23 Burst results for "Yuval"
"yuval" Discussed on Experts on Expert with Dax Shepard
"It's dangerous but we can't stay behind in this arms race and it's the ceo. Is things like genetic engineering in the us on genetic engineering. You should meddle with the human dna engineering super babies. But if the chinese are doing it and they're getting results than very soon the americans will feel. We have to do it all so we don't want to because we have to do it otherwise we will stay behind and maybe the chinese are feeling the same thing. We also don't want to do it. But we can't stay behind if the russians or the americans are doing it. So the only way to effectively regulate these disruptive technology is by having some kind of global corporation. And you know it's not impossible. People can agree. You know you take for instance the olympics. You think about sports then on the one hand. The olympics is a nationalist competition. Everybody go and waved the flags and how many medals we have and how many medals the russians have and cheer for your national team but at the same time all based on global corporation. Because if you want to compete against the russians in swimming or in whatever you i have to agree on the same rules for the game and the amazing thing. Is you manage to do it. You know athletes from the us. From russia from all over the world can come together. The same place agree on exactly the same rules and this kind of model that you still have your national loyalties. You don't cheer for the russian athletes but nevertheless having agreement about the common basic rules and again back to your previous point and we got to have a couple of institutions that we trust so that when there is a negative or a positive drug test that institutions trusted and believed because people do cheat but again they by these systems they get caught by journalists. They get caught by committees that test that we trust exactly if we don't have these institutions that everybody respects then very soon the olympics and actually every sport would become a competition between biochemists and between.
"yuval" Discussed on Experts on Expert with Dax Shepard
"Hey nice to meet you again. Are you in israel. I assume yes. We are in israel. It's quite difficult to get in and out of the country these days. We're in tel aviv at our office. And is it hard because people don't wanna let you in or you're not allowed to leave. You are allowed to leave. But most countries are not very keen on having israelis at the moment because we were red country. And also when you come back you often have to be in quarantine you can fly to the. Us no problem. I mean they don't care about anything. Most countries are in a bit more careful than the americans. I just read an article that you had written about. And we'll explore it in detail. But you were a little critical of netanyahu policy about surveillance during covid. I immediately got curious. If you could give countries out of ten score of how free they are to criticize the current regime. What would you give israel. And what would you give us. So i have some sense of how safe you are. It depends what kind of criticism you level at the government. I mean there are some things that are kind of almost taboo but the social political tabu with regard to saying things about netanyahu and government. You can basically say anything you want okay. That's nice so you give yourself like a nine again in terms of criticism of calling the prime minister corrupt and criminal and whatever you can say that at least for now the nobody will arrest you in the middle of the night. Well i think i read. We had a guest on who explained this ranking i think. Ibm created because they had satellite businesses. All over the world it was kind of detailed in one of the malcolm gladwin books that israel is one of the only countries that has less fear of authority than americans. You guys are like the apex of that right. This is part of israeli culture. I see it in the university. There are no students like israeli students for good and for bed. Like i would give them an assignment to read for next week. They will come to the next class. They will openly say. I didn't read the who of the article. But i think they are wrong. If you say something like this and they disagree they have no respect for your authority as a whatsoever which it sounds is make life a bit difficult but for me. It was a great learning experience. Because if you say nonsense you will immediately be told so it really makes you kind of check yourself and also there are nevertheless things in israel's certain things related to israeli palestinian relations to the occupation to the army that say them they won't go to jail perhaps but the social reaction would be very very severe. Almost every society has these kinds of red lines. Somewhere and in israel there are certain things to boo. Okay so. I get immediately curious. Because as i try to assess our response to covid and i think it's probably well known around the world. We have a pretty significant faction of people that are against the mask in to them. What that represents a lack of freedom and choice and these principles that they value and so at first i look at the data and we're one of the worst in the world. I'm embarrassed i like. Oh my god of all the places. We have access to the most education technology. Everything so i i. I'm embarrassed and disappointed..
"yuval" Discussed on Experts on Expert with Dax Shepard
"Will come welcome to armchair expert experts on expert. I'm yuval harari you joined by dome. Chomsky i i know i am. Dan sheppard and of course your maximus mouse. Mus makes me think of the photo. We took in our halloween garb. Your hair was very tall. Thank you. Your spiderweb was very spooky. Yeah can i tell you a secret. So when i arrived i was just wearing that. Black dress spider headband. I didn't look like a spider and i was embarrassed. How did you course correct. I walked through the house and our friend. Laura had the idea of putting that like cotton that stretches chlorine decor shir scher taking that and putting that all myself and i was like oh great idea so we're walking around the house looking for that and when we did we found to table runners that were spiderweb my goodness while. This was a real improv. It was and i mean the idea of me going through the whole halloween just in my black dress. That would have so embarrassed. Phone yourself in the position. I'm generally in truth be told i didn't really have an outfit. I had a sleeveless t shirt in some combat boots but the hair really sold. It came together nicely complained. Oh we should say something really important. Okay we're recording this on tuesday at twelve pm. This is coming out on thursday so in election. we'll have come and gone. Thank you for that. And if you didn't hear the first yuval harari episode which was one of our favorites and not enough. Time by are greedy estimation this time we had some time and boy. Was that fun. Yuval harari is a historian with hd tea from the university of oxford. He lectures at the department of history. The university of jerusalem and he specializes in world history. You've all and his husband have co-founded sapien. A social impact company with projects in the fields of entertainment and education. Their main goal is to focus the public conversation on the most important global challenges facing the world today the as the best selling book sapiens and homo dais and twenty one lessons for the twenty first century. He has a new book out now called sapiens. A graphic his which is incredibly unique approach to help clean the reader understand the material and we will get into it at length with one of our star. Guess yuval harari. We are supported by brooke lennon. Some mornings you wake up feeling ready to.
"yuval" Discussed on Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard
"Will come welcome to armchair expert experts on expert. I'm yuval harari. Joined by dome. Chomsky i i know i am. Dan sheppard and of course your maximus mouse. Mus makes me think of the photo. We took in our halloween garb. Your hair was very tall. Thank you. Your spiderweb was very spooky. Yeah can i tell you a secret. So when i arrived i was just wearing that. Black dress spider headband. I didn't look like a spider and i was embarrassed. How did you course correct. I walked through the house and our friend. Laura had the idea of putting that like cotton that stretches chlorine decor shir scher taking that and putting that all myself and i was like oh great idea so we're walking around the house looking for that and when we did we found to table runners that were spiderweb goodness while this was a real improv. It was and i mean the idea of me going through the whole halloween night just in my black dress. That would have so embarrassed. Phone yourself in the position. I'm generally in truth be told i didn't really have an outfit. I had a sleeveless t shirt in some combat boots but the hair really sold. It came together nicely complained. Oh we should say something really important. Okay we're recording this on tuesday at twelve pm. This is coming out on thursday so in election. we'll have come and gone. Thank you for that. And if you didn't hear the first yuval harari episode which was one of our favorites and not enough. Time by are greedy estimation this time we had some time and boy. Was that fun. Yuval harari is a historian with hd tea from the university of oxford. He lectures at the department of history. The university of jerusalem and he specializes in world history. You've all and his husband have co-founded sapien. A social impact company with projects in the fields of entertainment and education. Their main goal is to focus the public conversation on the most important global challenges facing the world today the as the best selling book sapiens and homo dais and twenty one lessons for the twenty first century. He has a new book out now called sapiens. A graphic his which is incredibly unique approach to help clean the reader understand the material and we will get into it at length with one of our star. Guess yuval harari. We are supported by brooke lennon. Some mornings you wake up feeling ready to.
