Transcripts For CSPAN2 In Depth Yuval Levin 20240712

The great debate, the fractured republic and a time to build. This is two hours. Host author yuval levin, what is your assessment of the United States . Guest thanks for having me here. That is a wonderfully broad question to open within a challenging one. They are living in a moment of crisis. It is hard to deny. We have been through a spring dominated by a Public Health crisis. We are facing now also a social crisis and the struggle for racial the quality and very much of this moment that forces us to confront challenges that weve had trouble with in recent yea years. In th a time of crisis, you kno, its because it is the time of testing its also the time to think about what americas strengths are, what they are good at as a country and how we can build on that address the enormous problems in front of us. Host how did we get here . This is that an era marked by crises from 9 11 to the financial crisis to a pandemic that forces us to look to the sources of restraint what the politics is not always good for doing the theory and practice room politics to address those problems that has long had. Host the fractured republic you talk about the norm have we ever had a norm it what do you consider to be the norm in this country . That is a very important question. We live in a time now that has Something Like a misperception of the norm. That has been commonly by the baby boomers those born between 1946 and the midsixties. Those who are running the core institutions and trump was born 74 years ago this month. President george w. Bush born july 46. Clinton august 46. Barack obama 1961. They are all boomers that has been a pretty unusual version of america coming of the Second World War. Afford and over the course of the 50 or 60 years we have lived through diversification and fragmentation for those on the edges of desire those who were alienated from the mainstream consensus but we also lost that solidarity that defined postwar america. Now politics is defined by a sense of loss about that we would find a divided societys with the economic and cultural forces so to think about a moment like this so in the fifties early sixties america was a very unusual form of society and we simply should not take it to be the norm. To regurgitate and reiterate what the boomers did when they were young. The ideals are written in the declaration of independence of the core fundamental believe, we are all created equal, the government begins at the premise we have freedom as individuals but as strong united society. And then to lead us through the challenges that we should look to in a moment like this the politics can be organized around the golden age of is not as golden as people think it was. History does not go backwards a question should be how do we could become strong for the future and that means racing to our principles to see how we can imply one apply enduring ideals. And understanding our country as it is and then how can we be our best selves at this time and that which gets in the way. Host the fractured republic came out in 2016 life in america is always Getting Better and worse at the same time. Liberals and conservatives not only insist the past is easy to see but also the country was once on the very path and with the resulting political debates little evidence of real engagement of contemporary problems and few Practical Solutions spent that is a description of my frustration with the basic politics and you do see them both parties there is a way where the Republican Party yearns for the cultural arrangement in the fifties and sixties but it change for that. For some good reasons that opened up opportunities and that created options and choices and economic dynamism and also it did come at a cost thinking how we address the cost we cannot just think about how we go back to an earlier social order how we apply our in the ideals to a situation to think about whose fault it is we didnt talk much about what america would need in 2040. Twenty or 40 years from now is as close to us as they are 2000 and thats exactly what we should think about with politics. And to get out of the referent nostalgia for midcentury america to speak as progressives with the left and right in general what we want for the future and what we need to be doing to get there. Host you identify as a conservative what does that mean to you . A lot of my work has been about the question what that means with the left right divide and what that is about. It begins from basic premises with anthropology human beings are born less and perfect are born fallen and twisted and we have to be formed before we can be free that is done by family and community and religion and those institutions that are capable of affirmation should be conserved to prove themselves over time to provide generations of people for what we need to be a free society. But that is central and difficult. People who describe themselves as progressives begin from the premise that we are actually born free but they are not living up to their potential because they are being oppressed my institutions that impressed on them. But which you choose to emphasize was very deep and free Society Needs them both with that conservative you of how social order enable justice. So im a conservative. Host the most recent book a time to build, our souls institutions shape each other in the ongoing way. To make us more are responsible the institutions fail to form us to be cynical selfindulgent and reckless to reinforce what undermines a free society. That book is really about the nature of the social crisis we are living through tries to think in broad terms of the social dynamics and the history that led us to the polarization of society and the newer book thinks about the institutional underpinnings of the social crisis we are living through how we connect with each other and understand ourselves as individuals with the crisis of alienation not only Political Polarization but in the private lives of many people a desperation that leads people to opioids and enormous increase in the suicide rate to do a weakening of our institution and with the sense the purpose is not to form them or mold them but to serve as a platform to build a following or build their own brand or elevate themselves. With politics to the media and the academy where they are existing as platforms for themselves rather than molds for character and behavior. And what it means to be part of an institution or to be shaped by an institution is important. We see that powerfully in politics where people who run for congress basically to get a bigger social media following and a better timeslot on cable news rather than work within the institution to change our country for the better. Host you write we have seen a powerful additional source of dereliction and dysfunction to take us deeper toward the core of congress institutional confusion. Many members have come to understand themselves most fundamentally in a larger cultural ecosystem at the point of which is not legislating or governing with that outrage for a partisan audience and you specify, you mentioned matt gates republican of florida and alexandra ocasiocortez. I use them as examples but it is much more widespread coming to a place where we think of Political Institution as a platform and to get a blued checkmark on their name they are trying to do good and improve society but it is fundamentally a platform role to put themselves in a place to channel the outrage and perform and obviously that has been happening in the presidency as well. With a sense the presidency is a stage in the place to perform and to see himself as an outsider spending time talking about the government complaining on twitter with the department of justice does rather than understanding himself as the ultimate insider and then that we dont ask anymore in politic politics. Given my role house they behave. As a pastor in congregant given that how should i behave . Thats a way of letting our institutional roles form and shape that might drive us toward graver one greater responsibility rather than taking ourselves a standing on a platform the logic of social media has taken over the institution and we need to push back. Host technology has played a role . Yes we are not just at the whim of social media but the long larger social process is a function of liberalization and in the middle of the 20th century many great social forces were telling people be more like everyone else the same social forces tell everyone to be yourself with liberation and there is good to that but it can