0
SPEAKER_01
The following is a conversation with Jeremy Surry, a historian at UT Austin.
0
SPEAKER_01
And now, a quick few second mention of each sponsor.
0
SPEAKER_01
Check them out in the description.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s the best way to support this podcast.
0
SPEAKER_01
We ve got Aidsleep for naps, BetterHelp for mental health, InsightTracker for biomonitoring, and Athleta Greens for multivitamins.
0
SPEAKER_01
Choose wisely, my friends.
0
SPEAKER_01
And now, onto the full ad reads.
0
SPEAKER_01
As always, no ads in the middle.
0
SPEAKER_01
I try to make this interesting, but if you must skip them, friends, please still check out the sponsors.
0
SPEAKER_01
I enjoy their stuff.
0
SPEAKER_01
Maybe you will, too.
0
SPEAKER_01
This episode is sponsored by Eight Sleep and its new Pod 3 mattress.
0
SPEAKER_01
I saw a meme recently, maybe I should look it up.
0
SPEAKER_01
It was a meme that was highlighting different ways you can do self-care, which is, you know, depending on how you feel, what s the best solution.
0
SPEAKER_01
I think it was, if everybody hates you, go to sleep.
0
SPEAKER_01
If you hate everybody, eat some food.
0
SPEAKER_01
And if you hate yourself,
0
SPEAKER_01
take a shower, I think those advice.
0
SPEAKER_01
Obviously it s just a meme, but there s some truth to that, at least the first and the third for me.
0
SPEAKER_01
A shower is a refreshing way to take control of your life, and it feels like a fresh start.
0
SPEAKER_01
And sleep, it s just magic to me.
0
SPEAKER_01
And not even a full night s sleep, but a little bit of sleep, like a nap, can completely transform my worldview.
0
SPEAKER_01
Just having a bit of a melancholy outlook, or maybe being a little bit cynical about the world.
0
SPEAKER_01
For me, I take a nap and everything feels new.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s just, I could see the beauty in the world again.
0
SPEAKER_01
And some of that is, of course, a gift.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s built on a foundation of regular exercise, a good diet, and some of that is genetics.
0
SPEAKER_01
biochemistry in the brain, but really sleep for everybody.
0
SPEAKER_01
It can give a positive delta to your mood.
0
SPEAKER_01
So I take sort of the bed I sleep on extremely seriously.
0
SPEAKER_01
Some of that is temperature control.
0
SPEAKER_01
I think, for me, temperature s so essential to a great sleeping experience, and Eight Sleep does a good job of that.
0
SPEAKER_01
They control the temperature, obviously in a technological way, so you could do it with an app.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s a wonderful thing.
0
SPEAKER_01
Check it out and get special savings when you go to eightsleep.com slash Lex.
0
SPEAKER_01
This episode is also brought to you by BetterHelp, spelled H-E-L-P, help.
0
SPEAKER_01
I actually have a conversation with an amazing scientist and a psychiatrist coming up, and it s going to be a very wide-ranging conversation, I think, about different aspects of human behavior.
0
SPEAKER_01
The good, the bad, and the ugly.
0
SPEAKER_01
So I think much of his specialization is in trauma, but he really knows so much about narcissism, sociopathy, psychopathy, just the nature of evil.
0
SPEAKER_01
the nature of hate, all of those things.
0
SPEAKER_01
And the human mind is just really fascinating.
0
SPEAKER_01
And I do think that talk therapy is a really, really good way to explore some of the darker corners of that mind, of that human mind.
0
SPEAKER_01
I ve been a big fan of that from a historical perspective, Freud and Jung.
0
SPEAKER_01
Just psychoanalysis has been really interesting to me.
0
SPEAKER_01
Obviously as a big fan of podcasts, I see a huge value in the power of conversation.
0
SPEAKER_01
to achieve a kind of intellectual, spiritual, emotional intimacy in the realm of ideas.
0
SPEAKER_01
Sometimes it feels one way, but as a fan of a lot of podcasts, it doesn t feel one way.
0
SPEAKER_01
It feels like a real conversation, even though I know I m just a listener.
0
SPEAKER_01
Anyway, I m a big believer in talk therapy and BetterHelp allows you to do that really easily.
0
SPEAKER_01
So the barrier to access is nil.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s super easy.
0
SPEAKER_01
That s essential, the first step.
0
SPEAKER_01
The first step is really the hardest, truly is.
0
SPEAKER_01
So you can check them out at betterhelp.com slash Lex and save on your first month.
0
SPEAKER_01
This show is also brought to you by InsideTracker, a service I use to track biological data.
0
SPEAKER_01
I love tracking stuff about my life.
0
SPEAKER_01
Now I do want to be extremely careful not to over optimize everything.
0
SPEAKER_01
I think in some way optimization is the death of romance because I think romance is just the appreciation of the beauty of the human experiences.
0
SPEAKER_01
in part grounded in the chaos, the unpredictability, the uncertainty, the mystery, all of that, right?
0
SPEAKER_01
And I think getting perfect data and coming up with a perfect plan and optimizing every single little thing is, I think, suffocates the possibility of magic that is the human condition.
0
SPEAKER_01
That said, you do, I believe, have to build a foundation of health.
0
SPEAKER_01
health broadly defined.
0
SPEAKER_01
And so for that, you have to collect as much data from your own body as possible and take actions based on that data.
0
SPEAKER_01
That s what Insight Tracker helps you with.
0
SPEAKER_01
You can get special savings for a limited time when you go to insighttracker.com slash Lex.
0
SPEAKER_01
This show is brought to you by Athletic Greens and it s Age You Won t Drink.
0
SPEAKER_01
This set of ad reads I m doing today is just the all-stars of what brings joy and happiness and health to my life.
0
SPEAKER_01
Sleep, mental health, collecting good long-term data about your body, and now with Athletic Greens, I mean, that s really my favorite source of happiness in the health space, in my personal life.
0
SPEAKER_01
I drink the Age You Won t Drink twice a day.
0
SPEAKER_01
I break my fast with it, I do it after a long run, put it in the fridge, get a little bit cold.
0
SPEAKER_01
While I take a quick shower, jump out, drink the drink, I feel refreshed and ready to continue the day.
0
SPEAKER_01
Now that all of the dark, deep exploration of my own mind, the process of running, whether I m listening to audio books and brown noise, all of that is done.
0
SPEAKER_01
And now that s kind of the trigger that says I m going to start.
0
SPEAKER_01
a new, and I m gonna take on the rest of the day.
0
SPEAKER_01
That s what AG1 symbolizes for me.
0
SPEAKER_01
Anyway, they ll give you one month s supply of fish oil when you sign up at athleticgreens.com slash Lex.
0
SPEAKER_01
This is the Lex Friedman Podcast.
0
SPEAKER_01
To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description.
0
SPEAKER_01
And now, dear friends, here s Jeremy, sorry.
0
SPEAKER_01
What is the main idea, the main case that you make in your new book, Civil War by Other Means, America s Long and Unfinished Fight for Democracy?
0
SPEAKER_00
So our democratic institutions in the United States, they are filled with many virtues and many elements in their design that improve our society and allow for innovation.
0
SPEAKER_00
But they also have many flaws in them, as any institutions created by human beings have.
0
SPEAKER_00
And the flaws in our institutions go back to a number of judgments and perspectives.
0
SPEAKER_00
that people in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries had.
0
SPEAKER_00
And those flaws have been built into our institutions and they continue to hinder innovation and growth in our society.
0
SPEAKER_00
Three of the flaws that I emphasize in this book are flaws of exclusion, the ways our institutions exclude people, not just African Americans, many different groups.
0
SPEAKER_00
The ways our institutions also give power to certain people who have position rather than skill or intelligence or quality.
0
SPEAKER_00
And third and most of all, the ways our institutions embed certain myths in our society, myths that prevent us from gaining the knowledge we need to improve our world.
0
SPEAKER_00
In all of these ways, our democracy is hindered by the false reverence
0
SPEAKER_00
for institutions that actually need to be reformed, just as we need to highlight the good elements of them.
0
SPEAKER_00
That s really what my book is about.
0
SPEAKER_01
And the myth, the false reverence, what are we talking about there?
0
SPEAKER_00
So there s a way in which we believe that if we love our country,
0
SPEAKER_00
It s somehow wrong to criticize our institutions.
0
SPEAKER_00
I believe if you love your country, you want to encourage your institutions to get better and better.
0
SPEAKER_00
I love my university where I work, but I want it to be better.
0
SPEAKER_00
We have many flaws.
0
SPEAKER_00
I love my family, but I m constantly telling family members how they can be better.
0
SPEAKER_00
That s what true knowledge leadership is about, not just cheerleading.
0
SPEAKER_01
What s the counterpoint to that?
0
SPEAKER_01
Because the other extreme is a deep, all-encompassing cynicism towards institutions.
0
SPEAKER_01
So for me, I like the idea of loving America, which seems to be sometimes a politicized statement these days, that you believe in the ideals of this country.
0
SPEAKER_01
That seems to be either a naive or a political statement, the way it s interpreted.
0
SPEAKER_01
So the flip side of that, having a healthy skepticism of institutions is good, but having a complete paralyzing cynicism seems to be bad.
0
SPEAKER_00
Absolutely.
0
SPEAKER_00
Both are ahistorical positions.
0
SPEAKER_00
What I try to do as a historian is work in between those spaces.
0
SPEAKER_00
The virtue is in the middle ground, for better or for worse.
0
SPEAKER_00
And what we have to recognize is that our institutions are necessary.
0
SPEAKER_00
There s a reason government exists.
0
SPEAKER_00
There s a reason our union was created.
0
SPEAKER_00
That s what Abraham Lincoln was heroically fighting for.
0
SPEAKER_00
So we have to believe in our union.
0
SPEAKER_00
We have to believe in our government.
0
SPEAKER_00
And we as business people, as intellectuals, we have to be part of the solution, not the problem.
0
SPEAKER_00
But that doesn t mean just ignoring.
0
SPEAKER_00
the deep flaws in our institutions, even if we find personally ways to get around them.
0
SPEAKER_00
What really worries me is that there are a lot of very intelligent, well-intentioned people in our society who have figured out how to live with the flaws in our institutions, rather than how to use their skills to correct the flaws in our institutions.
0
SPEAKER_01
There s folks like somebody that lives next door to me, Michael Malice, is an anarchist.
0
SPEAKER_01
Philosophically, maybe more than practically, just sort of argues for that position.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s an interesting thought experiment, I would say.
0
SPEAKER_01
And so if you have these flaws as institutions, one thing to do,
0
SPEAKER_01
as the communists did at the beginning of the 20th century, is to burn the thing down and start anew.
0
SPEAKER_01
And the other is to fix from within, one step, one slow step at a time.
0
SPEAKER_01
What s the case for both from a history perspective?
0
SPEAKER_00
Sure, so historically, there has always been an urge to burn down the institutions and start again, start with a blank slate.
0
SPEAKER_00
The historical record is that almost never works.
0
SPEAKER_00
Because what happens when you destroy the institutions, you gave the example,
0
SPEAKER_00
of the Bolshevik revolution.
0
SPEAKER_00
When you destroy the institutions, all you do is in the jungle that s left behind, you give advantages to those who are the most powerful.
0
SPEAKER_00
institutions always place certain limits upon the most powerful in the jungle.
0
SPEAKER_00
If you go back to the jungle, the most powerful are actually going to have the most influence and most control.
0
SPEAKER_00
So the revolutionaries who are usually the vulnerable turn out to then be the victims of the revolution.
0
SPEAKER_00
And this is exactly what we saw with the French Revolution, with the Russian Revolution.
0
SPEAKER_00
So the record for that is not a great record.
0
SPEAKER_00
There still might be times to do that.
0
SPEAKER_00
But I think we should be very cautious about that.
0
SPEAKER_00
The record for working through institutions is a much better record.
0
SPEAKER_00
Now, what we have to be careful about is as we re working through institutions, not to become bought into them, not to become of those institutions.
0
SPEAKER_00
So what I ve written about in this book and in other books, my book on Henry Kissinger, for example, is how it s important when in an institution to still bring an outsider perspective.
0
SPEAKER_00
I believe in being an inside outsider.
0
SPEAKER_00
And I think most of your listeners are inside outsiders.
0
SPEAKER_00
They re people who care about what s going on inside, but they re bringing some new ideas from the outside.
0
SPEAKER_01
I think the correct statement to say is most of the listeners, most people aspire to be inside or outsiders.
0
SPEAKER_01
But we, human nature is such that we easily become insider insiders.
0
SPEAKER_01
So we like that idea, but the reality is, and I ve been very fortunate because of this podcast to talk to certain folks that live in certain bubbles, and it s very hard to know when you re in a bubble that you should get out of the bubble of thought.
0
SPEAKER_01
And that s a really tricky thing because like, yeah, when you re, whether it s politics, whether it s science, whether it s any pursuits in life, because everybody around you, all your friends, you have like a little rat race and you re competing with each other, and then you get a promotion, you get excited, and you can see how you can get more and more power.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s not like a dark, cynical rat race.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s fun.
0
SPEAKER_01
That s the process of life.
0
SPEAKER_01
And then you forget
0
SPEAKER_01
that you just collectively have created a set of rules for the game that you re playing, you forget that this game doesn t have to have these rules.
0
SPEAKER_01
You can break them.
0
SPEAKER_01
This happens in Wall Street.
0
SPEAKER_01
The financial system, everybody starts to collectively agree on a set of rules that they play, and they don t realize we don t have to be playing this game.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s tough, it s really tough.
0
SPEAKER_01
It takes a special kind of human being, as opposed to being,
0
SPEAKER_01
anti-establishment on everything, which also gets a lot of attention, but being just enough anti-establishment to figure out ideas how to improve the establishment.
0
SPEAKER_01
That s such a tricky place to operate.
0
SPEAKER_00
I agree, I like the word iconoclastic.
0
SPEAKER_00
I think it s important to be an iconoclast, which is to say you love ideas, you re serious about ideas, but you re never comfortable with consensus.
0
SPEAKER_00
And I write about that in this book, I ve written about that actually a lot in the New York Times too.
0
SPEAKER_00
I think consensus is overstated.
0
SPEAKER_00
As someone who s half Jewish and half Hindu, I don t wanna live in a society where everyone agrees, because my guess is they re gonna come after people like me.
0
SPEAKER_00
I want to live in a society that s pluralistic.
0
SPEAKER_00
This is what Abraham Lincoln was really fighting for in the Civil War.
0
SPEAKER_00
It s what the Civil War is really about and what my book s about, which is that we need a society where institutions encourage, as you say, different modes of thought and respect different modes of thought and work through disagreement.
0
SPEAKER_00
So a society should not be a society where everyone agrees.
0
SPEAKER_00
A democratic society should be a society where people disagree but can still work together.
0
SPEAKER_00
That s the Lincoln vision.
0
SPEAKER_00
And how do you get there?
0
SPEAKER_00
I think you get there by having a historical perspective, always knowing that no matter what moment you re in, and no matter what room you re in with really smart people, there are always things they re missing.
0
SPEAKER_00
We know that as historians.
0
SPEAKER_00
No one is clairvoyant, and the iconoclast is looking for the things that have been forgotten, the silences in the room.
0
SPEAKER_01
And also,
0
SPEAKER_01
I wonder what kind of skill, what kind of process is required for the iconoclast to reveal what is missing to the rest of the room.
0
SPEAKER_01
Because it s not just shouting with a megaphone that something is missing, because nobody will listen to you.
0
SPEAKER_01
You have to convince them.
0
SPEAKER_00
Right.
0
SPEAKER_00
It s honestly where I have trouble myself, because I often find myself in that iconoclastic role, and people don t like to hear it.
0
SPEAKER_00
I like to believe that people are acting out of goodwill, which I think they usually are, and that people are open to new ideas, but you find very quickly
0
SPEAKER_00
even those who you think are open-minded, once they ve committed themselves and put their money and their reputation on the line, they don t wanna hear otherwise.
0
SPEAKER_00
So in a sense, what you say is bigger than even being an iconoclast, it s being able to persuade and work with people who are afraid of your ideas.
0
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, I think the key is, like in conversations, is to get people out of a defensive position, like make them realize we re on the same side, we re brothers and sisters, and from that place,
0
SPEAKER_01
I think you just raise a question.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s like a little thought that just lands.
0
SPEAKER_01
And then I ve noticed this time and time again, just a little subtle thing.
0
SPEAKER_01
And then months later, it percolates somewhere in the mind.
0
SPEAKER_01
It s like, all right, that little doubt.
0
SPEAKER_01
Because I also realized in these battles, especially political battles,
0
SPEAKER_01
People often don t have folks on their side that they can really trust as a fellow human being to challenge them.
0
SPEAKER_01
That s a very difficult role to be in.
0
SPEAKER_01
Because in these battles, you kinda have a tribe and you have a set of ideas, and there s another tribe and you have a set of ideas, and when somebody says something counter to your viewpoint, you almost always wanna put them in the other tribe as opposed to having
0
SPEAKER_01
truly listening to another person, that takes skill.
0
SPEAKER_01
But ultimately, I think that s the way to bridge these divides, is having these kinds of conversations.
0
SPEAKER_01
That s why I m actually, again, optimistically believe in the power of social media to do that, if you design it well.
0
SPEAKER_01
But currently, the battle rages on, on Twitter.
0
SPEAKER_00
Well, I think what you re getting at, which is so important, is storytelling.
0
SPEAKER_00
And all the great leaders that I ve studied, some of whom are in this book, some of whom are not, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
Whether they re politicians, social activists, technologists, it s the story that gets people in.
0
SPEAKER_00
People don t respond to an argument.
0
SPEAKER_00
We re trained.
0
SPEAKER_00
At least in the United States, we re often trained to argue.
0
SPEAKER_00
You re told in a class, okay, this part of the room take this position, this part of the room take this position.
0
SPEAKER_00
And that s helpful because it forces you to see different sides of the argument.
0
SPEAKER_00
But in fact, those on one side never convince those on the other side through argument.
0
SPEAKER_00
It s through a story that people can identify with.
0
SPEAKER_00
It s when you bring your argument to life in human terms.
0
SPEAKER_00
And someone, again, like Abraham Lincoln was a master at that.
0
SPEAKER_00
He told stories, he found ways to disarm people and to move them without their even realizing they were being moved.
0
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, not make it a debate, make it tell a story.
0
SPEAKER_01
That s fascinating, because yes, some of the most convincing politicians, I don t feel like they re arguing a point, they re just telling a story.
0
SPEAKER_01
And it gets in there, right?
0
SPEAKER_00
That s right.
0
SPEAKER_00
That s right.
0
SPEAKER_00
I mean, when we look at what Zelensky has done in Ukraine in response to the Russian invasion, and I know you were there on the front lines yourself, it s not that he s arguing a position that persuade us.
0
SPEAKER_00
We already believe what we believed about Russia.
0
SPEAKER_00
But he s bringing the story of Ukrainian suffering to life and making us see the behavior of the Russians that is moving opinion around the world.
0
SPEAKER_01
Well, the interesting stuff, sometimes it s not actually the story told by the person, but the story told about the person.
0
SPEAKER_01
And some of that could be propaganda, some of that could be legitimate stories, which is the fascinating thing, the power of story.
1
SPEAKER_00
is the very power that s leveraged by propaganda to convince the populace.
1
SPEAKER_00
But the idea, one of the most powerful ideas when I traveled in Ukraine, and in general to me personally, the idea that President Zelensky stayed in Kiev.
1
SPEAKER_00
in the early days of the war, when everybody, from his inner circle to the United States, everybody in the West and NATO, everybody was telling him, and even on the Russian side, I assume they thought he would leave, he would escape, and he didn t.
1
SPEAKER_00
from foolishness or from heroism, I don t know.
1
SPEAKER_00
But that s a story that I think united the country.
1
SPEAKER_00
And it s such a small thing, but it s powerful.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s the most basic of all human stories, the story of human courage.
1
SPEAKER_01
And I remember watching his social media feed on that.
1
SPEAKER_01
And he was standing outside, not even in a bunker, standing outside in Kiev, right, as the Russian forces are attacking and saying, I m here, and this minister is here, and this minister is here.
1
SPEAKER_01
We re not corrupt.
1
SPEAKER_01
We re not stooges of the Americans who told us to leave.
1
SPEAKER_01
We re staying.
1
SPEAKER_01
because we care about Ukraine.
1
SPEAKER_01
And the story of courage, I mean, that s the story that, you know, babies grow up seeing their parents as courageous, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
It s the most natural of all stories.
1
SPEAKER_00
And that s also the stories, for better or worse, that are told throughout history.
1
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
1
SPEAKER_00
Because stories of courage and
1
SPEAKER_00
stories of evil, the two extremes are the ones that are kind of, it s a nice mechanism to tell the stories of wars, of conflicts, of struggles, all of it.
1
SPEAKER_00
The tension between those two.
1
SPEAKER_01
And the reason I believe studying history and writing about history is so essential is because it gives us more stories.
1
SPEAKER_01
The problem with much of our world, I think, is that we re confronted by data, we re confronted by information, and of course it s valuable, but it s easy to manipulate or misuse information.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s the stories that give us a structure, it s the stories where we find morality, it s the stories where we find political value.
1
SPEAKER_01
And what do you get from studying history?
1
SPEAKER_00
You learn more stories about more people.
1
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I m a sucker for courage, for stories of courage.
1
SPEAKER_00
I ve been in too many rooms, I ve often seen too many people sort of in subtle ways sacrifice their integrity and did nothing.
1
SPEAKER_00
And people that step up when the opinion is unpopular and they do something where they really put themselves on the line, whether it s their money, whether it s their well-being, I don t know.
1
SPEAKER_00
That gives me hope about humanity.
1
SPEAKER_00
And of course, during the war, like Ukraine, you see that more and more.
1
SPEAKER_00
Now, other people have a very cynical perspective of it that s saying, oh, those are just narratives that are constructed for propaganda purposes and so on.
1
SPEAKER_00
But I ve seen it with my own eyes.
1
SPEAKER_00
There s heroes out there, both small and big.
1
SPEAKER_00
So just regular citizens and leaders.
1
SPEAKER_01
One set of heroes I learned about writing this book that I didn t know about that I should have are more than 100,000 former slaves who become Union soldiers during the Civil War.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s an extraordinary story.
1
SPEAKER_01
We think of it as North versus South, white northern troops versus white southern troops.
1
SPEAKER_01
There are, as I said, more than 100,000 slaves, no education, never anything other than slaves, who flee their plantations, join the Union Army.
1
SPEAKER_01
And what I found in the research, and other historians have written about this too, is they become some of the most courageous soldiers because they know what they re fighting for, but there s something more to it than that.
1
SPEAKER_01
It seems in their stories that there is a humanity, a human desire for freedom and a human desire to improve oneself, even for those who have been denied even the most basic rights for all their lives.
1
SPEAKER_01
And I think that story should be inspiring to all of us as a story of courage, because we all deal with difficulties, but none of us are starting from slavery.
1
SPEAKER_00
That s really powerful that that flame, the longing for freedom can t be extinguished through the generations of slavery.
1
SPEAKER_00
So that s something you talk about.
1
SPEAKER_00
There s some deep sense in which while the war was in part about slavery, it s not, the slaves themselves fought for their freedom and they won their freedom.
1
SPEAKER_01
I don t think it s a war about slavery.
1
SPEAKER_01
I think it s a war about freedom.
1
SPEAKER_01
Because if you say it s a war about slavery, then it sounds like it s an argument between the slave masters and the other white guys who didn t want slavery to exist.
1
SPEAKER_01
And of course that argument did exist, but it wasn t.
1
SPEAKER_01
It was a war over freedom, especially after 1863, into the second year of the war, when Lincoln, because of war pressures,
1
SPEAKER_01
signs the Emancipation Proclamation, which therefore says that the contraband, the property of Southerners, i.e.
1
SPEAKER_01
their slaves, will now be freed and brought into the Union Army.
1
SPEAKER_01
That makes it about freedom.
1
SPEAKER_01
Already the slaves were leaving the plantations.
1
SPEAKER_01
They knew what was going on and they were gonna get out of slavery as soon as they could.
1
SPEAKER_01
But now it becomes a war over freeing them, over opening that opportunity for them.
1
SPEAKER_01
And that s how the war ends.
1
SPEAKER_01
That s really important, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
And that s where we are in our politics today.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s the same debate.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s why I wrote this book.
1
SPEAKER_01
The challenge of our time is to understand how do we make our society open to more freedom for more people?
1
SPEAKER_00
So let s go to the beginning.
