And for human equality. But the notice was very much at this moment. Enforces to confront challenges in our society that weve had trouble with in recent years. This is a time that makes us wonder how strong our institutions are going to prove to be. How we are going to rise to the challenge like this. I think you cant help but to see it as a time of crisis. Because it is a time of testing is also time for us to think about what americas strengths are and what were good at is a country and how we can build on that to confront these enormous problems. See 500 we get there. Our country has always tried to strike a balance between the dignity and equality of individuals in one hand and some form of strength of community on the other. Every free Society Faces that in our society think is in the past halfcentury really emphasize the individual. Yuval emphasize liberty and freedom. And also diversity. That is brought some enormous advances and benefits. But there is another side to the coin. And it can look like isolation. You look like alienation and loneliness. I think we have seen all of that in this 21st century. This has been an era that is been marked by some crisis. From 911 at the beginning of it to the financial crisis to now, a pandemic. And it has forced us to look to the sources of our strength. Invoice that drive us on one hand to think about her history and on the other she pushes to look at the future which are politics is not always very good at doing. So somebody like me was trying to look at the intersection of political theory and Public Policy, theory and practice around politics. This is really time to think about fundamentals and look for ways to draw strength from what is been good about our country to address the problems that is long had and still very much lives with. Peter in your book, you talk about the norm. How we ran an arm and what you consider to be the norm in this country. Yuval is a very important question. We look at them this perception of the norm, were looking at a moment that culturally very dominated by the baby boomers. In the generation of people who were in between, about 9046 in the early 1960s. These are still today though, often in their 70s and 60s. People are running our Core Institutions and in charge of our politics. And with president donald trump, was born 74 years ago this month, june 1946 pretty george w. Bush was born in july of 1946 and bill clinton in august of 1946 pretty rock obama was born in 1961. They are all boomers. The Life Experience that they have had to come is actually been pretty unusual version of america. In a market that came out of the Second World War very unified and having achieved something great by coming together and mobilization. The country was in normas confidence is institution. In his government and big business and big labor and working together to solve problems. And over the course of the 50 or 60 years since that kind of height, we have lived through fragmentation and diversification and i think a lot of that is been good critically people who have been on the margins sprinted and people who are alienated from that mainstream consensus. But it also meant that we have lost solidarity. The so defined postwar america. Now her politics are defined by the sense of loss. And defined by sense that the era of the baby boomers childhood was the norm and we have fallen from that. That era was not the norm. The dilettante america, any point in the 19th century, you would find a divided society with very little confidence in institutions pretty dealing with some economic and cultural forces that are very much like we are saying now. Mass immigration, industrial issues, urbanization, our country has a lot of resources to draw on and thinking about how to deal with a moment like this. It is important not to misperceive the norm. 1950s, early 60s, america was very an unusual form of our society. We shouldnt simply take this is norm pretty we are sort of stuck in a place, regurgitating and reentry with boomers and they were young. Peter should be the idea. Yuval i dont think so. Its not about one moment in history. It should be at about Core Principles. How we treat each other. I think our ideals are written in the declaration of independence. The core fundamental beliefs that we are all created equal, that our government comes from that premise that as a result we have some freedom as individuals but we also are a strong united society. Those Core Principles along with the ideals laid out as forms of government, institutional design in our constitution can provide us and we do through date very kind of time and challenge. I think those kinds of ideals are what we should look to in a moment like this. Our politics cant be organized around returning to some golden age. Thanks for small, was on his wilderness people think it was. For many americans, it was a very hard from that. In any case, three does not go backwards question should be at a become strong future. Jimmy the conservative, means reaching to our principles and sing how we can apply in the ideals to changing circumstances. This matter politics should be striving to do. That means coming to terms with those circumstances. Understanding a country as it is in being at home in the 21st century america. And thinking, how can we be our best self in this time. But how we can return to some bygone golden age. I think the left and the right both, engage in nostalgia for midcentury american the consent the way of constructive politics. Peter going t read a little bit from your book, life in america is always Getting Better and worse at the same time. The resin conservatives both frequently, not only that the path to the mark of the dreams, but easy to see but also that our country was once on that very path is been thrown off course by the foolishness or wickedness of those on the side of the aisle. In the broader public meanwhile, fines and resulting political debates, little evidence of engagement with contemporary problems and few attractive solutions. Yuval that is the description of my frustration with the basic dynamics of the contemporary politics free to think you