Transcripts For CSPAN2 Books By Hoover Institution Fellows 20240713

Books written by fellows of the cooper institution at Stanford University. You will hear from former secretaries of state schultz and rice, economist, soul, kissinger biographer and historian neil ferguson. Former George W Bush justice departmendepartment official, ad winning author Shelby Steele in the first, heres a portion of the 2013 interview with george schultz, secretary of state during the Reagan Administration he talked about his book issues on my mind. And the issues in my mind, you right when it comes to terrorism, lee in this country must think hard about the moral stakes involved. If we truly believe in our Democratic Values in a way of life, we must be willing to defend that. Passive measures are unlikely and active defense must be considered and given the necessary political support. Is a if you have the Law Enforcement approach, you say okay a terrorist attack happened, and you find out who did it. They might try them in the u. S. Court and make them guilty. And their endless appeals, then they go to jail. What does that accomplish. A certain deterrence but in the meantime, the terrorist act has taken place. The terrorist act of 911 can kill a lot of people. So if you know something is coming at you, why not stop it. Stop it from happening because it was prevention. And i think, when i first said that in 1984, it was very controversial. But after 911, people said of course, should we should be trying to stop it. We should stop those events from happening. So i think trying to permit things, is very important. As become common if we do a great deal this country. They did been lots of terrorist acts that of heaven because we have found about them through intelligence and prevented them. Georgepete and work talking wie former secretaries george schultz, issues on my mind. Mr. Secretary, what was your favorite job you ever had. George recent job, job in place something that you have to do in order to get some money. If you say that i never had a job in my life. Ive always done things that i have found rewarding and interesting. If i want of doing something that wasnt that i would find Something Else to do. But in government, is a great privilege and an opportunity to serve. And i had a succession of jobs and all of them other tough moments but they were rewarding. Starting with my two and half years overseas in the United States marine corps in world war ii. And i was, fighting for my country. And it was victorious. He didnt much to do with it but i was one person. I served in the Eisenhower Administration as counsel and economic advisers. It was a great privilege and i remember going down to my office, it was in this Big Office Building right next to the white house. Part of the allstate building anyway, i had an office with a window that looked out on the south lawn of the white house. In my father, who died not too long after that, he came and i took into my office and he saw this view. And he said son, you have arrived. So its great to work there. And when youre working in the white house complex, you have a view of the whole government. And i learned a lot about how you put the statistics together that we talk about all of the time. That was a great experience. And then i was secretary of labor. I knew the subject matter very well. In a new the department while because i dont some things about the kennedy and johnson administrations and that gave me that exposure. Didnt know anything about washington politics. Or the present all of that. So i had a good base of knowledge from which to learn about these things. I was fortunate in situating the man and joke. To come and be the press person. Joe had worked for the New York Times for decades. He was a labor reporter. Anywhere and he was really good. Everybody read his stories. He really knew the subject. He said he would sign on but he had conditions. I said okay joe, what are your conditions. He said will first of all, im going to be the spokesman, i have to know what is going on. I have to be able to work. I dont want to be blindsided. If im blindsided, that i am over. And a symbol of course, you can go anywhere you want. Anybody would be glad to have you there. What else. He said will dont like. And i said come on joe, i dont like. Youd be surprised what happened to people. They come down here in the get under pressure, maybe they dont live that they mislead. Misleading as bad as lying. So you have got to expect to be straight. And i said okay ill be straight. What else. He said never have a press conference unless you have some news. And i said well, reporters like to look around. You dont understand, reporters are guys who are trying to make a living. In the way you make a living is to get it is during their name on it and he gets on the front page of your paper. You call news conference, and he comes and you dont have any news, what is he going to do pretty is going to start asking you question and try to make you Say Something stupid. Had a whole bunch of things like that. So i learned a lot about the press from joe. And while some peoples right things that you dont like on a whole, he had a constructive attitude. You help them get the facts straight. You be much better off. Then there was a guy in the white house who was the political counselor and congressional relations guy. He should be a grizzly to a certain extent. And he had roles. He said never make a promise unless you can deliver on it. And if it turns out its really hard to deliver fight all the harder. People only deal with you if they trust you did and they trust you if you say youre going to do what you are what you do which were to do. Trust is the coin. So it always try to remember that. And then in the Labor Department has a big, my first big battle in congress. And i learned something about that. It was a great morning thing. Then i went from there to be director of the budget. There you have the whole government out in front of you. So that was great friday night became secretary of the treasury. It was a time where we were heated the International Monetary system. So lots of dealings with people all of the world. I learned a lot about how to do something internationally read it so was a great experience for me pretty morning was fun. I enjoyed the people. Some are still good friends today. But of course when i was secretary of state, the world changed. When Ronald Reagan and i took office, the cold war was just as cold as it could