1
SPEAKER_00
How did the American Civil War start and why?
1
SPEAKER_01
So the American Civil War starts because of our flawed institutions.
1
SPEAKER_01
The founders had mixed views of slavery, but they wanted a system that would eventually work its way toward opening for more people of more kinds.
1
SPEAKER_01
Not necessarily equality, but they wanted a more open democratic system.
1
SPEAKER_01
But our institutions were designed in ways that gave disproportionate power
1
SPEAKER_01
to slave holders in particular states in the Union, through the Senate, through the Electoral College, through many of the institutions we talk about in our politics today.
1
SPEAKER_01
Therefore, that part of the country was, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, holding the rest of the country hostage.
1
SPEAKER_01
For a poor white man like Abraham Lincoln, born in Kentucky, who makes his way in Illinois, slavery was an evil, not just for moral reasons.
1
SPEAKER_01
It was an evil because it denied him democratic opportunity.
1
SPEAKER_01
Why would anyone hire poor Abe to do something if they could get a slave to do it for free?
1
SPEAKER_01
An economy of opportunity for him had to be an economy that was open and that did not have slavery, particularly in the new states that were coming into the union.
1
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln was one of the creators of the Republican Party.
1
SPEAKER_01
which was a party dedicated to making sure all new territory was open to anyone who was willing to work, any male figure who would be paid for their work, free labor, free soil, free men, basic capitalism.
1
SPEAKER_01
Southerners, southern plantation owners were an aristocracy.
1
SPEAKER_01
that did not want that.
1
SPEAKER_01
They wanted to use slavery and expand slavery into the new territories.
1
SPEAKER_01
What caused the Civil War?
1
SPEAKER_01
The clash and our institutions that were unable to adapt and continue to give disproportionate power to these southern plantation slave owners.
1
SPEAKER_01
The Supreme Court was dominated by them, Senate was dominated by them, and so the Republican Party
1
SPEAKER_01
came into power as a critique of that, and Southerners unwilling to accept, Southern Confederates unwilling to accept that change, went to war with the Union.
1
SPEAKER_00
So who was on each side, the Union Confederates?
1
SPEAKER_00
What are we talking about?
1
SPEAKER_00
What are the states?
1
SPEAKER_00
How many people?
1
SPEAKER_00
What s like the demographics and the dynamics of each side?
1
SPEAKER_01
The Union side is much, much larger, right?
1
SPEAKER_01
In terms of population, I think about 22 million people.
1
SPEAKER_01
And it is what we would today recognize as all the states basically north of Virginia.
1
SPEAKER_01
The south is the states in the south of the Mason-Dixon line.
1
SPEAKER_01
So Virginia and there on south, west through Tennessee.
1
SPEAKER_01
So Texas, for example, is in the Confederacy.
1
SPEAKER_01
Tennessee is in the Confederacy.
1
SPEAKER_01
But other states like Missouri are border states.
1
SPEAKER_01
And the Confederacy is a much smaller entity.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s made up of about 9 million people plus about 4 million slaves.
1
SPEAKER_01
And it is a agricultural economy, whereas the northern economy is a more industrializing economy.
1
SPEAKER_01
Interestingly enough, the Confederate States are in some ways more international than the northern states.
1
SPEAKER_01
because they are exporters of cotton, exporters of tobacco.
1
SPEAKER_01
So they actually have very strong international economic ties, very strong ties to Great Britain.
1
SPEAKER_01
The United States was the largest source of cotton to the world before the Civil War.
1
SPEAKER_01
Egypt replaces that a little bit during the Civil War.
1
SPEAKER_01
But all the English textiles were American cotton from the South.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so it is the southern half of what we would call the eastern part of the United States today with far fewer people.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s made up, the Confederacy is, of landed families.
1
SPEAKER_01
Wealth in the Confederacy was land and slaves.
1
SPEAKER_01
The northern United States is made up predominantly of small business owners and then larger financial interests such as the banks in New York.
1
SPEAKER_00
And what about the military?
1
SPEAKER_00
Who are the people that picked up guns?
1
SPEAKER_00
What are the numbers there?
1
SPEAKER_00
So the union also outnumbered the Confederates.
1
SPEAKER_01
By far, but it is a really interesting question because there s no conscription in the constitution.
1
SPEAKER_01
Unlike most other countries, our democracy is formed on the presumption that human beings should not be forced to go into the military if they don t want to.
1
SPEAKER_01
Most democracies in the world today actually still require military service.
1
SPEAKER_01
The United States has very rarely in its history done that.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s not in our constitution.
1
SPEAKER_01
So,
1
SPEAKER_01
During the Civil War, in the first months and years of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln has to go to the different states, to the governors, and ask the governors for volunteers.
1
SPEAKER_01
So the men who take up arms, especially in the first months of the war, are volunteers in the North.
1
SPEAKER_01
In the South, they re actually conscripted.
1
SPEAKER_01
And then as the war goes on, the Union will pass the Conscription Acts of 1862 and 1863, which for the first time, and this is really important because it creates new presidential powers, for the first time Lincoln will have presidential power to force men into the army, which is what leads to all kinds of draft riots in New York and elsewhere.
1
SPEAKER_01
But suffice it to say, the Union army throughout the war is often three times the size of the Confederate army.
1
SPEAKER_00
What s the relationship between this no conscription and people standing up to fight for ideas and the Second Amendment?
1
SPEAKER_00
A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
1
SPEAKER_00
We re in Texas.
1
SPEAKER_00
What s the role of that in this story?
1
SPEAKER_01
The American population is already armed before the war.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so even though the Union and the Confederate armies will manufacture and purchase arms, it is already an armed population.
1
SPEAKER_01
So the American presumption going into the war is that citizens will not be forced to serve, but they will serve in militias to protect their own property.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so the Second Amendment, the key part of the Second Amendment for me as a historian is the well-regulated militia part.
1
SPEAKER_01
the presumption that citizens, as part of their civic duty, do not have a duty to join a national army, Prussian style, but are supposed to be involved in defending their communities.
1
SPEAKER_01
And that s the reality.
1
SPEAKER_01
It s also a bit of a myth.
1
SPEAKER_01
And so Americans have throughout their history been gun owners.
1
SPEAKER_01
not AK-47 owners, but gun owners.
1
SPEAKER_01
And gun ownership has been for the purpose of community self-defense.
1
SPEAKER_01
The question coming out of that is, what does that mean in terms of you have access to everything?
1
SPEAKER_01
Antonin Scalia even himself asked this question on the Supreme Court.
1
SPEAKER_01
He said, in one of the gun cases, you have the right to defend yourself, but you don t have the right to own an Uzi.
1
SPEAKER_01
You don t have the right to have a tank.
1
SPEAKER_01
I don t think they d let you park a tank, Lex, in your parking spot, right?
1
SPEAKER_00
I looked into this.
1
SPEAKER_00
I think there s a gray area around tanks, actually.
1
SPEAKER_00
I think you re legit allowed to own a tank.
1
SPEAKER_00
Oh, you really?
1
SPEAKER_00
I think that somebody look into this, somebody told me, but I could see like that, because it s very difficult for that to get out of hand.
1
SPEAKER_00
Right, right.
1
SPEAKER_00
Okay, maybe one guy in a tank that you could be breaking laws in terms of the width of the vehicle that you re using to operate.
1
SPEAKER_00
Anyway, that s a hilarious discussion.
1
SPEAKER_00
But, starting to make the case, speaking of AK-47s and rifles, and back to Ukraine for a second, one of the fascinating social experiments that happened in Ukraine at the beginning of the war is they handed out guns to everybody, rifles, and crime went down, which I think is really interesting.
1
SPEAKER_00
I hope somebody does a kind of psychological data collection analysis effort here to try to understand why.
1
SPEAKER_00
Because it s not obvious to me that in a time of war, if you give guns to the entire populace, anyone who wants a gun, it s not going to, especially in a country who has historically suffered from corruption, not result in robberies and assaults and all that kind of stuff.
1
SPEAKER_00
There s a deep lesson there.
1
SPEAKER_00
Now I don t know if you can extend that lesson beyond wartime though.
1
SPEAKER_01
That s the question, what happens after the war?
1
SPEAKER_01
I mean, my inclination would be to say, that can work during war, but you have to take the guns back after the war.
1
SPEAKER_01
But they might be very upset when you try to- That s the problem.
1
SPEAKER_01
No, that s precisely the problem.
1
SPEAKER_01
That s actually part of the story here.
1
SPEAKER_01
I mean, what happens after the Civil War, after Appomattox in 1865, is that many Southern soldiers go home with their guns.
1
SPEAKER_01
and they misuse their weapons to, quite frankly, shoot and intimidate former slaves who are now citizens.
1
SPEAKER_01
This is a big problem.
1
SPEAKER_01
I talk about this in the book in Memphis in 1866.
1
SPEAKER_01
It is former Confederate soldiers and police officers and judges who are responsible for hundreds of rapes within a two-day period and destroying an entire community of African Americans.
1
SPEAKER_01
And they were able to do that because they brought their guns home.
1
SPEAKER_00
But underneath the issue of guns there is just the fundamental issue of hatred and inability to see other humans in this world as having equal value as another human being.
1
SPEAKER_00
What was the election of 1860 like that brought Lincoln to power?
1
SPEAKER_01
So the election of 1860 was a very divisive election.
1
SPEAKER_01
We have divisive contested elections from 1860 really until 1896.
1
SPEAKER_01
The 1860 election is the first election where a Republican is elected president, that is Lincoln, but he s elected president with less than 40% of the vote because you have two sets of Democrats running.
1
SPEAKER_01
Democrats who are out to defend the Confederacy and everything, and then Democrats who want to compromise but still keep slavery.
1
SPEAKER_01
Most famous, Stephen Douglas, who argues for basically allowing each state to make its own decisions, popular sovereignty as he called it.
1
SPEAKER_01
Then you still have traditional Whigs who are running.
1
SPEAKER_01
That was the party that preceded
1
SPEAKER_01
the Republican Party.
1
SPEAKER_01
So you have four candidates.
1
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln wins a plurality.
1
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln is elected largely because the states that are anti-slavery or anti-expansion of slavery are not a majority but they re a plurality and the other states have basically factionalized and so they re unable to have a united front against him.
1
SPEAKER_00
Was the main topic at hand slavery?
1
SPEAKER_01
I think the main topic at hand at that time was the expansion of slavery into new territories.
1
SPEAKER_01
Into new territories.
1
SPEAKER_01
Right.
1
SPEAKER_01
It was not whether to abolish slavery or not.
1
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln is very careful and his correspondence is clear.
1
SPEAKER_01
He wants no one on his side during the election to say that he s arguing for abolitionism, even though he personally supported that.
1
SPEAKER_01
What he wants to say is the Republican Party is for no new slave territories.
1
SPEAKER_01
Did he make it clear that he was for abolition?
1
SPEAKER_01
No, he was intentionally unclear about that.
1
SPEAKER_00
Do you think he was throughout his life?
1
SPEAKER_00
Was there a deep, because that takes quite a vision.
1
SPEAKER_00
Like you look at society today and it takes quite a man to see that there s something deeply broken where a lot of people take for granted.
1
SPEAKER_00
I mean, into modern day you could see factory farming.
1
SPEAKER_00
It s one of those things that in a hundred years we might see as like the torture, the mass torture of animals could be seen as evil.
1
SPEAKER_00
But just to look around and wake up to that, especially in a leadership position.
1
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
1
SPEAKER_00
Was he able to see that?
1
SPEAKER_01
In some ways, yes.
1
SPEAKER_01
In some ways, no.
1
SPEAKER_01
I mean, the premise of your question is really important that to us, it s obvious that slavery is a horror.
1
SPEAKER_01
But to those who had grown up with it, who had grown up seeing that, it was hard to imagine a different world.
1
SPEAKER_01
So you re right, Lincoln s imagination, like everyone else s, was limited by his time.
1
SPEAKER_01
I don t think Lincoln imagined a world of equality between the races, but he had come to see that slavery was horrible.
1
SPEAKER_01
And historians have differed in how he came to this.
1
SPEAKER_01
Part of it is that he had a father who treated him like a slave.
1
SPEAKER_01
And you can see in his early correspondence how much he hates that his father, who was a struggling farmer, was basically trying to control Lincoln s life.
1
SPEAKER_01
And he came to understand personally, I think, how horrible it is to have someone else tell you what you should do with your labor, not giving you your own choices.
1
SPEAKER_01
But Lincoln was also a pragmatist.
1
SPEAKER_01
This is what made him a great politician.
1
SPEAKER_01
He wanted to work through institutions, not to burn them down.
1
SPEAKER_01
And he famously said that if he could preserve the Union and stop the spread of slavery by allowing slavery to stay in the South, he would.
1
SPEAKER_01
If he could do it by eliminating slavery in the South, he would.
1
SPEAKER_01
If he could do it by buying the slaves and sending them somewhere else, he would.
1
SPEAKER_01
His main goal, what he ran on, was that the new territories west of Illinois, that they would be areas for free, poor, white men like him, not slavery.
1
SPEAKER_00
What do you learn about human nature if we step back and look at the big picture of it, that slavery has been a part of human civilization for thousands of years, that this American slavery is not a new phenomenon?
1
SPEAKER_01
I think history teaches us a very pessimistic and a very optimistic lesson.
1
SPEAKER_01
The pessimistic lesson is that human beings are capable of doing enormous harm
2
SPEAKER_01
brutality to their fellow man and woman.
2
SPEAKER_01
And we see that with genocide in our world today, that human beings are capable, with the right stimuli, the right incentives, of enslaving others.
2
SPEAKER_01
I mean, genocide is in the same category, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
The optimistic side
2
SPEAKER_01
is that human beings are also capable with proper leadership and governance of resisting those urges, of putting those energies into productive uses for other people.
2
SPEAKER_01
But I don t think that comes naturally.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think that s where leadership and institutions matter.
2
SPEAKER_01
but leadership and institutions can tame us.
2
SPEAKER_01
We can tame, we can civilize ourselves.
2
SPEAKER_01
You know, for a long time we stopped using that verb, to civilize.
2
SPEAKER_01
I believe in civilization.
2
SPEAKER_01
I believe there s a civilizing role.
2
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln spoke of that, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
So did Franklin Roosevelt.
2
SPEAKER_01
The civilizing role that government plays.
2
SPEAKER_01
Education is only a part of that.
2
SPEAKER_01
It s creating laws, minimal laws, but laws nonetheless that incentivize and penalize us for going to the dark side.
2
SPEAKER_01
But if we allow that to happen, or we have leaders who encourage us to go to the dark side, we can very quickly go down a deep, dark tunnel.
2
SPEAKER_00
See, I believe that most people want to do good.
2
SPEAKER_00
And the power of institutions, if done well, they encourage and protect you if you want to do good.
2
SPEAKER_00
So if you re just in the jungle,
2
SPEAKER_00
from a game theoretic perspective, you get punished for doing good.
2
SPEAKER_00
So being extremely self-centered and greedy and even violent and manipulative can have, from a game theory perspective, benefits.
2
SPEAKER_00
But I don t think that s what most humans want.
2
SPEAKER_00
Institutions allow you to do what you actually want, which is to do good for the world, do good for others, and actually in so doing,
2
SPEAKER_00
do good for yourself.
2
SPEAKER_00
Institutions protect that natural human instinct, I think.
2
SPEAKER_01
And what you just articulated, which I think the historical record is very strong on, is the classic liberal position.
2
SPEAKER_01
That s what liberalism means in a 19th century sense, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
That you believe in civilizing human beings through institutions.
2
SPEAKER_01
That begins with education.
2
SPEAKER_01
Kindergarten is an institution.
2
SPEAKER_01
Laws.
2
SPEAKER_01
And just basic habits that are enforced by society.
2
SPEAKER_00
How do you think people thought about the idea, how do they square the idea of all men are created equal, those very powerful words at the founding of this nation?
2
SPEAKER_00
How do they square that with slavery?
2
SPEAKER_01
For many Americans, saying all men were created equal required slavery, because it meant that the equality of white people was dependent upon others doing the work for us, in the way some people view animal labor today.
2
SPEAKER_01
And maybe in 50 years, we ll see that as a contradiction.
2
SPEAKER_01
But the notion among many Americans in the 17th, 18th century, and this would also be true for those in other societies, was that equality for white men meant that you had access to the labor of others that would allow you to equalize other differences.
2
SPEAKER_01
So you could produce enough food so your family could live equally well nourished as other families because you had slaves on the land doing the farming for you.
2
SPEAKER_01
This is Thomas Jefferson s world.
2
SPEAKER_01
So it s like animal farm.
2
SPEAKER_00
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
2
SPEAKER_01
That s right.
2
SPEAKER_01
And I think that s still the way people view things.
2
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
2
SPEAKER_00
Right?
2
SPEAKER_00
I don t know if that s a liberal position or it s just a human position.
2
SPEAKER_00
that all humans have equal value, just on the basic level of humanity.
2
SPEAKER_01
But do we really believe that?
2
SPEAKER_01
We want to.
2
SPEAKER_01
I don t know if our society really believes that yet.
2
SPEAKER_00
And I don t know exactly, I mean, it s super complicated, of course, when you realize the amount of suffering that s going on in the world, where there s children dying from starvation in Africa, and to say that all humans are equal, well, a few dollars can save their life, and instead we buy a Starbucks coffee.
2
SPEAKER_00
and are willing to pay 10, 50, $100,000 to save a child, our child, like somebody from our family, and don t wanna spend $2 to save a child over in Africa.
2
SPEAKER_00
And I think Sam Harris or others have talked about like, well, I don t wanna live in a world where we d rather send $2 to Africa.
2
SPEAKER_00
There s something deeply human about saving those that are really close to you, the ones we love.
2
SPEAKER_00
So that like hypocrisy,
2
SPEAKER_00
that seems to go at tension with the basic ethics of alleviating suffering in the world, that s also really human.
2
SPEAKER_00
That s also part of this ideal of all men are created equal.
2
SPEAKER_00
It s a complicated, messy world, ethically.
2
SPEAKER_01
It is, but I mean, I think, at least the way I think about it is, so what are the things even within our own society?
2
SPEAKER_01
where we choose to do something with our resources that actually doesn t help the lives of many people.
2
SPEAKER_01
So we invest in all kinds of things that are often because someone is lobbying for them.
2
SPEAKER_01
This happens on both sides of the aisle.
2
SPEAKER_01
This is not a political statement, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
Rather than saying, you know, if we invested a little more of our money, really a little more, we can make sure every child in this country had decent healthcare.
2
SPEAKER_01
We can make sure every child in this country had what they needed to start life healthy.
2
SPEAKER_01
And that would not require us to sacrifice a lot, but it would require us to sacrifice a few things.
2
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, there s a balance there.
2
SPEAKER_00
And I also noticed the passive-aggressive statement you re making about how I m spending my money.
2
SPEAKER_00
And I ll be spending it a little more wisely.
2
SPEAKER_01
You know, I like to eat nice meals at nice restaurants, so I m as guilty of this as you are.
2
SPEAKER_01
I got a couch, and that couch serves no purpose.
2
SPEAKER_01
It looks nice, though.
2
SPEAKER_01
No, it s a nice-looking couch.
2
SPEAKER_00
It s actually very clean.
2
SPEAKER_00
I got it for occasional Instagram photos to look like an adult.
2
SPEAKER_00
Okay.
2
SPEAKER_00
Because everything else in my life is a giant mess.
2
SPEAKER_00
What role did the ideas that the founding documents of this country play in this war, the war between the Union and the Confederate States, and the founding ideas that were supposed to be unifying to this country?
2
SPEAKER_00
Is there interesting tensions there?
2
SPEAKER_01
Well, there were certainly tensions because built into the founding documents, of course, is slavery and inequality and women s exclusion from voting and things of that sort.
2
SPEAKER_01
But the real brilliance of Abraham Lincoln
2
SPEAKER_01
is to build on the brilliance of the founders and turn the union position into the defense of the core ideas of the country.
2
SPEAKER_01
So the Confederacy is defending one idea, the idea of slavery.
2
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln takes the basket of all the deeper ideas and puts them together.
2
SPEAKER_01
Three things the war is about for Lincoln, and this is why his speeches still resonate with us today.
2
SPEAKER_01
You know, every time I m in Washington, I go to the Lincoln Memorial.
2
SPEAKER_01
It s the best memorial or best monument, I think, in the world, actually.
2
SPEAKER_01
And there are always people there reading Gettysburg Address and the second inaugural.
2
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln had two years of education, yet he found the words to describe what our country was about better than anyone.
2
SPEAKER_01
And it s because he went back to these founding values, three values.
2
SPEAKER_01
We already talked about one, freedom.
2
SPEAKER_01
And freedom is actually complex, but it s also simple.
2
SPEAKER_01
The simple Lincoln definition is that freedom is the right of each person to work for himself or herself, which is to say, it doesn t mean you own your own company, but it means you control your labor.
2
SPEAKER_01
And no one can tell you you have to work for a certain wage.
2
SPEAKER_01
You might not have a job, but you decide.
2
SPEAKER_01
You decide, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
You can see where that comes from his own background as a poor man, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
So freedom is the control of your own labor.
2
SPEAKER_01
Second, democracy, government of the people, by the people, for the people.
2
SPEAKER_01
The government is to serve the people, is to come from the people.
2
SPEAKER_01
And then the third point, justice and helping all human beings.
2
SPEAKER_01
He, at the end of his life, as the Civil War is ending, he never declares that the South should be punished.
2
SPEAKER_01
His argument is that we shouldn t apologize for their misdeeds, but that all should be part of this future.
2
SPEAKER_01
He s not arguing for consensus.
2
SPEAKER_01
He s arguing for a society where everyone has a stake going forward.
2
SPEAKER_01
So justice, democracy, freedom.
2
SPEAKER_01
Those are the gifts.
2
SPEAKER_01
I talked about the flaws in our system.
2
SPEAKER_01
Those are the virtues in our system that our founders coming out of the enlightenment planted.
2
SPEAKER_01
And Lincoln carries them forward.
2
SPEAKER_01
He gives us the 2.0 version of them.
2
SPEAKER_00
So a few tangent questions about each of those.
2
SPEAKER_00
So one on democracy, people often bring up the United States is not a democracy, it s a republic, that it s representative.
2
SPEAKER_00
Is there some interesting tensions there in terminology or is, yeah, can you maybe kind of expand on the different versions of democracy?
2
SPEAKER_00
So the philosophy of democracy but also the practical implementations of it.
2
SPEAKER_01
Sure.
2
SPEAKER_01
The founders intended for us to be a democracy.
2
SPEAKER_01
This argument that they wanted us to be a republic instead of a democracy is one of these made-up myths.
2
SPEAKER_01
They believed that fundamentally what they were creating was a society, very few of which had existed before, a society where the government would be of the people, by the people, for the people.
2
SPEAKER_01
That s what they expected, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
That s what it meant.
2
SPEAKER_01
So the legitimacy
2
SPEAKER_01
of our government was not going to be that the person in charge was of royal blood, that s the way the Europeans did it, or that the person in charge had killed enough people, a la Genghis Khan, or that the person in charge was serving a particular class.
2
SPEAKER_01
It was that the person in charge, the institutions were to serve the people.
2
SPEAKER_01
They adopted Republican tools to get there.
2
SPEAKER_01
because they were fearful, appropriately, of simply throwing every issue up to the masses.
2
SPEAKER_01
Democracy is not mob rule.
2
SPEAKER_01
Democracy is where you create procedures to assess the public will
2
SPEAKER_01
and to act in ways that serve the public without harming other elements of the public that are not in the majority.
2
SPEAKER_01
That s why we have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights.
2
SPEAKER_01
And for their time, the founders did not believe that women should be part of this discussion, that they were not capable
2
SPEAKER_01
They were wrong about that in their time.
2
SPEAKER_01
That s how they thought.
2
SPEAKER_01
We ve of course changed that.
2
SPEAKER_01
They believed you had to have property to have a stake.
2
SPEAKER_01
We don t believe that anymore.
2
SPEAKER_01
So we can argue over the details and those 50 years from now will criticize us, right, for the way we think about these things.
2
SPEAKER_01
But it was fundamentally about, this is the radicalism of the American experiment, that government should serve the people.
2
SPEAKER_01
all people.
2
SPEAKER_00
So democracy means of the people, by the people, for the people, and then it doesn t actually give any details of how you implement that, because you could implement all kinds of ways.
2
SPEAKER_01
And I think what we ve learned as historians, I think what the founders knew, because they were very well read in the history of Rome and Greece, was that democracy will always have unique characteristics for the culture that it s in.
