弗朗西斯·福山：历史的终结并非你所想

萨姆·哈里斯 2026年4月16日

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMFkJ3Xq2Go&t=450s

萨姆·哈里斯与弗朗西斯·福山探讨了自由民主、美国政治和全球秩序。他们讨论了被误解的“历史终结”论题、保守主义如何演变为民族主义、身份政治和新自由主义的极端化弊端、特朗普第二任期的危害、伊朗战争、以色列的未来、左右两派的反犹主义以及其他话题。

弗朗西斯·福山是斯坦福大学弗里曼·斯波格利国际问题研究所的奥利维尔·诺梅利尼高级研究员，也是斯坦福大学福特·多尔西国际政策硕士项目的负责人。作为他那一代最具影响力的政治思想家之一，他最著名的作品是1992年出版的《历史的终结与最后的人》。他的回忆录《在最后的人的领域》即将出版。福山博士曾在约翰·霍普金斯大学、乔治·梅森大学、兰德公司和美国国务院政策规划部担任要职。他的文章发表在Persuasion网站上，他的播客节目是Frankly Fukuyama。

网站：francisfukuyama.com

订阅萨姆·哈里斯的免费新闻简报：https://samharris.org/newsletter-signup/

0:00民主，尤其是美国的民主，看起来正在分崩离析。你听说过，你知道，白人是受迫害的少数群体。

0:088在美国。嗯，所以他们在某种程度上借用了左派的受害者话语。他

0:1515攻击了美国最基本的制度，似乎没有哪个制度是他不想破坏的。

0:2222你知道，呃，他真的想像国王一样统治美国。我今天和

0:3030弗朗西斯·福山一起。弗兰克，感谢你参加我的播客节目。哦，非常感谢邀请。

0:3535我想你我只见过一次面。我不知道你是否还记得，但我想我们是在……
0:4141很久以前在墨西哥的Seo Dasi Day会议上见过面。好的。当然。在普埃布拉。

0:4848是的。是的，那是一场制作精良的活动。呃，令人印象深刻。这就像……

0:5656 墨西哥版的TED，但是……呃，前排坐着一个很明显的毒品贩子。

1:031分3秒 呃，你知道，就是那种有20岁女朋友的氧气爱好者之类的。

1:081分8秒 是的。由墨西哥最富有的人之一资助。

1:111分11秒 是的。很高兴见到你。呃，我们有很多话要说。嗯，那我就从头开始吧。

1:171分17秒 你从来没有上过播客，这似乎是我犯的一个明显的错误。所以，很抱歉让您和观众等了这么久才见到您。

1:25 1分25 但我想请教您一些政治智慧，以及您对当下局势的看法。

1:33 1分33 但让我们从头开始，大多数人首先会通过您的文章认识您，然后是

1:40 1分40 然后是《历史的终结》这本书。作为一名作家，我对书名非常敏感，因为书名可能会误导大部分读者，甚至误导那些永远不会读这本书的人。我认为您就是这方面的典型例子。《历史的终结》

