Making Sense - Sam Harris - January 22, 2018


#114 — Politics and Sanity


Episode Stats

Length

50 minutes

Words per Minute

161.67987

Word Count

8,091

Sentence Count

493

Misogynist Sentences

1

Hate Speech Sentences

10


Summary

David Frum and Andrew Sullivan join me to discuss their experience moderating a conversation with me at my event in Washington, D.C. on Nov. 22. I m not proud of what happened, but I m proud of the conversation, and I hope you enjoy it as much as I did moderating it. David Frum is a senior editor at The Atlantic, and he is the author of the new book, Trumpocracy: The Corruption of the American Republic. Andrew Sullivan is a writer-at-large for The New York Magazine, and was the creator of The Daily Dish, which was one of the first political blogs in print. He was the founding editor of The New Republic from 1991 to 96. He holds a B.A. in History from Yale and a PhD in Modern History and Modern languages from Harvard. He s been in conservative media for quite some time, and has been a lifelong Republican. And he was a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute from 2001 to 2002. And the man who was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush. And he certainly knows a lot about politics. He s also been on the podcast, and we ve debated various things in print over the years, and over the past few years, we've debated a lot in print, too. Today you ll hear the audio from my event with Andrew Sullivan. I love the event, I m sure glad you re here! in this episode of The Weekly Standard, where I talk about the conversation I had a lot of fun, and talk about how to have a good time. and what it s like to be on stage with two people who have a lot to say. in general and how to talk about politics, and why I think it s a good idea and why it s important to have two guests on stage in a conversation so you should do it in a way that s not just one thing, not two things that s better than one, but three things that are better than two, not three, not just two, so you can have it all at once a day not two, and not two days in a day, not one, and two days, and one day, and three days, not four, and a week, and so on that s all the same thing, and That s right, that s good, right? In this episode, we talk about that.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Today you'll hear the audio from my event in DC with Andrew Sullivan and David Frum.
00:00:21.780 I love the event, I love the conversation, but here are the two mistakes I think I made.
00:00:26.920 The first is, I brought politics to DC, which was a totally natural thing for me to do.
00:00:36.020 When I go to a city, I'm first trying to find local guests, so as to spare people the hassle
00:00:41.020 of traveling, and in DC it's quite natural to think of people in politics, and having
00:00:47.860 speakers of the caliber of David Frum and Andrew Sullivan there, it was natural to grab them.
00:00:53.700 But the reality is, if there's any city in the world that would have loved to have me
00:00:58.340 avoid politics altogether, and talk to a physicist or a biologist, it has to be DC.
00:01:04.880 And honestly, that hadn't occurred to me until after the fact.
00:01:08.940 So I should have taken David and Andrew to some other city, and that would have made much
00:01:14.040 more sense for the local audience.
00:01:15.760 But also, as you'll hear, David and Andrew are people with so much to say, that I found
00:01:22.540 myself moderating a conversation between them, largely.
00:01:28.020 Which, again, was totally natural for me to do, and felt fine at the time, because I was
00:01:34.080 interested to hear what both of them had to say.
00:01:36.700 But, in the aftermath, I realized that most of the people who came out that night came
00:01:43.480 to see me.
00:01:44.180 In fact, most of the tickets to the event had sold before I had even announced who my
00:01:47.960 guests would be.
00:01:49.580 So, from the perspective of someone who came out to hear me talk, that person got shortchanged.
00:01:57.580 Again, this is something that I'm learning as I go, but I believe these are legitimate
00:02:02.760 concerns.
00:02:03.220 So, going forward, I think, unless there's some real reason to have two guests on stage,
00:02:08.100 I will opt to have just one.
00:02:10.780 It will either keep me from focusing too much on one guest, as I think I did in my event
00:02:16.400 with Eric Weinstein and Ben Shapiro, where Ben and I got into a mini-debate and sidelined
00:02:22.920 Eric for a while.
00:02:24.080 And it will keep me from falling into the mode of merely moderating between two other people,
00:02:30.260 however interesting.
00:02:30.940 But, that said, I don't think any of these flaws really affect the podcast.
00:02:36.380 And, if you enjoy Andrew and David as much as I do, you will enjoy listening to them at
00:02:41.660 this event.
00:02:42.660 There were some intense moments.
00:02:44.060 There was some heckling for my guests at various points.
00:02:48.320 Got contentious between us.
00:02:49.900 Toward the end, we agreed about more or less everything for the first hour.
00:02:53.120 And then, several topics of debate came up, mostly in the Q&A period.
00:02:58.260 There was a legalization of marijuana, which David and Andrew strongly disagreed about.
00:03:03.420 There was a question about the validity of religion, where they both strongly disagreed
00:03:08.800 with me.
00:03:10.080 There was a question about Kissinger, I believe, where Andrew and David found themselves at loggerheads.
00:03:16.560 And, a few others.
00:03:18.200 It was a little inconvenient that we couldn't deal with each one of those topics at length.
00:03:22.420 But, anyway, there was enough there for you to see where we all stand.
00:03:27.360 And, we all certainly had fun.
00:03:29.380 One point of subtext that didn't actually get explained on stage.
00:03:34.840 Andrew had just released an article in New York Magazine that day, for which he was getting
00:03:39.220 totally hammered on social media, about the Me Too movement.
00:03:44.200 So, he was a little shell-shocked there.
00:03:47.420 And, I think there was one reference to it that got a laugh from the crowd, because everyone
00:03:51.260 knew what was going on there.
00:03:53.280 But, it actually never got discussed.
00:03:56.880 So, in case you don't know who they are, David Frum is a senior editor at The Atlantic.
00:04:02.000 And, he is the author of the new book, Trumpocracy, The Corruption of the American Republic.
00:04:07.760 That's his ninth book.
00:04:09.220 I have read it, and I recommend it.
00:04:11.960 And, David's been on the podcast, I think, twice before.
00:04:15.320 He's been in conservative media for quite some time.
00:04:18.400 He was a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
