibility institution within american politics and culture, so then I went on to long Two long nose did my directory here. I found Clinton by ninety six, to be so ethically and morally despicable on that I actually supported bobbed, all ninety six on the grounds that I did not do. I actually believe that, given his conduct in office so far that it was simply a matter of time before Clinton, sabotaged himself and the country which turned out to be, unfortunately, a true in two thousand.
I was really up in the air. I had a great deal of respect for our goal, but I liked at least candidate George W Bush. I liked the humble foreign policy I like the compassionate conservatism. To some extent. I liked the ability to reach out to demographic groups. It had not been properly Paul. The republican coalition, primarily latina voters and thought between a moderate right, candidate and moderate left one. I didn't see a big problem with the moderate right one. It turns out, of course, that I was completely mistaken about that and. Envy. I think in the partisan and polarizing moment after nine eleven, I kind of went off the deep and actions supported the war and supporting Bush law actually out of a horror and what is longest. Fundamentalism was threatening against.
Core western values in the mass murder that they were put perpetrating in the name of fundamentalist religion on I'm. Also, if I should say you know just a feeling- people, Roman Catholic, I still actors and but grew increasingly concerned with also the trend towards fundamentalism, of a different, find within the catholic Church under Benedict sixteenth and to some extent, John Paul, the second anyway, I'm I'm, I'm just trying to give you a brief, or are you so then with it? But then I turned against Bush and the Republicans because of what I saw an inability to effectively the conductor
and two infected realised that they had made a terrible era. For me, the fundamental issue in that conflict was the the use of torture by the United States, which I found to be a step, to take us outside of civilization boundaries and also a period of time where I felt the constitution was essentially in abeyance, and I was so repelled by that I supported a man. I really didn't like very much on carrying two thousand four and then came to see Obama as actually what I believe The moderate centre right president right always wanted. But even more thrillingly able to bring african Americans more fully into. That centre and into american public life and really founding Obama. On the kind of politician, I really could amazed when the first people to really seize on him and support him and began
I'm really in my blog anyway, a sort of key part of the Mama coalition, which I continued through twenty twelve. So that's why I am a sort of o bomber con, as it were, a moderate conservative that actually thought you know bomber that we had a moderate conservative president of really unimpeachable character, considerable moderation, reason and Extraordinary eloquence, I still think he's an extraordinary figure and I think we still need him quite badly, especially over the next few months, when things could get really scary and he's com, his ability to hold the country together I think, is one reason why in this incredibly fraught period He's approval ratings are aware Reagan's where at this point, I think he will be understood, especially if Hilary, obviously, if Hilary winds this election as
though the Reagan liberal Reagan Reagan. If the Democrats and the silver lining. I see we do about this more about the car, a moment which otherwise seems to be the darkest cloud I've ever seen in american policy the small silver lining is that it might be the final repudiation of the most ugly disgusting and foul tendency on the american right, in other words, that this might be the true long game winter, when the president is able to win too. Elections and then actually get his opposition to recognise their failure and to adjust towards the new mainstream. That's yet to be seen, but in a small sliver of hope that I have out of this really does european electoral landscape, that we are now looking at your side However, an agenda for this part of
rotation that I want to make explicit far listeners, because you, I have said many terrible things about Trump on this podcast and I am sure I will say some terrible things today, but this is revealed, some very disconcerting things to me about my audience and about just then the possibilities of communication. The first is that just this is the fact that there is a significant number of people who follow me, who are trump supporters and who are amazed that I'm not one two, and I can only assume that has something to do with how hard I've been on Islam over the years. But I continually here from people who claim to have loved my work into a read my books, but now have lost all respect for me, because I am voting for Hillary Clinton. Adding a one person just wrote saying it is too bad hitched died when it should have been. You write a massive it is these communication, you're very pointed at an animal's, most annoying
about that. One is honestly the fact that this person is certain that hitch would have voted for Trump right now, and then we can. We can talk about that. I've talked about that podcasting or even with all that hitch. Wrote about the Clinton's. I think there is actually no way he would have voted for Trump, but the problem is that, no matter how clearly I spell out what is wrong with Trump and describe my endorsement of Clinton as the lesser evil right, I'm accused of being Rankly, partisan and totally dishonest and of ignoring all that's wrong with Clinton, and this really bothers me because it meant there really. Is in so far as I can know my own mind. There is absolutely nothing partisan about my endorsement of Clinton. I could easily imagine a Republican who I would vote for over her and this just not much. You would have to change about this being a generic Republican so as to make me.
Vote for him or her over Clinton. I saw your ear most recent appearance on real time, Talkin Bout Clinton and Trump, and you given your background and given that you are in touch with with what has wrong with our system and will end the way in which Clinton's in many ways crystallize what's wrong with our system. It seems that you could be the perfect person to help me try to bridge this gap, because what I want us to do is to talk honestly about what's wrong with the Clintons, to give it as a sympathetic of you as possible of why people hate them with such passion and why people hate the system, of which there are very clear expression and then make the case. Why none of that matters in the current election, because people are just missing just how how terrifyingly unqualified trump is and on every conceivable level and
and that their there now missing it, their missing, Houck Lear? This is right, mistress it. This is unmistakable so in any our speaking on the morning after they third presidential debate being aware, the evidence of the difference between Clinton and Trump was not in short supply. So just restless. Let's just start with the issue with the Clinton to me was: why did you break ranks with Bill clan than an end. Give me a sympathetic view of why some one would not be happy to see the the Clinton's back in the White House. Oh, I do. I start really a metre high on their about the pursuit of power by almost any constitutional means possible that there is a lack of integrity to both of them. It seems to me
I witnessed at first hand. I was editor. The new republic, when Clinton first became president and the New Republic was under my editorship, actually champion the Clinton candidacy, one of the first Sidney Blumenthal. May God, forgive me, was my campaign corresponded amounted to an you saw with Sidney when I actually caught him faxing pieces to Hilary in advance of their publication to check that he got every single spin right again shows just who these people are on their operators there at the centre of a web of we used to call it consists of friends and colleagues dedicated to the advancement of each other. They are
money grubs. They are liars, and I, for one, for example, in the early nineties, was one of the first advocates of marriage, equality and for military service were gay people and to watch them, kill us in that period and treat gay people with complete contain and then to portray themselves as pioneers of gay civil rights, the sheer spur of these people, when they were actually not just against marriage equality. They did everything in their power to kill off the movement marriage, equality and I know cause- I was someplace one of four people in that movement. At the beginning, the dearer here hear Hillary Clinton on fresh air with grows, trying not to admit that her opinion on marriage equality had changed for about ten minutes. Getting more and more defensive. What that's planet like drives you crazy about them, is their refusal to tell the truth
even about themselves that the constant spinning, the constant refusal to really be accountable- and this also goes to build Clinton's history of sexual assault, one of things proudest over the New Republic was was running. An editorial. Defending polar Jones is right to have a say in court, which was greeted by the democratic left as an act of treason. The way in which honest alleged feminist we are prepared to sacrifice every single principle. They ever had to advance this man, who was essentially one of them, one of the most horrendous offenders in dealing with women sexually. Just staggered me at the time and Hillary Clinton, of course, in full knowledge of her husbands, history of sexual assault and harassed,
and went to town in defending him and trashing those women. All of that the Trump campaign has re aired is true. I absolutely His true actually, what one question their cause, I'm not as familiar with the history is, I might be s room. I certainly haven't waded through all the the relevant biographies, but Many people think that Hilary was legitimately deceived by yo on many of these points, and certainly will say that the Lewinsky scandal that she had bought his Why that nothing had happened and then any you could sort of sea either her reaction to the truth emerging play out and real untiringly. I think that's absolutely true, Lewinsky! Ok, it's not true agenda. Where is it not true with Paul adjoins? It's not true with twenty two broad Rick, it's not true. We ve Catholic, Willie and others who
beginning to come forward? I think to say that Hillary Clinton was not aware of her husbands, attended see for sexual assault and justification and demeaning and degrading treatment of women is, is it is really not to do her justice, she's, she's, she's, a groan person? She sat the sixty minutes united to brazenly, lying about her husband's affair, which any for flowers, almost everyone around her acknowledges this, and yet she stuck with their husbands, and not this, but at the very beginning this this is pioneer of Feminism D. I did that her career could only really get off the ground if she married a an up and coming governor and hitched her wagon to his. This is not what Margaret Thatcher it's not what tourism may did it's, not what I'm Merkel did it's not what many pioneering women in politics have done, which is why I think it sticks in the crowd.
See her and why so many people have not been able to embrace a as the first potential women president. However much we might want to see the one woman become president, somehow the wife of the former president who trashed women on the way up and to herself never did do feminist thing and pioneer at her own career in her own life in politics, is actually not a great feminist icon at all and always arguing always arguing that whatever we do. However, we behave. We are so much part of the greater good end. The Republicans are always so evil that anything we do is justified, and that, of course, is how they have succeeded, largely because every time there are public a post them they ve done so on despicable, hone, overreaching grounds, impeaching a president. The way they did with such a grotesque, override
and the way they poured into Bill Clinton private life with this appalling, and I thank you african people decided. No. If we have to pick between this charlatan philanderer liar and these fanatics, then I guess we're gonna- have to put up with the Clinton's and in some way, that's the story of their entire career, somehow They managed to work. To always do that the lesser of two evils successfully and in most cases absolutely rightly I mean I, I drew the line at the impeachment through the, even though I believe that he was a hideous person, I dont think he should have been taken to that. It should have been taken, as a vote of censure would have been perfectly acceptable and would be better for the Republicans there again. You get the sort of sense that not only do they wanted just survived. By hook or by crook, jettisoning principles, trashing the constituencies they're supposed to support They they want to turn around to be regarded as civil rights pioneers for women.
