Podcast appearances and mentions of Francis Fukuyama

Get access to The Backroom Exclusive episodes on Patreon: ⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/OneDime.⁠In this episode of 1Dime Radio, I am joined by political theorist Benjamin St. Studebaker, a PhD at Cambridge and author of the books “The Chronic Crisis of American Democracy” and “Legitimacy in Liberal Democracies,” on we are witnessing the “end of neoliberalism” (given the ongoing tariff wars and move away from globalization in favor of right wing populsim and protectionism). Whether “Neoliberalism” was really a useful concept in the first place.  We also discuss how liberal thinkers like  Ezra Klein and Francis Fukuyama have been moving away from neoliberal economics and towards a kind of neo-Keynesianism.  In The Backroom, Benjamin and I discuss the idea of building educational “Monestaries” as an alternative to Academia and Benjamin's idea of “vulture socialism.” Become a Patron at Patreon.com/OneDime if you haven't already!Timestamps: 00:00 The Backroom Preview: Vulture Socialism and Monasteries02:55 Welcome to 1Dime Radio03:33 What was “Neoliberalism” actually?35:26 The Pivot from China42:34 Neoliberalism without China or the end of Neoliberalism? 01:06:05 Trump's Strategy with China: A Rational Wager?01:12:54 China's Unique System vs India and Other Developing Nations01:30:22 Degrowth and Third World Realities 01:58:54 Transition to the BackroomFollow Benjamin Studebaker on X: https://x.com/BMStudebakerFollow me on X: https://x.com/1DimeOfficial: Follow me on Instagram: ⁠instagram.com/1dimeman⁠Check out my main channel videos: https://www.youtube.com/@1DimeeOutro Music by Karl CaseyGive 1Dime Radio a 5-star Rating if you enjoy the show!

This is a rant video about the 'expert' 'analysis' coverage of the China-US trade war/tariff skirmish. There is no analysis or even coherent thought process here. This is basically just my train of thought about why it's a bad idea to try and predict the future. I try and relate it to Fukuyama as well, I don't know, just listen and have your own opinions."The End of History?" Francis Fukuyama: https://pages.ucsd.edu/~bslantchev/courses/pdf/Fukuyama%20-%20End%20of%20History.pdfChapters (00:00) Introduction(04:26) How is any of this relevant to tariffs?(10:48) Pro-US and Pro-China analyses are equally bad(21:10) All articles are the same info with a different conclusion#china #tariffwar #chinausrelations Buy me a coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/sinobabblepodLatest Substack post: https://sinobabble.substack.com/p/i-asked-4-china-experts-4-questions?r=bgkuvLinks to everything: https://linktree.com/sinobabbleSupport the showSign up for Buzzsprout to launch your podcasting journey: https://www.buzzsprout.com/?referrer_id=162442Subscribe to the Sinobabble Newsletter: https://sinobabble.substack.com/Support Sinobabble on Buy me a Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/Sinobabblepod

Predstavljamo Francisa Fukuyamo (1952), enega najodmevnejših sodobnih političnih mislecev. Ta ameriški politični ekonomist je še danes znan po propadli tezi o koncu zgodovine, a je skozi desetletja ostal opazen mislec o prihodnosti globalne politike, demokracije in njenih izzivov. V pogovoru z njim, ki je nastal ob avtorjevem gostovanju v Ljubljani v okviru festivala Fabula, ko mu je v slovenščini izšla druga njegova knjiga Liberalizem in njegove tegobe (Beletrina, 2025), med drugim razmišljamo o liberalizmu in njegovemu pomenu danes, javnih institucijah, vlogi identitetnih politik in civilne družbe ter nevarnostih, ki nam pretijo v prihodnje. Francis Fukuyama v Cankarjevem domu v Ljubljani, ko je gostoval na festivalu Fabula, foto Gregor Podlogar.

1989 : La chute du mur de Berlin qui était le symbole de la Guerre froide, marque le début d'une cascade d'événements qui redessine la carte du monde et transforme radicalement notre façon de vivre.En quelques mois seulement, des régimes qu'on pensait inébranlables s'effondrent comme des châteaux de cartes. L'URSS, cette superpuissance qui faisait trembler l'Occident, disparaît. Et soudain, le monde entre dans une nouvelle ère.Ce basculement est si profond que l'historien Francis Fukuyama va même jusqu'à proclamer "la fin de l'Histoire", pensant que la démocratie libérale et le capitalisme ont définitivement triomphé.Mais est-ce vraiment si simple ? Le monde post-1989 est-il celui de la paix et de la prospérité promises ?"#3ème #Terminale***T'as qui en Histoire ? * : le podcast qui te fait aimer l'Histoire ?Pour rafraîchir ses connaissances, réviser le brevet, le bac, ses leçons, apprendre et découvrir des sujets d'Histoire (collège, lycée, université)***✉️ Contact: tasquienhistoire@gmail.com*** Sur les réseaux sociaux ***Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/TasQuiEnHistoireTwitter : @AsHistoire Instagram : @tasquienhistoireTiktok : @tasquienhistoire ***Credit sonoresScorpions - Wind Of Change (Karaoke With Lyrics)@Stingray Karaokehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAPRtwEp82c 09 novembre 1989 : Le Mur de Berlin est détruit par les Allemands | Archive INA@INA Politiquehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_romprNFd70 Rostropóvich plays during fall of Berlin Wall - no comment@euronewshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqIEdv3Q3-M Track: The OneMusic by https://www.fiftysounds.com 11 septembre 2001 : L'attentat du World Trade Center à New York | Archive INA @INA Sociétéhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ70vt3FQb4 Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

O que acontece quando o mundo muda tanto em tão pouco tempo? Neste episódio, o politólogo João Pereira Coutinho e Manuel Cardoso analisam as dinâmicas que estão a redesenhar o mapa do poder global e que vão constar nos futuros manuais de História.A conversa revisita o famoso «Fim da História», de Fukuyama, que proclamou a vitória definitiva da democracia liberal após a Guerra Fria, e contrasta este otimismo com a visão mais cética de Huntington sobre o choque das civilizações.Explorando a tese de Robert Kagan sobre os americanos serem de Marte e os europeus de Vénus, questiona-se o futuro da NATO, a vulnerabilidade de uma Europa desarmada e o papel da China – essa potência de «Saturno», que parece operar num horizonte temporal bem distinto do ocidental.REFERÊNCIAS E LINKS ÚTEISALLISON, Graham, «Destinados à Guerra: Poderão a América e a China escapar à armadilha de Tucídides?» (2017, Gradiva)FASTING, Mathilde, ed., «After the End of History: Conversations with Francis Fukuyama» (2021, Georgetown)FUKUYAMA, Francis, «O Fim da História e o Último Homem» (1992, Gradiva)HUNTINGTON, Samuel, «O Choque das Civilizações e a Mudança na Ordem Mundial» (1996, Gradiva)KAGAN, Robert, «O Paraíso e o Poder: A América e a Europa na Nova Ordem Mundial» (2003, Gradiva)KAPLAN, Robert, «Waste Land: A World in Permanent Crisis» (2023, C. Hurst & Company)KUPCHAN, Charles, «Isolationism: A History of America's Efforts to Shield Itself from the World» (2020, Oxford)BIOSMANUEL CARDOSOÉ humorista e um dos autores do programa de sátira política «Isto É Gozar Com Quem Trabalha», da SIC. Faz parte do podcast «Falsos Lentos», um formato semanal de humor sobre futebol. É o autor da rubrica radiofónica diária «Bem-vindo a mais um episódio de», nas manhãs da Rádio Comercial. Contribui semanalmente para o Expresso, desde 2023, com uma crónica semanal.JOÃO PEREIRA COUTINHOProfessor do Instituto de Estudos Políticos da Universidade Católica, onde se doutorou em Ciência Política e Relações Internacionais. É autor dos livros «Conservadorismo» e «Edmund Burke – A Virtude da Consistência». Ao longo de 25 anos tem assinado artigos na imprensa nacional e é colunista do diário brasileiro «Folha de S. Paulo», o maior jornal da América Latina.  

V tokratni Kulturni panorami povzemamo nekatere odmevnejše dogodke, ki so se pretekli teden odvili v sklopu festivala Fabula. Med drugim sta v okviru teoretično-humanističnega programa festivala gostovala dva misleca – ameriški družbeno-politični mislec Francis Fukuyama in izraelski teoretik kapitalizma Noam Yuran. V nadaljevanju oddaje boste izvedeli, kdo je letošnji prejemnik Glazerjeve nagrade za življenjsko delo ter več o retrospektivi vizualne umetnice in režiserke Nataše Prosenc Stearns. Obiskali smo tudi 16. Grošljev simpozij, za konec pa se odpravljamo še v Kranj, kjer se v četrtek, 27. marca, na svetovni dan gledališča, začenja 55. Teden slovenske drame.

The celebrated American theorist, Francis Fukuyama, in his book 'The End of History and the Last Man' argued that US-style liberalism was the ultimate destination for all mankind, 'the final form of human government'.John Gray explains why he believes his prophecy has been turned on its head. 'As in the past, many human beings will live under tyrannies, theocracies, and empires of various kinds,' John writes. 'Failed states and zones of anarchy will be common. Democratic nations are likely to be rare, and often short-lived.'Producer: Adele Armstrong Sound: Peter Bosher Production coordinator: Liam Morrey Editor: Penny Murphy

In this podcast extra, acclaimed author and professor Francis Fukuyama discusses his seminal works “Trust” and “The End of History” and how they apply today, and to an era of mounting distrust and conspiracy theories in the new Trump era, in this extended conversation with MSNBC's Ari Melber. Fukuyama also analyzes Elon Musk's “oligarch” politics, and shares his passions beyond academia - woodworking and drone building.

Letošnji program 27. Festivala dokumentarnega filma bogatita dva filma o živalih. Gre za film Nočni obiskovalci, ki je posvečen biodiverziteti moljev in vešč, ter film Med volkovi, ki nam približa življenje volkov in divjih živali. V Kinu Šiška je danes mogoče obiskati dogodek ZVO.ČI.TI Akuzmonij Okta- Fuzija, v okviru katerega zvočni umetniki predstavljajo svoja nova in arhivska dela. Na festivalu Fabula danes zvečer gostuje Francis Fukuyama, politični mislec in avtor nove knjige Liberalizem in njegove tegobe. V Galeriji mesta Ptuj pa bo odprtje skupinske razstave Narava osebno. Vabljeni k poslušanju!

Francis Fukuyama is a political scientist, author, and the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. Fukuyama's notable works include The End of History and the Last Man and The Origins of Political Order. His latest book is Liberalism and Its Discontents. You can find his blog, “Frankly Fukuyama,” at Persuasion. In this week's conversation, Yascha Mounk and Francis Fukuyama discuss talks of a ceasefire in Ukraine and what this means, what the impact of Donald Trump's foreign policy might be on the Far East, and why we should be concerned by Trump's domestic policy. Please do listen and spread the word about The Good Fight. If you have not yet signed up for our podcast, please do so now by following this link on your phone. Email: podcast@persuasion.community  Website: http://www.persuasion.community Podcast production by Jack Shields, and Leonora Barclay Connect with us! Spotify | Apple | Google Twitter: @Yascha_Mounk & @joinpersuasion Youtube: Yascha Mounk LinkedIn: Persuasion Community Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, host Andrew Keen sits down with Francis Fukuyama to explore the concept of trust. Fukuyama defines it as a byproduct of virtuous behaviors like reliability, truthfulness, transparency, and keeping commitments. He describes trust as a crucial "lubricant" for social interactions and distinguishes between interpersonal and institutional trust, both of which are built through experiences of reliability and can be eroded by betrayal and disappointment. Fukuyama discusses how trust originates within families and extends to broader social circles. He also examines the global decline in trust over the past 30 years, attributing it to several key factors: the rise of technology and anonymous online interactions, higher education fostering more critical thinking, increased transparency exposing institutional failures, and growing political polarization reinforcing tribal identitities. Connecting trust to his earlier work on "the struggle for recognition, " he argues that as liberal democracies secure equal rights, individuals increasingly seek recognition for specific identities - such as religion, ethnicity, or gender - which can contribute to societal fragmentation. To address this decline, Fukuyama emphasizes the importance of governments reliably delivering on promises and providing expected services. However, he acknowledges that while competent governance is essential, it alone may not be enough to fully restore trust in institutions and society.

“The outcome of the American election will have huge implications both for American institutions and for the world,” Francis Fukuyama wrote in September of last year. Just a few weeks into his second term, with a slew of executive orders and controversial appointments, President Donald Trump seems determined to refashion the fabric of American politics and society with the aim of aggrandizing presidential power at the expense of Congress and the courts. Globally the new administration is worrying allies by withdrawing from the Paris Climate agreement and the World Health Organization, suspending foreign assistance, and imposing tariffs on key trading partners.How will these efforts impact America's political system? Will the checks and balances the framers envisioned to constrain the abuse of power hold? What impact will the foreign and domestic policies of the new Administration have on America's role and image in the world? Join Aaron David Miller as he engages in conversation with Francis Fukuyama, a nonresident scholar in the Carnegie Endowment's Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program and the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, to discuss these and other issues. 