get when we left, was only a shadow. So it was a huge thank to be involved in. And watch it unfold. Pete in your book issues on your mind, it rules for leadership in a couple of those you have already expanded like the rules, but your first rule was to be a participant. George thats what democracy is all about. Ronald ragan gave me a type. Another type says democracy is not a spectator sport. So be part of it. Be part of the politics be willing to serve. Be a participant. Pete rule number five, competence is the name of the game and leadership. George is a great start. If you not competent, you will get in big trouble. In a tough experience and i told you when i went to washington secretary of labor i was kind of innocent of politics. And i had a bunch of pointy spots to fill. I realized you trying to work with a diverse just constituency. So i 70 best management guy in this industrial relations field everybody told me there was a guy named jim. I talked to him and i said we have to have a real labor guy. Somebody who negotiates the contracts. A real union guy. We found him gotta get somebody who really knows them in our training. Delegate somebody is working in area of how to deal with discrimination in the workplace. And a lawyer who knows the labor markets. I get a lot of these people and president elect nixon felt it would show progress in his administration so he wanted to bring him to the hotel. They will have a little meaty. Then will take him down to the press. So we have a meeting. In a introduced him. And they asked him all kinds of questions. It was ready obvious that jim was a real pro. He knew what he was doing. Some guy in the back of the room was hennepin he said are you democrat or a republican. And in my innocence i have never even asked him. And he said i am a democrat. So the next thing that happened, was dazzling. Same guy was hennepin settlement democrat. The last guy was jeff our nominee to be head of the Bureau Labor Statistics and he was a stabbed tension. He was very close to president nixon. Something that he wanted i wanted. In the same guy asked him a question. He was like a cow the scud. And he said i guess you have to say im an independent. Anyway get back to my hotel room the phone was ringing off the hook. It in the republicans in the Senate Labor Committee or say, was a selection. Visible look i cleared this the white house and the ranking republican, and he was republican pretty all of my guys were terrific. They were competent. He was some of the people called me and said we like you guys. And jim succeeded me a secretary. He later became our ambassador to japan. He went on, and he was a brilliant North University person and so on. If i had rolled all of these people out because they were registered democrats, i wouldnt have had the competence. Im not saying that i shouldve asked the question and does something about it but anyway, if you have competent people, you will do much better than if you dont. Your first job is to form your team and get people who are competent in the slots. George schultz was one of several others we interviewed in 2013. You can find them on all on our website book tv. Org. Up next another former secretary of state and soontobe director of the Hoover Institution, price and in this portion of the program she talks about her book democracy. Stories from the long road to freedom. But i think about democracy, its actually kind of a mysterious thing the people are willing to trust these constitutions, rules and laws. The road to go over the falls and elect people to represent them. Rather than going into the streets or rather than buying into the family plan or religion. They trust constitutions and the rule of law. As a very mysterious process. I think is a good, a child growing up in birmingham, alabama, was perhaps one who very early on felt something even more mysterious. I thought in segregated alabama, where you couldnt go to a Movie Theater tour our restaurant if you are a black person, are you are most certainly is in class citizen, i saw black citizens absolutely devoted to the institution of american democracy. At one instance in the book that encapsulates it for me. I was six is years old and my uncle alto, my mothers brother had picked me up from school and it was election day. But there were long lines of black people pointing to vote. Listen to my uncle, this must mean that the man wallace, George Wallace cannot win. My own sexual way public did not want him to win. As a medical said, no, we are a minority so he will win. I look to my uncle and i said, why did they bother. My uncle said that maybe one day that but will matter. As i went around the world and i saw a long line of afghans or iraqis or south africans, latin america, people voting sometimes for the first time. They know that one day that votes will matter. And we are blessed with this extraordinary gift, democracy. Americans in particular were blessed with Founding Fathers who understood and institutional design that would protect our liberties, our right to say what we think. To be free from the secret police at 92 have the dignity, it comes with having those who are going to govern you, have to ask for your consent. But if we were blessed but thats we believe that we are endowed by our creator with those rights rated and cannot be true for us not for them. And one of the marvelous legacies of the United States of america and the building in which he said, the library in which we set. Most marvelous legacy of Ronald Reagan, was that he never forgot our obligation to speak for the voiceless, never forgot her obligation to do the right thing in supporting those who just wanted the civil freedoms we had. And he delivered. Because he believed that the United States of america, is an idea. And it is an idea that universal. And so that is why i wanted to write this book read. [applause]. When you work secretary of state, you are in the position to the opinion of the United States actions im sure. And i no United Office now. So just over 100 a sense you have had the Trump Administration and power. I wondered if you would ever speak to, is amending a change in your mind as to how americans are viewed as we transition from president obama to president trump. Lives in europe not too long after the election and the first thing was to save us to settle down. [laughter]. The United States of america is engaging in a little bit of the democratic experiment. [laughter]. With just elected somebody is never been in