Work with you in the congress, eager to chat about your book, the case against socialism but maybe first just reflect about the role you have within the congress, within our party as an independent voice and someone whos willing to strike out on issues that may be of the republicans are not willing to strike out on tragic sometimes i think im a lonely voice. You know it is in the house, if you believe we should spend less or have a limited Constitutional Government really controversial things like that, limited Constitutional Government, unfortunately we never get any of the other side but the wind is a lot on our side i could be better at it and and i guess ts one of my frustrations but i try very hard to have the same opinion was its republican president or democrat president , that the constitution with specific, spending power was ours. Things like that we should keep our hands on, power to declare war is ours. We too easily give that up and one of interesting things that i found coming up here is democrats are better on these issues when its a republican president who want to oppose the republicans are better when its a democrat president but when the parties are the same they tend to acquiesce a bit on the idea of separation of power. Host in this book you might the case against socialism, it operates to me very much as a debate guide against those who would try to grow the left Political Movement by dancing socialists ideas, embracing socialist dictators, maybe talk about the need for the book through the lens of which Political Movement is expanding or contracting. Guest most people hear the title, the case against socialism and he said thats a great idea but i wish it wasnt necessary. You wouldnt think it would be necessary and it is true. I was born in the 1960s and we still were sort of experience. In the early 1960s khrushchev was just admitting to stalin, the terror of the stalin and the programs of killing to millions of people who died in the famines about that time, the great famine and changes happen in the 50s. Many of these things were becoming known but throughout most of my lifetime people were horrified at what they learned of what happened with socialism. Now we turn the page and we have poll showing young people over half of them alike enthusiastic. Almost half of them hate capitalism. Almost half think socialism is something that to try. Its perplexing to some of us of registered socialism. It is necessary. We have a couple of socialists over on your side. We have socialists on the senate side and when i was a kid i think that were socialist they were embarrassed at the label. They didnt want to be called socialists so that liberals. They did want to be called liberals but the new with me popular. Now they are in your facing im a socialist and and want to bring socialism in. They have party, the democratic socialists of america and theyre proud of it. It alarms began people are not going my goodness, what the socialism really mean . Host its been in a short period of time weve seen democrat socials brace embrace the socialist brand as a growth agenda. He said something earlier in your political career which ive never forgot about our prospects for growth and leveraging liberty for growth and uses specifically want our party needs more people who have tattoos and more people who dont have tattoos so the question is, we need to go find people with tattoos to join the party or do we need to tattoo more people . Guest a good question. I said with and without tattoos. With ponytails and with that. With the without earrings. We need to be a more hipper, cooler party the young people want to join. Thats part of the public some of socialism has become hip or cool but they dont know what it is. The same studies essay therefore it, like 10 of the people for four socialism can define as they government owning the means of production. They think its about fairness. Part of this i blame the government schools. The government schools teach everybody kind of self sustainment and if you cant spell will give them a price anyway because he needs to go good about himself. We will have come passout selfesteem, passout fairness and they get this idea somehow the government will make things fair. One of the things we point out in here is there still top 1 socialism. The difference is under our system its at least mostly or to a large extent based on merit who becomes wealthy. If im sam walton and its also the one what im good at sellid distributing. I can become a billionaire but no would force you to buy stuff. Its the same way with most billionaires in our society. When you look at socialism there still a top 1 . They maduros doesnt have top 1 . There are generals that are all well fed. One thing to point out about maduro, the leader in venezuela is the average persons lost 20 pounds down there but he makes ted kennedy look slip your keys wearing a size 60 a jacket or 74 chest jacket and because he keeps getting fatter and fatter. Host i have never read of book that better that shane socialism than your book. Guest . You went on this project as an interesting endeavor in marriage as well. He wrote the book with your wife. I am not married but i always heard that wallpapering together can be difficult. Talk to us about the process of writing this book with your wife. You write a beautiful poem at the beginning of the book to your wife that i think speaks to a lot of people who have endured some sense of sacrifice and