A. Over the last decade you bring them together with the larger argument so it might make sense for you if you could read from the introduction . Absolutely. In response to the angloamerican and union with the election of donald trump and finally the response to the covid19 outbreak. And the champion of the economist. And the true indoctrination and into the alternative in a democracy and with those in our times. And at the height of the cold war the western civilization fanatics the highly can teach an achievement of human existence. So the biggest of history were communist and fascist and the american theologian and then to see and how they are intended to guarantee the individuals, they became the ideology and to be used by them and still use with the proper political control of that power. Also to that creed that shaped capitalism and liberal democracy and every society in short did justice britain and the United States did. And those who come to occupy History Center stage. And freemarket global lasers to be intractable and have a large part of asia and africa and that chaos. I love the phrase so can you give us a sense of what youre talking about . So to publish this in the late fifties to be responding to people who at that point the idea that with certain american achievements including democracy and capitalism. And very much questioning the notion if these achievements could be spread in different parts of the world. But and with that broad tendency to use by the 20th century and historians are assuming the world word converge on the moderate supplyside. Of course this also becomes much much stronger when there is absolutely no opposition whatsoever. And the kind of madness in the air that they are assuming that now they have the option with all the notions of the new world order so there is something so blatantly absurd and that wisdom under the financial crisis. By the time they arrive not so glad anymore. And truly become fanatics of a brilliant sort and to think about the blood he chaos it created and in that context. And those who seem to be within and those that are so full. And then to say some of the things that he would say in the New York Times. So in these areas but the fact that you find so offensive and to make a documentary and the Financial Times and that challenge coming to an end there are people obviously elsewhere of the British Empire and with those individuals that you mentioned but there was an atmosphere this particular group or people that were ivy league or university and washington Dc Foundation and the various publications even though not speaking that language but the world will be transformed someone in the Financial Times and then the ground supporter. And with those other elements. And then with all those different tendencies. And of that fundamental low those that particular group that are not as aggressive. And those that did not present themselves even though many propositions a put forward are quite extreme in certain cases as they identify as liberals so to clarify what form and of theres a regulated markets is that what we are talking about in the last two or three decades and the economist which i write about and for liberalism and free trade but all of this is a huge military power of britain behind these ideas. So that is one particular tradition that i return to again and again in the book working and alliance with the military and diplomatic power and then to become a great cheerleader so in that sense that is illuminating that they adhere to with the stuff to talk about. And how that becomes the elite everywhere. And this is something that each wants and also allowing them to feel permissive and fuel the history says the true far right with the iraq war and the economist but then that becomes legitimate. And then to create the prestigious so this is something im interested in and to represent the liberalism and with those ideas and to make alliances with those political movements. So in the opening is the rhetoric and the mismatch between those ideas so can you talk about that. But in the introduction matt gave me that disconnect that was in reality there isnt a very strong liberation and india but what exist but at the same time a man is deeply to the old establishment and one that has absolutely no time for secularism with that oldfashioned liberal bed in the past the liberal elite particularly in india was to political power and they have this vision and kashmir for instance right from the beginning but they have these very progressive notions from advanced civilization and democracy and i actually assumed they were right so when i went out there and realized the new civilization there is a military occupation. So a very shocking disconnect very highminded rhetoric about a superior set of ideas and then you see violence and suffering many people over the last two or three decades the promise of spirits t and Economic Growth and what are the realities they correspond to . So for that huge reservoir and that kind of violent backlash against anyone that calls themselves to find as a liberal. And that is with a compromise of the hypocrisy and i am reminded of a very famous interview she says please dont call me a liberal it is a dirty word and south africa. And then the world has become in them those liberals and with those ideas. And with that history because with those individual rights and freedoms but yet the recurring theme in these essays that liberalism has been tied up in that form of racism to be experienced in the colonizing countries. And for a long time. So you talk about the crisis and what is the process coming home . And to be much more aware of these problems and to diagnose them. And those that we are now engaged in. Because liberalism during the cold war became this entrenched ideology. And which was unified and that which became dominant and mainstream journalism and academia. And the intellectual tradition and the 19 fifties but in contrast to communism and then defeating fascism and with the best game in town to do away with liberalism. Are that totalitarianism. And then to hide this liberalism the way in which an right on the 19th century onward. And with that ideology theres something deeply delusional. And those just like john lewis in the sixties and seventies talking about liberty and justice and where are the africanamericans and those that are beginning to fight for and actually achieving sovereignty and independence with that deep colonization with the civil rights movement. And