government before. Susan never even been there before. And that president is going to take some time, bit of a learning curve rated the one thing that you can trust us that american has institutions that are absolutely firm in absolutely concrete and will hold america in check. So if you look at the president , i think it is getting used to the fact that actually is not as easy as it looks in there. That the american presidency is not just one person it is an institution. In the Founding Fathers were very terrified of executive power. Ms. Rice if they were leaving a king, they didnt want to create another. His thinking created it congress, a separate and equal branch of government. Its an article one is the congress will constantly mind you in the executive branch. And today, that congress 535 people and most of them think they should be the president of the United States. He has courts which he learned his talents and he has governo governors, 50 of them in half of them thinks they should be president of the United States and they have legislatures. On the way because the press as well. Civil society and americans who are ungovernable. And so, the job of getting to be president is one thing. Once youre there, it is quite another. As the learning curve i think is steep but i think we have seen some things that really the world likes and what they see in america. I think the decision to strike the syrian airbases after the chemical weapons attack by this man by his own people was a very important directive. We had laid out a redline for five years ago. We have done nothing in the meantime. And then eroded american credibility. And that single strike, the administration said, this far and no further. If theres just some things that are intolerable. I saw Something Else to in the way this present did that. You remember he said, i could not set by and watch babies choking on chemical gas. But he was really saying was as president of the United States, i do not set by and watch babies choking on chemical gas. I think it is this still a lot of water to pass under that bridge. And we are still learning in many ways. What is like to get up and not just react every time. This american things have happened. And the one thing i will say as an american, we have only one president at a time. We have to do everything we can to try to make our president successful. In the streisand. [applause]. John a very smart percentage of our audience here, is just an absolute waste of our tax dollars. When our schools need to be rebuilt and our bridges and all the rest of that predict so the questions, do you think theres a foreign aid group that is really important for the american people. Condoleezza rice for me, its a little bit the same argument i would make about democracy. And promoting democracy. You can say, this Pay Attention to our own affairs. We could to build our bridges in pennsylvania, so why are we building ridges in afghanistan. You can say our schools are not in great shape, so why are we trying to send girls to school in nigeria. You can say all of the things. But i think there are two very powerful arguments against that kind of thinking. One is a moral argument and one is a practical argument. The moral argument is this. Americans is an idea. And if life liberty and the pursuit of happyness are universal, and again for us, than it can be good for us and not for them. And we are at our best when we need for both power and practical. Now the principal the no man woman or child should have to live in the direst of poverty in the worst of circumstances, because we are also compassionate nation. But actually believe that as many problems as we have, we have been given an extraordinary bounty. If you go to some of the places in the world, i dont care how bad it looks in the United States of america. Its much worse. How can you turn a blind eye to those children playing in the dirt in haiti. And how can you turn a blind eye to an ebola pandemic in liberia. [applause]. We are two good to be that way. And so, the moral argument is that i am christian. I have been told that but you do for the least of my brothers, you did for me. And whatever your tradition is in whatever that impulse comes from, for the compassion, americas hat has had it may have to keep it pretty that is the moral piece. Now the practical case. Democratic states that can deliver for their own people, dont invade their neighbors. They dont traffic in child soldiers who are ten and 11 years old. It of traffic in the human six died so that women and open brothels in Eastern Europe and southeast asia. They dont harbor terrorists as a matter of state policy. As democracies dont fight each other. Its called the democratic peace. Theres a reason we have believed that we are better off when other people beyond us are beyond the borders to live with decent governments to try to take care of them. So i think it was a time when foreign aid was just given to us strategically. Give money to somebody else or maybe a little bit of guilt about colonialism or whatever. But the states have actually been long gone for a long time. And if you look at some of the foreign aid programs that we now run, the more challenge is a very good example of this. It says to countries, you will receive large foreign aid packages from the United States only if your governing our fighting corruption, if youre investing in your people. And if you are doing those things, then we will give you foreign aid. I will give just one example. The millennial challenge compact. They wanted to do a lot of farms in the third world, are quite inefficient. Small farms and one of the problems in combining them is nobody knows what the title to the land is pretty so they were going to do linda tyler to titling. There is a lot of the book that women could not hold land in their own names. So the United States of america said if you want to see done in this foreign, you will change that law. They change the law. And so when you go abroad and you look at what american has done and aids relief for humanitarian crises in the kinds of programs we fund all of the world, we have largest donor of food aid. You recognize that the most powerful country in the world also ought to be the most compassionate. Its good for us to. Because many print responsible progress in act in the International System in a way that enhances prosperity and security, we are all better off. So its a very expensive way from keeping us from ultimately having to intervene