The now infamous meeting of President Donald Trump and President Volodomyr Zelensky sent shockwaves around the western world that are strongly reverberating the heads of Europe's political elite. Now instead of helping Ukraine, America is forcing the embattled nation to the negotiating table; and expecting the Ukrainian head of state to smile for the cameras while they do it. Many in Europe are now openly wondering if the US can be trusted; and secretly planning for a world where the answer is 'no'. To give their expert takes on these historic events, Piers Morgan talks to public policy analyst Professor Jeffrey Sachs, author and political scientist Francis Fukuyama, host of 'The Crucible' Andrew Wilson, Commander of NATO Allied Land Command Ben Hodges, host of 'Part of the Problem' podcast Dave Smith and veteran and Youtuber Jake Broe. Uncensored is proudly independent and supported by: Jacked Up Fitness: Go to https://GetJackedUp.com and use code PIERS at checkout to save 10% off your entire purchase Field of Greens: Visit https://BrickHouseNutrition.com/PIERS & use code PIERS for 20% off your first order Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us a textWhat is Universal Basic Income (UBI) and why is it so popular among economists and freedom lovers relative to other types of poverty policy solutions? What does it even mean to “solve a problem” or to “learn” in the social sciences?  Join us today to explore the answers to these two questions and many more. Today, I am excited to welcome on Peter Van Doren to talk about the history of poverty policy and policy debates and the reality about universal basic income. We talk about some pretty conclusive economic studies which highlight the effect of UBI type policies and what to make of them!  Peter Van Doren is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the editor of Regulation, a quarterly magazine about applied microeconomics and economic policy issues.Want to explore more?Michael Munger on the Basic Income Guarantee, an EconTalk podcast.Thomas Koenig, Adam Smith, Francis Fukuyama, and the Indignity of the UBI, at Speaking of Smith.Bruce Meyer on Poverty, an EconTalk podcast.Scott Winship on Poverty and Welfare, a Great Antidote podcast.Clark Nardinelli, Industrial Revolution and the Standard of Living, in the Concise Encyclopedia of Economics.Jeremy Horpedahl on the Real Cost of Thriving Index, a Great Antidote Podcast.Support the showNever miss another AdamSmithWorks update.Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

How historic are Trump 2.0's first few weeks? For the veteran correspondent, Nick Bryant, the longtime BBC man in Washington DC, what the Trump regime has done in the first few weeks of his second administration is as historic as the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. It's the end of the America we haver known for the last seventy years, he says. Bryant describes Trump's rapprochement with Russia as Neville Chamberlain style appeasement and notes the dramatic shifts in U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding Ukraine and European allies. He sees Trump's actions as revealing rather than changing America's true nature. Bryant also discusses the failures of the Dems, the role of Elon Musk in the administration, and structural changes to federal institutions. Despite all the upheaval, Bryant suggests this isn't so much "goodbye to America" as a revelation of the cynically isolationist forces that were always present in American society.Here are the five KEEN ON takeaways from our conversation with Nick Bryant:* Historic Transformation: Bryant sees Trump's second term as a pivotal moment in world history, comparable to the fall of the Berlin Wall, with rapid changes in global alliances and particularly in America's relationship with Russia, which he characterizes as "appeasement."* Democratic Party Crisis: He analyzes how the Democrats' failures stemmed from multiple factors - Biden's delayed exit, Kamala Harris's weak candidacy, and the lack of time to find a stronger replacement. While Trump's victory was significant, Bryant notes it wasn't a landslide.* Elon Musk's Unexpected Role: An unforeseen development Bryant didn't predict in his book was Musk's prominent position in Trump's second administration, describing it as almost a "co-presidency" following Trump's assassination attempt and Musk's subsequent endorsement of Trump.* Federal Government Transformation: Bryant observes that Trump's dismantling of federal institutions goes beyond typical Republican small-government approaches, potentially removing not just bureaucratic waste but crucial expertise and institutional knowledge.* Trump as Revealer, Not Changer: Perhaps most significantly, Bryant argues that Trump hasn't changed America but rather revealed its true nature - arguing that authoritarianism, political violence, and distrust of big government have always been present in American history. FULL TRANSCRIPT Andrew Keen: Hello, everybody. About eight months ago, we had a great show with the BBC's former Washington correspondent, Nick Bryant. His latest book, "The Forever War: America's Unending Conflict with Itself," predicted much of what's happening in the United States now. When you look at the headlines this week about the U.S.-Russia relationship changing in a head-spinning way, apparently laying the groundwork for ending the Ukrainian war, all sorts of different relations and tariffs and many other things in this new regime. Nick is joining us from Sydney, Australia, where he now lives. Nick, do you miss America?Nick Bryant: I covered the first Trump administration and it felt like a 25/8 job, not just 24/7. Trump 2.0 feels even more relentless—round-the-clock news forever. We're checking our phones to see what has happened next. People who read my book wouldn't be surprised by how Donald Trump is conducting his second term. But some things weren't on my bingo card, like Trump suggesting a U.S. takeover of Gaza. The rapprochement with Putin, which we should look on as an act of appeasement after his aggression in Ukraine, was very easy to predict.Andrew Keen: That's quite a sharp comment, Nick—an act of appeasement equivalent to Neville Chamberlain's umbrella.Nick Bryant: It was ironic that J.D. Vance made his speech at the Munich Security Conference. Munich was where Neville Chamberlain secured the Munich Agreement, which was seen as a terrible act of appeasement towards Nazi Germany. This moment feels historic—I would liken it to the fall of the Berlin Wall. We're seeing a complete upending of the world order.Back at the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, we were talking about the end of history—Francis Fukuyama's famous thesis suggesting the triumph of liberal democracy. Now, we're talking about the end of America as we've known it since World War II. You get these Berlin Wall moments like Trump saying there should be a U.S. takeover of Gaza. J.D. Vance's speech in Munich ruptures the transatlantic alliance, which has been the basis of America's global preeminence and European security since World War II.Then you've seen what's happened in Saudi Arabia with the meeting between the Russians and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, completely resetting relations between Washington and Moscow. It's almost as if the invasions of Ukraine never happened. We're back to the situation during the Bush administration when George W. Bush famously met Vladimir Putin, looked into his soul, and gave him a clean bill of health. Things are moving at a hurtling pace, and it seems we're seeing the equivalent of a Berlin Wall tumbling every couple of days.Andrew Keen: That's quite dramatic for an experienced journalist like yourself to say. You don't exaggerate unnecessarily, Nick. It's astonishing. Nobody predicted this.Nick Bryant: When I first said this about three weeks ago, I had to think long and hard about whether the historical moments were equivalent. Two weeks on, I've got absolutely no doubt. We're seeing a massive change. European allies of America are now not only questioning whether the United States is a reliable ally—they're questioning whether the United States is an ally at all. Some are even raising the possibility that nations like Germany, the UK, and France will soon look upon America as an adversary.J.D. Vance's speech was very pointed, attacking European elitism and what he saw as denial of freedom of speech in Europe by governments, but not having a single word of criticism for Vladimir Putin. People are listening to the U.S. president, vice president, and others like Marco Rubio with their jaws on the ground. It's a very worrying moment for America's allies because they cannot look across the Atlantic anymore and see a president who will support them. Instead, they see an administration aligning itself with hard-right and far-right populist movements.Andrew Keen: The subtitle of your book was "America's Unending Conflict with Itself: The History Behind Trump in Advance." But America now—and I'm talking to you from San Francisco, where obviously there aren't a lot of Trump fans or J.D. Vance fans—seems in an odd, almost surreal way to be united. There were protests on Presidents Day earlier this week against Trump, calling him a tyrant. But is the thesis of your book about the forever war, America continually being divided between coastal elites and the hinterlands, Republicans and Democrats, still manifesting itself in late February 2025?Nick Bryant: Trump didn't win a landslide victory in the election. He won a significant victory, a decisive victory. It was hugely significant that he won the popular vote, which he didn't manage to do in 2016. But it wasn't a big win—he didn't win 50% of the popular vote. Sure, he won the seven battleground states, giving the sense of a massive victory, but it wasn't massive numerically.The divides in America are still there. The opposition has melted away at the moment with sporadic protests, but nothing really major. Don't be fooled into thinking America's forever wars have suddenly ended and Trump has won. The opposition will be back. The resistance will be back.I remember moments in the Obama administration when it looked like progressives had won every battle in America. I remember the day I went to South Carolina, to the funeral of the pastor killed in that terrible shooting in Charleston. Obama broke into "Amazing Grace"—it was almost for the first time in front of a black audience that he fully embraced the mantle of America's first African-American president. He flew back to Washington that night, and the White House was bathed in rainbow colors because the Supreme Court had made same-sex marriage legal across the country.It seemed in that moment that progressives were winning every fight. The Supreme Court also upheld the constitutionality of Obamacare. You assumed America's first black president would be followed by America's first female president. But what we were seeing in that summer of 2015 was actually the conservative backlash. Trump literally announced his presidential bid the day before that awful Charleston shooting. You can easily misread history at this moment. Sure, Trump looks dominant now, but don't be fooled. It wouldn't surprise me at all if in two years' time the Republicans end up losing the House of Representatives in the congressional midterm elections.Andrew Keen: When it comes to progressives, what do you make of the Democratic response, or perhaps the lack of response, to the failure of Kamala Harris? The huge amount of money, the uninspiring nature of her campaign, the fiasco over Biden—were these all accidental events or do they speak of a broader crisis on the left amongst progressives in America?Nick Bryant: They speak of both. There were really big mistakes made by the Democrats, not least Joe Biden's decision to contest the election as long as he did. It had become pretty clear by the beginning of 2024 that he wasn't in a fit state to serve four more years or take on the challenge of Donald Trump.Biden did too well at two critical junctures. During the midterm elections in 2022, many people predicted a red wave, a red tsunami. If that had happened, Biden would have faced pressure to step aside for an orderly primary process to pick a successor. But the red wave turned into a red ripple, and that persuaded Biden he was the right candidate. He focused on democracy, put democracy on the ballot, hammered the point about January 6th, and decided to run.Another critical juncture was the State of the Union address at the beginning of 2024. Biden did a good job, and I think that allayed a lot of concerns in the Democratic Party. Looking back on those two events, they really encouraged Biden to run again when he should never have done so.Remember, in 2020, he intimated that he would be a bridge to the next generation. He probably made a mistake then in picking Kamala Harris as his vice presidential candidate because he was basically appointing his heir. She wasn't the strongest Democrat to go up against Donald Trump—it was always going to be hard for a woman of color to win the Rust Belt. She wasn't a particularly good candidate in 2020 when she ran; she didn't even make it into 2020. She launched her campaign in Oakland, and while it looked good at the time, it became clear she was a poor candidate.Historical accidents, the wrong candidate, a suffering economy, and an America that has always been receptive to someone like Trump—all those factors played into his victory.Andrew Keen: If you were giving advice to the Democrats as they lick their wounds and begin to think about recovery and fighting the next battles, would you advise them to shift to the left or to the center?Nick Bryant: That's a fascinating question because you could argue it both ways. Do the Democrats need to find a populist of the left who can win back those blue-collar voters that have deserted the Democratic Party? This is a historical process that's been going on for many years. Working-class voters ditched the Democrats during the Reagan years and the Nixon years. Often race is part of that, often the bad economy is part of that—an economy that's not working for the working class who can't see a way to map out an American dream for themselves.You could argue for a left-wing populist, or you could argue that history shows the only way Democrats win the White House is by being centrist and moderate. That was true of LBJ, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton—all Southerners, and that wasn't a coincidence. Southern Democrats came from the center of the party. Obama was a pragmatic, centrist candidate. Kennedy was a very pragmatic centrist who tried to bring together the warring tribes of the Democratic Party.Historically, you could argue Democrats need to move to the center and stake out that ground as Trump moves further to the right and the extremes. But what makes it harder to say for sure is that we're in a political world where a lot of the old rules don't seem to apply.Andrew Keen: We don't quite know what the new rules are or if there are any rules. You describe this moment as equivalent in historic terms to the fall of the Berlin Wall or perhaps 9/11. If we reverse that lens and look inwards, is there an equivalent historical significance? You had an interesting tweet about Doge and the attempt in some people's eyes for a kind of capture of power by Elon Musk and the replacement of the traditional state with some sort of almost Leninist state. What do you make of what's happening within the United States in domestic politics, particularly Musk's role?Nick Bryant: We've seen American presidents test the Constitution before. Nobody in the modern era has done it so flagrantly as Donald Trump, but Nixon tried to maximize presidential powers to the extent that he broke the law. Nixon would have been found guilty in a Senate trial had that impeachment process continued. Of course, he was forced to resign because a delegation of his own party drove down Pennsylvania Avenue and told him he had to go.You don't get that with the Republican Party and Donald Trump—they've fallen behind him. FDR was commonly described as an American dictator. H.L. Mencken wrote that America had a Caesar, a pharaoh. Woodrow Wilson was maximalist in his presidential powers. Abraham Lincoln was the great Constitution breaker, from trashing the First Amendment to exceeding his powers with the Emancipation Proclamation. Thomas Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase was unconstitutional—he needed congressional approval, which he didn't have.There's a long history of presidents breaking rules and Americans being okay with that. Lincoln has never been displaced from his historical throne of grace. FDR is regarded as one of the great presidents. What sets this moment apart is that constraints on presidents traditionally came from the courts and their own political parties. We're not seeing that with Donald Trump.Andrew Keen: What about the cultural front? There's talk of Trump's revenge, taking over the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., revenge against traditional scientists, possibly closing some universities. Is this overdramatic, or is Trump really taking revenge for what happened between 2020 and 2024 when he was out of power?Nick Bryant: Trump is in a vengeful mood—we always thought Trump 2.0 would be a project of vengeance. Republican presidents have always thought parts of the administrative state work against them, and Trump is dismantling it at warp speed. Elon Musk is going into various government departments acting like he's heading a hostile takeover of the federal government.Reagan launched a rhetorical assault on federal government, which was really a creation of the New Deal years under FDR. That period saw massive expansion of federal government into people's lives with Social Security and the welfare net. We haven't seen this kind of assault on federal government since then. Trump is also trying to dismantle what he regards as America's cultural establishment, which he sees as too white, too elitist, too intellectual. He's trying to remold America, its government, and cultural institutions in his own image.Andrew Keen: You've mentioned Reagan. I came to the U.S. like you—you came as a grad student to study American history. I came in the '80s and remember the hysteria at UC Berkeley over Reagan—that he would blow up the world, that he was clueless, a Hollywood actor with no right to be in politics. Is it conceivable that Trump could be just another version of Reagan? In spite of all this hysteria, might this second Trump regime actually be successful?Nick Bryant: You can't rule out that possibility. The mistake made about Reagan was seeing him as a warmonger when he really wanted to be a peacemaker. That was the point of ending the Cold War—he wanted to win it, but through gambles on people like Gorbachev and diplomatic moves his advisors warned against.There are analogies to Trump. I don't think he's a warmonger or wants to send U.S. troops into countries. He's described some surprising imperial ambitions like taking over Greenland, though Harry Truman once wanted that too. Trump wants to make peace, but the problem is on what terms. Peace in Ukraine, in Trump's view, means a massive win for Vladimir Putin and the sidelining of the Ukrainian people and America's European allies.There wasn't a big cost to Reagan's peacemaking—the European alliance stayed intact, he tinkered with government but didn't go after Social Security. The cost of Trump is the problem.Andrew Keen: The moral cost or the economic cost?Nick Bryant: Both. One thing that happened with Reagan was the opening of big disparities in income and wealth in American society. That was a big factor in Donald Trump's success—the paradox of how this billionaire from New York became the hero of the Rust Belt. When the gulf between executive pay and shop floor pay became massive, it was during the Reagan years.You see the potential of something similar now. Trump is supercharging an economy that looks like it will favor the tech giants and the world's richest man, Elon Musk. You end up worsening the problem you were arguably setting out to solve.You don't get landslides anymore in American politics—the last president to win 40 states was George Herbert Walker Bush. Reagan in '84 won 49 out of 50 states, almost getting a clean sweep except for Mondale's home state of Minnesota. I don't think Trump will be the kind of unifying president that Reagan was. There was a spontaneity and optimism about Reagan that you don't see with Trump.Andrew Keen: Where are the divisions? Where is the great threat to Trump coming from? There was a story this week that Steve Bannon called Elon Musk a parasitic illegal immigrant. Is it conceivable that the biggest weakness within the Trump regime will come from conflict between people like Bannon and Musk, the nationalists and the internationalist wing of the MAGA movement?Nick Bryant: That's a fascinating question. There doesn't seem to be much external opposition at the moment. The Democrats are knocked out or taking the eight count in boxing terms, getting back on their feet and taking as long as they can to get their gloves up. There isn't a leader in the Democratic movement who has anywhere near Trump's magnetism or personal power to take him on.Maybe the opposition comes from internal divisions and collapse of the Trump project. The relationship with Elon Musk was something I didn't anticipate in my book. After that assassination attempt, Musk endorsed Trump in a big way, put his money behind him, started offering cash prizes in Pennsylvania. Having lived at Mar-a-Lago during the transition with a cottage on the grounds and now an office in the White House—I didn't anticipate his role.Many people thought Trump wouldn't put up with somebody who overshadows him or gets more attention, but that relationship hasn't failed yet. I wonder if that speaks to something different between Trump 2.0 and 1.0. Trump's surrounded by loyalists now, but at 78 years old, I think he wanted to win the presidency more than he wanted the presidency itself. I wonder if he's happy to give more responsibility to people like Musk who he thinks will carry out his agenda.Andrew Keen: You've been described as the new Alistair Cooke. Cooke was the father of Anglo-American journalism—his Letter from America was an iconic show, the longest-running show in radio history. Cooke was always very critical of what he called the big daddy state in Washington, D.C., wasn't a fan of large government. What's your take on Trump's attack on large government in D.C.? Is there anything in it? You spent a lot of time in DC. Are these agencies full of fat and do they need to be cut?Nick Bryant: Cutting fat out of Washington budgets is one of the easy things—they're bloated, they get all these earmarks, they're full of pork. There's always been a bloated federal bureaucracy, and there's a long historical tradition of suspicion of Washington going back to the founding. That's why the federal system emerged with so much power vested in the states.Reagan's revolution was based on dismantling the New Deal government. He didn't get that far in that project, but rhetorically he shifted America's views about government. He emphasized that government was the problem, not the solution, for four decades. When Bill Clinton became president, he had to make this big ideological concession to Reaganism and deliver Reaganite lines like "the era of big government is over."The concern right now is that they're not just getting rid of fat—they're getting rid of expertise and institutional knowledge. They're removing people who may be democratic in their thinking or not on board with the Trump revolution, but who have extensive experience in making government work. In moments of national crisis, conservative ideologues tend to become operational liberals. They rely on government in disasters, pandemics, and economic crises to bail out banks and industries.Conservatives have successfully planted in many Americans' heads that government is the enemy. Hillary Clinton saw a classic sign in 2006—a protester carrying a sign saying "get your government hands off my Medicare." Well, Medicare is a government program. People need government, expertise, and people in Washington who know what they're doing. You're not just getting rid of waste—you're getting rid of institutional knowledge.Andrew Keen: One of the more colorful characters in these Trump years is RFK Jr. There was an interesting piece in the National Review about RFK Jr. forcing the left to abandon the Kennedy legacy. Is there something symbolically historical in this shift from RFK Sr. being an icon on the left to RFK Jr. being an icon on the libertarian right? Does it speak of something structural that's changed in American political culture?Nick Bryant: Yes, it does, and it speaks to how America is perceived internationally. JFK was always seen as this liberal champion, but he was an arch pragmatist, never more so than on civil rights. My doctoral thesis and first book were about tearing down that myth about Kennedy.The Kennedys did inspire international respect. The Kennedy White House seemed to be a place of rationality, refinement, and glamor. JFK embodied what was great about America—its youth, dynamism, vision. When RFK was assassinated in California, weeks after MLK's assassination, many thought that sense of America was being killed off too. These were people who inspired others internationally to enter public service. They saw America as a beacon on a hill.RFK Jr. speaks of a different, toxic American exceptionalism. People look at figures like RFK Jr. and wonder how he could possibly end up heading the American Health Department. He embodies what many people internationally reject about America, whereas JFK and RFK embodied what people loved, admired, and wanted to emulate.Andrew Keen: You do a show now on Australian television. What's the view from Australia? Are people as horrified and disturbed in Australia as they are in Europe about what you've called a historic change as profound as the fall of the Berlin Wall—or maybe rather than the fall of the Berlin Wall, it's the establishment of a new kind of Berlin Wall?Nick Bryant: One of Australia's historic diplomatic fears is abandonment. They initially looked to Britain as a security guarantor in the early days of Australian Federation when Australia became a modern country in 1901. After World War II, they realized Britain couldn't protect them, so they looked to America instead. America has underwritten Australia's security since World War II.Now many Australians realize that won't be the case anymore. Australia entered into the AUKUS deal with Britain and America for nuclear submarine technology, which has become the basis of Australia's defense. There's fear that Trump could cancel it on a whim. They're currently battling over steel and aluminum tariffs. Anthony Albanese, the center-left prime minister, got a brief diplomatic reprieve after talking with Trump last week.A country like Australia, much like Britain, France, or Germany, cannot look on Trump's America as a reliable ally right now. That's concerning in a region where China increasingly throws its weight around.Andrew Keen: Although I'm guessing some people in Australia would be encouraged by Trump's hostility towards China.Nick Bryant: Yes, that's one area where they see Trump differently than in Europe because there are so many China hawks in the Trump administration. That gives them some comfort—they don't see the situation as directly analogous to Europe. But it's still worrying. They've had presidents who've been favorable towards Australia over the years. Trump likes Australia partly because America enjoys a trade surplus with Australia and he likes Greg Norman, the golfer. But that only gives you a certain measure of security.There is concern in this part of the world, and like in Europe, people are questioning whether they share values with a president who is aligning himself with far-right parties.Andrew Keen: Finally, Nick, your penultimate book was "When America Stopped Being Great: A History of the Present." You had an interesting tweet where you noted that the final chapter in your current book, "The Forever War," is called "Goodbye America." But the more we talk, whether or not America remains great is arguable. If anything, this conversation is about "hello" to a new America. It's not goodbye America—if anything, America's more powerful, more dominant, shaping the world more in the 2020s than it's ever done.Nick Bryant: It's goodbye to the America we've known for the last 70 years, but not goodbye to America itself. That's one of the arguments of the book—Trump is far more representative of the true America than many international observers realize. If you look at American history through a different lens, Trump makes perfect sense.There's always been an authoritarian streak, a willingness to fall for demagogues, political violence, deep mistrust of government, and rich people making fortunes—from the robber barons of the late 19th century to the tech barons of the 21st century. It's goodbye to a certain America, but the America that Trump presides over now is an America that's always been there. Trump hasn't changed America—he's revealed it.Andrew Keen: Well, one thing we can say for sure is it's not goodbye to Nick Bryant. We'll get you back on the show. You're one of America's most perceptive and incisive observers, even if you're in Australia now. Thank you so much.Nick Bryant: Andrew, it's always a pleasure to be with you. I still love the country deeply—my fascination has always been born of great affection.Nick Bryant is the author of The Forever War: American's Unending Conflict with Itself and When America Stopped Being Great, a book that Joe Biden keeps in the Oval Office. He was formerly one of the BBC's most senior foreign correspondents, with postings in Washington DC, New York, South Asia and Australia. After covering the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden, he left the BBC in 2021, and now lives in Sydney with his wife and children. Nick studied history at Cambridge and has a doctorate in American history from Oxford.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Does human nature push us towards democracy or autocracy? Renowned political scientist Francis Fukuyama, author of The End of History and The Last Man, joins Preet to discuss attacks on the civil service, the crisis of trust in America, and where history is now headed.  Then, Preet answers questions about the iconic “Princess Bride,” his transition from the U.S. Attorneys Office to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and whether we're in the midst of a constitutional crisis. You can now watch this episode! Head to CAFE's Youtube channel and subscribe.  Show notes and a transcript of the episode are available on our website.  Have a question for Preet? Ask @PreetBharara on Threads, or Twitter with the hashtag #AskPreet. Email us at staytuned@cafe.com, or call 669-247-7338 to leave a voicemail. Stay Tuned with Preet is brought to you by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Weeeeeey amigos! Acompáñenos el día de hoy con la historia del fin del fin de la historia, si...asi tan loco como se escucha. ¿Se acabó la historia? En este episodio les vamos a echar el choro sobre la polémica teoría de Francis Fukuyama, quien en los 90s aseguró que la democracia liberal era el punto final de la evolución política de la humanidad. ¿Acertó o se equivocó por completo? Descúbrelo aquí con sus pannas de confianza. ►Síguenos en Instagramhttps://www.instagram.com/historiaparatontospodcast►Síguenos en Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/historiaparatontos_podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Kate Schecter, CEO of World Neighbors, returns to the show and reveals how empowering local communities leads to long-term self-sufficiency in developing economies. She explains that roads connecting isolated communities to local markets can massively improve opportunities. She also explains that even modest interventions, like access to municipal water, can have profound impacts. From disaster preparedness in Indonesia to sustainable farming in Africa, Kate illustrates how World Neighbors helps communities build resilience.If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for Gene, please email him at contact@economicsexplored.com.About this episode's guest: Dr Kate SchecterKate Schecter, Ph.D., joined WN as President and Chief Executive Officer in June, 2014. Dr. Schecter is responsible for managing World Neighbors' programs and operations in 14 countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean. In her previous position, she worked for the American International Health Alliance (AIHA) for 14 years.  As a Senior Program Officer at AIHA, she had responsibility for managing health partnerships throughout Eurasia and Central and Eastern Europe.  Through her work with over 35 partnerships addressing healthcare and treatment, she has extensive experience successfully implementing AIHA's health partnership model.From 1997 to 2000, Dr. Schecter worked as a consultant for the World Bank specializing in healthcare reform and child welfare issues in Eurasia and Eastern Europe.  She taught political science at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor for four years (1993-1997).  She has written extensively about healthcare in post-Soviet states, and has made three documentary films for PBS. Over the past eight years at World Neighbors, Dr. Schecter has authored or co-authored 21 articles about the challenges of international development in very poor rural countries, the impact of climate change, and how to help alleviate mass migration through effective international aid.Dr. Schecter holds a Ph.D. in political science from Columbia University and an M.A. in Soviet Studies from Harvard University. She is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and served on the Board of Children's National Medical Center in Washington, D.C. from 2010 to 2018.Timestamps for EP273Introduction (0:00)World Neighbors' Geographical Reach and Recent Developments (2:34)Improving Climate Resilience in Agriculture (6:03)Disaster Preparedness and Community-Based Approaches (9:57)Connecting Communities with National and Regional Administrations (14:05)Funding and Operational Efficiency (23:21)Impact and Future Plans (27:08)Conclusion and Final Thoughts (29:24)TakeawaysInfrastructure can be transformative – Building a simple road or bridge can unlock market access for rural farmers, dramatically improving incomes and food security.Local savings and credit groups empower communities – These groups help farmers and entrepreneurs access capital for investments without relying on exploitative lenders.Disaster preparedness saves lives – Teaching communities to plan for floods, earthquakes, and other disasters helps them recover quickly and with fewer casualties.Indigenous crops can boost resilience – Reviving traditional drought-resistant crops helps communities adapt to climate change and maintain food security.Links relevant to the conversationKate's previous appearance on the show:https://economicsexplored.com/2022/05/23/economic-development-through-savings-and-credit-groups-w-world-neighbors-ceo-kate-schecter-ep140/World Neighbor's website:https://www.wn.org/Francis Fukuyama's book Trust:https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Social-Virtues-Creation-Prosperity/dp/0029109760Lumo Coffee promotion10% of Lumo Coffee's Seriously Healthy Organic Coffee.Website: https://www.lumocoffee.com/10EXPLOREDPromo code: 10EXPLORED Full transcripts are available a few days after the episode is first published at www.economicsexplored.com.