Four gaze and all the rest of it, and I'm sorry, but I don't buy it now. I just don't buy it. Do you think you're being or possibly being too cynical here on a few points, so, for instance, what about the possibility that Hilary stuck by bill through all of this and obviously got married in the first place to him not based on some macchiavelli in political scheming? But just this is the person she's in love with she has accepted his flaws in that may harking back to another generation. You know madman style and she was just all in with him and realise that in some purely pragmatic and obviously not honest way since there are on the right side of history on most of these issues, since they have the right goals for the country. This is how the sausage gets made. You gotta get on sick,
three minutes and lie about this meaningless affair that you don't care about, and you're the wife you're, the one who's supposed to care or you're. The only one who needs to care if if Karen is called for- and you have to lie, because this is going to torpedo your political career and your husband and it matters, because the other side is wrong. On issues of car The quest for millions of people is our way to sympathize with her and that moment, or is she still a bit of a monster? Even then, of course, everyone is a human being, and I don't doubt that she did fall in love with Bill Clinton. But at the same time, I think it would be naive to believe that their marriage was hardly about love, it was also a political partnership and which she use that partnership to gain clinic? power in a way that I think was fundamentally legitimate in the first Country administration we elect one president didn't elect to. If we had elected to President's or co
president, she would be eligible to run right now, but she wanted her cake and eat it too. She wants to be you know the advocate of a clean system in in in government and against campaign finance abuses The Dashie is making millions of dollars in way she didn't need to off. Very many banks. Have many and entities are many foreign governments that just despicable you can't there's plenty ways to excuse what they didn't justify an aid provided those excuses justification and in many cases it said I support a continent in ninety two, but over the long run, these things do change you that if you sacrifice your integrity report ITALY, even if every single time for little bit it might be in your mind, justified. The cumulative effect of this is to render you incapable of taking any principle them.
Our position and be seen to be doing so people when they say they don't trust her fate. This I think most people have watched closely- and they know the yes, she will switch around. She will change. She will be pragmatic around principle in a way that cumulatively gets to be disturbing, and I think that's the point. Every no politician is in a modern is a king Jr, then not. We have to accept that, but there's something particularly sustained and more. Phyllis about her sacrifice of principles in pursuit of power, and I think to be sceptical about that, and also to believe that kind of figure can never actually reach people.
And persuade them in moments of of difficulty or crisis that there's someone that they can look to the someone they can trust. She still doesn't have that she doesn't have that with the american people. She still unable in a crisis, I think if she were present- and I think she They will be this point jack. You sit down and really be the president of all the people in a way, for example, that Barack Obama could indeed however hostile people ADI, he did have the connection. People do actually think of him as having integrity, because the actually does happen. Aggravate now he's a hard act to match and that's why he beat her. But here again you ve, been in the White House Potu terms as First lady you ve been secretary of state. You, you lost your major attempt to win. What do you do what you do in her,
case was to try and prevent any rising star in the Democratic Party from ever challenging her holding on so that its her turn holding the entire party hostage to our own fortunes squelching possible new blood in order to get another term in the centre of power, and at some point look I dont want to Saint, but there was something consistent about this and it's it's typified. For example, by her you know claiming to be an avatar of gay rights, while her husband signed a defensive marriage act, doubled the number of people discharge from the military and then, crucially and I'll, give you two examples. One ran advertisements in the south touting in ninety six, his exclusion of gay people from marriage, equality and subsequently and I'll tell you this. When I went in, I was testifying in Congress further hence a marriage act, and we were ready to go in and make our case
Very morning the Clinton Justice Parliament set put out and completely unnecessary guidance that they believed they defensive. Marriage act had no no constitutional problems whatsoever, just because in the got to kill off this movement because it might threaten, they believed their reelection prospects and, I think, to Vienna be safe borders. The personal experience of this to me personally lie too to be told his eye was personally told by George Stephan Awful is that they would in don't ask, don't tell completely ensure that no one was subsequently fight, and yet they double discharges from the military and did nothing about it. And just sign the defensive marriage act, four billion to do that, while he's Making a mockery of inheriting in the White House at some point you just have to say I there's something about these people. There is something about these people. That is not trustworthy There's something about these people that in the end will
found themselves against any principle, and I admire certain gratuitous in politics, and I I certainly understand we have to make compromises that something bout, the relentless willingness, the sacrifice, any core principles that they have that has rightly made us many of us deeply sceptical of them. I also think just leave them moral and ethical question. I just don't think she's been that good in public life. I just don't think she's a very good, not just a very good politician, which now even her supporters acknowledge as a cat. Terribly weak rate in many respects, but not very good in government. You ask what does she dawn in thirty years? She doesnt really have a good
human. She has one good argument, I think, which is the S ship programme, which really did give children greater health security, health insurance options than they had before, which I think I dont want to dismiss in any way. That's a huge achievement on our part, but that's about it. She also by bungling healthcare reform. In the first term, glint masturbation made healthy EU expanding health insurance of people. Leslie before another twenty years as sexy state, she supported the only way you can see her actual input. She supported libyan intervention which, if you supported Iraq war and say you ve learned the lessons, which is the best way to think of what she said. Well, though, she's took a hell of a long time and meeting it and only admitted it when it would help her politically on points out, but then, admit that you did something stupid by deciding you're going to remove a dictator in the Middle EAST country. Without planning for the aftermath and then doing
Finally, one more time when your secretary of state creating chaos in Libya Although many people have pointed out that there was at least one relevant difference there, which is it that you had a a significant popular uprising calling for intervention in Libya which you didn't have in Iraq, will you did indeed she each year will constantly in the Kurds. Simply asking for intervention begging for it. I haven't. Even now, America's intervention in Libya is still popular mysterious, like seventy percent of Libyans. Think could that it was a good thing that it is. It is a chaotic situation yet where ISIS gain ground on, I think it was bad judgment on her and I think it's one of the greatest mistakes, and even now she is attempting to get us militarily involved in in Syria. She's learned very little from her own mistakes, and I think I think it's very hard
and I think you could see it in the debates. We had actually defend her record to point anything really. She made a difference that wasn't itself disastrous there are a couple of great moments. Last night in the debate that Mickey, I think you share my view that she just destroyed him last night, and yet was that was the implacable but in ways or or by techniques that also don't recommend her for any kind of award for honesty, a machine. So there were two moments where really flabbergasted that it he let her get away with these moments in and that Chris, whilst it as well the one where he asked her whether she would give back leave twenty point five million dollars that the Clinton Foundation and taken from the south Asian and that just
He just kept talking there and and didn't give her any space to reply, and then she never had replied to that, and also she didn't really shouldn't address it all his claims about Bill Clinton's sexual indiscretions, but you can see those moments how compromised she is F, Equally, in that she just she really has to walk on eggshells there. She can't just give it a straightforward defence of what he's point into there and she just has to hope that nobody producers and the topic changes it, this is an election which weirdly enough became a core issue of sexual assault on the way men treat women. And she's, the first woman candidate, the President and she's, barely been able to say a single thing about it here: relax growth, roused color because of her being achieved recognizes, is actually morally compromise on the question, she's also utterly compromise by telling all sorts of private audiences that
he believes in open borders, when she's now advocating to fend off trumps attacks that she's actually tough on the security except they do. You think that I've seen that Wikileaks email and My reading of that is certainly much closer to what she suggested in the debate, which is she's either. She was talking about energy and trade and just used the phrase open borders to signify just the free flow of goods. An information and the electrons or she was talking in a much
were you told me in style of you know we all want to live in a world where there is open borders and just the free flow of everything, but she was not claiming that she wants unchecked immigration to the to the United States. No, I think that's fair SAM. I think that's a totally fair point you make and I do think, but again the rhetoric is using to a particular group which he did everything she. Good to prevent being aired. Precisely because she worried about the discrepancy, at least in the rhetoric between her private rhetoric and her public rhetoric is disconcerting. There is and the rhetoric she gives to the bankers, winches inside and she's. Talking about raining. The men on the outside. You know, there's only again. One instance of this might be one thing you can sign up at this is it this is,
lifetime of doing this- and the other thing I would say is that is her offhand remarks when she's core privately so, for example, in these funds raises the gay fund raises by way where she, you know she calls millions of people. Irredeemable, in an election. I not just pragmatically. I think that is stupid, but it's you the attitude- condescension, the dismissal of of lots of people on, even if there are plenty of people, obviously in this old right trump movement- that just foul and despair
but no one's irredeemable. Why do I think that there are people who are just judging from my communications online and in my inbox I think there are people who are irredeemable for all practical purposes in terms of getting them to understand. What's true in the world and those just touch talkative Peter singer. On a previous podcast, I hear from people who claim that the Sandy, massacre was a hoax engineered by the Obama administration to justify him coming to take our guns right to say that half the few supports read this category, which he then had to walk back and she withdrew and retract it. What she said: half of it look. Yes, there are irredeemable people in that makes. There are also deplore
Where will people but to dismiss half of his supporters? That's that's. Certainly: let's ride monotonous entered the country. He see, I think, with a clear that Clinton's really don't. I fundamentally believe in the american people. They think the american people cannot really adjust or accept the arguments that they really want to make they think, they're, bigots and racists neanderthals. That have to be lied to in order to get your way, don't you think the support for Trump and then we're going to segway now in to talk in about Trump or at least a little keep Nicklin gosh. I want to talk a quarter of an hour, but like just want to give you, I just want to insist. You know anybody listening this I'm passionately in favour of her winning this election finally, what were you we're gonna get though I have no illusions: none all
out what a wretched example of the worst kind of corruption in politics I mean, but not the worst kind, but a kind of low level, systemic, liberal, condescension and arrogance, as well as money, grubbing corruption that that really is discussing iced, I'm I'm still completely. Without any qualms, supporting her for this little ice. Believe me, I would not have let us here. If I didn't know, we were get into that punch line, because my goal It is not to reduce the likelihood that she is going to be the next president, because I really You feel- and I think you feel as well, that we are witnessing a fairly frightening moment in american politics no fairly. I think the most frightening moment, my adult lifetime, but to take a few more wax at the lady when Trump said, are you going back, the money to this out is the twenty more efficient if his twenty million
twenty five million in any of the other Gulf states have given a ton of money to the foundation. What do you think she could have said to that it had she given a reply, here's what she should have said- and it's interesting why she didn't want you can say, is look I took twenty million dollars for, however many dollars from a disgusting regime, but I say eleven million lives, and you know that's yet If you want to really raise big money to help people who would living and dying with HIV in Africa. You'll get it take it from whoever wrote and that's the frank answer, but to say that you'd have to say this out is a despicable. This is what mystifies may amuse, whose vote is sheer afraid to lose. If she speaks more honestly about Islam and is as a member and the spread of jihadism and end the Saudis role in doing that and, in necessity to achieve energy.
Security in light of the Saudis role me, why how? Why can't you speak basic human sanity on this point cause. You could give us some political liabilities as president with respect to the? U s patients should, without you re beer which she wants to keep open. She can't character logically, can't take a clear moral stance on these questions and be completely frank. That's what people say when they dont trust. They can feel. There is an obvious answer to this, but you can't do it like, for example, on border security. She, actually, if you wanted to go tromp and say: look. I am in favour of tough border security. I believe in that I believe in that I voted for many things that beefed up the border. I mean this metaphor of the war. Is one thing, but yes, she did support the war. Why She forthrightly say that, because that she then worries, will will alienate some Latinos that I have to keep on my side. She couldn't make a distinction.