in other more extensive ways including military force. Standford and University Hoover Institution was founded in 1919 with mike herbert hoover. Collecting materials about world war i. It has since grown to nearly 200 fellow who specialize in a range of Public Policy fields. I look at books written by Hoover Institution phillips continues with economist thomas rated he appeared on cspans Author Interview program in 1990 to discuss his book, preferential policies. Having grown up in the south, i was shifted between Different Levels of education. So i was a top student in my class and then it was immediately the bottom student in my class in harlem. And i was way behind. Next to the bottom. It was just that great of a difference. But there was no racial issue involved rated all of the other people having more black. Until i got through that. And in for the second time in my life, i went out on my own lowes 17 and didnt return to college until i was 25. And it was very difficult to what i was used to it will begin, i was way behind and in danger flunking out of school at harvard. It was really incredible, lichen ten years, i was a fulltime student and a fulltime student without a High School Diploma at harvard. [laughter]. Was a little difficult. At this stage i majored in economics. And again there was no one there to tell me, they have it in for you. Thats why youre doing that. Because first of all, i overcame it and then overhearing overcame it. How long did you stay at harvard. While i graduated from harvard. I went there in a transfer to harvard. And i was working fulltime during the day. It is truly criminal what goes on with those students to serve all kinds of purposes. Give us an idea of those external things you talk about. Political purposes just a couple days ago that there is a campaign that those black girls that did not want to participate were violent and that is not unique at stanford the students played the hispanic establishment has threatened them if they dont want to go along with what is being said and done and they claim only 15 percent of hispanic students have ever attended a single event sponsored by the establishment so you have this kind of thing going on. That once you let in the students i can make the academic standard then the professors can make it so you have to create courses that with of academic standards. Cspan2 the names . Harvard law school black. Threat and the law school. He is leaving. He is taking unpaid leave until such time as they hire a woman of color as he says. But he has also said that by black he doesnt mean skin color but those that are really black not just think white and look black he once ideological conformity to fill the position thats not uncommon either. I know black women for example who had a book published in a contract on another book has a couple of nice places has trouble getting a job teaching at a college and the reason is she is shut down or blackballed by people who dont like her ideology. That law school i learned recently a woman speaking to the tenured position all the men voted for her and the women voted against her so you get these ideological tests at the very time there is this narrow ideological conformity. Cspan2 what are your politics outside of the race issue . Is a my biases against politics. I havent been a registered member since before 1972. And i am disingenuous with all of that. So by what they do and how they do it they are quite clever the things they do and is not just raise issues. Has this changed over the years. The changes for the worse people trying to limit the terms of congress i would like to see it limited to one if you allow a member of the house i would rather they change that to one, fouryear term or two, twoyear terms because of reelection and then to raise all that money they sell the Public Interest to get the money. Thats like the sugar industry and congress well appropriate enough money to the sugar industry to put back 1000 and you cannot get that return on your investment so there is no sign they will stop doing that to stop offering the money they will stop giving the money. And with the International Perspective we have about 20 minutes left in our discussion in history who are your favorite not politicians but people . You mean historic figures that people i look to when i was growing up . To have you follow like the Winston Churchill types . Most High School Students dont know who mr. Churchill is if one man could phase western democracy and what led to world war ii warning him and with 40 Million People would not have lost their lives but on the 11th hour had britain not pulled through and then its highly unlikely. Cspan2 your favorite american president . Might have to go back to abraham lincoln. And of the modern people in different respects fdr, jfk and Ronald Reagan and reagan and fdr they recognize International Danger and all the other issues wouldnt matter. It isnt a political party. I suppose im a great believer of freedom. A libertarian . Not in the sense of the American Civil Liberties union is i believe they should be kept in school because a strange reading of the constitution people have to recognize that all people all over their lives in society cannot simply demolish it because its on just and what youre going to do to make it better is in that context. So the tendency is to want more for individuals. I dont want people making decisions who dont pay the price to their decisions and that is what politics is about. You dont pay the price. Early in the book one of the reasons in this country was politicians didnt pay the price that was enormously costly but those that put it in paid no cost they drew full salaries their respective i want someone who discriminates that has to lose money discriminating people tend to back off when they lose money. Harlem was an allwhite community and became a black Community Despite organized efforts to keep the blacks out because people were losing many trying to keep the white community. People in the civil rights area on arrived missed that trying not to promote more free market because that makes discrimination the most costly. Cspan2 one of the most interesting sentences is the book is india where you say they have the most diverse country in the world with 180 different languages anymore of the melting pot and the United States . To be polarized one of the tragedies is an organized group trying to organize the United States to create the enormous handicaps and Subsaharan Africa