1:57 1分57 这句话似乎让很多人误以为您在宣称一些您实际上并没有宣称的东西。所以你的论点是什么？

2:05 2分5 人们对它的常见误解是什么？

2:07 2分7 嗯，我认为它围绕着两个词展开。它指的不是历史的终结，而是指

2:15 2分15 历史似乎朝着哪个方向发展？历史，你知道，在我看来，是

2:23 2分23 哲学家黑格尔的观点，即人类社会的进步演进。所以，历史的终结意味着

2:32 2分32 整个现代化发展进程的走向是什么？我的论点是，它看起来

2:39 2分39 走向与自由民主政治制度相联系的市场经济。呃，这就是

2:47 2分47 我觉得这是个误解，因为很多人只看了标题就说他认为那些事情会停止发生，但这从来都不是呃

2:56 2分56 这个想法。还有一件事，我把原文改编成了一本书，书名是《历史的终结与最后的人》。

3:05 3分5 “历史的终结”部分来自哲学家黑格尔。“最后的人”部分来自哲学家弗里德里希·尼采。

3:11 3分11 尼采说，最后的人是历史终结时出现的没有抱负、没有激情的生物，那时他所有的

3:20 3分20 物质上的舒适和安全都得到了保障，他不再有任何远大的抱负或呃

3:29 3分29 野心。而这正是历史终结论的问题之一：人们不愿处于那种境地。

嘿，你们打算尝试

3:36 3分36 重新反抗它。实际上，我在书版的最后五章解释了民主会以哪些方式崩溃，

3:45 3分45 我认为这些方式实际上正在上演。所以，你仍然觉得自由民主，你知道，

3:54 3分54 自由民主沿着资本主义的轨道运行，已经或多或少地赢得了这场争论，而且没有真正的

4:02 4分2 持久的竞争者，即使实际上存在它的敌人，以及它可以被削弱的过程，或者

4:10 4分10 你认为，我的意思是，最近，就在昨天，有一个数据点支持这一点，那就是你

4:17 4分17 我们看到维克托·欧尔班输掉了选举。但我认为很多人把我们现在在中国看到的这种准资本主义威权主义视为更持久的竞争者。

4:27 4分27 你们如何看待这种感觉？

4:34 4分34 我们知道历史的结局，那就是如果我们能坚持下去，那就是自由民主？

4:41 4分41 说实话，我不知道答案。我认为中国人已经建立了一个相当令人印象深刻的

4:49 4分49 制度。它是威权的。它是准市场经济的，而且他们在运用新技术方面非常成功。

4:56 4分56 他们能够创新很多我们认为他们做不到的事情。相反，

5:03 5分3 民主制度，尤其是美国民主制度，看起来正在崩溃。呃，如果我是……一个试图……

5:115分11 从一个贫穷、治理不善的国家搬到其他地方的人，呃，我会毫不犹豫地选择美国，

5:205分20 在过去的几十年里。但是你知道，如今我不确定这对很多人来说是否还是一个有吸引力的模式。呃，我想说，如果……
5:285分28 中国人继续保持他们的……发展机器运转，呃，你知道，他们或许真的有一个……