00:04:21.760 He's been a lifelong Republican.
00:04:24.500 And, he was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2002.
00:04:31.000 He holds a B.A. and M.A. in history from Yale, and a law degree from Harvard.
00:04:36.220 And, the man certainly knows a lot about politics.
00:04:38.200 And, my second guest was Andrew Sullivan, who's also been on the podcast before.
00:04:43.680 And, we've debated various things in print over the years.
00:04:47.940 Andrew is a writer-at-large for New York Magazine.
00:04:50.800 He holds a B.A. from Oxford University in modern history and modern languages, and a Ph.D. in government from Harvard.
00:04:58.280 He was the editor of the New Republic from 1991 to 96.
00:05:02.080 And, the creator of the Daily Dish, which was one of the first political blogs, which he ran from 2000 to 2015.
00:05:11.340 He's a winner of three National Magazine Awards.
00:05:14.640 And, he was also the weekly American columnist for the Sunday Times of London from 1996 to 2014.
00:05:21.280 And, if you don't know it, Andrew's commentary was very influential in helping our nation come to its senses around marriage equality.
00:05:30.420 In fact, he wrote the first cover story and first book in favor of marriage equality in 1989 and 1995.
00:05:38.840 He wrote a memoir about the AIDS epidemic, titled Love Undetectable, in 1998.
00:05:45.540 And, after that, he wrote the book, The Conservative Soul, in 2006.
00:05:51.120 And, so, I now bring you David Frum and Andrew Sullivan, live from the Warner Theatre in Washington, D.C.
00:06:03.960 Thank you.
00:06:08.880 Thank you very much.
00:06:15.540 Well, I have two guests tonight who, they have great bios, I have their bios here, but I realize they actually need no introduction in this town.
00:06:27.120 So, please welcome Andrew Sullivan and David Frum.
00:06:36.840 Thanks for coming.
00:06:45.540 So, I just heard from my wife that my daughter, my youngest daughter, who just turned four, was asked yesterday who her favorite monsters were.
00:06:57.020 And, she thought for a while, and she said, Grover and Donald Trump.
00:07:03.600 Now, this is after, at two and a half, saying she was going to vote for Donald Trump.
00:07:07.840 So, she's made progress.
00:07:09.660 Now, I promise we are not going to focus exclusively on politics, and if I don't keep that promise, there will be a long Q&A, and you can move on to other things, if that interests you.
00:07:20.720 But, clearly, with the two of you, we need to talk about Trump and his consequences.
00:07:27.020 I want to start by attempting to nullify any kind of charge of partisanship that would be leveled at us, however incongruously.
00:07:36.120 Maybe I'll start with you, David.
00:07:37.040 David, if you don't know, is just about to release a big and wonderful book on the Trump issue, the Trumpocracy.
00:07:45.840 And that is for sale, along with our books in the lobby afterwards.
00:07:50.860 We'll have a book signing.
00:07:52.060 Our books are made grateful very, very easily.
00:07:54.400 We're the chief of states ever.
00:07:55.460 So, David, just deflate this notion that any expression of concern of the sort that we will articulate here about politics, and Trump in particular, must be an expression of ideology or partisanship here.
00:08:13.020 Well, first, I don't know why I should be so worried about that, because when you express a moral attitude or a political attitude, I don't think you have to – it's either true or false.
00:08:24.820 It's either plausible or not.
00:08:26.740 It either holds water or it doesn't.
00:08:28.560 So, the why question, and that's just psychoanalysis, and we all have our motives.
00:08:34.700 I come to this as someone who's a very conservative person who's been lifelong involved in the conservative movement, not just in this country, but in my native Canada.
00:08:43.700 I've been very involved in Britain as well.
00:08:45.080 And I've been a pretty consistent supporter, in fact, a perfectly consistent supporter of those parties.
00:08:53.120 And I think a lot of my reaction to Donald Trump is not – it's the deepest level, not a political one.
00:08:59.480 He's cruel.
00:09:01.020 He's cruel.
00:09:01.680 He's cruel to animals.
00:09:02.900 He's cruel to his children.
00:09:04.140 He's cruel to people who depend on him.
00:09:06.360 He's cruel to the men and women who come into his orbit.
00:09:08.740 And I think that's the beginning of my reaction to him.
00:09:15.080 I think it's maybe the opposite that needs to be explained, that it is not the revulsion against him, which is now shared by more than 60 percent of American society.
00:09:27.620 That's not the phenomenon that needs to be explained and where you raise the question of, is this partisan, is this ideological?
00:09:33.600 It's those who support him.
00:09:36.880 Some support him because, unfortunately, human beings are more excited by cruelty than maybe it's comfortable to admit.
00:09:45.360 That's how the gladiatorial games in Rome sold out.
00:09:48.520 You could fill the whole Coliseum with people watching cruelty.
00:09:52.380 There's something that's exciting about it.
00:09:54.140 But a lot of people, because of partisanship or ideology, are able to close their eyes to what they see.
00:09:59.400 Maybe this is an entirely vain hope, but what would it take to have a conversation on this issue of the sort we're about to have that could change minds?
00:10:09.580 I mean, we're talking about 35 percent of the population and an environment of hyper-partisanship, unlike any we've seen before.
00:10:17.940 What do you think about, Andrew, the prospect of actually changing minds on this issue?
00:10:22.360 What would it take?
00:10:22.920 I don't know what it would take.
00:10:25.700 I've been staggered and dismayed by the number of people who are prepared to side with a figure so repellent in so many ways, except for one thing, which is tribalism.
00:10:43.280 This is not partisanship is sort of a bit like supporting your football team.
00:10:49.000 It isn't existential.
00:10:50.520 It isn't integral to your entire being.
00:10:54.700 But America is now essentially not one country.
00:10:58.000 It's two tribes.
00:10:59.040 In fact, warring in a zero-sum game, in which one party seeks to undo everything of the last administration, in which the notion that you might actually accept that there is a place for two parties in this system, and that they should take turns, that in fact that's a strength of a bipartisan system, this has been completely wiped away by these deeper, more primordial loyalties.
00:11:25.540 Is he with us, or is he with them?
00:11:29.180 And the bulk of the blame of this does go absolutely to the Republican Party's transformation, really, in the 90s particularly, I think, and onwards, into believing that the other party has no right to govern at all, that it's illegitimate.
