Author here on june 72020 what is the assessment of the United States . Thanks for having me thats a wonderful a broad question to open with its challenging one in a moment of crisis sets hard to deny a spring dominated by a Public Health crisis that is still very much with us we are facing now a social crisis as old as the country the struggle for racial equality and human equality but very much of this moment forcing us to confront challenges our society has had trouble with in recent years and makes us wonder how strong our institutions will prove to be how we will rise through a challenge like this you cannot help see it but it is a time of crisis but also to think of americas strengths what we are good at as a country and how we address the problems. Host how did we get here . Its a complicated question our country has always tried to strike a balance between the dignity and quality of the individual on the one hand and some form of strength of community on another our society in the past halfcentury has emphasized the individual, liberty , freedom and diversity and that has brought some enormous advantages and benefits but there is another side to the coin that can look like fragmentation and isolation and alienation and loneliness and we have seen all of that in the 21st century. And era marked by some crises from 9 11 to the financial crisis to now as a Pandemic Forces us to look to the source of our strength in ways on one hand to think about our history and push us to look to the future our politics are not always good at doing so for someone like me who tries to work at the intersection of Public Policy and theory around politics its time to think about fundamentals to look for ways to draw strength and address the problems weve had. Host in your book the fractured republic you talk about the norm have we ever had a norman what you consider that in this country . Thats a very important question because we live in a time now Something Like a misperception of the norm living in a moment culturally very dominated by the baby boomers those born between 1946 in the early sixties still today although still the seventies and sixties are those who are running the core institutions and in charge of politics even President Trump was born in 74 years ago this month president george w. Bush was born july 46 clinton born august 1946 barack obama born 61. They are all boomers and Life Experience they have had has been the unusual version of america that came out the Second World War very unified achieve being something great with mobilization with enormous confidence in its institution and governments big business working together to solve problems and over the course of the 50 and 60 years we have lived through fragmentation and diversification especially those on the margins and for people who were alienated to the mainstream consensus but we have lost that solidarity that defines postwar america and now it is to find by a sense of loss the era of the baby boomers childhood was the norm and we have fallen from that but it wasnt any point in the 19th century you would find a divided society with very little confidence in its institution dealing with some economic and cultural forces very much like what we are seeing now industrialization and urbanization our country has a lot of resources to john and its important not to misperceive the norm 19 fifties and early sixties america was a very unusual form and we shouldnt take it to be the norm but we are stuck in that place to regurgitate what they did. Should be the idea . Our ideals are not about one particular moment in history. They should be about Core Principles how we treat each other the core fundamental beliefs we are all created equal the government begins from the presence on the premise freedom with individuals but a strong and United Society those Core Principles with the ideals laid out constitutional design can provide is what we need the very different kinds of times and challenges those ideals are what we should look to our politics cant be organized by returning to the golden age is not as golden as people think for Many Americans it was far from that. And history doesnt go backwards now the question should be how do we become strong for the future . And for me as a conservative reaching to the principles how we can apply those ideals to changing circumstances that so we should be striving to do in coming to terms to understand to be home 21st Century America and how do this and this time not just return to a bygone golden age the left and the rights both have a nostalgia that gets in the way of constructive politics. Host reading from the fractured republic coming out in 2016 life in america is always Getting Better and worse at the same time liberals and conservatives both frequently and says not only the path to the america of their dreams is easy to see but also our country was once on the very path that has been thrown of course by the foolishness of those on the other side of the aisle. The broader public meanwhile finds the resulting political debates little evidence of real engagement with contemporary problems and few attractive solutions. Description of my frustration of the basic dynamics of contemporary politics you do see that both parties there is a way the party yearns for the social and cultural arrangements of the 19 fifties and early sixties america change for good reason we went through liberalization opening up opportunities and that created options and choices in ways we have benefited from enormously and also at a cost thinking how we address that cost that we can go back to an earlier social order the question is how do we apply the ideals to a new situation . We spend too much time thinking about whose fault it is we fell from a height rather than how do we prepare for the future . Politics from today has remarkably little to say about the future. We dont talk about what america will need in 2040. That sounds impossible its as close to us as the year 2000 and exactly what we should be thinking about. There is a need to get ourselves out of the rut of nostalgia for midCentury America and has left and right what we want for the future and what we have to build to get their. Host you identify as a conservative. What does that mean to you . I am. A lot of my work has been about the question of what that means or that left right divide and what that is about so for me and begins of the basic premise. My conservatism starts human beings are born less than perfect, fallen, broken and we have to be formed before we can be freed then by the chorus dictations of Society Religion education, ultimately by politics so those institutions that are capable they have proven themselves over time for generations people what we need to be a free society and because i began from the premise its difficult to do want to conserve the institutions that are capable those who describe themselves as progressives at their best come from a different premise we are born free but a lot of people are not free and living up to their potential by being oppressed by institutions that impose on them on the impressive status quo. What you choose to emphasize runs very deep. Are