tear society apart and we can push against those places where we lean too hard. That means we cover solidarity. Host i want to bring your book the great debate into our conversation. The political left and right seems to represent genuine the distinct point of view the National Life seems by designed to bring to the surface questions that divide them. How did we become an country of political left and right . It is a work of intellectual history and began is my doctoral dissertation and then over a period of years with the more general look at the origins of the left right divide and it does that by looking through the lens of the late 18th century debate between edmund burke and thomas paine the great english politician thought to be one of the fathers of modern conservativism, english pain english born American Revolutionary war figure a very important figure in making the case for the french revolution and to have an argument over the nature of social change that encapsulated what is the core distinction between the left and the right with the difference of how it is as a human being enters the world and what it requires both of these views are generally speaking liberal views to belong and free society with democracy, individual liberty protecting equal rights of all but they differ fundamentally from what it is from the human person and that debate of how to advance the good is still the right way to understand the left right debate in politics they are parties and the sense they are divided by a difference of opinion what is good for everyone and society at large it is a constructive difference it can be very ugly and divisive is necessary to formulate the debates and it still serves this way the difference between left and right is still relevant and part of what politics is about. What is your politics with this point of view. Im an immigrant to the United States. Born in israel my family came to the us when i was eight years old. I grew up in new jersey went to college in washington dc and went to graduate School University of chicago to come back to work in the Bush Administration first with department eight hsl policy staffers in the second term and then into the think tank world where im at the intersection of my Academic Work in my work of Public Policy of political practice im now a scholar at aei and run a journal called National Affairs i tried to connect theory and policy and practice and has how i came to my conservative use that is a mystery. My father is a conservative that ultimately reaches to a mysterious level we never understand how we come to those fundamental views that is a little bit mysterious. But i am impressed by institutions that enable people to thrive am impressed by the constitutional system and we can drive a lot out of our history of those problems. What are the non negotiables in the social contract . Because are stated in the declaration of independence in human equality and human dignity. Thats why people are on the street we all saw and video a gross violation of those who should be treated as an equal and was not that was a nonnegotiable fact whatever the political inclinations we all believe we are created equal and endowed with basic rates and from there what should the institutions look like to be most effective but the basic ideals are those non negotiables of american politics and i think they are true. Host good afternoon. Welcome to book tv cspan2 we have missed you the last couple of months we are happy to be live again beginning with tierney of reason 2001. Imagining the future 2008. The great debate 2013. The fractured republic 2017. The newest book a time to build how we committing to our institutions can revive the American Dream. We want you to participate in our conversation this afternoon. Doctor levin, back to the great debate was a lasting effect of the revolution in france and this country . The revolution was a core ethical moment in the history of the west and the effect is enormous to unleash the modern way the revolution for good and bad and created a frame the shape of modern radicalism shaping 19th century politics and does so with us it is important to see the french revolution is not where modernism is born i dont mean liberal as the left better way of life began in the United Kingdom well before the french revolution its important to remember the American Revolution happened before and i think of it as the great turning point and turning point of history that is made possible with the achievements of the dreams of liberalism. After the french revolution and the politics of every subsequent free society has been divided over a core question of social change by building on a pastor breaking with it . The basic question the distinction between left and right, comes the defining question between britain and the United States and the democratizing countries and every free society today. For the french revolution the cap Party Politics divided if it is the crown of parliament that should have power. After the french revolution that divided left and right was the french revolution whether the purpose of politics is an ongoing revolutionary process to liberate entirely in the burdens of the past is a process of gradual change to keep us connected to the roots of civilization to enable us to make the most of our inheritanc inheritance. The french revolution has an enormous amount to do the nature of what we have so is a hugely consequential and continues to be. And to fit with your description of edmund burke and thomas paine. Exactly edmund burke was a wig and a sense he comes from the reforming party the fundamental disposition was gradual reform that is not revolution almost offered in opposition and says we need to change gradually not to lose what works pain had much less patience and said the status quo was unjust when he to overturn and start over we know those principles to guide free politics so throughout what we have and start over in the right way both of those hues it was a conservative and a radical revolution you can see that in the declaration of independence by stating radical principles that then goes on to state previous to me is to overthrow governments and it goes on to list why they want to revolt. They have denied the right to those institutions that have long been theres its a purely radical break so it contained the entire framework of the politics that would be hours. Host the first call from elizabeth in new jersey. Caller hello. I want to ask, how does he explain the disconnect how they go along with the amoral and selfserving dictator like president . Things are not adding up. Just wondering what he would say about that. I am a conservative who is critical of donald trump. I dont think hes fit for the presidency. Hes not my choice i dont think hes done well by her country. That said the fact politics is as polarized as it is is why so many republicans have stuck by trump even while they disapprove of or should come i dont think he is a conservative or has advanced the worldview people should want to see but we have reached a point each party defines the other as the countrys biggest problem rather than think about the challenges we think one another of the core problems to be dealt with that Partnership Means that ultimately you prefer your own party over Everything Else so to rationalize and justify what the president has done i when you criticize everything has done he has appointed good judges he has done well that generally speaking with the question of character which is essentia essential, the president should be people of character im enormously criticism on critical more people should be. Host reported this morning in the New York Times may be supporting joe biden. That is unclear he hasnt said who he is supporting exactly bed george w. Bush and the policies he pursue is a man of character i can see him in action working at the white house and was struck me the most is he lives with the weight of responsibility of the presidency in his shoulders to know a lot depended on them to be taken seriously and he owed it to the country to approach his job with the gravity it required. That is clearly lacking in this president. The two t they both saw that ultimately both parties enable us to do this form broad coalitions. We think of the them now as fundamentally divisive and breaking us down. But in fact they have a strong incentive to form broad not narrow coalitions. If you are the Republican Party easy to find ways to appeal to people in broad terms different circumstances and that is a healthy force in our politics if the forces compromise