Francis Fukuyama makes a triumphant return to The Remnant to discuss the current state of liberalism, the flaws with emerging sects of postliberalism, and the rapidly deteriorating expectations of normalcy for the second Trump administration. Plus: reactionary horseshoe theory, the new American oligarchy, and the risks of Trumpian expansionism. Show Notes: —Francis' work on Substack —The Patrick Deneen article in question —Yascha Mounk and Francis Fukuyama talk Trump 2.0 The Remnant is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including Jonah's G-File newsletter, weekly livestreams, and other members-only content—click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What are the consequences of President Trump’s executive orders after January 20th? Why is Trump a threat to American bureaucracy? Will the bromance between Musk and Trump break? What will happen in Ukraine?Professor Francis Fukuyama, in conversation with Mathilde FastingSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

ELON MUSK COME BERLUSCONI: La Profezia che Spaventa la Politica Mondiale!Elon Musk sta seguendo le orme di Silvio Berlusconi? Francis Fukuyama lo accusa di voler dominare la politica con il controllo dell'informazione. Scopri la sua profezia inquietante sul futuro della democrazia.#ElonMusk #Trump #Fukuyama #Berlusconi #PoliticaUSA #Democrazia #XTwitter #Oligarchia #SocialMedia #Elezioni

Yascha Mounk and Francis Fukuyama discuss the first few days of the Trump administration–and what it means for domestic and foreign policy. Francis Fukuyama is a political scientist, author, and the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. Fukuyama's notable works include The End of History and the Last Man and The Origins of Political Order. His latest book is Liberalism and Its Discontents. You can find his blog, Frankly Fukuyama, at Persuasion. In this week's conversation, Yascha Mounk and Francis Fukuyama discuss what the flurry of executive orders really means; how the civil service needs to change; Trump's plans for Greenland; and what China will do next. This transcript has been condensed and lightly edited for clarity. Please do listen and spread the word about The Good Fight. If you have not yet signed up for our podcast, please do so now by following this link on your phone. Email: podcast@persuasion.community  Website: http://www.persuasion.community Podcast production by Jack Shields, and Brendan Ruberry Connect with us! Spotify | Apple | Google Twitter: @Yascha_Mounk & @joinpersuasion Youtube: Yascha Mounk LinkedIn: Persuasion Community Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is a crossover episode of the Business Government HourJoin host Michael Keegan for a Special Edition of The Business of Government Hour – The National Academy of Public Administration FALL MEETING SERIES. This third in a series of conversations exploring the key challenges facing democratic institutions and the role of public service reform in tackling these challenges. Michael welcomes  Francis Fukuyama on this Special Edition of The Business of Government Hour.Links:Visit The Business Government Hour homepageMusic Credits: Sea Breeze by Vlad Gluschenko | https://soundcloud.com/vgl9Music promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.comCreative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en_

As the 21st century enters its 25th year, The Sunday Magazine's Pete Mitton speaks with a range of big thinkers about what they see as the defining features of the 2000s so far. Historians Margaret MacMillan and Anne Applebaum, political scientist Francis Fukuyama, global affairs expert Janice Stein, and more share their reflections on the century's first quarter to this point, and explore what lessons this period may hold for the next 25 years.