5:365分36 替代方案。然而，我认为现在得出这个结论还为时过早，因为中国有很多问题，这些问题都与缺乏反馈有关，

5:465分46 对民意没有……回应。呃，我认为，从长远来看，这会给他们带来麻烦。

5:55 5分55 嗯，我们会在这里详细讨论美国民主的问题，但在此之前，

6:02 6分2 我想我们会相当多地提到自由主义的概念。在你最近的一本书里，我想应该是你最近的那本书，《自由主义及其不满》

6:09 6分9 深入探讨了自由主义的概念，以及

6:17 6分17 在某些情况下，自由主义可能会适得其反，我想谈谈这一点。但在我们深入探讨之前，什么是

6:24 6分24 自由主义？这个词似乎对不同的人来说含义各不相同，在不同的语境下可以有很多不同的意思。我们应该如何理解

6:32 6分32 自由主义？它的核心承诺是什么？嗯，我可以告诉你我的意思。我认为自由主义政治制度是指政府的权力受到法治和宪法制衡的限制。

6:42 6分钟 42 这是防止

6:50 6分钟 50 政府，特别是行政部门，侵犯普通公民权利，过度干预市场和公民日常活动的一种方式。

7:00 7分钟 而真正让我理解的自由主义政治制度的核心，正是对法律的服从。现在，它在

7:08 7分钟 8 在世界其他地区还有其他含义。所以，如果你在欧洲说“自由主义”，

7:12 7分钟 12 这意味着你非常支持自由市场，反对监管等等。但我认为，经济上的自由主义解读对我来说并不是关键。

7:21 7分钟 21 对我来说，自由主义的关键不在于此。关键在于，国家权力应该受到法律的限制，并且

7:29 7分29应该有制衡机制来防止政府侵犯个人权利。

7:36 7分36那么，你如何将自由主义的概念与保守主义联系起来？它们又如何与我们政治中传统的左右之分联系起来？

7:48 7分48嗯，这很复杂，因为首先，现在对保守主义有几种不同的定义。

7:57 7分57你知道，保守主义可能意味着你只想尽可能多地保留过去的传统。

8:04 8分4如果你生活在一个自由主义社会，那就意味着要保留自由主义的传统。呃，我

8:12 8分12我认为我们现在面临的问题之一是保守主义已经变异成某种几乎面目全非的东西。你

8:19 8分19你知道，它回归了旧的……嗯，这么说吧。我认为在罗纳德·里根时代，保守主义实际上

8:27 8分27是一种自由主义。他相信市场。他相信有限政府，呃，所有这些

8:33 8分33限制。你知道，我基本上同意这一点。我认为政府可以

比他更积极地处理社会正义、不平等之类的问题。但他实际上仍然秉持着我认为是基础性的自由主义传统。

8:50 8:50 自从美国建国以来，这一直是美国政治的核心。

8:57 8:57 改变的是保守主义，因为它朝着种族主义的方向发展，变得……你知道的

9:06 9:6 相当专制，就其实施方式而言。我认为这非常不自由。你知道，维克托

9:14 9:14 奥尔班，你刚才提到的在匈牙利战败的奥尔班说，他试图建立一个不自由的

9:21 9:21 民主制度。这意味着，你知道，有选举，有民意，

9:26 9分26 但政府不受约束。政府不必遵守制衡原则。呃，你知道，政府可以做任何它想做的事。

9:34 9分34 如果这就是新的保守主义形式，我的意思是，JD Vance 似乎也这么认为。呃，那么这和

9:41 9分41 罗纳德·里根时代的那种保守主义关系不大。所以，你怀念的那种保守主义现在通常被称为古典自由主义。

9:50 9分50 是的，这是在美国表达这种观点的一种方式。嗯，这有点复杂，因为有些自由意志主义者也认为自己是古典自由主义者。

10:02 10分钟2 （他们自认为是古典自由主义者。）我认为还有更极端的版本，因为我认为真正的古典自由主义者，比如约翰·斯图亚特·密尔，

10:11 10分钟11 或者亚当·斯密，他们明白政府是必要的。政府提供某些公共产品。它提供，你知道，

10:18 10分钟18 （它提供规则和法律的执行），你根本无法废除政府。而在美国，

10:25 10分钟25 （你明白，这里有一些自由意志主义边缘群体，他们认为政府活动的各个方面都是不合法的。）

10:34 10分钟34 （你明白，税收是不合法的。）

10:36 10分钟36 嗯，我认为这是一个大问题，这真的不是古典自由主义的全部意义所在。 10:43 10分钟43 嗯，我认为大多数理智的人，至少，你知道，如果给他们足够的时间来考虑这个问题，如果我们能够把这个论点推到足够远的程度，抛开任何扭曲的激励机制，我认为大多数人

10:58 10分钟58 目前来看，会趋向于类似古典自由主义的东西，

11:02 11分钟2 也就是说，应该尊重个人权利。任何在私营部门最能实现的事情都应该在那里实现。

11:10 11分钟10 但有些事情是市??场看不到的，政府只能很好地为我们完成。所以我们需要一些治理。我们不能成为无政府主义者或极端自由主义者。

11:21 11分21秒 个人权利是神圣的，因为个人至上确实能够有效对抗威权主义和

11:30 11分30秒 极端形式的部落主义。然而，有一种观察认为，这种形式的自由主义可能会

11:37 11分37秒 滑向一种极端的个人主义，以至于你失去了对

11:45 11分45秒 社会凝聚力的掌控，对吧？我们都变成了消费者。我们变得原子化。

11:52 11分52秒 政治体系根本无法真正确保人们能够共同获得他们想要的东西。然后，这就引出了

12:00 12分钟 潜在的非常不自由的力量崛起，并占据一些空缺的空间。所以我们有了民粹主义，它以

12:07 12分7秒 各种形式出现。我们有身份政治，也有其他民族主义。我的意思是，你提到了JD Vance。所以，所以你可以拥有你你你

12:15 12分钟15 你看起来可能很理智，直到你谈论足够长的时间，然后你就会感受到一种血统和土地的民族主义承诺，你知道，这是一种

12:24 12分钟24 确保人们感到彼此联系的方式，事情变得越来越奇怪，而我们正生活在

12:31 12分钟31 经历这一切。你能花一分钟谈谈自由主义本身是如何脆弱的吗？一个建立在开放和宽容基础上的体系是如何容易被颠覆的？

12:41 12分钟41 卡尔·帕特里克至少在一个方面称之为宽容的悖论。

12:45 12分钟45 是的。嗯，我认为这基本上就是好想法被推向极端，左右两派都有这样的例子。嗯，在右派，呃
12:55 12分55秒 就是所谓的新自由主义。

12:58 12分58秒 呃，我认为这是一种对市场经济的极端崇拜，认为市场永远不会犯错，或者你

13:05 13分5秒 想要尽可能地放松管制，呃

tion。

13:28 13分28 我认为左翼问题基本上是身份政治，你知道，古典自由主义基于这样一种观念：

13:36 13分36 所有人类都拥有平等的尊严，没有任何特定群体比其他人优越，或者拥有

13:45 13分45 支配他人的权利。我认为身份政治某种程度上颠覆了这一点，它把以前受压迫的

13:53 13分53 少数群体或边缘群体说：“不，你知道，

13:57 13分57 他们是特殊的，或者他们应该得到特殊的认可和关注。”

14:03 14分钟3 我认为，他们就是从这里开始偏离古典自由主义的，因为他们愿意利用国家权力来强制执行一些

14:13 14分钟13 这些群体身份，并强化它们，而不是将人们视为平等的公民。而且我

14:20 14分钟20 我认为，极右翼和极左翼相互滋养，身份政治造成了这种

14:28 14分钟28 前多数族群的反应，他们声称自己才是被压迫的人，使用了同样的身份政治语言

14:36 14分钟36 所以现在你听到的是，在美国，白人是受迫害的少数族裔。嗯，所以

14:43 他们在某种程度上借用了左派那种受害者的语言。

14:50 是的。是的。我必须承认，我还没读过你关于身份政治的书。但是，我想我从我看到的采访中了解到了一些你的想法。

14:59 我觉得你对身份政治的抵触情绪比我低。

15:06 15分钟6我的意思是，我的感觉是，现在一切都失灵了，我的意思是，我总结一下：
15:13 15分钟13尤其对于你来说，你知道，对于民主党人来说，在目前的政治形势下，我会说：
15:20 15分钟20在这一点上，几乎在任何情况下，出于任何原因提及种族问题，几乎总是适得其反。