"yuval" Discussed on Science Rules! with Bill Nye
"Starting now. Welcome welcome to science rules. I'm your host bill i. This is the show where science rules. It's a call in show if you wanna be on the show and i hope you do. Who leaves voicemail a two zero one four seven two zero seven eight five or go to ask bill. Nye dot com on the electric internet can also check me out and all the social media out there and to find out about her upcoming guests. But today i am joined once again by science writer editor and dear friend seriously. Corey us powell. Greetings corey greetings. Bill as always a pleasure to be here with you a pleasure to have a chance to sit back and think about things you know here we are in the midst of this covid pandemic. what's been going on for quite a while and people talk a lot about all. These people are not wearing masks and all this resistance but to me one of the most striking things is how compliant people been how cooperative have been. I'm walking my neighborhood and it's a good. These ninety percent of the people are being very responsible in distancing wearing masks. You think about how hard it is to get ninety percent of people to agree about anything and yet here we are. We're acting in this. Very responsible. Collective behavior the troublemakers. And the people who are giving pushback. They get a lot of attention in part because there outliers they make a lot of noise there you know. They caused a lot of agony. But this is relatively small portion of the population and it reminded me of this interview. I did with primatology. Bronze to wall a while back and i was asking him about. Why is human nature so violent and you know he studies bonobos pygmy chimpanzees and he laughed. He said look. You're talking to me from new york city. They're eight million people living in close proximity there. If you put eight million chimpanzees together in the same place it be pandemonium it would be a disaster and yet new york really quite peacefully. The question is not wire humans violent. The question is why are human so peaceful so that really got me thinking and it got me excited about today's episode. Yes yes. Today is none other the doctor. You've all know a harari. His a historian philosopher and author of the new york times mega bests hours sapiens. A brief history of humankind homo a brief history of tomorrow and most recently sapiens. A graphic history. There's a graphic novel version of his ideas. So dr yuval harari. Welcome to science rules. may i call you all. Certainly. i'm very happy to be here when you start sapiens. you say there's three revolutions. The first one i find especially enchanting the three big ones out the collective revolution about seventy thousand years ago. Then you have the controversy pollution ten thousand years ago and scientific revolution which is really just beginning. I mean again. Five hundred years ago but that's nothing in terms of human history so the company could prove aleutian is on about storytelling to make a long story. Short it's really all about storytelling. We control this planet and not the chimpanzees not the elephants not even the neanderthals because we can cooperating much larger numbers than any other animal and we can do that first and foremost because of our ability to invent and believe fictional stories. If you look at any large scale human corporation you'll always find at the basis some story wages longest everybody believes everybody cooperates and follows the same rules the same lows. It's most obvious in the case of religion that that's easy but the interesting thing is economic systems are based on fictional stories. Just like religions. I get what you mean. I believe by stories but the idea that what corporations do or what motivates them is fiction is somehow prove ably not true. It's not what motivates them. It's what they are. Corporations are not a biological or physical entity. The only place is exists is in our show imagination. He's in the stories. We believe we have these powerful costs of storytellers tens of thousands of years ago. You had the shamans telling stories about spirits. Then you had priests telling stories. About god's way the modern world we have lawyers corporate lawyers telling stories about corporations but it's really the same thing if everybody stops believing in it disappears and in the case even more clearly in the case of money. Maybe the greatest story told if everybody or even say eighty percent of people stop believing in the dollar disappeared. It has no value whatsoever. I mean most dollars are not even pieces of paper. They'll just electronic data when you hear today that the federal reserve bank has created during this crisis trillions of dollars. They don't even bother to bring them anymore. It's they just enter some computer file and zero somewhere and poof. You have a trillion dollars appearing out of nowhere. Tell us about the cognitive revolution. What happened when this is when people could create stories and believe in them right. This is when something happened. We don't understand what which enabled our species of humans homo sapiens. At the time there were at least five other human species we used to being the only humans around but seventy thousand years ago. There were at least six different human species. The most famous apart for us are of course neanderthals until then sapiens homo sapiens does not seem to be superior to undertows all to the other human species sapiens They leave a we leave in africa and then we spread from there and push to extinction all the other human species and many of other big animals of the world and take over the planets and what the neighbors to do. It is a sudden ability to cooperate far more effectively large numbers neanderthals which were as powerful as physically and have bigger brains than homo sapiens. But they could cooperate. Only in small bands twenty fourteen. Maybe eight hundred dollars could.
"yuval" Discussed on Talking Politics
"Science fiction. That's just the future. Thinking about whether human beings, really all mortal in the way that they used to be whether the lifespan of my life expectancy, but the shape of human life is GonNa look anything like it. Did People born in the twentieth century for people born deep into the twenty first century? That's not science fiction for his. that. He says is how he and his friends think. So four years maybe changes the way that I think about that interview with Harari and I think about home address book that I loved at the time and still love and still recommend. It's an Amazing Book and Harari is among other things, a truly amazing writer. But at the risk of repeating myself I'm increasingly weather. How people of my age respond to these things is so different. To how people thirty years younger respond to these things. That full years for me? Maybe it doesn't seem like a long time. Before years is a long time. If you're twenty one. Over the summer we will replay a few other podcast episodes the ones that we think. A, definitely worth listening to again in two thousand and twenty. The next week we're going to be talking to Diane coyle about economics of the pandemic. And what we've learned now that we're months in about the different ways that we value many things including the different ways that we value different kinds of work. My Name is David. Runciman and we've been talking politics..
"yuval" Discussed on Talking Politics
"Which means that the big decisions will be taken, either by nobody by market forces all they will be taken by a very small group of individuals in places like Silicon Valley who nobody voted for, and they represent nobody and they don't really have a kind of political commitment of the kind. You even find in the Communist Party in China or in movies, people like Putin ed one. So far I must say that most of the decisions taking by the GEEKS in silicon. Valley has proven themselves to be quite good I mean. We could have done much much worse, but still it's dangerous to put the future, not really only of humanity. It's really the future of life. I mean the rise of artificial intelligence is going to change things, not their historical level, but really on the biological level after four billion years of evolution of organic beings for the first time life is about to break out into the inorganic room, and we'll start seeing inorganic life forms, and the people taking the decisions about it. You know bunch of engineers in in silicon. Valley, so this is a frightening thought. One thing that has definitely changed in the four years since we recorded that interview is that Yuval Harari has become a lot more famous. He was pretty famous back then sapiens. His first book was already an international bestseller. Homogeneous was about to become not quite as big a book. But a book with just as big an impact. But in the full year, since he has turned into a global intellectual superstar. And a kind of one person industry and ideas industry. I tried to get him back on talking politics for this episode, so he could reflect. On what a difference! Full years had made to his arguments, but he is in a lot of demand. He has been in huge demand since the start of the pandemic. And so he wasn't able to do it. I am still hopeful that one day we'll get him back. But in his absence, I was thinking about some of the things that he said back then. And whether they all still ring true. I think some of it has changed in the original version of this interview when we broadcast in twenty, sixteen. I introduced by saying that many people I knew in a town like Cambridge attack town. Full of computer engineers who are designing the technology of the future. There is quite a lot of skepticism. About the argument that machine intelligence is on the verge of exploding into something that will leave human intelligence behind. In the full year since I would say if anything that skepticism has grown so Harari seems pretty sold on the idea. that. We've already passed the point of no return. Where Machine Intelligence Separated out from human consciousness. Is simply going to explode exponentially and human intelligence, and could to human consciousness won't be able to keep up. Well in the four years, since there hasn't been a huge advance in machine intelligence, there have been some remarkable successes particularly in the field of game playing the kind of successes that have been achieved. By computers playing, go and poker and chester level in a human being has ever imagined. But more broad triumphs have machine intelligence actually quite hard to find. Machines are more and more a part of our lives. They're integrated in our lives and in our consciousness. But, they're not massively smarter than they were four years ago. They have hugely more capacity in some areas and machine, learning or deep learning as it's called. has taken machines to places where human beings Congo simply because of scale and power. And depth. That is depth of data analysis, but depth of intelligence. That still seems quite remote. I'm not sure that the full years since we recorded that interview has settled the case and if anything, I think there are even more reasons to doubt. The machines can do some of the basic things that we associate with intelligence. At least they're going to be able to do it soon. Machines still struggle with language. Machines still struggle with creative thought. Machines definitely still struggle with even the basics of what we would think of as human imagination. And Twenty twenty. It's not clear. The machine intelligence is about to leave us, behind. Elsa found myself thinking about an interview that we recorded on talking politics with Brett Freshman talking about his book, reengineering humanity. In which he makes the case that we should be much more worried about unintelligent machines, the intelligent machines. That is the machines that are permeating our lives and not particularly smart. They. Often had extraordinary capacities in particular areas, but they one dimensional. They can do things that we can't, and they can do things much quicker than we can. But they can't do. What's called General Intelligence. And living in a world that's increasingly dominated by those narrow specific task oriented machines, would that inability to process any form of complex language? Is Changing us. It's not that the machines becoming smarter. Is that we possibly becoming less intelligent as we adapt to a world in which those kinds of machines? Increasingly dominate our day to day lives? And that does seem to me still to be a serious risk. The before the machines become a lot smarter than us. We become a lot more like the less small Sheen's. There is a kind of assumption in Harare. was saying in that interview that we will also on the cusp of a sort of machine takeover problem-solving. The machines because of their extraordinary capacities that processing ability. We're going to quite soon be able to solve problems that were beyond human capacity to solve. Maybe including climate change global problems, the sorts of problems that we think of as being essentially political could be taken out to the domain of politics and somehow. A next to and then resolved by the domain of machines. Loss for years. That also seems if anything more remote, less.