No book in the series gets more hate than Feast. That's understandable--the earlier books comprise arguably the greatest epic fantasy trilogy of all time. Faced with writing a sequel to that, GRRM plotted an entirely different course--Feast sacrifices epic action for internal struggle. The original trilogy is about heroic characters remaking the world around them. In Feast, we're navigating internal landscapes. The transformation is personal. Consider these lines from the book: Have you decided what you are? The question is, who are you? Girl or boy, we fight our battles, but the gods let us choose our weapons. What is dead may never die but rises again stronger. What changed? I died in the Battle of the Trident. Who are you? No one. The earlier books contained many great ideas and insights. Feast goes a step further and shows how you can apply those ideas to enrich your own life. Another big difference is that Feast emphasizes and highlights the social context in which we operate. As a result, it offers a much more nuanced and thoughtful discussion of personal choice and responsibility than does the original trilogy. Feast also differs from the earlier books because it's the product of a different cultural moment. The earlier books were conceived and written in the 1990s, when political scientists were contemplating "the end of history." Feast is written after 9/11 and Bush/Gore, when our understanding of democracy and our place in the world has been massively shaken. The point is, Feast is not at all like the original trilogy--it's even better. Mentioned during pod: Original, correct Margaret Thatcher quote with context: https://www.loc.gov/programs/poetry-and-literature/poet-laureate/poet-laureate-projects/poetry-180/all-poems/item/poetry-180-133/the-summer-day/ Francis Fukuyama and the end of history: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24027184 The cost and complexity of "greed is good": https://www.chicagobooth.edu/review/moral-ambivalence-gordon-gekko GRRM against voter suppression: https://grrm.livejournal.com/287215.html Song of Myself (I contain multitudes):  ⁠https://poets.org/poem/song-myself-51⁠ The Summer Day (one precious life): ⁠https://www.loc.gov/programs/poetry-and-literature/poet-laureate/poet-laureate-projects/poetry-180/all-poems/item/poetry-180-133/the-summer-day/⁠

On the GZERO World Podcast, we're taking a look at some of the top geopolitical risks of 2025. This looks to be the year that the G-Zero wins. As longtime listeners will know, a G-Zero world is an era when no one power or group of powers is both willing and able to drive a global agenda and maintain international order. We've been living with this lack of international leadership for nearly a decade now. But in 2025, the problem will get a lot worse. We are heading back to the law of the jungle. A world where the strongest do what they can while the weakest are condemned to suffer what they must. And the former—whether states, companies, or individuals—can't be trusted to act in the interest of those they have power over. It's not a sustainable trajectory. But it's the one we're on. Joining Ian Bremmer  to peer into this cloudy crystal ball is renowned Stanford political scientist Francis Fukuyama.Host: Ian BremmerGuest: Francis Fukuyama Subscribe to the GZERO World with Ian Bremmer Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.

On the GZERO World Podcast, we're taking a look at some of the top geopolitical risks of 2025. This looks to be the year that the G-Zero wins. As longtime listeners will know, a G-Zero world is an era when no one power or group of powers is both willing and able to drive a global agenda and maintain international order. We've been living with this lack of international leadership for nearly a decade now. But in 2025, the problem will get a lot worse. We are heading back to the law of the jungle. A world where the strongest do what they can while the weakest are condemned to suffer what they must. And the former—whether states, companies, or individuals—can't be trusted to act in the interest of those they have power over. It's not a sustainable trajectory. But it's the one we're on. Joining Ian Bremmer  to peer into this cloudy crystal ball is renowned Stanford political scientist Francis Fukuyama.Host: Ian BremmerGuest: Francis Fukuyama Subscribe to the GZERO World with Ian Bremmer Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.

In a tour d'horizon, Yascha and Frank discuss the fall of Assad, the rise of China, the crisis in Europe, and what awaits the United States under Trump. Francis Fukuyama is a political scientist, author, and the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. Among Fukuyama's notable works are The End of History and the Last Man and The Origins of Political Order. His latest book is Liberalism and Its Discontents. He is also the author of the “Frankly Fukuyama” column, carried forward from American Purpose, at Persuasion. He is a member of Persuasion's Board of Advisors. In this week's conversation, Yascha and Frank discuss Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy's flawed plans for reforming the federal bureaucracy (and how to actually reform it); why crises in France and Germany bode ill for Europe; and what the public reaction to the assassination of Brian Thompson says about healthcare in America. This transcript has been condensed and lightly edited for clarity. Please do listen and spread the word about The Good Fight. If you have not yet signed up for our podcast, please do so now by following this link on your phone. Email: podcast@persuasion.community  Website: http://www.persuasion.community Podcast production by Jack Shields, and Brendan Ruberry Connect with us! Spotify | Apple | Google Twitter: @Yascha_Mounk & @joinpersuasion Youtube: Yascha Mounk LinkedIn: Persuasion Community Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

特朗普 2.0 时代，不同政治光谱的美国大学生们有怎样的反应？要进行一场理性的对话又会有多艰难？ 此前第 322 期节目，我们邀请来了正在波士顿高校教书的仲树老师，她和我们分享了自己对当下美国年轻人是如何看待与参与政治的观察及思考。今天的节目则是仲树老师的一期返场节目，我们一起来讨论：大学校园的反应与八年前特朗普的初次胜选有何区别？不同流派间的政治对话是如何展开的？为什么修宪可能不会是一个解决美国社会问题的好办法？ 或许不用质疑的一点就是，当下的我们的确正站在一个缓缓展开的新世界的门口，不妨带着开放的心态参与我们的讨论，也参与到写满变数的未来中去吧。 关于kimi Kimi.ai - 会推理解析，能深度思考的 AI 助手。 点击链接 (https://sourl.cn/UzegXS)，体验 kimi 最新视觉思考模型 k1。 本期人物 徐涛，「声动活泼」联合创始人 仲树，「独树不成林」主播，政治哲学博士候选人 主要话题 [02:02] 大选结果出来后的美国校园是何反应 [19:35] 美国的社会主义者是如何批评民主党的 [28:26] 美国零零后为什么对自由主义的命运并不关心 [38:23] 特朗普可能会是一个「建设型」总统吗 [48:55] 美国年轻人对自己的国家体制还有信心吗 Untitled https://media24.fireside.fm/file/fireside-uploads-2024/images/8/8dd8a56f-9636-415a-8c00-f9ca6778e511/NYmwBQUl.png 声音时光胶囊五周年特别活动 下周四，2024 声音时光胶囊会准时和大家见面，不仅如此，我们还将举办声音胶囊五周年线下活动。 我们的制作人们会在现场，分享从 2020 年到 2024 年我们这些年制作胶囊的幕后。我们想邀请大家来到现场，用这种特别的方式告别 2024。每一位到场的朋友还会收到一枚我们制作的 NFC 实体珍藏版声音时光胶囊。 - 活动时间：12.28 周六 15：00-16：30 - 活动地点：北京泰康美术馆（朝阳区景辉街 16 号院 1 号楼泰康集团大厦 1—2 层） - 报名截至：12.23 周一中午 12：00，共 40 名额 - 报名方式：付费成为胡同会员即可报名，可以点此一键成为会员并报名活动（学生可享受优惠） (https://sourl.cn/AdFDnx)。场地位置有限，所以也会通过报名表选择合适的朋友参加~ 感谢泰康美术馆的支持！馆内正在举办关于人工智能艺术的展览「跨越六十年：人工智能的创意之火」 (https://sourl.cn/jtZwTL)。参与活动的朋友可以免费参观。 给声东击西投稿 「声东击西」开放投稿啦，如果你在日常生活中产生了任何想要与我们分享的观察和思考，它可能是一个引起了你注意的社会现象，也可能是对你而言很有启发意义的一本书或一个影视剧，都欢迎你写下来与我们分享。 期待你的来信，我们一起「声东击西」~ 投稿入口 (https://eg76rdcl6g.feishu.cn/share/base/form/shrcne1CGVaSeJwtBriW6yNT2dg) 加入我们 声动活泼的工作邀请 —— 我们正在寻找：【商业化合作经理】和【播客节目监制】的全职伙伴，以及《声动早咖啡》内容研究实习岗，加入声动活泼（在招职位速览） (https://eg76rdcl6g.feishu.cn/docx/XO6bd12aGoI4j0xmAMoc4vS7nBh?from=from_copylink)，点击相应链接即可查看岗位详情及投递指南。工作地点: 北京东城区，期待你的加入。 延伸阅读 节目中提到的书单： - MAGA perspective: Roger Kimball: The three reasons Trump won (https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/11/the-three-reasons-trump-won/) - Socialist perspective: Exit Right (Dissent Mag) (https://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/exit-right/) - Normie Liberal perspective: Damon Linker on Kamala Harris Failed to Read the Room (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/07/opinion/kamala-harris-election.html) - Normie Republican perspective: Yuval Levin on What Trump's Win Doesn't Mean (https://thedispatch.com/article/what-trumps-win-doesnt-mean/) - Classical Liberal perspective: Francis Fukuyama on what Trump unleashed means for America (https://www.ft.com/content/f4dbc0df-ab0d-431e-9886-44acd4236922) - Steve Skorownek on presidential leadership in political time (https://politicalscience.yale.edu/publications/presidential-leadership-political-time-reprise-and-reappraisal-third-edition) - Madison on election (Federalist No. 68) - Lord Bryce on why great men are not chosen as presidents - How Biased Is the Media, Really? (https://www.newyorker.com/news/fault-lines/how-biased-is-the-media-really) 《乡下人的悲歌》 (https://book.douban.com/subject/27007881/) 《旧制度与大革命》 (https://book.douban.com/subject/1032063/) 幕后制作 监制：可宣、Riley 后期：赛德 运营：George 设计：饭团 往期节目 #325 跨越红蓝：七位在美华人的政治选择和选择背后的理由｜2024 Election (https://etw.fm/2132) 树老师上一期参与的播客：#322 美国最年轻一代选民的争吵、分裂和与父辈不同的烦恼｜2024 Election (https://etw.fm/2129) #316 万斯 vs. 沃尔兹：美国大选辩论迎来终局之战 风暴中的副总统辩论 | 2024 Election (https://etw.fm/2122) #305 拜登退选哈里斯接棒，天降女主还是权宜之计｜2024 Election (https://etw.fm/2107) #304 遇袭后的特朗普与被选中的万斯：「天选之子」与「寒门逆袭」的联手造梦｜2024 Election (https://etw.fm/2106) 商务合作 声动活泼商务合作咨询 (https://sourl.cn/6vdmQT) 关于声动活泼 「用声音碰撞世界」，声动活泼致力于为人们提供源源不断的思考养料。 我们还有这些播客：不止金钱（2024 全新发布） (https://www.xiaoyuzhoufm.com/podcast/65a625966d045a7f5e0b5640)、跳进兔子洞第三季（2024 全新发布） (https://www.xiaoyuzhoufm.com/podcast/666c0ad1c26e396a36c6ee2a)、声东击西 (https://etw.fm/episodes)、声动早咖啡 (https://sheng-espresso.fireside.fm/)、What's Next｜科技早知道 (https://guiguzaozhidao.fireside.fm/episodes)、反潮流俱乐部 (https://fanchaoliuclub.fireside.fm/)、泡腾 VC (https://popvc.fireside.fm/)、商业WHY酱 (https://msbussinesswhy.fireside.fm/) 欢迎在即刻 (https://okjk.co/Qd43ia)、微博等社交媒体上与我们互动，搜索 声动活泼 即可找到我们。 也欢迎你写邮件和我们联系，邮箱地址是：ting@sheng.fm 获取更多和声动活泼有关的讯息，你也可以扫码添加声小音，在节目之外和我们保持联系！ 声小音 https://files.fireside.fm/file/fireside-uploads/images/8/8dd8a56f-9636-415a-8c00-f9ca6778e511/hdvzQQ2r.png Special Guest: 仲树.