15:27 15分钟27在政治上几乎总是有害的。这并不是说我们不需要民权运动，但就我们现在的情况而言，我真的

15:34 15分钟34感觉我们需要完全致力于一个不分种族的，你知道，

15:40 15分钟40他们的品格，呃，你知道，政治和道德规范。嗯，在你看来，这是否太过分了？

15:48 15分钟48 不，不，不。我完全同意。我认为，你知道，民权运动时期那种“种族平等”的古老理想仍然应该是

15:57 15分钟57 我们想要努力实现的目标。我们可以承认，事实上，我们的社会并非种族平等，而且

16:04 16分钟4 存在着各种隐性特权等等，但我认为，一个运转良好的自由主义

16:12 16分钟12 社会不能建立在将这些身份类别视为至关重要的基础上

16:19 16分钟19 你是谁。在一个自由的社会里，你会根据个人的优点、成就、

16:27 16分27品格、道德，来评判一个人，而不是因为他们是女性、黑人、西班牙裔，或者属于某个特定的群体，

16:38 16分38你想在一个多元化的社会中生活，在那里你不会压迫任何群体。

16:45 16分45但你也不会仅仅把社会看作是群体的集合。你会把社会看作是

16:53 16分53由个人组成的集合，他们可能出于共同的目的选择与某些群体联系，但他们的主要身份是他们自己创造的，并且他们自己可以控制的。

17:01 17分1是的。

17:06 17分6是的。我们很多人都对目前左右两派都出现的反犹主义抬头感到担忧。而且，呃，我

17:14 17分14秒我想稍后谈谈以色列的现状以及我们在中东的各种行动，但是，呃
17:21 17分21秒就美国语境下的反犹主义而言，我担心大多数犹太人会

17:30 17分30秒将身份政治视为他们对抗反犹主义的唯一途径。我的感觉是，呃，这真的

17:39 17分39秒毫无疑问，我们必须在不沉迷于身份政治的情况下捍卫自由主义价值观。这听起来是不是太

17:47 17分47秒太异想天开了，还是这才是正确的方法？

17:50 17分钟50 不，不，我觉得你说的完全正确。我觉得，嗯，如果美国犹太人首先把自己视为犹太人，其次才把自己视为美国人，那么他们肯定会对此产生负面反应。还有一点是在以色列内部，你

18:06 18分钟6 你知道，在我看来，以色列国最令人印象深刻的事情之一，嗯，对我这个古典自由主义者来说，就是阿拉伯人可以成为以色列公民。

18:16 18分钟16 你知道，虽然犹太身份对以色列的自我认知很重要，但它

这并非成为以色列公民的唯一途径。因此，以色列也有阿拉伯人。

18:27 他们并非总是受到公平或平等的对待，但他们可以投票，也可以参与政治体系。

18:35 参与政治体系，我认为这一直是以色列非常令人印象深刻的地方，是其他国家无法复制的。

18:43 在许多周边的阿拉伯专制国家，你知道，这正是我真正担心的，在这个特定的右翼联盟的统治下，这种权利正在丧失。

18:52 这个联盟更倾向于将犹太身份，以及某种特定的犹太身份，

19:00 视为成为以色列人的核心，我认为这几乎必然会排斥那些并非传统意义上的犹太人。

19:11 19分11 是的。好吧，我们还是回到那个话题吧，因为……嗯，世界上的那个地区让我担忧，就像此刻几乎每个人都担忧一样。但先说说美国吧，

19:20 19分20 我认为我们从未有过如此腐败的政府。拜登本应解决所有这些问题。呃，你们有一位总统，

19:28 19分28 试图推翻一场公开反民主、对普京和她以及所有独裁者友好的选举，

19:36 19分36 而我们竟然又让这个人连任了。我认为，如果民主党人……呃，你……

19:43 19分43 想不出一些更有吸引力的方案，那将真是一场悲剧。

Francis Fukuyama: The End of History Was Never What You Think

Sam Harris  2026年4月16日
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMFkJ3Xq2Go&t=450s

Sam Harris speaks with Francis Fukuyama about liberal democracy, American politics, and global order. They discuss the misunderstood thesis of "The End of History," how conservatism has mutated into ethno-nationalism, the self-defeating extremes of both identity politics and neoliberalism, the damage of Trump's second term, the war in Iran, the future of Israel, antisemitism on the left and right, and other topics.