"yuval" Discussed on Uncommon Knowledge
"Born in Israel Yuval Levin moved to the United States with his family when he was eight now director of Social Cultural and constitutional studies at the American Enterprise Institute. You've all served the domestic policy staff in the White House of George W Bush. You've eleven's most recent book a time to build from family and community to Congress and the campus how recommitting to our institutions can revive the American dream. You've all welcome. Thank you very much. The economy is strong. We have rising household income and the lowest levels of unemployment in decades. And we're not engaged in any shooting wars anywhere on earth. There's a pretty good argument to be made that this is a good time. And here's the way you open a time to build two decades ago at the turn of the Millennium. Many Americans had a sense that we were living at the dawn of a new age by now it has become unavoidably evident that our country has experienced the beginning of this new millennium less as a dawn then as a twilight age. If things are so good how come. They're so bad. Yeah this is the question that really started me on the path to this book. And it's the question that the book opens with. Which is if you look at some of the familiar measures of wellbeing. How's the economy? Doing people healthier people safe bell measures. This is a great time And yet if you look at how people feel about this moment and if you look at the nature of our politics if you look at the polarization and dysfunction we're living through if you look at increases in suicide rates and use At at what's going on on college campuses and in a lot of arenas of American Life. It seems like this time of intense frustration and unease and the question is if the problem isn't evident in those areas where we normally look to. Where IS THE PROBLEM? And so the book looks for that problem in our social lives in the intersection of people rather than in how people are doing individually and ultimately ends up thinking about the health of our institutions as the way to understand why we're frustrated what otherwise seems like a good time. All right this is a rigorous argument rigorous arguments begin by defining their terms quote when I speak of institutions. I mean the durable forms of our common life the durable forms of our common life. They're the frameworks and structures of what we do together got to explain that. Yeah so this term institutions is very broad and capricious. It defines a lot of things right. I the families and institution. A corporation is an institution marriage institution. The rule of law has described as a student. I think it's right to call all those things by that same name but that means we have to think about what that name is and the book works through some of the attempts by academics to define the term but ultimately it comes to what for me as a sort of Priscilla an answer to the question. Our institutions are the forms of what we do together. They're not just clumps of people clumps of people organized around a particular end and organized around an ideal and a way of achieving that important goal so some of our institutions are in charge of of teaching our kids. Some of them enforce the law. Some of them just provide us with a good or a service but each of them forms the people within it into a shape that makes them capable of achieving that. And that's what makes them an institution you trace the collapse of confidence and institutions and the polling data is right there you go through it. The Gallup organization HAS BEEN ASKING AMERICANS CONFIDENCE. They have in our institution since the seventy. Here's just one example in the nineteen seventies more than forty percent of the public expressed confidence in Congress. You might think that's us. Starting at a relatively low point by twenty eleven that figure had fallen to percent and and you kind of have to wonder even those eleven percent savings. Do you know what I haven't met any of them. What accounts for the collapse again? A time to build we have moved roughly speaking from thinking of institutions as molds. You just mentioned that as molds that shape people's characters and habits toward seeing them instead as platforms that allow people to display themselves before a wider world. Yeah so the collapse of trust in institutions as you say the the fact of that happening sort of Cliche by now but it forces you to ask what do we actually mean. Trust in institutions. It's not the most obvious idea and wh- surely one of the things we mean. Is We think. The institution is competent and honest as so that incompetence and and fraud or corruption undermines our trusted institutions. But those things aren't new incompetence and corruption. That's that's part of the human experience if anything is so it doesn't explain this this collapse of trust lately but there is an element of our loss of trust in institutions. That seems more native to the twenty first century and that has to do with the sense that we trust and institution because we think it forms people to do their job in trustworthy way so that not only does it perform an important function it shapes the people in it to do that with integrity and defines an ideal of integrity for them. But what we've seen in the last. Several decades is a transformation in our expectations of institutions. So that we think of them less is doing that now. More is giving people on. I'm old thing I'm almost thinking of just to get to the point. I'm almost think he was something as Cliche as the Richard Gere. Move The old Richard Gere movie an officer and a gentleman. The young man is a mess. Put Him into the military outcomes. An officer and a gentleman. That's an extreme example of what all kinds of institutions do they take. Human beings are a mess in all kinds of ways in good institutions shape. Them make them useful with the military is interesting? Because it's the it's the great exception to our loss of trust and institutions. Americans have higher confidence in the military now than they did when Gallup started measuring the seventies and I think the reason for that has everything to do with what you say. Here which is the military is unabashedly formative. It's not just good at protecting us from our enemies of it is. It's also good at transforming young people into responsible. Serious men women when somebody tells you that they went to Harvard. You think maybe that's a serious person. Maybe that's an an intelligent person. Maybe not but you know whatever they are. They got into Harvard because Harvard sort of measured them decided if they were up to that standard and then let them in when someone tells you they went to the Naval Academy. You think this is a serious person and it's because of the Naval Academy because it made them that way right all right. You discuss a number of institutions in the book. Let's take a couple The federal government. Let's start with Congress a time to build. It is perfectly obvious that something has gone wrong with Congress in our time. There hasn't been a proper budget process in over a decade very little significant legislation gets passed and most member serving today have never really been part of a traditional legislative process. There's nobody on that hill. Who knows how it's who's seen with his own ice is how it's done now. Here's the provoke especially provocative sentence. Congress is weak because its members wanted to be week. Yeah explain that Yeah. I mean you know it's it's easy to go looking for external pressures that create this problem but I think Congress is the source of the problem and in fact. A lot of are other concerns about the government. I worry a lot for example but activist judges or about the administrative state. I think those are functions of a week. Congress congresses as left the the scene empty and judges in administrative agencies have rushed in and Congress has done on purpose because its members. Don't want the responsibility for hard choices. And they don't think of what they do fundamentally in legislative terms at this point at least many members don't they think of it in performance of terms they think of Congress as a way to be seen making the argument for the things. They're voters believe in especially to be seen making the argument against the things that frustrate their voters and a lot of it is about getting a better time slot on cable news or talk radio by getting a bigger social media following younger members in particular think of Congress in extraordinarily performed of terms. And they're not doing. The work of bargaining and accommodation compromised it is ultimately would legislation is limit. Let me try something that occurred to me as I was reading. This part of your book to impeachments nine hundred seventy two to seventy three the impeachment. Richard Nixon was never finally impeached because he stepped down before the full. House voted to impeach him. Nevertheless the impeachment proceeds proceeds pursuant to a vote of the full House Judiciary Committee that holds open. Hearings the President's council is permitted to play a role to cross examine witnesses. There are legal wrangles between the committee and the White House. They take their time for these matters to go to court and to be decided and when the Judiciary Committee does vote a recommendation of impeachment to the floor of the house it is a Republicans who vote no but it is a bipartisan. Vote impeachment number. Two of course is what we just saw doesn't take places pursuant to vote of the House but pursuant to a press conference by the speaker. It's the Intel Committee instead of the Judiciary Committee. At least at first they hold the hearings in private. The President's council excluded the vote is one hundred percent partisan. What accounts for the dance? What counts for the different? I do think a big part of it is the difference between an internal process and an external show. Though the impeachment of Richard Nixon was a process of members of Congress. Went through with each other as an institution and so they had a they had a nonpartisan staff head. Republican lawyers on the staff And they were trying to persuade each other to vote a certain way they were talking to one another. In this impeachment of president trump. Everyone was talking to an outside audience at all times. Even in those closed hearings the intelligence community. The whole point was fundamentally a performance point. I think there's a way of of of seeing this. As Congress losing its inner life. It doesn't think of itself as an institution that does its work and then goes out and talks about its work. The talking is the work and a lot of politicians. Now you know you might have said people people seek a microphone to get power and then change things. Today people seek power to get a microphone and then talk about things. And that's an institutional transformation the presidency a time to build every one of our past presidents was formed by a set of institutions formed by set of institutions as either a senior military officer or a government official. Donald Trump is the first American president. Who has not been shaped by any experience in such institutions? Close quote? Now you know that a lot of people will answer immediately. Yes and it was about time. Yeah well I I would say first of all. Donald Trump is not the beginning of this problem in the presidency He's an example of it but so is his predecessor. It's something we've seen building for a long time but I do think that the there's a way in which president trump thinks about the presidency as an outsider as a platform on which to stand and complain about the government. When the president isn't insider is the insider And and should think of himself as operating the executive branch more than speaking about it. And so this isn't. This book isn't focused on complaining about Donald Trump from it but I do think that what did what did you see. During the Obama Administration. I mean trump is Sui generis it. Let's say let's take a bomb Obama's presidency in of terms more than any of his predecessors really maybe not as much as donald trump has more than any prior president in the sense that he understood it as a place to change the culture He understood it. In terms of Away to elevate his own profile more than to work with the system he barely knew. Any members of Congress very rarely worked with the legislative branch in a way the presence generally due to advance an agenda. He used executive power in ways that we're just intended to avoid Interacting with the system in working inside and by the way part of what that's meant is that he wasn't a very consequential president because everything he did was ephemeral. It just went away when the next show came up I worry that some of that is happening now with things that I do like They're also being pursued by executive action and the Democrats are just keeping a list and they're going to go through a non do it? All as soon as they have an opportunity. The campuses shifting from the Federal Government. The campuses a time to build conservatives have clearly long been a minority of American academics but their numbers have dwindled to a tiny remnant in one thousand nine sixty nine a quarter of American professors described themselves as right of center by Nineteen Ninety nine. That figure was down to twelve percent. Recent surveys have put the number below one in ten and the situation is far worse in the social sciences and the humanities as political.
Can The Coronavirus Change American Society?