is laboring due to historical and geographical reasons and now being blessed over a distance having had that blessing we would throw that down the bright one down like down the drain not to be aware of the history of the balkans what happens when people speak different languages and different beliefs in the same society. You say the Race Relations were battle campus but if this keeps up what will happen . Some skinheads are already on campuses student unions are already being formed there are harassments of minority students unseen from 20 or 30 years ago. And then the reaction on both sides escalates because that gives a lot of leverage to those crazy elements of all those different groups. Pick international for example in israel somebody said on television that because this has managed any reproach mom between the arabs and the jews has to be put aside one man has a leverage to prevent millions of people both sides from working out a political arrangement and of course once you get the racial height event that into the power to prevent vast numbers of people that can be disposed not to do anything because they are polarized of the crazies. Where it is creating other than the elites . What is it among people that creates the differences . They have always been there. Blacks and whites were different but you didnt find all the black students huddled together like you do today. All the black students that i knew had white roommates and they were all popular other than me. But thats not the situation today. The fact you do have the political elite and that they are forced to come out to do the demonstrations and the fact that you have students there that are alienated because they find themselves in the situation and can barely keep their nose above water if they could barely do that and this is all part of the white power structure. The natural problem. Dont give us this that is called insensitivity. Also self reinforcing son keep feeding each other ever ugly racial incident happens on campus invariably the first thing will say you have a larger pool of minority studentsof faculty subject white students to the sensitivity courses or ethnic courses. Thats like to make things better it will make them worse. But if they get worse you keep doing that so its a spiral i dont see where that ends. I see that we leading only two bad things. Cspan2 what would you do if you are the administrator of the college . Now you are bringing me 20 years after. Twenty years ago i said dont do it. I said if you do it this will be the consequence. I was not the only one. People did not want to hear it. I am sympathetic to the administrators im not. Nobody wants to hear what i say. It is a live issue. Some gentlemen will be from princeton i think associated with the university if i would come to princeton and confer. I said no. No one has ever asked me in all these years to come to university. Because the word the truth and the light they want to confuse with the mission the others are ideologues. Or just to chitchat with people. This is the first ever to book authorized biography that only has it been written with Henry Kissingers cooperation. How did that happen . It implies he had some control over it. But when he suggested this to me now more than ten years ago, i said yes, i would be willing to do this, but with the condition that you have to accept if you want me to do this, you give me access to your private papers and i will write what i think is the truth which incidentally was the basis of which i wrote the previous book the rothschild family. He agreed to that. I wouldnt have taken it on with any other basis. Did you know him before hand . We met at a party in london. So we met on the basis and i forget exactly when for some time after that the subject came up. He was attracted to the biography being written i was not the first person who was and then i initially said no and then he wrote me a letter. And it said what a great shame just when i decided you are the ideal man to do this and that they have those boxes of my partners papers, but i had been a bit daunted. It is an extremely difficult life. So this is not a man who has been undocumented meeting to write his own memoirs. So why do you think he wanted . He also shared some information talking about Walter Isaacson for his biography. Why did he want this written . By nature he is a historian. They know that the memoir is different from the histories and the biographies. His three volume lateral cover is mostly government and nothing before 1969. So half of his life and i think the idea was that somebody and then for those archival sources because thats who and a bunch of lights that can be turned off. But most of that and as it turns out the material was very good and rich. I was lucky because that hole. But in germany up until right down to the moment making nixon juried on jealous to because he was neglected by the previous writers. Cspan2 you are often described as a historian conservative did he choose you for that reason who is the other unnamed person be considered that way . Yes he was. But i am british because i do think thats an advantage to be an outsider in my opinion as i work of american history. One part of the future of kissingers life is the extraordinary political diplomacy from the early seventies and has raged on and in some ways it is off the generation of 1968 during the vietnam war your generation of americans but im somebody who can come at this is history and memorabilia from woodstock. But on the question of conservativism i would add a footnote because they need Something Different if you have grown up in the uk. Its not republicanism the us version that i am by not any means a republican in my politics now that i live in the United States. I am a conservative like kissinger was and the european conservative because things that they say are so completely shocking to you in that same kind of way that kissinger conservativism is european that saves minor that may be one reason he thought it would work. We say european conservative are they National Security real realm . The social issues and those things are not in the name of politics. Then National Security issues it is also the case people get confused into thinking there is a straight argument going on about National Security i have been critical in recent years of president obama and also his predecessor and the book colossus is extremely critical of the invasion of iraq and the way it was handled so i have been