Podcasts about Fukuyama

Felix Wemheuer zu Staatskapitalismus, Planwirtschaft und unserer Zukunft mit China.  Shownotes Felix Wemheuer  Prof. Dr. Felix Wemheuer (Lehrstuhl für Moderne China-Studien) an der Universität zu Köln: https://chinastudien.phil-fak.uni-koeln.de/arbeitsbereiche/moderne-china-studien/personal/prof-dr-felix-wemheuer Fuchs, D., Klotzbücher, S., Riemenschnitter, A., Springer, L., & Wemheuer, F. (2023). Die Zukunft mit China denken. Mandelbaum. https://www.mandelbaum.at/buecher/daniel-fuchs-sascha-klotzbuecher-andrea-riemenschnitter-lena-springer-felix-wemheuer/die-zukunft-mit-china-denken/ Konferenz 'CHINA und WIR - Perspektiven für Frieden, Menschenrechte und sozial-ökologischen Wandel': https://www.attac.de/china-konferenz/startseite https://www.attac.de/china-konferenz/anmeldung   Kritisches China Forum: https://kritisches-chinaforum.org/ Youtube Kanal ‘Studying Maoist China': https://www.youtube.com/@felixwemheuerstudyingmaois1051 zum ‘Chinesischen Traum': https://www.readingthechinadream.com/ Leese, D. & Ming, S. (2023). Chinesisches Denken der Gegenwart. Schlüsseltexte zu Politik und Gesellschaft. C. H. Beck. https://www.chbeck.de/leese-ming-chinesisches-denken-gegenwart/product/34659702 Fukuyama, F. (1989). The End of History? The National Interest. https://pages.ucsd.edu/~bslantchev/courses/pdf/Fukuyama%20-%20End%20of%20History.pdf zu China als ‘Werkbank der Welt': https://www.bpb.de/shop/zeitschriften/izpb/china-337/275570/von-der-werkbank-der-welt-zur-innovationswirtschaft/ zu Authoritarian Resilience: Nathan, A. J. (2003). China's Changing of the Guard: Authoritarian Resilience. Journal of Democracy 14(1), 6-17. https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/chinas-changing-of-the-guard-authoritarian-resilience/ zu ‘Chimerica': Ferguson, N., & Schularick, M. (2007). ‘Chimerica' and the global asset market boom. International Finance, 10(3), 215-239. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-2362.2007.00210.x Grundlagen zu Staatskapitalismus (in China): https://www.lpb-bw.de/china-wirtschaft https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staatskapitalismus zu Mao Zedong: Wemheuer, F. (2021). Mao Zedong. Rowohlt Verlag. https://www.rowohlt.de/buch/felix-wemheuer-mao-zedong-9783644010192?srsltid=AfmBOopJE_AXx57LiheMHh9YOyy-Tl3MVKPkWznaGGKMUFlvtnj058-X zur Mao-Ära:  Wemheuer, F. (2019). A Social History of Maoist China. Conflict and Change, 1949-76. Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/social-history-of-maoist-china/6D2579E4BA68B4C8DACB08F8AAC9809A zur Wirtschaftsreform 1978 nach dem Tod Maos: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform-_und_%C3%96ffnungspolitik Weber, I. (2021). How China escaped shock therapy. The market reform debate. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/How-China-Escaped-Shock-Therapy-The-Market-Reform-Debate/Weber/p/book/9781032008493 zur erwähnten ‘Eisernen Reisschüssel': https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiserne_Reissch%C3%BCssel zum Zitat Engels:  Engels, F. (1880). Die Entwicklung des Sozialismus von der Utopie zur Wissenschaft. manifest. https://manifest-buecher.de/produkt/entwicklung-des-sozialismus-von-der-utopie-zur-wissenschaft/ zur Neuen Ökonomische Politik: Bergmann, T. & Schäfer, G. (1989). Liebling der Partei. VSA. https://www.zvab.com/Liebling-Partei-BergmannSch%C3%A4fer-Hg-Hamburg-VSA-Verl/30757362947/bd Wemheuer, F. (2021). Marktsozialismus. Eine kontroverse Debatte. Promedia. https://mediashop.at/buecher/marktsozialismus/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160304205516/http:/www.mlwerke.de/le/le33/le33_453.htm zu den Kommandohöhen der Wirtschaft:  Yergin, D. & Stanislaw, J. (1998). The Commanding Heights. The battle for the world economy. Simon & Schuster. https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Commanding-Heights/Daniel-Yergin/9780684835693 zum Fall Jack Ma und Alibaba: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ma https://www.icij.org/investigations/china-targets/interpol-red-notice-police-warrant-jack-ma/ https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000125770730/kurssprung-von-alibaba-aufatmen-nach-rekordstrafe Einschätzung der gesellschaftlichen Entwicklung Chinas:  Wemheuer, F. (2022). Chinas große Umwälzung. Soziale Konflikte und Aufstieg im Weltsystem. PapyRossa. https://shop.papyrossa.de/Wemheuer-Chinas-grosse-Umwaelzung zu Hartmut Elsenhans:     https://hartmutelsenhans.net/ zu Hartmut Elsenhans' Konzept der Staatsklassen:  Elsenhans, H. (1997). Staatsklassen. In: Schulz, M. (eds) Entwicklung. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-322-91011-0_9 Wallerstein, I. (1974 [2012]). The modern world-system I-IV. ProMedia Verlag. https://mediashop.at/buecher/das-moderne-weltsystem-i-iv/ zu den ‘Panama Papers': https://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/ https://www.icij.org/investigations/panama-papers/ zu Xi Jinping: Rudd, K. (2024). On Xi Jinping: How Xi's Marxist nationalism is shaping China and the world. Oxford Universtity Press. https://academic.oup.com/book/58156 Torigian, J. (2025). The Party's interest come first: The life of Xi Zhongxun, father of Xi Jinping. Stanford University Press. https://www.sup.org/books/history/partys-interests-come-first zum ‘Sozialismus mit chinesischer Besonderheit':  Boer, R. (2021). Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. Springer Singapore. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-1622-8 https://jungle.world/artikel/2017/44/der-kern-der-fuehrung zu Wen Jiabao: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Wen-Jiabao zu den Reformen Yugoslawiens und Ungarns: https://www.akweb.de/gesellschaft/planwirtschaft-und-marktmechanismen/ zu Josib Broz Tito: https://www.dhm.de/lemo/biografie/josip-broz-tito zum Fünfjahresplan: https://www.zdfheute.de/politik/ausland/china-fuenfjahresplan-kommunistische-partei-strategie-100.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-year_plans_of_China zum Xi-thought: https://www.soas.ac.uk/research/political-thought-xi-jinping zu den Reichswerken Hermann Göring: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichswerke_Hermann_G%C3%B6ring https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/hitlers-holding-die-reichswerke-hermann-goering-100.html zur Verstaatlichung Renaults in Frankreich: https://monde-diplomatique.de/artikel/!1405644 zur Britischen Labour Regierung nach 1945: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britische_Unterhauswahl_1945 zu Hu Jintao: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hu-Jintao zu Jiang Zemin: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jiang-Zemin Überblick politisches System in China: https://www.bpb.de/themen/asien/china/44270/charakteristika-des-politischen-systems/ Überblick chinesischer Führungskräfte: Shambaugh, D. (2021). China's Leaders: From Mao to Now. Polity Press.  https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail?book_slug=chinas-leaders-from-mao-to-now--9781509546510 zu Neokonfuzianismus und der ‘neuen Linken': https://jungle.world/artikel/2023/10/solidaritaet-mit-wem https://chinabooksreview.com/2024/05/16/how-chinas-new-left-embraced-the-state/ zu den Ereignissen in Xingjiang und Hongkong: https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2026/country-chapters/china#d22098 zum erwähnten Spiegel-Artikel: https://www.spiegel.de/ausland/china-abschied-eines-korrespondenten-das-regime-steht-bombenfest-a-0b653e07-092a-41fc-a9c4-8edee76044c5 Xi, J. (2014-2025). The Governance of China I-V. http://english.scio.gov.cn/featured/xigovernance/node_7248444.htm zum Machtwechsel in Kuba: https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/hintergrund-aktuell/264845/zehn-jahre-machtwechsel-in-kuba zu Abdelaziz Bouteflika in Algerien: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Abdelaziz-Bouteflika zur Kulturrevolution: https://www.bpb.de/shop/zeitschriften/apuz/228467/kulturrevolution-in-china/ zu den linksdissidentischen Strömungen der Kulturrevolution:  Wu, Y. (2019). Die andere Kulturrevolution. 1966-169: Der Anfang vom Ende des chinesischen Sozialismus. (R. Ruckus, Übers.). Mandelbaum Verlag. https://www.mandelbaum.at/buecher/wu-yiching/die-andere-kulturrevolution/ Orwell, G. (1945 [2022]). Animal Farm.  zu Hu Yaobang: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hu-Yaobang zur Institutionalisierung und Demokratiebewegung unter Hu Yaobang: https://pekinger-fruehling.univie.ac.at/die-demokratiebewegung-1978-1981/hu-yaobang-und-die-demokratiebewegung/ zum ‘Fragend schreiten wir voran' Motto der zapatistischen Bewegung: https://www.suedwind-magazin.at/fragend-schreiten-wir-voran/ zur Debatte innerhalb der deutschen Linken: https://jungle.world/artikel/2023/10/solidaritaet-mit-wem zur Streikwelle 2010 in China: https://www.bbc.com/news/10389762 zu Arbeitskämpfen in China: https://www.gongchao.org/ zu den Bewegungen in Hongkong: https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/hintergrund-aktuell/296970/massenproteste-in-hongkong/ Demirović, A. (2025). Marx als Demokrat oder: Das Ende der Politik. Dietz. https://dietzberlin.de/produkt/marx-als-demokrat-oder-das-ende-der-politik/ zu Gramsi und ‘Hegemonialer Block': Cox, R. (1996). Gramsci, Hegemony, and International Relations. Approaches to World Order, 124-41. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/03058298830120020701 zum Tiananmen Massaker: https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/taegliche-dosis-politik/549121/vor-35-jahren-tiananmen-massaker-in-peking/ zum geopolitischen Hintergrund Venezuela – China – USA: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly92dkxqvko zur Iranischen Revolution (1979): https://www.britannica.com/event/Iranian-Revolution Zhao, T. (2025). Alles unter dem Himmel. Vergangenheit und Zukunft der Weltordnung. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/zhao-tingyang-alles-unter-dem-himmel-t-9783518298824 Kang, Y. (1935 [2020]). Die große Gemeinschaft. Drachenhaus. https://www.drachenhaus-verlag.com/products/die-grosse-gemeinschaft Thematisch angrenzende Folgen S02E09 | Isabella M. Weber zu Chinas drittem Weg https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e09-isabella-m-weber-zu-chinas-drittem-weg/ S02E54 | Alex Demirovic zu sozialistischer Gouvernementalität, (Re-)produktion und Rätedemokratie (Teil 2) https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e54-alex-demirovic-zu-sozialistischer-gouvernementalitaet-re-produktion-und-raetedemokratie-teil-2/ S02E53 | Alex Demirovic zu sozialistischer Gouvernementalität, (Re-)produktion und Rätedemokratie (Teil 1) https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e53-alex-demirovic-zu-sozialistischer-gouvernementalitaet-re-produktion-und-raetedemokratie-teil-1/ Future Histories Kontakt & Unterstützung  Wenn euch Future Histories gefällt, dann erwägt doch bitte eine Unterstützung auf Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories Schreibt mir unter: office@futurehistories.today Diskutiert mit mir auf Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/futurehistories.bsky.social Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehpodcast/ Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@FutureHistories Webseite mit allen Folgen: www.futurehistories.today English webpage: https://futurehistories-international.com Episode Keywords  #FelixWemheuer, #JanGroos, #Interview, #FutureHistories, #China, #Mao, #MaoZedong, #Sozialismus, #Kommunismus, #Staatskapitalismus, #Marktsozialismus, #Planwirtschaft, #XiJinping, #ChinasWirtschaft, #Ökonomie, #Staatsklassen, #NeueÖkonomischePolitik, #Chimerica, #GeschichteChinas, #Arbeitskampf, #ChinesischerTraum  