00:11:44.520 Whereas I was a happy supporter of Republican presidents and conservative prime ministers until I thought, you know, it's good for Tony Blair and Bill Clinton to have a shot.
00:11:57.980 This is good.
00:11:58.520 It'd be good for us to be out of power for a bit.
00:11:59.940 Because the point is really the whole system, not this particular interest.
00:12:03.580 And then you realize the Republicans have become something like a cultural tribal force in which they had to run everything.
00:12:11.620 And they still do.
00:12:12.520 Yeah.
00:12:13.120 Well, listen, let's talk about the system, because it is just a fact that democracies fail.
00:12:19.340 And this is something you cover in your book.
00:12:21.040 And it's a fact that we are not very sensitive to.
00:12:25.460 I feel like, just speaking personally, I feel like the first moment in my life where I realized I was living in the stream of history, like real history, where bad things happen in surprising ways, was 9-11.
00:12:40.100 That was the first moment where I realized, OK, the big bombs could start falling anywhere.
00:12:45.880 And you can't take anything really for granted.
00:12:48.780 But yet, I feel like I, up until the moment of Trump, have been asleep on this particular point, that I've taken our institutions and their strength for granted.
00:12:57.820 I've taken democracy for granted.
00:12:59.820 And so connect some of the dots about what's at stake here.
00:13:04.020 Well, I think one of the reasons it's easy to be blind to the danger around you is that we imagine the danger, the only kind of danger to worry about is the danger at its most extreme.
00:13:14.600 Unless it's Hitler, it's fine.
00:13:16.320 And I keep trying to persuade people, you know, there are a lot of stops on the train line of bad before you get to Hitler Station.
00:13:25.400 That you can't say, let's study the worst example of democratic breakdown in the history of the world.
00:13:33.540 And then say, OK, well, obviously our situation is nothing like that.
00:13:36.900 And I started writing about this in order to explain why that analogy can be so completely mistaken, and yet the danger can be real.
00:13:46.860 Because when democracies corrode, they can corrode more gently.
00:13:52.640 You know, you asked at the beginning, you asked Andrew about changing minds.
00:13:56.340 In fact, minds are being changed every day.
00:13:58.220 And the Gallup polls reflect that.
00:14:00.900 It's not, you know, a cataclysmic event.
00:14:03.880 But every day, you know, a couple of thousand people in America change their mind on this issue.
00:14:08.480 They become disillusioned.
00:14:09.560 That's happening.
00:14:10.420 That's why we're in a dangerous situation.
00:14:13.040 Because Donald Trump and the people, if Donald Trump were popular, he would rule popularly.
00:14:19.240 Because he is not, and because the people around him fear that in a real election, they might not do so well.
00:14:26.640 In fact, they didn't do so well the last time.
00:14:28.760 They keep telling you they did, but they didn't.
00:14:31.180 You know, if the ball had bounced a little bit differently, and we're just looking at the total vote,
00:14:34.720 Donald Trump got about half a point more of Michael Dukakis.
00:14:37.560 And nobody writes essays about the Dukakis voter and what's on their minds, the Dukakis voter.
00:14:46.480 He's like, Dukakis plus half a point.
00:14:50.680 They deny that.
00:14:51.940 His mental condition probably forced them to.
00:14:54.360 But he also is aware of it, and the people around him are aware of it.
00:14:57.760 And that's why they need to circumvent a lot of normal political processes.
00:15:01.940 Precisely because they know that minds are changing against them,
00:15:04.260 they're going to need to use power in other kinds of ways.
00:15:07.560 But then what do you make of all the enabling we have seen from mainstream Republicans?
00:15:14.520 So the crucial minds that need to change are the Republicans in Congress,
00:15:19.620 and what would it take for Paul Ryan, to name a name, to just disavow this president?
00:15:27.460 Does pure opportunism explain this, or is there something deeper and less cynical?
00:15:36.060 No, or something deeper and more cynical.
00:15:41.760 Human nature apparently is worse than I realize.
00:15:43.700 If you start with that assumption, then life can hold nothing but pleasant surprises.
00:15:50.460 If you start with the bad assumption, then things get better.
00:15:53.740 But Paul Ryan's made this deal, and he's getting things from it.
00:15:58.940 That as Steve Bannon has moved off, we've seen that what is integral to Trump was not the set of issues that he wrote in 2015.
00:16:06.680 What's integral to him is the power that he seeks to hold in order to protect himself from legal danger,
00:16:13.520 and to enrich himself, and also to meet his psychic needs, and maybe to glut some of his deep inner hates.
00:16:21.580 He's not so interested in the details of any of these bills he signs.
00:16:25.160 So the people who do care, they can strike a bargain with him.
00:16:27.640 As the popularity of the Republican Party continues to corrode, Donald Trump will more and more become the only game in town.
00:16:35.480 They will have to defend him.
00:16:36.980 That's the danger, the next danger that I see.
00:16:39.860 The Republicans are going to take bad losses, it looks like, in November of 2018.
00:16:44.700 They may lose a house.
00:16:45.700 They may lose two houses.
00:16:46.560 If that happens, there may be individual intellectuals and donors who turn on Donald Trump and say it's your fault,
00:17:01.500 but the logic of the situation will force his party to cling to him more desperately,
00:17:05.520 because remember, it took three branches of government, the House, the Senate, and the President to pass the tax cut.
00:17:13.340 It takes only one of them to defend it.
00:17:16.560 So, I want to talk a little more about what it looks like for democracy to begin to erode.
00:17:23.940 And there are many signs here that we're not in normal territory,
00:17:27.900 but one is just with respect to the norms of political discourse.
00:17:30.780 And the most infuriating retort to everything I say when I worry out loud about Trump that I've encountered is,
00:17:43.880 he's just trolling, like as though that excuses any possible indiscretion, whether it's threatening nuclear war or singling out some private person on Twitter for abuse.
00:17:56.400 You know, we have the President of the United States going after someone.
00:17:59.060 This notion of just trolling, which there's a kind of nihilistic delight in him eradicating the norms of civil political discourse.
00:18:11.560 And, I mean, you must spend as much time on social media as I do.