2
SPEAKER_01
If coming out of the war against Russia, Ukraine is able to build a better democracy than it had before, it s never going to look like the United States.
2
SPEAKER_01
I m not saying it s gonna be worse or better.
2
SPEAKER_01
Culture matters.
2
SPEAKER_01
The particular history of societies matters.
2
SPEAKER_01
Japan is a vibrant democracy.
2
SPEAKER_01
I ve been there many times.
2
SPEAKER_01
It does not look at all like the American democracy.
2
SPEAKER_01
So democracy is a set of values.
2
SPEAKER_01
The implementation of those values is a set of practical institutional decisions one makes based in one s cultural position.
2
SPEAKER_00
So just to linger on that topic, is there, if you do representative, you said like,
2
SPEAKER_00
democracy should not, one failure mode is mob rule.
2
SPEAKER_00
So it should not descend into that.
2
SPEAKER_00
Not every issue should be up to everybody.
2
SPEAKER_00
Okay, so you have representation, but Stalin similarly felt that he could represent the interests of the public.
2
SPEAKER_00
He was also helping represent the interests of the public.
2
SPEAKER_00
So that s a failure mode too.
2
SPEAKER_00
If the people representing the public become more and more powerful,
2
SPEAKER_00
they start becoming detached from actually being able to represent or having just a basic human sense of what the public wants.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think being of the people, by the people, for the people, means you are in some way accountable to the people.
2
SPEAKER_01
And the problem with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, this was already evident before Stalin came into power, is the same problem the Communist Party of China has today, which is that you have leadership that s non-accountable.
2
SPEAKER_00
Well, let me go then to one of the other three principles of freedom, because one of the ways to keep government accountable is the freedom of the press.
2
SPEAKER_00
So there s the internet, and on the internet there s social networks, and one of them s called Twitter.
2
SPEAKER_00
I think you have an account there, people should follow you.
2
SPEAKER_00
And recently, people have been throwing around recently, for a while, the words of freedom of speech.
2
SPEAKER_00
Just out of curiosity, for a tangent upon a tangent, what do you think of freedom of speech as it is today and as it was at that time during the Civil War, after the Civil War, and throughout the history of America?
2
SPEAKER_01
So freedom of speech has always been one of the core tenets of American democracy.
2
SPEAKER_01
And I m near absolutist on it because I think that people should have the right to speak.
2
SPEAKER_01
What makes our democracy function is that there is always room for, quite frankly, people like you and me who like to disagree and have reasons to disagree.
2
SPEAKER_01
So I am against almost all forms of censorship.
2
SPEAKER_01
The only time I believe in censorship
2
SPEAKER_01
is if somehow an individual or a newspaper has stolen the Ukrainian plans for their next military movements in the next week.
2
SPEAKER_01
You should not be able to publish that right now, maybe after they act.
2
SPEAKER_01
But criticism, opinion, interpretation should be wide open.
2
SPEAKER_01
Now, that doesn t mean though that you have the right to come to my classroom
2
SPEAKER_01
and start shouting and saying whatever you want.
2
SPEAKER_01
You have the right on the street corner to do that.
2
SPEAKER_01
But my classroom is a classroom for my students with a particular purpose.
2
SPEAKER_00
Sorry about that from last week.
2
SPEAKER_00
I ll never do it again.
2
SPEAKER_00
I m really sorry.
2
SPEAKER_00
It s okay.
2
SPEAKER_00
Never happened.
2
SPEAKER_00
I get drunk.
2
SPEAKER_00
To the people who don t know, you re a professor at UT Austin.
2
SPEAKER_00
It s nearby, so sometimes I get a little drunk and wander in there.
2
SPEAKER_00
I apologize.
2
SPEAKER_00
You re not the only one.
2
SPEAKER_01
Was that you?
2
SPEAKER_01
I didn t even know it was you.
2
SPEAKER_00
I m sorry.
2
SPEAKER_01
The point is that free speech is not licensed to invade someone else s space, and I also believe in private enterprise, so I think that if I owned a social media network, I don t.
2
SPEAKER_01
it would be up to me to decide who gets to speak on that network and who doesn t.
2
SPEAKER_01
And then people could decide not to use it if they don t wanna use it.
2
SPEAKER_00
So yes, that s one of the founding principles.
2
SPEAKER_00
So oftentimes when you talk about censorship, that s government censorship.
2
SPEAKER_00
So social media, if you run a social media company, you should be able to decide from a technical perspective of what freedom of speech means.
2
SPEAKER_00
But there s some deeper ethical, philosophical,
2
SPEAKER_00
sense of how do you create a world where every voice is heard of the people, by the people, for the people.
2
SPEAKER_00
That s a complicated technical problem.
2
SPEAKER_00
When you have a public square, how do you have a productive conversation?
2
SPEAKER_00
Where critics aren t silenced, but at the same time, whoever has the bigger megaphone is not going to crowd out everybody else.
2
SPEAKER_01
So I think it s very important to create rules of the game that give everyone a chance to get started and that allow for guideposts to be created from the will of the community, which is to say that we as a community can say we can t stop people from speaking.
2
SPEAKER_01
But we as a community can say that in certain forms, we re going to create certain rules for who gets to speak and who doesn t, under what terms, but they can still have somewhere else to go.
2
SPEAKER_01
So I believe in opening space for everyone, but creating certain spaces within those spaces.
2
SPEAKER_01
that are designed for certain purposes.
2
SPEAKER_01
That s what a school does.
2
SPEAKER_01
So I will not bring someone to speak to my students who is unqualified.
2
SPEAKER_01
It s not a political judgment.
2
SPEAKER_01
The rules at a university are we re an educational institution, you need to have the educational credentials to come speak about artificial intelligence.
2
SPEAKER_01
I m not going to bring some
2
SPEAKER_01
bum off the street to do that, right?
2
SPEAKER_01
We have certain rules, but that bum on the street can still, in his own space or her own space, can still say what he or she wants to say about artificial intelligence.
2
SPEAKER_01
This is how newspapers work.
2
SPEAKER_01
When I write for the New York Times, they have an editorial team.
2
SPEAKER_01
The editorial team makes certain decisions.
2
SPEAKER_01
They check facts.
2
SPEAKER_01
And there are certain points of view.
2
SPEAKER_01
They don t allow anti-Semitic comments.
2
SPEAKER_01
You re not going to be able to publish an anti-Semitic screed, whether you think it s true or not true in the New York Times, but that doesn t prevent you from finding somewhere else.
2
SPEAKER_01
So we allow entities to create certain rules of the game.
2
SPEAKER_01
We make transparent what those rules are.
2
SPEAKER_01
And then we as citizens know where to go to get our information.
2
SPEAKER_01
What s been a problem the last few decades, I think, is it hasn t been clear what the rules are in different places and what are the legitimate places to get information and what are not.
2
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, the transparency seems to be very critical there.
2
SPEAKER_00
Even for the New York Times, I think there s a lot of skepticism about which way the editorial processes lean.
2
SPEAKER_00
I mean, there s a public perception that it s, especially for opinions, it s going to be very left-leaning in the New York Times.
2
SPEAKER_00
And without transparency about what the process is like, about the people involved, all you do, like conspiracy theories and the general public opinion about that is going to go wild.
2
SPEAKER_00
And I think that s okay for the New York Times.
2
SPEAKER_00
People can, in a collective way, figure stuff out.
2
SPEAKER_00
Like they could say, okay, New York Times, 73% of the time is gonna lean left in their head.
2
SPEAKER_00
They have like a loose estimation or whatever.
2
SPEAKER_00
But for a platform like Twitter, it seems like they re, it s more complicated.
2
SPEAKER_00
Of course, there should be rules of the game, but I think there s,
2
SPEAKER_00
Maybe I wanna say a responsibility to also create incentives for people to do high effort empathetic debate versus throwing poop at each other.
2
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, I think those are two slightly different things, so I agree.
2
SPEAKER_01
I think that my view is that the failure of Facebook and Twitter and others in recent years has been that they have been completely untransparent.
3
SPEAKER_01
So what I would think would advance us is if they had a set of rules that were clear, that were consistently followed, and we understood what they were.
3
SPEAKER_01
That would also tell us as consumers.
3
SPEAKER_01
how much, what the biases are, how to understand what s going on.
3
SPEAKER_01
It seems, if I might say, that since Elon Musk has taken over Twitter, it s been arbitrary in who s thrown off and who s not thrown off.
3
SPEAKER_01
And that s a real problem.
3
SPEAKER_01
Arbitrariness is in some ways the opposite of democracy.
3
SPEAKER_00
But there s also a hidden arbitrariness in interpretation of the rules.
3
SPEAKER_00
So for example, what comment incites violence?
3
SPEAKER_00
That s really, really difficult to figure out to me.
3
SPEAKER_00
Like there s a gray area.
3
SPEAKER_00
Obviously there s very clear versions of that.
3
SPEAKER_00
But if I know anything about people that try to incite violence, they re usually not coming out and clearly saying it.
3
SPEAKER_00
They re usually kind of dog whistling it.
3
SPEAKER_00
And same with racism and anti-Semitism, all of that.
3
SPEAKER_00
It s usually dog whistles.
3
SPEAKER_00
So like, and they usually,
3
SPEAKER_00
have fun playing with the rules, playing around the rules.
3
SPEAKER_00
It s a great area.
3
SPEAKER_00
Same with during COVID, misinformation.
3
SPEAKER_00
What s misinformation, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
I agree.
3
SPEAKER_01
And some of these are age-old problems.
3
SPEAKER_01
Our legal system, common law, has been struggling with what is incitement to violence since the first Supreme Court decisions in the 18th century, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
So you re absolutely right.
3
SPEAKER_01
But I will say this.
3
SPEAKER_01
there are certain things that are clearly incitement to violence.
3
SPEAKER_01
I ll give you very clear examples.
3
SPEAKER_01
I ll just make it personal, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
My wife is an elected official here in Austin.
3
SPEAKER_01
There have been people who have put things up on Twitter calling for her to be hanged or calling for her to be attacked.
3
SPEAKER_01
That s incitement to violence.
3
SPEAKER_01
When you specifically call for violence against someone, I agree, there s a lot of other stuff where it s a gray area, but we could start, if we re applying these rules,
3
SPEAKER_01
by getting that material off of these sites.
3
SPEAKER_00
So some of that is a problem of scale, too, but the gray area is still a forever problem that we may never be able to solve, and maybe the tension within the gray area is the very process of democracy.
3
SPEAKER_00
But saying, like, we need to take our country back, is that incitement of violence?
3
SPEAKER_01
I don t think that.
3
SPEAKER_01
I think we need to take our country back, just that?
3
SPEAKER_01
No.
3
SPEAKER_00
But then, you know- Because I might say that.
3
SPEAKER_00
I might say we need to take our- I say that all the time.
3
SPEAKER_00
Again, I walk around drunk just screaming at everybody.
3
SPEAKER_01
I thought you wanted us to take you back.
3
SPEAKER_01
Exactly.
3
SPEAKER_01
I was very confused.
3
SPEAKER_01
My messaging needs to work.
3
SPEAKER_01
But let s go to the January 6th example, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
To say, hang Mike Pence, that s incitement to violence.
3
SPEAKER_01
Yeah.
3
SPEAKER_01
To say, go get Nancy, that s incitement to violence.
3
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, it s very clear.
3
SPEAKER_00
Again, I don t think that s the big problem.
3
SPEAKER_00
The big problem is the gray area.
3
SPEAKER_00
And the other problem is just how to get, how to technically find the large scale of comments and posts and so on that are doing this kind of clear 7-11.
3
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, but this is something for you to solve.
3
SPEAKER_01
You re the AI guy.
3
SPEAKER_01
I mean, don t ask me those questions.
3
SPEAKER_00
Well, I have to say, some of that is motivation, some of that is vision, and some of that is execution.
3
SPEAKER_00
So for example, just to go briefly on a dark topic,
3
SPEAKER_00
Something I ve recently became aware of is Facebook and Twitter and so on, people post violence on there, like videos of violence, child porn, some of the darkest things in this world.
3
SPEAKER_00
And to find them at scale is a difficult problem.
3
SPEAKER_00
And to act on it aggressively is a difficult problem.
3
SPEAKER_00
But that,
3
SPEAKER_00
I think part of this motivation, like saying this is a big problem, we need to take this on, we need to find all the darkest aspects of human nature that rise and appear on our platform and remove them so that we can create a place for humanity to flourish through the process of conversation.
3
SPEAKER_00
But it s just hard, it s just really hard.
3
SPEAKER_00
When you look at millions of posts, trillions of interactions, it s wild, the amount of data.
3
SPEAKER_01
But where we are now with social media seemed wild and impossible five years ago, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
I actually, what frustrates me is I think there are people who have politicized this issue in unnecessary ways.
3
SPEAKER_01
Everyone, regardless of their politics, should support what you just said.
3
SPEAKER_01
Investing our money, maybe grants from the federal government, in AI-skilled people like you figuring out ways to get violent videos off of there.
3
SPEAKER_01
That shouldn t be political.
3
SPEAKER_00
Well, some of that also requires being transparent from a social media company perspective, and transparent in a way that really resists being political.
3
SPEAKER_00
To be able to be transparent about your fight against these...
3
SPEAKER_00
evils while still not succumbing to the sort of the political narratives of it.
3
SPEAKER_00
That s tricky.
3
SPEAKER_00
But you have to do that kind of, and walk calmly through the fire.
3
SPEAKER_00
That s what Twitter feels like if you re being political.
3
SPEAKER_00
It s like a firing squad from every side.
3
SPEAKER_00
As a leader, you have to kind of walk calmly.
3
SPEAKER_01
And that is where we need a new generation.
3
SPEAKER_01
of people who will have diverse politics, but will stand up against that, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
I mean, that s the lesson from after the Civil War is where progress is made.
3
SPEAKER_01
The war doesn t solve problems of hate.
3
SPEAKER_01
Where progress is made is where you have local leaders and others who stand up and say, we can differ, but we re gonna stop calling people from certain backgrounds monkeys, which was a common thing to do at that time.
3
SPEAKER_01
Jews are still called monkeys in certain places, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
People have to stand up while still maintaining their political differences.
3
SPEAKER_00
Several hundred thousand people died.
3
SPEAKER_01
What made this war such a deadly war?
3
SPEAKER_01
It s extraordinary how many people died, more than half a million.
3
SPEAKER_01
And this was without a single automatic rifle, without a single bomb.
3
SPEAKER_01
It was mostly in hand-to-hand combat, which is to say that these 600,000 or so people who died, they died where the person who killed them was standing within a few feet of them.
3
SPEAKER_01
And that s really hard.
3
SPEAKER_01
Most of the killing that happens in wars today is actually from a distance.
3
SPEAKER_01
It s by a drone, it s by a bomb, it s by a rocket, or by an automatic weapon.
3
SPEAKER_01
And just to make this even more focused, to this day, the deadliest day in American history was during the Civil War.
3
SPEAKER_01
September 1862 at Antietam, more than 22,000 Americans killed one another hand to hand.
3
SPEAKER_01
There hasn t been a day that deadly in American history since then.
3
SPEAKER_01
That s amazing considering the technological changes.
3
SPEAKER_00
What was in the mind of those soldiers on each side?
3
SPEAKER_00
Was there conviction for ideas?
3
SPEAKER_00
Did they hate the other side?
3
SPEAKER_01
I think actually they were fighting out of fear.
3
SPEAKER_01
what we know from reading their letters, what we know from the accounts, is that yes, there are ideas that are promoted to them to get them to the battlefield, they believe in what they re doing, but here it s the same as World War I, and I think the Civil War and World War I are very similar as wars.
3
SPEAKER_01
You are in these horrible conditions, you re attacked, and you have the chance to either kill the other side and live, or die.
3
SPEAKER_01
And you fight to live, and you fight to save the people next to you.
3
SPEAKER_01
What is true about war, what is both good and dangerous about it, is you form an almost unparalleled bond with those on your side.
3
SPEAKER_01
This is the men under arms scenario, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
And that s where the killing goes.
3
SPEAKER_01
And it s a civil war, which means sometimes it s brother against brother, quite literally.
3
SPEAKER_01
And what it teaches us is how human beings can be put into fighting and will commit enormous damage.
3
SPEAKER_01
And that s why this happens.
3
SPEAKER_01
It goes on for four years.
3
SPEAKER_00
And just the extensive research you ve done on this war for this book, what are some of the worst and some of the best aspects of human nature that you found?
3
SPEAKER_00
Like you said, brother against brother.
3
SPEAKER_00
That s pretty powerful.
3
SPEAKER_01
They re both, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
So the level of violence that human beings are capable of, how long they re able to sustain it.
3
SPEAKER_01
the South should not have, the Confederacy should not have lasted in this war as long as it did.
3
SPEAKER_01
By the end, I mean, they re starving, and they keep fighting.
3
SPEAKER_01
So the resilience in war of societies, and the power of hate to move people.
3
SPEAKER_01
What are the bright sides?
3
SPEAKER_01
You see in Lincoln and Grant, who I talk about a lot in the book as well, Ulysses Grant, you see the ability of empathetic figures to still rise above this in spite of all the horror.
3
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln went to visit more soldiers in war than any president ever has, often at personal peril, because he was close to the lines, and he connected.
3
SPEAKER_01
It wasn t propaganda.
3
SPEAKER_01
There weren t always reporters following him.
3
SPEAKER_01
He was able to build empathy in this context.
3
SPEAKER_01
And I think, as I said, war, as horrible as it is, often gives opportunities to certain groups.
3
SPEAKER_01
So African-Americans, former slaves, are able to prove themselves as citizens.
3
SPEAKER_01
Jews did this an enormous number in World War II.
3
SPEAKER_01
Henry Kissinger, who I wrote about before, he really only gets recognized as an American.
3
SPEAKER_01
He s a German Jewish immigrant.
3
SPEAKER_01
He s seen as an American because of his service in World War II.
3
SPEAKER_01
So the bright side of this is that often in the case of war, on your own side, you will let go of some of your prejudices.
3
SPEAKER_01
Ulysses Grant has a total transformation.
3
SPEAKER_01
He goes into the Civil War, an anti-Semite and a racist.
3
SPEAKER_01
He comes out with actually very enlightened views because he sees what Jewish soldiers and what African American soldiers did.
3
SPEAKER_00
What s Ulysses Grant s story?
3
SPEAKER_00
What do you learn from him?
3
SPEAKER_00
Is he a hero or a villain of this war?
3
SPEAKER_01
I think he s a hero, though he s a flawed hero, as all heroes are.
3
SPEAKER_01
He s a man from Ohio and Illinois who was really a failed businessman time and again, and had an ability to command people in war.
3
SPEAKER_01
Where did this come from?
3
SPEAKER_01
He was a clear communicator and an empathetic figure.
3
SPEAKER_01
He tended to drink too much, but he was the kind of person people wanted to follow.
3
SPEAKER_01
They trusted him.
3
SPEAKER_01
And so in battle, that became very important.
3
SPEAKER_01
And the second thing is, he did his homework.
3
SPEAKER_01
He had a sense of the terrain, he had a sense of the environment he was operating in, and he was ruthless in pursuing what he had studied.
3
SPEAKER_01
So he turns out at battles like Vicksburg and elsewhere, to actually undertake some pretty revolutionary maneuvers.
3
SPEAKER_01
And then he figures out that the advantage now is on his side in numbers, and he just pounds Lee.
3
SPEAKER_01
Similar to what the United States does at the end of World War II with Germany and Japan.
3
SPEAKER_01
He comes out of the war, Grant does.
3
SPEAKER_01
He s a believer in union.
3
SPEAKER_01
He wants to protect former slaves and other groups, and he tries to use the military for that purpose.
3
SPEAKER_01
He s limited.
3
SPEAKER_01
And then as president, he tries to do that as well.
3
SPEAKER_01
Right now, we still use many of the laws that were passed during Grant s presidency to prosecute insurrectionists.
3
SPEAKER_01
So the 900 or so people who have been prosecuted for breaking into the Capitol and attacking police on January 6th, those insurrectionists, they ve been prosecuted under the 1871 anti-Klu Klux Klan law.
3
SPEAKER_01
So that s a big accomplishment by Grant, and we still benefit from it.
3
SPEAKER_01
The problem is Grant was not a great politician, unlike Lincoln.
3
SPEAKER_01
He didn t give good speeches.
3
SPEAKER_01
He wasn t a persuasive figure in a political space.
3
SPEAKER_01
And so he had trouble building support for what he was doing, even though he was trying to do what, in the end, I think, were the right things.
3
SPEAKER_01
What was the role of the KKK at that time?
3
SPEAKER_01
So the Ku Klux Klan is formed at the end of the Civil War by Confederate veterans, first in Tennessee, in Pulaski, Tennessee, and then it spreads elsewhere.
3
SPEAKER_01
And there are other groups that are similar, the Red Shirts and various others.
3
SPEAKER_01
These are veterans of the Confederate Army who come home and are committed to continuing the war.
3
SPEAKER_01
They are going to use their power at home and their weapons to intimidate and if necessary kill people who challenge their authority, not just African Americans, Jews, Catholics, various others.
3
SPEAKER_01
They are going to basically protect the continued rule of the same families who owned the slaves before.
3
SPEAKER_01
in post-slavery Tennessee and post-slavery South Carolina.
3
SPEAKER_01
And when we get to voting, they re often the groups that are preventing people from voting.
3
SPEAKER_01
The white sheets and the ritual around that was all an effort to provide a certain ritualistic legitimacy and hide identity, though everyone knew who they were.
3
SPEAKER_01
Oh, so that whole brand, that whole practice was there from the very beginning.
3
SPEAKER_00
Have you studied the KKK s history a little bit?
3
SPEAKER_01
I have, and there are a number of other historians who have too, so I ve used their research as well.
3
SPEAKER_00
I m kind of curious.
3
SPEAKER_00
I have to admit that my knowledge of it is very kind of caricature knowledge.
3
SPEAKER_00
I m sure there s interesting stories and threads because I think there s different competing organizations or something like that.
3
SPEAKER_00
Of course.
3
SPEAKER_00
Within the United States.
3
SPEAKER_00
And I feel like they, through that lens, you can tell a story of the United States also of these different- They re often business associations.
3
SPEAKER_01
I mean, there s a lot of work showing that actually people joined the KKK for the reasons I just laid out, but also because it was networking for your business.
3
SPEAKER_01
You gain legitimacy in the area that you were in.
3
SPEAKER_01
So these were community groups that were formed to help white business people.
3
SPEAKER_01
They helped white sheriffs get elected.
3
SPEAKER_01
What we have to understand today is when we re debating policing, this history matters enormously, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
I have nothing against police.
3
SPEAKER_01
My cousin, one of my closest relatives, just retired from 25 years in the New York Police Department.
3
SPEAKER_01
Thank God he survived.
3
SPEAKER_01
I have deep respect.
3
SPEAKER_01
He s one of the best public servants I know.
3
SPEAKER_01
But what we also have to recognize, as we respect police officers, is that for many communities in our country, they know this history.
3
SPEAKER_01
And the KKK, in the 1870s and in the 1930s, you look at any KKK organization, as I have in my research, and you find the police chiefs.
3
SPEAKER_01
or the KKK members, the local police officers, local judges, because it was how you became police chief.
3
SPEAKER_00
So these groups infiltrated some of the main institutions in our nation.
3
SPEAKER_00
I don t even think they infiltrated.
3
SPEAKER_01
I think they were part of those institutions.
3
SPEAKER_00
The deeper question today in the 21st century is, one, how much of that is still there, and how much of the history of that reverberates through the institutions?
3
SPEAKER_01
And I m making the latter point, that it s not there that much now, but people remember it.
3
SPEAKER_00
And some people would even say it s not there at all, that there is not institutional racism of policing.
3
SPEAKER_00
But if that s the case, then you can also say that if there is not direct institutional racism there, what is it?
3
SPEAKER_00
The echoes of history still have effects.
3
SPEAKER_01
Of course, and that s really important in that we have to take that seriously.
3
SPEAKER_01
That s not an excuse for people then saying nasty things about the police.
3
SPEAKER_01
But it is what we have to recognize.
3
SPEAKER_01
Look, I m Jewish, and there are certain
3
SPEAKER_01
elements of Russian behavior today I see in Ukraine that reverberate with the history of how my grandparents dealt with pogroms in Russia, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
Even though what Putin is doing in Ukraine might not technically be a pogrom, that history matters in how I view these issues.
3
SPEAKER_01
And that s a reality.
3
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I had I went to 7-Eleven recently.