En 1989, au moment où le mur de Berlin tombe et où le bloc soviétique vacille, Francis Fukuyama publie un article devenu célèbre : The End of History? Il y développe une thèse audacieuse : l'humanité serait peut-être arrivée au terme de son évolution idéologique majeure.Attention, il ne parle pas de la fin des événements, ni de la fin des conflits. Il parle de la fin de l'Histoire au sens philosophique, hérité de Hegel et d'Alexandre Kojève : l'Histoire comme lutte entre grandes idéologies concurrentes pour définir le meilleur régime politique.Selon Fukuyama, le XXe siècle a vu s'affronter trois grands modèles : le fascisme, le communisme et la démocratie libérale. Le fascisme est vaincu en 1945. Le communisme s'effondre en 1989-1991 avec la chute de l'URSS. Il ne resterait alors qu'un modèle sans rival idéologique crédible : la démocratie libérale associée à l'économie de marché.Sa thèse est donc la suivante : la démocratie libérale pourrait constituer la forme finale de gouvernement humain, non pas parfaite, mais la moins mauvaise et la plus universalisable. Il ne dit pas que tous les pays sont démocratiques, mais qu'aucune idéologie alternative globale ne semble capable de la remplacer durablement.L'argument repose aussi sur une dimension anthropologique : le besoin humain de reconnaissance, ce que Hegel appelait le « thymos ». La démocratie libérale offrirait un cadre permettant de satisfaire ce besoin par des droits, l'égalité juridique et la participation politique.La thèse a suscité un immense débat. Certains l'ont interprétée comme un triomphalisme naïf de l'Occident. D'autres ont souligné que l'histoire postérieure — terrorisme, montée de la Chine autoritaire, résurgence des nationalismes, guerres en Ukraine ou au Moyen-Orient — semble contredire l'idée d'un monde stabilisé autour d'un modèle unique.Fukuyama lui-même a nuancé sa position par la suite. Il reconnaît que la démocratie peut reculer, que les institutions peuvent s'affaiblir et que l'Histoire, au sens des crises et rivalités de puissance, continue évidemment.La « fin de l'Histoire » n'est donc pas l'annonce d'un monde pacifié pour toujours. C'est une hypothèse sur l'absence d'alternative idéologique systémique à la démocratie libérale après la Guerre froide.Qu'on l'approuve ou qu'on la critique, cette thèse reste l'une des plus influentes pour comprendre l'optimisme des années 1990… et les désillusions du XXIe siècle. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Get access to The Backroom (95+ exclusive episodes) on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OneDimeIn this episode of 1Dime Radio, Keegan Kjeldsen from Essential Salts (Untimely Reflections/The Nietzsche podcast) joins me for a chapter-by-chapter breakdown of Francis Fukuyama's book The End of History and the Last Man. We unpack liberal democracy's philosophical roots, the fragility of authoritarian states, the Hegelian struggle for recognition, and the tensions between capitalism, legitimacy, and human dignity. Don't miss this guide to one of the most misunderstood books of the modern era.Part 2 of this discussion is in The Backroom (Patreon Exclusive). You will you get an additional 2 hours of Keegan/EssensialSalts and explaining the rest of Fukuyama's book chapter by chapter. Timestamps:00:00:00  The Backroom Preview00:04:53  Why Read Fukuyama 00:10:14 Theory of History Explained: Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche)00:26:01  The Weakness of Strong States00:46:02  Why Communism and RW Dicatorships Failed01:12:00  Liberal Democracy as the final form of government? 01:28:03  The Struggle for Recognition and Human Nature02:10:01  Transition to Part 2 (On Patreon)GUEST:Keegan Kjeldsen (EssentialSalts / Untimely Reflections)• YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@untimelyreflections• The Nietzsche Podcast (Spotify): https://open.spotify.com/show/0ZARzVCRfJZDCyeKjvIEfE• Untimely Reflections Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/untimelyreflectionsFOLLOW 1Dime:• Substack (Articles and Essays): https://1dimereview.substack.com/• X/Twitter: https://x.com/1DimeOfficial• Instagram: instagram.com/1dimeman• Check out my main channel videos: https://www.youtube.com/@1DimeeTags: #1DimeRadio #Fukuyama #PoliticalPhilosophy #Hegel #TheNietzschePodcast #EssentialSalts #UntimelyReflectionsLeave a like, drop a comment, and give the show a 5-star rating on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you listen to this.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comJason is a columnist at the Washington Post who writes about law, politics, and foreign policy. He used to be an editorial writer and assistant editorial features editor for the Wall Street Journal, and before that he was a staff writer and associate editor at The American Interest.For two clips of our convo — on whether SCOTUS has surrendered to Trump, and the failures of his own lawfare — head to our YouTube page.Other topics: growing up in liberal Palo Alto; raised by a doctor and a physics prof at Stanford; Fukuyama a formative prof and Walter Russell Mead a formative boss; conservatives mags that fell apart under Trump; the GOP primaries in 2016; Hillary's denialism after her terrible run; Russiagate; Watergate; the politicization of DOJ; Trump suing the IRS; Comey and obstruction of justice; how Alvin Bragg and Jack Smith helped Trump; the January 6 pardons; the ICE paramilitary; the latest Epstein document dump; the power network around him, including “populist” Bannon; the SCOTUS immunity ruling; the delayed tariff ruling; Trump's b******t “national emergencies” and the 1977 law; CECOT; Abrego Garcia and Ozturk; Biden and student loans; Jerome Powell and Lisa Cook; Gabbard in Fulton County; Thom Tillis vs Trump; the US vs NATO; Ukraine and Putin; Trump soft on China; bombing Iran and Nigeria; invading Venezuela; crypto corruption and the UAE chips deal; Jimmy Kimmel and the FCC; Ed Martin out; and Trump's success at bullying institutions.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy. Coming up: Zaid Jilani on the Dems, Derek Thompson on abundance, Matt Goodwin on the UK political earthquake, Kathryn Paige Harden on the genetics of vice, Tiffany Jenkins on privacy, and Michael Pollan on consciousness. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