History is entering a new phase, where old forms and ideas clash with present realities. The John Adams Institute was excited to welcome Francis Fukuyama back to Amsterdam to discuss his findings in his book, Liberalism and Its Discontents.In this rigorous and trim volume, Fukuyama returns to liberalism, arguing that it cannot grow complacent. Liberalism—despite its flaws—appears to be the only system adaptable enough to accommodate the myriad challenges the future holds. Today, caught up in the maelstrom of political ideologies and cultural realities, where can people take ideological and organizational refuge? How can we not only survive, but thrive together in a world whose present is dominated by immense challenges and an uncertain future? Fukuyama's return to one of his most iconic topics is not only timely and insightful, but also cements his reputation as one of today's most engaging thinkers.This conversation was recorded on 3 October, 2022 at the Aula (Uva) in Amsterdam.Become a member of the John Adams and support the show.Support the show

Donald Trump's victory in the 2024 U.S. presidential election comes at a moment of turbulence for global democracy. It's been a year marked by almost universal backlash against incumbent leaders by voters apparently eager to express their anger with the status quo—and also an era when liberalism has been in retreat, if not in crisis. Francis Fukuyama, a political scientist at Stanford University, has done as much as anyone to elucidate the currents shaping and reshaping global politics. He wrote The End of History and the Last Man, a seminal work of post–Cold War political theory, more than three decades ago. And in the years since, he has written a series of influential essays for Foreign Affairs and other publications.  He joins Editor Dan Kurtz-Phelan to consider what Trump's return to the presidency means for liberal democracy—and whether its future, in the United States and around the world, is truly at stake. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