3
SPEAKER_00
And what did I eat?
3
SPEAKER_00
I ate one of their salads.
3
SPEAKER_00
I m sorry, I love 7-Eleven, I m sorry.
3
SPEAKER_00
I ate one of the salads and got like terrible food poisoning.
3
SPEAKER_00
I was suffering for like four days and now I can t, I love 7-Eleven.
3
SPEAKER_00
I love going to 7-Eleven late at night in sweatpants and just I escaped the world.
3
SPEAKER_00
I m listening to an audio book and now every time I pass that salad,
3
SPEAKER_00
For the rest of my life, I would have hate for that salad.
3
SPEAKER_00
So history matters, even if the salad is no longer have any bad stuff in it.
3
SPEAKER_00
It s probably the lettuce or something, whatever.
3
SPEAKER_00
Mostly for humor s sake, but I m also giving a kind of metaphor that history can have an individual and a large-scale society effect on human interactions, both the good and the bad.
3
SPEAKER_00
if you actually recommend to me offline books on the KKK, they ll be really happy to.
3
SPEAKER_01
There were a few mentioned in the footnotes of my book here.
3
SPEAKER_00
And also in part, because I also want to understand the white nationalism, white supremacists, Christian supremacists or Christian nationalism, all those different subgroups in the United States and elsewhere in the world.
3
SPEAKER_00
I m a bit, my mind has been focused on some of the better aspects of human nature that it s nice to also understand some of the darker aspects.
3
SPEAKER_00
Let me ask you sort of a personal question for me.
3
SPEAKER_00
Do you think it s possible
3
SPEAKER_00
Do you think it s useful to do a podcast conversation with somebody like David Duke or Somebody This was somebody that everybody knows So it s not like you re giving a platform to somebody.
3
SPEAKER_00
That s a hidden.
3
SPEAKER_00
I
3
SPEAKER_00
member of the KKK or like a, it s sort of putting a pretty face on some dark ideas, but everybody knows.
3
SPEAKER_00
And so now you re just exploring, you re sitting across the table, maybe not in his case, maybe somebody who s an active KKK member, sitting across from a person that literally hates me, Lex.
3
SPEAKER_00
I think that s fascinating to explore that.
3
SPEAKER_01
I do too.
3
SPEAKER_01
I think so long as what you are doing
3
SPEAKER_01
is not boosting someone, so taking an obscure figure and making that figure now famous, but if it s someone who s already infamous, and it helps us to understand them, and so long as your effort is to ask them tough questions, which you do, right?
3
SPEAKER_01
You don t give them all the questions in advance, you don t have limitations on what you can ask,
3
SPEAKER_01
So long as it is a real interview, not pablum, then I m for it.
3
SPEAKER_01
What I m against is a softball interview that allows someone to sound reasonable when they re not.
3
SPEAKER_01
But the way I ve seen you do this when you ve had figures like that, I won t name who I have in mind, but what I ve seen that is I think that s useful because honestly, the historian in me and the citizen in me wants to understand.
3
SPEAKER_01
My Jewish grandfather always was the first to be against any effort to suppress anti-Semites, because his view was he wanted to know who they were, and he wanted to know what they thought so he could be prepared.
3
SPEAKER_00
And I also see, perhaps as a historian, you may be able to appreciate this kind of thing, that s probably how you see the world, but there s several ways to see a human being, like Vladimir Putin is an example.
4
SPEAKER_00
One is a political figure that s currently doing actions on the world, geopolitics internally, the politics of Russia.
4
SPEAKER_00
But there s also that human being in a historical context.
4
SPEAKER_00
And collecting information about that person in the historical context is also very valuable.
4
SPEAKER_00
So you could see interviews with Hitler in 39, 40, 41 as being very bad and detrimental
4
SPEAKER_00
to all that is good in the world.
4
SPEAKER_00
But at the same time, it s important to understand that human mind, how power affects that mind, how power corrupts it, how they see the world.
4
SPEAKER_01
Absolutely, absolutely.
4
SPEAKER_01
I would be all in favor, and maybe he will, if Vladimir Putin would sit down with you, absolutely.
4
SPEAKER_01
I don t think you re boosting someone like that when you ask them tough questions.
4
SPEAKER_01
In fact, I think that s what we need to do.
4
SPEAKER_01
those sorts of figures tend to insulate themselves from tough questions.
4
SPEAKER_01
So just to restate, I am for the Lex Fridman interview of those sorts of figures.
4
SPEAKER_01
I am not for the puff piece on Fox and Friends where they just come on and they re asked, oh, isn t it?
4
SPEAKER_01
Tell us what you think of this.
4
SPEAKER_01
Tell us what you think of that.
4
SPEAKER_00
So there s a balance there because
4
SPEAKER_00
A lot of people that interview somebody like Vladimir Putin, all they do is hard-hitting questions.
4
SPEAKER_00
They often demonstrate a lack of knowledge of the perspective of the Russian people and the president.
4
SPEAKER_00
There s not an empathy to understanding that this is a popularly elected, you can criticize that notion, but this is still a leader that represents the beliefs of a large number of people, and they have their own life story, they see the world, they believe they re doing good for the world.
4
SPEAKER_00
And I don t...
4
SPEAKER_00
that idea seems to not permeate the questions and the thoughts that people say because they re afraid of being attacked by the people back home, fellow journalists, for not being hard enough.
4
SPEAKER_01
Well, maybe.
4
SPEAKER_01
I think that s probably true.
4
SPEAKER_01
I think in my experience with interviewers is that a lot of them are really lazy.
4
SPEAKER_01
You re not, which is why I like talking to you.
4
SPEAKER_00
Can I just say, okay, this is not you saying it.
4
SPEAKER_00
Can I just rant?
4
SPEAKER_00
If you re sitting across from Xi Jinping or from Vladimir Putin, you should be fired if you have not read at least several books on the guy.
4
SPEAKER_00
The surprising lack of research that people do leading up to it.
4
SPEAKER_00
So you need to be a historian or a biographer.
4
SPEAKER_00
You need to be the kind of person that writes biographies or histories.
4
SPEAKER_00
before you sit in front of the person, not a low effort journalist.
4
SPEAKER_00
And it s so surprising to me that I think they re probably really busy and it s probably not part of the culture of the people that do interviews to do deep, deep like investigative.
4
SPEAKER_00
You need to be the kind of person that lives that idea.
4
SPEAKER_00
Like see it as a documentary that you work on for three years kind of thing.
4
SPEAKER_00
Anyway, of course, some journalists do do that and they do that masterfully and that s the best of journalism.
4
SPEAKER_01
But I think a lot of the times when the questions are, as you said, out of touch with the society that person is leading, it s because the interviewer hasn t taken the time.
4
SPEAKER_01
And I understand you can t be an expert on every subject, but you can do what you do, right?
4
SPEAKER_01
You read my book to prepare for this.
4
SPEAKER_01
You looked things up.
4
SPEAKER_01
You had a sense of the person you re talking to, and you put the time in to do that.
4
SPEAKER_01
This is what I always tell my students, right?
4
SPEAKER_01
The secret to success in anything is outworking other people.
4
SPEAKER_01
Be more prepared.
4
SPEAKER_01
Right?
4
SPEAKER_01
What you show is like an iceberg.
4
SPEAKER_01
It s the tip of the iceberg, right?
4
SPEAKER_01
Is what people see.
4
SPEAKER_01
It s all the work that goes on below the surface.
4
SPEAKER_00
And if you work hard enough, which I aspire to do, at the end of the day, just like an animal farm, you ll be like the horse boxer and slaughtered unjustly by those that are much more powerful than you.
4
SPEAKER_00
But you ll be happy when you re slaughtered.
4
SPEAKER_00
You have lived for the right ideal, and history will remember you fondly.
4
SPEAKER_00
Okay, what about Robert E. Lee?
4
SPEAKER_00
So he s the confederate general that you mentioned.
4
SPEAKER_01
Was he a hero or a villain?
4
SPEAKER_01
To me, he s a villain.
4
SPEAKER_01
Many people treat Robert E. Lee as a hero, and one of the points I make in the book is we have to rethink that, and it s very important for our society because Robert E. Lee pops up all over our society, names of schools, names of streets, and he also embeds and justifies certain behaviors that I think are really bad.
4
SPEAKER_01
Lee was a tremendous general.
4
SPEAKER_01
He had the weaker side, and he managed to use maneuver, secrecy, and circumstance to give himself so many advantages and win so many battles he should have lost.
4
SPEAKER_01
So in terms of the technical generalship, he s a great general.
4
SPEAKER_01
But Lee, at the end of the war, never wants to really acknowledge defeat.
4
SPEAKER_01
What he acknowledges at Appomattox is that his soldiers will have to leave the battlefield because they have not won on the battlefield.
4
SPEAKER_01
but he refuses to do what Grant asks him, which is to help sell his side on the fact that we re going into a post-war moment where they don t have to see themselves as losers, but they have to get on board with change.
4
SPEAKER_01
Real leadership is convincing people who follow you that they have to change when they don t want to change.
4
SPEAKER_01
Lee refuses to do that.
4
SPEAKER_01
He says to Grant, I quote this in the book, he says to Grant at Appomattox, if you want to change the South, you have to run your army over the South three or four times.
4
SPEAKER_01
He s not going to do anything.
4
SPEAKER_01
He s not going to help.
4
SPEAKER_01
And he becomes a figure who people rally around in the rest of his life and even after he dies.
4
SPEAKER_01
So it is as if at the end of World War II,
4
SPEAKER_01
Hitler had been allowed to just retire, and he didn t go back into politics, but yet he was there and he continued to have meetings with former Nazis, and people would rally around the idea of bringing back or going back to Hitler s ideas.
4
SPEAKER_01
Think of how harmful that would be.
4
SPEAKER_01
Lee played that kind of role after the war, and I think it s one of the problems we have now.
4
SPEAKER_01
I don t think we should continue to revere him because it justifies too much of what the Confederates stood for.
4
SPEAKER_00
And that s the difference that you highlight between World War II and the Civil War, that in the case of Hitler, there was an end to that war.
4
SPEAKER_00
There s a very distinctive, clear end to that war.
4
SPEAKER_00
And you also make the case that World War II is not a good example, not a good model of a war to help us analyze history.
4
SPEAKER_01
It s given Americans the wrong idea of what war is, because World War II ends as most wars don t end.
4
SPEAKER_01
World War II ends with a complete defeat
4
SPEAKER_01
of the German army and the German society and the near complete defeat of Japan.
4
SPEAKER_01
And we re both sides in different ways, except defeat.
4
SPEAKER_01
What I m pointing out in the book is that most wars don t end with one side accepting defeat.
4
SPEAKER_01
And generally the war continues after the battles end.
4
SPEAKER_01
This is something that s hard for Americans to understand.
4
SPEAKER_01
Our system is built with the presumption when war is over, when we sign a piece of paper, everyone can go home.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s not what happens.
4
SPEAKER_00
I mean, civil war is a special case.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s especially strong case of that because the people that fought the war is still living in that land.
4
SPEAKER_00
That s exactly right.
4
SPEAKER_00
And in this case, some of them are leaders also.
4
SPEAKER_01
Many of them become the leaders of the very areas that they were leading before.
4
SPEAKER_01
And I think that s another lesson here, too, that we did undertake after World War II, though in a flawed way.
4
SPEAKER_01
We had a Nuremberg system.
4
SPEAKER_01
we did prohibit at least Nazi leaders from coming back into power.
4
SPEAKER_01
We made an exception for the emperor in Japan, but we generally followed the same rule in Japan.
4
SPEAKER_01
Whereas in the United States, as I point out, many of the leaders of the Confederacy, first of all, don t surrender.
4
SPEAKER_01
They flee to Mexico,
4
SPEAKER_01
Then they come back, after they lose in Mexico a second time, they come back to the United States and they get elected to office.
4
SPEAKER_01
The guy who writes the election laws in Texas, Alexander Watkins Terrell, most people don t know this, even in Texas, he was a Confederate general, fled to Mexico, so he committed treason by joining the army of Maximilian, Emperor of Mexico, who was put in power by Louis Napoleon.
4
SPEAKER_01
After Maximilian s defeated, Alexander Watkins Terrell comes back to Texas, runs for the state legislature,
4
SPEAKER_01
and then writes the election laws.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s crazy.
4
SPEAKER_00
Can you make the case for that, that that s a feature of the American system, not a bug, that that is an implementation of justice, that you forgive, that you don t persecute everybody on the other side of the war?
4
SPEAKER_01
Maybe, and I think that s a good feature in terms of lower level individuals, but I think a bad feature of our system is we do allow
4
SPEAKER_01
elite figures who have committed wrongdoing, we give them many ways to get out of punishment.
4
SPEAKER_01
You are more likely to be punished in this society if you do something wrong, and you re not an elite figure than if you are an elite figure.
4
SPEAKER_01
There should be a proportional, like forgiveness should be equally distributed across.
4
SPEAKER_01
And it s not.
4
SPEAKER_00
Yeah.
4
SPEAKER_01
And it s not.
4
SPEAKER_01
But we could change that.
4
SPEAKER_01
We could fix that.
4
SPEAKER_01
How do we fix that?
4
SPEAKER_01
How do we fix that?
4
SPEAKER_01
What I think was argued at the end, this is one of the really important things about studying history, you learn about ideas that were not pursued that could be pursued today.
4
SPEAKER_01
At the end of the Civil War, there was an effort to ban anyone who was in a leadership position in the Confederacy from ever serving in federal office again.
4
SPEAKER_01
That s the third element of the 14th Amendment.
4
SPEAKER_01
It s in the 14th Amendment.
4
SPEAKER_01
The 14th Amendment clause three says that if you took an oath of office, meaning you were elected to office, you re an elite figure, and you violated that oath, you can still live in the country.
4
SPEAKER_01
You can still get rich, but you can t run for elected office again.
4
SPEAKER_01
And we ve never really implemented that.
4
SPEAKER_00
Is it obvious that everybody who s in a leadership position on the Confederate side
4
SPEAKER_00
is a bad person for the future of the United States?
4
SPEAKER_00
Or is that just a safe thing to assume for the future of the nation?
4
SPEAKER_01
I think it s the latter.
4
SPEAKER_01
People do things for all kinds of reasons, and sometimes they have regrets.
4
SPEAKER_01
That s also why we have the pardoning capability.
4
SPEAKER_01
You could pardon someone individually if they show you that they ve changed.
4
SPEAKER_01
And it would only create fairness, because right now, let s say, Lex, you take out a huge, huge loan, and you don t pay your loan back, that will go on your credit.
4
SPEAKER_01
and you won t get a big loan again.
4
SPEAKER_01
You don t get to say, just give me another chance.
4
SPEAKER_01
You re gonna have to prove.
4
SPEAKER_01
I think about holding public office in the same way.
4
SPEAKER_01
If you ve violated your credit rating on that, you should have a much higher road to go to prove to us that you should be back in office.
4
SPEAKER_00
How did the war end?
4
SPEAKER_00
In quotes, what was the, so you said, and you make this case in the book, that in some sense, the elements, the tensions behind the Civil War continue to this day, but officially, how did the war end?
4
SPEAKER_01
So officially the war ends at Appomattox in the early spring of 1865 when Grant has pretty much smashed Robert E. Lee s army.
4
SPEAKER_01
Appomattox Courthouse is a small town in Virginia and the two men meet and their portraits of this is a painting of it we have in the book.
4
SPEAKER_01
And Grant and Lee sign a paper which basically allows Lee s soldiers to leave the battlefield
4
SPEAKER_01
and leave with their side arms to go back home.
4
SPEAKER_01
That s pretty much the end.
4
SPEAKER_01
Jefferson Davis, who s the president of the Confederacy, goes into hiding.
4
SPEAKER_01
He s later captured and then not convicted.
4
SPEAKER_01
But there s no formal settlement in the way there is at the end of World War II, where they meet in Yokohama Bay, the U.S.
4
SPEAKER_01
and Japanese leaders in China.
4
SPEAKER_01
This is not that.
4
SPEAKER_00
So what stands out to you as brilliant ideas during this time and actions of Lincoln, Abraham Lincoln?
4
SPEAKER_01
So I mentioned his values.
4
SPEAKER_01
I think a number of the things that he does that are quite extraordinary.
4
SPEAKER_01
First, in emancipating the slaves.
4
SPEAKER_01
Now the slaves were freeing themselves, but Lincoln recognizes that he needs more labor in the Union Army.
4
SPEAKER_01
And he recognizes that there s still a lot of resistance.
4
SPEAKER_01
And what he does is he makes the case for freeing the slaves based on the argument, not just of the moral value of that, but based on how that will benefit the North.
4
SPEAKER_01
He s able to convince non-abolitionists to pursue abolitionist policies by serving their own interests.
4
SPEAKER_01
What he s basically saying by 1863 or 64 is,
4
SPEAKER_01
I can ask for more white soldiers or I can bring in former slaves.
4
SPEAKER_01
Would you like me to take your son or would you like me to put in?
4
SPEAKER_01
It s the same thing Franklin Roosevelt does during World War II.
4
SPEAKER_01
He says, we need to build more planes and more tanks.
4
SPEAKER_01
And I m sending all the soldiers off to Europe.
4
SPEAKER_01
I ve got all this African-American population in the South.
4
SPEAKER_01
Wouldn t you like me to move them up to Chicago so we can win this war and build things in the factories?
4
SPEAKER_01
So Lincoln uses the war
4
SPEAKER_01
to move the country forward morally, even if at times he s convincing people by using other reasons.
4
SPEAKER_01
And I think that s great politics.
4
SPEAKER_00
I guess that s one of the components of great leadership, is do the right thing for the wrong reasons.
4
SPEAKER_01
Or publicly sounding wrong reasons, yeah.
4
SPEAKER_01
Find ways to move people.
4
SPEAKER_01
What we talked about before, different stories move different people.
4
SPEAKER_01
So you can tell different stories.
4
SPEAKER_01
He tells one set of stories to the religious leaders who are abolitionists, and a different set of stories to the New York bankers.
4
SPEAKER_01
And that s leadership.
4
SPEAKER_01
You tell different kinds of stories to move people to a new position.
4
SPEAKER_01
The other thing Lincoln is really brilliant at is managing the international side of this.
4
SPEAKER_01
So one of the real dangers for the Union is that the British will come in on the side of the Confederacy.
4
SPEAKER_01
The Confederates expected the British – because again, the Confederates were selling all their cotton to Britain.
4
SPEAKER_01
And they knew that the British leadership, first of all, was very happy to work with slaveholding societies, even though they didn t have slaves.
4
SPEAKER_01
And number two, that they believed the union was getting too strong and threatening the British in Canada.
4
SPEAKER_01
So there were many reasons the British might have gone in with the Confederates.
4
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln mixes sticks and carrots with the British.
4
SPEAKER_01
He threatens them.
4
SPEAKER_01
And when the British actually try to send diplomats to negotiate with Southerners, he interdicts that.
4
SPEAKER_01
He basically initiates a quarantine of the South.
4
SPEAKER_01
On the other hand, he reaches out to them and tries to show that he wants better relations and makes the argument that they will actually benefit more from having the industrial capability of the union on their side.
4
SPEAKER_01
So he s a very good diplomat.
4
SPEAKER_00
He is considered to be one of the great presidents in the history of the United States.
4
SPEAKER_00
Are there ways that he failed?
4
SPEAKER_00
Is there things he could have done better?
4
SPEAKER_01
So he failed in the ways that most great leaders fail, which is that he had a terrible succession plan.
4
SPEAKER_01
His vice president, who I spend a lot of time on in the book, Andrew Johnson, who was probably our worst president ever, Andrew Johnson had no business being anywhere near the presidency.
4
SPEAKER_01
Andrew Johnson was the only southern senator who did not secede.
4
SPEAKER_01
And so even though he was a Democrat, Lincoln wanted to show that he was creating a unity ticket when he ran for re-election in 1864.
4
SPEAKER_01
This happens today, right?
4
SPEAKER_01
So he put someone on as vice president who he didn t even like, but who he thought was politically useful.
4
SPEAKER_01
Problem is, when Lincoln was assassinated, this guy took over.
4
SPEAKER_01
Andrew Johnson was drunk at his own inauguration.
4
SPEAKER_01
The guy was a true drunkard.
4
SPEAKER_01
He was not prepared to lead in any sense, intellectually, politically, and he was against most of the principles Lincoln was for.
4
SPEAKER_01
And the irony is that when Lincoln is assassinated in April of 1865, Andrew Johnson takes over and he has all the war powers Lincoln had.
4
SPEAKER_01
That was not good planning by Lincoln.
4
SPEAKER_01
And we can look back on it now and say, even though Lincoln is the first president who was assassinated, he should have known that there were people coming for him.
4
SPEAKER_01
It wasn t inevitable that he d be assassinated, but he should have had a backup plan for who would take over, hopefully someone who was capable of doing the job, and Andrew Johnson was not capable.
4
SPEAKER_00
So for me, for a person, if I were to put myself in Lincoln s shoes or anybody, any leadership position s shoes, it is difficult to think about what happens after my death, after I m gone, right?
4
SPEAKER_00
To plan well.
4
SPEAKER_00
But at the same time,
4
SPEAKER_00
If you care about your actions to have a long-term impact, it seems like you should have a succession plan that continues on the path, continues to carry the ideals that you ve implemented.
4
SPEAKER_00
So I m unsure why people don t do that more often.
4
SPEAKER_00
Like I wonder how much Vladimir Putin spends percentage of time per day thinking what happens after he s gone.
4
SPEAKER_00
to help flourish the nation and the region that he deeply cares for.
4
SPEAKER_00
I wonder, and it s the same as for other presidents, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, they might think politically, like, how do I guarantee that it s a Democrat or a Republican?
4
SPEAKER_00
But do they think like visionary for the country?
4
SPEAKER_00
I don t know, I wonder.
4
SPEAKER_01
I think that s very rare.
4
SPEAKER_01
And I think what I understand from the literature among business people who talk about this a lot is what ends up happening is you become so powerful
4
SPEAKER_01
you assume you re always gonna be in power.
4
SPEAKER_01
You convince yourself of that.
4
SPEAKER_01
You convince yourself that the end is far away.
4
SPEAKER_01
And of course, for Lincoln, the end could have been far away.
4
SPEAKER_01
He was healthy.
4
SPEAKER_01
He was only in his 50s.
4
SPEAKER_01
He could have lived a lot longer, but it also, it ended fast as it could.
4
SPEAKER_01
And my understanding is that most Americans don t prepare their wills and estates, and it doesn t matter whether they re rich or poor.
4
SPEAKER_01
They assume things are just gonna go on because it s not fun to think about this.
4
SPEAKER_00
But I feel like it s freeing.
4
SPEAKER_00
You know what I did, which is interesting?
4
SPEAKER_00
Before I went to Ukraine, I recorded a video.
4
SPEAKER_00
I set up a whole thing where I record a video, like what happens if I die?
4
SPEAKER_00
I record a video to release, and I gave my brother access to my passwords, and I gave him instructions.
4
SPEAKER_00
You re not allowed to look at this, but please publish this if I die.
4
SPEAKER_00
And you know, that made me, it sounds silly and ridiculous, but that made me feel free to do the best thing I wanna do.
4
SPEAKER_00
It s liberating, so I guess that s for your will, but also do the best possible damn job you can.
4
SPEAKER_00
I feel like as a leader, having a plan what happens if you fail, if you die, if you...
4
SPEAKER_00
or you lose some of the oomph, some of the power, some of the momentum that is driving you currently, that there s going to be a handoff where you will still be remembered as a great man or woman.
4
SPEAKER_01
But you identify one of the other problems, right?
4
SPEAKER_01
Which is one of the other reasons why someone like Lincoln or certainly Henry Kissinger doesn t create a successor.
4
SPEAKER_01
Because you re afraid they re going to steal your passwords.
4
SPEAKER_01
You re afraid they re going to steal the power.
5
SPEAKER_01
That s true.
5
SPEAKER_00
You had to find someone, your brother, hopefully, who you could trust.
5
SPEAKER_00
No, no, no.
5
SPEAKER_00
Let s just be clear.
5
SPEAKER_00
I love my brother, but he s a troll.
5
SPEAKER_00
So there s a feature on whatever password manager I may or may not use, and there s a bunch of services like this.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s interesting.
5
SPEAKER_00
I don t know if you know about this.
5
SPEAKER_00
I ve learned about all of this.
5
SPEAKER_00
is you can have them request access, and it s gonna wait 30 days before it gives them access.
5
SPEAKER_00
So it s kinda has this built-in trust, trust padding.