then not to mention the fact from the 1970s onward and for those demagogues to emerge. And with this and then to be developed. And from this point except to say. Try to get to the link further way they have been enabled. And they thank you are saying that the ability of the european powers to go and settle countries and colonize other countries has enabled liberalism to step up in the home country and that is the link with the empire. And this is something anti loyal activists were starting to point out from the 20th century onward. Even before the first world for the idea of individual liberty of individual liberty even gandhi said this explicitly. But all the rights the right now are available to people and as long as they can exploit these nations and then to be in danger. So with the economic model we need to think to be in the world that is the whole point that this model made you prosperous and somewhat democratic and we can see it because we can see what it inflicts on us. And that violence at some point will come home when you can no longer exploit the society. What are trying to understand or clarify is why liberalism needs the exploitation . And everyone is free to compete and then there was the escape valve. And someone that needs to be exploited . And with the system and not automatically assume and within that framework and with the exploitation of the 19th century and no way Carry Forward by indiana expansion to open markets in different parts of the world and those that are sending in bullets to open the market so liberalism in the idea of expansion and growth and freedom from the very beginning brought into practice were always connected with this capitalist economy which was it was based on exploitation with slavery and even after different forms of coercion and force labor. And the pure form you could argue the moment if you thought that was part of liberalism so the history of liberalism that is what makes it so problematic of the democratic age and with the democratic revolution and some are not aware politically conscious to be in positions of power and privilege for a long time. In the idea of these problems coming home in large part even though there is a great deal of exploitation but now it is more visible in the United States or the United Kingdom and other western democracies. And that is the point people like gandhi and others were making in their the 20th century. That this becomes more and more visible to the fact the economy on the political system is based upon violence and exploitation but at some point they realize thats what this is about. So i feel we did damage to her self and in the 19th century and the fact i write and periodicals because where word you find a proper footnote with the infrastructure and the way industry works and then to incite people and put together these additions but so much is out there and not put together in that way the way it works in britain and america. So including that stuff, why do we need that . Are very cool or the variations of it. Looking in your situation with the comment that he is told basically the same thing that he is talking to people and we dont want anything to do with it if its rich people. So one thing you talk about there are several events you see to delay the reckoning and one is the idea of industry and history but when it becomes clear things are not working out because the election of obama almost any could be used to justify the reckoning about neoliberalism. If you have this that grew up during the cold war and those books that were written to the father of the elites and the intelligentsia advancing certain american ideas and with america in the fifties and sixties and with the anti a communist and exiles when they came to america they were shocked to see the end on the industry coming into being even the magazines and the atmosphere of conformity that we really havent broken free of that in so many ways. That essentially we havent really started to think about the whole range of things and the reason it is extremely lucrative and profitable and defense is not rewarded. You will have a small that is not afraid to that many people want to. That the people you have written about essentially agree with everything Us Government was doing. But it was supposed to being contrary in. And even to have that rhetoric that somehow they were bad boys outside of the establishment just like george bush. The reason why we dont talk about these things in public and the reason there are not more articles who would write them or publish them . That what else do you find it sustained critiques of these individuals and personalities . It is a huge problem and those that are funded and go off and work eight hours and then we look respectfully because in one moment and with that agility and the henchmen that and then the people go on and on with line atrocity after another. But it is so easy but what will they do. Something that intrigued me was that only the people so what do you think is going on their . He eloquently those in with these prestigious magazines that ten years earlier now presenting themselves as a struggle for racial justice. I dont notice any real significant change or ideologies. But if people are not focused for making catastrophic errors that lead to cause destruction of human lives which is the case for those intellectuals on the middle east and those raising interventions elsewhere but who is holding these people accountable . Is it the same sponsor and financiers and you can write as many articles as you want the small verification magazines but that has very limited effect and when you publish books. And then to do away with liberalism. So there are many good studies that are difficult to. I was at the head the more they have a tradition of small magazines a large magazines. But there are so many that have come out to reinvent themselves but i dont know how much influence and authority i can emphasize. But still very much a minority voice so we do one type of critique people make frequently about so now you are that i want to clarify what you think about that. If you do talk in the book and rather than discarding it. What is your relation . Either the trajectory is very instructive as someone who is commonly regarded as the great exponential liberalism back toward the end of his life or to life he was with the warships only on that society that can realize those ideas he sought out so growing out in a place like india this is an experience i shared with