00:18:15.420 I'm trying not to.
00:18:16.800 Yeah, well, it's...
00:18:18.280 Certainly today.
00:18:18.860 Yeah, we'll get to that.
00:18:21.300 We'll get to that.
00:18:23.140 What do you think about this idea?
00:18:25.860 There's a sense that...
00:18:28.460 I mean, this just seems genuinely new, where you have smart...
00:18:30.360 These are not stupid people.
00:18:31.440 These are smart people who delight in a kind of wrecking ball-like chaos.
00:18:37.220 Yes, because something really happened, it seems to me, in this moment.
00:18:41.580 Now, if you're an old-school conservative and you've studied political thought, you're terrified of what happens in democracies as they continue.
00:18:49.620 You know, Aristotle and Plato and the ancients understood that democracy is inherently unstable and will almost always devolve at some point into a tyranny.
00:19:00.220 But those two things are deeply connected.
00:19:02.160 What happens is that people have simply decided they're not interested in rational deliberation.
00:19:10.560 Emotions are much more important than arguments.
00:19:14.540 They're much more interested in people rather than principles.
00:19:19.000 And at some point, they made a decision that they would rather abandon self-government and give it up to the one man.
00:19:28.560 Now, this is something that they all predicted in the ancient world, but essentially when democracy is fully extended, when everyone is equal to everyone else, there are no intermediary things.
00:19:40.480 There's just the masses and the celebrities.
00:19:43.860 Then there will be some point at which the masses will elect a celebrity to govern for them and feel great calm in that.
00:19:50.560 And when they've made that decision, it's a personal commitment to that person, which is at a level that cannot be argued out of.
00:19:59.400 This is a cult.
00:20:01.300 And he represents a rebuke to the elites that didn't think he could happen, that have failed dramatically on a whole variety of fronts over the last 20 or 30 years.
00:20:17.620 And it's a sign that they really don't care if the system of government survives.
00:20:24.740 That's an incredibly dangerous moment in democracy.
00:20:27.280 That one of our major parties and a whole slew of intellectuals who should know better have decided to go along with this.
00:20:34.860 It just shows they don't understand what they're dealing with and how powerful and dangerous this is.
00:20:39.120 You know, to echo Andrew's point, the people belong to the generation of my parents who came of age after World War II.
00:20:48.480 For 30 years, they saw life just get better and better and better for the ordinary person.
00:20:55.060 Things become that incomes rose.
00:20:57.500 The housing got better.
00:20:58.860 The opportunities got better.
00:21:00.320 The schooling got better.
00:21:01.340 People whose parents had not finished high school, were able to complete college, and they had tremendous confidence in the system that made all of this possible.
00:21:12.160 I sort of sum it up by if you watch an old movie, whenever a character steps forward who's wearing a white lab coat, you know he's got the answer, especially if he has a German accent.
00:21:22.400 He will tell you how the time machine works, how you've got the tiny little submarine inside the bloodstream.
00:21:29.940 He has the answers.
00:21:31.620 And starting sometime in the middle 1970s, whenever you see a man in the white lab coat, he's like a hubristic maniac.
00:21:39.540 We will see him, his last scene will be vanishing down the gullet of a Tyrannosaurus Rex that he thought it was a good idea to bring back to life.
00:21:46.680 And so we have a loss of confidence in a lot of institutions.
00:21:50.540 But here's something to say, and I think maybe this is the very first thing I should have said here.
00:21:55.520 I think one of the things that is sort of exciting and inspiring about the, when I say the moment, I don't mean the big moment, I mean literally the hour that we're living in, is the counteract to all of this is a revival of civic spirit.
00:22:07.580 I mean, I never thought I would be sitting on a stage on a theater on a Friday night and have people listen to these musings when they could be doing it.
00:22:15.260 Yeah.
00:22:15.820 Yeah.
00:22:17.140 Yeah.
00:22:17.380 Yeah.
00:22:17.500 Yeah.
00:22:20.540 And I don't, I think, I don't know if narcissistic personality disorder is infectious, I hope not, but I don't have enough, I don't have, I haven't caught enough of it yet to think that people are here for any of us.
00:22:32.980 I mean, they're here because one of the reactions to this president, I quoted in the book, it's an email I got from somebody who just said that he had reacted to the election of Donald Trump by resolving to be a better citizen.
00:22:44.540 And you see that, and you see that, and you see that, and you're doing it, and thank you, and that's what's going to make the difference.
00:22:49.980 Yeah.
00:22:51.580 Well, that's, if, if, if only, if only that would, would generally true, I'm, I'm more pessimistic than you.
00:23:00.860 It didn't last long, that hopeful feeling.
00:23:02.760 I'm here to squelch any single hint of optimism here.
00:23:09.820 I would say a couple of things.
00:23:13.540 I've been amazed at how many people are perfectly happy with a president that has contempt for the courts, that talks about shutting down the free press, that wants to use the Justice Department to prosecute his political opponents.
00:23:26.920 Actions that are inimical to liberal democracy.
00:23:32.480 I'm amazed by the number of people that much prefer to emote about their identity, or the people hating them, or the people they hate, as opposed to thinking about what are the best solutions to this particular problem.
00:23:45.180 Um, I think identity politics has definitely made all of this worse, and that when the right decided to adopt identity politics, in a particular moment in time, uh, they compounded all of its problems.
00:24:00.460 So that, essentially, you're not voting for a set of policies against another.
00:24:05.060 It seems irrelevant, what he's doing.
00:24:06.720 The people seem to support him.
00:24:08.540 He's, he's pursuing a classic Randian policy, when he ran as a populist person standing up for the forgotten men and women, but no one cares.
00:24:17.820 Um, now one of the reasons is, he's just a white man who represents the last stand, really, of a white majority country, which is going to become a non-white majority country, whatever you mean by white.
00:24:28.460 Uh, and that is the first time in human history that's ever happened.
00:24:34.680 When it's happening at a time, also, of mass immigration, and declining, and, or stagnant living standards for most people, it is, it is, it is a very dangerous moment.