5
SPEAKER_00
But it s interesting, I mean, to me, on that aspect is just to have a plan in all aspects of life.
5
SPEAKER_00
This is for leadership in your private life, like what happens
5
SPEAKER_00
to not just your will and your wealth or whatever, but what happens to other stuff like social media and all of that in this digital world.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s fascinating.
5
SPEAKER_01
And anything you care about, if you want it to live on.
5
SPEAKER_01
And that s the problem.
5
SPEAKER_01
But if you, unless you can devise...
5
SPEAKER_01
a technical solution like that, you have to give someone power now.
5
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, and that s the tricky thing.
5
SPEAKER_00
I mean, democracy is a kind of technology.
5
SPEAKER_00
You kind of have to figure out how to do it correctly, how to have that power propagate, and especially during war, how you get everybody together into this warmongering mood, and then how do you like come down from that and just relax?
5
SPEAKER_01
Precisely.
5
SPEAKER_00
So in some sense, that s
5
SPEAKER_00
With Andrew Johnson, that was the problem, is the overcentralization of power.
5
SPEAKER_01
It was the overcentralization of power, but it was also that Lincoln had a designated successor who was going to do and tried to do everything that ran against what Lincoln was doing.
5
SPEAKER_01
And it set the country back.
5
SPEAKER_01
We went forward at the end of the Civil War, and then we went backward.
5
SPEAKER_01
more so than we would have if there had been a new election.
5
SPEAKER_01
Because if there had been a new election, there still would be reason for that person running, even if they were on the other side, to try to find some compromise positions.
5
SPEAKER_01
Andrew Johnson inherited power with very few limitations on how he used that power.
5
SPEAKER_01
Congress wasn t even in session.
5
SPEAKER_01
And so this became very directly a problem because Andrew Johnson started pardoning Southerners, allowing them to come back into power.
5
SPEAKER_01
So he had like a few months where he just went wild.
5
SPEAKER_01
Yeah.
5
SPEAKER_01
It s giving the car keys to someone who s not prepared to drive, but decided that they re going to do what they want with the car for a while.
5
SPEAKER_00
All right.
5
SPEAKER_00
Is there any level to which power corrupted Lincoln, a war president?
5
SPEAKER_01
Yes, I do think there were some areas, and I think that even though he was a great president, if not our greatest president, maybe one of the greatest figures of our history, he was flawed.
5
SPEAKER_01
One is his problem with succession, but also
5
SPEAKER_01
I think Lincoln over-invested in the power of the presidency.
5
SPEAKER_01
He came to believe too much in the role of one man and not in creating a more balanced approach to governance.
5
SPEAKER_01
And that s a function of war.
5
SPEAKER_01
That s where war is dangerous.
5
SPEAKER_01
War has an inherent centralizing power in a democracy.
5
SPEAKER_01
That is dangerous, because even when you have the best of people running a war, that gives them a lot of power to make decisions.
5
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, how do you come down from that?
5
SPEAKER_00
I see that was Zelensky and Putin currently.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s a war.
5
SPEAKER_00
How do you come down?
5
SPEAKER_00
Because Ukraine and everybody, anybody in a war kind of, especially if you re fighting for the ideal of democracy, it seems like war is anti-democratic.
5
SPEAKER_00
It is.
5
SPEAKER_00
So how do you come down from that?
5
SPEAKER_00
What s the interesting mechanism
5
SPEAKER_00
I mean, some of it is leadership.
5
SPEAKER_00
You have to be like a George Washington type figure to be able to walk away from power.
5
SPEAKER_01
I think you gave the answer right there.
5
SPEAKER_01
You need to walk away from power or you need to be forced to walk away from power.
5
SPEAKER_01
Historically, one of the things that democracies have tended to do when they have a chance is to vote out of office the victor in the war.
5
SPEAKER_01
Think about Winston Churchill.
5
SPEAKER_01
Roosevelt is elected to his fourth term when he s still in the war.
5
SPEAKER_01
It s not clear that he would have been elected again, let s say he lived on, because there is a sensibility that the person has become too powerful in this role and that someone else should now step in, someone else who s also not a war president but has other interests.
5
SPEAKER_01
So let s hope Ukraine wins this war.
5
SPEAKER_01
Zelensky should then step down.
5
SPEAKER_01
or someone else should be voted in.
5
SPEAKER_01
It will be dangerous if he remains president.
5
SPEAKER_01
Let s say he wins somehow and a true victory, which is just hypothetical.
5
SPEAKER_01
He should be praised, maybe given a nice villa, but someone else should take over because the problem is that he s gonna have too much power.
5
SPEAKER_01
And honestly, he s going to be too out of touch with what the country needs after the war.
5
SPEAKER_00
What do you think would have happened if Lincoln had lived?
5
SPEAKER_00
That s the sort of counterfactual view of history.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s an interesting question that probably you think about a lot.
5
SPEAKER_00
This gets raised a lot.
5
SPEAKER_00
What would have happened if he didn t get assassinated?
5
SPEAKER_01
It s a reasonable question because it was not inevitable he d be assassinated.
5
SPEAKER_01
He could have had more protection that night.
5
SPEAKER_01
He d invited Ulysses Grant to go to the theater with him and Grant and his wife didn t go.
5
SPEAKER_01
If they had been there, there would have been more protection for Grant.
5
SPEAKER_01
So he would have had at least double the security there.
5
SPEAKER_01
So there are many ways in which he might not have died.
5
SPEAKER_01
I think it still would have been a difficult
5
SPEAKER_01
transition.
5
SPEAKER_01
But I think there were a few things that would have been better.
5
SPEAKER_01
First of all, Lincoln would not have pardoned all of these Confederate leaders and allowed them to come back into power.
5
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln also would have been a better politician at holding his Republican coalition together.
5
SPEAKER_01
And I think Lincoln was more committed to empowering former slaves and others.
5
SPEAKER_01
So we still would have had a lot of conflicts, but I think what would have been a degree of difficulty was doubled or tripled because
5
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln was removed and the opposite came into power with Andrew Johnson.
5
SPEAKER_00
So you don t think there s a case you made that Andrew Johnson turned out to be a bad decision, but the spirit of the decision is the correct one?
5
SPEAKER_01
No, I think it was a terrible decision because you should never put someone one step away from enormous power who s not prepared.
5
SPEAKER_00
Oh, in that sense.
5
SPEAKER_00
In that sense, I got it.
5
SPEAKER_00
But the spirit of the decision, meaning you put somebody who represents a very opposing viewpoint than you.
5
SPEAKER_01
Well, I m for that so long as that person is on board with some of the basic values that you re pursuing, and that person is capable of doing the job.
5
SPEAKER_00
Do you think that was obvious to him, that Andrew Johnson was not capable of doing the job?
5
SPEAKER_01
I mean, everyone recognized that.
5
SPEAKER_01
But it made sense.
5
SPEAKER_01
I mean, what Lincoln has to be praised for is in the midst of a war, when at that point he was not doing well, the war was not going well, he ran for re-election.
5
SPEAKER_01
He didn t try to postpone the election.
5
SPEAKER_01
He didn t try to do anything.
5
SPEAKER_01
And so he needed all the help he could get when running.
5
SPEAKER_01
And so he wanted to have someone on there who looked like a unity candidate who could appeal to some southerners.
5
SPEAKER_01
So it made sense from a political point of view.
5
SPEAKER_01
But it created a really big problem.
5
SPEAKER_01
And there were people who said he should have removed Johnson as soon as he was elected.
5
SPEAKER_01
And in retrospect, he probably should have.
5
SPEAKER_00
How gangster is that to during a war still run the election?
5
SPEAKER_01
It s extraordinary.
5
SPEAKER_01
Lincoln believed in democratic values.
5
SPEAKER_01
He also believed he would win, but he knew it was not guaranteed.
5
SPEAKER_01
And it s interesting for people who don t know this, the reason we have mail-in balloting in the U.S.
5
SPEAKER_01
is because of that.
5
SPEAKER_01
So almost, what, I think almost a million union voters are away from their homes.
5
SPEAKER_01
And so how do they vote?
5
SPEAKER_01
As soldiers, as nurses, they vote by mail.
5
SPEAKER_01
The post office delivers their ballots.
5
SPEAKER_01
That s why we have mail-in balloting.
5
SPEAKER_00
What about the other counterfactual question of what would have happened if Confederate States won the war?
5
SPEAKER_01
If the Confederate States had won the war, you would have seen, I think, a separate country.
5
SPEAKER_01
in the South, you would have seen two countries, and that Confederate country would have been a smaller country, but it probably would have been able to defend itself because it would have actually gotten much richer than it was.
5
SPEAKER_01
It was poor at the time, but through its cotton trade and other things, it would have been recognized by Great Britain, by France, by other societies, and you would have seen a Southern Republic.
5
SPEAKER_01
I don t think you would have seen that Southern Republic dominate the continent.
5
SPEAKER_01
The Union had the men and people and had the resources.
5
SPEAKER_01
but you would have seen a rival republic to the United States in the South.
5
SPEAKER_01
Do you think they had interest to dominate the continent, to take over the Union?
5
SPEAKER_01
They had a foreign policy, they had a plan, many have written about this, they had plans, many Southerners did, of expanding into the Caribbean, which was actually more feasible.
5
SPEAKER_01
They did not have the personnel to occupy so much territory going out West, if you think about the amount of land that had to be covered.
5
SPEAKER_01
but they had the nautical capabilities and naval power and the money to dominate islands in the Caribbean.
5
SPEAKER_01
And those islands were important for their trade.
5
SPEAKER_01
So there were many Southerners who wanted to take control of Cuba, wanted to take control of Haiti and the Dominican Republic.
5
SPEAKER_01
And so you probably would have seen Southern warfare in those areas.
5
SPEAKER_00
From a counterfactual history perspective, can you make the case
5
SPEAKER_00
that secession would have been created a better world?
5
SPEAKER_00
Like if we re sitting today and do back to the future thing, the secession in this context, if we put aside the suffering and the loss of life in the war, that we d be in a better world today?
5
SPEAKER_00
Just look at the political climate.
5
SPEAKER_00
And can you also make the case that actually this outcome of the Union winning the war is the better one?
5
SPEAKER_01
I think the union victory is by far the better outcome because I think what you would have had otherwise is you would have had a slave republic in the South that would have encouraged slavery in other parts of the world, would have exported slavery, and would have necessarily been hostile to many of the positive changes that occur in the union.
5
SPEAKER_01
movement toward progressive reforms, creating cities with health codes and public education and many of those things.
5
SPEAKER_01
Public education really develops in the North as a way of training workers who are being paid to be better workers in a factory.
5
SPEAKER_01
There s a reason you don t educate slaves, because if you educate slaves, they rebel.
5
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, so don t you think there ll be a huge pressure from the North to abolish slavery anyway?
5
SPEAKER_01
There would have, but I think the South could have survived without another war.
5
SPEAKER_01
I mean, I think the way that slavery would have ended in the South, if it didn t end with the Civil War, it would have been with another war.
5
SPEAKER_00
I guess the deeper question is, is it better to work through your problems together, or is it better to get a divorce?
5
SPEAKER_01
I think in this case, it was better to work through the problems.
5
SPEAKER_01
It s not even working through them together.
5
SPEAKER_01
It s better to work through the problems where one side has the resources to incentivize you to work through the problems rather than leaving you on your own to go your own direction.
5
SPEAKER_01
I think the argument against the union winning would be the argument that would be made by those who believe they suffered from union power later on.
5
SPEAKER_01
So you could argue, if you re a historian of Native Americans, if you re a historian of the Philippines, you could argue some of the areas where this newly united nation coming out of the Civil War was able to use its power to spread its influence, it would have been harder for the Union to do that if the Union had to deal with a rival to the South.
5
SPEAKER_00
So as a historian, the Union won.
5
SPEAKER_00
To which degree are the people from the Union, that is now the United States, the writers of the history?
5
SPEAKER_00
that color the perspective of who s the good guys and the bad guys.
5
SPEAKER_00
So this is such an interesting question because- I like how you take every question I ask and make it into a better question.
5
SPEAKER_00
That s a deep, I deeply appreciate it.
5
SPEAKER_00
Every time I ask some ridiculous question and you go, that s really interesting.
5
SPEAKER_01
No, because they re really good questions.
5
SPEAKER_01
They re thoughtful questions.
5
SPEAKER_01
You know, actually the best questions are not the simple ones, right?
5
SPEAKER_01
So, um,
5
SPEAKER_01
The axiom is that the winners write history.
5
SPEAKER_01
And that s usually the case, right?
5
SPEAKER_01
Most of the history I learned about Ukraine when I was growing up was written by Russians.
5
SPEAKER_01
It was Russian history of Ukraine.
5
SPEAKER_01
Most of the history of Europe has been written by Germans and French and British citizens, right?
5
SPEAKER_01
I mean, so usually it s that way.
5
SPEAKER_01
And for the most part, our history has been written from a sort of Northeastern point of view.
5
SPEAKER_01
But it s very interesting, the history of the years after the Civil War that I focus on in this book,
5
SPEAKER_01
has largely been written by the losers.
5
SPEAKER_01
Because the Union and its legacies, and I grew up in New York, so I m growing up as a legacy of that, right?
5
SPEAKER_01
Those were individuals who wanted to write about what happened long after the Civil War, when the North got rich.
5
SPEAKER_01
All those beautiful buildings in New York, all that wealth in New York, it s 1880s, 90s, late 19th century, it s the Gilded Age.
5
SPEAKER_01
And that s what Northerners want to write about, right?
5
SPEAKER_01
Because there s glory there.
5
SPEAKER_01
The 20 years or so after the Civil War, the years that really count, 1865 to 1880 or so, those years are ugly.
5
SPEAKER_01
It s messy.
5
SPEAKER_01
And so who wrote about them?
5
SPEAKER_01
Southerners wrote about them.
5
SPEAKER_01
And they wrote a story that was about northern carpetbaggers and corrupt African Americans.
5
SPEAKER_01
And this is the story that Americans learned until a few years ago.
5
SPEAKER_01
I ve gone around the country talking about this book, and the number of people have told me they never learned this basic history, because they grew up in Chicago, not because they grew up in Texas, because they grew up in Chicago.
5
SPEAKER_01
And the story they were told the Civil War ended, oh, now let s talk about the Chicago World s Fair in 1893, and how Chicago is coming of age as this great city.
5
SPEAKER_01
We don t like to write history in our country that s not about glory.
5
SPEAKER_01
I m all for the greatness of our country, but you become great by studying your failures as well as your successes.
5
SPEAKER_01
And that s a real problem we have.
5
SPEAKER_00
And I would love to see a kind of humility from a history perspective.
5
SPEAKER_00
One of the things that always surprised me just coming from the Soviet Union to the United States, as you ve I think spoken about, is the perspective on World War II and who was the critical component of winning the war.
5
SPEAKER_00
Obviously in the Soviet Union, it s a great patriotic war.
5
SPEAKER_00
The Soviet Union are the ones that suffered, and often actually don t emphasize the suffering, they emphasize the glory, that they defeated this huge evil.
5
SPEAKER_00
But then you listen to the United States  perspective on this, and it s almost like, I mean, there s several ways of phrasing it, but basically the United States won the war.
5
SPEAKER_00
Without the United States, it would be impossible to win the war.
5
SPEAKER_00
They were the turning point.
5
SPEAKER_00
There were the last, my everything, that song, my first, my last, my everything.
5
SPEAKER_00
So that, and I m sure, I wonder what growing up in, maybe after war in Britain,
5
SPEAKER_00
I wonder if there s history books written there that basically say, and they could also make a pretty strong case, that Britain was central to the turning point.
5
SPEAKER_00
You could really make a strong case that Churchill and Britain were the turning point of the war, that they re responsible for some of the first failures, major failures of Hitler from a military strategy perspective.
5
SPEAKER_00
But that s interesting to look at that very recent history from very different perspectives.
5
SPEAKER_01
And it s the same problem with the Civil War.
5
SPEAKER_01
We wanna tell the story of the Union winning the war, and then everything is good.
5
SPEAKER_01
And it s not the way it worked.
5
SPEAKER_01
What I m really trying to get at is when you love your country, you have to study the failures.
5
SPEAKER_01
Because by studying the failures, that s how you improve yourself, and that s where you see where real courage is.
5
SPEAKER_01
It s actually that Lincoln failed for so long that makes him a great president.
5
SPEAKER_01
He lost more battles than he won.
5
SPEAKER_01
but he learned and he got it right in the end.
5
SPEAKER_01
Same with Ulysses Grant.
5
SPEAKER_01
I don t want generals, I m just echoing Lincoln here.
5
SPEAKER_01
I don t want generals, I don t want leaders who think they re gonna get it right the first time, because they re never gonna get it right the first time.
5
SPEAKER_01
You never get it right the first time in an AI experiment, right?
5
SPEAKER_01
It s those who can work through failure learn from failure.
5
SPEAKER_01
And we as a society have to start doing that better.
5
SPEAKER_01
We have to not just trumpet the successes.
5
SPEAKER_01
Let s talk about where we failed as Republicans, as Democrats, as independents.
5
SPEAKER_01
and let s move forward from there.
5
SPEAKER_00
In recent years have been a kind of movement of highlighting some of the hypocrisy, sort of highlighting the racism, the fact that many of the founding fathers were slave owners, that kind of thing, sort of highlighting from the current ethics of our world, showing that many of the people involved in the war on each side were evil.
5
SPEAKER_00
What do you think about that perspective on history?
5
SPEAKER_01
I think it s super valuable.
5
SPEAKER_01
I think we should expose the gap between ideals and practice.
5
SPEAKER_01
But that doesn t mean we should throw away the great people who are also hypocrites because everyone I ve studied is a hypocrite.
5
SPEAKER_01
I m a hypocrite.
5
SPEAKER_01
I think I m a pretty good father.
5
SPEAKER_01
Luckily, my son is an even better mother.
5
SPEAKER_01
But
5
SPEAKER_01
There are parts of me that, I mean, I often find myself telling our children to do things that I didn t do, right?
5
SPEAKER_01
But they re smart and they recognize that and they learn something from that.
5
SPEAKER_01
So let s not cover over the hypocrisy, but let s not throw people away for being hypocritical.
5
SPEAKER_01
Here s my view of Thomas Jefferson, which is similar to my view of Abraham Lincoln, right?
5
SPEAKER_01
These are incredibly insightful, thoughtful people who added so much to our country, but they also created flawed systems.
5
SPEAKER_01
And one of, excuse me, Jefferson s flaws was even though he saw all the evils of slavery, he was a terrible farmer and he could not imagine living the lifestyle he lived without slaves.
5
SPEAKER_01
He could never work his way out of that.
5
SPEAKER_01
But that doesn t make the Declaration of Independence less valuable.
5
SPEAKER_01
In fact, it makes it more valuable.
5
SPEAKER_01
There s more that we can learn from that.
5
SPEAKER_00
And to me, on the hypocrisy side, many of the people that participate in cancel culture and these kinds of movements, that call everything is racist and so on, sometimes they re highlighting properly,
5
SPEAKER_00
the evils in our current society, but the hypocrisy they have is not realizing if they were placed in Germany in the 40s, if they were placed in the position of being a white Christian,
5
SPEAKER_00
during slavery at the founding of this country, they would do the same thing.
5
SPEAKER_00
They would do the evils they re now criticizing, most of them.
5
SPEAKER_00
So it takes a truly heroic human to think outside, to be aware of all the evils going on around you and take action.
5
SPEAKER_00
It s easy now on Twitter to call people as racist.
5
SPEAKER_00
What s hard is to see the racism when you re living in it and your wellbeing is funded
6
SPEAKER_01
by it.
6
SPEAKER_01
Yep.
6
SPEAKER_01
I think that s right.
6
SPEAKER_01
I think to analyze ourselves and look honestly in the mirror is very hard.
6
SPEAKER_01
I also think, I make this point in actually all of my books, the real, and it s an Eli Wiesel point, that a lot of the evil in our world is the evil of silence and just looking away.
6
SPEAKER_01
And one form of that on Twitter is just hitting like.
6
SPEAKER_01
It s a cheap way.
6
SPEAKER_01
of pretending you re doing something that s important, right?
6
SPEAKER_01
After the Civil War, there s all sorts of bad stuff that happens.
6
SPEAKER_01
I talk about it a lot.
6
SPEAKER_01
There always are people there who could stop it.
6
SPEAKER_01
Most people are not responsible for the bad activities, but most don t do something to stop it.
6
SPEAKER_01
And when I say do something, I mean really do something.
6
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, really.
6
SPEAKER_00
And it s also to push back and push back, silence on Twitter is not what Elie Wiesel was talking about.
6
SPEAKER_00
So sometimes silence on Twitter is the courageous action because you wait and think and learn and have patience to truly understand the situation before you take actual action, not participate in the outrage crowds on Twitter, the hysteria of cancellation.
6
SPEAKER_00
What s hard to do is to speak up when everybody else is silent.
6
SPEAKER_00
That s what s hard to do.
6
SPEAKER_00
Right, and to speak up against those who you thought were on your side.
6
SPEAKER_00
Yes, exactly.
6
SPEAKER_00
Good luck to those on the left who speak up against the left.
6
SPEAKER_00
And the same, good luck to those on the right who speak up against the right.
6
SPEAKER_00
It s a lonely place.
6
SPEAKER_00
It s a painful place.
6
SPEAKER_00
That s why walking in the center is tough.
6
SPEAKER_00
You get attacked by both sides.
6
SPEAKER_00
It s a wonderful, wonderful journey.
6
SPEAKER_01
And you know, what s interesting to me, and what I learned writing this book, every book is a journey.
6
SPEAKER_01
What I learned in the laboratory of this book, right,
6
SPEAKER_01
was a lot of those figures who do stand up, even in their own lifetime, they don t get the accolades they deserve, but they make a difference.
6
SPEAKER_01
And that s maybe not enough comfort because you want to see benefits in your own lifetime, but I think it really matters.
6
SPEAKER_01
And many of the figures I talk about were not even well-known in their time.
6
SPEAKER_01
So you can make a difference, you do impart something small in the universe that can grow into something better, and we shouldn t forget that.
6
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, that s why I admire Boxer, the horse.
6
SPEAKER_00
I will work harder even if he gets sent to the slaughter by the evil pigs.
6
SPEAKER_01
You re on Orwell today, I love you.
6
SPEAKER_00
I m on, recently, I mean, Animal Farm is one of my favorite books.
6
SPEAKER_00
I ve been recently, I just am rereading 1984 now.
6
SPEAKER_00
It s been politicized, that book in general, but to me it s a love story.
6
SPEAKER_01
It is a love story.
6
SPEAKER_00
That there s a, like, love is the,
6
SPEAKER_00
It s a story of an oppressive government, a surveillance state, and the nature of truth being manipulated by wartime, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah, so on.
6
SPEAKER_00
But the beacon of hope in the human heart that pulls you out, that wakes you up in a world like that is a love of another human being.
6
SPEAKER_01
It s transcendence, I totally agree.
6
SPEAKER_01
My understanding, you would know better than I would, is that it s now a best-selling book in Russia again.
6
1984?
6
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, it s actually being downloaded more.
6
SPEAKER_01
There was a piece on NPR, I heard about this actually.
6
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, well, I hope it s because they re looking for love.
6
SPEAKER_01
That s what I was just gonna say.
6
SPEAKER_01
Hopefully not in all the wrong places.
6
SPEAKER_00
Hey, there s no such thing as the wrong places.
6
SPEAKER_00
But that s that s my opinion.
6
SPEAKER_00
I m the one that showed up naked and drunk to your classroom.
6
SPEAKER_01
I still surprised that was you.
6
SPEAKER_00
I was wearing a wig.
6
SPEAKER_00
I m sorry.
6
SPEAKER_00
Quick pause.
6
SPEAKER_00
Can I take a breath?
6
SPEAKER_00
And we re back.
6
SPEAKER_00
John Wilkes Booth assassinated Abraham Lincoln.
6
SPEAKER_00
In his diary, as you write in your book, he wrote about Lincoln, our country owed all her troubles to him, and God simply made me the instrument of his punishment.
6
SPEAKER_00
The country is not what it was.
6
SPEAKER_00
What was the idea of the country that John Wilkes Booth believed in?
6
SPEAKER_00
You talked about this country that just constantly being repeated in his writing.
6
SPEAKER_01
For John Wilkes Booth and many other people who are close to the southern part of the country in the Confederacy, they believe the country should be a democracy for white people.
6
SPEAKER_01
abounded democracy.