many people that and those larger groups of people so liberalism and the ideas individual autonomy, these are wonderful ideas by the way it is only a socialist society with those ideas. So you also need economic quality and other forms thats only through socialism but the book itself i wouldnt say you are a socialist critic, word you . I do believe looking at the platforms of the venues where the essays were originally published with the New York Times or the guardian or and the new yorker im engaged in a very different kind of discourse all together and trying to critique them and working people or others like more liberals its like training people to rethink the cherished notions and ideas that they are not really object to. Socialism certainly wasnt a word when i worked there said you ever feel you were smuggling these ideas in . Because i think like you frame to those pieces like a contributor to the review you are giving valve liberal readers something that they recognized and respect like a socialist argument. This is how you work if i said earlier i was stop calling a chinese writer that someday i read write about them where certain purchases become shockingly clear and you are left aghast at just how deep someone from china and all of thy these emerged as opposed to and i examined. It is a Getting Better is it getting more accepting . Absolutely thats why i cannot understand how people complain about cancel culture how much more so the infection freedom that i see today has been missing absent for much of my writing life and i began in the mid nineties. So to stand in the exact opposite i have never seen more intellectual freedom that exist today. So the notion that people are stifled and not allowed to say certain things, i say people use to say horribly objectionable things in the past like the British Empire was a wonderful thing. They are morally challenged today and they should of been challenged because they are taking far too long. And are you can no longer talk abouts black beats the same way that you use to. They would like to have the freedom to express their views without being but there are several people that it is like moving article five and others but this is the only one we can think of that makes sense. But to think of myself really is a writer and a spent and then to do exactly the same thing and offering solutions. And i really strongly feel that whatever prescriptions we have or can look forward to in the future, need to come out of experiences of social or economic realities that the notion the intellectual will devise a solution is something we need to be suspicious of. I think of myself as a critic and not someone devising manifestoes. Next question sometimes to mention. That is the question. And i said that. I have lived with the notion of increase of freedom and interference and and then with the notions and with that scope of ideas that are also acceptable by a large majority of the population and that is where liberals need to be much more modest and humble thinking of our democracy. On the one hand you were justify and skeptical but also your idea is to recognize that unusual fact and this is a quote to appropriately and a moral intrusive identity with the pluralistic run for president with an International Feature coming from the appearing and let it fast but what are you really pushing against if that is the only sense of wisdom left and its all because of the enlightenment and ive never been better i hope to get better all the time. And the sophisticated notion that certainly and then to devise these ideas in the late h century that we should all be working hard to realize these ideas and we should be thinking more about india or china. Also in the past away should think about not the 18th or 19th century but the enlightenment so for what they have to say what they are thinking about with that population with that population that is a sure sign of stability there is a lot of problematic stuff out there that is the enlightenment so the notion. I think that was the last question. If you can see yourself engaging more directly with a socialist tradition incurred you find yourself writing about marx instead of review . And they asked for the undergraduate. And i knew that first exposure and then to discuss and all the circles that this is wonderful because the books that we were reading emphasized the more humanistic aspects of marxism and the idea of spiritual freedom in particular and so they want to engage with us with a very long social tradition and india and in different parts of asia that has not been highlighted. And the chinese thinkers in the socialist tradition try to bring them into a conversation. So its a mistake to think of it as something that really only exist in western europe and the United States. There is a lot more to the socialist tradition than Walter Benjamin and other icons. I was wrong that was not a final question from the audience measure able to drop back now . Here it is. Someone said that a question about fiction but now i cant find a that would be a great question to ask you. Has had a client . And then to expose those exposed countries and then some contributing to the common good and it is not at all surprising against the pandemic that involve the states in a way so these that have managed to deal with the pandemic much better than private ties Health Systems and then to be ignored so that liberal ideology with the emphasis during the pandemic and Going Forward obviously but only the state can do. And biden has taken on much of those policies from the Bernie Sanders leftwing group of the Democratic Party more than the exception as we go forward. With that stronger protector and neglected these things. And somehow dynamic individuals and entrepreneurs and to make it prosperous has been pretty comprehensive. I did get the question about fiction. It says we returned to writing novels for are you a simply the essayist . For are you a simply the essayist . And fiction can do things. And it is a very different form and yes the answer to that. That is all we have time for thank you so much for talking to us. And then to encourage the audience to check it out and actually we will be back tomorrow even though it is a monthly series. We are not in germany that these things are happening in the streets and on the news and happened again and again it was really a deliberate act of forgetting or lack of engagement. A refusal to understand they voted in the mechanisms to allow these things to happen