the notion that sacrifice is linked to another human being that you love. Guest kelly and i worked pretty well together. They give you advice in marriage, when your wife says something you sort of divide up, you have things and then ultimately you let her make the final decision. Thats not entirely too but it kind it is in the im laid back. I wrote a lot of stuff and she read it and said it would be interesting to add this in. Host give us a kelly paul unique sweetener. Guest i would say the discussion of the Covington Catholic but was largely hers. It really got it going, cotter upset, all this upset a watch this with the media did to this. Sort of the link into social news weve gotten to a point where we have propaganda filling our airways. Under socialism is from the government. This is coming from private entities but that one was an innocent 15yearold boy. Our kids went to catholic school. School. He never says a word and get all these adults on scene and were saying he has a punch of office. I met with some of these people a week later when the truth is, were still saying looks like you to punch him. Really . Do not understand what you are saying . Just anything about that story was wrong and i really hope in the in the courts will save you cant lie about somebody because the really is a court case here. Theyre having kids that get into harvard because they do inappropriate things other social media. He didnt do that but hes being lumped in with people or racist or who say bad things. It might be excluded from schools and from careers because people think he was some terrible person. In reality he never said a word, never did anything and other side were all this terrible adult dating in his face yelling horrible epithets at both and the others. The media get everything completely wrong because they had an agenda. Kelly whiskey in getting that in and she does a great job of im describing that it describing what happens under propaganda and socialism trauma the democrats and socialists we serve with thomas socialism is the path dependence. Who are the Fairness Police and how do you write about them . Guest thats a good point, is that in the abstract they say will have fairness but the thing is you have the conception of the fence, i have a conception of fairness. But to invoke hers on us if we disagree shes not going to sell us her ideas at of their strict justice in the police basically. This is what breaks down because and this is why maybe its become popular, is a conflict fairness with things like charity and being your brothers keeper. I think we should be our brothers keeper. I believe in christianity and accretion id with commuting that we should take care of our people but nothing to do with government. They believe it and the conflict and they say charity is a backup to your house and take your money and give to someone else. Charity is if you get of your own money. Its not charity will become it comes like it isnt very charitable in the way the government doesnt because the more you want socialism, this is one of the points when they come if you want a little bit of socialism, violence and, may be tolerable. You have more date violence but if you want to take the property and when mao came to take the farm, when stalin like devise the farms is a point which people can rebel and the weight and get as to violence. You have to kill a people and does it happen under stalin. Not just a few, billions. From that we typekey to help the question is, i i taught a coure at George Washington on the dystopian novel and the kids kept asking, is violence and action of socialism or is violence inherent . Is it inevitable . The more socially you get yes, absolutely its inherent. The more, the closer you get to taking peoples property, people will resist and then you cant just buy them. You also have to put them in jail or shoot them. Host i interact with folksy talk to me as young conservative and say how can i motivate my child, my grandchild to embrace the principles that have made our country great . I would say the book does detail out all of the arguments that socialist make and it goes into i think a good historical context, good global context. The question is when we move past the Tipping Point you cite a harvard study says more than half the people under the age of 29 have now a a critical view of socialism. Have we crossed the rubicon or do we have to go and win back his argument with people who embrace that incremental socialism is . Guest jefferson was one who said every generation has to renew, water the tree of liberty. Thats true with socialism and bad ideas. Every generation has to realize the problems with socialism, what comes from it. The big lie that is out there and the big sort of superficial sort of attitude they throw at you is they say the intellectuals in america used to like stoller but was onto his bed. Thats not the socialism we want. Want. We used to like castro birding was a big fan f castro began with our it wasnt so great. We used to like shop as but not so much. What we really like is sweden. We love scandinavian socialism. Its a kinder gentler socialism. A big part of the book is disproving that. One that sweden and scandinavia is socialist because they are not, they write pretty high on the Freedom Index for trade and a lot of other things, one of the main policy things ernie wants is to raise the Corporate Income taxes. We loaded up from 35 to 21 . Interestingly, scandinavians have