In the convention between legal and illegal immigrants. Which is a crucial distinction, one of the things that Trump has been able to use because she doesn't want to offend this constituency. It's always calculation and it's always caution, and- and and that's that's that's what drives you crazy about them after while they can't say what they know, they refuse to be that clear about it and she's worse, even than her husband and and and it's that constant hedging. That constant, leaving abandoning any sort of conviction so, for example, on Obamacare she could not say which he should say what we have to do to make. This work is to beef up the individual update to make sure more healthy people are brought into the system and the government's gonna have to do that to make this work. Are she won't do that? that would possibly alienate some people, justice, and so she want she won't. Do
when alienate the saudi government she doesnt alienate any support, isn't social. We end up in this sort of calculated money. In the middle, where people don't trust it. My worry is that if you dont trust to now how you going to trust when, when really some Ngos badly wrong. Why United Mean. I think it's a dangerous. I mean I do I'm we can talk about this I am fearful of her presidency in the sense that not sure she has the ballast to hold this country together at a time when it seems to be careening apart, but one one thing that's causing it to fly apart is this: the way seems to me, based on my communications, with people, and just what I read on line or even in just a totally balkan epistemological, where, people are getting their information from sources that you just have a kind of the bright Bart Universe and the New York Times universe and they almost
Don't share a world view on any level. Occasionally some fact will cross. The boundary there and remain a fact, but the role that conspiracy theory plays in our world and the way in which it is potentially aid at every point by time? any, but nevertheless, real conspiracies me find you like the Wikileaks emails it my reading of them thus far Is it there's really not much there? That is surprising to me, I like how did you think the sausage was getting made and what did you think the private communications in a campaign would look like right. I mean it's, not you there are there things there. We wish wouldn't be there. We wish people wouldn't operate this way, but there's Nothing there that I've seen that is fundamentally shocking or the tells us something we don't know where that is didn't know where that or that would be disqualifying her candidacy,
No, I agree. What's shocking, however, is that people's private correspondence can be hacked and delivered this way, and I think- and I think the ability for politics to function at all for government to function at all does require some lack of transparency. I any organization has to have something: that's private! he had already can actually function, but that is sort of a point in her favour. Here. I think it is. The trump phenomenon is also point her favorite to go back to the comments you made a few minutes ago that that one of the thing, things. That is only about hers that she believes have to have a public and private conversation which are distinct, because the people can't handle the truth there so little appetite or ability for honest reasoning that people will seize upon your words like the way she was using the fray.
Open borders in contacts as opposed to the way that those words can be made to seem and you'll never become. President or you'll never achieve the office. Your seeking, because people are stupid and cynical and the truth will be used against. You say you have to do in that everything. Compare that with Barack Obama he's not that way. He actually did articulate what he wanted to do in his speeches in his state of the union addresses whose very clear about what he tried to do was although we don't have his private email communication from his campaign. So no, but we do know that he, had confidence, not in lying to the american P all about who we was what he wanted to do, and he won two elections, and he you know ending with an approval rating. That's similar Reagan's. I think the Clinton's give up before they even start here and I think learned this from being haste essentially in the
an coming of that generation of democrats- you, especially during Reagan and Bush, really believed that the american people did not agree with them and therefore the only waiting advanced themselves. What to all this stuff on the hush hush. I saw this particularly with gay rights, where they refused to make strong, clear arguments for why this matted numbers were out there trying to make the substantive arguments believing if we made those jobs, The arguments of the american people would come along and you know what they did. They each a third of the american people, change their mind over fifteen years, because we didn't come here to this idea that the american people are essentially a bunch of idiots and also bigots that you have to: u have to it in order to be to advance reasonable goals you have to somehow dissemble, because
people can't be trusted. That is where they come from the point of view that no one really agrees with him there, but they have to do this by stealth and they have to have one conversation inside the tent Another conversation out Here- and I know that that is- that is not what Barack Obama has done, or sad and he's more successful, but actually in defence of container or to impugn Obama's well he's done it really in the identical way she had as on the topic of Islam and jihadism. This lie that Islam is a religion of peace that has nothing to do with terrorism. And the ices is not Islamic Adam in this, I've talked about this on the pot cast many times that there certainly is a a rationale for that lie, and it may in fact be true that it is politically prudent or just geopolitically, prudent to lie in this way, but it is a lie and everyone knows it's a lie and the expiring
of being lied to. On that point, a spy Surely in the immediate aftermath of some terrorist atrocity, his soul galling and the differences that Obama has explained candidly, why he won't say, for example, radical jihadist terrorism because he thinks it will make it water to defeat. Radical jihadist terrorism. Now you can agree or disagree with that road, but he said that there are both bodies seem We just at the eleventh hour being pushed me for after years of method, set it in a whereby I found his defensive the way he talks about this fairly, infuriating because it was a really bullying, hectoring Sanctimonious attack on people who just want an honest discussion of the issues, and I think- and I certainly can argue that we would empower the moderate Muslims and the reformers in the muslim world. Much more. If we just had an honest discussion
the civil war that occurring in the muslim world? I'm with you SAM? You know, I'm with you on this. Not! I do think that the role the view and I have is different and the role of a president running a war. Yes, certainly acknowledge as well, and there are in in wartime. There are some things that you don't want to give the enemy propaganda advantage, and one of the reasons, for example, I'm for Clinton, not tromp, is letting a Trump victory, would empower jihadist terror in a way that that would be terrifying and that and that he's then response to that would be incredibly destructive of our constitution and our way of life. So in some ways I think
and the fact that she referred to Lincoln in some of these respects that that that that there is a balance, especially in wartime, which is what Lincoln was dealing with its what actually any president of this country in so far as jihadist terror. Is, is in some has declared war on us and who we are is going to have to have some war time. Caviling of of the truth, justice happened to a second. War they're out there are some things that are allowed. In that context, I think now I agree with you frustrates frustrating and I don't think it's actually very helpful, but I think this illegitimate argument fortnight think Obama finally did explain its also true, of course, that just saying these words with an doesn't actually help us too a strategy, although I do agree with you that it I think it would help air the real differences dream many Muslims and what this disgusting terrorist thick and violence
impulses and ideologies and religion is but the other promises it has, at least from my perspective, given us Trump, obviously there other. Reasons as well, but it is one of the main ones that has brought Trump to the very threshold of the oval office because, yes, I'm out it is the most common thing I here and I can I get a fair amount of this from mine, my area, while readers and and listeners there, many single issue, voters out there and they leave. The issue is Islam? Terrorism, immigration? In so far as we're talking about Syria refugees coming in who are going to be jihadist sore islamist. It's a single issue that these are people who are worried about Latinos coming to pick our fruit. The way that what they see in Europe I mean the migrant crisis in Europe is a disaster
Tourism is as much as your heart breaks for the people who are coming out of the the Hell hole of Syria who you would just want to help and who are never going to become jihadis. What is happening in Europe is really horrible for its horrifying, an end and Merkel. You know there's a huge amount of responsibility for that and I think, for example, some of that is precisely why the UK left the Eu Non what's left but voted that way. So I agree with you. However, the United States is not Europe, its not absorbing a million absorbed, almost no one, so I mean comparatively very few from Syria. We have to vast oceans but yeah. I do think that not addressing this format, a really constructive, clear minded, and
positive way, does allow someone like tromp to gain credibility, because people want to hear someone telling the truth here, just as it is important that its true that many people in this country, especially those without Greece with, are have to have their wages depressed by mass immigration, especially immigration. That is not in any way legal or documented, and that's a completely legitimate question and when he says we're either a country or not a country he's right, and they frustrates me that not addressing those facts will lead to extremists. I'm crazy people like Trump being able to secure a foothold, and that's that's deeply deeply concerning told so, let's begin to subway into why none of this matters giving
in all her flaws. What do you think Clinton will actually do you know with respect to immigration, with respect to g autism which had set itself for it. You might my argument against the people who win jet. May about Islam and jihadism, and can Clinton's lying about it. My arguments if it is clearly she knows where that jihadis are and she has been prosecuting or has played our part in prosecuting a war against them. If you're, a liberal, perhaps to a fault right, sounds like you are that sort of liberal least on that point too, you, you think she's too interventionist. Probably too eager to fly drones over foreign countries, whether acknowledged or not, and easier, to eager the bomb jihadists and not think too hard about the possible collateral damage. We could talk a lot about
the wisdom or not of intervening in in the Middle EAST at this point, but it seems to me that there is no question. She understands that we have a problem which he hot ism, that securing our country against terrorism and against the spread of Islamism is a a very high priority for any president, and if you wander too far afield here you get into the media the conspiracy theories about whom, Aberdeen and and just how she's, just in the tank for the Saudis and the fact that Clinton has taken money from the Saudis and the categories? all the rest into the Clinton Foundation will make her somehow unable to prosecute the war on terror. I don't find any that credible now I don't either I mean precisely because you such a low Pereda she's perfectly capable of taking money for them and not feeling that any moral obligation to uphold them in future me. That's that's it.