and force cooperation ultimately the institutions we require to free society are ones that force us to accommodate each other. Thats what the congress is the essential because the congress exists to compel accommodation. There are always going to be fundamental differences people will disagree with each other. That is never going away. The question is how to be handled to live with it. The answer in a free and liberal society is compromise so you wont institutions will require you to compromise to achieve anything. And i do think that burke is right at the party isnt on the list of those institutions. Host from windsor linwood. Caller by what has been said in the first call said dictator. If the people to justify word right about the policy, absolutely right, they did not have the rights to say to the president you must follow me because im right. Thats called stupidity. Long ago i talked about the march on washington, and organized march on washington, the same guy, not a philosophical, they said about him speak of i am not into trump coming into my house [inaudible] that is the United States drunk or sober. Not violating the law or anything, thats fine with me. Host youre going to leave it there. A little bit about political director. I think that its important to say donald trump isnt a dictator, hes th he is the eled leader i have problems with how he governs and she doesnt have the character that it takes that he is our president , he was elected, he hasnt violated the constitution at least not in any obvious way that i can see. There are debates about some of the things hes done, and those debates will be had in the court where they belong. For all the objections i do have, i think the arguments you sometimes hear that hes an authoritarian are not wellfounded. If anything, hes an unusually weak president of the doesnt use the power of the president in ways they might have been a crisis with Public Health crisis that we have been looking for this year and other circumstances, so i was raised some objections. The word shouldnt be just thrown around. Host patrick is going in from minnesota. Caller good morning. Excellent conversation. [inaudible] what my question was is with reference to any quality it seems a lot of the protesters are using the answer since trump has been elected as the society had an interest since we addressed this, and have we watered down to expectations to shortchange the generations in order to compete . Host before we get an answer from yuval levin what is the last couple of weeks been like for you . You are 20 miles from Downtown Minneapolis . It is a privileged community on highway 12 on the outskirts of minneapolis. I am originally from wisconsin. I moved here 35 years ago and went to Community College and i flourished in school later in life, graduated ten years later and have contributed to the community and have grown with it. This has been a disappointing time to see this fall in front of me. I am in my mid50s. I got off to a late start, but i care about the future, and i volunteer in all the communities locally, and they work with addiction communities. But this has been a very challenging time. I was fearful for the first time that it would not end. Host a recent headline in the New York Times, how minneapolis, one of americas most liberal cities struggles with racism. Caller is it a product of these policies that have not worked . Other options that we have not explored and character issues that have been brought up in reference to the possible selfishness of groupthink and individual thought processes of its about me now and my market instead of collectively the community and the state. Guest thank you for what you do. Its people like you that make this country great and ultimately its that kind of engagement and concern and involvement in the local community that can strengthen our society. I think first of all on the question of the Great Society, it was many things. On the one hand it was a set of large Public Programs that were intended to some of those have been effective in some have been less so. Even though these programs have done a great deal of good. The society was also a kind of social bishop and connected in our minds and reality to the civil rights revolution in some ways into the civil rights bills preceded the Great Society is from 64 and 65 became the perfect heart of the Great Society. I think those bills have been largely successful. Even when we left at the moment that we see how much there is to do on the civil rights front and freely on the question of basic human quality in our society and the struggle against racism, we shall give east coast still should see that progress has been made and the kind of problems we deal with now are not at the same scale and character as the sort of problems that have been contended with in midcentury america let alone what we saw in prior decades and centuries in our society. A lot of work remains to be done but we live in a time where that Murderous Police officer that killed george floyd on the streets of minneapolis was violating the law and will be tried for murder. There was a time society would have been behind that called and when our society simply didnt have valued the lives of black americans in the way that now they do. So also progress has been made and i wouldnt say that thats been a failure but ultimately the progress that needs to be made as moral progress, which isnt the same thing as social progress. Moral progress has to be made anew in every human heart. This is a reason why i am a conservative. I think ultimately the problems we have are rooted in the human heart and in the imperfection of the universe and that means we need to be informed and educated and shaped to be moral people. We require engagement with those ideas that can give the right kind of form to respect each other and that is work that hass to be done in every generation. There are certainly ways we can change the social institutions and structures to make it easier and to treat people equally under the law and we have made a lot of progress on that front, but there will always be the need for us to put before the rising generation the Core Principles and ideas. The java simply will never end and theres no way around it this is the first highprofile incident in the city. Guest theres no question having littl liberal politics ia solution to basic social and moral problems. These arise everywhere and in some ways i think theres a way in which the power of the Police Unions and other structural institutional factors make it very difficult for the Police Department in things like minneapolis to enforce its own rules and make sure its officers traced the public with respect and dignity so when these problems arise they can be more difficult to deal with in the liberal policies in some ways, not every way. So again, i just think we should be ready to deal with evil anywhere. It isnt a function of politics in a simple sense. These things happen. We should be glad they have been less than they used to but we shouldnt just accept that they will always happen. We should deal with them and make sure that we are engaged as citizens and institutions are formed around the commitment and quality of every person regardless of race or anything. And that has to be done in the jurisdictions. I dont think politics. Host the recent book is a time to build from family and community to congress and the campus help in writin adding tor institutions can revise the American Dream. Stewart is out in seattle. You are on with author yuval levin. Caller good morning to both of you. I would like to know how i come as a longtime supporter but more on the side of burke also i appreciate the sentiment but today as an older person i appreciate burke a lot more. How can i talk to people that are ardent Trump Supporters and seem to be resistant to compromise and absolutely opposed to a common cause unless you are totally on that team, the partisanship seems to have knocked its way out of hand. Guest guest i very much agree i think that in both parties young willingness to compromise is now the core problem of our political life. Its not the fact that there is a left and righ right with its factions within the left and right that we may like or not like. The fact they are not willing to see each other as conversation partners and partners and compromise. A frethe free society is comprod and i think what polarization has really meant in the politics of the 21st century is the loss of the sense that ultimately compromises the only way that our politics will function. Its happened before