"So the other day I was doing one of those. Ask Me anything events at the daily wire. You know where people send in questions. Several people ask me what changes I thought would be wrought in society by the Chinese flu crisis and the truth is I have no idea. They'll be any changes or what they'd be if there are any but the question did set me to thinking about what I'd like to see happen. For instance. A lot of students have been taking their classes online during the lockdown. That could bring about some educational improvements. College obviously has become a cesspit of socialist and diversity. Garbage garbage is spreading from classrooms. Out into what we laughingly call the real world. I'd like to see smaller. Better colleges like Hillsdale with better values be able to compete with large institutions through online classes. Be Better I think if more people could take classes hillsdale than they do. Some of the universities working today I think the press has been behaving in a shamefully. Corrupt and one-sided manner for a long time and I think trump's daily briefings or maybe bringing that to light a little more than usual. Cnn is actually cutting away from any news they don't like an NBC. Says they want to stop covering the briefings altogether. Making trump popular. I hope they do stop covering them. So viewers move onto better venues. It would be great truly if people finally got wise to guys like NBC News Chairman. Andy lack who relentlessly cells leftism and feminism under the guise of news while covering up for rapists like Harvey Weinstein and abusers. Like Matt. Lauer has never been a reporter. He doesn't know anything about journalism. He's just selling a philosophy and he's doing it in a very dishonest way and it would be nice if it weren't it would be nice if it weren't just conservatives but also liberals who wanted a fair press. I think that would be helpful to both sides as I've said to many times already. It'd be nice if some women discovered that they've been lied to in that motherhood and homemaking actually a lot more significant and rewarding than virtually any out of the home job you can have. I want individuals of the female persuasion to have free choice. Obviously but I think they've been propagandized out of their best choice and no speaking. Generally I don't think men are as good at motherhood and homemaking just to save you. The trouble of asking in a Gotcha tone futures writer. Yuval Harari makes an interesting point about evolution. He points out that evolution favors life but not necessarily good life for instance animals that people like to eat. Cows and pigs and chickens thrive in terms of survival because we people keep them alive. But we don't always treat them very well so they survive but their lives suck and then we eat them. Harari points out that that can happen to humans to that a way of life that helps us. Survive can be chosen by evolution over a way of life that is good or moral. I actually think that has been happening to us. Recently I think globalism may be good for human survival and working women may be good for human survival and maybe even abortion infanticide and babies raised by strangers may be good for human survival and I think humans can survive and even thrive physically and yet becomes spiritually empty moral monsters with no hearts or souls. And I've sometimes been afraid. That was exactly what was happening to the world and once it happens by the way you won't even be aware of it. You'll just think it's progress. Even Conservatives will defend it once it actually goes through. It would be nice if this crisis made us pause a moment and ask ourselves not how we can survive and get rich but how we can live and become more human closer to God who made us into the people. He made us to be as the old joke. Goes I can dream. Can't I all right? You know you're sitting at home. We got to say a thank you to all the people who are delivering stuff. Because I know it's dangerous. I know they were working because they need the dough but they're doing a great job. I know we're depending on here People bringing us you know food and books and all the things that we need and medicine all the things that we need a really doing a great
Israel starts surveilling virus carriers, sends 400 who were nearby to isolation
"Take me back to last Wednesday when four hundred. Some Israelis got a text message on their phones. What did it say basically the you may already be infected with the corona virus. This was a brand new program that Benjamin Netanyahu had asked for and got permission to implement in which the State Security Service was allowed to use its digital surveillance systems in the service of viral tracking. Basically they were able to go through the phones. Presumably of every Israeli see where they had been in the previous few weeks overlay that onto where they knew certain cove in nineteen positive cases that Ben and extrapolated who might be at risk of having been infected. Those four hundred people were all notified that they were on that list and we're told to begin self isolation immediately well it's an attention grabber strictly from epidemiological perspective would seem to make some sense who is in proximity of someone known to be infected elsewhere. Public health officials are using more laborious analog way through interviews and so on but this nonetheless has been criticized. Why did did raise it media. Objections from privacy advocates. No one gave consent for this kind of monitoring. So Israelis are trying to decide whether the cost is worth the benefit even those people who were notified of the few that we talked to found it very creepy without a doubt but we're also quite aware of the benefits of being able to track the virus. There is also a question I gather of really how much security because this thing is not all that precise a tool. Yeah that's right there. There's not a lot known about exactly what the government is doing here. And there's a lot of elements to Israel's intelligence service generally and specifically its digital capabilities. That just aren't known as you say when it's just a matter of my Cell Phone Ping the cell tower somewhere in Tel Aviv. At a certain time of day where a known corona virus patient was also picking tower. There's not a lot of precision there. You're still talking about dozens of square miles of territory and at a recommended distance transmission for this virus of six feet. What's not known? Or what other intelligence digital surveillance capabilities. The Security Agency might be bringing to bear. Its suspected that Israel has ways of sorting a lot of material. That's more precise than that. We don't know exactly what they're using so All by itself it's low resolution tool but maybe something else from the Security State toolkit is enhancing the image. That's right there's been other reporting including by the New York Times that the government is bringing to bear other more sophisticated intelligence apparatus. Here you mentioned concern from privacy advocates does their voice matter in Israel in March of twenty twenty are. They drowned out by other voices. Well there's so much going on here not just the pandemic but also an ongoing political crisis where Israelis are beginning to question some very long held beliefs about the soundness of their democracy. I think as in countries all over the world prime minister. Benjamin Netanyahu here is pushing the boundaries of government power. Is He addresses this crisis. Some of those concerns seem to have as much to do with endangered political power as they do responding to the pandemic for example his handpicked Justice Minister early on in the crisis cancelled pretty much all judicial proceedings in the country. Two days before Netanyahu's own trial on corruption was scheduled to begin. I don't think many people here thought it was a coincidence. It is kind of hard now to imagine Normally function court system. Nothing else is operating as normal plenty of democracy advocates. Feel like it's just one of Midi our grabs that he has instituted in the name of fighting the corona virus including the restrictions on parliamentary activity. That serve his 'cause well now that his faction no longer has the majority and there's a lot of concern that He's willing to go a lot further. He's desperate to hang onto power. He's proven willing to incite against the justice system against the Arab minority against anyone who opposes his ability to maintain power as he flips. Forward as sort of the essential person the only one as his supporters will say who can help Israel get through this pandemic so you have an authoritarian leaning prime minister struggling for power and his own personal liberty as a matter of fact neutering the parliament historian. Yuval Noah. Harari has said that's just tantamount dictatorship just today former president of the Israeli Supreme Court said that the speaker of the Knesset refusal to adhere to a High Court ruling that he must allow vote. That would likely take. His own job is rocking the foundations of democracy in Israel. It's hard to overstate the triple sense of crisis in this country. I think Israelis are wondering exactly how they're going to get out of this.
"yuval" Discussed on The Frame
"Welcome back to the frame John Horn Yuval. Sharon is used to getting some pretty baffled looks when he tries to explain the work of his opera company which is called the industry. Sharon's hopscotch for example took place inside cars driving around L. A. In invisible cities people listen to his opera on headphones as they move through. La's Union station. Sharon's latest piece is called sweet land. It's a collaborative air opera about colonialism. And displacement is set in the La State historic park which is just north of downtown in sweetland opera is used to challenge and dismantle some myths about America's origins. Here's Yuval Sharon. I have been speaking a lot recently about opera. This country being a remaining colonialist art form because so much of opera that we see in this country is the German French Italian repertoire in those languages telling those stories and here we are in America Retelling the stories over and over again and it seems like especially in our times now when there is so much to talk about and there is such a need for artists to be speaking about the kind of things that that we've taken on with this project and so much more. It seems strange to go into the privileged sphere of an Opera House and hear a story about nineteenth century. Italy There's something about that that feels so escapist And feels like it's a. It's trying to pretend like the situation out on the street in our daily lives. is not as dire as it really is So I think that that was for me. A real push to try and create a piece like like sweet land and one of the most important aspects of it was creating the conditions for collaboration To really flow something that would be not another iteration of a kind of hierarchical leadership But the idea that a more horizontal consensus based process would be something that I could offer a kind of antidote to some of the problems that we're talking about before we talk about the story and the music I wanna ask you about the venue it said in the La State historic park and this was native land. It was home to the San Gabriel Band of mission Indians then. It was the site of the Southern Pacific Transportation Companies River Station where migrants from around the world would disembark trains Ryan and now it said against the skyline of downtown Los Angeles next to a metro track next to the one ten freeway. There's like a little wine store across the street. It's got so much history. Why was it a good place for you to set the story to me when we were conceiving of this project we were thinking about the right site for where this this piece should take place and of course we started thinking about things like warehouses or alternative spaces but but you know still interior spaces and I was hearing from my collaborators over and over again how much The relationship to land with such a crucial aspect of what they wanted to explore with this piece and when it comes to that relationship with land it seemed to me that one of the one of the one of the places that that really hold so much of. La's cultural history and meaning. Is that sliver of land? That is now the state historic park. you mentioned it's a couple of its iterations but it had so many others for a long time. It was considered a Brownfield as if Meaning that they didn't think that anything could grow on it anymore because of how terribly it was maintained during industrialization during the railroad era So so thinking that. And it wasn't until Lauren. Bon came up with not a cornfield project. This really bold experiment in kind of replanting The land showing it's continuous fertility Before that people sort of abandoned it and thinking that that was the most important tongue village that it was the site of this crucial Spanish settlement that it was this a flood plain all of those things for a while were buried under layers of industrialization and thanks to Lauren and th thanks now to the park. It has It has this new life to it but those layers Still struggle to come out those voices that are still part of the archaeology that layering effect. That's in the land Still has a lot of voices that have been suppressed and a big part of what the opera was about was not to pinpoint any one particular language or one particular story to lift up but instead to think about and to invite the audience to contemplate Those stories that are in the land that were on. We're talking with Yuval Sharoni about the new opera sweet land. I WANNA play a clip of the music and some of the Libretto from your opera..