Francis Fukuyama is the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and Director of Stanford's Ford Dorsey Master's in International Policy. One of the most influential political thinkers of his generation, he is best known for his 1992 book The End of History and the Last Man. His forthcoming memoir is In the Realm of the Last Man. Dr. Fukuyama has held distinguished appointments at Johns Hopkins, George Mason University, the RAND Corporation, and the U.S. Department of State's Policy Planning Staff. His articles can be read at Persuasion, and his podcast is Frankly Fukuyama.

Website:  francisfukuyama.com

Subscribe to Sam Harris’s free newsletter: https://samharris.org/newsletter-signup/

0:00democracy, especially American democracy, looks like it's falling apart. You hear, you know, that white people are the persecuted minority in
0:088秒钟the United States. Um, and so they're in a way borrowing that same language of victimization from the left. He has
0:1515秒钟attacked the most basic American institutions and there doesn't seem to be an institution that he doesn't want
0:2222秒钟to somehow undermine. You know, uh he really does want to rule uh the United States like a king. I am here with
0:3030秒钟Francis Fukyama. Frank, thanks for joining me on the podcast. Oh, thanks very much for having me.
0:3535秒钟I think you and I have only met in person once. I I don't know if you recall this, but I think we met in um
0:4141秒钟Mexico ages ago at the Seo Dasi Day conference. Okay. Sure. In Puebla.
0:4848秒钟Yeah. Yeah, that was a a a strangely well produced event. It was uh it was impressive. It was like the the the
0:5656秒钟Mexican version of TED but with um some uh obvious narot trafficker sitting in in the front row.
1:031分钟3秒钟Uh you know, oxygenarians with 20-year-old girlfriends or something like that.
1:081分钟8秒钟Yeah. Funded by one of the richest men in Mexico.
1:111分钟11秒钟Yeah. Well, it's good to see you. Uh we've got a lot to talk about. Um so I'm just going to take it from the top here.
1:171分钟17秒钟You've never been on the podcast, which seems like a um a glaring omission on my part. So, apologies to both to you and the audience that it took so long to get
1:251分钟25秒钟you here, but um I just want to tap your um political wisdom uh and um get your view of the present.
1:331分钟33秒钟But um let's start with the um the beginning that most people will will know you first from your article and
1:401分钟40秒钟then book the end of history. Uh, as a writer of books, I'm I'm exquisitly sensitive to a title uh serving to
1:491分钟49秒钟mislead most of one's audience and most of the world who will never read the book. And I think you're the ultimate example of this. I The end of history as
1:571分钟57秒钟a phrase seems to have um convinced many people that you were claiming something that you were not in fact claiming. So what what what was your thesis there and
2:052分钟5秒钟what what is the common misunderstanding of it?
2:072分钟7秒钟Well, I think uh it revolves around two words. um and does not mean the sessation of history. It meant what is
2:152分钟15秒钟the objective or goal towards which history seems to be moving and history uh you know in my sense was that of the
2:232分钟23秒钟philosopher uh Hegel which um was a progressive uh evolution of human society. So the end of history meant
2:322分钟32秒钟where is the whole modernization development process uh tending and my argument was that it looked like it was
2:392分钟39秒钟tending towards a market economy linked to a liberal democratic uh political system. Uh so that was the origin of the
2:472分钟47秒钟I think the misunderstanding because a lot of people just read the title and said he thinks that stuff is going to stop happening and that was never the uh
2:562分钟56秒钟the the idea. The other thing is that I turned the original article into a book with the title the end of history and the last man.
3:053分钟5秒钟The end of history part comes from the philosopher Hegel. The last man part comes from the philosopher Friedrich
3:113分钟11秒钟Nichze who said that the last man is the ambitionless, passionless creature that emerges at the end of history when all
3:203分钟20秒钟of his material comforts and security had been taken care of and he no longer has any great aspirations or uh
3:293分钟29秒钟ambitions. and that this was one of the problems of the end of history that people aren't going to want to be in that position and they're going to try
3:363分钟36秒钟to re rebel against it. And I actually spent the last five chapters of the book version explaining how democracy could break down in ways that
3:453分钟45秒钟I think are actually uh being acted out as we speak. So, do do you still feel that liberal democracy, you know,
3:543分钟54秒钟liberal democracy uh running on the rails of of capitalism has more or less won the argument and there's no real
4:024分钟2秒钟durable contender to it even even if in fact there are uh enemies of it and and and processes by which it can erode or
4:104分钟10秒钟do you think and I I mean so one one data point recently as recently as I think yesterday in favor of that is you
4:174分钟17秒钟know we saw Victor Orban and lose the election. But I I think many people view uh the um the kind of capitalist quasi