These people are yeah and an interest, and at this point that I was surprised to make in the debate, because she's out she's been often small I'm than an even slime by Trump himself, this billionaire our or pseudo billion, her for being a completely beholden to the billionaires, who give her given her money both for her campaign and for her foundation and yet she's explicitly promise to raise taxes on them. Why doesn't you say yes and if I'm so, such a puppet of the billion where's? Why can I promise now, prior to the election, but I'm going to raise taxes on the right. The bidding about having no principles as she and no core loyalties is that it's the UK, who can do all this and but again she doesn't want to quite advertised that she has no principles or halt his so she's again slightly constraining herself on those on those issues, but yeah and and and vice versa, trumped up the real tribune of the planet,
I say giving all these people a massive that's got hit. It doesn't make any sense at all. Don't you think, there's something a little more sympathetic. We can say about her it at that point that where she is not just that she has no principles is just that there is a need to take the foundation as the narrow case. She will take money from even odious people because she actually knows she can do good with it and she and her heart is in the wrong. Place in so far as what she wants to get done in the world and if she, if she had all the power, what do you think the world? look like it would not be a world of shocking inequality and children. We know it will work in it. You know in sweat, shops. It would be a world very much like the one you hope to have realised at some point is not that her hearts in the wrong place on these issues and for something like
her foundation yeah? Why not take the saudi money in and use it to deal with the AIDS epidemic in Sub Saharan Africa, yet in some ways it yet I agree and the one thing I dont like his personal money. Grubbing, oh you mean such as the personal enrichment through speeches. The personal enrichment through speed he's the people and organisations and regimes that are really disgusting. You don't have to do that. It doesn't advance any broader social good. It just makes you money, yeah well, let me and Bill Clinton has been especially egregious there did you ever do it? Do you know the stories of him asking to give speeches? I forget what which regimes that they were by either of you, obviously the wrong ones with terrible human rights wreckers. He he wanted to give his four hundred thousand dollar keynote somewhere and sent something
like three appeals to the State Department to get this ok and they kept a nine like this is not good. The optics are all wrong here and he just wouldn T no for an answer, and we just think they know the next four hundred thousand dollars, even when you ve made whatever was for the eight million in a period of four years on your speeches, it's just he's he's just to grab that that extra check, whether these people have have We are seeing a check, they didn't like no, and it seems as if they they can just be well off. They have to be extremely well off they after they have to hobnob with some of the most wealthy individuals. In the world, and they want to compete with those people and be in that that league again look we're all human, I'm not we don't electing saints, but there's something unseemly about their money, grubbing and their their ability to accept massive conflict of interests in order to enrich themselves. There is some
unseemly about this? I forget the name of the charity, but you remember the that model who was hit in the asian tsunami and whose I think lost her boyfriend, your fiance and then she started a charity. I think for India asian relief in a salami relief, and this got a fair amount of press at one point an end date. They held a fundraiser for her charity I think it raised like a million dollars and Clinton was the keynote, but then it comes out that he charged five Five hundred thousand dollars for his kilos. You Betty did something I mean you ain't ever thing, it's like he he's already he's already, and maybe this money went to the Clinton Foundation will say that's the best case scenario, but he's already fantastically wealthy he's ostensibly supporting this charity. There's just struggling to be born right and all he has to do is show up and give his speech. I'm sure he didn't even have to travel for it, and he takes fully.
Half of the money raised. That tells me like everything I need to know about him. It would never occurred to me to do that and when I say if I am speaking in a cup away, some I'm gonna, speak with Richard Dawkins at a benefit for that, the centre for Inquiry and Richard Dawkins Foundation. It would never heard me to ask to be paid to do that is like this Let's get every last time, no matter what you you get off, these people and its it really is it isn't. It is isn't extremity to them an institute that the text, even if you were to even if I were to concede the pointed at present should be able to make a huge amount of money off in a private speaking to private groups. There is, there is simply a degree with which they are less
Let's put it. We know that they are money grubbing in a way that they really does leave ones jor open. That's that's all I'm saying, and you look at someone like Jimmy Carter, hoo hoo, who has behaved in such an exemplary fashion or or even George, W Bush, and I think those things matter in a republic, I think one- reasons are democracy is in such terrible straits and the reason the people so cynical about it. It's because they see these public officials trying to use public office for their own personal enriched and that is that it may be in any individual case, defensible but collectively and politically it tarnish is our system and it adds to the cynicism, while the the revolving door that people talk about is obviously corrupting where you have senators, become lobbyists who become senators who become lobbyists that opportunism and cronyism items is where populism does gain a foothold
I mean you. U. I live in Washington, D c n. It I've lived here for twenty five years and the man the money that has come into the city. I mean it's great for those of us who live here if you've already got some people already bought property here, which I did twenty five years ago, but at the same time, it just feels like an assisted. The hideous incrustation of low level corruption, that I think has has helped and aided and abetted the kind of populism trump has absurdly, of course harnessed and and- and I do think, unless we, unless the elites begin to exercise some sense- civic responsibility. When I see someone like Leslie Moon verse, for example, of CBS saying you know, George may be terrible for America, it has been great CBS. I mean at some level screw you. I mean really your
disgrace a use, a a citizen or you will you a parasite simile, the way, the Jeff, car is only now saying. Well, maybe we shouldn't have opened the spigots and let him have his rallies live on CNN for hours on end day after day, but it made us on a money. I mean at summit level when people seeds leads behaving in this way. They have every reason to despise them when they see the elites you have, for example, conducted and supported a war that was a disaster and no one. No one is really been held accountable in any core way for it. When they see these, Financial elites leads screw up massively and in such a way that they, they plunged millions of people into poverty and economic insecurity for decades and still demand this.
Same amount of remuneration, in fact earning more now than they did before. At some point, these things, these things will count and they will destabilize the entire system that we believe in its trump is right. The elites in this country deserve a shocking and my view is that the only way forward its begin in this country. To start treating their responsibilities as members of this republic seriously their citizens, not just moneymakers, and you know I wrote a piece about Plato and his he's an analysis of how a tyrant emerges democracy and one of the crucial conditions for Plato the ruling elite becomes more interested in money than they do in the survival of their own republic and narrow. Those conditions are absolutely in place, a magic, absolutely classic example. One of the members of the elite with lots of money says I am go
to call out the other members of the Oleta, I am going to represent you and I, and I am going to expose them and there's an element in which Trump has exposed the bankruptcy of of a republican and democratic neoconservative foreign policy he's exposed the bankruptcy of the globalist economic policy. That has no concern whatsoever for many people in this country who smell the condescension and who rightly a repeal and, in my view, is that if the elites don't hear this and don't adjust their own behaviour, make some bloody sacrifices, then can trump is just the beginning of a populist radical movement that threatens the entire countries. Similarly, if the elites don't understand the danger of this kind of income. Inequality will do to democracy. You're, then they're gonna lose that democracy and they're gonna lose their free markets. Their share the view that way
Inequality is a huge problem and when I wrote about it some time around the time of the day financial collapse. I was amazed at the the Vitry all that I got back into Chance of you know no ethical concern and all around wealth inequality, and they just people and any this was I'm sure these were not especially wealthy. People attack in me. There's something there's this very strange religion of the self made per sin in in America, where general general. I am very sympathetic to that view, but look why that leads to a situation and its not that has always happened. There were many situations in which it has happened, in which The ability and lots of money has been great for everybody, but in a combination of globalized economics, the increased massively increased benefits to people who are smart in this economy.
The the massive sorting and sifting of the population in which large numbers of able people are moving into Super zip codes in which which we created this bubble. That is essentially Lloyd Native of the rest of the country, then then you in real danger of tipping the entire system upside down. I think I mean this is. I think conservatives of all people conservatism want to conserve a free market system and undemocratic system, need to be more concerned than anybody else about this kind of wealth and income inequality, because it will destroy, belies and deal utilise the entire system What we living in right now is clearly a moment in which the entire system is illegitimate, in the views of many Americans now tromp is empty up to it
but in a way that is utterly irresponsible, reckless in fact free, but that there is a ground for this. That there is a real reason for this resistance is. Is it denial, and I think we need to get real about that here. We also that the way that technology is, of necessity dragging us into a future, which could be a very good future if we play our cards right. Where there are jobs that are disappearing, that are never coming back and they're not going to be replaced by new jobs and people know descend not fools their living they are living in a way that people like you and me, and not living in some ways on the edge of this abyss. I can see their futures disappearing. A more than just this morning, Tesla just released a video of the next generation of cars, so there's literally com It's available now right that is fully autonomous, so there
You see this car leave the garage drive on side streets, stop it stop signs, avoid pedestrians and recognise red lights versus green lights, drop its occupant, but it offers Tesla and then go find an empty parking space. Driverless cars are here what they're going to do. When you look at white working class men in this country, so many of their involved in driving, they are the most common profession. Apparently white man in his country, and the truth is that people look at the elites and say who is really worried about this? Who there is really listening to us. And the truth is almost no one is I mean you think I'd take NAFTA. Even after I supported, and I think in general, it has been a good thing, but that it has had extraordinary disparate impact in this country that that some populations have lost leverage com,
out and and income, because of it is undeniable, and the fact that these economist didn't really predict that and if so far as they did predicted, didn't really take that seriously where they would at if it were their jobs and and I think the isolation increasingly the elites in that the diff distance between them and most people in this country has lead people to feel this, no one who can represent their voice there that no one represents their interests and and- and I think it is incredibly important that they they hear that
see something that is concerned, which is so that, even though you can make an argument for say, TCP you, you have to acknowledge it politically and socially. This country hasn't it. Maybe not able to absorb this kind of rapid change. Did it that mainly to slow it down for the sake of our social stability, for the sake of our political integrity, and that's what you that's. What you're saying in in Britain, for example, were breaks. It happened, which is a perfectly my view, here. You didn't have a couple of loony demagogues like Boris, I'm not a barrage of Nigel, but no there wasn't a trump figure there wasn't and this was a genuine feel that the elites in this country are doing things that with. Regard for their fellow for many of their fellow citizens must push Britain into an existential crisis of this point and- and I think,
if we ignore those trends at our peril, we have to figure out how to addressing the power Of course, we don't know how to address this question there. If we don't go when you have an answer to this problem, but one to take the point I just raised about the progress of technology, the clearly at a certain point. And once we arrive at the actual end of human drudgery, may wonder we have when you self driving cars, and not only there are no need for ape driven cars. You would have to be irresponsible to let an ape I have a car, because you are so much worse added right. It it'll be illegal to drive your car, and it should be because, right now, Thirty thousand people or thirty five thousand people die every year reliably because of how bad we are driving cars. So, at a certain point the machines are going to steal jobs that aren't coming back and we have to break this connection. This is this pseudo ethical connection,
queen work and having a claim on your own survival in society rights of the idea that, if you don't work, you shouldn't be able to eat witches where a lot of people at you know, ironically, a lot of the people who would vote for Trump or who will vote for Trump or people who look across. The way at the another ship was neighbour and think if you don't work for you don't deserve anything. I don't want any of my tax dollars going to to support your shiftless lifestyle. Well, at a certain point among its stand by way of thinking, but at a certain point, We will arrive in a world where, again, if only if we play our cards right We will arrive in a world where there is so much wealth, and so much automation, boring jobs that that there, will not be enough productive things to do and will be left with just creative and fun things to do, and people like the troll had only paid for that no