Jean-Michel Valantin, docteur en sociologie de la défense et chercheur sur la stratégie américaine, il est également l'auteur de Hyper guerre. Enfin il collabore avec le think tank The Red Team Analysis Society. Spécialiste des mutations géopolitiques et de l'impact des ressources énergétiques sur les relations internationales, il décrypte ici les fractures profondes du monde contemporain.Dans cet épisode, nous parlons de guerre, bien sûr – mais pas seulement de celle que l'on voit. J'ai questionné Jean-Michel Valantin sur les tensions invisibles qui redessinent la carte du pouvoir mondial : influence chinoise en Amérique latine, remilitarisation de l'Europe, rôle stratégique du Groenland, retour des zones d'influence, montée en puissance des technologies comme l'IA ou le lithium, effondrement du droit international, brutalité de la doctrine Trump...Trump n'est pas si fou. en réalité vou sallez l'entendre.Ensemble, nous décortiquons un basculement historique majeur : celui d'un monde qui ne croit plus à la paix, ni à la coopération, mais à la force. Un monde qui revient aux logiques de confrontation, de territoire, de contrôle des matières premières. Un monde que l'Europe, trop longtemps désarmée intellectuellement et militairement, peine à comprendre – et donc à affronter.Citations marquantes« Le droit sans la force n'est qu'impuissance. »« On a cru à la fable de Fukuyama sur la fin de l'Histoire. »« Le président Trump ne joue pas, il applique une stratégie parfaitement cohérente. »« Le Venezuela, c'est le retour d'un monde où les États s'arrogent des zones d'influence. »« L'Arctique est devenu une zone stratégique, avec tous les appétits qu'elle suscite. »Idées centrales discutées 1. La guerre est de retour – mais sous de nouvelles formesTimestamp ~00:01:10Ce n'est plus seulement des conflits armés : c'est la militarisation de l'économie, des réseaux sociaux, de l'information.

Jean-Michel Valantin, docteur en sociologie de la défense et chercheur sur la stratégie américaine, il est également l'auteur de Hyper guerre. Enfin il collabore avec le think tank The Red Team Analysis Society. Spécialiste des mutations géopolitiques et de l'impact des ressources énergétiques sur les relations internationales, il décrypte ici les fractures profondes du monde contemporain.Dans cet épisode, nous parlons de guerre, bien sûr – mais pas seulement de celle que l'on voit. J'ai questionné Jean-Michel Valantin sur les tensions invisibles qui redessinent la carte du pouvoir mondial : influence chinoise en Amérique latine, remilitarisation de l'Europe, rôle stratégique du Groenland, retour des zones d'influence, montée en puissance des technologies comme l'IA ou le lithium, effondrement du droit international, brutalité de la doctrine Trump...Trump n'est pas si fou. en réalité vou sallez l'entendre.Ensemble, nous décortiquons un basculement historique majeur : celui d'un monde qui ne croit plus à la paix, ni à la coopération, mais à la force. Un monde qui revient aux logiques de confrontation, de territoire, de contrôle des matières premières. Un monde que l'Europe, trop longtemps désarmée intellectuellement et militairement, peine à comprendre – et donc à affronter.Citations marquantes« Le droit sans la force n'est qu'impuissance. »« On a cru à la fable de Fukuyama sur la fin de l'Histoire. »« Le président Trump ne joue pas, il applique une stratégie parfaitement cohérente. »« Le Venezuela, c'est le retour d'un monde où les États s'arrogent des zones d'influence. »« L'Arctique est devenu une zone stratégique, avec tous les appétits qu'elle suscite. »Idées centrales discutées 1. La guerre est de retour – mais sous de nouvelles formesTimestamp ~00:01:10Ce n'est plus seulement des conflits armés : c'est la militarisation de l'économie, des réseaux sociaux, de l'information.

No vídeo de hoje eu explico por que as últimas oito décadas – o maior período sem guerra entre grandes potências desde o Império Romano – são uma anomalia histórica que a gente trata como normal. Parto de três números-chave dessa “longa paz”: 80 anos sem guerra direta entre grandes potências, 80 anos sem uso de armas nucleares em combate e apenas 9 países com armas atômicas, apesar de mais de 100 terem capacidade de fabricá-las. Reconto como Hiroshima, Nagasaki, a crise dos mísseis em Cuba e a lógica da destruição mútua assegurada na Guerra Fria forçaram EUA e URSS a construírem uma ordem internacional de segurança baseada em alianças (OTAN, Japão), instituições (ONU, FMI, Banco Mundial) e no Tratado de Não Proliferação Nuclear. Depois analiso como o “dividendo da paz” pós-1991, o fim da URSS, o otimismo de Fukuyama sobre o “fim da história” e a globalização criaram uma falsa sensação de segurança, enquanto os EUA se atolavam no Afeganistão e no Iraque. A partir daí, mostro os cinco fatores que hoje ameaçam essa paz: amnésia histórica sobre o horror de uma guerra total; ascensão da China e o ressentimento da Rússia de Putin; a erosão do peso econômico dos EUA em um mundo cada vez mais multipolar; o excesso de compromissos militares americanos; e a polarização interna que paralisa a política externa dos EUA. No fim, a pergunta central é direta: essa era sem Terceira Guerra Mundial é o “normal” ou é um acidente histórico que pode acabar? E o que seria necessário, em termos de imaginação estratégica e vontade política, para segurar essa paz por mais uma geração?