4:274分钟27秒钟capitalist authoritarianism of that we're seeing in China now uh as a a more durable contender. How do you view that
4:344分钟34秒钟the sense that we know the punchline of history and it is liberal democracy if we can only hold on to it?
4:414分钟41秒钟Well, honestly, I don't know the answer to that. Uh I think that the Chinese have uh created a pretty impressive
4:494分钟49秒钟system. It is authoritarian. Uh it's quai market-based and they are very successful at marshalling new
4:564分钟56秒钟technology. They're capable of innovating a lot of things we thought they weren't able to do. And conversely,
5:035分钟3秒钟a democracy, especially American democracy, looks like it's falling apart. uh if I were uh somebody trying
5:115分钟11秒钟to move from a poor misgoverned country uh somewhere else uh I would have chosen the United States without question for
5:205分钟20秒钟most of the last several decades. But you know these days I'm not sure that it's such an attractive model for many people. Uh and I would say if the
5:285分钟28秒钟Chinese keep their uh development machine going uh you know it may turn out that they have a real uh
5:365分钟36秒钟alternative. I think however that it's a little premature to come to that conclusion because there are a lot of problems in China which are related to the fact that there's no feedback,
5:465分钟46秒钟there's no uh responsiveness to public opinion. Uh and that is going to get them into trouble, I think, uh in the long run.
5:555分钟55秒钟Well, we we'll talk about the um the problems of American democracy, I think, at some length here, but before we do,
6:026分钟2秒钟we're I think we'll invoke the concept of liberalism a fair amount. in your most recent book, I think it's your most recent book, the liberalism and its
6:096分钟9秒钟discontents, um goes deep into uh the concept of liberal liberalism and
6:176分钟17秒钟the way in which it can be self-defeating under certain conditions and I want to talk about that. But what before we jump in, what what is
6:246分钟24秒钟liberalism? And this word seems to shapeshift for people and it can mean many different things in different contexts. What should we mean by
6:326分钟32秒钟liberalism and what are its core commitments? Well, I can tell you what I mean. I think that a liberal political system is one in which government
6:426分钟42秒钟authority is limited by a rule of law and by constitutional checks and balances. It's a way of preventing the
6:506分钟50秒钟government, the executive from violating the rights of ordinary citizens from interfering too much in you know markets and uh ordinary activity of citizens.
7:007分钟And it's really that u obedience to law that is at the core of what I regard as a liberal political system. Now it has
7:087分钟8秒钟other connotations in other parts of the world. So if you say liberal in Europe,
7:127分钟12秒钟it means that you're kind of very pro pro- free market. You're anti-regulation uh and that sort of thing. But I don't think that the economic uh
7:217分钟21秒钟interpretation of liberalism is for me the key thing. The key thing is that the state should be limited by law and there
7:297分钟29秒钟should be checks and balances to prevent violations of uh individual rights by the government.
7:367分钟36秒钟So, so how do you relate the concept of liberalism to conservatism and how do they relate uh to the traditional notion of of left and right in our politics?
7:487分钟48秒钟Well, um it's it's complicated because first of all, there are now several different definitions of conservatism.
7:577分钟57秒钟Uh you know, conservatism could mean that you simply want to preserve as much of the past uh tradition as uh as
8:048分钟4秒钟possible. And if you live in a liberal society, that's going to involve retaining liberal uh uh traditions. Uh I
8:128分钟12秒钟think one of the problems we're facing now is conservatism is mutated into something uh scarcely recognizable. You
8:198分钟19秒钟know, it's returned to an old Well, let me put it this way. I think in the days of Ronald Reagan, uh conservatism really
8:278分钟27秒钟was a form of liberalism. He believed in markets. He believed in limited government uh in all of these
8:338分钟33秒钟constraints. And you know, I basically agree with that. I think the government could be more active uh in terms of uh
8:428分钟42秒钟dealing with social justice, inequality kinds of questions than he did. But he was actually still in that liberal tradition that I think is foundational
8:508分钟50秒钟that's really been at the core of American politics really since the founding of the uh United States. What's
8:578分钟57秒钟changed is conservatism because it's gone off in this ethnoist uh direction that has become uh you know
9:069分钟6秒钟quite authoritarian in in the way that it's uh implemented. Uh and I think that that's very illiberal. You know Victor
9:149分钟14秒钟Orban that you um referred to as just having been defeated in Hungary said that he was trying to run an illiberal
9:219分钟21秒钟democracy. That means, you know, you have elections, you have popular will,
9:269分钟26秒钟but you're the government isn't restricted. The government doesn't have to follow checks and balances. Uh, you know, the government can do whatever it
9:349分钟34秒钟wants. And if that's the new form of conservatism, I mean, JD Vance seems to think so. Uh, then that's not that
