The calendar please silence your cell phone so as not to please speak clearly into the microphone cspan book tv is here as well. Label having the signing up here if you have not purchased your books there are plenty so im excited to welcome you all to politics andme prose with the book the time to build. As the nation faces divisiveness to argue rather than trying to tear down frameworks to look as sources of strength for support. Time for build and then to commit ourselves with the vitality of institutions rangingit to churches in the military and renew our ties to each other Founding Editor of National Affairs director of social cultural and constitutional studies at aei cofounder and Senior Editor and the fractured republic and the great debate articles have appeared in numerous articles the wall street journal and many others. [applause] thank you very much i appreciate you being here on friday night. What this might say to understand what is gone wrong in recent years and what we can do about it. What it is isnt as clear as what we pretend we are living through a social crisis from vicious partisan polarization in the upsurge of isolation and despair was suicide rates driving opioid abuse. These are deep dysfunctions and parts of society. They have some common roots but is not easy to say what those roots are. Part of the crisis is we cant get a handle on what that is we certainly went through a severe recession 2007 and 2008 now we are living through the longest economic expansion in the moderne era with those inflation and Interest Rates that the problems we have on that front dont add up to the enormousth crisis we are going through other measures of wellbeing dont offer obvious explanations for echo what are we complaining about clicks some argue that it tends to overwhelm us with imaginary grievancesri that they might themselves might be the problem Steven Pinker takes these complaints to be what he describes selfindulgence and gratitude to look over mountains of data with health and safety and choice and concludes populist complaints are detached from reality within discriminant can lead to fatalism why we should throw time and money to leave to radicalism to drain the swamp or empower charismatic content. But surely these kinds of responses public frustration is not a delusion especially that has revealed itself in such a broad range of symptoms. s days are not wrong but they dont explain the raining sentiments of our time we should ask what indicators we are ignoring or signs missing by usual measures of wealth and health and personal freedom dont explain the problem because as important as they are they assess our wellbeing but none of us can experience wellbeing on our own. Id is that the junctures of individuals life that it issues itself. Many struggles seemed rooted in loneliness and isolation polarization these are the kinds of problems we have now in the programs to fall into a blind spot. How do we explain a crisis like this many argue the trouble is fundamental metaphysical liberalism has failed for solidarity others say they are traditional measures for it is economic in a deeper sense that contemporary capitalism has levels of inequality making it impossible to feel equal parts of a larger whole in the legitimacy of the order. Those external print pressures like racism or identity politics and there is some truth to all of these things because they treat the human person is embedded whether metaphysical or social or economic they see what is wrong now is the way in which we live out but they are still missing something crucial. Think about our problems in these ways Reimagine Society in a vast open space so we talk about breaking down walls or to castst a narrative with there is a missing step between joining together and legitimacy so it is a structure into shape to give purpose and concrete meaning in life is a big open space is not filled with individuals but o structures of social life and filled with institution if we fail to have trust and intimacy that we confront that failure and institutions do a lot more than connecton us in terms of what they are and what they do that is the understanding this book tries to advance. What is an institution cracks there are a lot of different academic definitions. Let me suggest the general definition that looks toward the society that shapes and structures of what we do together Something Like a corporate form a Civic Association technically legally formalized. Maybe they are shaped by laws or norms or rules the first and foremost in this one heinstitution or a particular tradition the rule of law but it keeps its general shape over time in which it is said to operate. It only changes very gradually and incrementally. Flash mobs dont count as institutions. But it is a form in the deepest sense the structure and contour the shape of the organization that speaks of itss purpose and logic in function and meaning. The social form isnt just a bunch of people that are ordered together to advance in a deal so they are formative to structure our interaction and us shape our habits and our souls and character that formative rule has a lot of the social crisis we think of the role right now we may think first of confidence that the trend we hear a lot about they paint a very grim picture gallup has kept track of americas confidence for decades. And continues to do it on a regular basis. To the branches of federal government 80 percent of americans said they had a great dealer a lot of confidence in doctors and hospitals. Forty years ago 65 percent of americans had confidence in organized religion last year it was less than 40 percent. 