Care sînt consecințele – pentru Statele Unite ale Americii dar și la nivel mondial – ale primelor măsuri luate de președintele american în 2026? În 3 ianuarie, forțele speciale americane l-au capturat pe președintele Venezuelei, Nicolas Maduro. În 7 ianuarie, Donald Trump a retras SUA din peste 60 de organizații internaționale. Şi tot la începutul anului, Donald Trump a reluat ideea că SUA au nevoie de Groenlanda din motive de securitate națională. Despre toate acestea vorbim cu politologii Vlad Adamescu şi Răzvan Petri, fondatorii platformei „Politică la minut”.  Vlad Adamescu: „Preşedinţii americani au de obicei o fereastră de oportunitate: primii doi ani din mandat, adică pînă la midterms (alegerile de la jumătatea mandatului), alegerile pentru Congresul american – care vor avea loc în noiembrie anul acesta, în SUA. Aceea este perioada de putere maximă, în care de obicei au şi Camera Reprezentanţilor, şi Senatul şi pot să-şi îndeplinească agenda. Trump a fost un preşedinte cu un neobişnuit succes în a-şi îndeplini propria agendă. Vedem acel Project 2025, care se spunea că este agenda lui politică. S-a dovedit că era agenda lui politică şi a reuşit să îndeplinească o majoritate covîrşitoare a lucrurilor care erau scrise acolo. Vedem mici victorii ale opoziţiei, ale democraţilor, mai ales ale opoziţiei mai de stînga, acei democraţi socialişti din jurul lui Bernie Sanders, zona Mamdani – s-a tot discutat şi în România despre victoria sa la New York, dar acolo oricum cîştigau democraţii. Vedem însă o opoziţie slabă în general, care n-a putut să se organizeze. Democraţii, chiar dacă o să cîştige – pentru că de obicei partidul de opoziţie cîştigă midterms –, par în continuare paralizaţi şi nu prea ştiu unde să meargă, nu prea văd care sînt liderii potenţiali pentru a conduce partidul la victorie în alegerile din 2028. Poate guvernatorul Californiei, Gavin Newsome.” Pînă nu de mult trăiam într-o lume pe care mulți au numit-o „sfîrșitul istoriei”, în care liberalismul a cîștigat, într-o lume globalizată a organizațiilor, a cooperării internaționale. Ce s-a schimbat odată cu revenirea lui Trump la Casa Albă, odată cu acest fenomen MAGA? Care sunt punctele de divergență între viziunea lui asupra Americii și cele peste 60 de organizații și tratate internaționale pe care le-a abandonat acum?Răzvan Petri: „Asta e o dezbatere foarte interesantă pentru că într-adevăr, pînă nu de mult trăiam în „sfîrșitul istoriei” al lui Fukuyama, pe care l-a declarat în anii ʼ90. El spunea că am ajuns la apogeul evoluției acestui sistem și că liberalismul și ordinea bazată pe reguli au cîștigat și vor domina relațiile internaționale pentru un viitor previzibil. Ceea ce se întîmplă astăzi este, evident, decesul acestei ordini. Deces cumva anunțat odată cu alegerea lui Donald Trump, pentru că știam ce va face mișcarea MAGA odată ce va ajunge din nou la putere. Ceea ce este diferit este că nu știm care este noua ordine. Mulți spun că ne-am întors undeva pe la 1700-1800, la ordinea în care domină realismul în relațiile internaționale, balansul și contrabalansul de putere. Might is right, cum se spune, dreptatea e a celui puternic. Eu sînt de acord mai degrabă cu o abordare care vine dinspre doi profesori americani, Goddard și Newman, care spun că ne aflăm într-o ordine neoregalistă. Pentru că Donald Trump nu urmărește neapărat interesul național american, ci mai degrabă interesul clicii sale. Ei ne explică acțiunile administrației Trump printr-o logică de clică care relaționează cu alte clici, cu alți oameni pe care ei îi văd puternici, care ignoră statele și suverenitatea națională, și care vor nu numai să domine politic, dar vor și să cîștige material de pe urma tranzacțiilor internaționale.  Apasă PLAY pentru a asculta întreaga discuţie!O emisiune de Adela Greceanu și Matei Martin Un produs Radio România Cultural 

Ian Bremmer unpacks the fallout from the Trump administration's dramatic operation in Caracas that captured Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro and brought him to the US to face federal charges. The raid was a stark demonstration of American power, and few are mourning the fall of a leader whose rule helped collapse Venezuela and drive millions to flee. But even with Maduro gone, the hard questions start immediately: who governs now, how long does the US stay involved, and how quickly could “stability” turn into something far messier?First, Bremmer speaks with Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego, who says the operation may have been “limited” in scope, but the political and strategic risks are only beginning. Gallego argues that the White House is improvising and that Congress is watching closely for signs of escalation. “There really isn't a plan,” he warns. “They're kind of just playing this as it goes, which is very scary that they're doing that.” He lays out what a more sustainable path could look like, including releasing political prisoners, setting a timeline for elections, and pursuing economic steps that reduce the chances of renewed conflict.Then Bremmer is joined by Stanford political scientist Frank Fukuyama, who cautions against viewing Maduro's capture as a clean “one and done” victory. The regime, he argues, is bigger than any single leader, and the US may be stepping into a long, unpredictable project whether it admits it or not. “Let's not kid ourselves,” Fukuyama says. “This is a nation building exercise.” From the risk of economic collapse and refugee flows to the precedent set by a US foreign policy driven by raw leverage, Fukuyama and Bremmer explore what happens when Washington embraces the “law of the jungle,” and why the consequences could extend well beyond Venezuela.Host: Ian BremmerGuests: Ruben Gallego and 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. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Ian Bremmer unpacks the fallout from the Trump administration's dramatic operation in Caracas that captured Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro and brought him to the US to face federal charges. The raid was a stark demonstration of American power, and few are mourning the fall of a leader whose rule helped collapse Venezuela and drive millions to flee. But even with Maduro gone, the hard questions start immediately: who governs now, how long does the US stay involved, and how quickly could “stability” turn into something far messier?First, Bremmer speaks with Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego, who says the operation may have been “limited” in scope, but the political and strategic risks are only beginning. Gallego argues that the White House is improvising and that Congress is watching closely for signs of escalation. “There really isn't a plan,” he warns. “They're kind of just playing this as it goes, which is very scary that they're doing that.” He lays out what a more sustainable path could look like, including releasing political prisoners, setting a timeline for elections, and pursuing economic steps that reduce the chances of renewed conflict.Then Bremmer is joined by Stanford political scientist Frank Fukuyama, who cautions against viewing Maduro's capture as a clean “one and done” victory. The regime, he argues, is bigger than any single leader, and the US may be stepping into a long, unpredictable project whether it admits it or not. “Let's not kid ourselves,” Fukuyama says. “This is a nation building exercise.” From the risk of economic collapse and refugee flows to the precedent set by a US foreign policy driven by raw leverage, Fukuyama and Bremmer explore what happens when Washington embraces the “law of the jungle,” and why the consequences could extend well beyond Venezuela.Host: Ian BremmerGuests: Ruben Gallego and 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. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Over the weekend, the US military captured the president of Venezuela Nicolas Maduro and brought him to the United States to face drug trafficking charges. Francis Fukuyama joins the podcast to talk about the geopolitical context for this mission, what comes next for Venezuela, and what questions you should be asking as the situation develops in Venezuela. To get bonus episodes, support us at patreon.com/newliberalpodcast or https://cnliberalism.org/become-a-member Got questions? Send us a note at mailbag@cnliberalism.org. Follow us at: https://twitter.com/CNLiberalism https://cnliberalism.org/   Join a local chapter at https://cnliberalism.org/become-a-member/

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comLaura Field is a writer and political theorist who specializes in far-right populist intellectualism in the US. She's currently a Scholar in Residence at American University, a Senior Advisor for the Illiberalism Studies Program at GW, and a nonresident fellow with Brookings. Her new book is Furious Minds: The Making of the MAGA New Right. We bonded over some of the right's wackier innovations, and differed over how far the left has also slid into illiberalism.An auto-transcript is available above (just click “Transcript” while logged into Substack). For two clips of our convo — on the New Right's “post-constitutional moment,” and the war on the civil service — head to our YouTube page.Other topics: growing up in Alberta; losing a parent at a very young age; Plato an early inspiration; growing tired of the Straussians; the decline of religion under liberalism; Locke; Rousseau; Nietzsche; Fukuyama; the resurgence of the illiberal left and illiberal right; the Claremont Institute and Harry Jaffa; Jaffa's extreme homophobia and hatred of divorce; Allan Bloom; Lincoln fulfilling the Founding; Hobbes; the role of virtue in a republic; Machiavelli; Michael Anton's “Flight 93 Election”; John Eastman and “Stop the Steal”; Curtis Yarvin and The Cathedral; Adrian Vermeule's Common Good Constitutionalism; Catholic conversion; Pope Leo; Obergefell, debating Harvey Mansfield over marriage; Woodrow Wilson's expansion of the state; Thatcher and Reagan slimming it down; the pros and cons of technocratic experts; DOGE vs federal workers; “queer” curricula and the 1619 Project; edge-lords; Bronze Age Pervert and pagan masculinity; Fuentes and Carlson; and debating the dangers of wokeness.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy. Coming up: Claire Berlinski on America's retreat from global hegemony, Jason Willick on trade and conservatism, and Vivek Ramaswamy on the right's future. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

David Lloyd Dusenbury is a Senior Fellow at the Danube Institute and Visiting professor Eötvös Loránd University. Author of The Space of Time (2014), Platonic Legislations (2017). In this episode we discuss his recent piece The Era of Re-Civilization?, alongside discussion on Alexandre Kojève and Francis Fukuyama.Dusenbury and Pilkington's piece: https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2025/11/the-era-of-re-civilization/---Become part of the Hermitix community:Hermitix Twitter - https://twitter.com/HermitixpodcastHermitix Discord - https://discord.gg/77abuTVYNGSupport Hermitix:Hermitix Subscription - https://hermitix.net/subscribe/Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/hermitixDonations: - https://www.paypal.me/hermitixpodHermitix Merchandise - http://teespring.com/stores/hermitix-2Bitcoin Donation Address: 3LAGEKBXEuE2pgc4oubExGTWtrKPuXDDLKEthereum Donation Address: 0x31e2a4a31B8563B8d238eC086daE9B75a00D9E74