Yuval Sharon's Not-So-'Sweet Land'
"Sharon is used to getting some pretty baffled looks when he tries to explain the work of his opera company which is called the industry. Sharon's hopscotch for example took place inside cars driving around L. A. In invisible cities people listen to his opera on headphones as they move through. La's Union station. Sharon's latest piece is called sweet land. It's a collaborative air opera about colonialism. And displacement is set in the La State historic park which is just north of downtown in sweetland opera is used to challenge and dismantle some myths about America's origins. Here's Yuval Sharon. I have been speaking a lot recently about opera. This country being a remaining colonialist art form because so much of opera that we see in this country is the German French Italian repertoire in those languages telling those stories and here we are in America Retelling the stories over and over again and it seems like especially in our times now when there is so much to talk about and there is such a need for artists to be speaking about the kind of things that that we've taken on with this project and so much more. It seems strange to go into the privileged sphere of an Opera House and hear a story about nineteenth century. Italy There's something about that that feels so escapist And feels like it's a. It's trying to pretend like the situation out on the street in our daily lives. is not as dire as it really is So I think that that was for me. A real push to try and create a piece like like sweet land and one of the most important aspects of it was creating the conditions for collaboration To really flow something that would be not another iteration of a kind of hierarchical leadership But the idea that a more horizontal consensus based process would be something that I could offer a kind of antidote to some of the problems that we're talking about before we talk about the story and the music I wanna ask you about the venue it said in the La State historic park and this was native land. It was home to the San Gabriel Band of mission Indians then. It was the site of the Southern Pacific Transportation Companies River Station where migrants from around the world would disembark trains Ryan and now it said against the skyline of downtown Los Angeles next to a metro track next to the one ten freeway. There's like a little wine store across the street. It's got so much history. Why was it a good place for you to set the story to me when we were conceiving of this project we were thinking about the right site for where this this piece should take place and of course we started thinking about things like warehouses or alternative spaces but but you know still interior spaces and I was hearing from my collaborators over and over again how much The relationship to land with such a crucial aspect of what they wanted to explore with this piece and when it comes to that relationship with land it seemed to me that one of the one of the one of the places that that really hold so much of. La's cultural history and meaning. Is that sliver of land? That is now the state historic park. you mentioned it's a couple of its iterations but it had so many others for a long time. It was considered a Brownfield as if Meaning that they didn't think that anything could grow on it anymore because of how terribly it was maintained during industrialization during the railroad era So so thinking that. And it wasn't until Lauren. Bon came up with not a cornfield project. This really bold experiment in kind of replanting The land showing it's continuous fertility Before that people sort of abandoned it and thinking that that was the most important tongue village that it was the site of this crucial Spanish settlement that it was this a flood plain all of those things for a while were buried under layers of industrialization and thanks to Lauren and th thanks now to the park. It has It has this new life to it but those layers Still struggle to come out those voices that are still part of the archaeology that layering effect. That's in the land Still has a lot of voices that have been suppressed and a big part of what the opera was about was not to pinpoint any one particular language or one particular story to lift up but instead to think about and to invite the audience to contemplate Those stories that are in the land that were
Biden and Sanders brace for one-on-one battle in new phase of Democratic race
"To the fray mom. John Horn the race to be the Democratic nominee for president is basically down to two candidates now Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders after Elizabeth. Warren dropped out today. Warren and former candidate Pete. Buddha judge attracted a good amount of support from Hollywood. So where do all those donors and their money go now? Ted Johnson has been covering all this for deadline dot com as its Washington. Dc correspondent Ted. Welcome back to the show. Thanks for having me so. A lot has changed in the candidate landscape since we last talked Pete. Buddha judge had the support of big names like Lee Daniels and Seth McFarland since dropping out Buddha judge endorsed Biden have some of his supporters followed. Yes some of the fundraisers have committed to Joe Biden's campaign actually did fairly quickly after people to judge endorsed Biden. And I'm talking about names that are really household. Names former executive and NBC universal a fundraising consultant. People like Lee Daniels in Seth Macfarlane. They actually hosted a fundraiser for people to judge they haven't said where they're GONNA go. Seth Macfarlane is. I actually tweeted out. The fact that in the last cycle he endorsed Bernie Sanders. So perhaps he's weighing that decision whether to go for by her whether a Gopher Sanders so I think people are still still may be a little bit on the fence even though there has been this definite movement toward Joe Biden's campaign. Let's talk more about that. There was a big fundraiser. Last night hosted by former paramount pictures head Sherry Lansing and I think a lot of the momentum hinges on his performance on Super Tuesday. You wrote in deadline that I think at one point eighty people were expected. It turned out to be a whole lot more than that. What happened. Well Yeah Actually. I talked to Sherry Lansing on Monday. And since then she continued to get phone calls for people interested in coming to the event and they finally had to cut it off. I think at about three hundred and fifty people. They just couldn't accommodate anymore to a certain extent. This isn't that surprising because Joe Biden occupies that moderate lane in. There aren't a lot of other options left so if you are not in favor of sanders you're probably naturally going to be looking at Joe Biden if you want to be engaged to this political cycle we're shaping up to have a Biden Bernie battle in Hollywood and we'll see how this plays out. It could be ended up being as as contentious and even nasty as it was back in two thousand and eight when you saw this huge division in Hollywood between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton if there were any lessons learned about that polarization that fight between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. How did the town eventually choose where? There's some conflicted feelings about working with people who might have supported another candidate. Yeah for some people. I think it took them a while. I'm Savan is actually a big name. He's a longtime donor to the Democratic Party. Big Media executive known often for mighty morphin power rangers but he was a figure that was very much behind Hillary Clinton. He appeared on the today show and it took a while to actually get behind Barack Obama. I think it took him until the fall to support Obama's candidacy so it could be even more difficult when you are considering a choice between Biden and Bernie because the division isn't so much behind these two different personalities as it is ideological this race has been set up as a race between the moderates and the left or the far left. And you didn't see that back in two thousand eight. We're talking with Ted Johnson at deadline dot com about Hollywood's take on the two remaining Democratic candidates Elizabeth. Warren has officially dropped out of the race. But she's not endorsing anybody yet. She has a lot of Hollywood support. People that Krissy teagan and buried Jenkins is there any indication yet of where her supporters might go again? I think that this is where people could definitely be on the fence. Between Biden and between Bernie Sanders. I was added warrant event in South Carolina last week with John Legend. And he was. I thought an extraordinarily effective spokesperson for her campaign. He hasn't said Who He's going to endorse yet but he actually would be Think a valuable endorsement for either campaign and he seemed to really kind of reflect. This idea that weren't tried to advance that. There was kind of middle ground between what Biden represented and what sanders represented and she She just had a news conference. Apparently I was wrong about that. That there really wasn't that that lane in this Democratic primary so we'll see what someone like John Legend how he comes out in supporting either. By Sander's there are some very big Hollywood players who have yet to say where their money is going to go to be no which way they're leaning. And how influential are they in? Where other money might go after they pick a candidate? Yes people like Sabban people like Steven Spielberg and Jeffrey Katzenberg. Heaven publicly said who they're backing. I would be awfully surprised if they went for Bernie Sanders Just because people like for example Jeffrey Katzenberg. He has contributed to multiple candidates in this race except for Sanders. So I I think that might be an indication right there. Some of these figures wanted to kind of sit out the primary process but their support can be influential. It has the bandwagon effect. It probably would have been more influential earlier in the primary because it kind of would have rallied the troops behind one of these more moderate candidates but it will matter to a fair degree especially in fundraising. Especially if someone like a Katzenberg or someone like a High Sabban not only host fundraisers but also get involved in some of the Super Pacs for these campaigns where they can raise a much greater sums of money in the millions as opposed to twenty eight hundred. There might be some people in the country who would say to themselves. Well if George Clooney supports this candidate. I'm going to support that candidate. Is that really the factor though the celebrity endorsement or is it more about the money and what the check writing ability can mean for these candidates. Well I think that it depends on what time in the process. There's not a whole lot of evidence that voters look to celebrities for who they are going to vote for. But what they can do is kind of help. Elevate a candidate in terms of attention. And that's extremely important during the primary process. Probably less important when we get into the general election when it's just two candidates facing other and that's where fundraising tends to become a bigger issue especially as we get closer and closer to
"yuval" Discussed on EconTalk
"To hurt the people in the near you at the same time you have this urge to show off and impress people and and to gain acclaim and fame and glory and money and etc. But we understand that we're on the dance floor We have a role to play. That role to play is a very powerful idea. Renaissance recently called the story of my life. And I think I see justice in there that we see ourselves as the hero of some great narrative and that that is often saves us and but often causes us to do things that not so not so You know kind and Get might be better to think of ourselves. As being part of an ensemble a a role. That's not the starring role a role. That's maybe cooperative a role that's ties people together a role that listens to what the other percents to say. Rather than trying to think of what you want to say next. And I think that That combination of what is your role in life. What is the proper thing to do in this circumstance and It isn't all about. You is really a useful way to think about life. Generally forget about institutions Which in the state of America and the populist versus whatever just that if you want to be a productive and and kind person and have a good life you got to pay attention to this. Yeah I think that's right. It's it's very basic in a sense of course but It's enormously important to having flourishing life in a flourishing society. I think it can help to see that through the Lens of institutions because that helps us see how this becomes a big problem. Not just a challenge for US individually in our lives but a problem for society a problem for people around us we care about but ultimately this is about understanding that we That that we have a role to play in the flourishing of a larger hole here It's a very basic point is a very familiar point. And it's not something we've forgotten entirely but we need to see it more. We need to see it more often and rebalanced some of the ways we make decisions respond to some of the changes that we've had to live with and that's part of what it is to build institutions. I think Americans in general have been pretty good institution builders in times of crisis in times of need We've lost that knack a little bit and I think some of the the extraordinary Options we have now as I said before for just being effective loners Have allowed us to avoid being forced to see these things and if we see them I think it is within our reach to do something about to make things just a little better. You don't have anything against loners. Though against introverts by the way which is another thing we have these conversations. People say well. It's you know this thing about putting your phone. Well that's great for you. You're an extrovert. I'm an introvert. I like to look at my phone alone. I I've always described myself as a communitarian introvert. I believe that it is important to be part of larger Social and cultural groups. But I don't find it easy and you know that sometimes you just have to see the importance of things that you don't find easy. So yeah I I. I have nothing against introverts. I am one myself but I think we have to see that. We're not alone here as you say I guess that has been Yuval Levin. His book is a time to build. You've all thanks for being part of ECON TALK..