trouble. Is that not everybody is capable of writing quit your folks for that so you wouldn't you universal basic income. Are you need something that Joe, you need a safety net that gets better? and better and better than your wealth gets created. That's that's at you. The best argument for a bombing here that one of the things you can actually do to help people in the situation is give them healthcare that works. You know that's an actual way of making, but that the diva problem SAM is it work, makes people happy it gives the meaning it makes them feel doctor, if it makes them feel as if they they're worth something so so, then we need a cultural renaissance that values that that very principle of Gilad, mastering some craft getting good added and doing it, but we have also mentally. We will have to break the connection, but
when doing that and surviving, because there's no need me as the alternative that just wealth inequality of a sort we have never witness before? Yes, but that's gonna, be solely within the protestant work Ethic and of the United States can be a huge natural cycle shipped, but I'm not sure we capable of achieving an you see in these communities around the country. You first will you see it dropping labour force participation by working age, men all over the place and working age? Young men who have nothing to do except go and video games is not a good thing for the society as a whole in it it decouples also marriage and taken care of kids as something that that you can. You can take pride in because you are the provider and Can we talk about people's psyches here? We're not talking about simply economics- and I worry about this. You know and and
I also worry about, and here we will disagree about the collapse of of real religious, communities around the country and traditional religion, because that did give people meaning and direction just as the nation. The idea of the nation gives people meaning and connection- and you know Mark said religion is the appeal to the people, but you know what these days opiates, the opiate of the people and and and at some level, unless you have a cultural shift in which people can have meaning in their licence, have self worth That's, not going to be simply about surviving, but about something else. Then you can have a psychological and social problem. That's going to. Don't get worse and worse, and we seeing now patterns of behaviour and patents, a family life in Rural America that that's very closely correlate with some of the more disastrous patents in in the past and in an calling the present in inner cities in this country and its
this is a huge problem. I agree. I think a universal basic income is is poor. Only one way to go, but it's just the beginning, its not the end of this and its credibly hot, and no one is really talking about this, and yet people are deeply anxious about it and I think that's discrepancy between When you look at this country right now, it's doing really really well. Actually, certainly, if you compare it to any other advanced economy, the United States is the country you would bet on an yet its yet its people are clearly in large. Numbers of people are deeply unhappy and and lost and bewildered, and when someone comes along, this is the moment when the that want to be tired comes along and says. I will make it all better for you. I will fix it. U dont, you can't fix it yourself. I will do it for you this issue. Huge appeal as a kind of relief of giving over to someone else who is making as well
no absurd promises and crazy claims, but that's where the appeal comes in it. We ve got to begin. Is it leads to really engaging in reengage these real stresses psychological, social as well as we can mac among so many of our fellow citizens, so that they feel they are part of the same country. Your. Why I totally agree with that, but I am aware that we ve spent ninety minutes terror tearing down Clinton's candidacy for Helen, let me get back to Trump and why he's a particular danger? It hasn't really less to do with policy, then, with his core political, thinks he is a man or even just as core. I made it like this course was just talk about trumped. The man will trust the man is some
who has no understanding of a non zero sum. Engagement in this is, I think, part of his corps that that an end, liberal democracy and a free market in a free society are absolutely depend and on the notion that we can do things together and you in and I win at the same time, and even if we don't in the particular instance winner, someone else. We know that in the long run, what we're doing will make all of us better and so that ability to actually understand a nonsense or some engagement and how win win can happen is crucial to the survival of liberal democracy. He has no concept of it. This is why it is not a stand. Trade he's. Only understanding is I win. You lose. It goes further and the only way he can be psychically at peace. Is when he is mastering and dominating another individual. There's only one way in which a country can exist in the world and
It is by mastering and dominating other other countries. This psyche, this profoundly at odds with the very character that is required to sustain western civilization, is put his so dangerous about. So you see that sets a typical democratic institution that people can Haeckel stand up and protests to speech and the proper thing for a democratic power. Visions to say is when the crowd drawers it disapproval of this disruption to say hold on a minute. This person has a right to say: let give them their moment now. If they disruptive you can have been taken out at this moment, we everybody listen. We live in a free society. This person deserves to have their say and that's part of the two and where you see, Obama do it a million times. Every politician time from now from says this person is disgusting. I would like to punch human face I'd like to see him carried out on a stretcher. Similarly, if you take the question of a free press which again no
politician likes in the moment their taking him down or her down their they're barbs. He regards that function as something disgusting. He singles them out in these round. These are disgusting, awful disgusting people. This process is is right. He doesn't, he actually thinks it. Satire should be prevented. He wants, as an elderly taken off the air because of less match's stay against him. This is an attitude is utterly incompatible with a free society. You can see this in his attitudes again to women, it's employee and you can see it. The only interaction is one in which he controls and owns and dominates a woman not that he treats that person as an equal. He can't because that would mean he's he's psychologically incredibly disturbed when he has to deal with people as equals. He just can't that's
why he has no friends these obviously Emmy. He really does present a kind of clinical case study in at least a few problems and is obviously a narcissist again in the clinic sent me the way he reacts to slights against him. His character, or is just it is, is pathological. Not is not just bad style is not just on presidential. It is. He cannot resist his impulse to do what obviously not in his best interests and will certainly not be in the interests of the country. There is also a real psychological panicky. Has this old, probably Robbie, off the wrong way, but he's he's a pagan. He has no conception that the week have any status in our society. He only understand strength now, if you think of anything of Christianity, as I would in its in its best sent its core sense, the one
The core insights of Jesus, one of the most counter intuitive inside so Jesus, was that if someone hits you on that, one cheek turn around and offer him the other. If someone does something wrong to you be good to him, if someone does something to horribly a thousand times, let them do it again and trumps position is. If someone gives you the slightest insult, you have to hit back a thousand times more he's. Not just not. Christianity is clearly the case. He's antichrist it I mean he is he's a he's he's like something out of game drones. He has no capacity, that's why he has no compunction in marking the week, and I I don't want you sound, but I've never never seeing someone in my entire life, I've been around someone who seeing someone disabled and openly mocks them for their disability. What isn't the trump
defence of that is that he mocks people that way in general, so wasn't actually specifically targeting this disabled reporter. Yes, but nonetheless, let's see you, you mock all sorts of people. There is a distinction between mocking people who a powerful, which is a completely legitimate thing. A mocking people for idiocy but markings people for vulnerabilities that they cannot change he so obviously a boy and the fact that his bullying plays well to so many millions of peoples is really disturbing because- and this also Profound recklessness about the man he's narcissism is so great that, if challenged he doesn't he you, you will bring anything down around him. He has no loyalty to the system or any institutions outside of himself. And you see this in his financial dealings to the constant lying, the sting of people, the tearing up of contracts, the treatment of simple obligations to one's fellow human beings that-
have to instantly be sacrificed and then the ability, for example, to get into such amazing debt through such reckless spending and then to be in such debt that he himself is too big. Bail out the banks have to bailing out and then to treat. That is a success afterwards. This is this: is pathway vehicles, I mean this is a man. This is a man also utterly out of control. Its is something really bizarre about the impulse to get back control or take back control is breaks. It had control your borders or control of society or control these four is to hand over power to someone has no control over himself We ve never seen this. I mean he is any such an outlier in terms of human behaviour yeah. He's he's now live in a way that I have spoken about before on the Pike ass. I just want to talk about all the more because not that many people talk about what is so strange about his speech and the very few
people who find it as disturbing as I do, but I want to just found some this off, because it, this is action what I find most disturbing about him. So we we ve talked about how all politicians, why and how- and I actually think that they should pay much more a price for this than they do, but there's something about trumps lies that are of a totally different character and I'm so. To take one example I recall from- and it was the second debate where Anderson Cooper brought up the his tweeting about the sex tape for the pageant contestant. It doesn't exist like he tweeted out going go, find her sex tape and I'm sorry I didn't happen, write his. He just didn't happen. Now there is not a person on either side of the island. It is not a person in trumps Camp who didn't know about this tweet raymie. He absolutely happened that that part was not disputable right. He tweeted go look for the sixty and yet he said
didn't happen, I didn't do it right or last night, when they, when he was brought up, that he had marked the looks of the women. He doesn't want right right, we're dead and announced it didn't didn't do that. I didn't do that and at some point you realise that the people watching it even his supporters must know, must know right. That he's denying in front of millions of people, something that we know we can prove to be true, but that's not a lie and let us not even a lie. That's the thing, there's something so there's something so childish about this, and that is that is terrifying. It's a it's. Also a big lie. I mean it's such a massive, but is about it. It's I just want to get. It was behind this lie because it is a is either a total unawareness that you're in dialogue with others antient creatures, they who have like a leader who have memories and who have logical expectations, or it is a just a total shamelessness
because what you are doing is you are totally disregarding what is inevitable going to be going on in the minds of the people you're talking to that they all saw the tweet. How can you say It didn't happen because there only besides, I think in his mind. Those only are you with me or again. Me there's no other paradigm in which he understands reality. So so, demand is demanding in the way that someone like Hitler, demanded that Mussolini money. You you. Actually. You know it's a lie, but you support him anyway right down the key thing, and you willingly see this as an act of power. Nor is it not in any way related to truth or reality, and that's what your worshipping your worshipping, someone's mastery over yourself and you're feeling a kind of relief
and release in in supporting somebody who can make this way you can do is telling you I will create reality, for you think you're, giving them too much credit In terms of any of that being thought out, I think he really is much more of a child, then that he's not girdles he's not somebody who has thought this through as calibrate in his speech to the the moral sentiments and and panic of his audience. He is someone who can do other than he's doing miss it is there that the line is one thing, but the this is what I have commented about before my part caterpillar, there's something about the vacuousness of his speech. The fact that he can say something three times and it was meaningless. The first time right. What I'd like to think like that, the lack of information content when he begins talking. We he'll say something like this. I guess it also lie where he'll say something like he said this in the last two debates. What when the his sexual assaults and indiscretions were brought up his response
Is nobody respects women more than I do nobody right, then I did it to get around of laughter last, and I am happy to say what only what does he think he's doing. There is like this, so I mean just on its ways. He didn't you SAM to go back to the Clinton lies let that lets, because here we really do have to lawyers but yeah, but the word liar doesn't capture the difference here. Right now, then there's an obviously self serving machiavellian way in which we lighted to cover our ass into protect ourselves into get through a situation. We all do that, whether we like two minutes or not, we not all saints. We visited human thing. This is it is a different level of of of asserting that reality has to reality. Itself has to be under my mastery. That's it that's what I get from it that he has to always be in control, and so, if reality is telling him he's not, then he has to simply be
able to deny the reality, and he has also just think it stupidity, I think I think, is actually not very smart. The problem, as he D can't deal with the cognitive overhead required to actually lie success Matthew. He lies about everything, and so some of his lies are successful. But these cases when he, when he's in extremism, he can't do the arithmetic to figure out. How can I push back against this charge that I don't know no admit to in a way that will be credible. Anymore, obviously be Alai right, so he just can't do them but the many other thing about his speech in this isn't really unique. They focused on line, is just as the information poverty of it. I view some one speech, as is almost like one of those three detours, you have a house serve a hotel room or if you have a conference centre, we get online once he with his place, looks like- and you can