00:24:45.080 And everybody should be attempting, at such a moment, to mitigate those, those issues, to lean against those issues, where the political temptation, of course, is to fan them for extraordinary power.
00:24:58.980 And that's happening now on both sides.
00:25:00.380 So you're not voting on a set of issues, you're voting because you're gay, you're voting because you're black, you're voting because you're white, you're voting because you're a woman.
00:25:06.500 So, these are not arguments, this is not a democracy.
00:25:10.120 Well, I want us to touch identity politics because I think that is especially problematic on the left now, and it will be the reason why the left will fail to contain this problem.
00:25:19.880 But I want to stay on this point of explaining the Trump phenomenon, and it seems to me it's not, it can be fully explained, perhaps, almost without reference to who Trump is himself.
00:25:33.820 It's like he's, I mean, I've said this before, but I've been thinking of him for a very long time as a kind of evil Chauncey Gardner.
00:25:40.820 He's just like, he's a person who has stumbled into a situation that is misinterpreting his chaos as these genius manipulative gifts, but he's in some deep sense exactly as he appears, and yet he's paying absolutely no consequence for being uninformed and imbecilic and callous.
00:26:02.940 And David, you say something in your book about that it's not so much him, it's the enemies he's picked that explains his rise.
00:26:11.660 I mean, it's his counter-elitist stand across the board, which has drawn so much support.
00:26:20.580 Like everybody, I was riveted by the Michael Wolff book, of course.
00:26:24.120 And as someone who's releasing a book the week after, you feel a little bit like whoever had to go on the Golden Globe stage after Oprah.
00:26:35.220 But I think the image of Donald Trump as a drooling, imbecilic, senile-tending maniac, I mean, that, I think that's not, that can't be true.
00:26:48.020 He has gifts, and one of his gifts, one of his most important gifts.
00:26:51.620 I'll grant you one gift.
00:26:54.120 Whatever you're about to say, I'll give you for free, but there's not one more gift.
00:26:59.800 He's got the bully's instinctive ability to see the psychic weak spot in his target.
00:27:08.760 To Jeb Bush, and to Marco Rubio, and to Ted Cruz, he found that thing that, you know, for Donald Trump to call Ted Cruz a liar, I mean, it seems audacious, right?
00:27:21.700 But what he saw in Ted Cruz was that Ted Cruz is not the person.
00:27:26.980 He had constructed an identity that Ted Cruz was a very sophisticated graduate of America's, you know, most expensive educational institutions.
00:27:37.300 You know, someone who has a deep knowledge of the law.
00:27:39.640 You know, someone who's got a very modern marriage.
00:27:41.320 You know, his wife was the head of Goldman Sachs office in Texas.
00:27:46.920 This guy was not the person that he presented himself to, his evangelical voters.
00:27:52.400 He saw it.
00:27:52.840 There was a central lie at the heart of the Ted Cruz message.
00:27:55.780 And Donald Trump saw that, and he hammered that point.
00:27:58.420 And he saw that there was a kind of psychic weakness in Jeb Bush, that he could, that low energy was a way of saying, you know, I'm going to attack you, and I'm going to attack you, and I'm going to attack you.
00:28:07.120 And what you're going to do is take half a step backward and stand on your tippy toes to look taller, but you're never going to meet me.
00:28:14.200 And what he did to those opponents, he's done to the American political system.
00:28:19.420 He's found its points of vulnerability, and he has twisted them.
00:28:22.480 You know, he wants you to believe that he's popular.
00:28:25.580 He is not.
00:28:26.120 But what he is very skilled at is being able to put together something close enough, enough popular support to overwhelm the institutions and to keep that support revved up by constantly making them united in what they hate and make everybody else be divided in what they are trying to defend.
00:28:45.260 There's another simple gift he has, or rather ability, which politicians in the past in the West have not done.
00:28:58.020 Now, they've done it in code, and they've done it with different issues appealing to certain instincts, but no one's gone out there and openly said, vote for me because you hate or are afraid of black people.
00:29:12.000 Vote for me because you're afraid of foreigners coming in with different color skin.
00:29:17.080 Actually, go out there and pull.
00:29:18.760 There are levers you can pull in politics.
00:29:22.060 There are appeals you can make to people's worst lizard brain instincts.
00:29:27.160 And in most liberal democracies, every politician knows we don't do that because we know not how awful it is, but how powerful it can be.
00:29:36.440 And he just was the first person to say, I don't care.
00:29:39.900 I'm going to say these things.
00:29:40.960 I'm going to call it a shithole country.
00:29:42.780 I'm going to put that in the evil Chauncey Gardner category.
00:29:45.440 Yeah.
00:29:46.200 So any politician can do that.
00:29:47.780 You can do that every day.
00:29:48.420 We were vulnerable to somebody who just simply did not have the scruple or the political calculation.
00:29:53.220 Simple as that.
00:29:53.880 Yeah.
00:29:54.360 And then what he's done, and he has got more quick gifts than that.
00:29:58.080 He's able, actually, he did a self-hostage taking.
00:30:01.020 I mean, how is it that you get a Lindsey Graham who was one of Donald Trump's severest critics and a person who was committed to a set of political views about as far within the Republican Party as you could be away from Donald Trump,
00:30:16.440 and make him not only his defender but the person who would be one of two signers of a criminal referral of one of Donald Trump's opponents,
00:30:24.500 and break all the rules of the Senate that Lindsey Graham loves, or not the rules but the habits of the Senate that Lindsey Graham so loves,
00:30:30.720 he's a real institutional senator, that you would send this thing out without even informing, never mind consulting your Democratic counterparts.
00:30:36.320 How did he get Lindsey Graham to do that?
00:30:38.300 And the answer is, well, Donald Trump has sort of shackled the whole Republican Party to himself.
00:30:42.520 If he goes down, they all go down.
00:30:44.520 And, indeed, they sort of know that he's going to be the last man to sink because he's got a four-year term and they're all facing nemesis.
00:30:51.200 But, again, isn't that a situational truth?
00:30:54.420 That's just what happens when you have 35 percent of the country and whatever percentage of the Republican Party that is that simply will not disavow you no matter what you do.