Alessandro Barbero ospite del Centro Sociale Askatasuna prima dello sgombero del 18 dicembre 2025: una maxi-operazione che ha portato all'irruzione all'interno del centro sociale, coordinata dalla procura di Torino, ed eseguita da questura carabinieri e guardia di finanza si inserisce nell'ambito dell'inchiesta sugli assalti compiuti nei mesi scorsi durante le manifestazioni pro Palestina a Ogr, stazioni, Città Metropolitana e alla sede de La Stampa. Crediti - Evento organizzato da Centro Sociale Askatasuna: https://www.instagram.com/askatasuna_1996 Festival Culturale Altri Mondi / Altri Modi: https://www.instagram.com/altrimondi_altrimodi/ Registrazione di: https://www.instagram.com/p/CpbD-wEKTz8/ I libri da leggere sull'argomento:

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comGeorge is a journalist and novelist. He was a long-time staff writer at The New Yorker, now a staff writer at The Atlantic. He's the author of 10 books, including The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America — which won the National Book Award — and Our Man: Richard Holbrooke and the End of the American Century. His new novel is called The Emergency. It's a parable of our polarized times — and a deeply unsettling one. We had this conversation the afternoon after I finished the book, and, as you'll see, it really affected me emotionally. For two clips of our convo — on the clarity of Orwell's writing, and the savior complex of the woke — head to our YouTube page.Other topics: raised by two Stanford professors; his dad accused of fascism by his leftist students and red-baited by the right; his dad's stroke and subsequent suicide at a young age; George's time in the Peace Corps; how Orwell's Homage to Catalonia “saved me”; entering journalism at 40; reporting in Iraq; Orwell's contempt for elites; Auden and Spender; the ideologies of intellectuals; the young turning on their elders; the summer of 2020; Camus' La Peste; January 6; Orwell's bigotries; his love for the countryside and common decency; Animal Farm; Nineteen Eighty-Four; Hitchens; utopianism; Nietzsche and slave morality; Fukuyama and boredom; the collapse of religion; intra-elite competition; Mamdani; the Gaza protests; virtue signaling; struggle sessions; mobs on social media; the loss of gatekeepers; the queer takeover of the gay rights movement; the brutality of meritocracy; Nick Fuentes; Trump's multi-racial win; his Cabinet picks as trolling; the utter capitulation of Vance; Haidt and smartphones; and our post-literate democracy.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy. Coming up: Shadi Hamid in defense of US interventionism, Simon Rogoff on the narcissism of pols, Arthur Brooks on the science of happiness, Vivek Ramaswamy on the right, and Jason Willick on trade and conservatism. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

A ideia de «fim do mundo» paralisa ou mobiliza a espécie humana? No derradeiro episódio da dupla, João Pereira Coutinho e Manuel Cardoso descobrem que até no «fim dos tempos» a política tem uma palavra a dizer.Vivemos tempos conturbados – da emergência climática aos conflitos armados entre estados, da polarização política aos avanços da inteligência artificial. Mas será que o fim dos tempos está realmente próximo ou nós é que não conseguimos pôr de lado esta ideia?As teorias apocalíticas que pretendem revelar o sentido da História encontram-se à esquerda e à direita e em todos os períodos históricos. Se na Antiguidade e na Idade Média os medos se relacionavam com fomes, invasões e pestes, nos séculos XX e XXI o cenário de extermínio da humanidade ganha força com os desenvolvimentos tecnológicos.Nesta viagem por diferentes autores e doutrinas, o politólogo e o humorista revisitam teses sobre o fim, como a das religiões milenaristas e a da sociedade sem classes de Marx, passando pelos argumentos de Fukuyama em prol da democracia liberal. A dupla reflete ainda sobre o declínio das grandes utopias políticas e sobre como esse desencanto ajudou a consolidar o imaginário pessimista dos dias de hoje.Num salto para a atualidade, discutem-se teorias da conspiração e a forma como as obsessões apocalíticas podem desviar a atenção do presente, paralisando-nos nas decisões políticas que impactarão o futuro. Para saber mais, não precisa de ir até ao fim do mundo, basta carregar no play deste episódio [IN]Pertinente.REFERÊNCIAS E LINKS ÚTEISBENATAR, David, «Better Never to Have Been - The Harm of Coming into Existence» (Oxford University Press)COHN, Norman, «The Pursuit of the Millenium» (Oxford University Press)FUREDI, Frank, «How Fear Works» (Bloomsbury)PHILLIPS, Tom, «A Brief History of the End of the F*cking World» (Wildfire)SHKLAR, Judith, «After Utopia - The Decline of Political Faith» (Princeton University Press)WADE, Lizzie, «Apocalypses» (William Collins)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.

Veja também em youtube.com/@45_graus Francis Fukuyama is one of the world’s most influential political scientists. He is a Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and Director of its Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law. He previously taught at Johns Hopkins SAIS and George Mason University, and served in the U.S. Department of State’s Policy Planning Staff. Fukuyama became internationally known with The End of History and the Last Man (1992), both a landmark and controversial book that helped shape the post–Cold War debate on democracy and liberalism. His research spans comparative political development, institutions, governance, state capacity, identity politics, technology, and democratic resilience. _______________ Índice: (0:00) Introdução (5:53) Democratic backsliding, state capacity vs democracy | What’s happening in the US? (14:10) Culture and social capital | Robert Putnam: Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital | Europe vs US (23:59) Why do people support populists even after they fail? | Georgia Meloni, Javier Milei (30:05) How can democracies deal with immigration? (40:54) Are the rise of populism and authoritarianism related phenomena? (44:17) The information revolution. Dangers of AI. The idea of deliberative assemblies (57:23) Yascha Mounk: The Great Experiment: Why Diverse Democracies Fall Apart and How They Can Endure (59:56) Will left-wing populism come back?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What are the latest sustainable japan topics on our radar for November?Monthly chat about sustainability trends, innovation, events and issues for Japan & beyond with JJWalsh & Tove Kinooka / Topics & Updates - November 2025LINKSThe Conduit - Climate and Conflict https://www.theconduit.com/programme/... The Burning Question: Climate & Conflict • The Burning Question: Climate and Conflict Talk with traditional-Japanese design expert author-architecht Azby Brown about how Humans connect to human-made things • Hand Crafted Design Appeal of Traditional ... Blacksmith in Fukuyama: / akitakazuyoshi Deep Travel Experience with Alex Kerr in Kagawa via ONESTORY / onestorytraveller LinkedIn Univ Exeter COP30 Summary

This episode of Management Matters with James-Christian Blockwood features Frank Fukuyama, author, political scientist and professor at Stanford University, Vanessa Williamson of the Brookings Institution, and Philip Howard, founder and chair of Common Good for "The State of Public Administration" in front of a live audience during the 2025 National Conference in Washington, D.C. on November 3. Part 2 of this episode features questions from the Academy Fellows in attendance about reform efforts, and how to foster communication with the public.Management Matters is a presentation of the National Academy of Public Administration produced by Lizzie Alwan and Matt Hampton and edited by Matt Hampton. Support the Podcast Today at: donate@napawash.org or 202-347-3190Episode music: Hope by Mixaund | https://mixaund.bandcamp.comMusic promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.comFollow us on YouTube for clips and more: @NAPAWASH_YT

This episode of Management Matters with James-Christian Blockwood features Frank Fukuyama, author, political scientist and professor at Stanford University, Vanessa Williamson of the Brookings Institution, and Philip Howard, founder and chair of Common Good for "The State of Public Administration" in front of a live audience during the 2025 National Conference in Washington, D.C. on November 3. This captivating discussion about the state of American public service, how to rebuild and retool government capacity, and where we go from here. This episode is split into two parts, with the audience Q&A to follow next week, so stay tuned!Management Matters is a presentation of the National Academy of Public Administration produced by Lizzie Alwan and Matt Hampton and edited by Matt Hampton. Support the Podcast Today at: donate@napawash.org or 202-347-3190Episode music: Hope by Mixaund | https://mixaund.bandcamp.comMusic promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.comFollow us on YouTube for clips and more: @NAPAWASH_YT