drawn into the debate of us Foreign Policy from that moment and i probably approached it naively thinking i could criticize both republicans and democrats its hard to be in that position youre expected to be on one side or the other but National Security to be more open. Is there has been a convergence in looking at issues like bosnia or iraq itself people on the left with those humanitarian challenges and people on the right im not sure than anybody else who does casebycase . If they recognize the partyline on his National Security issues of social and cultural issues and interestingly the young man was in rather the same position and saw himself as a small see conservative did not identify as liberal in the fifties but when you encounter real Americans Services from the Republican Convention he was appalled and with the right of the Republican Party and with conservatives as well. So with kissingers predicament makes him a controversial figure. But also he has enemies on the right. The book is called the idealist and with cast on even with kissinger is described as the realist. So that choice that you explain in the book is not that notion of idealism. Can you explain for the audience at home that idealist when it comes to kissinger . But thats not the description you are using. Its true most people think of Henry Kissinger as the realist with the names that they throw around our machiavellian or bismarck. So maybe its not surprising they fall into that trap but i like to show in the book he wasnt a realist but he was not one of them and wasnt critical and wet went with that mac of alien notion and then i began to think not many people have died but then i was struck of that realism and do be critical with that essay on bismarck is highly critical of the maestro of 19th century. So they go deeper into kissingers intellectual and one development. And so in germany 1938 and to be highly critical of the appeasement and to appease the realist with of interesting essay they thought it was the same narrow approach a form policy of those dictatorships so his own experience makes him suspicious never to come to harvard with the pushy undergraduates and then come back when you are finished and then to see them again and underestimate and ultimately put it into your senior thesis. And particularly in the problem on the one hand with freedom and free will and free choice but that experience is real but on the other hand to argue there is some kind of plan for the world and the discussion of the senior thesis that he says there is an ultimately that experience of choice is real and freedom as kissinger defines it is and that experience but the third point is back to the crucial one with the cold war concept of the early academic career that he rejected the materialism and the theory of the soviet bloc and also rejected capitalist materialist theories if our growth rate is higher than we will win the war so kissinger emerges with diplomacy in the 19 fifties. Let me briefly describe the case in texas and how that to me encapsulates the issues and taming globalization. And that was the case of a Mexican National who across the border and committed murder capital murder sentenced to death by the state court in texas. However he was not given his warnings under the Vienna Convention to require when an alien is arrested in the United States he be given warnings he can seek access to his consulate and get assistance from translators and so on. Texas refused to reconsider the decision even though they did not provide those as required by a treaty. The country of mexico went to the International Court of justice to seek release that the us had violated the treaty obligations the International Court of justice found against the United States and said they had violated the obligations under the treaty and issued an order to the United States and the other aliens on death row who also were in the same situation president bush issued an order to the governor of texas i trust he knew the address on the letter to governor perry asking him basically ordering him to stop the executions of the United States could come into compliance with the Vienna Convention and the International Court of justice decision. Texas refused to obey and actually was sued in the Supreme Court and ultimately the us Supreme Court refused to stop the execution and he was executed shortly thereafter. In that decision the Supreme Court said even though the United States said they sign the Vienna Convention requiring these warnings, Congress Still had to act to put into effect and until congress did that the courts were not going to get into the business of enforcing the treaty even in a Death Penalty case when someone was on death row. So that one case its complicated but it summarizes a lot of issues in this book the first is that globalization although we use the phrase a lot caused a lot of changes in the political system we mean a few things the easy and rapid and cheap movement of goods and capital and people across National Borders so for example in the United States millions of aliens cross the borders every year coming in and out of the country billions of dollars is good and services across our borders and the report of the president a few years ago said that gnp is either related to imports or exports and of course billions of dollars move with the press of a button between accounts here and abroad globalization refers to the ease of communication and the rise of the internet and the creation of those networks to make it extremely easy and cheap to communicate and for things the bride to affect us like they didnt 50 years ago or 25 years ago look at the american stock markets up and down in reaction to greece if it can pay back its bonds has a direct and Immediate Impact on the same day on the dow jones that is something that would not have happened 30 years ago or 40 years ago but the speed of communications makes that possible but also the first to admit globalization is not the undiluted good it also makes bad things possible so Transnational Criminal Networks drug smugglin smuggling, pollution, terrorism in fact a lot of these problems use the same channels of International Commerce and communication to move around the world just as goods and capital and people do that has sparked in our review, a response to try to create regulatory regimes that control these new types of globalization. We call it Global Governance that people refer to it as many Different Things that idea