00:31:04.920 It just seems like anyone could successfully exploit 35 percent that is unmovable and scandal-proof.
00:31:10.800 In a two-party system with an electoral college, exploiting 35 percent is actually quite tricky.
00:31:15.500 You exploit 35—I mean, Herbert Hoover got more than 35 percent of the vote in 1932.
00:31:19.880 It didn't do him a lot of good.
00:31:22.460 What Trump understood and what previous Republicans have not faced up to is that the Republican message has become,
00:31:32.460 over the past generation, but especially since the Great Recession, more and more out of sync, not only with the country, but with the Republican Party's own voters.
00:31:41.820 That was the thing that Donald Trump understood that the others did not, that your own voters don't—my joke about this, I kept saying through the cycle,
00:31:50.380 was that the Republican base was signaling they wanted more health care security, less immigration, and no more Bushes.
00:31:56.080 And what the party offered was less health care, more immigration, and one more Bush.
00:32:00.220 And they couldn't have missed it more.
00:32:02.600 And he saw that.
00:32:04.100 But what Paul Ryan and the others believe is if only we had better communications or explained it more,
00:32:09.700 or if only put a little bit more of this special sauce on it, we could somehow build out—
00:32:16.520 instead, we're not going to change our core message, but we can—in fact, that was the thing that so many people said after 2012.
00:32:21.400 We're not going to, in any way, change our core message, but we will season it.
00:32:25.160 What Donald Trump intuited was if you've got 35 percent, that's only a problem so long as you've got a political system that requires you to have a majority.
00:32:36.720 But what if I can short-circuit that?
00:32:38.180 What if I can sort of weaken the political restraints?
00:32:42.500 And you can actually govern with less than half of the country, maybe a lot less than half.
00:32:47.820 And what does this look like?
00:32:49.520 I think Americans pay too much—when they think of democratic breakdown, they pay too much attention to the spectacular example of what happened between the wars in Europe.
00:32:58.060 I sometimes try to direct people to what's happening now in Central Europe.
00:33:01.120 But one of the ways—we have—there's an example right here at home, which is what happened in the half-century after Reconstruction.
00:33:06.660 I mean, here's a statistic that when you hear about this gerrymandering in North Carolina, to keep in mind.
00:33:11.600 So in 1872, after the Civil War, the state of South Carolina had about 700,000 people, of whom 100,000 cast a vote in the presidential election of 1872.
00:33:24.180 1924, half a century later, the state's population has grown from 700,000 to 1.7 million.
00:33:29.460 The number of votes cast drops from 100,000 to 50,000.
00:33:34.320 And South Carolina was still an American state.
00:33:38.540 It had a governor.
00:33:39.280 It had a state legislature.
00:33:40.160 I think you'd have to be a pretty informed person of the state's history to say it wasn't really that much of a democracy in 1924.
00:33:48.060 But it looked like one.
00:33:49.440 It had elections.
00:33:50.540 It had newspapers.
00:33:52.340 It had courts that functioned more or less approximately fairly, at least for the white half of the population.
00:34:00.160 That could be the future.
00:34:02.880 One of the things that Donald Trump has forced—and he's forced on, I think, a lot of us on the right-hand side of the spectrum—
00:34:07.380 is a deeper encounter with the American past, things that we thought were past and buried, that were maybe just dormant and that are coming to the fore again.
00:34:17.960 But the problem is, it seems to me, and I'm not—obviously, there's no defense of Trump.
00:34:23.840 There's not a single redeeming characteristic.
00:34:26.580 But, I mean, I've tried very hard.
00:34:28.860 I've kind of prayed about this.
00:34:30.060 Because you're not supposed—as a question, you're not supposed to hate somebody quite like that who's in your mind all day.
00:34:37.300 But what I resent most about this is the psychic terror that a mentally disturbed person can impose upon you every minute of the day.
00:34:49.600 My definition of a free society is where you can spend a week without thinking about the person who's running the country.
00:34:56.640 But he's also exploited a situation, whether he did it purposely or—I don't know.
00:35:05.380 But look, we've had 30 years, for most people in this country, getting nowhere economically.
00:35:11.280 The vast majority.
00:35:11.980 They've also experienced an unprecedented—well, not quite unprecedented, but only once before this volume—of immigration from one country, primarily,
00:35:27.900 that has completely altered the demographics of this country in ways that people are, especially older generations, are simply bewildered by.
00:35:35.200 The last time that happened, we had the 1924 Immigration Act, which basically shut all immigration down.
00:35:41.980 If you are not—if you are a Democratic Party and your only response to this question, which, by the way, also must affect the wages in terms of competition,
00:35:51.320 and your only response to the situation is all of you people are racists, and we're not going to even discuss you, discuss the issue,
00:35:59.640 then I think that's why people land back with him.
00:36:04.500 And I think the Democrats' inability to listen to those white working-class voters in the middle of the country
00:36:13.220 has been an incredible—as big an enabler to his capacity as president as Hillary Clinton was an enabler to his candidacy.
00:36:22.260 Yeah, well, just to take that single issue, the idea that immigration is all upside with no casualties,
00:36:27.980 that's clearly a lie, and the fact that millions of people were suffering the actual truth of that equation,
00:36:35.680 and that's unaddressed on the left, and to—
00:36:38.320 Not just unaddressed, but bringing it up as itself an active racist.
00:36:40.540 Yeah, you're a racist if you worry about it, yes.
00:36:42.260 This is how the far left has now occupied the entire territory on questions of identity
00:36:47.380 and is actively alienating the very people we need to talk to.
00:36:53.500 And they don't think—they somehow think they can't—the people out there don't see what's going on.
00:37:00.120 They think they don't hear what they're being called.
00:37:04.320 They can't hear—they can't hear the lazy bigotry of elites about white working class.
00:37:09.360 They don't hear someone on television use the word white male as a bald insult in itself.
00:37:17.420 Right.
00:37:19.200 And that is—that reverse racism has definitely pushed people up against a wall.