do see it in both parties. There is a way in which Republican Party often yearns for a social arrangement and cultural arrangement of the 1950s and early 60s and the democrats year for the economic arrangement of that time. But the fact is that america change from that. First of good reasons pretty with her. A liberalizations that opportunities for people who have been the emergence of our society and also the created options and choices and economic dynamism in place which we benefited from enormously they also did come at a cost of the event how we address that, you cannot just think about how we go back to normal or social order. It is not even what conservatives are to do pretty the question is how we apply our enduring ideals couldnt situation. I think we have spent too much of her time thinking about whose fault is that we fell from height rather than thinking about elite prepare for the future. Our Politics Today has remarkably little to say about the future of talk much about what america is going to need and 2040. That sounds impossibly far away. The 20 years from now is as close to us is that your 2000. Tennis exactly exactly what we should be thinking about her politics. Thinkers need to get ourselves out of the rut of nostalgia for midcentury american think as left and right in markets in general. But we want for the future and will be no need to be filled and to get there. Peter you involve himself as a conservative. Yuval love my work has been about that question. What does that mean. What the left right divide in american politics and free society is really about. To me it begins from base basic premises. Almost from an anthropology side. Human beings are born less than perfect. Ralph fallen her twisted her lofgren and formed we can be free in evolution is done by the court institutions where families in religion and community and education and ultimately politics and culture. Most institutions are capable to be valued and treasured and preserved. What we need to be a free society. Because again from the premise that that is very difficult to do, information is difficult. Want to preserve these institutions that are capable of it. I think people who describe themselves as progressives from the premise that we are actually born free. A lot of people rent free not living up to potential because they are being oppressed by institutions that impose on them an impressive status quo. There is some truth to both of these views. What you choose to emphasize runs very deep in your character and your sense of what politics is about. I think free Society Disney developed but it seems to be to ultimately the conservative view offers what we need most is what the sense of social order also enables justice. So i am a conservative. Peter our institutions to meet other in an ongoing way. Their flourishing company into institutions make us more responsible. But when theyre degraded, they failed to form us or the d form is to be cynical, selfindulgent or reckless. Reinforcing exactly the things that undermine free society. Yuval that book is really the nature of this social crisis. The fractured provoked republic, is more in broad terms about the history that is let us to the polarization that we are living within our society. In this new book, time to build think about the underpinnings of the social crisis devices that we know in connect each other and understand each other and was ourselves a part of all. Isolation, in the private lives of many people. It can lead people to up we always an enormous increase in suicide rate of recent years. I argument that is partly due to the weakening number institutions. The purpose of the institution is not to harm them, possible them, but to serve as a platform for them. They can stand on or elevate themselves. I think theres been this sort of deal d formation. From the media, academy, club people now think of the institutions they are part of as existing as platforms for themselves rather than as molds of our character not behavior. In some recovery of what they mean to be a part of an institution to be shaped by an institution. Its very important to her life. See that very powerfully to politics which has become so formative now where people run from congress basically to get a bigger social media following. [silence]. [silence]. Yuval we have come to a place where we think of a Political Institution as platforms for cultural performances. It is, people run for congress to get a blue checkmark next to the name on twitter. More than to enact legislation pretty they are trying to do good. The term to include society with deceit the world all six complaints fundamentally platform rule. Way to themselves in place where they can channel the outrage of the voters who got them there. They can perform really can stand as outsiders in common about congressmen than as insiders connect within congress. Obviously this been happening in the presidency as well. I think President Trump exilic isaac more than any president weve had to says that the presidencies the stage. It is a place to perform. The presidencies himself as an outsider. He spends a lot of time talking about the government. And complaining on twitter about things that the department of justice does rather than understanding of self as the ultimate insider nurses and with responsibility as defined by the role he plays. This ultimately argues that to recover something in the institutionalism, we have to each ask ourselves the question we know dennis anymore in politics. Given my rule here how should i behave. It goes well beyond politics. As number of congress or employee, as a pastor or congregant or neighbor, even that, how should i behave here. This may related our institutional role formative the way we behave in society in ways that might drive us to a greater sense of obligation and responsibility to one another rather than just thinking of ourselves as standing alone on a platform and acting out this kind of cultural rage. The logic is overtaken lumber for institutions and be ready back against such. Peter so technology is literal. Yuval ultimately assumes the role we wanted to bring the forces