El ‘capital comunitario' es un aspecto fundamental de la sociedad. Sin tenerlo en cuenta, no podemos resolver problemas endémicos de nuestra sociedad. Tengo la convicción de que constituye la verdadera riqueza de las naciones y nos permite avanzar ilustradamente por la senda del progreso. Sin tenerlo en cuenta, no podemos resolver problemas endémicos de nuestra sociedad. ¿Porqué no funcionan los programas contra la violencia de género? ¿Por qué no conseguimos limitar el consumo de drogas? ¿Por qué estamos presenciando el auge de las ‘democracia iliberales'? ¿Por qué es tan difícil mejorarun sistema educativo?  Mi respuesta es: porque hay una quiebra de ‘capital comunitario'. Por eso las acciones específicas tienen tan poco éxito. Los estudios nos dicen que un alto capital social favorece la buena marcha de las instituciones democráticas (Putnam), crea prosperidad económica (Fukuyama), fomenta el éxito educativo (Coleman, Favre y Jaeggi), mejora la salud pública (Carrillo,Riera) y aumenta el bienestar social (OCDE).  ¿Cómo se puede estimular el crecimiento del ‘capital comunitario'? ¿Quién debe hacerlo? Pues todos los agentessociales: los ciudadanos, el Estado, los empresarios, lossindicatos, el sistema educativo, los medios de comunicación, la Iglesia. ¿Cómo pueden hacerlo? Con argumentos, conejemplaridad, con paciencia, utilizando todas las armas de lapersuasión y de la seducción.Atribuciones:“If I were a rich man”  – BSO «Fiddler on the roof»"Desert Caravan"  – Aaron KennyEntradilla y cierre: «The Comedy» de plaincaskMúsica de fondo: «Jazz Intro Luxury Lounge» de pianorock

Jim Baer talks with Francis Fukuyama — author of The End of History and the Last Man — about the fragility of liberal democracy in an age of rising authoritarianism and deepening polarization. They discuss political decay in the U.S., geopolitical threats from Russia and China, and the outsized influence of social media. Fukuyama also shares a practical vision for rebuilding effective governance through an “abundance agenda” that cuts through gridlock and proves democracy can still deliver.

To suggest that there is considerable turmoil across the globe is an understatement. “Nature abhors a vacuum” is constantly given new reign. Following the Soviet Union's collapse in 1989, political scientist Francis Fukuyama announced history was dead. His best selling “The End of History and the Last Man” is updated, still in print and nowhere near death. Then in 2018 Fukuyama's book “Identity” announces that “fragmentation based on alignment of interest into identity groups, has emerged as a new threat to democracy”. On September 3, 2025 retired barrister Louise Clegg wrote an opinion article drawing on all the above, called “Sliding into technocracy”. After thirty years in the legal profession, she guests in Podcast 302. From Nietzsche to Charlie Kirk, it is a worthy discussion. There's more on the assassination of Charlie Kirk in the Mailroom with Mrs Producer. File your comments and complaints at Leighton@newstalkzb.co.nz Haven't listened to a podcast before? Check out our simple how-to guide. Listen here on iHeartRadio Leighton Smith's podcast also available on iTunes:To subscribe via iTunes click here See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Paddy O'Connell speaks to Professor Francis Fukuyama about the threats to liberal democracies around the world. The American political economist and international relations scholar, who is currently a senior fellow at Stanford University, has written widely on issues about development and international politics. He is best-known for his 1992 book ‘The End of History and the Last Man'. He argued that the end of the Cold War, marked by the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, represented the end point of mankind's ideological evolution, and the universalisation of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.But three decades on, Western liberal democracy appears to be struggling to adapt to the many challenges of the 21st century. Amid geopolitical instability, its future does not appear as universal as Fukuyama once proposed, even in the US. The Interview brings you conversations with people shaping our world, from all over the world. The best interviews from the BBC. You can listen on the BBC World Service, Mondays and Wednesdays at 0700 GMT. Or you can listen to The Interview as a podcast, out twice a week on BBC Sounds or wherever you get your podcasts.Presenter: Paddy O'Connell Producer: Ben Cooper Editor: Nick HollandGet in touch with us on email TheInterview@bbc.co.uk and use the hashtag #TheInterviewBBC on social media.(Image: Professor Francis Fukuyama. Photo by Thomas Trutschel/Photothek via Getty Images)

When the Soviet Union collapsed, Frances Fukuyama famously declared that we had reached the “end of history.” He meant that the big arguments, the major ideological struggles, were now all in the past, and that liberal democracy would prevail from then on. The rest would be just cordial arguments about policy. That peaceful kingdom has obviously not come to pass. Some might argue that Fukuyama's core thesis is still true. Liberal democracy lacks a coherent, universal rival. No alternative ideology has matched its global appeal or institutional resilience. Even authoritarian regimes adopt democratic trappings (e.g., elections in Russia) to gain legitimacy, implicitly acknowledging liberal democracy's normative power. That said, Fukuyama clearly underestimated internal challenges within democracies—polarization, disinformation, and inequality—evident in events like the U.S. Capitol riot or Brexit. These weaken the system's appeal and stability. While history may not have “ended,” liberal democracy remains a dominant, yet contested, paradigm. Its triumph is neither inevitable nor complete, as cultural, economic, and political forces continue to shape ideological battles globally. These are some of the issues that Hunter Baker looks at in his new book Postliberal Protestants: Baptists Between Obergefell and Christian Nationalism. And, if you're not Baptist, don't be turned off by the sub-title. Baker argues – I think convincingly – that the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest protestant denomination in the country, is in some ways a proxy for all of evangelicalism. I think he's mostly right, and that's why I think his book should be read not just by Baptists, but by all Christian leaders who want to have a role in shaping important public conversations in the 2020s and beyond. Also, Hunter Baker's argument for religious liberty – a cause long championed by Southern Baptists – is one that I think bears particular attention in this era in which we've seen a resurgence of religious intolerance both in the United States and around the world. Hunter Baker has both a law degree and a Ph.D., and he's the provost and dean of faculty at North Greenville University, in South Carolina. He is the author of four books, and you may have seen his byline at WORLD Magazine, where he is a frequent contributor to WORLD Opinions. In a spirit of full disclosure, I should also say that Hunter is a friend, someone I turn to regularly for counsel and fellowship. The producer for today's program is Jeff McIntosh. Until next time, may God bless you.

On this week's episode of The Current Thing, I am joined by bestselling author, Charles Cornish-Dale AKA Raw Egg Nationalist, whose new book is The Last Men: Liberalism and the Death of Masculinity. We discuss: -How liberal democracy tames and neuters men -Why humans might not be able to reproduce naturally in the near future -Why testosterone makes you right wing -The devastating effect of the modern diet on our health and even our politics -Why people misunderstand Fukuyama's predictions about the ‘end of history' -How you can improve your life and health by rejecting toxic influences -Why he likes to sit in a barrel And lots more! Watch the full episode, with extra content not available anywhere else, here: https://www.nickdixon.net/ Get all full episodes with top guests, join Nick's private chat group, and of course support the podcast and help us save the West, all for just £5 by going to nickdixon.net Or make a one-off donation here: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/nickdixon Nick's links Substack: nickdixon.net YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@nick_dixon X: https://x.com/njdixon Raw Egg Nationalist's links: https://x.com/Babygravy9  raweggnationalist.com

Slightly contra Fukuyama on liberal communities Francis Fukuyama is on Substack; last month he wrote Liberalism Needs Community. As always, read the whole thing and don't trust my summary, but the key point is: R. R. Reno, editor of the magazine First Things, the liberal project of the past three generations has sought to weaken the “strong Gods” of populism, nationalism, and religion that were held to be the drivers of the bloody conflicts of the early 20th century. Those gods are now returning, and are present in the politics of both the progressive left and far right—particularly the right, which is characterized today by demands for strong national identities or religious foundations for national communities. However, there is a cogent liberal response to the charge that liberalism undermines community. The problem is that, just as in the 1930s, that response has not been adequately articulated by the defenders of liberalism. Liberalism is not intrinsically opposed to community; indeed, there is a version of liberalism that encourages the flourishing of strong community and human virtue. That community emerges through the development of a strong and well-organized civil society, where individuals freely choose to bond with other like-minded individuals to seek common ends. People are free to follow “strong Gods”; the only caveat is that there is no single strong god that binds the entire society together. In other words - yes, part of the good life is participation in a tight-knit community with strong values. Liberalism's shared values are comparatively weak, and its knitting comparatively loose. But that's no argument against the liberal project. Its goal isn't to become this kind of community itself, but to be the platform where communities like this can grow up. So in a liberal democracy, Christians can have their church, Jews their synagogue, Communists their commune, and so on. Everyone gets the tight-knit community they want - which beats illiberalism, where (at most) one group gets the community they want and everyone else gets persecuted. On a theoretical level, this is a great answer. On a practical level - is it really working? Are we really a nation dotted with tight-knit communities of strong values? The average person has a church they don't attend and a political philosophy that mainly cashes out in Twitter dunks. Otherwise they just consume whatever slop the current year's version of capitalism chooses to throw at them. It's worth surveying the exceptions that prove the rule: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/should-strong-gods-bet-on-gdp