00:37:26.420 I don't think—I think if there were a credible center-left party which adopted serious policies to address economic inequality
00:37:36.060 and curtail immigration, I think they could win very easily.
00:37:44.480 So how do you—I want to hear how you both view the—perhaps the rosiest future here of the left and the right.
00:37:52.500 I mean, what do conservatives and liberals do well now to put us back on our proper footing?
00:38:00.680 One of the—the beginning of answering this question is to recognize what a frozen political world we've lived in
00:38:05.400 for the past quarter century.
00:38:07.060 I mean, imagine somebody standing in the year 1990 and looking forward 25 years and backward 25 years.
00:38:13.820 Rip Van Winkle falls asleep in 1990, wakes up in 2015 and says, who's running for president?
00:38:18.860 Bush and Clinton.
00:38:20.200 Oh.
00:38:21.140 What are they talking about?
00:38:22.080 Oh, health care in Iraq.
00:38:25.180 Okay.
00:38:25.680 You go back 25 years from 1990.
00:38:27.860 You're in 1965.
00:38:29.280 The most powerful person in Washington, D.C. is the head of the AFL-CIO.
00:38:33.200 The second most powerful is J. Edgar Hoover.
00:38:35.040 There are liberal Republicans.
00:38:36.440 There are urban riots.
00:38:37.700 It's a different world.
00:38:39.280 And I think in a dynamic country like this, what happened between 1965 and 1990 in politics
00:38:44.000 is normal.
00:38:45.000 And the stasis—because when you think about how much everything else in the country changed
00:38:48.700 between 1990 and 25—there's no internet in 1990.
00:38:52.120 You know, that we're—in 1990, life expectancies are still rising for Americans.
00:38:58.460 And that—they stop rising after—it's a different world.
00:39:01.380 But the politics were frozen.
00:39:03.500 Whatever else he's done, I think Donald Trump has unfrozen those politics.
00:39:07.120 And so when you ask the beginning this question about partisanship, I think for those of us
00:39:12.060 who are of a certain age, it's going to be hard to understand, you know, those maps are
00:39:17.260 about to start moving really fast.
00:39:21.920 And a lot of—the question of who is on the right and who is on the left is going to be—and
00:39:27.020 what those things are, it's going to mean, I think, more different in 2025 from 2015 than
00:39:32.960 it meant in 2015 from 1990.
00:39:35.200 I think Andrew points to some—I mean, new things are going to become issues.
00:39:41.620 Immigration will remain a huge issue.
00:39:43.620 What is happening—you know, when we think how much we talk about wages and how little
00:39:47.600 we talk about life expectancies, but Americans are living less long.
00:39:52.480 And that—
00:39:53.080 White Americans.
00:39:54.120 White Americans.
00:39:54.940 White Americans are living less long.
00:39:56.780 But other Americans, just generally, life expectancies are moving—are improving for
00:40:02.480 non-white Americans way less quickly than they are for people in the rest of the world.
00:40:07.100 And that is in peacetime.
00:40:09.020 There are only two other places where that has ever happened, or there are only one other
00:40:12.300 place, and that is in the post-Soviet republics after the breakup of the Soviet Union.
00:40:15.740 During the Depression, American life expectancies continued to improve.
00:40:19.860 That—how does that not—I mean, it's an amazing degree of how the political world is
00:40:24.180 so insulated from everybody else that people dying earlier—
00:40:28.660 Is the opiate epidemic the main cause there?
00:40:31.480 Is that understood?
00:40:32.060 It's a main cause, but Americans are less likely to wear seatbelts than people in other
00:40:36.660 developed countries.
00:40:37.960 They eat worse.
00:40:40.420 They shoot themselves accidentally at rates dramatically higher.
00:40:48.400 They have more other kinds of accidents.
00:40:52.120 You know, you could—the drugs are certainly part of it, but they're not all of it.
00:40:57.020 And the fact that that is not this—that that is not maybe the issue uppermost in people's
00:41:03.000 mind—that that is not issue one, I find that amazing.
00:41:05.700 I think it has to become issue one.
00:41:08.380 And the problem here, though, is that the—is ideology.
00:41:11.320 That what happened is that politics became one ideology versus another, and they never
00:41:15.640 changed.
00:41:16.220 So that those of us who, for example, started out—and I still think of myself as a small-c
00:41:22.760 conservative—but those of us who started out believing that the problem of the 70s was
00:41:26.540 overweening government, too high taxes, needed to be reformed, needed to be opened up, too
00:41:32.640 many tariffs—that was a completely legitimate position, because those are the problems of
00:41:37.480 the time.
00:41:38.240 That has now run its course.
00:41:39.860 It has succeeded, and therefore now is a failure.
00:41:43.400 What has happened is that the neoliberalism that was needed in the 70s is actually poison
00:41:48.180 in 2017.
00:41:49.640 It is not addressing the issues.
00:41:51.640 And yet, Brian and the Republicans put this bill through that's entirely not about reality,
00:41:57.840 that it's entirely about ideology.
00:41:59.460 And also, people are punished, severely punished, both socially and politically, if they change
00:42:06.400 their minds.
00:42:07.000 The worst thing you can do, apparently, is to decide, this time I'm going to support
00:42:12.540 a Democrat rather than a Republican.
00:42:13.740 Then, there's no incentive for you.
00:42:16.560 No incentive for anybody in this system to come out and enter the center.
00:42:21.880 Okay, so you take the extremes.
00:42:24.160 You take the pathology of identity politics on the left that we've touched on briefly,
00:42:30.080 and you take the extreme of the right that you describe in your book, which is—there are
00:42:36.620 so many stats there, but I think one of them was that 70 percent of Republicans are still
00:42:43.060 taken in by birtherism.
00:42:44.720 They still think Obama was—
00:42:46.500 They're not sure.
00:42:47.300 —may not have been.
00:42:48.220 If you add those who are sure he wasn't to those who—
00:42:50.620 It's like 40 and 30, yeah.
00:42:51.920 Yeah.
00:42:52.120 You get up to 70, you know, yeah.
00:42:53.920 So what—this just seems discussion-proof.
00:42:57.340 So how do we move towards some kind of normalcy?
00:43:01.200 Well, remember, when you see all these statistics about what Republicans think, remember, every
00:43:05.560 week, there are fewer Republicans.
00:43:08.540 This is a—
00:43:09.860 So it's 70 percent of 70 people in the end?
00:43:12.800 You can mark that.
00:43:15.320 So it's like—it's a Friday night.
00:43:17.940 We don't want to bring up fractions.
00:43:19.860 But if the denominator is going down, you can't just look at the numerator.