been in the low 20s for 30 or 40 years and its part of their success is they that low business taxes. Bernie says want to be sweet and scandinavia but he doesnt what the vote Corporate Income taxes. Also interestingly scandinavia doesnt have a minimum wage. The other interesting thing, this is probably the biggest lie of the left the biggest lie of all the socialist is you can have all this free stuff, something for nothing, free college, paid leave, everything you want. We give you free money and will only tax the rich people. The date lie is thats not what to do and scandinavia. Theres a lot of free stuff but they tax act out of everybody. Bernie and his clan and his merry trip of socialism wont tell you that because theyve want to stick to the rich, not the middle class but in scandinavia, everybody pays a 25 sales tax. From the pores to the richest 25 sales tax. Everybody pays a very significant income tax. So the income and tax is 60 start at 60,000 60,000 is the middle class, this isnt the rich. Thats how they get so much money is they tax the heck out of middle class. You will not see ernie or aoc say we are going to 10 trillion for Climate Change and 60 turn for medicare for all. And we have the middleclass want to have 60 income tax. They are lying to you, their single class want of any tax increase, just the rich. Stick it to the rich people. Its a lie. Host is capitalism zerosum . Thats the argument they make, as the rich get richer that comes of some elses expense and use of right of illustrative examples to go to circumstances where its capitalism that is the rising tide lifts all boats. Guest income inequality has been bandied about by the left and its this terrible thing. We look at an interesting thing is they say one of them points out that pakistan and ethiopia have less income inequality that is. I was like move there then. It really isnt about how close you are to each other. Its about which are level is. Income inequality what are the authors we quotes a its like a jealousy trill. Its about me carry health when you make. Thats a really bad, almost a vice, i should care how rich i am. Theres another one of the big lies the come from the socialist. They said the economic pie is fixed and if i get some, you are getting less. The truth of the met matter isd the statistics are overwhelming on this that the economic pie is getting bigger and bigger and bigger others less poverty, is a group we call from associate with cato, the statistics are amazing. Poverty, and about 1820, 90 of people lived on less than two dollars a day. They do cost in dollars. When i was born it went from 90 in 1820 to about onethird of the world living apartment in the early 1960s today it is less than 10 . Thats incontrovertible. 137,000 people escape extreme poverty every day for the last 25 years. So theyre facts are wrong. Theyre completely wrong. The world is so much better than it used to be. Host you take that global lands. I expected the book to focus on a lot of domestic policy reform that you championed has liberty, reduce the size and scope of government and our allies but i think readers can expect a very global view of how our qualityf life has been impacted as folks have moved toward Big Government or liberty tried to write. The thing is the facts are there that the World Economy is going. Like the u. S. Economy may have doubled eight times in the last 200 years. Poverty as was the everybody is richard. In fact, i started speeches by saying theres never ever, ever been a better time to be alive. I wouldnt want that to sink in. This is not host maybe not in venezuela. You take on venezuela very early in the book and you make some people eat the words on venezuela. He seemed to take some joy in point of fact only bernie but folks obscene income even oliver stone championed venezuela as if great utopia. You have different critique. Guest venezuela is such a disaster. People literally eating their pets. We tell the story of a young lady a teenage girl, and she has a gang letter gang is to defend the truth of the trash pick of certain garbage receptacles, those are her garbage receptacles to look for food. How sad. People killing rats industry to try to eat them, pigeons, andt usually is a sad thing. Kind of going back to the World Economy we have to understand why it got better and understand why venezuela deteriorated into chaos. That is part of what the book is doing but also the debate we should be having here and we dont seem to have in congress is we dont, were not talking of which Economic System is better and nobody in the media seems to care what aoc is supporting or what bernie is supporting is stalin and mao and paul pot and all these terrible ideas, and to get away with it because they are not challenged. , you also trace the roots of social back to the arab world which i think would be in writing committee who would cast these monarchies and other arab endeavors as rightwing governments, not leftwing. But you cite the socialism is a brand of socialism been particularly violent and harmful. Thats part of a problem weve had really since the 1930s. High act and is set when you have hitler, bored by the late 1830s there are recalling how rightwing dictator. I dont think this was accident. I think these were political scientist who decided to develop a spectrum of right and left and so they put nazism over here and socialism and communism over here. When in reality they are different variances of socialism. In fact, the