So how can The Dude and The Boss save America? According to the cultural critic, David Masciotra, Jeffrey "The Dude" Lebowski and Bruce “The Boss” Springsteen, represent the antithesis of Donald Trumps's illiberal authoritarianism. Masciotra's thesis of Lebowski and Springsteen as twin paragons of American liberalism is compelling. Both men have a childish faith in the goodness of others. Both offer liberal solace in an America which, I fear, is about to become as darkly surreal as The Big Lebowski. Transcript:“[Springsteen] represents, as cultural icon, a certain expression of liberalism, a big-hearted, humanistic liberalism that exercises creativity to represent diverse constituencies in our society, that believes in art as a tool of democratic engagement, and that seeks to lead with an abounding, an abiding sense of compassion and empathy. That is the kind of liberalism, both with the small and capital L, that I believe in, and that I have spent my career documenting and attempting to advance.” -David MasciotraAK: Hello, everybody. We're still processing November the 5th. I was in the countryside of Northern Virginia a few days ago, I saw a sign, for people just listening, Trump/Vance 2024 sign with "winner" underneath. Some people are happy. Most, I guess, of our listeners probably aren't, certainly a lot of our guests aren't, my old friend John Rauch was on the show yesterday talking about what he called the "catastrophic ordinariness" of the election and of contemporary America. He authored two responses to the election. Firstly, he described it in UnPopulist as a moral catastrophe. But wearing his Brookings hat, he's a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, described it as an ordinary election. I think a lot of people are scratching their head, trying to make sense of it. Another old friend of the show, David Masciotra, cultural writer, political writer. An interesting piece in the Washington Monthly entitled "How Francis Fukuyama and The Big Lebowski Explain Trump's Victory." A very creative piece. And he is joining us from Highland Indiana, not too far from Chicago. David. The Big Lebowski and Francis Fukuyama. Those two don't normally go together, certainly in a title. Let's talk first about Fukuyama. How does Fukuyama explain November the 5th? DAVID MASCIOTRA: In his. Well, first, thanks for having me. And I should say I watched your conversation with Jonathan Rauch, and it was quite riveting and quite sobering. And you talked about Fukuyama in that discussion as well. And you referenced his book, The End of History and the Last Man, a very often misinterpreted book, but nonetheless, toward its conclusion, Fukuyama warns that without an external enemy, liberal democracies may indeed turn against themselves, and we may witness an implosion rather than an explosion. And Fukuyama said that this won't happen so much for ideological reasons, but it will happen for deeply psychological ones, namely, without a just cause for which to struggle, people will turn against the just cause itself, which in this case is liberal democracy, and out of a sense of boredom and alienation, they'll grow increasingly tired of their society and cultivate something of a death wish in which they enjoy imagining their society's downfall, or at least the downfall of some of the institutions that are central to their society. And now I would argue that after the election results, we've witnessed the transformation of imagining to inviting. So, there is a certain death wish and a sense of...alienation and detachment from that which made the United States of America a uniquely prosperous and stable country with the ability to self-correct the myriad injustices we know are part of its history. Well now, people--because they aren't aware of the institutions or norms that created this robust engine of commerce and liberty--they've turned against it, and they no longer invest in that which is necessary to preserve it.AK: That's interesting, David. The more progressives I talk to about this, the more it--there's an odd thing going on--you're all sounding very conservative. The subtitle of the piece in the Washington Monthly was "looking at constituencies or issues misses the big point. On Tuesday, nihilism was on display, even a death wish in a society wrought by cynicism." Words like nihilism and cynicism, David, historically have always been used by people like Allan Blum, whose book, of course, The Closing of the American Mind, became very powerful amongst American conservatives now 40 or 50 years ago. Would you accept that using language like nihilism and cynicism isn't always associated--I mean, you're a proud progressive. You're a man of the left. You've never disguised that. It's rather odd to imagine that the guys like you--and in his own way, John Rauch too, who talks about the moral catastrophe of the election couple of weeks ago. You're all speaking about the loss of morality of the voter, or of America. Is there any truth to that? Making some sense?DAVID MASCIOTRA: That's a that's a fair observation. And Jonathan Rauch, during your conversation and in his own writing, identifies a center right. I would say I'm center left.AK: And he's--but what's interesting, what ties you together, is that you both use the L-word, liberal, to define yourselves. He's perhaps a liberal on the right. You're a liberal on the left.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Yes. And I think that the Trump era, if we can trace that back to 2015, has made thoughtful liberals more conservative in thought and articulation, because it forces a confrontation and interrogation of a certain naivete. George Will writes in his book, The Conservative Sensibility, that the progressive imagines that which is the best possible outcome and strives to make it real, whereas the conservative imagines the worst possible outcome and does everything he can to guard against it. And now it feels like we've experienced, at least electorally, the worst possible outcome. So there a certain revisitation of that which made America great, to appropriate a phrase, and look for where we went wrong in failing to preserve it. So that kind of thinking inevitably leads one to use more conservative language and deal in more conservative thought.AK: Yeah. So for you, what made America great, to use the term you just introduced, was what? Its morality? The intrinsic morality of people living in it and in the country? Is that, for you, what liberalism is?DAVID MASCIOTRA: Liberalism is a system in and the culture that emanates out of that system. So it's a constitutional order that creates or that places a premium on individual rights and allows for a flourishing free market. Now, where my conception of liberalism would enter the picture and, perhaps Jonathan Rauch and I would have some disagreements, certainly George Will and I, is that a bit of governmental regulation is necessary along with the social welfare state, to civilize the free market. But the culture that one expects to flow from that societal order and arrangement is one of aspiration, one in which citizens fully accept that they are contributing agents to this experiment in self-governance and therefore need to spend time in--to use a Walt Whitman phrase--freedom's gymnasium. Sharpening the intellect, sharpening one's sense of moral duty and obligation to the commons, to the public good. And as our society has become more individualistic and narcissistic in nature, those commitments have vanished. And as our society has become more anti-intellectual in nature, we are seeing a lack of understanding of why those commitments are even necessary. So that's why you get a result like we witnessed on Tuesday, and that I argue in my piece that you were kind enough to have me on to discuss, is a form of nihilism, and The Big Lebowski reference, of course--AK: And of course, I want to get to Lebowski, because the Fukuyama stuff is interesting, but everyone's writing about Fukuyama and the end of history and why history never really ended, of course. It's been going on for years now, but it's a particularly interesting moment. We've had Fukuyama on the show. I've never heard anyone, though, compare the success of Trump and Trumpism with The Big Lebowski. So, one of the great movies, of course, American movies. What's the connection, David, between November 5th and The Big Lebowski? DAVID MASCIOTRA: Well, The Big Lebowski is one of my favorite films. I've written about it, and I even appeared at one of the The Big Lebowski festivals that takes place in United States a number of years ago. But my mind went to the scene when The Dude is in his bathtub and these three menacing figures break into his apartment. They drop a gerbil in the bathtub. And The Dude, who was enjoying a joint by candlelight, is, of course, startled and frightened. And these three men tell him that if he does not pay the money they believe he owes them, they will come back and, in their words, "cut off your Johnson." And The Dude gives them a quizzical, bemused look. And one of them says, "You think we are kidding? We are nihilists. We believe in nothing." And then one of them screams, "We'll cut off your Johnson." Well, I thought, you know, we're looking at an electorate that increasingly, or at least a portion of the electorate, increasingly believes in nothing. So we've lost faith.AK: It's the nihilists again. And of course, another Johnson in America, there was once a president called Johnson who enjoyed waving his Johnson, I think, around in public. And now there's the head of the house is another Johnson, I think he's a little shyer than presidents LBJ. But David, coming back to this idea of nihilism. It often seems to be a word used by people who don't like what other people think and therefore just write it off as nihilism. Are you suggesting that the Trump crowd have no beliefs? Is that what nihilism for you is? I mean, he was very clear about what he believes in. You may not like it, but it doesn't seem to be nihilistic.DAVID MASCIOTRA: That's another fair point. What I'm referring to is not too long ago, we lived in a country that had a shared set of values. Those values have vanished. And those values involve adherence to our democratic norms. It's very difficult to imagine had George H. W. Bush attempted to steal the election in which Bill Clinton won, that George H. W. Bush could have run again and won. So we've lost faith in something essential to our electoral system. We've lost faith in the standards of decency that used to, albeit imperfectly, regulate our national politics. So the man to whom I just refered, Bill Clinton, was nearly run out of office for having an extramarital affair, a misdeed that cannot compare to the myriad infractions of Donald Trump. And yet, Trump's misdeeds almost give him a cultural cachet among his supporters. It almost makes him, for lack of a better word, cool. And now we see, even with Trump's appointments, I mean, of course, it remains to be seen how it plays out, that we're losing faith in credentials and experience--AK: Well they're certainly a band of outlaws and very proud to be outlaws. It could almost be a Hollywood script. But I wonder, David, whether there's a more serious critique here. You, like so many other people, both on the left and the right, are nostalgic for an age in which everyone supposedly agreed on things, a most civil and civilized age. And you go back to the Bushes, back to Clinton. But the second Bush, who now seems to have appeared as this icon, at least moral icon, many critics of Trump, was also someone who unleashed a terrible war, killing tens of thousands of people, creating enormous suffering for millions of others. And I think that would be the Trump response, that he's simply more honest, that in the old days, the Bushes of the world can speak politely and talk about consensus, and then unleash terrible suffering overseas--and at home in their neoliberal policies of globalization--Trump's simply more honest. He tells it as it is. And that isn't nihilistic, is it?DAVID MASCIOTRA: Well, you are gesturing towards an important factor in our society. Trump, of course, we know, is a dishonest man, a profoundly dishonest--AK: Well, in some ways. But in other ways, he isn't. I mean, in some ways he just tells the truth as it is. It's a truth we're uncomfortable with. But it's certainly very truthful about the impact of foreign wars on America, for example, or even the impact of globalization. DAVID MASCIOTRA: What you're describing is an authenticity. That that Trump is authentic. And authenticity has become chief among the modern virtues, which I would argue is a colossal error. Stanley Crouch, a great writer, spent decades analyzing the way in which we consider authenticity and how it inevitably leads to, to borrow his phrase, cast impurity onto the bottom. So anything that which requires effort, refinement, self-restraint, self-control, plays to the crowd as inauthentic, as artificial--AK: Those are all aristocratic values that may have once worked but don't anymore. Should we be nostalgic for the aristocratic way of the Bushes?DAVID MASCIOTRA: I think in a certain respect, we should. We shouldn't be nostalgic for George W. Bush's policies. I agree with you, the war in Iraq was catastrophic, arguably worse than anything Trump did while he was president. His notoriously poor response to Hurricane Katrina--I mean, we can go on and on cataloging the various disasters of the Bush administration. However, George W. Bush as president and the people around him did have a certain belief in the liberal order of the United States and the liberal order of the world. Institutions like NATO and the EU, and those institutions, and that order, has given the United States, and the world more broadly, an unrivaled period of peace and prosperity.AK: Well it wasn't peace, David. And the wars, the post-9/11 wars, were catastrophic. And again, they seem to be just facades--DAVID MASCIOTRA: We also had the Vietnam War, the Korean War. When I say peace, I mean we didn't have a world war break out as we did in the First World War, in the Second World War. And that's largely due to the creation and maintenance of institutions following the Second World War that were aimed at the preservation of order and, at least, amicable relations between countries that might otherwise collide.AK: You're also the author, David, of a book we've always wanted to talk about. Now we're figuring out a way to integrate it into the show. You wrote a book, an interesting book, about Bruce Springsteen. Working on a Dream: the Progressive Political Vision of Bruce Springsteen. Bruce Springsteen has made himself very clear. He turned out for Harris. Showed up with his old friend, Barack Obama. Clearly didn't have the kind of impact he wanted. You wrote an interesting piece for UnHerd a few weeks ago with the title, "Bruce Springsteen is the Last American Liberal: he's still proud to be born in the USA." Is he the model of a liberal response to the MAGA movement, Springsteen? DAVID MASCIOTRA: Well, of course, I wouldn't go so far as to say the last liberal. As most readers just probably know, writers don't compose their own headlines--AK: But he's certainly, if not the last American liberal, the quintessential American liberal.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Yes. He represents, as cultural icon, a certain expression of liberalism, a big-hearted, humanistic liberalism that exercises creativity to represent diverse constituencies in our society, that believes in art as a tool of democratic engagement, and that seeks to lead with an abounding, an abiding sense of compassion and empathy. That is the kind of liberalism, both with the small and capital L, that I believe in, and that I have spent my career documenting and attempting to advance. And those are, of course, the forms of liberalism that now feel as if they are under threat. Now, to that point, you know, this could have just come down to inflation and some egregious campaign errors of Kamala Harris. But it does feel as if when you have 70 some odd million people vote for the likes of Donald Trump, that the values one can observe in the music of Bruce Springsteen or in the rhetoric of Barack Obama, for that matter, are no longer as powerful and pervasive as they were in their respective glory days. No pun intended.AK: Yeah. And of course, Springsteen is famous for singing "Glory Days." I wonder, though, where Springsteen himself is is a little bit more complex and we might be a little bit more ambivalent about him, there was a piece recently about him becoming a billionaire. So it's all very well him being proud to be born in the USA. He's part--for better or worse, I mean, it's not a criticism, but it's a reality--he's part of the super rich. He showed out for Harris, but it didn't seem to make any impact. You talked about the diversity of Springsteen. I went to one of his concerts in San Francisco earlier this year, and I have to admit, I was struck by the fact that everyone, practically everyone at the concert, was white, everyone was wealthy, everyone paid several hundred dollars to watch a 70 year old man prance around on stage and behave as if he's still 20 or 30 years old. I wonder whether Springsteen himself is also emblematic of a kind of cultural, or political, or even moral crisis of our old cultural elites. Or am I being unfair to Springsteen?DAVID MASCIOTRA: Well, I remember once attending a Springsteen show in which the only black person I saw who wasn't an employee of the arena was Clarence Clemons.AK: Right. And then Bruce, of course, always made a big deal. And there was an interesting conversation when Springsteen and Obama did a podcast together. Obama, in his own unique way, lectured Bruce a little bit about Clarence Clemons in terms of his race. But sorry. Go on.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Yeah. And Springsteen has written and discussed how he had wished he had a more diverse audience. When I referred to diversity in his music, I meant the stories he aimed to tell in song certainly represented a wide range of the American experience. But when you talk about Springsteen, perhaps himself representing a moral crisis--AK: I wouldn't say a crisis, but he represents the, shall we say, the redundancy of that liberal worldview of the late 20th century. I mean, he clearly wears his heart on his sleeve. He means well. He's not a bad guy. But he doesn't reach a diverse audience. His work is built around the American working class. None of them can afford to show up to what he puts on. I mean, Chris Christie is a much more typical fan than the white working class. Does it speak of the fact that there's a...I don't know if you call it a crisis, it's just...Springsteen isn't relevant anymore in the America of the 2020s, or at least when he sang and wrote about no longer exists.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Yes, I agree with that. So first of all, the working class bit was always a bit overblown with Springsteen. Springsteen, of course, was never really part of the working class, except when he was a child. But by his own admission, he never had a 9 to 5 job. And Springsteen sang about working class life like William Shakespeare wrote about teenage love. He did so with a poetic grandeur that inspired some of his best work. And outside looking in, he actually managed to offer more insights than sometimes people on the inside can amount to themselves. But you're certainly correct. I mean, the Broadway show, for example, when the tickets were something like a thousand a piece and it was $25 to buy a beer. There is a certain--AK: Yeah and in that Broadway show, which I went to--I thought it was astonishing, actually, a million times better than the show in San Francisco.DAVID MASCIOTRA: It was one of the best things he ever did.AK: He acknowledges that he made everything up, that he wasn't part of the American working class, and that he'd never worked a day in his life, and yet his whole career is is built around representing a social class and a way of life that he was never part of.“Not too long ago, we lived in a country that had a shared set of values. Those values have vanished. And those values involve adherence to our democratic norms.” -DMDAVID MASCIOTRA: Right. And he has a lyric himself: "It's a sad, funny ending when you find yourself pretending a rich man in a poor man's shirt." So there always was this hypocrisy--hypocrisy might be a little too strong--inconsistency. And he adopted a playful attitude toward it in the 90s and in later years. But to your point of relevance, I think you're on to something there. One of the crises I would measure in our society is that we no longer live in a culture of ambition and aspiration. So you hear this when people say that they want a political leader who talks like the average person, or the common man. And you hear this when "college educated" is actually used as an insult against a certain base of Democratic voters. There were fewer college-educated voters when John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan ran for president, all of whom spoke with greater eloquence and a more expansive vocabulary and a greater sense of cultural sophistication than Donald Trump or Kamala Harris did. And yet there was no objection, because people understood that we should aspire to something more sophisticated. We should aspire to something more elevated beyond the everyday vernacular of the working class. And for that reason, Springsteen was able to become something of a working-class poet, despite never living among the working class beyond his childhood. Because his poetry put to music represented something idealistic about the working class.AK: But oddly enough, it was a dream--there's was a word that Springsteen uses a lot in his work--that was bought by the middle class. It wasn't something that was--although, I think in the early days, probably certainly in New Jersey, that he had a more working-class following.DAVID MASCIOTRA: We have to deal with the interesting and frustrating reality that the people about whom Springsteen sings in those early songs like "Darkness on the Edge of Town" or "The River" would probably be Trump supporters if they were real.AK: Yeah. And in your piece you refer to, not perhaps one of his most famous albums, The Rising, but you use it to compare Springsteen with another major figure now in America, much younger man to Ta-Nehisi Coates, who has a new book out, which is an important new book, The Message. You seem to be keener on Springsteen than Coates. Tell us about this comparison and what the comparison tells us about the America of the 2020s.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Well, Coates...the reason I make the comparison is that one of Springsteen's greatest artistic moments, in which he kind of resurrected his status as cultural icon, was the record he put out after the 9/11 attack on the United States, The Rising. And throughout that record he pays tribute, sometimes overtly, sometimes subtly, to the first responders who ascended in the tower knowing they would perhaps die.AK: Yeah. You quote him "love and duty called you someplace higher." So he was idealizing those very brave firefighters, policemen who gave up their lives on 9/11.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Exactly. Representing the best of humanity. Whereas Ta-Nehisi Coates, who has become the literary superstar of the American left, wrote in his memoir that on 9/11, he felt nothing and did not see the first responders as human. Rather, they were part of the fire that could, in his words, crush his body.AK: Yeah, he wrote a piece, "What Is 9/11 to Descendants of Slaves?"DAVID MASCIOTRA: Yes. And my point in making that comparison, and this was before the election, was to say that the American left has its own crisis of...if we don't want to use the word nihilism, you objected to it earlier--AK: Well, I'm not objecting. I like the word. It's just curious to hear it come from somebody like yourself, a man, certainly a progressive, maybe not--you might define yourself as being on the left, but certainly more on the left and on the right.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Yes, I would agree with that characterization. But that the left has its own crisis of nihilism. If if you are celebrating a man who, despite his journalistic talents and intelligence, none of which I would deny, refused to see the humanity of the first responders on the 9/11 attack and, said that he felt nothing for the victims, presumably even those who were black and impoverished, then you have your own crisis of belief, and juxtaposing that with the big hearted, humanistic liberalism of Springsteen for me shows the left a better path forward. Now, that's a path that will increasingly close after the victory of Trump, because extremism typically begets extremism, and we're probably about to undergo four years of dueling cynicism and rage and unhappy times.AK: I mean, you might respond, David, and say, well, Coates is just telling the truth. Why should a people with a history of slavery care that much about a few white people killed on 9/11 when their own people lost millions through slavery? And you compare them to Springsteen, as you've acknowledged, a man who wasn't exactly telling the truth in his heart. I mean, he's a very good artist, but he writes about a working class, which even he acknowledges, he made most of it up. So isn't Coates like Trump in an odd kind of way, aren't they just telling an unvarnished truth that people don't want to hear, an impolite truth?DAVID MASCIOTRA: I'm not sure. I typically shy away from the expression "my truth" or "his truth" because it's too relativistic. But I'll make an exception in this case. I think Coates is telling HIS truth just as Trump is telling HIS truth, if that adds up to THE truth, is much more dubious. Yes, we could certainly say that, you know, because the United States enslaved, tortured, and otherwise oppressed millions of black people, it may be hard for some black observers to get teary eyed on 9/11, but the black leaders whom I most admire didn't have that reaction. I wrote a book about Jesse Jackson after spending six years interviewing with him and traveling with him. He certainly didn't react that way on 9/11. Congressman John Lewis didn't react that way on 9/11. So, the heroes of the civil rights movement, who helped to overcome those brutal systems of oppression--and I wouldn't argue that they're overcome entirely, but they helped to revolutionize the United States--they maintained a big-hearted sense of empathy and compassion, and they recognized that the unjust loss of life demands mourning and respect, whether it's within their own community or another. So I would say that, here again, we're back to the point of ambition, whether it's intellectual ambition or moral ambition. Ambition is what allows a society to grow. And it seems like ambition has fallen far out of fashion. And that is why the country--the slim majority of the electorate that did vote and the 40% of the electorate that did not vote, or voting-age public, I should say--settled for the likes of Donald Trump.AK: I wonder what The Dude would do, if he was around, at the victory of Trump, or even at 9/11. He'd probably continue to sit in the bath tub and enjoy...enjoy whatever he does in his bathtub. I mean, he's not a believer. Isn't he the ultimate nihilist? The Dude in Lebowski?DAVID MASCIOTRA: That's an interesting interpretation. I would say that...Is The Dude a nihilist? You have this juxtaposition... The Dude kind of occupies this middle ground between the nihilists who proudly declare they believe in nothing and his friend Walter Sobchak, who's, you know, almost this raving explosion of belief. Yeah, ex-Vietnam veteran who's always confronting people with his beliefs and screaming and demanding they all adhere to his rules. I don't know if The Dude's a nihilist as much as he has a Zen detachment.AK: Right, well, I think what makes The Big Lebowski such a wonderful film, and perhaps so relevant today, is Lebowski, unlike so many Americans is unjudgmental. He's not an angry man. He's incredibly tolerant. He accepts everyone, even when they're beating him up or ripping him off. And he's so, in that sense, different from the America of the 2020s, where everyone is angry and everyone blames someone else for whatever's wrong in their lives.DAVID MASCIOTRA: That's exactly right.AK: Is that liberal or just Zen? I don't know.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Yeah. It's perhaps even libertarian in a sense. But there's a very interesting and important book by Justin Tosi and Brandon Warmke called Why It's Okay to Mind Your Own Business. And in it they argue--they're both political scientists although the one may be a...they may be philosophers...but that aside--they present an argument for why Americans need to do just that. Mind their own business.AK: Which means, yeah, not living politics, which certainly Lebowski is. It's probably the least political movie, Lebowski, I mean, he doesn't have a political bone in his body. Finally, David, there there's so much to talk about here, it's all very interesting. You first came on the show, you had a book out, that came out either earlier this year or last year. Yeah, it was in April of this year, Exurbia Now: The Battleground of American Democracy. And you wrote about the outskirts of suburbia, which you call "exurbia." Jonathan Rauch, wearing his Brookings cap, described this as an ordinary election. I'm not sure how much digging you've done, but did the exurbian vote determine this election? I mean, the election was determined by a few hundred thousand voters in the Midwest. Were these voters mostly on the edge of the suburb? And I'm guessing most of them voted for Trump.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Well, Trump's numbers in exurbia...I've dug around and I've been able to find the exurbian returns for Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Arizona. So three crucial swing states. If Kamala Harris had won those three states, she would be president. And Trump's support in exurbia was off the charts, as it was in 2020 and 2016, and as I predicted, it would be in 2024. I'm not sure that that would have been sufficient to deliver him the race and certainly not in the fashion that he won. Trump made gains with some groups that surprised people, other groups that didn't surprise people, but he did much better than expected. So unlike, say, in 2016, where we could have definitively and conclusively said Trump won because of a spike in turnout for him in rural America and in exurbia, here, the results are more mixed. But it remains the case that the base most committed to Trump and most fervently loyal to his agenda is rural and exurban.AK: So just outside the cities. And finally, I argued, maybe counterintuitively, that America remains split today as it was before November the 5th, so I'm not convinced that this election is the big deal that some people think it is. But you wrote an interesting piece in Salon back in 2020 arguing that Trump has poisoned American culture, but the toxin was here all along. Of course, there is more, if anything, of that toxin now. So even if Harris had won the election, that toxin was still here. And finally, David, how do we get rid of that toxin? Do we just go to put Bruce Springsteen on and go and watch Big Lebowski? I mean, how do we get beyond this toxin?DAVID MASCIOTRA: I would I would love it if that was the way to do it.AK: We'll sit in our bathtub and wait for the thugs to come along?DAVID MASCIOTRA: Right, exactly. No, what you're asking is, of course, the big question. We need to find a way to resurrect some sense of, I'll use another conservative phrase, civic virtue. And in doing--AK: And resurrection, of course, by definition, is conservative, because you're bringing something back.“Ambition is what allows a society to grow. And it seems like ambition has fallen far out of fashion.” -DMDAVID MASCIOTRA: Exactly. And we also have to resurrect, offer something more practical, we have to resurrect a sense of civics. One thing on which--I have immense respect and admiration for Jonathan Rauch--one minor quibble I would have with him from your conversation is when he said that the voters rejected the liberal intellectual class and their ideas. Some voters certainly rejected, but some voters were unaware. The lack of civic knowledge in the United States is detrimental to our institutions. I mean, a majority of Americans don't know how many justices are on the Supreme Court. They can't name more than one freedom enumerated in the Bill of Rights. So we need to find a way to make citizenship a vital part of our national identity again. And there are some practical means of doing that in the educational system. Certainly won't happen in the next four years. But to get to the less tangible matter of how to resurrect something like civic virtue and bring back ambition and aspiration in our sense of national identity, along with empathy, is much tougher. I mean, Robert Putnam says it thrives upon community and voluntary associations.AK: Putnam has been on the show, of course.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Yeah. So, I mean, this is a conversation that will develop. I wish I had the answer, and I wish it was just to listen to Born to Run in the bathtub with with a poster of The Dude hanging overhead. But as I said to you before we went on the air, I think that you have a significant insight to learn this conversation because, in many ways, your books were prescient. We certainly live with the cult of the amateur now, more so than when you wrote that book. So, I'd love to hear your ideas.AK: Well, that's very generous of you, David. And next time we appear, you're going to interview me about why the cult of the amateur is so important. So we will see you again soon. But we're going to swap seats. So, David will interview me about the relevance of Cult of the Amateur. Wonderful conversation, David. I've never thought about Lebowski or Francis Fukuyama, particularly Lebowski, in terms of what happened on November 5th. So, very insightful. Thank you, David, and we'll see you again in the not-too-distant future.DAVID MASCIOTRA: Thank you. I'm going to reread Cult of the Amateur to prepare. I may even do it in the bathtub. I look forward to our discussion.David Masciotra is an author, lecturer, and journalist. He is the author of I Am Somebody: Why Jesse Jackson Matters (I.B. Tauris, 2020), Mellencamp: American Troubadour (University Press of Kentucky), Barack Obama: Invisible Man (Eyewear Publishers, 2017), and Metallica by Metallica, a 33 1/3 book from Bloomsbury Publishers, which has been translated into Chinese. In 2010, Continuum Books published his first book, Working On a Dream: The Progressive Political Vision of Bruce Springsteen.His 2024 book, Exurbia Now: Notes from the Battleground of American Democracy, is published by Melville House Books. Masciotra writes regularly for the New Republic, Washington Monthly, Progressive, the Los Angeles Review of Books, CrimeReads, No Depression, and the Daily Ripple. He has also written for Salon, the Daily Beast, CNN, Atlantic, Washington Post, AlterNet, Indianapolis Star, and CounterPunch. Several of his political essays have been translated into Spanish for publication at Korazon de Perro. His poetry has appeared in Be About It Press, This Zine Will Change Your Life, and the Pangolin Review. Masciotra has a Master's Degree in English Studies and Communication from Valparaiso University. He also has a Bachelor's Degree in Political Science from the University of St. Francis. He is public lecturer, speaking on a wide variety of topics, from the history of protest music in the United States to the importance of bars in American culture. David Masciotra has spoken at the University of Wisconsin, University of South Carolina, Lewis University, Indiana University, the Chicago Public Library, the Lambeth Library (UK), and an additional range of colleges, libraries, arts centers, and bookstores. As a journalist, he has conducted interviews with political leaders, musicians, authors, and cultural figures, including Jesse Jackson, John Mellencamp, Noam Chomsky, all members of Metallica, David Mamet, James Lee Burke, Warren Haynes, Norah Jones, Joan Osborne, Martín Espada, Steve Earle, and Rita Dove. Masciotra lives in Indiana, and teaches literature and political science courses at the University of St. Francis and Indiana University Northwest. Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.Keen On is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