a variety of reasons and one of those is the fact we have not really had a majority and Minority Party in the politics in some time. When you look at the american political history the Scientists Use these terms and most times in our politics there is a strong party. It might be the democrats, the republicans or those before them or others and thats a strong party reins for a time it is a Minority Party that functions as a Minority Party and forces compromise and uses its leverage where it can end up in things change and there is a realignment and the minority becomes the majority and you go through a period like that. We have now lived since about the middle of the 1990s in a period power shifts back and forth and we do not have a party that we can say is the Majority Party of the country where the minority part of the country. One of the things that means is each party that can win the next election. Every new president weve had come into office since 1992 has come in with control of both houses of congress with his own Party Controlling of houses of congress. That means they shift back and forth and each is right to imagine if we wait this out, after the next election it could control everything and push things in its own direction. Now of course when that happens, they are never very big and never very strong and you dont get very much done unless you are willing to compromise so the major legislation that weve seen in this century has tended to be quite partisan and not to endure and had a lot of trouble being sustained as we see power change. So i think thats taken away some of the incentive each party might have. At the end of the day stability means acknowledging the people you disagree with are still going to be there tomorrow and the political dynamics now are such that you might imagine that they wont be. Another election and thats it. So i think helping people see that ultimately political progress only happens in whatever direction you cared about by compromise and people you disagree with is the way to advance and as a practical matter sometimes that means working at the local level or the state level where we still do have real compromise happening. I live in maryland where we have a quite conservative republican governor is a pretty Progressive Democratic legislature and they worked together because they have to. Because o at a practical level t theres no other way. I think that kind of recognition is more on the surface of the state level and the local level and it means we should be channeling more power to the state levels and local level. They can still be constructed until the National Politics recapture something of its proper form. Guest if you cant get through on the phone line, you can send us a message on text or social media. The text numbered i number in te carefully placed 202 7488903. Include your first name and city if you would. Larry in st. Petersburg florida texts in what can an individual do to make politics better . Guest thank you for the question. Its a good question of course and very much the question i try to take up in the latest book they talked about, a time to build. It has to begin where we are come in the institutions we are each a part of. This might be community institutions, civic, religion or National Politics and we have to ask ourselves how we can Work Together with others to advance the common goal and again to ask ourselves how can i do better. That kind of question is the path towards larger reform. It does lay out larger reform that is necessary for congress and of the party system. There are some necessary reforms in the academy and the professional world. The book talks about the media and civic life but before this can happen, people within our institutions have to recognize that they are, we are part of the problem and the first of have to see all of us are subject to this tendency to think of the institutional responsibilities as optional and platforms for ourselves. Taking ourselves beyond that and helping ourselves be a force for good is the beginning of change. Its not an alternative for substitute but its an essential prerequisite for it. Host one of the other institutions you tackle in a time to build is the Education System both higher and lower and post on the Facebook Page with comments or educational institutions are failing to educate our children for a prosperous future and worse, dividing the country as progressives have shaped the curriculum that literally teaches our children that we are a country dominated by justice. These include the kids that are out on the streets now. Guest i think this raises a very important point. On the one hand its crucial to see the Education System in america especially the k12 primary and secondary schooling is enormously decentralized. It is the system where the control over curriculum is generally held at the local level and where different places can be very Different Things. And i think thats okay. That is the way to live with diversity and make the most of it. Places where ideas are going to be talked about and not like much and thought that id like but many people dont and that is just going to happen in america. But i do think that the plaintiff if she gets too about how to teach history is enormously important and im very concerned about a version of our history that denies us recourse to the best in that history is now being pushed on a lot of children and College Students. Any American Life would have to take very seriously and to teach fully the history in our society which is as old as the history of our society is central to understanding it would also have to take seriously the history of the struggle against racial aggression which is also as old as our society and which offers a somewhat to work with and trying to do better as a country. It is not the case that the american story is simply a story of failure on this front end to deny students access to the model and example of a Frederick Douglass or Abraham Lincoln or Harriet Tubman or Martin Luther king it is a tremendous failure of responsibility. I think we have to teach the good with the bad, try to offer a full picture and thats offers the rising generation in huge amount to wor of work went intog the country better from the core ideals and principles that have always been the ideals of our society even though we havent always looked up to him, to people that devoted their lives to that struggle in ways we can learn from and be inspired by. Efforts like this that were denying that and say there is only the downside and the dark side are anyway we shouldnt abide. Host from your book into chapter campus culture, harvard and yale have the first universities were created as conservatories for orthodoxy and to train men of religion to move to larger communities to repent of its sins and to seek redemption. This remains a driving purpose of the Higher Education and now largely of its religious roots this often looks like classroom instruction and political activism that demands a Larger Society a kind of repentance for some grave collective gasp. Guest that chapter tries to make sense of whats been going on on American College campuses in the last few years and it does that by trying to offer a little bit of perspective about the next character of Higher Education and that makes the character has always been a part. We command a lot of things of the university and expect them to give people the skills they need for the american economy. They expect them to give students access to the deepest truth and the most beautiful things in our civilization and also expect them to be engaged to improve our society to be active to try to change things. All these things have been part of the american Higher Education. The idea that campus activism began in 1960 is untrue. Campus activism is in the code we just read it. It was the original purpose of the american university. Harvard and yale wer are createo advance both change moral change. Now that which is different but the character of the sense that the purpose of Higher Education involved a kind of social activism is not new. Theres always been a tense balance between the different aims, between data giving students the skills for Economic Life and access to a higher truth and a kind of liberal education and then the changing society. I think that the american elite campuses have fallen out of that balance where now they lean heavily in the direction of the campus activism that isnt really about learning and teaching, so it isnt fundamentally academic and you have seen some delays on the American College campuses that