with a part of the socialism and he said like most inventors of something, he wants to make sure it was distinct and he was nationalistic, not international and give those racist and genocidal. He was part of the sink but he said this is a unique yet come up with unique form of socialism when you look at his original planks, they are all from the communist manifesto. Although collectivization but they did it because after the war people became so horrified with what he did with holocaust that social said we cancel socialism if you think hitler is a socialism, lets call him a capitalist. The same in the arab world. The commonality and i think this gets back to the top 1 , is mubarak, all these people, all these dictators in africa for many of the meta socials and but it was socialism combined with kleptocracy and enriching the family but it happens under socialism. Socials and i may will help everybody and anybody will get a chicken in every pot. Yet it always seems like castros daughter really rich, maduro has a rich daughter. The family seem to enrich themselves. Host in that sense you attack the notion that socialism is attainable by saying in the book that every a con in the world will distribute resources unequally, that there is the opportunity for full equal distribution grid and a world where theres an equal distribution of resources you prefer it over cronyism. Do we fall at some risk in the United States congress of leaning into those elements of crony capitalism, and doesnt take us on the slow march to the bad places . Fall into the trap sometimes because sometimes in order to get the things we want like reducing taxes on the economy, we taking people off at the lower end who pay no taxes. We have a tax system really that is a lot different than scandinavia instead of everybody paying, we are much more tipped toward a very progressive tax code. Our rate has come down at the top of the vast majority of the taxes like the top 20 of earners in our country pay 90 of the taxes now you are very critical of the way that a socialist system can fuel a black market and how they can really undermine peoples purchasing power and their opportunity to live within a normalized Economic System. What were the most striking examples to you in your research of the imposition of socialism directly feeling that nefarious black market economy. What always occurs, theres a price point at which people start selling things and its the problem with price control in general. If you set the price too low all the goods will be gone if you set the price too high the goods brought on the shelf in the black market develops. Its one of these things even conservatives screw up is what is it just price. What is the moral price. You have to leave it open to supply and demand. Then the invisible hand of the marketplace and those wanting to strive for more profit also have more efficiency and more goods out and once the government sets the prices we get into a world of hurt because they dont know the correct democratic price of anything. Its either too low or too high its never the perk perfect price. It leads to horrific problems in the black market to the balance of the black market. Also in several examples of talk about how under socialism it cant be tolerated. If you tolerate a little bit of it that undermines the whole system. The policies are very unpopular one of the examples in venezuela summary selling stuff on the street its a lot more than the price. He kind of apologizes but says we have stuff and getting it to people we have food and medicine and people get it. We are sorry we are charging more the unofficial price but the official price theres no food or medicine in a store. Thats what happened. It just doesnt work. Some of it could be wellintentioned. We want the price to be 0. 50 so everybody can have it but then when they do it well intentioned we keep it cheap and theres no bread. It happens everywhere. But bernie tells us the bread lines are good. Bernie tells us and you cited in the book that when people are waiting a long line for bread thats actually a sign of a healthy socialism. We suggest they go down and see what the lines are like in venezuela i dont think people are too excited about lines. And it still ignores the great wealth of our country. Our country is so wealthy right now we do not have a food problem. We have an excess of food problem. The biggest problem we have in health right now maybe not the biggest but one of the Biggest Health problems is too much food. The poorest people in our society am not saying its great to be poor but the poorest people in our society are better off than the middle class in all societies around the world. We have to figure out how to get people excited about being a part of that. Its still a problem even though unemployment is like three percent, workforce participation people who dont participate in workforces like a 38 percent. It still needs to be this thing and i think its coupled with our drug problem people arent working, they are divorced from the whole process of getting out there. Theyre more likely to get into the drug problems. We still have that problem here but its a problem of plenty. He probably here when you go home, the businesses are saying i cant find enough workers. Our biggest problem in our country right now is we cant find enough workers. We still have a bunch of them we just are participating. You clearly draw from the vast Academic Resources within the