move around in the space. You can turn around. You can see, basically everything. That's what's a person speeches like you see, basically, what's in the space of their mind, you see what's connected to what you see: what's not there and given the way he speaks. We know a tremendous amount about his mind and there is very little in their rights has he ever read a book, I would bet he has not read a book in the last thirty years. He cannot be a reader given the way he talks and we can be absolutely sure he knows almost nothing, that's relevant to being the present the United States and yet obviously forty percent of the american electorate doesn't seem to care about that. No again, and one has to explain this somehow right, I do think I
You think it's it's, it's the classic route of support for dictatorships. You know to surrender one's own entire possibility of self government and in thinking about reality yourself to this. This persons will to power and it's it's it's tackling by the way I'm in love. I saw last night that if you go back to twenty twelve after the election of twenty twelve, he said it was fixed. It was rigged, with the whole thing was a sham that we should have a revolution given the way that he has been, he will do that SAM, you gotta figure certainly take the moment the moment in the debate last night, where obviously the trump people think this has been blowing entirely out of proportion. The moment where he's and he wouldn't necessarily concede his defeat or Italian He'Ll- keep us in suspense. He has two he'll have to see at the time, and their dry and a an invidious comparison between
that and what score did in be contesting the election with the Supreme Court and what is so different here, and I don't know if you want to talk about the details of what record did, but what's so different here is that for me, Tromp has been stoking the mob, with fears about the illegitimacy of our electoral process, based on nothing right based on nothing but conspiracy theories and ease preparing his followers to react bad. And even violently to defeat so for him to stand on that stage night and say you'd. I don't know if I'm going to accept the I'll have to see at the time that was just a child s life, all undemocratic moment. He hates democracy. It means that he sometimes we'll have to lose. There's a reason he likes Putin, because here
The only way he conceived can conceive of democracy is the way Putin conceives of the democracy as a completely potemkin thing that simply empowers him and in which he is in control. That's that's why he likes Putin, could he wants to be Putin and it's the only way of governing that he truly understands some people are gonna, say immediately recoil at that claim. Gaga comparisons due to him in between, Hitler or or even a figure it look. Comparison is absolutely on. I really do, and I know that it's been disappointing completely devalued and is one reason We should never cried Wolf before, but I don't think I'm thinking about temporary now damaging with someone is running into democracy, on the principle that democracy itself must be is so corrupt. It must be I'm done or renewed by a single cope leader figure. This is
we buy more. Europe is extremely Weimar. He's member, he is now said he said and argued and still has not. Recant will really recanted that the president, the current president, should never was illegitimate because he was not a citizen. He said in advance now that Hillary Clinton should not have been allowed to run for president, because she's, allegedly part of a criminal conspiracy, so There is no none of these institutions have any legitimacy for him, and none of them was just take a second or try to rehabilitate the comparison to Hitler, because you again you you have lost the argument. Famously the moment, you involve Hitler, the Nazis, but it is worth reflecting on how consistently Hitler was underestimated and he was a he was treated. The way most of us have been treating trump as a buffoon as a clown, as somebody who couldn't do much damage, because he is obviously the forces
Reason are gonna prevail at the end of the day, in the face of this kind of guy They made fun of the way he looked. They made fun of his hair. Look look from pc ridiculous figure, I mean by any stretch of the imagination from the front stupid orange. For each in turn, the voluntary this absurd hair to all of us is the absolute clown. But people forget that's what everybody says. Hitler's what everybody said about Mussolini and they do look ridiculous, chow then made a movie making fun of him as a complete, absurd character. But if you campaign actively, if you whip up, especially if your touching these racial and and in in group, our group feelings and when you have consistently argued that the entire system is itself illegitimate and then you get to power and you get a power not because you want him. Hitler's Hitler ceiling with thirty seven percent, but the conservative traditional forces thought he could be
used. They like the support that is, is a follow, as with his followers brought into the broad right wing movement in Burke, thought he could be manipulated, made a figurehead. They didn't taken seriously well that that is what has been so irresponsible about the rest of the republican establishment, the way they have enabled him and I'm just a c p p he's my aware this is easier than happy. I understand is beyond disgraceful me. Do you think that their their egos wouldn't allow for this kind of this lickspittle approach to his assent? But, You look at people like Paul Ryan and Emma TED Cruz, going to going against him, and then now we are working the phone banks more I'm it's just it's incredible behavior, where you have someone like Mitt Romney, lose a stand, Now, like the one guy with a spine, gives a speech
I don't know when it was maybe eight months ago saying this guy's totally unqualified to be president. I Romney looks like a saint at this point. There all hindenburg at this point, and the terrified the reason and not taking on even now is because their terrified at their own voters attached to him I mean you look at his economics, free trade and the debt. These are things that the republican Hard CORE caucus, a hundred, how the freedom cork is the top a hundred PETE right wing people that had had ideological litmus test litmus test impurity up the was ew. This man has completely destroyed, any of their economic, let alone their debt vexation, but they none of them. In fact, they all have to support him. Why? Because their own voters are supporting him and they are terrified that if they tell him, the voters will turn on them, and once you see that moment when they are too frightened of their followers
act. Then you realize how terrifying to be were he to win because were he to win almost? Certainly the house and the Senate would be with him. Almost certainly, then he will be able to shape the Supreme Court. There would be no institutional resistance except the Republican Party itself, which has shown itself to be incapable of resisting so that justice cheaply deck in and let me let me point out- I just want to put the scenario because I didn't get, it hasn't been put out there before and we are at war and a war could get worse. In fact, he's very election, I think, would provoke a wave of of jihadist terrorism. Now what he's response to that be? I think there's no question that the cost
teaching is we ve known? It would be in tatters overnight. This is a man who was advocated openly advocate the torture of of prisoners of war is openly advocated. The mass murder of civilians he's he's advocated the killing of the families of terrorists, but both confusing about this for it for his supporters is his office Oh advocated an isolationism that makes Hilary look like the warmonger right here. I insisted, It was against the Iraq war, even though that's at best ambiguous, but he's advocated a retreat from the world and base clay. He just wants to build a wall and hunker down. If you take him in the least most of his moods and many of the people, I support him in any who supported Sanders. Frankly, this is music to their ears. We don't need to be the world's cop. We don't need to be in the Middle EAST. Those people are barber
Europeans who are never going to understand that democracy is a good thing. Less just make our country great again right. That's the promise, except he's not consistent on that He wants to destroy icy, I which he can live minutes presume. Presumably a Putin level bombing campaign or maybe a nuclear one. Why can't we use our nukes? We ve got em shouldn't, we be using them what this does and again what you have to understand. We always project from our current situation. Think things continue as they do. No, these kind of movements ah seize upon events The events change our reality and the emotions that they can be the can be can be summoned up and manipulated in these processes. The mass emotions, especially when we have no elite controlling media anymore. When it's completely free, far zone Is incredibly dangerous, I mean he's another thing I would point out: no, there was a story about business leaders who,
support trump in New York Times couple weeks ago and None of them would go on the record. Why? Because they all fell, feared personal retribution, and we all know it trusts incredibly craven that awaits a Craven. On the other hand, it also is also clear that He would do that, and he talked about the presidency, someone to call off the head of a company. He would do the equivalent of bills of attainder on individuals and dissenters. He threatened the owner of the Washington Post with using the Anti trust regulations to go after him if the washed imposed opposes him. Amid these This is this is completely dictatorial. Behaviour has nothing to do with a free society. So soldiers have to put a fine point on this, because
given all of the heinous things we have said about the Clinton's and Hilary in particular. Why does it matter that she be in charge as opposed to him and then, when you just imagine going forward in dealing with Russia, China or the problem of jihadism or anything else, any other challenge we're going to faze? Why do you feel that there really is a difference here worth caring about? The many people think that they're both liars. They ve all of you, know her husband's, a rapist he's a rapist, Esther beta they're, both trail at the very least trailing accusations of rape is ugliness on both sides because he uniquely threatens our entire political system from within and he uniquely threatened global stability, in a way that no president, no candidate for presidency for president Britain has ever done in this country. Did we just just because we haven't been here
for there is this amazing complacency about what can happen in a democracy, and if you read history, an you and you see this happening, it is textbook for how democracies perish it. Is it Reddit dangerous levelled at it completely outside any previous candidate. For the presidency outside anything in american history. Short of the eighteen sixties, butts all that out of a more outside any precedent with respect to the basic rules of liberal democracy, the basic core, constructing ideas that make us the west, but a minute it is its outside the per any present in terms of his disrespect for the institutions and his complete unawareness of of what's going on in the world. He's a he's, an ignoramus and a narcissistic bully who just wants to crash through every impediment. He
I and- and many of those impediments are our democratic system. Yes- and we ve seen, for example, that this is so powerful in him that he will continue to do this, even though it sabotage his himself. So man we, if he will be president, we would be the people he would be sabotaging our society would be what he would be casting asunder. We would be yanked, to and fro towards escalating conflict internally and internationally, in a way that we ve never been before this country will be torn apart. They would be violence in the streets
now. But what do you do with the the objection which I have now heard many times that you're giving the role of the presidency way too much weight? And if you think that he could do anything of the sort you have just described, you don't understand the checks and balances in our government. What checks and balances I mean, as I said before, you have, you would have a republican Senate and House and and us and a stacked supreme court. When you look at what the executive has developed into into this country, including under Obama, the powers that it is assumed, the fact that the Congress itself seems incapable of functioning to actually passing laws independently of a president to see exactly how this system has devolved out of being republic in
being something like an empire. He is all Caligula figure, but a Caligula with nuclear weapons. I can't I've, been I've been unable to sleep this past year. I've had ways of anxiety about this. People who do not take this threat seriously. Are deluding themselves, it's that grave. Until I found it chemical about this, but for God's sake, he's telling us all this. We seem there's no doubt the thing: it's terrifying may about our system in I'm sorry, as one who is now reasonably confident that that Clinton will be present so that we actually have to live with the consequences of this historic mistake that at least forty percent of Americans seem I want to make, but just imagine if he were a better Canada if he were, if he judged it, he had the same complete absence of moral core, but he were actually small
articulate aware of how to lie if he were is as attractive to intelligent people as we have someone like Obama was, and yet still had all the wrong instincts, but could just cover for them in the process of campaigning. He would be present this question yeah accept. I think, then, that the the pot of his appeal his is his craziness and it would be very hard for a sane person within our broad demagogue. Like system to be saying any of the things that he saying including I won't respect the results of the election. I mean, I don't think, there's a kind of gentler tromp out there. I think it is a package I dont, for example. I had no, no fear the Mitt Romney would behave like this if,
where to get into office, and to be perfectly honest, I have no. I would have nothing like these qualms if TED crews were to be present at the United States. So that brings up another topic which we haven't touch, but one thing that trump Has- on, strangely surprisingly, and in some ways, happily from my point of view, is he's either undercut or just revealed the unimportance of fundamentalist religion in our politics. This point him he's because he's not. He can't even credibly fake being a Christmas. Mercifully one thing he hasn't been able to do her to his credit right, but like all what? What do you make a value? His silver is another still writing jacketed out religion from our power to do. What is what do you want? I can we not think we're going to see a fascinating evolution on the evangelical in evangelical world, a generational split the what trumpet shown actually is exceeded.