are enormously troubling, closing off of knowledge and teaching rather than the building of knowledge. The answer isnt to pretend we can have Higher Education that is completely devoid of political activism. Thats nothing to do with the Larger Society or what we want or should expect. But i think the university has the answer fundamentally to the academic idea that means everything that is done should be done in the form of teaching and learning and thats where some elite schools have become disconnected from their purposes in recent years and i think that the culture of liberal education that sees teaching and learning as fundamental to Human Flourishing has an enormous role to play in bringing the culture of campuses back into balance and providing a rising generation of students the kind of enormous advantage for Higher Education can give. Host and other contemporary headline, rex cancer coulter afteripscancer cs dropped as the Commencement Speaker at Wichita State university after the students protest. Guest this is what im talking about some of the idea that students shouldnt hear from people that they or their professors dont agree with. The campus is no place for opinions other than the kind of accepted mainstream consensus progressive views of the society and a lot of times a form of rebellion against the establishment but in fact it is an establishment. Cultural progressivism now owns all of our institutions and i think its enormously important that College Students here this through a variety of news. Its not just intellectual for the purpose of diversity. I dont think that its everybody and anybody. And i think there is a difference between hearing from people who play a significant role in society and hearing from those who were there to stir up trouble. The cancel culture understood it as its been used to keep out conservative voices, libertarian voices and others, academic voices of those that have ideas to offer both come from a different place politically than the mainstream of professors and students. Its an enormous problem on the american campus and its a betrayal of the academics. Host oregon, youve been very patient. Where are you ask and am i saying that correctly clicks caller [inaudible] host where is that tax caller oregon. Host but whereas clicks caller central. Host go ahead with your question or comment for yuval levin. Caller i dont have a question but i have a statement. I worry about ourselves as a country. I worry about ourselves as how we view ourselves as american citizens. I did think of all the time for being in the military. I dont need to be thanked to be in the military. I volunteered in the draft. I consider what i did was for my country and i view today a political system that looks like a tugofwar. Two groups that are basically the same side of the coin, just two faces. It doesnt matter which one lands on top. They both want to be on top. We would do better to divest ourselves of the Political Parties of the United States and just require people to do their job including changing the paradigm. I dont think we should elect somebody for their views. They dont represent me. Not one politician i know in the United States of any state represents me. Nobody in the state of oregon represents me. They represent themselves. Host all right. Yuval levin. Guest well, i think theres a level of frustration thats understandable but ultimately i disagree. There really is no way around the need for represented politics. There are going to be differences in society about how to proceed and to govern ourselves and what kind of law we should have and how we should respond to changing circumstances. And we have to ask ourselves how do we resolve these differences and make a decision. I dont really expect to be satisfying there will be contradictions and a paradox in the problem that doesnt go away we cannot fully resolve we cannot mitigate them to make the most that this is not a Perfect World and how to live with its imperfections and address problems in ways that are legitimate and respect each other parties are an important part to find ways to represent different views and to protect minority voices. Our institutions of government at the state and federal and local level, the fact we are still dissatisfied at the end his life. But we are much less dissatisfied than a system that doesnt take our views as seriously or an effort to represent us. There are ways to do better and im open to those that ways we could do worse and i should be grateful for a system of government. Host Aubrey Richmond virginia. Caller how are you doing. I am a notorious long time cspan consumers. I spend a lot of time watching hearings. A little while ago mr. Levin said the scale of discrimination to change this country. Thats not true. The scale that changed i agree that the other has not he made some reference to George Floyds murder and the reaction to it. What you dont understand is the reaction to George Floyds murder is not just video because we had been watching videos from police abuse of rodney king going forward. What we saw this time is White Supremacy at its worst. You have a white Police Officer murder a disabled black man casually while looking into the camera. Its why you see what you see on the streets today. We had system institutional discrimination every day but the murders aside. Im talking about the workplace that people dont see every day. One of the problems in that regard is that eeoc. I will leave that aside but with the current Republican Party and democrats. We are looking at the evolution. Looking at the legacy from pat buchanan and Newt Gingrich but it came to a head during the Obama Administration do know what im reading the. Host go ahead with your thoughts and tell us what that meeting is. Caller it is around the time when president obamas first inauguration where a plan was put together for republicans not to cooperate at all. In that regard that led to the tea party and now the donald trump republicans who are the ultimate manifestation. Host we believe that there. Thank you for your thoughts. I appreciate those concerns and i agree entirely and that precisely is what we saw was White Supremacy and unacceptable both in character and in scope and thats why people are out in the streets. Its perfectly clear we have a lot of work to do on this front i entirely agree with that. As far as characterizing the polarization is Just One Party that strikes me as a symptom more than a diagnosis. It is unquestionable that both parties have moved toward the edges over the last two or three decades driven by various changes of camp time on Campaign Finance reform , social media, people is an echo chambers, simply less Cooperation Across Party Lines no doubt they have been a part of that so pointing to different people who play a different role but we can agree the process has been a huge problem for politics in our country and the recovery is oriented to cooperation and compromise, not under a dream that we will agree that by accepting the reality and therefore to make bargains and deals to give each party some of what it once that is essential in the way politics works. But there are some issues that are nonnegotiable and basic human equality its not a partisan issue and an issue we can ultimately allow to be put to the side its a fundamental question of human rights and equal dignity and essential to who we must be was people in america. Should be front and center. Host what about systemic institutionalized racism comment . There is. We have to see racism is a function of attitudes of individuals and the arrangements of individuals to structure politics. I do think we made Real Progress facing that racism there is less of it than it was. That doesnt mean we can stop the effort or the work can be put down. What we see in videos like what we saw. This is happening when there were not phones around it didnt just start on the contrary. Its a deep and enormous problem as a fundamental challenge of American Life. No question that the country has a lot of work before it to reach the ideals we aspire to. We do want to reach that in the very widely shared aspiration but that alone is not enough. Host gregory from kansas city says the system requires compromise. How did we ever get to the point where compromise is unacceptable . It seems to be more common on the right. We got there through cultural and political evolution in which politics especially at the National Level is around a set of symbolic issues where it treats the other party is the countrys biggest problem. Of the problem to be solved is the other party then you