6
SPEAKER_01
And Booth was horrified, and we have to empathize with it, not sympathize, but recognize how strange it seemed to him that all of a sudden those who were slaves were now soldiers with guns.
6
SPEAKER_01
And he was particularly offended when he saw in Washington, D.C., a group of African American Union soldiers holding Southern prisoners of war
6
SPEAKER_01
and the world was turned upside down for him.
6
SPEAKER_01
Democracy for him, he believed in democracy, but democracy for white people, and that justified mistreating black people for him.
6
SPEAKER_00
So country means white people.
6
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, and I don t think it s that different from... And white Christians.
6
SPEAKER_01
White Christians, yes.
6
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, he was not arguing for Jewish emancipation either.
6
SPEAKER_01
I don t think that s really different from what we ve seen in the 20th century for people who justify ethnic cleansing or genocide.
6
SPEAKER_01
Let s go to the, you know, the extreme example of Hitler again that we ve talked about before.
6
SPEAKER_01
His view was actually, he claimed he wanted a democracy for Germany.
6
SPEAKER_01
He wanted a democracy of the right Germans.
6
SPEAKER_01
And he wanted those who he saw infecting and mongrelizing the society out.
6
SPEAKER_01
That s in essence what John Wilkes Booth thought.
6
SPEAKER_00
The scary thing is those kinds of ideas, you can put a pretty face on them.
6
SPEAKER_00
Like you don t have to use, and maybe Hitler didn t until the war started, or even parts of the war, make it so clear that you just want
6
SPEAKER_00
the certain kind of Germans that have made Germany a great nation to be the people that are running that nation and other people who are not truly interested in, don t hold the interest of the country at heart.
6
SPEAKER_00
They should go elsewhere where they can flourish also, it s wonderful.
6
SPEAKER_00
But like the good Germans, they ve built all these amazing things, we should give them the power and not to the others.
6
SPEAKER_00
And you can put a bunch of flowery language around that.
6
SPEAKER_00
Precisely.
6
SPEAKER_01
It s the argument that s made all the time today against immigration.
6
SPEAKER_01
that the wrong people are coming into our society.
6
SPEAKER_01
It s ironic, because it s often made by those who themselves are immigrants.
6
SPEAKER_01
History teaches us that those who have arrived as immigrants are no more likely to like those who come.
6
SPEAKER_01
In fact, they might be against the next group for just this reason, because they think they re the right group.
6
SPEAKER_00
Can you describe to me if it s useful at all to know the difference, if there s a difference between white nationalism, white supremacism, and Christian nationalism?
6
SPEAKER_00
Is there an intersection between them?
6
SPEAKER_00
I ve heard these terms used, oh, separatism too, right?
6
SPEAKER_00
Is there an interesting distinction that permeated that history that still lasts today?
6
SPEAKER_01
I think there s a long history in the United States of a belief in white supremacy and it s not unique to the United States.
6
SPEAKER_01
We actually inherit this from Europe and white supremacy is the belief that for whatever reason, those with lighter color skin, usually of Northern European extraction,
6
SPEAKER_01
are superior, have more rights, are the better people to make decisions, all sorts of things.
6
SPEAKER_01
It s an aesthetic judgment as much as it is a political judgment, and that gets embedded in our society, right?
6
SPEAKER_01
We inherit that.
6
SPEAKER_01
Christian nationalism is the presumption that it s not just your race, but now it s also your Christian belief.
6
SPEAKER_01
And that is actually relatively new.
6
SPEAKER_01
There are little pieces of that in our history.
6
SPEAKER_01
But many of those who are white supremacists, even those in the Confederacy, are not Christian nationalists because they don t agree on which kind of Christianity and they don t view those who are from a different denomination of Christianity as being good Christians.
6
SPEAKER_01
There isn t this big tent Christianity in the 19th century.
6
SPEAKER_01
This notion that there is one Christian nation and that we re all part of it, that s actually really a 20th century creation.
6
SPEAKER_01
It precedes the evangelical movement, but it s been made even more popular.
6
SPEAKER_01
But it would not make sense to a confederate to say we re a white Christian nation.
6
SPEAKER_01
It would make sense to say we re a white Protestant nation.
6
SPEAKER_01
because they didn t consider Catholics good Christians or a white Presbyterian nation.
6
SPEAKER_01
And so that s something new, and I think what s particularly dangerous about this notion of Christian nationalism is it creates this false history.
6
SPEAKER_01
saying we ve always been together as Christians, that s always how we ve defined ourselves, and that s not accurate.
6
SPEAKER_00
Well, one interesting thing, so I recently talked to a left-leaning or maybe a far-left political streamer named Destiny, Stephen Bunnell, I don t know if you re familiar with him.
6
SPEAKER_00
He does live streaming debates with people, it s very passionate.
6
SPEAKER_01
Oh, I ve heard of this, my students have told me, I ve not actually seen it.
6
SPEAKER_01
My students are always up on the most hip things.
6
SPEAKER_00
The funny thing about him, he s already considered like a boomer.
6
SPEAKER_00
He s already the old streamer because he s been doing it for 10 years.
6
SPEAKER_00
He s not the cool kid anymore.
6
SPEAKER_00
Anyway, he goes into some difficult political territory and he actually had a mini conversation with Nick Fuentes.
6
SPEAKER_00
And he says, I mean, some of it is humor, but some of it is pretty dark, hard-hitting sort of criticism is, he says that anyone who claims to be a Christian nationalist asks them if they would rather have
6
SPEAKER_00
have a million people who are atheists from Sweden who are white come, or if you would rather have a million people from Africa who are Christian come.
6
SPEAKER_00
And the truth comes out, that this is a very surface level, this kind of idea of Christian nationalism is still, underneath it is a deep racism, like hatred towards black people.
6
SPEAKER_01
I think that s, I m sure that s right.
6
SPEAKER_00
I m sure that s right.
6
SPEAKER_00
That s the sense I got into is it does not seem to have deep,
6
SPEAKER_00
kind of, yeah, the historical context to it.
6
SPEAKER_00
It s just a different, a rebranding of the old kind of hate.
6
SPEAKER_01
What I think is important, though, in drawing this distinction, and why it really matters beyond the history of it, is someone like Lincoln quotes scripture all the time.
6
SPEAKER_01
The Second Inaugural is filled, Second Inaugural Address, Gettysburg Address, filled with biblical references.
6
SPEAKER_01
but he does it in a way that s not Christian nationalist because he s using the texts to bring people together.
6
SPEAKER_01
He s using it as a fable of humanity.
6
SPEAKER_01
And you could say he s not open to Islamic thinking, he s ignorant of the Islamic world.
6
SPEAKER_01
But as a Jew, I m a Jew, reading and studying Lincoln, I know he s a Christian, but I don t feel excluded from his rhetoric because I share that Bible.
6
SPEAKER_01
We have different views, but I don t feel excluded.
6
SPEAKER_01
It actually brings people together.
6
SPEAKER_01
The Christian nationalist approach that we ve seen in the 20th century, and especially in recent decades, is intended to divide people.
6
SPEAKER_01
It excludes Jews.
6
SPEAKER_01
It excludes Christians who don t interpret Christianity their way.
6
SPEAKER_01
And to say that s what we ve always done is an entire distortion of our country, and it also hides why this is so dangerous.
6
SPEAKER_01
Insofar as Christianity matters to our country, it should be in the way Lincoln uses it, as a set of common texts that many of us resonate with, knowing that we have different rituals and different understandings, not as a way to exclude people and not as a cover for racism, which is what it is.
6
SPEAKER_00
It s kind of interesting that you could talk about, I ve talked to a lot of people, Muslim folks, Jewish folks, Christian folks, there s a way to talk about religion that s inclusive and then that s exclusive.
6
SPEAKER_00
And it s just been, I ve been listening to a lot of these interfaith conversations and they re awesome.
6
SPEAKER_00
They celebrate the beauty of each religion.
6
SPEAKER_00
They banter and argue with each other about details and so on.
6
SPEAKER_00
But it feels like love.
6
SPEAKER_00
It feels like anybody from any of those religions would feel welcome at that party.
6
SPEAKER_01
And I think that s possible.
6
SPEAKER_00
Can you tell me about the disputed election of 1876?
6
SPEAKER_01
So this is fascinating.
6
SPEAKER_01
The 1876 election is one of many elections, we ve had some recently, that are intensely controversial.
6
SPEAKER_01
And they re controversial because they re so close.
6
SPEAKER_01
They re controversial because it s not always clear who s won.
6
SPEAKER_01
In 1876, Samuel Tilden, the governor of New York, who s running as a Democratic candidate, wins more votes across the country.
6
SPEAKER_01
So everyone knows he becomes president, right?
6
SPEAKER_01
Wrong, he doesn t become president because in three states, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida, it s very, very close.
6
SPEAKER_01
And even though Tilden has more total votes, if he loses those states, the electors in those states, all of which go to the winner of the state, would actually make Rutherford B. Hayes the Republican candidate president.
6
SPEAKER_01
In all three of those states, you also have Republican governors who have just lost, but are still the people who have to certify the election.
6
SPEAKER_01
All three states say that Hayes won, even though it s very close and disputed.
6
SPEAKER_01
So Hayes has one more electoral vote.
6
SPEAKER_01
Of course, the Democrats don t accept that.
6
SPEAKER_01
And so we go into February, the inauguration was done in March, not in January.
6
SPEAKER_01
We go from November to February without clear agreement on who the president is.
6
SPEAKER_01
In the end, there s an agreement that they come to a deal, which is where the Democrats will accept Hayes as president in return for Hayes doing all the things the Democrats want in the South.
6
SPEAKER_01
And so in essence, you have a deal made that one side will get all it wants while allowing the other side to have the figurehead.
6
SPEAKER_01
And so in a certain way, this marks a moment when the Confederacy wins.
6
SPEAKER_01
For example, Hayes has to agree to pull out all federal force from the South.
6
SPEAKER_01
which means there s no protection for fair elections going forward.
6
SPEAKER_01
And you ll see in states like Mississippi, the number of African American voters will decline and not recover again until the late 20th century.
6
SPEAKER_01
So that s what that election does.
6
SPEAKER_01
And from 1876 until 1896, we have a series of elections that are very close.
6
SPEAKER_01
It happens also
6
SPEAKER_01
in 1888 that the person with the most popular vote loses, that s Grover Cleveland, who loses to Benjamin Harrison.
6
SPEAKER_01
And again, we ll have the same issue.
6
SPEAKER_01
where there s a dispute.
6
SPEAKER_01
And so what that election shows us, 1876, 1888, is that our election system and the problem of having an electoral college really complicates things.
6
SPEAKER_01
It makes it harder for us to come to any kind of consensus, any kind of agreement on who s won an election.
6
SPEAKER_01
Super important for today, because most of the 20th century, we don t have close elections, so it doesn t matter.
6
SPEAKER_01
When we come to a world today where our elections are very close, our system is not well designed to deal with those issues.
6
SPEAKER_00
Do you draw any parallels with our time, and what are some key differences?
6
SPEAKER_00
There s been contested elections, Florida, Florida, Florida, with Al Gore, and there s been just contested election after contested election, and of course, most famously recently, with the contested election that led to January 6th.
6
SPEAKER_01
So I think a couple of parallels and a couple of differences.
6
SPEAKER_01
One parallel is that when you have close elections, the losing side s never happy.
6
SPEAKER_01
It s a myth that when you have a close election, the other side just accepts it and it s not, that doesn t happen.
6
SPEAKER_01
And we need to be attentive to that and ready for that.
6
SPEAKER_01
January 6th actually should surprise us, not because it happened, but because it hadn t happened before.
6
SPEAKER_01
People who lose a close election are never happy and they always think that something has been done.
6
SPEAKER_01
That s one parallel.
6
SPEAKER_01
Second parallel is elections are violent.
6
SPEAKER_01
we have this myth that our elections are peaceful.
6
SPEAKER_01
No, there s always violence involved in one way or another, violence in either trying to prevent people from voting or violence in preventing people from preventing people from voting, right?
6
SPEAKER_01
Elections are not peaceful walks in the park.
6
SPEAKER_01
And that s why most countries have a centralized system to manage elections and provide protection for people.
6
SPEAKER_01
We need to think about that.
6
SPEAKER_01
A lot of people don t vote because they re afraid
6
SPEAKER_01
They don t want to take the time, but they re also afraid that they re going to anger someone or that they re going to be seen as politicizing an issue.
6
SPEAKER_01
Differences.
6
SPEAKER_01
In 1876, there was fraud in the election.
6
SPEAKER_01
There were people who voted two, three times.
6
SPEAKER_01
One of the things the Ku Klux Klan did is it prevented black people from voting and that it helped white people go to multiple voting booths.
6
SPEAKER_01
And this was quite common.
6
SPEAKER_01
In the 1880s, if you went to vote, here s how it would happen in a place like Chicago or New York.
6
SPEAKER_01
The union boss from your factory would come and get you at the factory, give you lunch, get you drunk, and then drive you from one voting booth to another and give you a ballot that you would bring in and he would watch you deposit that ballot.
6
SPEAKER_01
Sounds pretty nice, not gonna lie.
6
SPEAKER_01
I take that ride.
6
SPEAKER_01
So that s a difference.
6
SPEAKER_01
That is not how our elections work now.
6
SPEAKER_01
One of our great accomplishments has been to eliminate virtually all the fraud in our elections.
6
SPEAKER_01
How have we done that?
6
SPEAKER_01
By creating safeguards.
6
SPEAKER_01
It is very difficult.
6
SPEAKER_01
All the evidence we have is that the minimal fraud that s occurred in elections are onesies and twosies.
6
SPEAKER_01
And it s never, in the last 20 years, had any big difference in the outcome of elections.
6
SPEAKER_01
So that s a big difference.
6
SPEAKER_01
And then another big difference, I think, is that in that time, the Democrats and Republicans are on the opposite sides of where they are now.
6
SPEAKER_01
And that changes everything.
6
SPEAKER_01
So the Democrats then are the party of the Confederacy.
6
SPEAKER_01
The Democrats are the party of exclusion.
6
SPEAKER_01
The Republicans are more the party of economic expansion.
6
SPEAKER_01
And the Republicans are the Big Ten party.
6
SPEAKER_01
We re reversed today.
6
SPEAKER_00
Do you think, because there s much less election fraud now, like you described, one of the lessons we wanna maybe learn from that is there doesn t actually have to be election fraud for either side to claim there s election fraud.
6
SPEAKER_00
It seems like it s more and more common, and it seems to me that in 2024 election, in the United States, if a Republican wins, there would also be
6
SPEAKER_00
just maybe just as likely as if a Democrat wins, that there will be nuanced claims of election fraud, because it s become more and more normalized.
6
SPEAKER_01
I think what this history shows is that our election system makes it easy for people to claim fraud because it s so unnecessarily complex.
6
SPEAKER_01
First of all, we don t have a system where the person who gets the most votes is necessarily the winner.
6
SPEAKER_01
So that already creates one problem.
6
SPEAKER_01
Second problem is everything I talk about this in the book is controlled at the county level.
7
SPEAKER_01
is you have one county official who says they think one person won, another county official says the other person won.
7
SPEAKER_01
There s no centralized system.
7
SPEAKER_01
It would be as if we allowed every airport to control safety in airplanes, our airplanes would not be safe.
7
SPEAKER_01
Our airplanes are safe because the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board have strict universal guidelines for what makes for a safe plane and therefore our planes generally don t fall out of the sky.
7
SPEAKER_01
Our system is very complex.
7
SPEAKER_01
It has complex rules and has too many people who have authority in too many different places.
7
SPEAKER_01
Complexity makes it easier for someone to make an argument that the wrong thing has been done.
7
SPEAKER_01
We should simplify the system.
7
SPEAKER_01
In Brazil, they had a very close election and it s very hard for Bolsonaro, who lost that close election, to claim there was fraud because there s a central authority run by the judiciary that counted the votes and it s just simple.
7
SPEAKER_01
It s not about which states, it s not about who the county officials were.
7
SPEAKER_01
Did he claim or no?
7
SPEAKER_01
He has not acknowledged that he lost.
7
SPEAKER_00
So to push back on your statement, I m undefeated in monopoly and risk, because any time I lose, I walk away claiming there was fraud and cheating involved.
7
SPEAKER_00
And I refuse to believe otherwise.
7
SPEAKER_00
I just think that...
7
SPEAKER_00
Accusations of fraud is a narrative that s disjoint from the reality of whether there was enough fraud.
7
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, I agree, but I think we make it a little easier for that narrative by having a complex, convoluted system.
7
SPEAKER_00
And I wonder if there s other improvements that take us into the 21st century that allow for electronic voting.
7
SPEAKER_00
There s all kinds of improvements that it seems our system is dragging their feet on.
7
SPEAKER_00
Rank choice voting, all that kind of stuff.
7
SPEAKER_01
Let s make this clear.
7
SPEAKER_01
We claim to be the greatest 21st century democracy and we still vote like the 19th century.
7
SPEAKER_01
We re not even in the 20th century.
7
SPEAKER_01
Most people, when they went to vote, they actually like, you know, checked a box and put a piece of paper in a box, right?
7
SPEAKER_01
I mean, that s not 21st century.
7
SPEAKER_01
We can move millions of dollars, maybe billions for you, Lex, in a bank accounts from our keyboard.
7
SPEAKER_01
From our keyboards.
7
SPEAKER_01
Billions of rubles.
7
SPEAKER_01
Billions of pennies.
7
SPEAKER_01
Why can we move money safely and not vote in the same way?
7
SPEAKER_00
And at the same time, so there s security there in the movement of money, and then there s the actual engagement.
7
SPEAKER_00
Most of us, depending on your age demographic, click like on Facebook or Twitter or TikTok.
7
SPEAKER_00
tens of thousands of times a year.
7
SPEAKER_00
I think this kind of mechanism, and a like is a vote.
7
SPEAKER_00
So you re constantly voting, voting, voting, voting.
7
SPEAKER_00
We love voting.
7
SPEAKER_00
We love giving our opinion on stuff.
7
SPEAKER_00
It just seems obvious that gamifying the system, which is essentially what the election is, making it fun to be engaged in different issues.
7
SPEAKER_00
And there s also be a case, now I don t understand these things deeply, but it always seemed to me that issue-based voting,
7
SPEAKER_00
should be the future.
7
SPEAKER_00
It seems like too complicated to vote for singular people versus on ideas, which, you know, on Twitter, we don t necessarily vote for people, we vote for ideas.
7
SPEAKER_00
If you like a tweet or not, you like it, and so on.
7
SPEAKER_00
That too seems to be like a possibility for improvement.
7
SPEAKER_01
Well, there s certainly a way to improve polling.
7
SPEAKER_01
We could measure public opinion better.
7
SPEAKER_01
We still poll as if we re in the early 20th century.
7
SPEAKER_01
They still actually call people.
7
SPEAKER_01
It s amazing to me.
7
SPEAKER_01
I was talking to one pollster, they will call 100 people and get one person.
7
SPEAKER_01
But they still do that.
7
SPEAKER_01
They probably still call landlines, right?
7
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, well, they try to get cell phones too, but they do call landlines.
7
SPEAKER_01
But one could create a system that would be far better in the way you re describing, it seems to me, Lex, to actually assess what people like and don t like.
7
SPEAKER_00
So your book, your work in general, your perspective on history is, I would say, at least from my perspective, non-partisan.
7
SPEAKER_00
Thank you.
7
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, you do an exceptionally good job of that, despite the attacks and the criticisms.
7
SPEAKER_00
That said, you personally, just the way you speak, my judgment, and you can push back on this, I think you lean left in your politics on the political spectrum.
7
SPEAKER_00
Maybe you can push back on that.
7
SPEAKER_00
Can you make the case for either perspective on your own personality?
7
SPEAKER_00
as a fan of yours that you do lean left or you don t lean left.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think it depends on the kinds of issues we re talking about.
7
SPEAKER_01
I do tend to lean left on the social and cultural issues.
7
SPEAKER_01
So I m a believer, a firm believer.
7
SPEAKER_01
I didn t believe this when I was younger.
7
SPEAKER_01
I ve come to believe that people should choose their own lifestyle and that we should get out of the way.
7
SPEAKER_01
I m a believer, deep believer as a father of a 20-year-old woman that my 20-year-old daughter should have the right to make any choice she wants with her body.
7
SPEAKER_01
And if she were to get pregnant at a fraternity party at college, she should have the right to decide whether to have a child or not.
7
SPEAKER_01
So on those issues, that would code me left of center.
7
SPEAKER_01
I m actually reasonably conservative on fiscal issues.
7
SPEAKER_01
I don t think we should spend money we don t have.
7
SPEAKER_01
I m skeptical.
7
SPEAKER_01
I ve long been skeptical of cryptocurrency and things like that.
7
SPEAKER_01
I know some of your listeners will disagree with me on this part.
7
SPEAKER_01
It s part of my own ignorance of cryptocurrency.
7
SPEAKER_01
But I m conservative, lowercase c, in the way I think about fiscal issues.
7
SPEAKER_01
I worry about debt.
7
SPEAKER_01
I m a believer that there are certain areas where the federal government should play more of a role.
7
SPEAKER_01
and there are other areas where things should be left to the localities.
7
SPEAKER_01
And so sometimes that can code me one way or another.
7
SPEAKER_01
But I think I sound sometimes a little more left of center because on the social issues, I definitely.
7
SPEAKER_00
Well, that because, I mean, there s other explanations not to be grilling you too hard here.
7
SPEAKER_00
No, it s fair.
7
SPEAKER_00
Because you re also an exceptionally respected and successful professor in the university system, where sometimes there is a lean towards the left.
7
SPEAKER_00
And the other aspect is, I think, your viewpoints on Trump, where you re a strong critic of Donald Trump.
7
SPEAKER_00
And I guess the question I wanna ask is, you as a historian, does that color your perspective of history?
7
SPEAKER_00
Can you, do you ever catch yourself where maybe your criticism of Donald Trump might affect how you see the Civil War?
7
SPEAKER_00
Like as you were completely diving in and looking at the Civil War, are you able to put aside your sort of the current day political viewpoints?
7
SPEAKER_01
No, I m not.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think we have to be honest that none of us
7
SPEAKER_01
our objective, we strive to be nonpartisan.
7
SPEAKER_01
I really liked when you said that, because I think it s an aspiration.
7
SPEAKER_01
No one is objective.
7
SPEAKER_01
We all have our biases.
7
SPEAKER_01
Some people like chocolate, some like vanilla.
7
SPEAKER_01
And that s just the reality, right?
7
SPEAKER_01
And as far as I know, it s very hard even to biologically explain that.
7
SPEAKER_01
And so my view is that what a good historian, what a good scholar does, I don t care what their field is, is you re self-conscious of your biases,
7
SPEAKER_01
and you try to recognize them as you re doing your research, and you make doubly certain that where your research seems to reinforce your biases, that you actually have the evidence to make that argument.
7
SPEAKER_01
But I still believe even doing that, that someone with a slightly different perspective might read the same evidence in different ways.
7
SPEAKER_01
That s what makes history vibrant.
7
SPEAKER_01
So I wrote this book in part, as I say in the introduction, because I was self-critical watching Trump and the things I quite frankly find deeply dangerous about Donald Trump and about what happened on January 6th.
7
SPEAKER_01
And I found I had not thought deeply enough about the roots of that in our society.
7
SPEAKER_01
because I don t believe Trump or any one figure creates these kinds of movements.
7
SPEAKER_01
They come out of a deeper history.
7
SPEAKER_00
Just a small side tangent.
7
SPEAKER_00
I do believe your work is nonpartisan, but it s also funny that there are a lot of people on the right that would read your work and say that you re partisan.
7
SPEAKER_00
And I think the reason that can happen sometimes, not strongly though, I think you do a really good job, is like the use of certain words also.
7
SPEAKER_00
I try to be cognizant of that.
7
SPEAKER_00
I try not to use words that trigger people s tribalism.
7
SPEAKER_00
It s kind of interesting, so you have to be also aware of that maybe when you re writing history, when you re writing in general, is if you re interested in remaining, you can put on different hats.
7
SPEAKER_00
You can be carefree in just stating your opinion of criticizing Donald Trump or Joe Biden, or you can be nonpartisan deliberately.
7
SPEAKER_00
And that takes skill, probably, and avoiding certain triggering words.
7
SPEAKER_01
And to me, it s about choosing your battles.
7
SPEAKER_01
So I tried to write, because I want everyone to read, and I actually think people on the left and right have a lot to learn from this history.
7
SPEAKER_01
So many people have said to me around the country, this is history I wish I had known before.