liberty movement, the Libertarian Movement but i sensed reading the book that you are at times frustrated by the lefts willful ignorance on how their own policies impact their communities and you tell a great story about how my colleague aoc at her coffee shop. Going back to her coffee shop and the willful ignorance and how her policies impact quality of life. The interview the owner and he basically says, we went on a business because minimum wage is too high and the rent was too high. Rent control in new york and minimumwage control. This is probably the biggest problem with the left is even if you want to grant them big heart and that they want to do things to help poor people i think many of them do, its that they are thinking through to the Second Quarter or the third order theyre not thinking through the unintended consequences. You could say having bread be 0. 50 that would be so good for the poor people but six months later you find there is no bread. Then theres a black market for the people are selling it at a different place that there is no official bread at 0. 50. They are unwilling to order ab some of them are simply demagogues because the one who say we will pay the top one percent its been pointed out repeatedly to aoc that the one percent tax that she has on those making like over 10 million brings in like i think 50 billion but her projects that she wants to spend are like 60 the a70 b 80 trillion. Maybe they think selling santa claus is easier and it is. Its easier to sell santa claus then freedom and liberty and responsibility and opportunity. I always say they have an even easier sale but arent there enough people to know you just cant give people that money doesnt grow on trees. But the math becomes challenging but you and i are critics of president obama but one thing he gets a lot of credit for, certainly message discipline throughout his campaigns he repeatedly talked about the middle class and pitched his socialist qualities ab talk about specifically those folks trying to follow the rules get by how the socialist policies erode the opportunity to get ahead. The bottom line is, once you get more and more socialism you get less and less Economic Growth. You get contraction. There is no wealth, the best example is venezuela where they have more oil reserves yet they dont have food. How did that happen . How can they become so desperate in the marketplace never allow that happen. In the marketplace its growing and there is more of this Economic Growth under socialism its contracting and shriveling up. But its not just one time can you see it time after time after time. Going back to that question on whether or not violence is inherent to socialism, hayek had a good way of putting it he said that if the ultimate desire of socialism is to own the property and you have to take it from people, and people will resist the more you take it from them, maybe socialism selects the most ruthless person because it takes lewis dismiss because when they finally come to your house, america should the tax collector, not an issue the regulator but if they come to my house abwho can do that . You cant have somebody who is a real passive easygoing kinder gentler socialist ends up having to be abmaybe its inevitable the more socialism you want more ruthless. Thats why you always end up with ruthless leaders if you really want to take peoples property you have to be ruthless to get it. That shows the lifecycle of socialism. One question i have for you, why do all these socialist dictators dress up as liberators initially . You go through this how do you break the cycle when you hear people talk about the birth of our country and talk about how extraordinary it was ours was amazing in the sense that we threw off the yoke of the king we kept much of our religious faith and traditions and virtues but then we also codified written document and said government cant get bigger than this. Government is bound within the chains of the constitution. I think that we also sometimes dont realize how much of that is the lineage of english tradition. Our revolution with thick of it being an abrupt thing, i think its a continuation of the glorious revolution in england of the magna carta. They been trying to limit the king for hundreds of years. Its a long list lineage but we are incredibly lucky we got this constitution, our founding fathers, we talk about George Washington not becoming a king and not serving again we are lucky in who we got but also lucky in the fact that they believe in a written document that would restrain the size and scope of government. Morality is an argument that the left often makes in service of socialism. They say all the data might be true but the moral thing to do is to embrace this governing philosophy. Your answer to that is very interesting. You talk about how selfish socialism is because it forces you to look inward whereas capitalism requires you to be more morally into them with the needs of others. Talk about that dynamic. If im going to be successful capitalist and i saw something and not caring about my desires i might want to be successful but have to care about what you want. I have to care about everything you want if you are a consumer. Everything is focused outward toward trying to get you to accept end by either my services or product. But if on the socialist and really not caring too much about popular opinion or pleasing a consumer. In fact, when we socialize things like healthcare