60 percent expressed confidence in Public Schools just one third did last year. One year after nixon resigned in disgrace the last year was 32 percent gallup found 42 percent of the public had confidence in congress but last year it was 12 percent and even that seems really high. Who are these people the pattern holds for almost all institutions the only major exception is what we will talk about but the American Public has gone from extraordinary levels of confidence to striking levels of mistrust but what do we mean when we dont trust institutions its what they are and do. It takes us back to the question of how they form every Significant Institution carries out an important test in society to educate children or enforce the law to provide a service and it does that by establishing a structure in the process to combine peoples efforts. But in the process informs people to carry out the task to shape the people within it if it makes the people within it more trustworthy it wouldnt take some Public Interest for the people to do the same. To carry out the defense of the country but shape the people who do that we promise business and seems to reward its people we trust the school because it bills culture making people devoted to learning and teaching keeping kids happy and safe. The Journalistic Institution because it has high standards of accuracy reporting the news making the people reliable. We lose faith we no longer believe it has that rule to shape the people. The one way if they claim that responsibility or just plainly fail to do that and instead impair how were bad behavior or if the clergy abuse as a child that gross abuse of power undermines public trust that is a familiar form of corruption but its not new there are plenty of examples in our time so it doesnt quite explain the loss of confidence but another related or a different way to lose our trust as it fails to impose altogether it doesnt seem that formation as a purpose when they no longer see it as a mold of character or behavior but as a platform to raise their profile to be seen in society and an institution like that is not worthy of our trust to even desire it ten Something Like that has happened to a lot of institutions over the last few decades if we dont think of them as formative but just stages for outrage or university is the venue or journalism is indistinguishable for activism or the church is a political stage they become a lot harder to trust. Theyre not asking for trust but attention. Allowed the most significant cultural institutions in our country are in the process of going through this transformation. The few exceptions most notably the military seem to prove that rule because one of the few where we are losing faith in the truly Novel Institution institutions, especially virtual institutions are inherently shaped as platforms it strange to trust a platform and we dont and that change of attitude is the decline of the w expectation at the heart of our loss of faith in the broader social crisis because they understood platforms the stages to perform more to shape our character with sources of legitimacy and ways to build mutual trust. With this transformation is everywhere around us once you start looking for institution are made into platforms for the performative virtue and outrage in the vast culture war so much society is living through. We find people who think of themselves asg insiders shaped by integrity of the institution instead of functioning as outsiders building their personal brand. Is there any doubt donald trump sees the presidency as a stage and himself as a performer acting on it rather than in and through it . The department of Justice Works for him. If he had a sense of his job , he would direct the executive branch rather than complain about it. Maybe its a good thing he doesnt know he could do that but the sense of his job is the stage for his Reality Tv Show of his life. But many members of progress of both parties run for office less to be involved in legislative work more to have a platform in the culture wars to become more visible cable news or talk radio to use elected office as a platform to complain about the various institutions they work so hard to enter. So they are always performingan for an audience. Major Political Parties if they have a function to even remember the roles and what they are supposed to be . Think about the profession of journalism. The insistence on the formative integrity to help us to be sure it provides reliableha but to step outside of those constraints for social media or cable news to build their own brand on a platform if you look at twitter right now youll see a lot of reporters reporters d professionalizing themselves if they are complaining how donald trump has behaved an office they could be similar to meeting journalists. Both play out that self that selfindulgence making them less able to do their important t work you can see the same pattern rather than the institutional purpose may find a lot of people to see it as a platform for theatrics its a version of the same thing or institutions that exist are used for political theater, so the s cachet of the church is rather than expressing themselves. We can see the pattern throughout American Life. That amounts of practice the great and asked question of our time. Is somebody takes the institution and a lot of the trouble is a widespread failure to ask that question. Given my role as a teacher or scientist or neighbor what should i do here . And those that respect asked that question before they make important judgments and those that drive you crazy are part of the problem they fail to ask that question when they should so we always find ourselves given their responsibilities. To understand the transformations that has left a lot of americans they cant be trusted they are not in the business of earning trust for belonging and legitimacy to simply explain the crisis but its one important factor that we are likely to miss or ignore. So we see through them in normal times. We only notice when something is wrong and something is wrong doubt. What do we do about it . So to have diagnose complicated problem to offer an agenda that this calls whatever the author has wanted them to do. But this book doesnt have a chapter like that because dealing with this problem too requires a change of mindset witnessing failures with to demolish and uproot only outsiders could save us like the politics is pulling down the establishment but we dont need more outsiders institutionalist earnest in their efforts to build free work and the acceptance of the duties. Leading especially to resist the urge they are outsiders as many do so often. We should try to embrace the responsibilities of the position rehaul to be sure obligation and restraint and inhabit the