00:43:26.820 The denominator's going down.
00:43:29.220 But, I mean, it's certainly true that you have this radicalized Republican world.
00:43:37.540 We are going to see, you know—
00:43:40.320 Well, let's talk about you and me, maybe, in this context.
00:43:44.500 Because—
00:43:45.180 I should say, Andrew and I have known each other.
00:43:47.940 I won't embarrass him because he's so youthful, but we've known each other a while.
00:43:52.020 And, in fact, we were just reminiscing about this.
00:43:54.800 I've known Andrew for a year longer than I've known my wife.
00:43:59.820 But my point is simply that—
00:44:02.140 I'm sorry, I'm embarrassed.
00:44:04.320 I'm embarrassed.
00:44:05.600 He doesn't look it.
00:44:07.420 Thank you, David.
00:44:08.180 But the point here is that we both started out in a certain place and changed our minds.
00:44:17.680 And my—I mean, I supported Clinton in 92, which meant I was sort of excluded, suddenly,
00:44:23.660 from any sort of respectability in conservative circles.
00:44:26.820 Then, when I turned against the Iraq War, decisively, and I apologize for my role in it, sorry to bring that subject up, but nonetheless,
00:44:35.360 then I was completely cut off.
00:44:39.040 There—the—and this is also true now increasingly, unfortunately, on the left.
00:44:43.180 If you don't sign up to the entire brigade of identity politics, you are banished.
00:44:50.820 And so the ability for us to actually—the very processes of thinking, of changing your mind, of weighing different things,
00:45:04.440 of seeing something the other side might have thought of, and openly doing that has been stigmatized.
00:45:10.700 And you are praised constantly, and all the rewards in both our intellectual and media—I'm talking about the intellectual life and media—
00:45:19.040 you are praised and rewarded, whether you're in a university or in a right-wing think tank, for your loyalty to the party line.
00:45:25.260 David actually was sacked from AEI because he actually thought that Obamacare was a perfectly decent, if flawed, possibility,
00:45:35.400 and it was not the hill for Republicans to die on.
00:45:38.880 And he was fired.
00:45:41.220 People—people are—this has become a group mentality within Washington itself,
00:45:46.980 in which no independence of thought, no independence of party, is ruled in any way legitimate.
00:45:55.200 Yeah, well, one thing that has always struck me as incredibly strange is that if you know someone's position on one topic,
00:46:02.640 like, let's say, climate change, or the link between human behavior and climate change,
00:46:07.700 you know their position with a high order of confidence on a dozen unrelated topics,
00:46:13.900 whether it's gun control—what's the relationship between climate change and gun control?
00:46:18.080 And yet, you know, you could win money all day long if you could just find a casino that would take these bets.
00:46:25.080 So.
00:46:25.560 Yeah, and the climate change thing is, look, it's just—I've always been a skeptic about any sort of left-wing cause.
00:46:37.000 Let's put it that way.
00:46:38.940 This is not a left-wing cause.
00:46:40.720 This is science, clearly, and the only—and there are obvious things we can do.
00:46:46.340 And some of them we are doing.
00:46:52.120 It's not—there's not an instant solution to this, but some of them we are doing.
00:46:55.300 I do not understand.
00:46:56.880 I just—there is some—it's psychotic that this is regarded as—
00:47:03.400 and every—there's no other civilized country in the world where a political party actually denies the existence of climate change.
00:47:11.560 No political party in the world, no right-wing political party in the world, except for this pathological, ideological, alienated, and angry fringe.
00:47:25.440 We're going to agree that there's a lot of things about the politics that are obsolete, but that linking up—that's the party system.
00:47:33.660 That's what parties do, that you have to organize different people who have different points of view to cooperate on politics.
00:47:40.620 And you can—this happens on—in any political system, that people have a set of concerns.
00:47:47.740 And so people from Los Angeles are able to collaborate with people from Boston on different kinds of issues because that's what party mechanisms do.
00:47:56.820 I don't think—and I think there are always going to be people who are more liberal and who are more conservative.
00:48:00.560 That's linked to the structure of the human brain.
00:48:03.000 There are people—and people are going to have different interests.
00:48:04.560 There are going to be people who work for the government sector.
00:48:06.260 There are people who work for the private sector.
00:48:07.660 They're going to have different interests.
00:48:08.840 The special problem we have right now is we're all supposed to be committed, first and foremost, to the rules of the game.
00:48:17.120 Rules that protect your view when my guys are in power and that protect my rights when someone else's people are in power.
00:48:26.680 And that's what's in danger right now.
00:48:28.440 I mean, I think when the day will come, I hope, when, you know, we can go back to, you know, taking out the wet mackerels and hitting each other with them over what the corporate income tax rate would be.
00:48:40.400 And I will probably agree with Paul Ryan about where the corporate income tax rate should be.
00:48:44.780 But I don't agree with him so much that I'm willing to corrode the American constitutional system in order to get my way.
00:48:51.080 I mean, 21 percent of—
00:48:52.880 Which, to my mind, is actually the definition of the conservative.
00:48:58.240 21 percent has been—
00:48:58.960 You want to conserve and keep this valuable and rare experiment in liberal democracy in the history of the world alive and healthy.
00:49:07.660 And that means adhering not just to its formalities but to its norms.
00:49:12.740 And one of those key norms is understanding that the other party or the other point of view does have a chance and should have a role in government.
00:49:20.880 And this is the genius of our system.
00:49:23.460 And Andrew spoke a little while ago about things that, you know, can you say something positive about Donald Trump?
00:49:30.600 If you'd like to continue listening to this podcast, you'll need to subscribe at SamHarris.org.
00:49:37.940 You'll get access to all full-length episodes of the Making Sense podcast and to other subscriber-only content,
00:49:43.980 including bonus episodes and AMAs and the conversations I've been having on the Waking Up app.
00:49:49.720 The Making Sense podcast is ad-free and relies entirely on listener support.
00:49:54.020 And you can subscribe now at SamHarris.org.
00:50:00.600 Thank you.
00:50:01.600 Thank you.