On this edition of Parallax Views, we continue our post-mortem of the 2024 election with two separate and distinguished guests. In the first segment, Stephen Semler of the date-based political blog Polygraph joins the show to discuss his articles "A couple charts to explain a Harris loss" and the facetiously titled "'The economy is fine'". Stephen delves into how the economy played a role in this election, and addresses criticisms by some pundits that economic anxieties could not have played a role in the election because the economy is doing well by some metrics and statistics (for example: low unemployment, a booming stock market, etc.). We'll delve into the difference between the economy and average American's economic well-being, and we'll look at two graphs from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Census Bureau that deal with food insecurity and poverty to further elucidate Stephen's analysis. We'll also delve into Biden's Build Back Better and American Rescue Plans and how certain elements of Bidenomics in spring of 2022 got sidelined in a way that may have led to economic whiplash for American voters. In the second segment of the show, Daniel Bessner, known for his work at the Quincy Institute and Jacobin as well as co-hosting the left-leaning foreign policy/international relations podcast American Prestige, returns to the program to give his own analysis of the 2024 election's outcome and what he expects from a 2nd Trump Presidency. We'll discuss the feeling that there's been a more muted response to this election that in 2016, the question of Trump and fascism and why Danny prefers to discuss Trump as a reactionary populist with authoritarian inclinations, Trump as a PT Barnum-esque carny barker character mixed with shades of Boss Tweed and Tammany Hall, Trump and his promises of mass deportation, what Trump means for climate change, populism and anti-establishment backlash in the 2024 election, what Danny expects out of Trump's foreign policy (with regards to Ukraine and Russia, China, Iran, and Israel/Palestine), and, most significantly, the crisis of liberalism. In regard to the crisis of liberalism we'll mention Francis Fukuyama's "End of History" hypothesis, the decline of civic institutions since the 1960s (and maybe even before), Clinton-era liberalism (colored by the primacy of Third Way neoliberalism in the Democratic Party) vs. FDR's New Deal liberalism, the liberal international order and great power politics, and much, much more.

Yascha Mounk and Francis Fukuyama discuss what a Trump victory means for America, its allies, and the world. Francis Fukuyama is a political scientist, author, and the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. Among Fukuyama's notable works are The End of History and the Last Man and The Origins of Political Order. His latest book is Liberalism and Its Discontents. He is also the author of the “Frankly Fukuyama” column, carried forward from American Purpose, at Persuasion. In this week's conversation, Yascha Mounk and Francis Fukuyama discuss how Trump's 2024 victory repudiates the racial grievance theory of 2016; what a second Trump administration will mean for the rule of law at home and abroad; and the lessons the Democratic Party must learn from its defeat. This transcript has been condensed and lightly edited for clarity. Please do listen and spread the word about The Good Fight. If you have not yet signed up for our podcast, please do so now by following this link on your phone. Email: podcast@persuasion.community  Website: http://www.persuasion.community Podcast production by Jack Shields, and Brendan Ruberry Connect with us! Spotify | Apple | Google Twitter: @Yascha_Mounk & @joinpersuasion Youtube: Yascha Mounk LinkedIn: Persuasion Community Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin says about eight thousand North Korean soldiers have now reached the Kursk region of Russia, where Ukrainian troops have attacked Russian forces. As the crisis in Sudan continues, we hear from the coalition seeking to bring the warring sides together at the negotiating table. Also, the thoughts of the political scientist Francis Fukuyama, as America counts down to its presidential election. And the AI artist whose work could sell for up to 200,000 dollars! (Photo credit: AFP)

Freddie deBoer has a post on what he calls “the temporal Copernican principle.” He argues we shouldn't expect a singularity, apocalypse, or any other crazy event in our lifetimes. Discussing celebrity transhumanist Yuval Harari, he writes: What I want to say to people like Yuval Harari is this. The modern human species is about 250,000 years old, give or take 50,000 years depending on who you ask. Let's hope that it keeps going for awhile - we'll be conservative and say 50,000 more years of human life. So let's just throw out 300,000 years as the span of human existence, even though it could easily be 500,000 or a million or more. Harari's lifespan, if he's lucky, will probably top out at about 100 years. So: what are the odds that Harari's lifespan overlaps with the most important period in human history, as he believes, given those numbers? That it overlaps with a particularly important period of human history at all? Even if we take the conservative estimate for the length of human existence of 300,000 years, that means Harari's likely lifespan is only about .33% of the entirety of human existence. Isn't assuming that this .33% is somehow particularly special a very bad assumption, just from the basis of probability? And shouldn't we be even more skeptical given that our basic psychology gives us every reason to overestimate the importance of our own time? (I think there might be a math error here - 100 years out of 300,000 is 0.033%, not 0.33% - but this isn't my main objection.) He then condemns a wide range of people, including me, for failing to understand this: Some people who routinely violate the Temporal Copernican Principle include Harari, Eliezer Yudkowsky, Sam Altman, Francis Fukuyama, Elon Musk, Clay Shirky, Tyler Cowen, Matt Yglesias, Tom Friedman, Scott Alexander, every tech company CEO, Ray Kurzweil, Robin Hanson, and many many more. I think they should ask themselves how much of their understanding of the future ultimately stems from a deep-seated need to believe that their times are important because they think they themselves are important, or want to be. I deny misunderstanding this. Freddie is wrong. https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/contra-deboer-on-temporal-copernicanism 

In the spirit of trying to channel his obsession with the US election in a (somewhat) productive way, Darren welcomes back Andrew Phillips from the University of Queensland to talk through the extent to which Trump is a ‘normal' political candidate versus an existential threat to US democracy. Along the way, Darren cannot resist the temptation to introduce Francis Fukuyama's “last man” model of political resistance, often overlooked when his “End of History” thesis is discussed. Australia in the World is written, hosted, and produced by Darren Lim, with research and editing this episode by Walter Colnaghi and theme music composed by Rory Stenning. Relevant links Sohrab Ahmari, “There is an intellectual sickness on the American right”, The New Statesman, 11 September 2024: https://www.newstatesman.com/world/americas/north-america/us/2024/09/there-is-an-intellectual-sickness-on-the-american-right Andrew Dougall, Mediatizing the Nation, Ordering the World, Oxford University Press, 2024: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/mediatizing-the-nation-ordering-the-world-9780198882114?lang=en&cc=ru Zhang, F.J. “Political endorsement by Nature and trust in scientific expertise during COVID-19”, Nat Hum Behav 7, 696–706 (2023): https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01537-5 Tyler Cowen, “How public intellectuals can extend their shelf lives”, Marginal Revolution, 6 February 2020: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/02/how-public-intellectuals-can-extend-their-shelf-lives.html Miss Americana (documentary): https://www.netflix.com/au/title/81028336 The Ezra Klein Show, “On Children, Meaning, Media and Psychedelics”, 3 September 2024: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/03/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-jia-tolentino.html The Ezra Klein Show, “Zadie Smith on Populists, Frauds and Flip Phones”, 17 September 2024: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/17/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-zadie-smith.html Linkin Park, “The Emptiness Machine” (Official Music Video): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRXH9AbT280 The Deep Life by Cal Newport (podcast): https://www.thedeeplife.com/listen/

In Lebanon, the leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, has condemned the back-to-back attacks targeting the group's pagers and walkie-talkie communications system as "massacres." He also warned Israel that Hezbollah's forces on the border won't stop until the war in Gaza ends. At the same time, Israeli fighter jets screamed over the capital Beirut, appearing to drop flares, and the IDF said it is striking targets in Lebanon. All of this is raising concerns about an all-out war to a new level, after Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant's warning on Wednesday that a new phase of this conflict is beginning. Christiane gets the latest from correspondent Ben Wedeman in Beirut.  Also on today's show: US Ambassador to China Nicholas Burns; author Robert Caro (“The Power Broker”); Francis Fukuyama, Senior Fellow, Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Já parou para pensar em como a dopamina influencia suas escolhas diárias? No episódio de hoje do Puro Malte, exploramos o neurotransmissor que governa nossas motivações e prazeres imediatos. Discutimos como o vício em dopamina pode estar moldando nossos comportamentos, desde a busca incessante por likes nas redes sociais até as decisões mais simples do cotidiano. Além disso, abordamos as diferenças entre dopamina, serotonina e ocitocina, e como esses químicos cerebrais afetam nossa felicidade e bem-estar a longo prazo. Dicas culturaisLivros - Nação Dopamina - Anna Lembke- Tuesdays with Morrie - Mitch Albom - Armas, Germes e Aço - Jared Diamond - Raízes do Brasil - Sérgio Buarque de Holanda - Revenge of the Tipping Point - Malcolm GladwellDocumentários - O Dilema das Redes - Disponível na Netflix Matérias- Tragédia Antes da Aula - Revista Piauí - https://piaui.folha.uol.com.br/suicidio-aluno-colegio-bandeirantes/Vídeos - Is Liberalism Dead? - Discussão entre Francis Fukuyama e John Gray - https://youtu.be/yZbR7HE_ER8

Tänk att man får leva just nu i detta otroliga tidevarv när så mycket händer. Och tänk att man får tillhöra en generation som fattat saker som andra inte fattar. För så måste det väl vara, eller? Veckans avsnitt handlar om kronocentrism – tankefelet som gör att vi tänker på vår egen tid som extra speciell och vår egen generation som överlägsen på olika sätt.Klipp:7.45 Francis Fukuyama on the End of History12.13 Svar Direkt 1984 Sivert Öholm22.46 My Generation - Oasis28.54  "The Most Dangerous Time" in History (Jamie Dimon)Redigering: Peter Malmqvist.Kontakta oss på dummamanniskor@gmail.com. Vill du slippa reklamen? Prenumerera på Dumma Människor för 19 kr/månaden (ink moms). https://plus.acast.com/s/dummamanniskor. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

All about defense. This is arguably one of the most difficult and interesting conversations we've ever had on the podcast. Enjoy the listen :) Timestamps (2:10) - What are Segundo Bros?
 (5:30) - What can young people do in Defense? (11:44) - $1000 drones taking out 3 billion dollar ships (25:20) - Deterrence Theory and Francis Fukuyama (40:50) - The Valley of Death for Defense Startups (55:00) - The Trickle Down Effect of Defense Tech