they just say, everybodys going to get it, will no longer be bankrupt. But you will have to have rationing they dont seem to care that you have to wait in line for six months or a year for your hip replacement. Its directed more toward their ideological concerns. How does that drive selfishness . It seems all you are making the argument that a country thats more socialist becomes more selfish . I think its true. I think its an irony in the way because they would profess to be, its for the other man. Everything is for someone else yet in the end its driven by selfishness and driven by their ends up being an elite in their society and they consume and accumulate power and money and homes all based on the cronyism of their system. Taking apart the scandinavia argument is a big part of the meat of the book also a big part of the debate that we have about the kinder gentler form of socialism but you actually point out trendlines and scandinavia moving away from socialism. Moving away from an overreliance on taxes. Where do you think we will see scandinavia 25 years from now and what trends do you see that answer back to less arguments. I think the peak of socialism like in sweden was probably in the 70s. 70s they move more to the right of the five countries that are scandinavian countries for our fiber led by centerright government. The trend line on taxes is always down. Theyve also been big trading nations. Very much involved with International Trade and worldwide trade. They have these economic indexes i think heritage does one and different associations do these they all rank pretty high. You have to know whether they are socialist or not. People own their own houses. Its a massive welfare state but its not socialism. Its welfarism you brand it. Walk us through the distinction between welfarism and socialism orders our country fall . I think its continuing. If capitalism is here, socialism is here we are sort of in the middle but maybe a little more toward the capitalist side. We are a little off the center toward capitalism not way over by capitalism. In the great deal of governmental controls and governmental involvement. You essentially write a plan to reform Social Security tucked into the book. Right. In the spectrum of things, thats where we are. As far as his scandinavia socialist or sweden socialist . Theres a quote in there from von mises and von mises said in talking to one of his students he said, if you want a real quick definition of one thing that is required to be a capitalist nation he says having a private stock market. Although scandinavia has private property so they are really capitalism with a big dose of welfarism. Welfarism basically is paid for through high taxes and you still have private ownership but its not something that am advocating. For goodness sakes, to buy a car in scandinavia its 100 tax you want to buy 30,000 car you have to pay another 30,000 or 200 percent. Its ridiculous what you have to pay. You dont think Bernie Sanders could get elected a he goes around saying denmark is socialist, the Prime Minister responded we are not socialists, mainly because they want to do business with the world and who wants to go to business in a socialist country . Denmark is saying, no, we are open for business and bernie says, i love the socialism of denmark and its kind of funny that the left in our country all wants to be in scandinavia they said they love the socialism of scandinavia, scandinavia says were not socialists. Transamerica might be shifting more the other way do you envision a circumstance with the two would cross . I hope not. The other thing thats interesting about scandinavia they have a lot of success and they have longevity and health. There are several authors that we look at to look at the statistics and try to understand why, there are amazing statistics. So scandinavians live longer than we do and have higher incomes we do but heres the interesting thing if you look at scandinavian americans, ones who live here are the scandinavians still living at home and some have migrated here for 100 years or more. Their average income is still average than are abthe argument is that there is something about culture and work ethic that make a difference. I truly think it is. Its something thats harder to teach people it comes from families, Family Structure and community and church. This is where we have to get away from this craziness of the government, schools would say, johnny deserves to have a trophy even though he cant spell. The problem is, when we give people selfesteem or try to give them that we dont teach them the work ethic that the harder you work the more success you get and as we get away from that we get a whole segment of our population 38 percent of them who dont work no who have never really felt the esteem you get from work. I tell people all the time and i absolutely believe that work is not a punishment, workers will reward him nobody can give you selfesteem you get it to work. There isnt one work thats better than other you can be a janitor, you can be a nurse, doctor, lawyer, physicist, you get it through trying to produce something with your mind or hands or body. If you dont do that it is something thats a huge hole in your life that is a real big problem for all of us. You have a vision for the Republican Party that is far more appealing to a more racially diverse electric. He said laws that disproportionately affect racial minorities should be subject to repeal. Yet