is outside the power of a single nationstate to effectively regulate any of these things anymore. It used to be the power to affect the goods and services and capital to control crime within the borders. But today because of the ease of transportation , communication and globalization, lies outside the power to regulate these new types of problems so you have the rise of a new kind of Global Governance with two features. One is the International Agreements try to regulate worldwide to effectively regulate something there has to be a scope it didnt use to have. So to regulate chemical weapons worldwide that convention regulates the production and storage and assistance of every chemical in the world no matter who possesses it even held by Research Laboratories and private persons fall under the Chemical Weapons Convention. So what you can see is a broad scope that reaches well into a nationstate international did not before and the rise of new kinds of internet on International Institutions that are neutral and independent from anyone country. They cannot do their job in this they have these characteristics because to effectively regulate and enforce these new International Laws , institutions have to be seen is outside the control of things in a single country see you have the rise not just United Nations in the court of justice, that things like the Chemical Weapons Convention or the wto with new forms of regulatory bodies that set up side the control of anyone country and because of that independence the power the International Institutions didnt have before. Is fair to say they are more directly under the control of the few nations are some nations but as the independent. The United States and other countries in the world would ever reach an agreement about global warming, they would have both of these characteristics for a treaty to be effective and have to reach into Energy Production and use in ways the federal government doesnt regulate here at home or to the extent of regulating domestic or home energy usage. At the same time the International Institution to decide how much each country was allowed to produce, how much pollution and also to measure of people are in violation and to issue sanctions nobody would trust that if it was under the control of the United States or the European Union it would lose the legitimacy and independent function and it would not function unless you have the independent institution separate control nationstates. I dont feel the czar controversial descriptions were still early stages but it has been accelerating the last few years and that ties the United States and the Economy Society tighter to see more and more of these agreements and institutions. The problem isnt these are not done at the International Level that for the book taming globalization is how does the United States Political Legal system respond . Can they cooperate with the International Institutions and new kinds of regimes and how do they do it . That is the fundamental attention at the heart of the book because some of the new kinds of regulations and institutions our intentions the way the United States traditionally exercises public power and to congress especially over control over domestic law and taxation and the executive branch and judiciary. For one example, when a treaty regulates an issue, the standard doctrine among many scholars and people who work in this area that treaties are not limited by the same restrictions on behalf of federalism that one apply to statues there is missouri versus holland where back in the 19 twenties it was thought congress cannot regulate and protect species of birds for endangered species recent montes reasons the lower court struck down the statute to try to protect birds. But then they entered a treaty with canada the Migratory Bird treaty implemented by congress they did exactly the same thing the court said it could not do under domestic powers and the Supreme Court said yes they could do that in the federal governments powers could be broader to regulate things domestically that it could not do with normal congressional statute. Another example in the area separation of powers. If the courts play the same role with International Affairs and Domestic Affairs the courts will grow and be called into areas and matters that traditionally were not involved with but because International Law and regimes and institutions are affecting more and more things under the National Government or the states, by nature draw the courts to delicate decisions about Foreign Affairs they use to try to stay out of. I wrestled with the title for a long time on this book there are many different themes i could not find a single thing finally i came upon with my wifes help that would seem to bring together the idea is that america is the greatest country in all of history also committed one of the greatest sins perpetrated over centuries to dehumanize an entire race of people. Year in and year out for a very long time. It is a profound evil in the midst of stunning breakthroughs. So now what i think is what finally delivered us from what we were doing wrong but on the other hand it is a shame we will now have to deal with. Maybe we were too close to the sixties when he first acknowledged the shame to understand its important but its one of the most important events in all of history to have a society that believes in freedom. So the book tries to look at different aspects of that irony. Host in my reading the shame belongs to the sixties liberal movement in your view but that is what has caused our current political polarization. Yes. Thank you. [laughter] that is a very fair assessment. In the 19 sixties american liberalism changed and took responsibility for dealing with that change to say we are the politics and the ideology to bring back american legitimacy as a democracy. Thats our mission. Symbolism has dominated american politics for the last 50 or 60 years because it took propriety over this terrible shame. We will not want israel and racism and sexism and overcome all of those things and great societies and wars on poverty and bring them up to power with everyone else. That will restore our legitimacy as a free society. Host in your book the end where it is used pretty liberally. Yes. [laughter] host you say some groups coopted that. They didnt want to be but they coopted the word for their own political purposes. Yes. Almost making a romance around it to ascribe to that word a kind of power that had