In a way that I never thought would be this boldly exposed the otter cynicism of those who allegedly are Christians. You know when it becomes purely transactional when you are electing a self evident pagan to enforce. To make sure that laws are passed to defend your particular fundamentalist view of certain policy proposals. Then you basically sacrificed any credibility and end moral integrity you ever had- and this is also blindingly he has to anybody under the age of forty who has it was a party evangelical world, and certainly anybody who isn't white and it was part of the agenda well, which people forget, is quite a significant proportion. In other words, this could be it my hope is that Obama's long game has been too Oh enrage he's like a poultice that has brought all the past to the surface, to drive these people so crazy that they will jump off the cliff. There is a hope,
and and- and I may be delusional here- but I certainly hope we have to do the audacity of hope that he will have so expose the bankruptcy of of of fundamentalist Christian against politics, that it will die and Christianity as it exists, and that should exist in in the private sphere in helping engine generating important social movements in in in in in in helping the poor in in protecting the week. In welcoming the stranger will actually begin to have a rebirth Out of this awful corrupting and cynical period, you and you see that liberty university- you see that where I talk to younger, even gels, he'll have seen people like Russell more people who have stood up against him within that faith. Community and their very important
and he may have just revealed in a way that no one else could have how bankrupt and disgusting these people are what trade as they are to what they purportedly leave themselves in it to be a Christian, isn't you can't you can be a transactional, amoral person and still be a risky and by any understanding of workers. The enemy is, I know, plenty of people have no say may happen, but this exposes it in such an incredible way. It's amazing to see people like Ralph Red talk about him as I've seen Ralph Reed talk about this in public by also actually ran into Ralph ETA at a conference and spoke to him face to face about this, as is the same story. He just goes to the move of you know: it's not for me to judge what what's in another man's heart. You know I can judge another man's faith and enough. He if he says, he's a Christian he's Christian, and you know it wants to lecture me about Corinthians too. I'm gonna get
these salmon irrelevant, as I have asked God forgiveness. Of course he hasn't no. But if you haven't ass, God forbid, given us here, did you just non you just sorry, you can believe what someone's telling you about their art there being very open and candid about. They don't give a damn about this, and every single thing they support is antithetical to any core christian thought. And I still supporting him so the table, but take me forwards- let's, let's assume, which seems reasonably safe at this point- that in twenty days or whatever it is, we wake up in a week, where Trump is no longer a candidate and he is not going to be president? What do you think the aftermath we'll be, and what do you think it should be from the point of view of holding people accountable for their their backing hammer there. There mere acquiescence to him will. The hope is that the losses so catastrophic
think that merely self interest alone will help Republicans to understand this direction, for their party is poison electrically poison, morally poison, politically poison. That this is the where they have ended up, is an absolute dead end, the bottom of a sewer, and there has to be a rebirth there has to be a construction of conservatism, a right of centre view that can once again as reestablished civility respect for tradition and institutions and can appeal in a constructive, rational way to some of the legitimate issues that the supporters of Trump have air the need to get a better handle on illegal immigration, the need to understand that free trade needs to be needs to be arrested to some extent at least not to be continued
in this accelerating way for a while, at least the didn't grappling with the confounded mental economic insecurity. The energy needs to grapple with its failure, its fundamental failure to provide meaning in people's lives so that they wouldn't be susceptible to this kind of crypto fascism? Or this cult, the leader, ah an inner, that's my hope. One of the things I hope to do is to begin to argue for such a conservatism, because unless we rescued that side of the equation, we have two parties, I mean I don't know, what's gonna happen to Republican
howdy! Maybe we may be going through a fundamental realignment, but my suspicion is the realignment will be socio economic. It will be around certain other issues, such as trade and immigration. It's going to be about nationalism, verses, global cosmopolitanism, old globalism and to construct that position in a constructive, sane and moderate way is going to be the challenge to save this country, because if they continue, this wait at some point they gonna get it did and to some extent, if we can interpret this election if it ends up that way and pray God it will ask, repudiate a sign that, in fact not only not only has this as this particular long running straining in radicalism and populism on the right run aground. It has to be started over, don't whose there the can do it and the paradoxes. Of course, when parties lose the most
We members of them are the ones that always survive because, because other ones only still with the safest seats or in office on, but I think this might be a huge wake up call not just for the and not just for the elite who had that wake up, call in twenty twelve and had an autopsy and saw this but may actually sink down so that you might get, for example, my hope rigs. If, for example, is the Fox NEWS might actually shift, might get rid of a Riley inanity and actually have more making Kelly and an end. Wallace and Shap Smith and responsible right of centre news gathering here. What were the role of the raw meat
Here is really worth thinking about, and hopefully that there will be a reckoning, because the way we have entertained ourselves into the abyss by just Jeff Watchin Trump, because his good television and giving him this megaphone, as I wrote a blog post on this couple weeks ago- and it ends with really what is just a fantasy. But it's it's a hope that I I don't see why it wouldn't be achievable and seems like it should just be r r reflexive reaction to his losing its also possible. You know that the people who have supported him will turn on him. What hoping is- is that they will see that they ve been conned. He had was never really serious and then there's something something incredibly dangerous and irresponsible. The just happened. It had nearly happened here and when the analogy I right is to o J after his acquittal.
Me OJ when he got acquainted from two murders that everyone knew he had committed. He just thought he was gonna get on the golf course in any call his golfing bodies and, in a start, his life over, but he an immediate outcast and he was a pariah and wondering if the media could treat trump. That way, which is actually deprive him of all oxygen so that it like these only course would beat us start his own website to gather his we hope that he will become a byword, a cautionary tale for what is possible and what is disgusting and dangerous society. It certainly those who are aided and abetted him need to be in a purged it. I don't mean that an aggressive way, but they need to
out the way they are ignored, so they need to be ignored, but in but as some send, insofar as they have positions of power and still like Ale. Thank God is, is gone, but social soccer and moving these people who ate it and abetted this for purely cynical self interested reasons. And those shameless individuals within the republican Party. People like Gingrich and Christie and Mcconnell and and Ryan need to be exposed.
Ah and and removed. But the question is: is their time and space to get reasonable replacements for those people who are we going to have to have them themselves, acknowledge their accountability and responsibility for this near death? Experience of the american experiment, and that's my hope that we can do this- might be such an excrescence in retrospect, once his lost and done so dramatically where he may about. He brought down the entire republican Party with him that we could start over and that it might actually be the reset moment for the right to use that word. Obama has said for a long time he's waiting for the fever to break this might be the moment. The fever is breaking that's why, at this moment of peak fever, it seems so terrifying, but this might be
necessary to purge these demons from the right and begin to reconstruct, but that will require from Hilary, and this is what a difficult and ability to reach out to exactly those people at a time in her own left is gonna, be demanding that she'd be even more politically correct and even more left wing than is our impulse to do. She's gonna be in a very tough position, and the left, I think, has to begin to understand their responsibility, also for the republic as a whole, but look he's got if he has. If she gets the house in the Senate, which is now completely possible unlikely, but possible she's gonna have two years just two years to do whatever she wants and the choices she makes will be an interesting not just for the advanced if our own political ideology, but for the preservation of this republic- and I also have a feeling that Obama himself and maybe Romney, I gonna have to have a role,
in helping put this back together again, you I'm left still within the sinking, feeling that many people listening to us. One think that are litany of trumps faults is firstly exaggerated and that he couldn't be that bad and he is, after all, a very successful business man or pretends to be and that we have some how soft peddled the corrosive effect of having Someone like Hillary Clinton with her email scandal and all the rest become president. No well. I don't know that we can do a better job than then we ve done trying to differentiate there. Two cases, but I am, I am left with the feeling that people still think how come on his he'd be fine with a system needs to be shaken up and he's just a guy to do it and she's just more the same. He won't shake it up, he'll blow it up, and no one should want
blow up liberal democracy and a free society and global peace. And unless you understand that distinction, your Europe. Your fooling yourselves, I mean your seriously falling yourselves is the difference between having an agenda that year, concealing perhaps some degree to get elected, but is actually sane and calculated and well informed and just being a wreck in ball. That is just swinging through the system. In a united iraqi balls, I say it's it's about it's about the abolition of self government. The impulse towards Trump is the impulse towards tyranny. And towards giving up your own control of your life for someone else, some believing whatever they say. In fact, every time. They lie and you agree with them and still support them. They are, you are you are essential, saying that I have given up the project of self government you can, almost understand that if you thought the situation was that dire and you
wanted a the right, desperate in charge. Will then he even that understandable, but in this case we have someone who says things that are like world these stabilizing assertions of policies, like you know, maybe will default on America's debt. Renegotiated, will cut a better deal with the entire world right or climate change. Is a hoax or you. Why can't we use our nukes? We have them or in a Putin, is isn't such a bad Ah, he likes me right anyway, one of these things, when you actually drill down on its implications, could virtually wreck the global, economy the globe means just these are bad ideas of thermonuclear proportions, so this guy's he so uninformed that he doesn't even understand the implications of his words right any This would be the guy who would be making decisions. That's that's a different situation than just guess.