7
SPEAKER_01
But there are moments when I use words that I know are controversial because I m trying to show there s a fact base behind them.
7
SPEAKER_01
So white supremacy does exist.
7
SPEAKER_01
I ve had people say, I don t think that s, I think that s a politically correct term, or it s a woke term.
7
SPEAKER_01
It can be used in the wrong ways.
7
SPEAKER_01
One should not go around calling everything one doesn t like that.
7
SPEAKER_01
But the Confederates were white supremacists.
7
SPEAKER_01
And I use that word because I think it s an accurate descriptor, and we need to recognize that that is a part of our history.
7
SPEAKER_01
But that does trigger some people.
7
SPEAKER_00
And because that language is used to mean other things currently.
7
SPEAKER_00
So the press will take on certain terms like white supremacist and label everybody white supremacist.
7
SPEAKER_00
Like a lot of people that basically are on the right or something like that, they use this outraged language and that actually ruins the ability to use the language precisely.
7
SPEAKER_00
For historical context.
7
SPEAKER_00
But you do have to, unfortunately, we do have to, no, actually people disagree.
7
SPEAKER_00
You might disagree with this.
7
SPEAKER_00
But I tend to try to avoid, like take on the responsibility of avoiding that language.
7
SPEAKER_00
Like if the press is using a certain kind of language, I try to avoid it.
7
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, what I try to do is sometimes avoid it, but where I think the language is necessary.
7
SPEAKER_01
Precise, yeah.
7
SPEAKER_01
To be precise, but also to contextualize it.
7
SPEAKER_01
So I don t call all Confederates white supremacists, but I point out where white supremacist ideas have influenced them, right?
7
SPEAKER_01
And I point out where certain individuals are doing things that resonate with that.
7
SPEAKER_01
But I m against these kind of blanket labels and categories.
7
SPEAKER_00
And you also have to speak about white supremacism in that context in a nuanced way.
7
SPEAKER_00
So people use white supremacism without thinking what that means, and they just use it as a slow word, like just an evil person.
7
SPEAKER_00
But white supremacism is also just an ideology that a lot of people have believed throughout supremacy.
7
SPEAKER_00
black supremacy, whatever supremacy, believing that some people are better than others, some group is better than another.
7
SPEAKER_00
And there s been nations built around these kinds of ideas, and a lot of human history is built around those ideas.
7
SPEAKER_00
It s not just evil people believe in this.
7
SPEAKER_00
We in the United States of America believe this kind of ideology is not productive, it s unethical, but those ideas have been held by a lot of people, and not like fringe groups.
7
SPEAKER_00
but majorities of nations.
7
SPEAKER_01
Right, I d say the same about anti-semitism.
7
SPEAKER_01
And there are many people who are not anti-semites, but don t recognize that they re carrying around or promoting anti-semitic ideas or anti-semitic myths.
7
SPEAKER_00
It s a thought that s been held by a lot of people, and you need to be convinced out of it.
7
SPEAKER_00
That requires conversation and being empathetic.
7
SPEAKER_00
It s not just calling somebody anti-Semite and you re evil because you ve ever said something that s kind of a dog whistle against Jewish people.
7
SPEAKER_00
You have to be open-hearted to that.
7
SPEAKER_00
These are ideas that you have to contend with, that you have to ultimately, I think, heal the division behind those ideas by having empathetic conversations with people, as opposed to, again, throwing poop.
7
SPEAKER_00
I just like saying poop.
7
SPEAKER_00
All right, ooh, I got a challenge for you.
7
SPEAKER_00
given that you have been an outspoken critic of Donald Trump, can you say one thing you like and one thing you don t like about Donald Trump?
7
SPEAKER_00
And perhaps can you do the same for our current president, Joe Biden?
7
SPEAKER_00
One thing you like and one thing you dislike.
7
SPEAKER_01
So it s harder for me to do the one thing I dislike because there s so many things I dislike.
7
SPEAKER_01
But the one thing I like about Donald Trump, he believes that
7
SPEAKER_01
America should be a better country.
7
SPEAKER_01
I disagree on what he thinks it should be, but he s not a declinist.
7
SPEAKER_01
He s someone who believes the world could be made better.
7
SPEAKER_01
I disagree with what he s trying to do.
7
SPEAKER_01
I disagree with how he s trying to do it, but I like the fact that he thinks it can be better.
7
SPEAKER_01
His whole argument for himself is that he can make things better.
7
SPEAKER_01
I don t think he can, but I think things can be made better.
7
SPEAKER_01
So I like the second half of that sentence.
7
SPEAKER_01
When he says, I can make things better, take the I out.
7
SPEAKER_01
I like the can be better because there are too many people on the left and the right
7
SPEAKER_01
who think that we can t make things better, we have to accept them as they are, or they re getting worse.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think a world without hope is horrible, and I think what he has offered his followers is a kind of hope.
7
SPEAKER_00
So underneath his message is a kind of optimism for the future of this nation.
7
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, it s a narcissistic optimism, but it s still an optimism, yes.
7
SPEAKER_01
He s promising that if you elect him again, he will make things better.
7
SPEAKER_01
And I think people need to be told and we need to believe that we can make things better.
7
SPEAKER_01
So that part I accept and I reject those who say we can t make things better.
7
SPEAKER_01
My whole historical career is about showing that history gives us tools to make things better.
7
SPEAKER_01
So I like the idea of trying to make things better and giving people hope and reason to believe that things can be better.
7
SPEAKER_00
What s the main thing you dislike about Donald Trump?
7
SPEAKER_01
I think he has no concern or care for the welfare of anyone other than himself.
7
SPEAKER_00
So assuming, on a basic human psychology perspective,
7
SPEAKER_01
And I think he doesn t even care about his children.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think he s just, I think it s him.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think he s gone into a rabbit hole.
7
SPEAKER_01
He might not always have been this way.
7
SPEAKER_01
I did watch him a long time in New York City when I was growing up in New York.
7
SPEAKER_01
And I think he s been in this path.
7
SPEAKER_01
And I think it s an extreme, it s a clinical kind of narcissism.
7
SPEAKER_00
So do you, when you analyze presidents and you ve written about presidents, you don t just look at policies and so on.
7
SPEAKER_00
You look at the human being.
7
SPEAKER_01
Of course you have to.
7
SPEAKER_01
Leadership is about human being.
7
SPEAKER_01
Policy matters.
7
SPEAKER_01
It s one part of the equation, but it s not the only part.
7
SPEAKER_00
What about Joe Biden?
7
SPEAKER_00
What do you like and what do you dislike about him?
7
SPEAKER_01
So what I like about Joe Biden is, in contrast to Trump, I think Joe Biden really, right now in his career, sees his role as the shepherd of democracy.
7
SPEAKER_01
He really believes that it s his role as president to make our democracy more stable and more vibrant.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think he really believes, I think that s why he s doing what he s doing right now.
7
SPEAKER_00
And he comes from that system, the political system, that basically the process of democracy, he s worked there for many decades.
7
SPEAKER_00
It s all he s done.
7
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, that s all he knows, and he wants that to propagate for better and for worse.
7
SPEAKER_01
And he s not an extreme Democratic partisan at all.
7
SPEAKER_01
He s actually a pretty middle-of-the-road guy on most issues.
7
SPEAKER_01
Some people don t like him for that, but I think he is about democracy.
7
SPEAKER_01
What do I dislike about Biden?
7
SPEAKER_01
I think he does not have the capacity
7
SPEAKER_01
right now to provide the language and the public discussion of where our country should go.
7
SPEAKER_01
He doesn t have a language to inspire and build enthusiasm for the future.
7
SPEAKER_00
That would probably be one of my, I mean, because I m a sucker for great speeches.
7
SPEAKER_00
And so for me, that s definitely a thing that stands out for several reasons.
7
SPEAKER_00
One, in a time, because we ve been facing so many challenges, like the pandemic.
7
SPEAKER_00
It just seems like a, to me, it seems like a easy layout
7
SPEAKER_00
There s so many troubles we re going through that just require a great unifying president.
7
SPEAKER_00
If I were to speak candidly about the speaking ability of Obama, for example, Obama would just destroy this right now, both on the war in Ukraine, on the pandemic, all of it.
7
SPEAKER_00
There s a hunger for unification, I believe.
7
SPEAKER_00
Maybe people disagree with that,
7
SPEAKER_00
I think people have become cynical in that the divisions that we re experiencing are kind of already really baked in.
7
SPEAKER_00
They ve really planted their feet.
7
SPEAKER_00
But I don t think so.
7
SPEAKER_00
I think there s a huge hunger, maybe a little bit of a quiet hunger for a unifier, for a great unifier.
7
SPEAKER_01
I agree, I agree.
7
SPEAKER_01
And I think what a great speech does is it s like a great piece of music or poetry.
7
SPEAKER_01
It helps you see something in yourself and feel something you didn t feel before.
7
SPEAKER_01
It doesn t overcome all difference.
7
SPEAKER_01
I don t think that speeches are unifying, but I think what they are is they re mobilizing.
7
SPEAKER_01
And you can mobilize people to the same mission with different points of view.
7
SPEAKER_00
Do you think Trump derangement syndrome is a medical condition?
7
SPEAKER_00
Also, is there such a thing as Biden derangement syndrome?
7
SPEAKER_00
What I mean by that, it s a funny kind of question, but why are people so deeply outraged, seemingly beyond reason, at their hatred or support of Donald Trump, but hatred in particular?
7
SPEAKER_00
I ve seen a lot of friends and people I respect lose their mind completely.
7
SPEAKER_01
So I m not sure it s a medical condition or not because I m not a medical doctor.
7
SPEAKER_01
So my kids say I m the wrong kind of doctor.
7
SPEAKER_00
I m a doctor, so let me take you from here.
7
SPEAKER_00
No, the fact that you get the doctor sign after getting a PhD is a ridiculous hilarity to me.
7
SPEAKER_00
Hilarious, ridiculous.
7
SPEAKER_01
So as the wrong kind of doctor, I m not gonna comment on whether it s a medical condition, but I do think you re onto something.
7
SPEAKER_01
I think there is a way in which these men become touchstones of anger.
7
SPEAKER_01
And there s all kinds of anger and anxiety that people have.
7
SPEAKER_01
And I ve seen this in other historical periods.
7
SPEAKER_01
You center it on one person.
7
SPEAKER_01
In a way, that s John Wilkes Booth and Lincoln.
7
SPEAKER_01
He actually didn t have a personal beef with Lincoln.
7
SPEAKER_01
It was that all the things he feared were manifest in that.
7
SPEAKER_01
And I think that s an old story, and then it s made worse by social media and the way we re bombarded.
7
SPEAKER_01
And it s like, it becomes a drug.
7
SPEAKER_01
I mean, there are people I know
8
SPEAKER_01
who hate Trump or Biden so much and just watch them.
8
SPEAKER_01
It s not that they don t watch them, it s that they do watch them, right?
8
SPEAKER_01
And it s just sort of, and it triggers you and you get hateful and then you feel like you ve done something by shouting out your hate or typing in.
8
SPEAKER_01
And so I don t know if it s a derangement syndrome, I think it s a way in which our energy gets channeled and expressed in totally useless ways.
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, that s an interesting psychology, which reminds me, I need to explore that, because I ve noticed that, believe it or not, it s easy for me to believe, but there s people watching this right now who really hate me, and they re watching because they hate me.
8
SPEAKER_00
They hate the way I look, the way I speak, the mumbling, all of that, and they re still watching.
8
SPEAKER_00
And I d like to say that, as I nervously try to explain myself, I d like to say that that s not a productive way.
8
SPEAKER_00
I get it.
8
SPEAKER_00
I understand, there s a kind of, because I, what is it?
8
SPEAKER_00
Is it the same psychological effect when you see a car crash and you keep staring?
8
SPEAKER_00
There s some kind of thing that pulls you in.
8
SPEAKER_00
Totally.
8
SPEAKER_00
But I feel like, it s that feeling, it s probably slightly different, but you kind of want to,
8
SPEAKER_00
you want to maybe feel something and there s an anger in you already, frustrations from day-to-day life, life is hard, and you just want to channel that anger towards something, but the internet really makes that easy for some reason.
8
SPEAKER_01
And it makes sense of your life, that s the problem.
8
SPEAKER_01
For people whose lives are chaos,
8
SPEAKER_01
hating you and blaming you gives order to their lives.
8
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, if it makes you happy, please continue.
8
SPEAKER_01
I m curious, it seems to bother you though, doesn t it?
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, hate of any kind.
8
SPEAKER_00
Not towards me, just the people.
8
SPEAKER_00
Because I think about them and I tend to think that most people are amazing human beings and that have a capacity to do great things in this world.
8
SPEAKER_00
And so I just think
8
SPEAKER_00
that s not a productive way of being.
8
SPEAKER_00
Psychologically, for anything whatsoever, everybody has quirks that you can hate, but you just focus on the really positive stuff, and you celebrate that stuff, and that feels good, that has a momentum to it.
8
SPEAKER_00
I guess the hate has a momentum to it too, and that s what I m trying to highlight.
8
SPEAKER_00
If you follow the momentum of hate, that s going to maybe feel good in the short term, but it s gonna fuck you over more and more in your life.
8
SPEAKER_00
And you have to be cognizant of that as you interact with each other.
8
SPEAKER_01
I agree with everything you said, but I think people who do things that are influential and serious, there always are some people who hate them.
8
SPEAKER_00
I suppose that, but I wanted to show the difference between philosophical disagreement that borders on hate and what s called hate watching, where you just, which is what I would say TDS is, which is you re almost enjoying
8
SPEAKER_00
how much you hate this person, you re just sitting in their hate, and you forgot, you lose all reason, you lose everything, your capacity to think as an individual, to empathize with others, you lose all of that.
8
SPEAKER_00
You re in this muck of hate, and somehow it helps you make sense of this particular difficult moment in your life, but otherwise, it just seems like a shitty way to live.
8
SPEAKER_00
But disagreement, definitely, I like disagreement.
8
SPEAKER_01
But I guess what I m saying is, and I think this is your message too, right, is that
8
SPEAKER_01
Don t let the fact that people don t like you or even that some people hate you stop you from doing the right thing.
8
SPEAKER_01
Think about how you can perhaps trigger them less, but don t stop what you re doing.
8
SPEAKER_01
I see too many, and this is why I bring this up, too many of my students, too many young, very talented people who are afraid to take risks because they re afraid that someone will hate them.
8
SPEAKER_01
And that can t get in your way.
8
SPEAKER_00
The reality is most people, or there will always be at least one person,
8
SPEAKER_00
that will have your back and that will support you.
8
SPEAKER_00
And you just focus on them.
8
SPEAKER_00
As long as you re doing the right thing, focus on them for the strength.
8
SPEAKER_00
But in general, I m exaggerating here because most of the time, 99% of people are supportive on the internet.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s just that something about the human psychology really stands out to you when somebody criticizes.
8
SPEAKER_01
Well, it s easy on the internet.
8
SPEAKER_01
This is historically different from where we were before as a society.
8
SPEAKER_01
It s very easy now to say hurtful things to people and not have to even deal with them looking at you in the face.
8
SPEAKER_01
One of the things that encourages politeness is the fact that we re looking at one another.
8
SPEAKER_01
And we are naturally programmed not to want the other person to react to us in certain ways.
8
SPEAKER_01
But when we don t see their face,
8
SPEAKER_01
It s very easy to say all kinds of things.
8
SPEAKER_00
Let me actually comment on that point.
8
SPEAKER_00
There s a lot of people on the internet that say that I don t push back on points or criticize people or ask the hard questions enough.
8
SPEAKER_00
First of all, oftentimes I disagree with that assessment, but also I don t think you guys realize how hard that is to do when you re sitting with a person.
8
SPEAKER_00
I don t care about access, I don t care about them being famous, just on a basic human level, it s really hard to ask a hard question.
8
SPEAKER_00
from a place of empathy.
8
SPEAKER_00
Except when I m sitting here, you seem to be able to ask me hard.
8
SPEAKER_00
No, this is a super fun, I mean, when there s brilliant people like you where there s nothing to push back on, that s easy.
8
SPEAKER_00
But there s a basic human thing that doesn t, I think it s almost easier to be a journalist, like journalists do this well, where they don t have empathy for the person.
8
SPEAKER_00
They re just asking the hard questions.
8
SPEAKER_00
So where were you at this time last night?
8
SPEAKER_00
Because that s very suspicious, it s in contradiction to what you said, and they re just doing factual stuff.
8
SPEAKER_00
If you actually truly have a conversation with another human being and you empathize, it s very difficult.
8
SPEAKER_00
Because they have a story, they have a vision of themselves that they re the good person.
8
SPEAKER_00
And to call somebody a liar while having empathy, basically imply that they re a liar, that s damn, damn hard.
8
SPEAKER_00
So anyway, I m trying to figure this thing out.
8
SPEAKER_00
Can you make the case that the January 6th storming of the US Capitol
8
SPEAKER_00
is a big deal, and can you make the case that it is not a big deal?
8
SPEAKER_01
I think the case is overwhelming that it was a big deal.
8
SPEAKER_01
And I opened the book with this before going back to the end of the Civil War because I think it echoes that moment.
8
SPEAKER_01
You had a group of people who literally tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power and were intending, and there s overwhelming evidence of this, if they had caught the Vice President or the Speaker of the House,
8
SPEAKER_01
to do bodily harm to them or to kidnap them.
8
SPEAKER_01
So this was a coup d etat.
8
SPEAKER_01
That is the definition of a coup d etat, when you try to capture and prevent elected officials from doing their job.
8
SPEAKER_01
That s a huge deal.
8
SPEAKER_01
That had happened before in our country in states.
8
SPEAKER_01
I talk about this in Louisiana, in Tennessee, and places like that after the Civil War, but it never happened in the Capitol.
8
SPEAKER_01
That s a huge deal.
8
SPEAKER_01
That is, if I might say, that s like third, what we would think of as third world behavior.
8
SPEAKER_01
in our society, and no offense to those from other parts of the world, I m just trying to make a point is how we see that is happening somewhere else, not here.
8
SPEAKER_01
That s a big fucking deal.
8
SPEAKER_01
The case that is not a big deal, I guess the case to make there is that they didn t succeed.
8
SPEAKER_01
The case that it s not a big deal is not that their intentions were not bad.
8
SPEAKER_01
I don t see how you can defend their intentions.
8
SPEAKER_01
The case that it s not a big deal is that they re a bunch of clowns.
8
SPEAKER_01
And yeah, they broke in.
8
SPEAKER_01
But in the end, once they got in there, they didn t know what to do, which is true.
8
SPEAKER_01
And so, you know, I think a professional coup plotter would say these were the amateurs and that they had no real chance of succeeding because once they got into the Capitol, they had no plan what to do next.
8
SPEAKER_01
What were they going to do?
8
SPEAKER_01
You know, steal Stapler from Nancy Pelosi s office.
8
SPEAKER_01
They didn t seem to have a plan.
8
SPEAKER_01
And then what ended up happening, they left the building.
8
SPEAKER_00
Well, that would be the case.
8
SPEAKER_00
That s not a big deal, because their intention was not to overthrow.
8
SPEAKER_00
Their intention was to protest, because if the intention was to overthrow, it would be much more organized.
8
SPEAKER_01
I think the evidence is pretty overwhelming that they intended to stop.
8
SPEAKER_01
They were there to stop the certification of the election.
8
SPEAKER_01
They were there to prevent Donald Trump from having to leave office.
8
SPEAKER_01
They just didn t have a good plan.
8
SPEAKER_01
This was the keystone cops.
8
SPEAKER_00
So you re saying there is statistically some possibility that this would have succeeded at halting the basic process of democracy.
8
SPEAKER_01
You could imagine a scenario where it might have, if they had gotten lucky.
8
SPEAKER_01
Sure.
8
SPEAKER_01
If they had caught the vice president.
8
SPEAKER_01
But what could have, if they caught the vice president.
8
SPEAKER_00
They couldn t go on and certify then.
8
SPEAKER_00
He has to be there.
8
SPEAKER_00
No, but don t you think that would resolve itself through police action and so on?
8
SPEAKER_00
My question is how much is this individual hooligans
8
SPEAKER_00
And how much of this is a gigantic movement that s challenging the very fabric of our democracy?
8
SPEAKER_01
It s not a gigantic movement.
8
SPEAKER_01
but it was a small coup d etat that could have actually made the transition much more difficult.
8
SPEAKER_01
Was there a scenario where Donald Trump stayed in office legitimately?
8
SPEAKER_01
No.
8
SPEAKER_01
But was there a scenario where they created a great deal of chaos that further undermine our democracy?
8
SPEAKER_01
Absolutely, yes.
8
SPEAKER_01
Here s how it happened, right?
8
SPEAKER_01
They capture Pence, right?
8
SPEAKER_01
They either kidnap him and try to ransom him, which is what they were trying to do with the Michigan governor, Governor Whitmer,
8
SPEAKER_01
Or they kill him.
8
SPEAKER_01
And then Donald Trump says, OK, well, there s no vice president, so you can t certify.
8
SPEAKER_01
The Senate would choose someone else to be vice president, but Donald Trump says, no, that s not legitimate.
8
SPEAKER_01
Do you think it s possible that Donald Trump would say something like that?
8
SPEAKER_01
Absolutely.
8
SPEAKER_01
I disagree with you.
8
SPEAKER_01
He said that morning that Pence should not certify.
8
SPEAKER_01
He said that morning.
8
SPEAKER_01
But there s a difference between sort of Twitter rhetoric.
8
SPEAKER_00
No, no, he said it at a rally.
8
SPEAKER_00
Sure, rally rhetoric.
8
SPEAKER_00
And there is a threshold.
8
SPEAKER_01
It feels like a big leap.
8
SPEAKER_01
He asked people around him in the Oval Office how he could make that happen.
8
SPEAKER_01
He tried to get a new person appointed attorney general who would do that.
8
SPEAKER_01
He tried to find legal justification for it.
8
SPEAKER_01
I think the evidence is overwhelming
8
SPEAKER_01
that Trump was supportive of efforts after the election didn t go the way he wanted to keep him in office.
8
SPEAKER_01
And whether that s legally actionable and whether one thinks that means he s a bad president or not is a matter of opinion, but facts are facts.
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I just wonder if it s possible for him to have stayed president in this kind of context.
8
SPEAKER_00
It seems like a heated, just like you said, elections can even be violent.
8
SPEAKER_00
They re heated.
8
SPEAKER_00
People are very upset.
8
SPEAKER_00
When Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016,
8
SPEAKER_00
I was in Cambridge, Massachusetts, the amount of anger, the energy I was getting from people.
8
SPEAKER_00
I mean, if there was any way to channel that anger, I think people would be in trouble.
8
SPEAKER_00
There s anger.
8
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, I agree with that.
8
SPEAKER_01
And that is right.
8
SPEAKER_01
And elections are violent, as I said.
8
SPEAKER_01
But this is different.
8
SPEAKER_01
This is the person in the office of the presidency using the power of the presidency to try to stay in office, to imperil people s lives, to distort our government on a scale we had not seen before.
8
SPEAKER_01
And these are not opinions of mine.
8
SPEAKER_01
We have the documentary evidence.
8
SPEAKER_01
We have the testimony from people about this.
8
SPEAKER_01
We can differ over what you think of his presidency as a whole.
8
SPEAKER_01
We can differ over whether you think he should be held legally responsible.
8
SPEAKER_01
Those are matters of opinion.
8
SPEAKER_01
But the facts are he sat on January 6th, watched it on TV, did not send ever, ever, did he ever send any protection for Congress.
8
SPEAKER_01
That is his job.
8
SPEAKER_01
And throughout, asked, continued to ask how this certification could be prevented.
8
SPEAKER_01
To you, that s not incompetence, that s malevolence.
8
SPEAKER_01
Absolutely.
8
SPEAKER_01
If I watch my children getting harmed and I don t do something about it, I m watching it, and in fact I take action that tries to help those who are doing the harm, you would not just say I m an incompetent parent, you would say I was a negligent parent and you d call parental support to take away my children.
8
SPEAKER_00
I was troubled by the way the press covered it, that they politicized the crap out of that.
8
SPEAKER_00
And not just the press, but also Congress itself.
8
SPEAKER_00
It just seemed like impeachment and all of this just seemed to be a kind of circus that wasn t interested in democracy or non-partisanship.
8
SPEAKER_00
I don t, so it s very difficult for me to see the situation with clear eyes because it s been colored by the press.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s very difficult for me to know what is even true.
8
SPEAKER_01
Members of Congress, including our members of Congress from our district and others, right?
8
SPEAKER_01
Their lives were threatened.