9:419分钟41秒钟doesn't have much to do with the kind of conservatism that existed, you know, in Ronald Reagan's day. So it seems that the the the kind of conservatism you're
9:509分钟50秒钟nostalgic for is often going by the name of classical liberalism now.
9:549分钟54秒钟Yeah, that's one that's one way of putting it in the United States. Uh it gets complicated because you have these libertarians who also think of
10:0210分钟2秒钟themselves as classical liberals. I think that there are more extreme version because I think that you know the true classical liberals, people like John Stewart Mill
10:1110分钟11秒钟or Adam Smith understood you had to have government. government provided certain public goods. It provided uh you know
10:1810分钟18秒钟the enforcement of rules and and law and you simply couldn't do away with government. Whereas in in the US you
10:2510分钟25秒钟have this libertarian fringe that thinks that somehow all aspects of government uh activity are somehow illegitimate.
10:3410分钟34秒钟The taxes are illegitimate. Yeah.
10:3610分钟36秒钟Uh and I think that that's uh you know a big problem and that really is not what classical liberalism was all about.
10:4310分钟43秒钟Well, I think most uh sane people at least, you know, given enough time to consider the matter and if we could push
10:5010分钟50秒钟the argument far enough um outside of any perverse incentives, most people I
10:5810分钟58秒钟think will converge on something like classical liberalism at this moment,
11:0211分钟2秒钟which is that there should be a respect for individual rights. Whatever should be whatever is best accomplished in the private sector should be accomplished
11:1011分钟10秒钟there. But there's some things the market can't see and the government can only accomplish well for us. And so we need some governance. We can't be uh anarchists or or extreme libertarians.
11:2111分钟21秒钟Individual rights are sacred because because the primacy of the individual really is a b work against authoritarianism and
11:3011分钟30秒钟extreme forms of tribalism. And yet there's there's this observation that liberalism in this form can kind of tip
11:3711分钟37秒钟over into a an individualism that's so radical that that you sort of lose purchase on
11:4511分钟45秒钟social cohesion, right? That we all just become consumers. We come become atomized. There's no way for the the
11:5211分钟52秒钟political system to really uh ensure that people get what they want communally. And then that invites
12:0012分钟uh potentially very illiberal forces to rise up and claim some of that vacated space. So we have populism in its
12:0712分钟7秒钟various forms. We have identity politics. We have other just nationalism. I mean you mentioned JD Vance. So you so you can have you you
12:1512分钟15秒钟can you can seem to be sane until you talk long enough and then you get a kind of blood and soil you know ethnationalist commitment coming in as a
12:2412分钟24秒钟way of uh ensuring that people feel uh bonded together uh and things get weirder and weirder and we're living
12:3112分钟31秒钟through that. Can you talk for a minute about just how liberalism itself is vulner how how a system built on openness and tolerance is vulnerable to being subverted?
12:4112分钟41秒钟Carl Pa called this the paradox of tolerance in in at least one facet.
12:4512分钟45秒钟Yeah. Well, I I think it's basically good ideas being carried to extremes and you had two cases of that both on the right and the left. Uh on the right uh
12:5512分钟55秒钟you had what's sometimes called neoliberalism.
12:5812分钟58秒钟Uh I think that this was an extreme sort of worship of market economics where you know markets could do no wrong or you
13:0513分钟5秒钟wanted to you know uh deregulate um uh as much as possible uh and you didn't
13:1213分钟12秒钟worry about things like growing economic u inequality as a result of you know this uh free market system. So that was
13:2013分钟20秒钟one of the things that drove liberalism in I think a bad direction that then spawned a left-wing reaction. The
13:2813分钟28秒钟left-wing problem I think is basically identity politics that uh you know classical liberalism is based on a
13:3613分钟36秒钟notion that all human beings have an equal dignity and that no particular group of uh people is superior or has a
13:4513分钟45秒钟right to dominate uh others. And I think identity politics kind of reversed that and took, you know, formerly oppressed
13:5313分钟53秒钟minorities or groups that had been marginalized and said, "No, you know,
13:5713分钟57秒钟they're special or they deserve uh special recognition uh and and notices."
14:0314分钟3秒钟And that's where I think uh they started to deviate from classical liberalism because they were willing to use state power to you know enforce uh some of
14:1314分钟13秒钟these group identities uh uh and strengthen them rather than treating uh people as uh as equal citizens. And I
14:2014分钟20秒钟think you know the extreme right and the extreme left then fed on each other uh that the identity politics created this
14:2814分钟28秒钟reaction on the part of former majority communities that said that they were the ones that were being oppressed using the same language this identitarian
14:3614分钟36秒钟language. So now you hear you know that white people are the persecuted minority uh in the United States. Um and so