institution that is necessary to reform them. And to understand ourselves and act accordingly not just what do i want but what do i roll but what do i do . It is only a start but how we can work for a change of mindset that can add up and make a difference with professionals in fields thought this way a little more and be easier to trust their expertise and accept their claims tond authority of all the institutions tried to think this way it would be easier to feelth we belong to something worthwhile. That change of mindset is not a substitute for institutional reform better prerequisite and we do need Institutional Reforms. I dont think the problem to be solved they dont trust institutions but that they are not trustworthy enough but there are some serious reasons to beio skeptical. Thereep are a lot of ways in which institutions can be oppressive to impose hierarchies or slow to change it hard to move some could be literally oppressive the term institutionalized racism is reality of life that arose for serious reasons the argument for transparency to the excessively rigid imperialist. If you see populism also involves serious tradeoffs institutions can be oppressive but its true they could reinforce the rule of the strong and thehe privileged the week have no hope to vindicate their rights more their rights but to embody the highest ideals to defend institutions is not the strong where the privileged it is most important for those who have power or privilege and they can become cold and bureaucratic without them to grow alienated and to see that around us it is the irony we confront an American Life the failures of our institutions leading us to demand to be uprooted or demolishediles we cant address the failures without rebuilding these institutions. We are right to be fed up but we need them to be respectful and legitimate they should guide thee reaction against the institutional strength. But the problem today requires recommitment theres nothing weaker than the establishment because our attitude has to change first the book does get etinto Institutional ReformsLike Congress and the Political Party of civic and religious rights but the common c denominator is the people in the institutions have to want them to happen that they must first see the way they are behaving is a big part of the problem made by making two of those social dysfunctions we face the challenge to draw people back into our institutions with how to build the trust that is to accomplish that and the simple way is for all of us to be more trustworthy we can give the responsibilities more time effort for those that matter most to hold themselves up to ideals. We can work to reform them where they are failing and be more worthy of trust and confidence that the autonomy of the independent contractor but the member and the partner but there is a word for attitudes like that in the word his devotion those that we do with other people in the service of common aspiration. That devotion does call for sacrifice and commitment to pledge ourselves to abandon ironic distance and analysis ago that devotion is not only necessary but its attractive we want those objects of devotion and something to commit to bet well see what we are looking for is right within our reach prickle its hard to remind ourselves why it is worthwhile thats the case that institutionalism involves and why its crucial so a modest change of our stance and that political transformation of how integrity is established so greater care of habits we have gone into that attempt to cut us off like there is no when we can trust except cynics and outsiders and nothing we can do except register outrage that is what the life of titiety would look like without functional institutionsns and could have many more if we devote yourselveso to strengthen and reform what we are part of. And thank you in just speaking att little different it can make a bigger difference than how imagine. And to do what we have been neglecting to say what we assume is taking for granted. Them exchange possible so they build upon each other to turn us all into builders. That in the end is the character of the transformation that a demolition crew has been allowed to define the spirit o of era but where we are headed is up to the builders and not as were each of us seek to be. Thank you very much. [applause] that gives you an overview of the book im happy to take questions. [applause] is this a american problem if you look beyond what are ,the lessons we can learn from that crack. Is not uniquely american the picture of the crisis happens around the west the politics of populism with trust in government is actually lower in the United States than it has been for a long time. That is saying something because confidence in the government is quite low for go but i do think there are distinct ways americans lookns through institutions to treat them as invisible. Weau identify authenticity with directness in a different way. Our culture is rooted doesnt trust but once direct access to voice been attracted to mavericks with that sort of figure. There was an exception to that in the middle of the 20th century coming out of the depression and decades of mobilization with very unusual confidence that was not the norm it was an odd momentin that defines the sense of default for go so now to have little trust feels much more broken. But we still are those baby boomers how culturally they can get. It turns out pretty elderly. [laughter] so i do think there is something distinct about this american approach that contributes with the breakdown of social trust is not just the american phenomenon. Thank you for your talk. We watch two different versions play out recently but the institutional failures and it was very well taken but you have not properly addressed the contributing factor in opposition to expertise and experts a longstanding pattern. I tell my students to read what you watch and avoid what gives you a dopamine hit of righteousness. But what would you do to address this problem this is very much connected to the loss of trust and expertise. Why do we trust experts which is to say we trust them when they are formed in a way to give them Greater Authority to the average person on