cannot compromise the only solution is to get rid of the other party. But you will not get rid of the other party. There are practical problems that stand in the way whether the quality of call on reconciliation , prosperity, the rising generation, those problems have to be taken up through Public Policy and can only be achieved by a process of accommodation or compromise. The political culture is transformed in a way to understand on understate compromise and accommodation. Largely at the National Level. To say this has been caused by one party is a symptom of the problem not a diagnosis. It is not true. Its been caused by both parties. There is the enormous amount of contempt for the right on the left it is destructive to makes it very difficult for people to take seriously the reality to make progress by working together and there is contempt for the left on the right that has to be addressed the same way we are not going away the people that you disagree with will still be here tomorrow so to think about politics as a way to live together as neighbors and fellow citizens not as enemies. They are not your enemys. Host book tv on cspan2 concentrating on the three most recent books and the time to build the most recent how we committing to institutions can revise the American Dream i agree with what he was saying when it came to morals we dont value character in our society anymore but i usually tell young people the most important thing in life is a good decent person thats the first thing we should be that we have a problem in our society that is not mentioned he doesnt mention we have a concentration of wealth and communication with the wealth that controls the debate we need to talk to one another we need good civil debate and i hear that. I would love to hear a debate between two americans with opposing views there are many views we have to get them out and talk to one another and thats not happening in that concentration of wealth with the concentration of the media has something to do with that. Host my guess most of us think that would be a good idea to hear two points of view with a reasonable argument . I think thats right. That doesnt happen very much when we do have things we call a debate its more like that talking points 12 people lined up on the cable news channel. With the publics Attention Span and that was happening to think about that seriously engaged in a deep way but also there are some deeper economic and cultural incentives shaping things the way the caller suggest a complicated question that it looks back to so much there was a much more concentrated media architecture with three Television Networks two or three National Newspapers that had enormous cultural power with the mainstream consensus things were much more concentrated than they are now with the fragmentation of the media because of the internet and economic pressures where there are many many more voices but also later greater economic concentration with a huge lard corporate owners that has gone the last 20 years into breaking up concentration with the life of a free society where there are dangerous concentrations the has to be broken up but it is much more complex than that with that fragmentation voices and consolidation of ownership. Host Pacific Palisades california says max says i thoroughly enjoyed reading your book the great debate and political philosophy open the door for human nature, institutional roles, hereditary politics, and went to make reform. How can we eliminate unhealthy populism on the left and right to get the general public to trust career politicians who i believe have the experience and wisdom burke outlined . Thank you very much. And from someone who benefited that are fit in college to get something out of it. And a core question of american political life so look at the condition of the institution that we dont really face a choice with the view people have all the answers and what is embodied in the american constitutional system that no one has all the answers should have all the power to give them some power with the Public Officials to exercise with those to be at a distance from the public the president is not as directly answerable as members of congress. We have competing Power Centers and layers with federalism and separation of powers. That no one knows everything and is has to put the has to be broad agreement over a long period so it sustains i us president who supports that that sentiment to enable that that means change happens slowly that can be very frustrating. Is important that they be answerable and take seriously public concerns and priorities and respect experience that there is such a thing of expertise in Public Policies of for example. Im not a supporter of term limits in congress i think those that are the most experience and somebody has to have the power in a system and those who have to go up for election rather than a permanent bureaucracy or structure that is much less answerable. So to find balance is pretty good on the whole. Host portland oregon. Caller thank you for taking my call. Resorting to my question Kareem Abduljabbar and to use shine light on it you dont see it. America should take this issue to regain its leadership and deal with it and the rest of the world will follow. My question is how to make them an independent body again and then to announce that political the education in their decisionmaking. There it is. We face the same challenges other institution we need balance between accountability and independence. So argue for a fully independent Supreme Court that it will always make better decisions which is answerable to the public and also a huge practical challenge. Who are these people to have this much power without accountability . And who decides whos on the court. Judges have lifetime tenure and not answerable to elections or Election Officials once appointed. But they are appointed there is a connection between them in our democratic system but also independence. I have been open to the idea lifetime tenure can be resolved and proposals for 18 year terms for example so you dont have justices appointed when they are 50 the answer for 40 years on the court and then you are stuck with whatever you get that you have more of a chance to change the makeup of the court and then to go to the Appellate Court with a lifetime tenure but on the Supreme Court they only serve a period of 18 years so every president gets two or three appointments and then you have more balance between the Democratic Politics and independent judiciary. Thats a workable idea. The framers didnt imagine anybody would be sitting on the court 40 years with lifetime tenure but that balance will never be easy to strike. Host coming from maryland next color. Caller good afternoon. I have a question for mr. Levin the first to have a comment. I have voted both ways the last 45 years but what you just mentioned about the contempt republicans have for the democrats that began in 2000 because the democrats feel they were robbed from the white house with the Supreme Court continuing through 20 tens with the Merrick Garland seat with obama in the Senate Republicans held that up then continuing through 2016 they will believe they were robbed of a second seat because clinton had 3 million popular votes more than President Trump but the constitution ruled out not their emotion. So my question is as your characterization of President Trumps character. How do you put that up against 2016 of exoneration of the Hillary Clinton email situation then moved into cost failure hurricane on crossfire hurricane end of july and now the illegal fisa warrants for. Three original and three renewals. Host there is a lot there. You are building a pattern ther there. Just like a good prosecutor. I think the story of contempt begins earlier. You can see the left contempt for the right and the robert bork hearings in the eighties and earlier than that the polarization of politics didnt just begin i do agree it has worsened for the reasons he has mentioned i defend Hillary Clintons character either. I dont think we had a good option and 2016. Both candidates under fbi investigation completely unprecedented. The question of the president s character is not legalistic with these named scandals but how a person thinks about the responsibility he has when he rises the presidency and treats people and thinks about people. And there is some narcissism that is fundamentally a character problem with the bully attitude some of the attitude about immigrants and others is not something we should seen the president i dont think ultimately its