"yuval" Discussed on EconTalk
"My guest is author political scientist. Yuval Levin he is director of Social Cultural and constitutional studies at the American Enterprise Institute. He is editor of National Affairs. His latest book just the subject of today's conversation is a time to build. This is his third appearance on E. Kentucky was last here in July of two thousand sixteen. I'll welcome back to e contact. Thanks very much for having me. Your book is Really a deep deep look at what is troubling about America today. And it's probably the first story I've heard I narrative of what's wrong. That actually spoke deeply to me as a possible explanation for why feel the way I do about the state of America. And we're going to get to that. I WanNa let you tell that story yourself I Which is you suggest. We've lost trust in our institutions Let's start with what you mean by an institution. And then we'll talk about what evidence we have for that loss trust. Yeah well obviously. The terminal is not a simple thing to define such a fundamental thing is inherently going to be difficult to frame. And if you look at the academic literature on institutions there are just a vast number of different definitions the political scientist you. Clo- twenty years ago wrote a book where he actually tried to go through these different definitions and he stopped when he reached one hundred definitions But ultimately a lot of them do fall into a few groups and I would say I define institutions as the forms of our common life the structures the shapes of the things we do together so that ultimately what institutions do is allow us to be more than just clumps of individuals but really holds that are directed to purposes and that are structured in ways that enable us to achieve those purposes so institutions are very obviously institutions a company or a Civic Association A school legislature these clearly institutions so institutions are a little harder to define as such. But they're they're they're central institutions. The family is the first and foremost institution of any society. The institution of marriage a profession as an institution. They're all ways. That form are common action in ways that make it more effective and they're part of you could argue. They're part of what we call sometimes civil society They're typically emergent. They're not designed by from from the top down so I I liked distinguishing between say the New York Times which is an institution some sense of the word you know we might call it. What such an institution. But at the same time I think talking about the media you say or the way we gain information as an institution is I think for me is more useful way to think about it once you do that. Of course it's much harder to find But I like your point about. It's a way that we work together voluntarily. Typically at their involuntary aspects of every one of these but what. You emphasize are the norms and informal rules in these institutions. Develop over time Why why do you argue that we've Lost Trust? What's what's the evidence for that. Well the evidence for loss of trust is just immense In a simple sense if you measure people's trust in institutions by asking them about it As Gallup is done in regular way since the early nineteen seventies you find a dramatic loss of public confidence in almost all of our major republicans. Where in the early seventies majorities of Americans expressed confidence in our political institutions in our major professional institutions in big corporations and banks in the healthcare system in all of those cases. Now we've seen a dramatic decline institutions Entrust institutions now. There are a number of ways to read those numbers in one sense. American confidence in institutions in the middle of the twentieth century was exceptionally high. And we should see that. That period was not a norm in American life. It's still matters that we fall in from that high and we've lived through the experience of having our institution of conference institutions collapsed that way But it is important to see that Americans have not always been a people who are confident in the institutions of their society. I think if you'd looked in on the America of the nineteen th century almost any point in the nineteenth century. You probably would have found fairly low confidence in institutions in a society that was undergoing immense dynamic. Change huge waves of immigration. The kinds of things. We're living through now but that said there's no question that we have been losing confidence lately and that the loss has been accelerating and has been dramatic and the book really tries to think through why that would be what that has to do with the larger kinds of social problems that were confronting American Life. And it's interesting I asked you about trust. I think that's already use a lot in the book but You Substituted the word confidence. They're slightly different And I would suggest that they're both problems That both confidence and trust is gone down. Obviously when you've lost trust you lose competence We used to rely on Expertise and decision makers who have power to some degree. They would do the right thing. We trust in them that they would do the right thing and then we were confident that they were so. We've both lost trust right. They'll do the right thing and we're no longer confident that they will do the right thing. Trust trust is a useful way to think about our attitude towards institutions because it forces us to ask what does it really mean to trust and institution given this sort of definition. I've offered what I think. Institution is an arrogant book. Is that we trust and institution when we think that it forms trustworthy people institution organizes common action and in the process it also creates a kind of ethic a way that people do what they do together and that ethic is not just about performing a function it's not just about teaching children or or enforcing the law or providing a good or service. It's about doing it in a certain way. And that way is what builds our trust so that we think that the people who are involved in this school have an ethic that takes the education of my children and their safety and happiness. Seriously or we think that these political institutions seem to create public officials who are trustworthy and how they do their work. And it's that formation of trustworthy people that leads us to have trust in institutions. I think our loss of trust in institutions is a loss of the sense that that is what our major institutions do that they form trustworthy people and that explains some of the exceptions to the military for example is the one major national institution in which we have more trust now than we did forty years ago and I don't think that's just because we think the military protects our country from its enemies. Well it does do that but I think it's. It has a lot to do with the fact that we think the military forms men and women who are better than they were when they came in and who live by certain ethic believe in certain ideals We take the military seriously that way and it's become harder to do that with some of our other institutions but I think there's an additional point making the book that that's a little more deeply to me a little more clearly which is It's not just that the that the people in these institutions trustworthy and Some examples would be a military leaders. university professors journalists. My doctor it's not just the institution malls them in a trustworthy way and and I should add that that word you use a lot. Molds people It forms them. It's that it molds and forms them in ways that are consistent with what I perceive as the goal of the institution or the achievement that the university's a the institutions able to do. And it's it's a challenge for me as a fan of emergent order to talk about this because we don't always have the vocabulary to do this so our institutions are designed so take the media's an example the media's not designed to be truth seekers that's not there's nobody overseeing it there's nobody in charge of it but it has come through time perhaps overly romanticized has come to be seen as a place that stab at an institution an organization a set of organizations accused me set of organizations that work at informing me and it has a set of ethics for its participants that are consistent with that mission now there may literally be a mission statement or hippocratic oath in the case of medicine of you not doing any harm but most of these norms and ethics are what what Smith would cement through call. Vague and indeterminate. They're not closely specified. But I watch and acted on by people in these organizations these institutions and when I see a disconnect between their behavior and what I perceive as the mission it's jarring and that's one of the first things I should say that your book really brought home for me like white lie find the time. We're in these times so troubling so chaotic. Why don't they like the the Earth shifted beneath my feet and gave me a way to see that vocabulary and a framework and this is just the first part of it. It's not so complex and just want to go slowly out because I think it's so interesting but versus to notice that. Hey these people are not doing what I thought their job was. And when you see that to take an example if you see a journalist Promoting himself or herself on twitter to the degradation of their role. As truth. Seeker. I find that weird. Of course I'm sixty five years old may for twenty five year old. It's like no big deal and and normal but for me it is A. It's a breakdown of of something similarly doctor who prescribes a drug that is provided by a pharmaceutical company. That takes them on a summer vacation under the guise of conference depth bothers me. I understand it but it bothers me so I think it's not just that the people don't act in a trustworthy way like there's something devious about them. It's it's that they're acting in a way. That doesn't conform to what I understood to be the goal of that said of of organizations. Yeah there's a lot there was quite wonderful I I would say I think this gets it. Just read your book. You've read it for weeks. Probably well yeah. Weeks is one way to put. I think that really gets at a core point of the book which can be very challenging to articulate which for me is a kind of Aristoteles point about form about structure And so I I lean on terms like mold which I think is a big part of what institutions do we pour ourselves into them and they give us a certain shape. and form use the term conform. Which I think is one one of those wonderful form. Words conform reform deform transform. These words are related to each other in ways that really tell us something and what institutions do in their functioning. Well is they give us a certain form. That's related to their purpose. And so that means that there is such a thing in the world as say an accountant. That's a certain human type. And it's a person of whom we have certain expectations there are defined by our understanding of what the profession is and what its institutions are in. Do or a lawyer or a doctor or a journalist or a parent or a neighbor in our community. These things are our expectations of them are shaped by the nature of the institution and by its purpose and its ethic and when people behave in ways that don't conform to those expectations. It is as you say very jarring it strikes assists. Something's wrong and in some way. The institution has failed to form. That person Through an ethic we can take seriously. I think one of the things that has happened in our time. That's led to this collapse of trust in institutions has to do with failures of formation. So there's there's a simple way that that can happen and that isn't at all distinct to our time which is just institutional corruption sometimes institutions. Tell us that they are that they make these people trustworthy but in fact they're just protecting misbehavior. So when a bank chiefs customers when a priest abuses a child this is corruption. It's abuse of power. And it is certainly a failure..