here run deeper than technology. Not at the whim of the social media or internet. Use them because thats what were looking for. I think the larger social trusses that weve been living through has been a function of time with liberalization, diversification greatest indian market for parking out before the middle of the 20th century, many of the social forces were telling people be more like everyone else. There were forces of conformity. Philbrick constricting too many people. And in our times, telling everybody to be themselves. Theres a lot of good to that but also care society part. I think we need to find balance. In push against those places where we lean too hard. Peter the great debates, auto Start Playing a quote from a book. The political lofgren often seem to represent genuinely distinct point of view. Our National Life almost by design, to bring to the servic , to divide them. Yuval it is a work of intellectual history and began is my dissertation at the university of chicago. Never appeared of years, developed into a general book. Look at the origins but in different ways have been the subject of my work. More broadly of the left and right to divide pretty and looking through the lens of the late 18th century debate between edmund burke and thomas paine. Edmund burke, the great irish born english politician sought to be one of the fathers of modern conservatism. Thomas paine and was born American Revolutionary war figure became very important figure making the case for the french revolution to the English Speaking world. They engage with each other. They had an argument as they are natural of social change. In overtime it would become between the left and right are politics. Anthropology, just how it is that the human being enters into the world. What we acquire to in order to flourish and be free. In both of these views, their liberal party they belong in a free society. The both believe in democracy, individual liberty. I believe in protecting the equal rights of all. But they differ fundamentally about what the free society is. Because of the different about the nature of the human person. The debate about how events good. It is still the right way to know the differences between the left and right there not factions in the each spaces on god. Their parties in the sense that they are divided by difference of opinion by what would be good for everybody. Society is large. It can invariably very divisive in a country. It is necessary, the way of framing in formulating the debate that we have the countries good. The differences between left and right revenue at the 18th century. Still relevant. Peter mature background that you came to this point of view. Yuval homonym born in israel. My family came to the u. S. When i was eight years old. I grew up here. Mostly in new jersey. I went to college and the American University in washington dc. It went to graduate school at the university of chicago. Anna came back to work the bush administration. Department of health and Human Services and then in the bush white house. Then i went into the world more my work is really been at the intersection on my Academic Work was about which is political theory and philosophy and what my work in Public Policy is been about which is political practice. So im now a scholar at the American Enterprise institute pretty and i started in 2009, and in some ways i try to connect theories and practices of politics to shed light on the other. As to how i came to my conservative views. This kind of a mystery. So what it has to do with influences around me growing up im sure. My father is a conservative but ultimately, it reaches to some mysterious level that would never fully understand about ourselves. They can about we just come to have fundamental is that we have is often a little bit mysterious. I am impressed by institutions that enable people to thrive. It means i am very impressed by the American Social order, the american constitutional system and i think we can draw a lot of our history. Peter or the non negotiables in our social compact. Yuval i think those are stated in the declaration of independence. We believe in human equality and dignity. Thats why people are the street now because we all saw on video a gross violation and abuse of the human person want to be treated as an equal was not. That is i think a nonnegotiable fact about americans. But our political inclination, we can differ a lot. We all believe that we are all created equal. We are all basic rights of the government should protect those rights. I think im thereon to relieve a lot of debate. How should government protect those rights. Questioner institutions look like and what would be most effective. With the basic ideals arisen in the charter of our society, the non negotiables in american politics. I think theyre true. Peter will good afternoon and welcome to book tv on cspan2. This is our monthly in depth program. Weve missed you last couple of months and we are glad to be alive again with author and scholar. He is the author of five books getting with tyranny and reason which came out in 2100 imagining the future, 2008. The great debate which we have discussed document in 13. The fractured republic, renewing americas social contract and the age of individualism, came out in 2017 and finally as this book at the time to build. From family and community, congress and the campus, help recommitting to our institutions can revise the american dream. We want you to participate in our conversation this afternoon. Well begin with the phone numbers. 202 7488200. This view them in the east and central time zones in violent if you have a question or comment for the doctor. 202 7488201 pretty you can also text any question or comment. Please include your first name and the city and state that you live in. So we can get that context. 202 7488903. We also have all of our social media sites, Instagrams Facebook twitter, at book tv is or handle and begin taking those calls in just a few minutes. Doctor, back to the great debate. What is been the lasting effect of the french revolution in france and in this country. Yuval is really one of thos