about a particular scandal but his character and that matters and theres no way around it we see that with the crisis you can never really get away from character. Host we asked our guest to list their favorite books and here were yuval levin choices. Tell us about the last two books said this is a list you might expect from a conservative. Crisis in a house divided is a very in depth study of the Lincoln Douglas debates he was a political philosopher and a teacher in california. This is a book he wrote 1959 that is a close reading to put the Lincoln Douglas debates in an extraordinary way in the philosophical context of classical political thought and articulates think lincolns way of thinking of morality to show the depth of the issues at stake in the Lincoln Douglas debates and the depth of the issues at stake in american politics at its greatest crisis i recommend everybody it is still in print and well worth your while. Looking at the list now i see its the only work of fiction on the list which speaks to my weaknesses as a leader a great english novel written by george eliot the pen name of marian evans a great English Writer of the 20th century published 1871 but set in the 18 thirties and the english midlands in the novel they get that hugely important issues of family and community and the status of women house social change happens and a great gripping story. I was introduced in graduate school by a wonderful teacher who laid it out as a way to think about the human condition. Its a wonderful book. Host he is currently reading the upswing and the year of our lord 1943. The upswing is putnams next book he is known for his book he wrote in 2000 to describe the breakdown of americans civic institutions , the rise of loneliness in American Life as the century dawns and one of the great social observers of American Life in his book upswing supposed to be out this summer now has been delayed i guess but it actually looks at the pattern of humanitarianism in American Life over the past century to describe the path that shows a coming together and pulling apart with social indicators that only Civic Engagement the Cultural Diversity economic inequality you find to be intensely in individualistic to mobilize in the direction of solidarity and then began to pull apart so now youre at another extreme. Its important it will be out in a few months. Alan jacobs is a professor of literature at baylor but has written wonderful books of the intersection of intellectual life and theology in politics and society this book the year of our lord is about a group of thinkers in the final years of the Second World War to imagine what the post world order would look like something i would recommend to everybody. Host has putnams book held up . Yes and no it was met with criticism at the time which in some ways was right that part of what it what was described the demise of american civil life was the evolution people were doing Different Things together so the old clubs and civic organizations got weaker bad people found other ways to join together but the fundamental argument the country was headed is in the direction of isolation was right but the problem became worse over time with the growth of technology that social media that brings us to gather that does that by a keeping us apart and many of the trends pointed to have in fact have gotten worse over time. On the whole i think it has held up. Host half an hour left with our guest this month. Good afternoon michael from new york. Caller thank you for having me on. Im enjoying the conversation. I have a few observations and then a basic question. We are a nation of debaters no question compromise is essential i would also like to interject a gentle man who wrote a book on popular is him said politics and politicians will not save us although compromise is essentia essential, how can or why would wind compromise their core beliefs . The case in point is the abortion issue no matter which side you are on spent thats a great question and points to what we mean by compromise i dont think it means giving up on core beliefs it gets part of what you want on a practical policy question by prioritizing what you want base precisely on your core belief so ultimately you are forced to decide what you are willing to give and went most matters to you there are issues like abortion is difficult to compromise but we do even on those with practical matters when we face the choice that is all or nothing we strive to turn it into giveandtake think abortion has been taken over by the courts in our country has been less open to this compromise a lot of people on the prolife side was a abortion should be determined in the states with a diversity of outcomes someone have very liberal regimes and others less so we certain the word have more restrictions than we have now the United States has the most liberal regime almost in the entire world with practically nation so a lot of people who have very strong views on the moral question would be open to more moderate laws to allow for their views to be respected and protect life compromises about giveandtake not giving up on those principles but in ways that allow you to tell the difference of gaining ground and losing ground by making it clear what your priorities are and what matters most thats where giveandtake becomes possible. Kelly and take california. Caller its good to see you back to normal. The last several weeks we saw extreme police brutality. One against mr. Floyd and the other against a gentle man in buffalo who was brutally shoved down and then 50 Police Officers just walk past him one looked down at him and told to get away even though he was bleeding. We assume floyd is racial and horrible and brittle because hes black the other gentleman was white there is a huge racial problem but also just simply badly Trained Police that is endemic through the country liberal places getting more demonstrators and protesters thank you for taking my questio question. I appreciate that point. Some of what we are seeing is simply the tendency of power to corrupt and the reason why there has to be ways to keep power in check. Some of that is racial some of that is abuse of power so there are exceptions there are many Police Officers of races and backgrounds who keep us safe every day and have to be respected even with Police Training practices and social institutions are reformed and transformed to address the problems that we have its a very complicated question that the abuse of power is a constant threat whether done in the name of racism or as a form of abuse it should be totally unacceptable and what we are learning is what we have known for years that this abuse exist and needs to be addressed we cant just wait for this to pass and get back to normal we have to change how we think about policing but has to be done in a way to respect the need for order for police, a real need in the communities where we have seen the most significant breakdowns of order in the last few weeks so enormously complicated social challenge that calls on us to take the problem seriously and never forget giving people power means they have to be watched with their use of the power. Host and you write in a time to build this is the irony we have repeatedly confronted the failures of our institutions have led us to demand to be uprooted or demolished but we cannot address those failures without renewing and rebuilding this very institution. There is a tendency in moments like this. Not just the past few weeks but the past few decades to say we need to burn down institutions get them off of smb liberated with the struggle against the establishment and the elites they are driven by real frustrations with very real problems but we need functional institutions and responsible respectable elites who run those institutions. We need the police. We do. When he power to be exercised in responsible ways and demand more its not enough to say get rid of them because our society cannot function without them so it is harder than that how do you renew or revitalize not just how we get rid of them. Caller doctor levin its great to talk to you this afternoon for massachusetts. Some background about myself first of all and then the student of demographics for years and i also wrote recently on march 4th for the daily news and article of plurality in america we think of our miss seeing troops so to apply those letters to morality in america so my statement to you is i have a mantra has been part of my dna four years the second the world goes up with the lack of vocation civilization goes down in morality i want