the same people who advocate for socialism are the self aggrandized Racial Justice warriors in the congress and you write about the ability for racism to animate moments of socialism and that socialism may create a susceptibility to racism that you wouldnt see in capitalism. Whats the basis for that viewpoint . I think because under socialism or when you view people collectively you view them as groups. Under capitalism everybody is an individual regardless of your skin color but religion all treated as individuals. If we see things is a collective we see there is group rights as black rights, white grits, brown rights, gay rights and this is still going on because its so emotional with people there are really only individual rights. The law should be blind to who you are, i dont care who you are or what you do at home what your personal beliefs are the loan should be the same for everybody. The problem is when you begin to recognize group rights the law is in the same. They have to have a special elevation above the individual and that sort of what happens is that under socialism if everything is to be distributed equally, the law or the government have to be unequal because society ends up when things are distributed to some people work harder so they get more stuff. To make it equal when you make it equal the law has to treat people not the same and its this irony that the law doesnt have equal protection under socialism in order to make us all equal and keep readjusting us to be reequal the law has to have not equal protection but has to have unequal treatment of people based on their groupings and whether they are in the party not in the party, poor, rich, as we redistribute it we have a lack of justice. You are very critical of china, you talk about the great leap forward being a failure, you talk about the erosion of property the way to change society, what do the lessons from china tell us about chinas future of the u. S. Relationship china Going Forward as they embrace these value. That might take a whole other book. Its a difficult situation. People of had a lot of hope in the 70s, people were very hopeful and many people predicted that with economic liberty, which they were getting much more economic liberty they get political liberty and it hasnt worked that way in recent years its gone the opposite way. I tend to think that in the long run, the long run might be longer than what we are seeing now the economic liberty makes people more interested in political liberty. I think in china they are interested. In Tiananmen Square there were hundreds if not thousands of people that were interested in it. In hong kong you see people very interested in not being extradited to china. By the hundreds of thousands. We can be disappointed that we still have Chinese Government thats authoritarian but i think we can be encouraged that there is still resistance. How we get there i dont know. So many people had separate some of the liberty minded people to the neoconservatives. I see the problem in venezuela, in china, the neoconservatives say we will just have military in and conquer china give them a new government everything will be great. Thats unfortunately doesnt seem to always work out that way. You talk about the purges that necessary flow from socialism. I know there are a lot of conservatives, deeply concerned about the fact that we lost fair debate. The radical left no longer wants to debate the merits of economic principles, they instead walk to the platform defame and destroy those who hold the values you express. Why do socialism accelerate the purging viewpoint and thought . I think because once you monopolize the economy, the planning, you have to monopolize criticism too you cant handle criticism. Its a consistent theme. There were secret police under hitler, secret police under stalin, everyone of these regimes ends up with the secret police disciple dissent and that goes back to the question unfortunately it went that direction or is it really inherent that they can handle the debate because ultimately it will lead to dissent and unraveling . Final issue i want to address, it would not be a rand paul book if there was a critique of forever wars as the member of congress who represents more trips than anybody else, i think you on behalf of those military families for what you do. You write you are criticizing a particular journalist and you say, i respected eisenhowers warning that small wars could lead to big wars. Ive never quite understood how one could be caught lying about his own opinion. This proposed fact checker held the deluded belief that somehow eisenhower belonged to the war crowd and then you go on to quote eisenhower saying i hate war, only a soldier who lived at kim only as one who has seen its brutality its futility and its stupidity. As we try to guide Foreign Policy in our government here away from forever wars, the what advice would you give us who try to have a realistic view of Foreign Policy rather than neocon view. Ethic talk to the veterans. You say you have a lot of veterans and soldiers in your district we have two big bases in my state. The interesting thing is, we talked about some of the most thoughtful people are other people who actually have served particularly in combat. If we had a roundtable with five or six guys are women who been involved in combat, they are not kneejerk the afghan war should go on and on most of them are like, we were okay after 9 11 to get the