"yuval" Discussed on The Ezra Klein Show
"Today is Yuval Lavigne. He is a director at the American Enterprise Institute of Their Social Cultural and constitutional studies program. He is a founding editor of the conservative journal National Affairs and he's the author of the the new book a time to build if you listen to the Nathan Robinson episode on Socialism. Just a couple days ago. Which I encourage you to do if you haven't you heard there a lot of discussion about the ways in which which socialism is on the one hand ideology a program for you might rebel to society but in a more direct way for a lot of people who adhere to it it is an ethic a mindset even temperament and I've become very interested in the ways in which things that we call it? The allergies are often ethics or temperament's things that we think temperament might be an ideology but sometimes those do things are pulled apart one of the reasons I want. If you've on the show is he's the best articulated I think right now of what you might call the conservative mindset. The conservative ethic or temperament went and that is a very different thing and increasingly different thing as we talk about in this Conversation from the conservative movement itself the Conservative ideology and so I think trying to understand how these two things have diverged the ways in which they are the same or different very important part of understanding what has happened and is happening. In American politics also what conservatism can look like versus what it does look like. But just as importantly in the other direction why conservatism doesn't look like the thing that its adherents often claim. It looks like or claim that it is the thing here is your book is very much about institutions by book is very much about institutions and it's very interesting interplay of our respective diagnoses no seas and what I would call a little bit more my pessimism than his in here. interestingly Yuval the conservative is I think much more confident about the ability of of actors here to overcome what I think is market incentives than I am I see the Kinda context in which these institutions are operating some cases a capitalistic context extent other cases of political context as much more binding and I think he is a more optimistic view of that and and the tension in that part of the conversation is I think pretty illuminating pretty helpful. A couple of quick things before we jump into the discussion itself My book speaking of which why were polarized is very much available for preorder. Do preorder. There's GonNa be a lot of cool stuff coming up on the show and it is going to be a lot easier to follow if you actually have the book and then the other thing there is we have the tour coming up and the first leg of the tour is in BC and Assaf and New York and Boston and Portland and Seattle Yes these are coastal cities that is not going to be the entire tour but for now The first bit of it is built around doing media media. But I've got great interlocutors in these cities. Jamal Bui Thanh codes and a sail. Dave Eggers a lot of great people from the past of the show. Larry LESSIG and so I hope you guys are gonNA come out. You can see all the tour dates at why were polarized dot com. We'll put a link in the show notes here but again you can preorder or find all the tour dates at why. WE'RE POLARIZED DOT COM. All it said as always is my email is as recon show at. Vox Dot Com and here is Yuval Levin you beloved welcomed by guest. Thanks very much for having me. Back to the PUCK as you've been on one before once before. Yeah it's a triumphant return return so I wanted to begin somewhere that you be in the book which is with what you call a conservative premise. You read that. Human beings are born as crooked creatures prone to waywardness in that we therefore always require moral and social formation and at such formation is what our institutions are for. Can You you talk about just that premise. In what makes it conservative. Yeah you know. I think in some way. That premise has been the premise of a lot of the work. That I've done over the years and of of several books now in different ways from different angles I would say it's one of the ways of thinking about the distinction between left and right if you WANNA take the ideological logical or Philosophical Distinction seriously which sometimes is a good idea and sometimes isn't but conservatives tend to start from the premise that human beings are fallen creatures whether in religious terms literally or simply that we start out imperfect and need to be formed before we can be free so that the purpose Savar institutions and of our politics and culture is not so much to liberate us from various forces that are trying to oppress us but to form us into two men and women who are capable of being free citizens. I think people on the left often start with the sense. That human beings are born just fine but society is structured in a way that that creates power relations that are unjust and that allowed the strong to oppress the weak and what we require of our politics. Instead is a liberation nation from some of those kinds of power relations so that ultimately people have to be liberated in order to be free rather than formed. In order to be free those are both true to an extent Danton a lot of the Times. Our politics is an argument. Between which of these ways of thinking about what the purpose of our institutions in our political life is Should prevail but you know it means that oftentimes people on the left look at political issues social and cultural issues as circumstances dances where you have an oppressor and oppressed conservatives. Tend to look at the same issues. As consisting of a party of civilization and the Party of Barbarism mm-hmm and a lot of the disagreements and disputes that are most heated in our politics are basically one side arguing. One question the other side arguing another question and and taking the opposition to be making a case for barbarism or four pression When in fact the premises are very different and the issues could be better understood and maybe the two sides could understand each other better if they saw a bit more of where they were coming from? When you say conservatives who you're talking about because when the conservative conservative temperament is described in this way I find a lot to agree within it and then I look out and people who self identify as conservative have ninety percent approval for among the most wayward and prone to send individual? I've seen on the public stage ever and so there's this dimension where the reticence in rectitude the and and like intense emphasis on personal responsibility and behavior that seems to define what people call the conservative temperament and then where the people who define themselves as conservatives have gone seem quite divergent absolutely i. I agree with that first of all and I think that there is an incoherence in the politics of the right in this period that leads to a lot of problems but I do think that there is such a thing as the right and the left generally speaking in our politics that do make some sense where the right begins from the understanding that there is a lot in our in our society that needs to be protected and guarded and And that a lot of the challenge of politics is to protect the good we have. The left begins from the premise. There is a lot that needs to be changed in overturned and the purpose of politics. Politics is to change in overturn and I do think that. Even in the trump era there is still this basic distinction where the right is trying to conserve something. Sometimes sometimes it is to my taste too much of a nostalgic conservation trust to preserve the way of life of the middle of the twentieth century rather than the institutions and principles principles and ideals that are to define American life but it is recognizably. The right and it is fighting a recognizable left. That is trying to who revolutionized our way of life in some meaningful way. Not Trump turns all this over over and over and over. There's no doubt about that. Trump is not a conservative in any way that I can imagine and I am one of those people on the right. WHO's very unhappy that Donald Trump is the leader of the Republican Party and You know I think it's a disaster for conservatives but that doesn't mean that there's no such thing as as a coherent recognizable right and left in American political life the Left Wing Intellectual Corey Robin Birth. This book the reactionary mind signed and he made a cut in that that I think is interesting for this discussion. which is he argues it? Conservatism going back. To Burke. is a reactionary phenomenon. where it is? He's true that is trying to preserve something but it is trying to preserve its own power. And I think you just without a second ago that you can imagine a conservatism. That is about trying to preserve certain institutions institutions and the way they're structured you know on one level maybe markets on another universities or religion or the family and their threads of that. And then there's a conservatism. That is trying to protect or retain existing power arrangements which can use a lot of the same language but that I would certainly understand as much more more simply one side of a power struggle than something that is trying to preserve anything that has Like a deep rudeness in in institutions values or forms. uh-huh yeah I think that book is very badly misguided about the the history the intellectual history political history of the right and the nature of the right important important ways and the simplest sense in which I disagree with it is that I don't think that even people who are engaged in power struggle understand themselves explicitly Isley to be engaged in a power struggle. I think that they're the ways that people approach politics in our society generally do consist of different understandings. News of what would be good for the whole of society and that there is really a disagreement about whether what would be good should begin from preserving what is good about our inheritance. It's and building on it or should begin from overturning. What is bad about our inheritance and recreating social order and structure and organization? I think think that is the way in which left and right have tended to understand themselves so that looking at it as simply a power struggle. Just isn't going to tell you very much about the people's actual motivations and the ways in which they relate to their actions. I I also think beyond that that this very peculiar way to think about the intellectual tradition addition of the right to think about burke to think about intellectual conservatism. Although as I say there certainly are strands political conservatism and in the political right in the West in general that have been much more about preserving a social order in terms of a kind of nostalgia understanding of the good life that the right always has to fight with and similarly left has its own problems with certain kinds of revolutionary ways of thinking about politics the can be quite destructive so obviously there are forms of both I left and right there are their darkest selves. But I think it's important to understand people's motivations in the terms in which they themselves see them and it. It does seem to me that there is a an honorable form of both left and right and that there is therefore an honorable form of partisan politics. That actually has a real existence in our society society even at times. That can't help but be very disappointing times to any citizen like the time we're living in now help me make the cut though between those different types of conservative. So you've read my book and you know that. This sort of blowing chapter about demographic reaction and I quote people like Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham and rush limbaugh and others Bill O'Reilly making very explicit explicit arguments that what is happening is a.