your comments on that statement in my Closing Remarks are i want to say that education of morality in a proper sense would solve many of these problems in our country and this is a beautiful country we live in. Thank you. Ultimately every effective form of education is in morality whether learning history to inspire us to be better people rather than lose faith and hope in our country whether education directed explicitly to form character , to help shape us. Ultimately that formation is moral formation one way or another swifter formed bad is why the health the standing matters enormously and the evolution of religiosity is complicated and in some ways we have seen a decline of religious practice to see an increase in the demand and traditionally has been answered by religious institutions and can be again if they approach society in the terms of contemporary problems by offering themselves up whether alienation and loneliness there is an enormous opportunity for institutions in society to rise up and offer themselves as responsible formative institutions. We dont see it enough in this moment demands at. If i imagine how we can make our way forward from here to revitalize society to make the coming years better than the last two that emergence unabashedly moral institutions to offer themselves as a way to become better from the local interpersonal level through the national is essential. Host you use the word devotion in your conclusion. Yes. That is what is required for us to be properly committed to the institutions we belong to in society. We look for things to be devoted to to respect and look up to and devote ourselves to ways to be made better rather than just promote ourselves to put ourselves out there on a platform we went to be part of something worthwhile some of the sources of devotion we dont think so because he by the language of easygoing cynicism but there is an enormous hunger for proper objects of devotion and the revitalization to proceed that way if it happens. Please comment on the concept of political correctness. It is a term used to describe the ways mainstream institutions demand certain political tenants of the left of progressivism as the price of admission into American Life you cannot be a professor if you have a view of the majority are you cannot participate in professional on professional institutions like a journalist. I do think it is a problem. But there are ways we can exaggerate and i can imagine we are held back because other people have conspired to keep us back but we have to offer ourselves as an alternative to offer a more attractive and inviting form of what the right has to say. It seems to be too exclusive and not speaking to everyone we should not be surprised so ask first how i or we can do better before imagining any problems is the fault of other people. Host have you ever been canceled on a College Campus . I have not. I have spent a lot of time on College Campuses back when that was still allowed to see people in person i hope to get back to that when it is allowed again. I have seen instances of disorder around political events i was at uc berkeley three years ago on a night when there were riots and fire on campus. Not about me but i have seen that happen and those that have that cancel culture but hopefully not myself. At the heart of this pressure is called identity politics and appears to the acute emphasis of structural power relationships among different social economic camps they are understood in terms of oppressors and the oppressed and described being the effort to describe progressivism and its own terms and in the best terms possible. I think there is a way of understanding the core distinction between the left and right getting to those roots to say the right things of those political challenges on the left thinks of them as oppressor and oppressed because the right begins at social order is difficult into think social order is the hardest to sustain so the necessary prerequisite the left being suppression is the core social problem everything has to be understood between different groups there is some truth to both but ultimately in order to have justice you have to have order and we worry about social order to help that society capable to worry about justice. But this decision between left and right is a serious debate with serious arguments how to make society better. In that sense it serves us well. Host saratoga florida go ahead. Caller yes. Doctor levin your recent mention of term limits provoked a question in my mind. Ice term limits as a way to break the cycle with the predominant role of money in our political lives with federal legislators with the vast majority of their time to raise money for reelection. Host i apologize you are cutting in and out but i think we got the gist on the term limits comment. Its what it is a solution on a solution to. That is a staff bureaucracy for people who dont leave and build up the knowledge and experience over time. That is the plaything of the permanent bureaucracy and for those there for the long term are answerable to the public. I can see the case in the sense some problems arise out of corruption followed from people being in these jobs for too long the trouble is it would create a much worse problem or can be the same that we have now. Those that are corruptible over time to see themselves as a permanent infrastructure they would not be elected officials to be lobbyist, staff come i dont think that would be better i see the problems but term limit is not a solution. Host some call that the deep state. Yes. Therefore those who are elected but i also think there is value that there is such a thing to be a legislator in such a thing as expertise and we want people who know what they are doing. I think we should underestimate to establish themselves. They are less in the grip of the power of money to build up their own constituency over time. So on the whole i think term limits would not serve us well. Host i went to read this email from patricia is that the continued growth of the federal government making the outcome more important . Federalism is not taken seriously we no longer have the freedom to experiment with different ways to do things. The Supreme Court has power. People are moving to states and areas where likeminded people live. Can our country survive selfsegregation . First of all i very much agree there is paradox with less and less trust in the government at the same time giving more power to government and resources. And this is the core argument that one way forward is by increasing the amount that flows to the state and local government federalism allows us to turn our growing diversity into a strength rather than let to become a debilitating weakness for our democracy. So as those constitutional principles with those basic political practice it would make sense and we seen that response to the pandemic which as it places differently and to respond differently. Host boca raton florida good afternoon. Caller can you hear me . I want to make a comment. A native of northeastern minnesota tracing my ancestry for your non for generations those settling the land in southern and northern minnesota as farmers or to the homestead act. To grow up in a workingclass and then for people who want to go into politics. The irony is incredibly sweet. Im now a conservative so i find it incredibly ironic and with dad explosion of violence with that horrible murder of the black man the irony says it all so i could go on about racism but i will spare you that. My question to immigrate from israel when he was at the age of eight and as a Jewish American what are his explanation of the key allegiance of Jewish Americans by and large ultraliberal socialist. With that liberal philosophy of american politics. Host i think we got the point lets ask yuval levin if he cares to answer. And that is a terrible tragedy the entire country rises up to respond to. With those deep roots of ethnic politics with a tendency toward political radicalism there is a fairly large growing segment of our Orthodox Jews so my community is diverse in the argument and with the to speak to all of us as a single nation to appeal to the highest aspirations and deepest ideals we certainly think thats the politics. Host is somebody should buy one of your books which do you recommend . [laughter] you cannot pick among them it is the great debate that has been translated into a few languages that people should read them all. Host the other two we have been talking about is the fractured republic yuval levin has been our guest we greatly appreciate your time