On resistance and reform in southeast Asia. Historian Sean Fear talks to Alex H and Lee Jones about Vietnam on the 50-year anniversary since the end of the war. How is Vietnamese identity wrapped up with the notion of resistance? Is Chinese influence as great as resistance to China? How is the ‘American War' thought about in Vietnam today? How similar is Vietnam to China: defying Fukuyama's thesis by retaining a state-socialist political system while adopting capitalism? Why has Vietnam achieved rapid growth and development while neighbours have failed? How is Vietnam reacting to being at the centre of Trump tariff disputes? For the full episode, subscribe at patreon.com/bungacast Links: The Republic of Vietnam, 1955–1975: Vietnamese Perspectives on Nation Building, Sean Fear, Tuong Vu (eds.), Cornell UP /115/ Singapore Shangri-La ft. Lee Jones Post-Cold War Vietnam: stay low, learn, adapt and try to have fun – but what about the party?, Adam Fforde

My guest is Francis Fukuyama, a scholar and political scientist. He is the author of many books. He is most well known for his 1992 work, "The End of History & the Last Man". Drawing on Hegel and Marx, Fukuyama explores the concept of teleology — the idea that history is a linear process where human societies progress through sequential socioeconomic forms. As Marx famously wrote, Feudalism was replaced by Capitalism and would ultimately be replaced by Socialism. But after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, Francis Fukuyama argued that western liberal democracy was the final form of human government. His thesis has been updated and revised many times since and remains a frequent subject of debate today. You can get access to the full catalog for Doomscroll and more by becoming a paid supporter: www.patreon.com/joshuacitarella joshuacitarella.substack.com/subscribe

Stanley Sharpey joins Douglas Lain to discuss Francis Fukuyama's 1992 book "The End of History and the Last Man," as well as Fukuyama's attempt to defend and return to this work over the last 33 years. Support Sublation Media on Patreonhttps://patreon.com/dietsoap

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comEd is the US national editor and columnist at the Financial Times. Before that, he was the FT's Washington Bureau chief, the South Asia bureau chief, Capital Markets editor, and Philippines correspondent. During the Clinton administration, he was the speechwriter for Larry Summers. The author of many books, his latest is Zbig: The Life and Times of Brzezinski, America's Great Power Prophet.For two clips of our convo — on how China played Trump on rare minerals, and Europe's bind over Russian energy — head to our YouTube page.Other topics: growing up in West Sussex near my hometown; the international appeal of English boarding schools; the gerontocracy of the USSR; Ed making a beeline to the Berlin Wall as it fell; Fukuyama's The End of History; Brzezinski's The Grand Failure — of Communism; enthusiasm for free markets after the Cold War; George Kennan warning against Ukraine independence; HW Bush and the Persian Gulf; climate change and migration; a population boom in Africa; W Bush tolerating autocracy in the war on terrorism; Trump tearing up his own NAFTA deal; the resurgence of US isolationism; the collapsing security umbrella in Europe leading to more self-reliance; Germany's flagging economy; the China threat; Taiwan's chips; TACO on tariffs; the clean energy cuts in OBBBA; the abundance agenda; national debt and Bowles-Simpson; the overrated Tony Blair; Liz Truss' “epic Dunning-Kruger”; Boris killing the Tory Party; the surprising success of Mark Carney; Biden's mediocrity; Bernie's appeal; and the Rest catching up with the West.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Tara Zahra on the revolt against globalization after WWI, Scott Anderson on the Iranian Revolution, Shannon Minter debating trans issues, Thomas Mallon on the AIDS crisis, and Johann Hari turning the tables to interview me. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

Send us a textA blend of biology, philosophy, and history exploring how hormones and endocrine disruptors affect social behavior and society.Episode Summary: Dr. Charles Cornish-Dale discusses the decline of masculinity in modern society, linking it to falling testosterone levels, environmental endocrine disruptors, and the limitations of liberal democracy. Drawing on Francis Fukuyama's “End of History & the Last Men” and historical perspectives, Cornish-Dale argues that biological and societal factors, including diet and hormonal interventions like birth control, are reshaping male and female behaviors, with profound implications for health and social structures.About the guest: Charles Cornish-Dale, PhD is a medieval historian and anthropologist with a PhD from Oxford. His new book is, “The Last Men: Liberalism and the Death of Masculinity.”Discussion Points:Thymos & Masculinity: Cornish-Dale uses the ancient Greek concept of thymos, meaning spiritedness, to explain male drives for recognition and distinction, which he ties to testosterone-driven behaviors.Testosterone Decline: Studies like the Massachusetts Male Aging Study show a ~20% drop in male testosterone levels over 17 years, correlating with reduced reproductive health and social withdrawal.Endocrine Disruptors: Chemicals in plastics, pesticides, and soy products mimic estrogen, disrupting hormonal balance and potentially causing developmental and behavioral issues.Diet & Behavior: Historical shifts to grain-based diets, as noted by Plato, and modern plant-based trends may suppress thymos and alter hormonal profiles, impacting societal dynamics.Hormonal Contraceptives: Birth control can thin the ventromedial prefrontal cortex in women, affecting emotional regulation, especially if taken during teenage years, with potential permanent effects.Fukuyama's End of History Framework: Cornish-Dale critiques liberal democracy's inability to satisfy megalothymia (the desire to be better), contributing to a crisis of purpose for men.Related episode:M&M 193: History of Diet & Food, Population Density & Social Stability, Psychological Pandemics, Physical & Mental Health in Civilizational CyclesSupport the showAll episodes, show notes, transcripts, and more at the M&M Substack Affiliates: KetoCitra—Ketone body BHB + potassium, calcium & magnesium, formulated with kidney health in mind. Use code MIND20 for 20% off any subscription (cancel anytime) Lumen device to optimize your metabolism for weight loss or athletic performance. Code MIND for 10% off Readwise: Organize and share what you read. 60 days FREE through link SiPhox Health—Affordable at-home blood testing. Key health markers, visualized & explained. Code TRIKOMES for a 20% discount. MASA Chips—delicious tortilla chips made from organic corn & grass-fed beef tallow. No seed oils or artificial ingredients. Code MIND for 20% off For all the ways you can support my efforts

Last month, Francis Fukuyama was scheduled to come to Washington, DC for a live taping of Wisdom of Crowds. Unfortunately, as subscribers know, Frank lost his voice the morning of his scheduled appearance, and we were forced to cancel. However, we were able to record a bit of conversation with him and Shadi Hamid the following day, with a few colleagues asking questions.The conversation ended up being a quasi-“state of liberalism” address, perfect for July 4th weekend.The conversation begins with Frank discussing the current challenges to liberal societies, addressing why some in the West today might be dissatisfied with it, but also why people living in autocratic regimes throughout the world still long for liberalism. He talks about the lassitude and dissatisfaction that permeates liberal societies, and the contradictory desires for ever-greater equality and spirited competition that drive citizens to rebel against liberalism.During the question and answer session, Fukuyama takes questions about recent events. He discusses the rise of right-wing parties in Europe, as well as recent developments in France, Germany and Romania. He touches upon citizenship, borders, deportations and Trump's immigration policies. And he answers the question that was on everybody's mind that night: Is history still over?Required Reading* Francis Fukuyama, “The End of History?” (National Interest). * CrowdSource, “Fukuyama's Children” (WoC). * Damir and Shadi's 2022 conversation with Francis Fukuyama (WoC).* Santiago Ramos, “Kicking the Ladder” (WoC).Wisdom of Crowds is a platform challenging premises and understanding first principles on politics and culture. Join us! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit wisdomofcrowds.live/subscribe

Nate Hile (  @grailcountry  ) joins Sam to discuss the historical and philosophical roots of liberalism. They explore how Christian personalism, rather than radical individualism, forms the true basis of liberal thought and why this tradition is worth defending against illiberal threats from both the left and the right.Names Mentioned:Paul Vanderklay (  @PaulVanderKlay  ), Luke Thompson (  @WhiteStoneName  ) , Dr. Jim, Caiaphas, David Walsh, Jordan Hall, John Vervaeke (  @johnvervaeke  ), Jonathan Pageau.(  @JonathanPageau  ) , Thomas Jefferson, Michael Servetus, Martin Luther, John Calvin, James White, Matthew Henry, Daniel Korbin, JD Vance, Trump, Elon Musk, Rod Dreher, Barry Weiss, Curtis Yarvin, Grim, Fukuyama, Peter the Great, Trent Horn, John Locke, Richard Rohlin, Constantine the Great, and more. Chapters:0:00 Introduction1:23 What is Liberalism?6:54 The Christian Roots of Liberalism12:48 Personalism vs. Individualism18:59 The Forgotten History of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth31:33 The Rise of an Illiberal Right41:44 How 9/11 and COVID Eroded Liberalism50:19 The Protestant Reformation's Influence1:09:10 The Unitarian Flight to the Netherlands and John Locke1:15:17 The Role of the Church in a Liberal Society1:20:45 Is America a Nation or a Church?