Biometric Devices May Eventually Remove All Sense Of Privacy
"yuval" Discussed on Ideas
"Now aim to overcome <hes> old age and even death itself and having raised humanity above the beastly level of survival struggles we will now aim to upgrade humans into God's and turn Homo Sapiens into Homo deals else? Yuval Harari is more than a public intellectual. You could say he's a global.
"yuval" Discussed on Tech & Society with Mark Zuckerberg
"Hey, everyone this year. I'm doing a series of public discussions on the future of the internet and society and some of the big issues around that. And today, I'm here with Yuval Noah Harari, a great historian and bestselling author of a number of books. His first book sapiens, a brief history of humankind. Chronicled and didn't analysis going from the early days of hunter gatherer society to now how our civilization has organized and your next to books the homo day, a brief history of tomorrow in Twenty-one lessons for the twenty th century, actually, tackle important issues of technology and the future. And and that's a I think a lot of what we'll talk about today. But you know, most historians, you know, only t tackle and and an analyze the past. But you know, but a lot of the work that you've done has had a really interesting insights. And raised important questions for the future. So I'm really glad to have an opportunity to to talk with you today. So you've all thank you for joining for this conversation. Yeah. Heavy it'll be here. I think that if he story ins, and philosophers cannot engage with the Coen questions of the -nology in the future of humanity. The we aren't doing jobs on not just supposed to chronicle events, you know, centuries ago, all the people that lived in the past dead. They don't care. The question is what happens to us and the the people in the future. Yeah. All right. So all the questions that you've outlined where where should we start here? I mean, I think one of the big topics that we've talked about is around, you know, this dual ISM around whether with all of technology and progress that has been made are people coming together. And are we becoming more unified or? Is is our world becoming more fragmented and some curious to to start off by how you're thinking about that. And I mean, that's probably a big area. We could price spent most of the time on on that topic. Yeah. I mean, if you look at the long span of history, then it's obvious humanities becoming more and more connected. If thousands of years ago plant earth was actually a galaxy of a lot of isolated worlds with almost no connection between them so gradually people came together and became more and more connected until today when the entire world for the first time is a single historical economic and cultural units, but connectivity doesn't necessarily mean. Harmony the people we fight most often our own family members, and neighbors and friends. So it's really a question of are we talking about connecting people? Or are we talking about harmonising people? Connecting people can lead to a lot of conflicts. And when you look at the world today, you see this our team. For example, in in the in the Orion vise of woes, which we talked about earlier when when we met. Yeah. Which for me is something that I just can't figure out what is happening because you have all these new connecting technology and the internet and virtual realities and social networks, and then the most one of the top political issues becomes building walls and not just, you know, simul walls of firewalls building stone walls, like the most stone age technology is suddenly the most advanced technology, so one how to make sense of this world, which is more connected than ever. But at the same time is building more walls than ever before. Yeah. Well, I think one of the interesting questions is around whether there's actually so much of a conflict between these ideas of people becoming more connected and. This fragmentation that you that you talk about one of the things that it seems to me is that we
"yuval" Discussed on Malicious Life
"Founded his software company iris all on his own addicted prior at its peak iris was a thriving organization employing dozens of workers in more recent years, though, major debt and in sufficient sales threaten to company with bankruptcy and forced to lay off his employees's and mass by November of nineteen eighty-seven iris was down to just three employee's total, including offer himself often became so desperate that he contemplated taking out a second mortgage on his house before friends and family stepped into convince him how foolish move that would have been wasn't as natural technology enthusiasts as Yuval and growing up in the seventies. He'd studied violin and continued that track through college knowing the financial pitfalls of music career decided he'd do a major in math as all Israelis. Of a given age are went to the Israeli defence forces after school. And while there was tasked with the production of statistical reports for military use the creation of these reports was done at the time with the help of mainframe computers coming to the times leveraging the technical acumen he'd build up while enlisted and abandoning career as a professional violinist at age twenty eight founded iris irises primary product fittingly enough was a software designed for.
"yuval" Discussed on On Point with Tom Ashbrook | Podcasts
"He's also author of the worldwide bestsellers sapiens a brief history of humankind and homo Deos a brief history of tomorrow. They've been translated into more than forty. Five languages sold more than twelve million copies likely the same thing's going to happen to his latest book which is out just this week. It's called Twenty-one lessons for the twenty first century. There's an excerpt at one point, radio dot org, Yuval Harari, welcome back to on point at Omegna. It's to be Oregon. It's very good to have you. First of all, you've written about the past you've written about the future, but I just want to ask you overall arching question about how you. View are present or our media present. Are you an optimist about it or pessimist? Well, I think we can summarize you manatees conditioning in three simple statements, things are better than ever. Things are quite bad and things can get much much worse, whether this Mexican optimist or pessimist, it's it's up to you. But but things are better than they have been are quite bad and things can get worse. Makes it sound like all of the above? Yes, I mean, but maybe the most important statement is the first one that things are still bitter than they ever were before, which means that you monitor can do things to improve the situation. If you think about our past achievements, maybe our biggest achievement ever has been to overcome famine which has been the greatest enemy of humankind. Since the beginning of history for most of history, most humans lived on the brink of starvation. But today more people die from obesity than from starvation. More people die from eating too much than from eating too little, which is actually an amazing achievement. And we have almost completely abolished natural famine from the world's natural famine is famine caused by natural disasters like floods and droughts and so forth. There are still a lot of people starving, but this is just political, famine. If people today starve to death and there are people starving to death. It is only because some government or politician wants them to starve to death in technological economic terms. There is no problem for the first time in history of feeding everybody, right? So this is along the lines of what Steven pinker wrote about right in his in his book enlightenment. Now that he says, we should be optimistic about how far humanity has come insist that our perceptions are wrong on. Yes, we should. I am not sure if we should be optimistic. We should be at least have gratitude and the knowledge are past chief moments. And this is also important in order in order to give us hope about the future. But we have a set of new and unprecedented challenges ahead of us. I would say the three most important, our nuclear war climate change and technological disruption. Even if we manage to prevent new. Nuclear Warren climate change it still almost certain that artificial intelligence and biotechnology will completely disrupt. Our job..
Beyoncé and Jay-Z announce "On the Run II" tour
"To be seen as an adult yeah and and um and then he doesn't really want to be asked about any thing about political about his dad i would assume so even though five yuval him on twitter he gets very political he's great yeah i'll a i get a kick out of his way to see fall from the democrats the republicans dole god's house yeah yeah well you know arnold is over and over and over his true this is true yeah you know i mean i can't be blind the apprentice care fathalla thing was my favorite i'll my gosh that was unbelievable that was out state were really quite key every johnny did you see them in person did you get a chance to see them no i did it was slim had so many people did have chemistry with each other like was it obvious an evidence kind of fun in there a couple of reviews that i read i guess these to have crazy chemistry i want a degree i view it if they were interacting grain i bet it shows unscreened they must sad i don't know what all the entourage highly send people thank you about that afterwards naval gotha publicists merrin jersey omega paul yep another preval says here this luckily from here yeah there were alive anywhere we're going to give those tickets we all week johnnie talked about last hour that beyond say announces on the run tour two with jay z and she's broken the internet and contain yourself she took to facebook to announce the tour lung center has been this was rumored a couple of weeks ago because something went up and then went down about an on the run to on the run tour apart two and it was the black and white clip that she posted with some behind the scenes home videos of beyond say and j gallivan teen about their place and um her announcement broke the website two and august eighth in minneapolis at us banks stadium tickets go on sale march nineteen wow yeah why will be sold out on march nine t pathetic 22nd interval that's what we're looking at so if you're a big big fair and you might want to check out if there's an early booking thing getting a member of the.
"yuval" Discussed on NewsRadio1620
"I love that question i mean i can tell you are in the thick of it in that uh that's a tough one in so many ways in a i think my answer is going to sound somewhat flippant but i think it's a it's a bolsa you got to have what i would call a marriage money summit between the three of you because just as i mentioned the last caller yuval got to get on the same page everybody can be working a different plan or else no plans gonna work and so that's the very first thing i will recommend can i'm guessing you would agree with that yeah and i my question would be for you from a psychological standpoint win you try that and you've got all these different parties with different motivation and one of those three is not playing ball right how do you manage through the that yeah well you know uh the flippant answers to say well you gotta learn to compromise that's a whole lot easier to say than it is to do but i think that the key to that can this won't surprise you is to make sure everybody feels understood in when somebody is not playing often times it because they they feel wounded they feel like they're of being manipulated they feel like they have been pushed out whatever it is and so you've gotta pull that person back into the game by helping them fuel understood and that really goes back to what we had in the previous segment and that is to reflect feelings for that person that is at the core of helping an individual feel like oh you get me you understand me and so when that persons plan if both have you can do that in that takes a lot of grace a lot of intention and a lot of intention aladi that allows you to really put yourself in their shoes so i think that's powerful less because the feelings are what are driving the beliefs about money absolutely be the habits yes it's all coming from a field how how you look at everything you begins on how you think until you think determines how you feel good stuff by folks we're gonna continue to take your calls on relationships marriage money dr less parrot best selling author big friend the days is part of our smart conference and our money and marriage event so hey give us a.