never been there before but did serve their argument because much of that coming from minorities in america that now you have to imagine that we now demand and that empowers us and gives us an entitlement of special consideration in america right now. So that word was part of what contributed to that larger point of view of victimization. Host why did you include the story in the book . The part about quitting and i was the only black kid on the Swimming Team. I was the captain. The coach and i were very close. But the summer before my senior year three weeks of Summer Vacation he was at his mothers home in upper Lake Michigan and never invited me. I was excluded not to be mean but the team organize without me knowing about it with this wonderful time they would have on the lake and i was never told about it. The implication is that he collaborated with racism. He was my friend. We like each other. But his mother said no blacks can come. So he honored that am plotted with the parents of the other swimmers so that did not happen. He was a metaphor in that sense for america. He knew better. He liked me. I liked him. I babysat for him. But yet we collaborated in a way that was cool but to send me a message that larger americans said something there was something unacceptable he claims he was not able to see that but i think he was and so i talk about this is the situation of that profound hypocrisy that america is in the now looking at minorities as my Swimming Coach looked at me and got mad and called me every name of the book i was very calm because i knew he was wrong and he knew he was wrong. And now it stands before the minorities apologetic and begging for some relief from the stigma of racism. And that is minority power we had an American Life now for 50 years. So that little incident of quitting the Swimming Team i grew up in segregation. Ive seen it all the time i would be here all day talking about all the incidents of segregation. But i knew he was compromised. So thats why it ended up amounting to. Host what were your parents like in 1940 chicago . They are two very exceptional people. I will write about them in the future. My father was black from the south third grade education, taught himself to read and write. Mother middleclass white daughter of the contractor got her degree from university of chicago. On the surface they were very different. Once you got to know them my father was better read and spent more time reading than my mothe mother, that and then to fight to replace an American Life and they did it. They did it without ever complaining, and then they had those core babies. So i marched all through childhood to demonstrate and that is the those and then to fight for the civil rights there were admirable people. With a wrong . They were right this is important they were not wrong. This was a deeply blanket a racist society. I grew up i could not go here or there i never a in a restaurant until i was 17. Because blacks could not go when restaurant you cannot get a job there. Segregation was everywhere they were fighting a real concrete unapologetic enemy in American Society that said listen you will be inferior. Or like William Faulkner the great novel is said in the fifties you are probably right but obviously hes never heard of Patrick Henry give me freedom or give me death. They were never apologetic they fought to the bitter end so i grew up seeing all of that and that had an impact on who i became in the long run that now 50 or 60 years later in a different place america isnt racist it no longer stops the dreams and hopes of any black person in American Life you can do anything you want you can be president , ceo, dishwashe president , ceo, dishwasher, anyg you choose to be today does that mean every white person will love you . I now when i dont care. Whats important is you have the opportunity that is what its all about the Civil Rights Movement today is very different than back then but an enemy that will stop their lives from bigotry. They are fighting now to manipulate white guilt and then to manipulate the Larger Society into those entitlements with a generation of black leaders who do nothing to shakedown corporations. This is not the Civil Rights Movement of my pastor what i grew up in its very different. What is your connection to stanford and the Hoover Institution . I am a senior fellow at Stanford University ive always been very happy about its a Great Institution a great environment that meant everything to me and my work to facilitate that. I am a fan. [laughter] George Washington is torn it feels like he cannot sit on the sidelines if everything he has worked his whole life for that is his legacy hes the father of this country with a threat to come out of retirement and at the same time he doesnt because he has questions for example he is worried what people will say he sensitive to criticism for all the things he said during the second term of his presidency and longing for retirement and saying the system is a sham and couldnt be happy in retirement he is worried he could be too old or somebody who was younger or more qualified the french are having terrific success with a general known as napoleon he was very young. The final thing is what it damage his legacy . That is so important to him at this stage in his life it always has hes always cared in a very conscious way his role in history and doesnt want to do something that will sacrifice the same he has already earned. That is one of the reasons he had a condition he doesnt want to take active command of the army unless there is an actual invasion by france and wants to choose the second in command who will serve as the chief in his absence. And for that position for a variety of reasons, he ends up choosing somebody he has actually warned john adams specifically does not want that is the star of everyones favorite musical, alexander hamilton. [laughter]. Monday 3 30 p. M. Eastern, the selling thriller writer talks about his writing career in books on in depth. Watch book tv, this memorial day weekend on cspan2. Good afternoon, im director at the brookings institution. We gather here this afternoon virtually because of the covid19 plank. To talk about reparations for African Americans from the descendents of slaves. We plan this event before the covid19. And we celebrated this book today, long before covid19. As we dissent from the disparity in this country, his first telling that the coronavirus seems to be afflicting lacks much more than w