Francis Fukuyama har besøkt Georgia, Kasakhstan og Ukraina og er mer pessimistisk enn på lenge. Tar Gaza-krigen oppmerksomheten fra Ukraina? Hva skjer i Kaukasus og Sentral-Asia hvis den russiske fremgangen i Ukraina fortsetter?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The world is complex. The state is primitive. Regulation is where they meet. Bhargavi Zaveri-Shah joins Amit Varma in episode 389 of The Seen and the Unseen to discuss her experiences with the regulatory state at the intersection of law & economics. (FOR FULL LINKED SHOW NOTES, GO TO SEENUNSEEN.IN.) Also check out: 1. Bhargavi Zaveri Shah on Twitter, LinkedIn, The Leap Blog and her own website. 2. The accountability framework of UIDAI: Concerns and solutions -- Vrinda Bhandari and Renuka Sane and Bhargavi Zaveri. 3. Institutionalise formal regulatory independence -- Bhargavi Zaveri. 4. Regulators don't need constitutional status -- Bhargavi Zaveri. 5. Measuring Regulatory Responsiveness in India: A Framework for Empirical Assessment -- Anirudh Burman and Bhargavi Zaveri. 6. Participatory governance in regulation making: How to make it work? -- Bhargavi Zaveri. 7. IBBI's draft framework sets new standards of regulatory governance in India -- Bhargavi Zaveri. 8. FIU's Penalty on PayPal: The Wisdom of Jurisprudence by Committee -- Bhargavi Zaveri. 9. Survey-based measurement of Indian courts -- Pavithra Manivannan, Susan Thomas, and Bhargavi Zaveri-Shah. 10. Helping litigants make informed choices in resolving debt disputes -- Pavithra Manivannan, Susan Thomas, and Bhargavi Zaveri-Shah. 12. Judicial triage in the lockdown: evidence from India's largest commercial tribunal -- Anjali Sharma and Bhargavi Zaveri. 13. The Loneliness of the Indian Woman — Episode 259 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Shrayana Bhattacharya). 14. Young India -- Episode 83 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Snigdha Poonam). 15. Dreamers: How Young Indians Are Changing Their World -- Snigdha Poonam. 16. The Loneliness of the Indian Man — Episode 303 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Nikhil Taneja). 17 Alice Evans on Twitter and The Seen and the Unseen. 18. The End of History? — Francis Fukuyama's essay. 19. The End of History and the Last Man — Francis Fukuyama's book. 20. Economic Facts and Fallacies — Thomas Sowell. 21. The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression -- Amity Shlaes. 22. Public Choice Theory Explains SO MUCH -- Episode 33 of Everything is Everything. 23. Parkinson's Law. 24. Statutory Regulatory Authorities and the Federal System in India -- KP Krishnan, Amrita Pillai and Karan Gulati. 25. Suits on Netflix. 26. The Accidental Prime Minister -- Sanjaya Baru. 27. The Life and Times of KP Krishnan — Episode 355 of The Seen and the Unseen. 28. The Life and Times of Montek Singh Ahluwalia — Episode 285 of The Seen and the Unseen. 29. The Four Quadrants of Conformism — Paul Graham. 30. Stay Away From Luxury Beliefs -- Episode 46 of Everything is Everything. 31. The Anxious Generation -- Jonathan Haidt. 32. Concrete Island -- JG Ballard. 33. High-Rise -- JG Ballard. 34. Judicial Reforms -- Episode 62 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Alok Prasanna Kumar). 35. Noise -- Daniel Kahneman, Olivier Sibony and Cass R. Sunstein. 36. Court on Trial: A Data-Driven Account of the Supreme Court of India -- Aparna Chandra, Sital Kalantry and William HJ Hubbard. 37. Fixing the Knowledge Society -- Episode 24 of Everything is Everything. 38. The Plague -- Albert Camus. 39. The Outsider -- Albert Camus. 40. The Life and Times of the Indian Economy -- Episode 387 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Rajeswari Sengupta). 41. Shoe Dog -- Phil Knight. 42. Laapataa Ladies -- Kiran Rao. 43. The Incredible Curiosities of Mukulika Banerjee — Episode 276 of The Seen and the Unseen. 44. The Life and Times of Mrinal Pande — Episode 263 of The Seen and the Unseen. 45. Caste, Capitalism and Chandra Bhan Prasad — Episode 296 of The Seen and the Unseen. Amit's newsletter is active again. Subscribe right away to The India Uncut Newsletter! It's free! Amit Varma and Ajay Shah have launched a new video podcast. Check out Everything is Everything on YouTube. Check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing. Episode art: ‘Warrior' by Simahina.

Yascha Mounk and Francis Fukuyama discuss the state of democracy around the world. Francis Fukuyama is a political scientist, author, and the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. Fukuyama's notable works include The End of History and the Last Man and The Origins of Political Order. His latest book is Liberalism and Its Discontents. In this week's conversation, Yascha Mounk and Francis Fukuyama discuss the triumph of the French far-right in the country's first round of legislative elections; President Biden's disastrous debate performance and what it may portend for the 2024 election; and the state of democracy from India to Ukraine. This transcript has been condensed and lightly edited for clarity. Please do listen and spread the word about The Good Fight. If you have not yet signed up for our podcast, please do so now by following this link on your phone. Email: podcast@persuasion.community  Website: http://www.persuasion.community Podcast production by Jack Shields, and Brendan Ruberry Connect with us! Spotify | Apple | Google Twitter: @Yascha_Mounk & @joinpersuasion Youtube: Yascha Mounk LinkedIn: Persuasion Community Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Happy Monday! Sam and Emma speak with John Ganz, writer of the Unpopular Front newsletter on SubStack, to discuss his recent book When the Clock Broke: Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked Up in the Early 1990s. First, Sam and Emma run through updates on Netanyahu's rejection of (supposedly) his own peace plan, Israel's pivot to Lebanon, another State Department resignation over Biden's Gaza policy, this week's primaries, Biden's polling numbers, the Supreme Court's agenda, flight attendant labor action, and DeSantis' vetoing of all state arts grants, before parsing through some stories that help explain who George Latimer, primary opponent to Jamaal Bowman, really is. John Ganz then joins, diving right into his metaphor of the broken clock, inspired by the right-wing's 1990s movement to “break the clock” of social democracy and Francis Fukuyama's concept of the Neoliberal consensus as the “end of history,” and how it provides a lens into the evolution of the far-right GOP we see today. Ganz then walks through some of the major players in the end of conservatism as we knew it, including the GOP establishment's rejection (and the voters' embrace) of KKK Grand Wizard David Duke, the shortcomings of George H. W. Bush's establishment centrism, and the fore-knowledge of libertarian Pat Buchanan, who would go on to serve as a central rhetorical influence for the presidential campaign of one Donald Trump. Expanding on this, John, Sam, and Emma explore how this era saw the conservative establishment begin to embrace the talk-show culture-war populism of Rush Limbaugh, which, alongside Bill Clinton's elitism and assimilation to Reagan economics, allowed for the GOP to somehow frame its anti-democratic and anti-working class policies as an anti-elitist anti-establishment agenda. After diving a little deeper into the right wing's ability (internationally) to frame itself as the ideology for-the-people over the first two decades of the 21st Century, Ganz touches on Biden's presidency as a continuation of the left wing's inability to progress its (supposedly progressive) politics, wrapping up the interview with a brief assessment of the future of the US' two political parties post-Trump and Biden. And in the Fun Half: Sam and Emma watch Will Cain try to comprehend Patrick Bet-David's genius value-taintment, executive pill-mill Dr. Ronny Jackson suddenly has a problem with drugged-up presidents, and Donald Trump has something to say about boats and sharks… we just can't figure out what it is. Corey from South Carolina discusses a GOP fundraising attempt at a Juneteenth celebration, Matt from San Diego explores money in politics, and Louisiana's Governor attempts to defend LA's new 10-Commandments commandment for what is perhaps the worst school system in the US, plus, your calls and IMs! Check out John's book here: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374605445 Check out the Unpopular Front newsletter here: https://www.unpopularfront.news/ Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Check out all volunteering opportunities ahead of Rep. Jamaal Bowman's primary on Tuesday 6/25!: https://www.mobilize.us/jamaalbowman/ Check out this canvassing event for Rep. Jamaal Bowman and volunteer if you can!: https://actionnetwork.org/forms/new-york-canvassing-event?source=tmr Phone bank for Rep. Jamaal Bowman through the Working Families Party here!: https://www.mobilize.us/workingfamiliespartycoordinated/event/624109/ Phone bank for Rep. Jamaal Bowman through "Jews For Jamaal" here!: https://www.mobilize.us/nea/event/618446/ Find our Rumble stream here!: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Join Sam on the Nation Magazine Cruise! 7 days in December 2024!!: https://nationcruise.com/mr/ Check out the "Repair Gaza" campaign courtesy of the Glia Project here: https://www.launchgood.com/campaign/rebuild_gaza_help_repair_and_rebuild_the_lives_and_work_of_our_glia_team#!/ Check out StrikeAid here!; https://strikeaid.com/ Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the ESVN YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/esvnshow Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! http://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: http://majority.fm/app Check out today's sponsors: Cozy Earth:  Remember to go to https://CozyEarth.com/MAJORITYREPORT to enjoy 30% off using the code MAJORITYREPORT. And after placing your order, select “podcast” in the survey and then select “Majority Report with Sam Seder'' in the dropdown menu that follows. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech @BradKAlsop Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on Youtube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder - https://majorityreportradio.com/

Professor Roy F. Baumeister is one of the world's most prolific and influential Psychologists. He has published over 700 scientific works, including over 40 books, and is one of the most highly cited scientists alive today. In 2013, he received the highest award given by the Association for Psychological Science, the William James Fellow award, in recognition of his lifetime achievements. As of 2024, He holds affiliations with Harvard University, Constructor University Bremen, Florida State University, BetterUp, Inc., and the University of Bamberg. Additionally, Baumeister serves as the president-elect of the International Positive Psychology Association. He is a Fellow of both the Society for Personality and Social Psychology and the Association for Psychological Science. His 2011 book "Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength" (with John Tierney) was a New York Times bestseller. Some of his other works include: "The Self Explained: Why and How We Become Who We Are" (2022), and his upcoming book "The Science Of Free Will: Bridging Theory & Positive Psychology" (2024). TIMESTAMPS: (0:00) - Introduction (0:13) - The Self Explained: Why And How We Become Who We Are (6:45) - Addressing Free Will Skeptics (11:38) - The Science Of Free Will: 1) The Moral Agent; 2) The Economic Agent; 3) The Information Agent (17:26) - Free Will Books: Robert Sapolsky (Determined), Kevin Mitchell (Free Agents), Daniel Dennett & Gregg Caruso (Just Desserts) (21:49) - Morality & Determinism (30:05) - Ego Depletion Theory (42:31) - Positive Psychology & Negativity Bias (52:43) - Willpower (59:11) - Language, Meaning, & Uncertainty (1:08:00) - Roy's Willpower! (1:15:10) - Roy's Recommendations: Immanual Kant, Sigmund Freud, David Buss, Michael Tomasello, Francis Fukuyama (1:19:55) - Conclusion EPISODE LINKS: - Roy's Website: https://roybaumeister.com - Roy's Publications: https://tinyurl.com/k94wzzwd - Roy's Books: https://tinyurl.com/2evz225h - The Science of Free Will: https://tinyurl.com/t9sjykzs - Roy Baumeister v Robert Sapolsky Debate: https://youtu.be/xeb98U9d1hg?feature=shared - Noam Chomsky: https://youtu.be/ZYiv790TfzI?feature=shared - Kevin Mitchell: https://youtu.be/UdlkYGbuD7Q?feature=shared - Gregg Caruso: https://youtu.be/YztCgd-CqtA?feature=shared - Randolph Nesse: https://youtu.be/wOuX0JYtxhc?feature=shared CONNECT: - Website: https://tevinnaidu.com - Podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/drtevinnaidu - Twitter: https://twitter.com/drtevinnaidu - Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/drtevinnaidu - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drtevinnaidu - LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drtevinnaidu ============================= Disclaimer: The information provided on this channel is for educational purposes only. The content is shared in the spirit of open discourse and does not constitute, nor does it substitute, professional or medical advice. We do not accept any liability for any loss or damage incurred from you acting or not acting as a result of listening/watching any of our contents. You acknowledge that you use the information provided at your own risk. Listeners/viewers are advised to conduct their own research and consult with their own experts in the respective fields.

This week we're going back to the 1980s with Charlie Wilson's War! Join us as we learn about the horrific things people used to do with safety pins, Soviet ambitions in the Persian Gulf, Gust Avrokotos, refugees from the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and more! Sources: "Advertisement: Maybelline." Seventeen, 07, 1982, 18-19 "Mascara Magic." Seventeen, 05, 1981 "Advertisement: Maybelline." Cosmopolitan, 11, 1978, 117 "Dear Beauty Editor." Seventeen, 02, 1978, 10 The Wilson Center Digital Archive, Sources available at https://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/topics/soviet-invasion-afghanistan The Soviet Occupation of Afghanistan, PBS Newshour: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/asia-july-dec06-soviet_10-10 Francis Fukuyama, "The Soviet Threat to the Persian Gulf" Rand Corporation, 1981, available at https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/papers/2008/P6596.pdf' Jonathon Green, "slang," The Oxford Companion to Sugar and Sweets (Oxford University Press, 2015) "cake eater," Oxford English Dictionary (2020).  Ngram Google Books Tazreena Sajjad, "Analysis: Where do Afghanistan's refugees go?" PBS News Hour (24 August 2021). https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/analysis-where-do-afghanistans-refugees-go  "Afghanistan's refugees: forty years of dispossession," Amnesty International (20 June 2019), https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/06/afghanistan-refugees-forty-years/  "Afghan Migration After the Soviet Invasion," NatGeo, https://media.nationalgeographic.org/assets/file/afghan_MIG.pdf  Meindersma, Christa. "Afghanistan." In Encyclopedia of Human Rights (Oxford University Press, 2009). “The MacNeil/Lehrer Report; Interview with Perez de Cuellar,” 1982-02-18, NewsHour Productions, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed April 25, 2024, http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-507-xk84j0c044  Amina Khan, "Protracted Afghan Refugee Situation," Strategic Studies 37, no.1 (2017): 42-65.  Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema, "Impact of the Afghan War on Pakistan," Pakistan Horizon 41, no.1 (1988): 23-45.  Patricia Sullivan, "CIA Agent Gust Avrokotos Dies at 67," Washington Post, available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/2005/12/25/cia-agent-gust-l-avrakotos-dies-at-age-67/22a47f22-6594-4b9d-a90a-6f7914aa909a/ Roger Ebert, "Evil Empire falls victim to clout," 20 December 2007, https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/charlie-wilsons-war-2007  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Wilson%27s_War_(film) https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/charlie-wilsons-war-2-159301/ 

In this special flashback Memorial Day broadcast - John celebrates American Asian Pacific Islander Month. In the second of a two part series he interviews Panthea Lee on violence against Asian women. He also talks with political science expert Francis Fukuyama about his new book - Liberalism and it's Discontents. To wrap it up he takes a call from Richard in Seattle and Mitch at Kent State on Guns and the Uvalde Tx mass shooting aftermath.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Je réponds de façon claire et directe à cette question en deux minutes ! Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

The end of the Cold War was supposed to be the end of history as Francis Fukuyama said—the final victory for democracy and the death knell for Communism. But it turns out China and the Chinese Communist Party had other plans. And the US helped by propping up the Chinese economy. Joining us once again is Captain Jim Fanell, the Former Director of Intelligence and Information Operations for the U.S. Pacific Fleet. And co-author of the new book Embracing Communist China: America's Greatest Strategic Failure. Buy the book! https://www.skyhorsepublishing.com/9781648210594/embracing-communist-china/ YouTube demonetizes our videos, which is why we rely on support from viewers like you. Please join our 50¢ army at: https://www.patreon.com/chinaunscripted https://www.chinauncensored.locals.com https://www.chinaunscripted.com/support Our social media: Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/ChinaUncensored Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ChinaUncensored Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ChinaUncensored #China