a particular subject the Scientific Method gives more authority because it is clear before they Say Something that helps them to figure out what is true and what isnt even thee trust has declined quite a lot and america i think journalism shows it has a method making it worthy of our trust. That the transformation of the professional institutions that is a stage iv political performance but the sense the public has they are no less then they say has a lot to do with the populism and is hadriven by the technological advantage that they know as much as their doctor. So now because of the fragmentation of theed media and culture we imagine we have access to all the knowledge of the world. That isnt what experts are. They have knowledge, experienc knowledge, experience, prudence to apply w knowledge so this is the idea that they just dont want toan hear. Politics actually requires knowledge and experience. Eoyou wouldnt think so now. But when people run for office they proclaim how little experience they havent take pride theyve never done this before. Im not sure thats a great way to prove you can be present dash president. This has a great deal to do with what i tried to deal with a sense that institutions exist to givee them the shape in the life of society as a way to make them trustworthy you want to hear that your surgeon is average you want to know that somebody who knows what they are doing and cant prove it but that is part of the cultural picture. Thank you for the presentation and your most recent comments have a lot to do maybe answering my question. One of the things you said among the institutions about doctors and medicine. But im not clear it sounds like a loss of faith in professions in your mind is true from people from the outside. But i dont get a sense from inside the scientific or medical community for that matter where the Engineering Community but there is a crisis of content in their own institutions remake its hard to sustain that when the public doesnt trust you. So a lot of what we think of as the four professions, there is a sense the educational institutions and those of practice s have lost some of their authority and people docu look for shortcuts and ways to gain prominence in public profile more than work their way through the normal steps involvede. To gain expertise actually have to know some things to Practice Medicine and you cant just pretend. But there is a way that the larger but not just but those today are much less happy with their professional lives because of the public does not value you from a generation ago than it does become much harder to justify yourself the kind of commitment necessary. You see at some places more t than others but you see it in the legal world and certainly in journalism and i would argue american doctors are much less satisfied than even a generation ago. Just with their place in society. I find myself agreeing with your analysiss almost entirely. I would just like to push you more toward specific polities when this policies because a look at this audience and see people at aei and other think tanks and those that are so inclined and intentional will hear your message. But for the vast majority of americans, this is like speaking a foreign language. So what do you think of policies like universal basic income and other reforms that are designed to bring people together. I appreciate that im not sure it doesnt speak to some people in the sense that it is harder now to find and with people having a certain level of education and to diagnose that in terms but i agree and with those Institutional Reforms and congress is a great example. Whatever you think of donald htrump, but the failure of congress is a much bigger problem and that the various complaints of the other branches of government are the largest of dysfunction to take responsibility seriously and the reforms to encourage members to think of themselves with changes to the budget process so we have gotten to a place o now where they take one big vote per year they had nothing to do with to create that it wasnt created in the leadership offices at midnight before it shuts down and the structure that congress has a lot to do withth that. Institutional changes could fix that but its there are ways that transparency has gone too far there are no quiet spaces for membersth to talk the only protected spaces are in the leadership offices at midnight before the government shuts down. Cspan is a godsend but there has to be places for members to bargain and you cant bargain in public if you see that youre watching a show not the real work of the legislature so congress has to be much more selfconscious the way a structures at work members are very dissatisfied the quality of life is pretty low they dont behave like they could see young members in particular dont even know what they are not doing the last big bipartisan bill in the early bush Years Congress has not felt the self functioning in quite a while. So this institution makes its own rules if it understood the problems in these terms then you would have the incentives but to try to surface these in the terms and it points in the opposite direction so rather than tear things down to understand we need to build them up with functional institutions and we just dont have them figure for your presentation. The first part is since what i gathered you are asking for a new attitude and a change of mindset. What would it take for us culturally to get launched more than you writing thiset great book so with the reform part so that it has to do with the way we organize our Society Institutions are handed down but now we are in the digital age and the structures and the hierarchies we have created we have undermined how we have used to be organized what Structural Reforms can you think of to restore personal connections to respond with that they are just different quick. Its an impossible elquestion. But i would say they are related if you ask how we start to change attitude the only answer is to articulate the problems in a particular way with her everyday decisions differently we cant do much better than that but that could be a powerful way to change i really dont think its a topdown change but the