In the latest episode of our monthly special incooperation with the Journal of Democracy, Francis Fukuyama and Beatriz Magaloni discuss why democratic legitimacy increasingly hinges on governments' ability to deliver tangible results.Drawing on their co-authored article with Chris Dann, “Delivering for Democracy: Why Results Matter” (April2025, Vol. 26, No. 2), Fukuyama and Magaloni examine how unmet expectations around infrastructure, security, and economic opportunity are fueling distrust in democratic systems and possibly opening the door to authoritarianalternatives. The conversation explores the performance–legitimacy nexus, whether democracies can overcome their “vetocratic” hurdles without compromising their core values, and what reforms might help reverse the global democratic malaise.

Subscribe now for the full episode and much more content! Danny and Derek welcome to the program political scientist Francis Fukuyama to talk about his recent article for the Journal of Democracy, “Delivering for Democracy: Why Results Matter.” The group explores why Dr. Fukuyama felt the need to address democratic backsliding, what about Trump's actions have precedents in American history vs what's unique to this administration, how capitalism interacts with Dr. Fukuyama's understanding of democracy, whether regulated capitalism is possible without an ideological challenger, the abundance movement, and what reforms can be made to help democracies deliver better.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comClaire Lehmann is a journalist and publisher. In 2015, after leaving academia, she founded the online magazine Quillette, where she is still editor-in-chief. She's also a newspaper columnist for The Australian.For two clips of our convo — on how journalists shouldn't be too friendly with one another, and how postmodernism takes the joy out of literature — pop over to our YouTube page.Other topics: a modest upbringing in Adelaide; her hippie parents; their small-c conservatism; her many working-class jobs; ADHD; aspiring to be a Shakespeare scholar; enjoying Foucault … at first; her “great disillusionment” with pomo theory; the impenetrable prose of Butler; the great Germaine Greer; praising Camille Paglia; evolutionary psychology; Wright's The Moral Animal and Pinker's The Blank Slate; Claire switching to forensic psychology after an abusive relationship; the TV show Adolescence; getting hired by the Sydney Morning Herald to write op-eds — her first on marriage equality; Bush's federal amendment; competition among women; tribalism and mass migration; soaring housing costs in Australia; rising populism in the West; creating Quillette; the IDW; being anti-anti-Trump; audience capture; Islamism and Charlie Hebdo; Covid; critical Trump theory; tariffs; reflexive anti-elitism; Joe Rogan; Almost Famous; Orwell; Spinoza; Oakeshott; Fukuyama and boredom; tech billionaires on Inauguration Day; the sycophants of Trump 2.0; and X as a state propaganda platform.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Next week: David Graham on Project 2025. After that: Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson on the Biden years, Sam Tanenhaus on Bill Buckley, Robert Merry on President McKinley, Walter Isaacson on Ben Franklin, and Paul Elie on his book The Last Supper: Art, Faith, Sex, and Controversy in the 1980s. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

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

Vzpomínáte ještě na Francise Fukuyamu, amerického politologa, který už v roce 1989, celé měsíce před pádem berlínské zdi, napsal článek s názvem Konec historie? Argumentoval v něm, že by rozpadem Sovětského svazu skončila nejen studená válka, ale i dějiny lidstva. V něčem Fukuyama projevil značnou jasnozřivost: SSSR se skutečně rozpadl, do zemí Sovětského bloku přišla svoboda.

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.

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.

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 free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comJohn Gray is a political philosopher. He retired from academia in 2007 as Professor of European Thought at the London School of Economics, and is now a regular contributor and lead reviewer at the New Statesman. He's the author of two dozen books, and his latest is The New Leviathans: Thoughts After Liberalism. I'd say he's one of the most brilliant minds of our time — and my first podcast with him was a huge hit. I asked him to come on this week to get a broader and deeper perspective on where we are now in the world. He didn't disappoint.For two clips of our convo — on the ways Trump represents peace, and how heterosexuals have become more like gays — pop over to our YouTube page.Other topics: this week's inauguration; the peaceful transfer of power; the panic of the left intelligentsia; the contradictions in the new Trump administration; Bannon vs Musk; Vivek's quick exit; the techno-futurist oligarchs; Vance as the GOP's future; tariffs and inflation; the federal debt; McKinley and the Gilded Age; Manifest Destiny; Greenland; isolationism; the neocon project to convert the world; Hobbes and “commodious living”; Malthus and today's declining birthrates; post-industrial alienation; deaths of despair; Fukuyama's “End of History”; Latinx; AI and knowledge workers; Plato; Pascal; Dante; CS Lewis' Abolition of Man; pre-Christian paganism; Puritans and the woke; Žižek; Rod Dreher; Houellebecq; how submission can be liberating; Graham Greene; religion as an anchor; why converts are often so dangerous; Freudian repression; Orwell and goose-stepping; the revolution of consciousness after Christ; Star Wars as neo-Christian; Dune as neo-pagan; Foucault; Oakeshott's lovers; Montaigne; Judith Shklar; Ross Douthat; the UK's rape-gangs; Starmer and liberal legalism; the Thomist view of nature; the medieval view of abortion; late-term abortions; and assisted dying.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Sebastian Junger on near-death experiences, Jon Rauch on “Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy,” Evan Wolfson on the history of marriage equality, Yoni Appelbaum on how America stopped building things, Nick Denton on the evolution of new media, and Ross Douthat on how everyone should be religious. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

On Trump's foreign policy, the 2nd time round. Historian and podcaster Daniel Bessner joins Alex Hochuli and contributing editor Lee Jones to ask how this era of rot and decay will proceed under Trump II, from Ukraine to China and beyond. We discuss: Will we see "America First transactionalism"? Does Trump have a capable cadre to bend the state to his will? What will Trump's relationship be to the deep state? How important are generational splits in attitudes to the US empire? Will there be a peace deal in Ukraine? Where does that leave 'Atlanticism'? Is confrontation with China baked in? Is the Middle East the key to world peace? Links: EU blows hot and cold over Trump, Benoît Bréville, Le Monde diplomatique America First, Russia, & Ukraine, Lt. General (Ret.) Keith Kellogg, Fred Fleitz, AFPI Empire's Critic: The Worlds of Noam Chomsky, Daniel Bessner, The Nation /171/ Fukuyama & the End of History ft. Daniel Bessner  /142/ Dollar Empire (2) ft. Daniel Bessner

Join host Michael Keegan for a Special Edition of The Business of Government Hour – The National Academy of Public Administration FALL MEETING SERIES. This second in a series of conversations exploring the key challenges facing public management today and how an agile mindset is necessary to tackle these challenges. Michael welcomes noted public intellectual […]

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

En el programa de hoy se analiza la posible reelección de Donald Trump y su impacto en la política y sociedad de Estados Unidos. El presentador explora la visión del filósofo Fukuyama sobre el fin del liberalismo y las implicancias que el retorno de Trump podría tener en la democracia y el sistema de clases. También se discute el creciente control social, tomando como ejemplo el modelo chino, y cómo el aumento de bases de datos y la tecnología de vigilancia alteran las dinámicas democráticas. Se concluye con reflexiones sobre los efectos de estos fenómenos en Chile y otros países en un contexto de cambio global. Para acceder al programa sin interrupción de comerciales, suscríbete a Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/elvillegas 00:00:06 - La reelección de Trump y su impacto 00:03:32 - Fukuyama y el fin del liberalismo 00:08:40 - Clases sociales y apoyo político en EE.UU. 00:22:00 - Control social y vigilancia global 00:37:01 - Cambios sociales y efecto Trump 00:40:47 - El futuro de la democracia y el liberalismo

The boys dive in to chapter 6 of Dugin's Fourth Political theory. Don't worry, there are literally no digressions and the guys stay on point the whole time.Check out Varn Vlog here:https://www.patreon.com/varnvlog/postsCheck out Antifada here:https://www.patreon.com/theantifadaSend us a textSupport the Show.

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