14:4314分钟43秒钟they're in a way borrowing that same language of victimization from the um uh you know from the left.
14:5014分钟50秒钟Yeah. Yeah. I I must confess I I haven't read your book on identity politics. Uh but I I think I've gleaned some of what
14:5914分钟59秒钟you think about it from from interviews I've seen. I feel like you're less allergic to identity politics than I am.
15:0615分钟6秒钟I mean my feeling is that just across the board it's now dysfunctional and and I mean the one way I would summarize
15:1315分钟13秒钟this is that especially for you know left of center for for Democrats at this moment in our politics I would say that
15:2015分钟20秒钟virtually any mention of race in any context for any reason is almost always counterproductive at this point. It's
15:2715分钟27秒钟almost always toxic politically. This is not to say we didn't need a civil rights movement, but where we are now, I really
15:3415分钟34秒钟feel like we need a a just a a full commitment to a raceblind, you know,
15:4015分钟40秒钟content of their character, uh, you know, political and ethical norm. Um, does does that go too far in your view?
15:4815分钟48秒钟No, no, no. I I completely agree with that. I think that uh you know this old ideal from the civil rights era of a colorblind society should still be the
15:5715分钟57秒钟objective that we want to move to. we can recognize uh you know de facto that our society isn't colorblind and that
16:0416分钟4秒钟there all these ways of hidden privilege and and so forth but I don't think that you can have a functioning liberal
16:1216分钟12秒钟society based on you know uh making these uh identity categories essential
16:1916分钟19秒钟to who you are. uh in a liberal society you judge individuals based on their individual merits, achievements,
16:2716分钟27秒钟character, uh morality uh and you don't judge them based on the fact that they are, you know, female or black or Hispanic or, you know, a member of any,
16:3816分钟38秒钟you know, particular uh group. You want to tolerate and live in a pluralistic society where you're not oppressing any
16:4516分钟45秒钟of those groups, but you're also not seeing the society just as a collection of groups. You're seeing a society as a
16:5316分钟53秒钟collection of individuals that may choose to associate with certain groups for common purposes, but their primary identity is something that they
17:0117分钟1秒钟themselves create and they themselves uh have uh control over.
17:0617分钟6秒钟Yeah. Many of us are concerned about the rise of anti-semitism we see on both the left and the right now. and and uh I
17:1417分钟14秒钟want to talk about the the status of Israel and our various adventures in in the Middle East uh in a minute, but um
17:2117分钟21秒钟just taking the anti-semitism piece in an American context, I'm I'm I'm worried that Jews will will see most Jews will
17:3017分钟30秒钟see identity politics as their only bull work against anti-semitism. And I I I my feeling here is uh that this is really
17:3917分钟39秒钟no exception that you we have to fight for liberal values without indulging in identity politics. Does that seem too
17:4717分钟47秒钟quicksotic to you or is does that seem like the right algorith?
17:5017分钟50秒钟No, no, I think that I think you're absolutely right about that. I think that um if uh American Jews see
17:5717分钟57秒钟themselves first as Jews and secondly as Americans, there's going to be a you know negative reaction to that. The other thing is within Israel itself, you
18:0618分钟6秒钟know, it seemed to me that one of the impressive things about the state of Israel, uh, for me as a classical liberal was the fact that Arabs could be citizens of Israel.
18:1618分钟16秒钟You know, that that although Jewish identity was important to Israel's self-conception, it wasn't the exclusive way that you could be an Israeli citizen. And so you had Israeli Arabs.
18:2718分钟27秒钟they were not always treated uh you know fairly or equally but you know they could um vote and they could you know
18:3518分钟35秒钟take part in the political system and I thought that that was always a very impressive thing about the state of Israel something that wasn't replicated
18:4318分钟43秒钟in many of the surrounding you know authoritarian Arab countries and you know that's what I really fear is being lost under this particular right-wing
18:5218分钟52秒钟coalition that you know they're they're more intent on uh making the Jewish identity and a specific kind of Jewish
19:0019分钟identity core to what it means to be Israeli, which I think is almost automatically exclusionary for people that, you know, aren't um uh Jews in that fashion.
19:1119分钟11秒钟Yeah. Well, let's get back to that cuz I I'm uh that part of the world worries me as it worries almost everybody at this moment. But to stick with America for a second,
19:2019分钟20秒钟I don't think we've ever had an administration that has been this corrupt. Biden was supposed to fix all of this. uh you had a president that
19:2819分钟28秒钟tried to overturn an election that was openly anti-democratic, was friendly to uh Putin and she and all the dictators
19:3619分钟36秒钟in the world and we managed to reelect this guy. I think that it's going to be really a tragedy if the Democrats uh you
19:4319分钟43秒钟know don't manage to come up with something a little bit more attractive.