A tyrant is one, it isn't control himself either an end this something at the same time, deeply appealing to that. The people who think they ve lost control of their wants to get things done. You want done. The the platonic definition of a tyrant is one who doesn't control himself either an end there's something at the same time, deeply appealing to that the people who think they ve lost control of their own life. That's my concern I mean he is he is he would represent in my mind the abolition of the american experiment. He is everything the founders feared. He is the figure that the founders constructed the constitution to resist and if you were to be calm president
tar system of government, aren't tar constitution will be going through a stress test like it hasn't since the eighty sixties, and not only would be its dresses, Aren T Constitution, the emotions that he would unleash and the fact there would be resistance course is gonna, be resistance. You send people in use and police force to deportation force in the country. You you taught, you talk the way he has about African Americans. You don't think. There's gonna be resistance, this this country codes Tipp into in into civil unrest in a moment and in that civil unrest, we have a president who is instinct would be inflame it not to comment who sees in the unrest and opportunity for further advancement of his own objectives and power. No concern for the consequences of his he's actions for other people, and you can see that drew out his career. He ruined so many people's lives. So many people's businesses, hee hee,
people lose fortunes and continue to lie. It has no compunction a sense of responsibility to anybody outside himself, and that is what he'll be treating every person in this country and indeed the world like a complete hostage to this man's lunacy, and I know I sound except I I I listened to myself and, unlike how can I be saying this I was like watching the bait outline talking to them. Friends on like this sounds like I'm in a mini series. Ok, this sounds like I'm in some distortion, many Syria but we are in. It should not think that this is somehow something happening on television or some kind of show, though the idea that you could talk about here, the suspense till the season finale, which is what he's talking about this lacking, is a profoundly irresponsible sentiment of. What's going to happen, when every Republicans can react, what do you think a tricked? Do you think you should have been elected
you lost your seat and when their own voters who voted for them believe that's the case. Do they know what happens in that situation? He hasn't thought about the consequence of this at all this I want to end on this point. I'm in and I know we have a whole other conversation that I wanted to have with you about your retreat. Into the wilderness, and Para Lavar online life, but I do now that we're past the two hour Mark II. Just I want it, so I want it. I want to invite you back for some future time where we're going to have that that other conversation but this at this point I want to end on because I think psychologically is interesting and is crucial to get past, and it's the sense that you just described. That you are. If you can't believe you're saying that you you sound like you're exaggerating to yourself, and you can't find a hand.
Call DORA in a break to pull to convince yourself that you are exaggerating and I've really tried SAM. I really tried to tell myself you're crazy. You you miss reading. This is not as bad as you think it is. I just haven't been able to find any fat but only in our system that helps me do that and I'm in exactly the same position meant is the banality of evil amazed at what Trump has done, as he is put the banality back into the banality of evil? You know he is. He is a comic figure. He is an uninformed one, he's a cute one. You know he can get a laugh even out of me and in certain moments, despite my better judgment, there's something in the tradition of american buffoonery, just the fact that his his such colossal really bad style, I'm? Who it was? Who say, he's got like in about a bath party sheikh right? If this is China do when you become this wealthy you're gonna cover air
thing in your life with gold areas. Just it legged, though you look at the shots of his apartment, that look like you, know Saddam Hussein's palace and ease comic through and through, and when there's this feeling that emu, you watch this guy and it is difficult to imagine him being at the top of some political movement in some political apparatus that reliably wrecks the american experiment, as you put it because he does not seem that sinister, but his incompetence and his lack of info. Nation and his the marriage between his confidence and his incompetence is every bit as sinister as a real mustache, twirling, evil person who's trying to destroy people's lives. Yes, you put it beautifully amino and in some ways in it in it decadent democracy. Isn't that how such attire would emerge? Isn't it
reality. Television, isn't it through this fathomless vulgarity in this common torch city has isn't that precisely how it would happen, if you had to imagine it today, I mean it Nor can we moved like a classic Hitler with the fascist ideology and a great movement and people wearing uniforms S. I'm gonna happen any more if it had to happen in our culture. This is something like how it would occur and you look at, for example, Sinclair Louis's novel. I can't it can't happen here In thirty six, who always the emerging fascist leader, it was a businessman It was somehow that also appeal to Sir core american things. That's the made us feel comfortable. They could actually win over people who do believe, for example, in the car of making a lot of money, even if they dont know understand. In fact he was a disastrous businessmen and we don't it you even know whether he's worth anything like what he says. I have always felt that if some forensic business journal
actually got the goods on him and reveal that he was exaggerating his wealth by a factor of ten or twenty. I think a one point clear have ten billion and in other cases it has been claimed have five billion, but if the only has you know two hundred at three hundred million dollars and a lot of debt, do you think revealing that fact would have torpedoed his candidacy or even then people wouldn't have cared. It is the one thing that he, for example, in that committee central roasted his he mandated. It was the one thing that couldn't he could. He would not tolerate being made fun of the notion that he wasn't his wealth, easy think as people think he is, that so integral to his psyche, I think it would destroy him, but a lot of people think he he is lying by something like an order of magnitude. There's no way he has paid the money he ever though the least one was more cuban make was Marquis, when I came out here has no way this guy is a real billionaire or the fact that he would.
Even now. Like forty years of precedent, not release, is tax returns. Tell you that that's the rosebud, that's the thing. He can't have exposed that he's a failure. There has always been a failure that, in fact all this stuff is Actually, all this you know, as as Obama said, buying, building slapping your name on it to get money is in the detail, Only thing he's been good at is trading is celebrity for money, but he's not a businessman at all. Also that he wouldn't self. He made a lot of a lot about self funding, his campaign, but hasn't you he hasn't. He sat under the campaign is incredibly cheap and he's been desperately raising money. It doesnt. If you had a billion dollars or even five billion dollars, and you really wanted to win here and differentiate in yours, EL from me, money grubbing, corrupt business, as usual politician were important as it is.
Why not throw your own billion dollars into this thing? You can be present. Why doesn't eights? Why not release attached agenda? They look. This is how well I've done. And I'm not taking any, but this is member that was part of his appeal in the primary to say. I don't need these rich. Well because I got enough money myself. Why would you not actually prove that year and basque in that because it's all a lie, he's has little man behind the curtain, like all these big wanna be tyrants in bullies are and This is the thing that would unravel him if he was actually if we actually saw the reality that he is the one thing he won't let go off, and that makes it all the more dangerous he is. He's amount of insecurity he's built. So many lies to protect what he knows deep down somewhere any psyche that he really is and he can handle it. I mean that's my mind is also terribly dangerous. We lacked any human being whose that site-
logically fragile whose clearly psychologically incapable of restraining even impulses that hurt himself to elect that person with we'll give him real power, not any real power. The power to end all life on this planet within four minutes of saying. Well, that's one it has been very sobering, which I frankly was not aware of. The details of how a presidency can initiate a nuclear first strike is just either that or the whole business of about having made the disk always on his person and either they the guy with the bag always unifying around and is really no. To media airy and no thought process between ouida what happens in his brain or her brain and what happens in the silos all these people, the thing they can
We have to understand that it is president you have to do what he says in the executive branch. He is the executive. He makes the decision no one else. In the end, it is decision and no one can stop it. There is no there could possibly stop it, and we ve seen that no one in this campaign has been able even to get him to prepare for debate. No one can get to him a bank forward. My experience, watching the debate last night was me with all that I dont like about Hilary and and the list is long and- and I am, I share your feelings really across the board about the Clinton's. To see her standing there last night well prepared her her line, which obviously self serving the inability on the one thing standing between you and the apocalypse. Basically, I think, can be taken at face value. I mean she but
for her standing there doing a good job who now oh, how fully we're fucked. So I really does mean I I just realized. I just I felt incredible gratitude that she was just issued. She didn't as good a job is, as as she could have done in that case, and hopefully enough. What's also fascinating, SAM is that his I want to end on a slightly another silver lining. Your note that she herself cannot really be a feminist icon. I put this election despite her in some ways has become an extraordinary moment in the relation between the two genders in this country here, and if women elect women who act, including republican women, including you know, but by what looks like currently at twenty point,
margin the first woman president against a figure who is enormous. I mean beyond a parody of massage any sexism and male privilege than Then it is a cultural watershed, just as powerful as the first black president, not not because Hilary has made it so, but because the women of this country has made it so and- and I know we ve been talking holly about the grimness of this, but there are also signs, for example, if this could lead to the recreation of saying conservative Party in this country, if it
could lead to the empowerment of women and away they ve never felt empowered before from the bottom up, not because they have a female leader, the does it all for them because they have decided this will not stand and that this is a watershed. Then that is a moment when american democracy might actually have a moment of of great glory in the next few weeks. So we can t. I think it's not american, to be this Qatar, be this attached a catastrophe, and I think that I think that the hope my is that if the, if we get the election result, it looks like we may get, it could be awaited. There might be a way to turn this around. There might be a way to see in this the meaning of a new kind of America that sees what it nearly did and never ever goes back there again. Maybe so and listen Andrew has been great talkin to you. I'm talking to you. Yes, this fine we ve been on for ever, but I insist that at some point you come back and talk about two other things or if things go sideways,
on us, and I am recording the spot gas from a bunker and in a few weeks yeah you talk about the future of civilization, will be in the resistance angry. The idea that you'd leave this country view elected is so absurd. We have to stay and fight. I would relish that chance If that were to happen, but we have to have balls and stand up to it. I should say we have more women, women, victims, women, if were due to parent. To paraphrase Eric Carmen women, have had the biggest reports in this election so far I hope they secure the result, but also I I just want to thank you for being the person that enabled me to go in that retreat now, which was I take. You leave a particularly amazing group of people and a particularly wonderful human being at the head of its Joseph Gold Year, Yahoo Joseph for those who of you, don't know Joseph I've done to pipe gas with em a while back some very early pike ass, but he runs the inside meditation society and- and that's where Andrew did
his first long, silent, intensive retreat, but there's just too much to talk about an your sag way. To kind of rethinking Your online life is too interesting that such as at some point when, after, if we take a breather, I'd love to have you back and talk about those things costs, because the problem of what technology and the internet is doing to our minds is he's not going away and- and I think you really been a very early intensive user- online life me what you're one of the first bloggers, if not the first problem and blogger, and you are not one of the first people to very publicly step away from it in and rethink. It sets a conversation that we should have at some point after the emergency is over. Listen thanks! Again, Andrew Unjust, finally, is there any social media or web site that you want people to know about tat
what you're doing or your full time now it at New York man in New York magazine, I'm, I'm writing. I've deliberately the reading or writing long for messes numb. As it as a deliberate attempt to to change the way we're thinking in communicating, but obviously if people want to to read my thoughts about what conservatism actually is and why Bush and Trump represented a perversion of it Then. The conservative soul is out there Amazon mom. It's my. It was completely ignored by the right when it came out, but I am very proud of it. It's now ten years old, but it's it's my attempt to say there is something called serve. It isn't. That is actually an important and distinguished and reasonable traditional anglo american political life ended. Gaining in re understanding. It is going to be a huge challenge for the next few years and I I wanted
ETA K pot in my life anyway. To trying to to do that. Ok! Well, I will linked to that book and also to your New York mag article that we didn't talk about some day. I'll. Have you back? all the best yeah thing I got my thanks again after just if you find this podcast, Bible, there are many ways you can support it. You can review I tunes or stature. Whoever happens to listen to it. You can share. Social media with your friends. You can blog about it or discuss it on your own podcast or you can support it directly and you can do this by subscribing through my website as samharris dot org and there you'll find subscriber only content which includes my ask me anything episodes you also get access to advance tickets to my live events as well as streaming video of some of these events.
Transcript generated on 2020-12-21.