8
SPEAKER_01
They were traumatized.
8
SPEAKER_01
I have a lot of students, at least a dozen who are staff members, more than half are Republicans.
8
SPEAKER_01
Part of what traumatized them was that the president did not do his job to protect them.
8
SPEAKER_01
Yes.
8
SPEAKER_01
As a child would be traumatized, not only if harmed by someone, but if mom and dad don t do everything they can.
8
SPEAKER_01
One of the things that makes people feel safe is they know their parents, they know their person in authority can t always keep them safe, but they want to know the person s always trying.
8
SPEAKER_00
I agree with you that, listen, I m somebody that believes in this kind of idea of family, especially people I work with, that to me is a high ideal to protect.
8
SPEAKER_00
But that s a little bit different.
8
SPEAKER_01
It s his job.
8
SPEAKER_00
Hold on a second.
8
SPEAKER_00
That s a little bit different than protecting democracy.
8
SPEAKER_00
Those are two different things.
8
SPEAKER_00
Protecting your employees and protecting democracy is an ideal.
8
SPEAKER_00
You could say he didn t protect either, but I think the criticism that he didn t protect the employees is one thing.
8
SPEAKER_01
but the employees in this case are the ones carrying out democracy.
8
SPEAKER_01
So it s like saying the general who doesn t protect his soldiers is maybe not protecting his employees, he s also not protecting the war effort, right?
8
SPEAKER_01
It is his, the people we re talking about are the people who are actually doing the work of democracy at that moment, the most basic function of democracy, which is certifying votes.
8
SPEAKER_01
And their lives with, I m telling you, I had students, one who works for Senator Romney, for example, who spent hours in a closet
8
SPEAKER_01
hearing people outside, looking on her phone, when is the president sending people to protect us so we can do our job?
8
SPEAKER_01
And she was not happy with the way the election turned out, but she was there to do her job because she believes in democracy, to service the Senate and the Senate s role.
8
SPEAKER_00
What should have Donald Trump done without turning him into a different human being?
8
SPEAKER_01
He should have immediately, just as we were watching things get breached, the moment that the members of the House and the Senate had to evacuate their respective chambers,
8
SPEAKER_01
He should have immediately gone on TV and Twitter and every space he could and tell his supporters to leave and say what he never said.
8
SPEAKER_01
This is un-American what you re doing.
8
SPEAKER_01
This is unacceptable.
8
SPEAKER_01
Never use those words.
8
SPEAKER_01
This is un-American.
8
SPEAKER_01
This is unacceptable.
8
SPEAKER_01
I m completely against anyone storming the Capitol like this.
8
SPEAKER_01
Go home now, please.
8
SPEAKER_01
Or you can use his own language, but tell him to leave.
8
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, and immediately as soon as we know he was watching for hours, and we have testimony from his own daughter from Ivanka, saying she tried time and again to get him to say something earlier on and he didn t.
8
SPEAKER_01
He watched it.
8
SPEAKER_00
He can still criticize all the politicians, he can criticize everyone he wants, but he should have told him to leave.
8
SPEAKER_01
All he has to do in that moment is basic protecting democracy, protecting the Capitol, leave, tell them to leave and do everything he can to find any kind of force he can give to go protect the Capitol.
8
SPEAKER_00
I wonder how difficult it is to lose a presidential election.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s happened so many times, we know.
8
SPEAKER_00
I understand that, but it s, especially when like, what is it, you know, 80 million people vote for you or like some, like millions and millions and millions of people vote for you.
8
SPEAKER_00
It s crazy, it s crazy.
8
SPEAKER_00
This democracy thing is crazy.
8
SPEAKER_00
George H.W.
8
SPEAKER_01
Bush.
8
SPEAKER_01
Won a war in the Middle East, right?
8
SPEAKER_01
He had 90% approval rating and a year later lost the election to someone Bill Clinton He thought had none of the experience.
8
SPEAKER_01
He had someone didn t have he believed didn t have the right moral character and Bush Did everything he could to help the next president get started.
8
SPEAKER_01
Well, and they became good friends.
8
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, George W Bush
8
SPEAKER_01
He didn t love Obama.
8
SPEAKER_01
That s considered one of the smoothest transitions.
8
SPEAKER_01
George W. Bush ordered every single person in his administration to do everything they could to help the new admin.
8
SPEAKER_01
That s what a leader does.
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, humility is one of the things I admire in leaders.
8
SPEAKER_00
Well, that felt heated.
8
SPEAKER_00
Speaking of which, can you just linger on, how do you think we can heal the divide in this country?
8
SPEAKER_00
Do you think it s possible?
8
SPEAKER_00
There feels to be a strong division.
8
SPEAKER_01
I think we can heal the divide.
8
SPEAKER_01
I think, as you said, there s so many opportunities with new technology to bring people together, just as we re using it to tear them apart.
8
SPEAKER_01
I have the best job in the world because I,
8
SPEAKER_01
get to teach so many students.
8
SPEAKER_01
I ll have 300 in my class in the spring, a U.S.
8
SPEAKER_01
history class.
8
SPEAKER_01
And what I found with my students is they re mostly not Democrats or Republicans.
8
SPEAKER_01
They mostly care about the same things.
8
SPEAKER_01
Every one of my students seems to care about climate change.
8
SPEAKER_00
I thought you were going to say TikTok, but OK.
8
SPEAKER_01
Second to that, climate change.
8
SPEAKER_01
You know, and I think they
8
SPEAKER_01
I think they offer a new future for us.
8
SPEAKER_01
And here s what I ll say as a historian.
8
SPEAKER_01
We go through cycles of division and cycles of less division, less partisanship.
8
SPEAKER_01
One moment when it seems people agree too much on the mainstream encourages people to go to the extremes.
8
SPEAKER_01
When people see the extremes, they want to come back to the middle.
8
SPEAKER_01
And that is where my students are.
8
SPEAKER_01
Most of my students want lower inflation.
8
SPEAKER_01
They agree with Republicans on that, but they want more to be done about climate change.
8
SPEAKER_01
They re in the middle on these issues, and I think giving them more opportunity.
8
SPEAKER_01
So what s the best way to heal our divisions, honestly?
8
SPEAKER_01
Get the old men out and the young women and men in.
8
SPEAKER_00
Because they ultimately don t have that same division, like deeply baked in.
8
SPEAKER_01
Not only that, they find it disgusting in the way you and I do.
8
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, that s true.
8
SPEAKER_00
What s the right way to have conversations?
8
SPEAKER_00
I mean, just to stay on that with people on the left and the right.
8
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, I mean, I don t know how often you practice this.
8
SPEAKER_00
You care about politics.
8
SPEAKER_00
How often do you talk to people who voted for Trump or who are Republicans?
8
SPEAKER_00
It s hard.
8
SPEAKER_00
I try, but it s hard.
8
SPEAKER_00
75% of the people I talk to are not those people.
8
SPEAKER_00
Do you have people who are Trump supporters in your extended family?
8
SPEAKER_00
Thanksgiving?
8
SPEAKER_01
No, I don t in my extended... Are they no longer... They re no longer in my family.
8
SPEAKER_00
Succession.
8
SPEAKER_01
I have taken them out of the photo.
9
SPEAKER_01
They do not exist, it s just a race, yeah.
9
SPEAKER_01
I do, but I know, I have friends who fall into that, but it s still a minority of my friend group, so I wanna be clear that I m not as good at this as I should.
9
SPEAKER_01
But I think we do have to reach out.
9
SPEAKER_01
But I also, I m less interested, honestly, in refighting old battles with old dogs.
9
SPEAKER_01
I m more interested in finding ways to get a new crop of people
9
SPEAKER_01
educated and involved and engaged without imparting the same partisanship on them.
9
SPEAKER_01
So I will support and encourage, especially any student of mine, but any young person who is smart, has good ideas, I don t care whether, I don t ask whether they re a Democrat or Republican.
9
SPEAKER_01
And I have given money to some young candidates who are not Democrats.
9
SPEAKER_01
So that s the way, I think it s a generational change and I think it s reaching out and trying to get people to see beyond partisan divisions who are in their 20s and teens rather than, that s why we do our podcast, this is Democracy, Zachary and I do that, my son and I, because we re exactly that, you will never hear an episode where we take one side or another, our goal is to explain the issue, whether it s the challenges of democracy in China,
9
SPEAKER_01
or it s climate change, or whatever it is, or it s memory of war in our society, and to explain the issue and then offer people an optimistic pathway that s neither one side nor the other.
9
SPEAKER_00
So actually, to push back a little bit on young people, I do see that, the exhaustion with the sort of partisanship, but I ve also, and this I think is the case throughout history, and I see it now, especially in the teenage years, especially if I m being honest with boys,
9
SPEAKER_00
there s a desire for extremism in various directions.
9
SPEAKER_00
All kinds of extremism.
9
SPEAKER_00
Like just extreme awesomeness or extreme anything, just extreme.
9
SPEAKER_00
And F the man that tries to make me behave, this kind of energy.
9
SPEAKER_00
And that s why you can take any ideology, basically any extreme ideology, it starts being exciting.
9
SPEAKER_00
Whether you re a Marxist or a communist, you re not just gonna be like for socialized healthcare.
9
SPEAKER_00
You re gonna be like, no, no, no, no, no.
9
SPEAKER_00
Let s go full hammer and sickle.
9
SPEAKER_00
I m going to wear red.
9
SPEAKER_00
And then the same with white supremacy or just red pill.
9
SPEAKER_00
The way you see society, the way you see the world, the extremism is there.
9
SPEAKER_00
And part of that
9
SPEAKER_00
it s kind of, to steel map that perspective, it can be productive, that energy, if it s controlled.
9
SPEAKER_00
And especially if we have institutions that keep it a little under control.
9
SPEAKER_00
One of the criticisms I have, a lot of people have, I m actually much more moderate than that criticism, of universities is they give a little too much power to the 18-year-old who just showed up with their Marxist books and so on, and they wanna burn the whole thing down.
9
SPEAKER_00
That s beautiful,
9
SPEAKER_00
but the whole process of the universities get different viewpoints, educate more, make that person s viewpoint more sophisticated, complex, nuanced, and all that kind of things.
9
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, yeah.
9
SPEAKER_01
I think you re right, but I think that s more talk than action.
9
SPEAKER_01
In my experience, there is, especially among young men, you re absolutely right, there is a valorization of the tough guy.
9
SPEAKER_01
because most men 18 and 19 are still not fully comfortable in their masculinity, however they re going to define it, and so a way of performing that is being extreme in one way or another.
9
SPEAKER_01
And I ve definitely seen that, but I think it s more often than not rhetoric, and actually
9
SPEAKER_01
There s a very strong power of peer pressure and conformity that works on young people.
9
SPEAKER_01
And the positive side of that now is the peer pressure among them is not to join one party or the other.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s to say, this is terrible, look at how our parents are screwing things up.
9
SPEAKER_01
And they re right.
9
SPEAKER_01
And I think we can lean into that and get a lot of positive, creative action out of that.
9
SPEAKER_01
On universities, you brought this up a few times, and I think we have to be careful.
9
SPEAKER_01
I think you and I agree on this.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s not that universities are free of bias, but universities, especially large universities, whether it s UT, MIT, Yale, whatever we re talking about, right, they re large, complex empires.
9
SPEAKER_01
and most universities, people in the arts, tend to be a little left of center at self-selection.
9
SPEAKER_01
Those in engineering tend to be pretty much in the middle, and those at business schools tend to be right of center.
9
SPEAKER_01
And so I think we need to be careful not to generalize.
9
SPEAKER_01
At the University of Texas, there s as much influence from the business school and the athletic department as there is from the humanities.
9
SPEAKER_01
So it s not a left-leaning campus.
9
SPEAKER_01
And that s also true at Yale.
9
SPEAKER_01
You have the School of Management at Yale.
9
SPEAKER_01
You have a huge medical school, right?
9
SPEAKER_01
People who are very professional and less political on a lot of these issues.
9
SPEAKER_01
So I think we have to be careful.
9
SPEAKER_01
I think there s certain pockets of things
9
SPEAKER_01
but some of that you re never going to avoid, right?
9
SPEAKER_01
Engineers are always gonna be the people who- Hey, no, easy now.
9
SPEAKER_01
No, but I m sure you could, who want to generally find some objective measure and avoid political interpretation, right?
9
SPEAKER_01
They wanna find their objective measure.
9
SPEAKER_00
I m surprised how most people in robotics don t seem to, they re afraid of humans, they run away from humans.
9
SPEAKER_01
Precisely, precisely.
9
SPEAKER_01
And the arts people are always gonna be more touchy-feely, and the business people are always gonna like markets.
9
SPEAKER_00
My own personal opinion on this is, this is just me talking.
9
SPEAKER_00
And I don t know if it s grounded in data, but just my own experiences, it seems a lot of the things that people criticize about universities comes from administrations, from the bureaucracies.
9
SPEAKER_00
The faculty and the students are, even with biases, are really interesting people, and all of their different, I wouldn t call them biases, but different perspectives add to the conversation.
9
SPEAKER_00
It s the, too much, of course you need, just like with institutions, you need some, but too much, it becomes too heavy-handed.
9
SPEAKER_00
Somehow that has been getting a little bit out of hand at a bunch of universities, just too much administration.
9
SPEAKER_00
And I don t know what the mechanism is to make it more efficient, but that s been always the struggle.
9
SPEAKER_00
Maybe the public criticism is the very mechanism that makes universities, the administration smaller.
9
SPEAKER_01
Absolutely, we have those issues, and you can also say athletics has gotten out of control.
9
SPEAKER_01
Sure, yeah.
9
SPEAKER_00
Like you said, you co-host a podcast with your son, Zachary, called This Is Democracy.
9
SPEAKER_00
What s been, there s a million questions I can ask, but just that pops to memory, what s been a challenging or maybe an eye-opening conversation you ve had on it?
9
SPEAKER_01
Oh, we ve had a lot of eye-opening conversations.
9
SPEAKER_01
Our most recent episode is an episode on the German right.
9
SPEAKER_01
As I m sure many of your listeners know, there was a group called the Reichsbürger.
9
SPEAKER_01
I think they still exist in Germany.
9
SPEAKER_01
They were actually led by a former German prince, and they had been planning to assassinate the Bundeskanzler.
9
SPEAKER_01
and we re organizing all sorts of other efforts.
9
SPEAKER_01
They do not believe that the current German government is legitimate.
9
SPEAKER_01
They think the last legitimate government was the Nazi government.
9
SPEAKER_01
They see the whole post-war period as illegitimate.
9
SPEAKER_01
So it s the German far right.
9
SPEAKER_01
Correct.
9
SPEAKER_01
And we had on a member of the German Bundestag, of their parliament, who s been involved in the investigations or in the oversight of the investigations.
9
SPEAKER_01
and talking with her about the depth of these issues and the challenges they face in Germany.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s certainly not a huge part of German society, but it s a significant number of people, probably more than 20,000 people who are part of this, to me brought home.
9
SPEAKER_01
how much of what we thought was the past is still in the present.
9
SPEAKER_01
And I think that s a recurring theme in our show.
9
SPEAKER_01
And our show is optimistic.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s not about woe is to the world.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s actually about taking issues.
9
SPEAKER_01
We take a topic each week that s in the news.
9
SPEAKER_01
We go back to understand the history.
9
SPEAKER_01
And we then use that history to make better policy, to talk about how to make better policy today.
9
SPEAKER_01
And in this case, it was clear that even in Germany, there s a lot of unfinished work in explaining to people and helping those, for instance, in the former East, where a lot of this group has its support.
9
SPEAKER_01
why this government is legitimate, why it operates the way it does, and addressing their concerns.
9
SPEAKER_01
It was strikingly similar to some of the problems we have in our own society.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, it s interesting that there s a far-right movement in Germany.
9
SPEAKER_00
So you look at different parts of the world as well, not just the United States.
9
SPEAKER_01
We do.
9
SPEAKER_01
We did an episode recently on China, on the effects of zero COVID and the protests in China.
9
SPEAKER_01
We ve done a number of episodes on the war in Ukraine.
9
SPEAKER_01
Our role each week is to have on either a policymaker or a scholar or an activist who can help us understand an issue and get beyond partisanship.
9
SPEAKER_01
So what s been eye-opening are some of the details, but what s also been eye-opening, honestly, is how easy it is to have a nonpartisan conversation.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s not hard.
9
SPEAKER_01
We open every episode with a poem that Zachary writes.
9
SPEAKER_01
He writes an original poem.
9
SPEAKER_01
I ll brag on my son.
9
SPEAKER_01
He s the Youth Poet Laureate in Austin right now, and he writes a poem on each topic.
9
SPEAKER_01
What s the style of poetry usually?
9
SPEAKER_00
Is he dark?
9
SPEAKER_01
Is he... No, he s usually... He s often ironic.
9
SPEAKER_00
Ironic?
9
SPEAKER_00
Like with a bit of humor?
9
SPEAKER_01
Yes.
9
SPEAKER_00
Okay.
9
SPEAKER_01
And he likes word plays.
9
SPEAKER_00
So he s not like a rebellious, dark teenager that s just... No.
9
SPEAKER_00
He s a creative know-it-all.
9
SPEAKER_00
Strong words, he would probably disagree.
9
SPEAKER_00
But what s interesting- Sounds like you re the know-it-all on the podcast.
9
SPEAKER_01
Oh no, oh no.
9
SPEAKER_01
We do have a lot of followers, and most of them comment on him, they don t comment on me, so I m the junior partner.
9
SPEAKER_01
You re the Yoko Ono of the partnership.
9
SPEAKER_01
Correct, correct.
9
SPEAKER_01
But what I will say, and this is a really optimistic thing that I deeply believe, if you frame things properly, you open with a poem, you open with questions, not with partisan positions, even when we have someone on who s a known Republican or Democrat, we can have a very nonpartisan conversation.
9
SPEAKER_01
I mean, of course, we get criticisms, but we re almost never criticized for being partisan one way or the other.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s not hard to do this, you just have to make an effort to avoid the partisan claptrap that we can all fall into.
9
SPEAKER_00
Focus on the humanity.
9
SPEAKER_00
What has your brilliant, popular son, Zachary, taught you about life?
9
SPEAKER_01
Oh, he s taught me so much in his 18 years, as has our daughter who s 20.
9
SPEAKER_01
Two things stand out.
9
SPEAKER_01
He s taught me that a new generation has so much to offer.
9
SPEAKER_01
And I don t just mean because he s smart and engaged as our daughter is too.
9
SPEAKER_01
I also mean that you realize when you have a child that even though you re doing the same things with them, they see the world differently and legitimately.
9
SPEAKER_01
And it reminds us that the world can be seen legitimately in different ways.
9
SPEAKER_01
And it s not that he and I disagree on major political issues, it s actually the small stuff that he sees differently.
9
SPEAKER_00
Like in the details, you see that you can have very different perspectives.
9
SPEAKER_00
Exactly.
9
SPEAKER_00
You have a very different way to draw, to create a painting of the same scene.
9
SPEAKER_01
And then the other thing he s taught me is, as I said about the poetry, the importance of the arts.
9
SPEAKER_01
I ve always been a lover of the arts, but it had always been, in some ways, parallel to my historical scholarship.
9
SPEAKER_01
We need to do a better job of integrating, as the Greeks did, right?
9
SPEAKER_01
the artistry, all the things we do, we separate them as disciplines, but they re all deeply connected.
9
SPEAKER_01
This is what I like about your podcast, honestly, is that you integrate all these things.
9
SPEAKER_01
You ll have people on with AI, you ll have a guy doing arm wrestling, you have all these things together, right?
9
SPEAKER_01
And it s that these worlds come together, and there s a lot to gain by bringing the arts and the sciences and all this together.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s an obvious thing to say, but we forget.
9
SPEAKER_00
Yeah, and it somehow becomes bigger than the individual parts.
9
SPEAKER_00
What gives you hope about the future?
9
SPEAKER_00
You looked at, especially with this book, at just such a divisive part of our history and the claim, the idea that you carry through the book that that division still permeates our society.
9
SPEAKER_00
So what gives you hope?
9
SPEAKER_01
I try to end the book on a very hopeful note because I am hopeful.
9
SPEAKER_01
I m hopeful that these divisions were made by people and can be unmade by people.
9
SPEAKER_01
I do not believe that what I describe in this book, the division, the hate that we see today as well, I don t think it s inevitable.
9
SPEAKER_01
I think it can be actually corrected quite easily.
9
SPEAKER_01
And corrected easily by addressing the challenges in our institutions, the ways in which this history has been embodied in our institutions, even though we re different.
9
SPEAKER_01
And through our own recognizing of it, the gift of the last few years, I don t care whether you re a Democrat or Republican, the gift of the last few years is that we ve been able to see the horror around us.
9
SPEAKER_01
And once you see the horror, you can do something about it.
9
SPEAKER_01
What s dangerous is when the horror is there and you don t see it, and it s hidden.
9
SPEAKER_01
It s been unmasked.
9
SPEAKER_01
I don t care where you stand.
9
SPEAKER_01
I ve probably spoken in about 25, 30 cities about this book.
9
SPEAKER_01
Every audience I ve asked, how many of you have been shaken by the last four to five years?
9
SPEAKER_01
And everyone everywhere has raised their hand.
9
SPEAKER_01
That s a gift.
9
SPEAKER_01
That s consciousness raising.
9
SPEAKER_01
I grew up in a time in the 1980s when we were concerned everyone was apathetic.
9
SPEAKER_01
That was what was being said.
9
SPEAKER_01
We had lower voter turnout than we have now.
9
SPEAKER_01
People didn t seem to care.
9
SPEAKER_01
My students, when I was a young, I m still young, when I was a very young professor in the early 2000s, my students all wanted to go work for banks.
9
SPEAKER_01
They just wanted to make money.
9
SPEAKER_01
The best students wanted to go work for Goldman.
9
SPEAKER_01
We re not in that world anymore.
9
SPEAKER_01
There s been a consciousness raising.
9
SPEAKER_01
Knowing there s a problem, naming the problem, gives us a chance to fix the problem.
9
SPEAKER_01
And I think that s where we are as a society now.
9
SPEAKER_00
Young people are excited to solve the problem.
9
SPEAKER_00
Do you think the individual
9
SPEAKER_00
Like, if a young person is listening to this, do you think the individual has power in this?
9
SPEAKER_01
Absolutely.
9
SPEAKER_01
I think the individual has a huge amount of power now.
9
SPEAKER_01
There s a demographic reason.
9
SPEAKER_01
We ve got all these old people who have held on too long.
9
SPEAKER_01
Look at president, look at senator, look at any institution.
9
SPEAKER_01
And they re all, we re reaching a demographic cliff.
9
SPEAKER_01
Unlike China, we have a large population that s coming up.
9
SPEAKER_01
So those who are watching now who are in their 20s, they re gonna get to move into leadership positions much faster than their parents did.
9
SPEAKER_01
Let s go.
9
SPEAKER_01
Yeah, so that s one.
9
SPEAKER_01
And then the second thing is just what we re doing here.
9
SPEAKER_01
I mean, social media, when used properly, gives a platform to young people.
9
SPEAKER_01
They don t have to go through the New York Times like I do, right?
9
SPEAKER_01
This is why I do the podcast with my son.
9
SPEAKER_01
Find other ways.
9
SPEAKER_01
You reach millions of people.
9
SPEAKER_01
And this can be done.
9
SPEAKER_01
You don t need to wait for the old guys to give you the checkmark that it s okay.
9
SPEAKER_00
Just put on a suit, get a haircut, and start speaking nonsense into a microphone, and yeah.
9
SPEAKER_01
Well, also, I mean, have a very neat place.
9
SPEAKER_00
That s why I love you.
9
SPEAKER_00
All right, Jeremy, you re an incredible human being.
9
SPEAKER_00
Thank you for talking once more time.
9
SPEAKER_00
Thank you for writing this important book.
9
SPEAKER_00
I hope you keep writing, and I hope to keep talking to you, because you re the shining beacon of political hope I have here in Austin that we get to enjoy.
9
SPEAKER_01
I want to thank you for having me on, and thank you for your show.
9
SPEAKER_01
I think what you re doing is so important, and I really deeply respect what you do.
9
SPEAKER_00
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Jeremy Suri.
9
SPEAKER_00
To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description.
9
SPEAKER_00
And now, let me leave you with some words from Abraham Lincoln.
9
SPEAKER_00
Nearly all men can stand adversity.
9
SPEAKER_00
If you want to test a man s character, give him power.
9
SPEAKER_00
Thanks for listening, and hope to see you next time.