enemy but when you told us to plant a flag and become policeman and build roads and nationbuilding coverages mention the word nationbuilding and most soldiers will recoil. They dont see themselves as policeman didnt want to be over there policing the streets and building roads and doing all this. Ultimately its a little bit, i make the analogy of welfare. You give People Welfare they will never step up and take the world into their hands and become selfsufficient. I think those who cant speak out the polls show 60 of them said we should end the afghan war. We should listen to them, we should also listen to the constitution which wanted to make war difficult. Some people say, thats antiquated, we cant really let congress do it, they could never declare war. You see my response to that is the two times we been attacked the last 70 years. We tend to do not so well in wars that dragged on and on a dont have a clear mission. I have three nephews in the military, my fatherinlaw was career military and my brotherinlaw was air force academy my dad was air force. We see this from a personal point of view and i just cant send a Family Member or your Family Member or anybody else down there without being very thoughtful about it and deciding what is International Interest to be there. We cant have one vote 19 years ago. Senator paul, thank you for being a unique and inspiring voice within our party and the liberty movement. Thank you for enlisting your brilliant wife to write this book with you. Thank you. Appreciate it. This program is available as a podcast, all after words programs can be viewed at our website at booktv. Org. For 40 years cspan has been providing america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and publicpolicy events from washington dc and around the country. So you can make up your own mind. Created by cable in 1979 cspan is brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. Cspan, your unfiltered view of government. Today, live at noon eastern on indepth, Princeton University professor imani perry joins us to talk about African American history and racial inequality. My mother came of age in jim crow alabama. My mother lived her youth through a White Nationalist society and it has a openly officially White Nationalist society. Yes. It has reared its head again. Her most recent book is breathe a letter to my sons. Other books and include prophets of the hood and may we forever stand. Join the interactive conversation with your phone calls, tweets, and facebook messages. At 9 00 p. M. Eastern on after words David Shelton author of it shouldnt be this hard to serve your country recounts his time as a secretary of Veterans Affairs and the trump administration. He is interviewed by iraq and afghanistan veterans of america ceo jeremy butler. The governments involvement in va healthcare is the most effective way of honoring our nations commitment to our veterans. That does not mean that veterans should not have the ability to go into the private sector when its in their best interest when the care is better or specialized care is available thats not olivier. I think we all believe that should be available. Watch booktv every weekend on cspan2. Recently on booktv, pulitzer prizewinning investigative journalist Ronan Farrell spoke about his reporting on Sexual Harassment and assault. Heres a portion of the program. Theres a bigger point here about the patterns of corporate behavior. She talks very eloquently about making a painful decision to come forward in this book. And feeling that the women who came before her and had voice complaints within the company about matt lauer carried a sense of guilt that her alleged assault happened and that she in turn carried a sense of guilt about anyone who might face violence afterwards. That ultimately is why she wanted to speak to break the cycle. A sense of guilt because of the silence . Because the moment you have a set of legal structures to conceal the alleged crimes and to allow the perpetrators to stay in position the power you expose subsequent people to victimization. Thats a feature of so many of the stories are reported of the Weinstein Company there was nothing in his hr file technically about Sexual Harassment. At fox where bill oreilly pointed out, there is nothing in the hr file about it. And where there were payoffs happening over and over again to conceal the record. It happened at cbs news, this is not an nbc problem, this is a problem in our culture and in corporate america. I think Brooke Nevels is not wrong, it should have been on her shoulders to break the cycle and should abandon the shoulders of the corporation. But it is only now coming under scrutiny because she was brave enough to speak and because a whole variety of sources there are seven claims about matt lauer, there is a wider group of claims about executives at the company a lot of people were really brave to expose the story that comes out of the book. To watch the rest of the Program Visit our website booktv. Org. Search for Ronan Farrell or the title of his book catch and kill using the box at the top of the page. Now on booktv we are live with author and Princeton University professor imani perry. Her book on race and African American history include prophets of the hood, may we forever stand, and the recently published breathe a letter to my sons. Professor imani perry, what is the structure of your newest book breathe a letter to my sons . There are three sections. Fear, fly,