trouble with the need for institutional reform it has to come from within and now you to changent them and thats very hard to get to. There has to be this sense this is the kind of attitude that we need if you can write a book and maybe write a book if you work in the institution that couldld stand this kind of change is important toor speak up so at the same time asking whatk kinds of reforms might be plausible is it has changed in dramatic ways we have seen big changes in our culture andoc society before some have proven very durable and some have not but we havent seen a response with Institution Building not just to recover but respond to novel problems. The last time our country went through intense dynamic change we had similar problems in some ways with the growth of the scale we responded to those with Institution Building. What we think of now is the Progressive Movement and the emergence the bottomup and topdown that spoke to the tendency but it is an american thing. To say if you get for americans together they will elect a treasurer. [laughter] thats one way to understand our National Character but now just to see a problem to organize around it because now theyre all these ways to express our dissatisfaction rather than structural organizational form but to signal in facebook that that is doing something on the problem but saying on facebook you are on the right side of something doesnt do anything at all. Very often avoiding doing something. Because those forms of reaction lead us to respond to problems rather than a confrontational way. We need that instinct the only contribution i can make is to articulate that to help people see when they face a problem maybe thats one way to think about it. Thank you for your talk given the context i work with the program to modernize congress there is a whole committee to upgrade and modernize the institution running in the get tele and way i work very closely with them at the hearings they all ask questions and contribute in the staff Work Together all the time. Just three weeks a ago they 9introduced bill based on 29 recommendations and legislation to reform the institution which is huge because it takes into account Building Digital infrastructure and deliberative process and all the things we hear about and allowing members more chances to lead but congress is down to 30 or 50 percent of the hearings we see the show pony hearings but that hasnt stopped doing the deliberative process and its now at 1980 levels so what i have noticed a lot is the problem with data and digital it has recognized transparency but every public place has been weaponize you can watch all the hearings. They areg tremendous. We love cspan but we need a channel for which does not exist at this point but it would be far more curated in local to create a voice that talks to congress. Late committees of jurisdiction. It with the monetization that doesnt serve deliberative democracy right now. And with capitalism and other massive set changes we have received your memos on the other side. Thank you for that and the work you have done because as f. A recovering Political Science myself we have offered recommendations the work is enormously important to the core to be asked in a more explicit way what is the purpose those that go in opposite a directions when we try to reform congress. Its like the purpose of the European Parliament until the government takes away their power. On the other side to compel accommodation and that it is absolutely essential decidedly not a European Parliament it is intended to force people with differences to come to an agreement. Congress has become very bad because now to say we should do whatever we can and push it through but the problem is then you lose it and the other party takes away everything you have done and now we live through it. Wen havent had a stable majority in congress so they think next time we will then everything dont compromise people will get in then we can do everything we want but it never works that way. Congress just sits around waiting for the next election. Are they accepting the fact that ultimately the people are not going away is the beginning of the Civil Democratic politics is now premised on the idea maybe next time they will go away that so we approach the election cycle and its both parties. It is bonkers and completely disconnected when American Life looks like right now. So the set of congressional reforms trying to address that need i would not get rid of the filibuster i would much rather have a filibuster in the house because it does force you to get anything significant done. Those types ofth changes to breakdown the two parties to create a Dynamic Coalition to change over time to reflect the Political Society that we live in could have electoral reforms and Structural Reforms of congress and it is much too centralized but these were all done for a reason but we have to see this is a moment when the institution is not functioning as in the forties and the seventies to take itself by the arms and make a change. The 12 members of the committee of the other ones that are doing anything. There may be ten senators between the two parties that are interested in structural interesteding more is essential i think thats it. Thank you very much. [applause] thank you for coming tonight we will have a signing at the table. [inaudible conversations] the other two are china and north korea so think about the healthcare you get in those countries to have a universal coverage starting in 1971 covering 90 percent they allow private coverage to run parallel in some of the companies but it is becoming popular because there were 4 million brits to get treatment and Cancer Treatment more than 62 days they have not met that standard for over five years. More important the who study brits are at the bottom of the wrong the most industrialized country in all forms of cancer survival rates five years out. That shows you cancer under government controlled system. Amy shira teitel is with us today. Amy is displaced space flight historian. Not unlike her subject she is one of the only academically trained young female space flight historians running for a general audience. Hosted by discover magazine