free Society Needs them both but ultimately the conservative you offers what they need most of social order can enable justice. Is one a conservative. In your most recent book our souls and institutions shape each other in an ongoing way when they are flourishing institutions make us more responsible but to be selfindulgent and reckless those that undermine free society the previous book fractured republic tries to think in broad terms of the social dynamics with the polarization in our society and the newer book a time to build things of the institutional underpinnings that we know to be a social crisis how we connect with each other and understand to be parts of a larger whole that only Political Polarization and that leads people to opioids and the enormous increase of suicide rate. I argue that has to do with the weakening of restitution and then to serve as a platform. And then to build their own brand to elevate themselves there has been a d formation from politics to the profession and the academy as existing and as platforms rather than molds of the character. Some recovery to be shaped by an institution its very important to the recovery of the societal life people run for congress to get a bigger following and bigger timeslot on cable news to change our country for the better. You say there has been a powerful additional source of dysfunction which takes us deeper toward the core of the institutional confusion. Many of come to understand themselves most fundamentally as players of a larger cultural ecosystem at the point of which is not legislating our governing but a performance outrage for a partisan audience. He mentioned matt gates republican of florida and alexandria ocasiocortez who represent the. Yes. I give some examples but its much more widespread when we think of our Political Institution as platforms. And people that run for congress get a blue checkmark next to their name on twitter more than legislation they are trying to improve society but they see the world of politics is platform as a way to put themselves in a place where they can channel the outrage of the voters that got them there they can perform and that has been in the presidency as well. The sense it is a stage is a place to perform and to see himself as an outsider talking about the government. Complaining about and as the ultimate insider with the responsibility defined by the role he plays. So to recover of a functional institutionalism have to each ask ourselves we dont ask anymore, given my role how should i behave . As a member of congress as an employer or employee how shed i behave here . Letting institutional roles form and shape in ways toward greater responsibility and obligation to one another rather than just thinking of ourselves standing alone on a platform but that cultural rage and we need to push back against that. Technology has played a role. Yes. So the forces here run deeper than technology were just not at the whim we use them in these ways because thats what were looking for a larger social process is a function of that liberalization and diversification and in america we talked about before and be more like everyone else forces of conformity. Individual liberation theres a lot of good to that but it can tear society apart we have to find the balance right now that means recovering solidarity. To bring your book the great debate into the conversation the political left and right often represent genuinely distinct point of view the National Life almost by design to bring to the surface questions that divide them how did we become a country of the political left and right . Of a book of intellectual history do more of a general book with the left right divide and it does that by looking through the lens of the 18 century debate in the great irish morning this politician with the modern conservatism thomas paine english born american and the revolutionary war figure and then became a very important figure to make the case for the french revolution through and through and the nature of social change and then over time the core distinction and then as i described my own view just how it is as they enter the world when it may require and those of these hues general speaking or liberal views in a free society individual liberty but they differ fundamentally what the society is. And that debate how to advance the good is still the left and the right this doesnt just speak its own good the parties the difference of opinion thats good for everyone. And for all that politics to be very devices is necessary and that the differences the left and right. What is your background . I was born in israel. Came to the us at eight years old. I grew up here and went to college in washington dc. And with the Bush Administration first at dhs and then the bush white house. And working for the bush second term. And where the work has been at the intersection and political philosophy and the work is about. s anonymous scholar at aei or run a quarterly journal for National Affairs we started in 2009 and to try to practice politics to shed light on the other as to how i came to my conservative views for me its a mystery. And then to reach to mysterious level we dont fully understand the fundamental that is a little bit mysterious but i am impressed by institutions that enable people to thrive that means i am very impressed by the American Social order in the constitutional system then we can draw a lot of history. What is the nonnegotiable and the social contract. In the declaration of independence Human Dignity the gross violation of abuse and the human person want to be treated as an equal and wasnt that was another negotiable fact about americans and we can differ a lot that we are endowed with great basic rights the government exist to protect those rights and from there on we have a lot of debate how government should protect those rights but the institution likes like but the basic ideas written in the charter of our society are nonnegotiables of american politics. I think they are true. In afternoon and welcome to book tv on cspan2 our monthly and depth program. We missed you the last couple months with author and scholar you fall within the author of five books on to imagine the future. The fractured republic the age of individualism 2017. The newest book is a time to build. We want you to participate this afternoon. What is a lasting effect of the french revolution in france and in this country . It was really one of those core ethical moments in the history of the west and effect has been enormous it unleashed the modern wave revolutions for good and bad and to create the frame the shape of modern radicalism 19th century politics. Its afford to see that it is that where modern liberalism was form that liberal society and in our way of life really began in the United Kingdom and happened before the revolution and that the American Revolution the great turning point of truly free society that is made policy on possible with the dreams of liberalism. But after the french revolution the politics of every subsequent fisa solid one society is divided over a core question how do we change by building on the pastor breaking with it . The basic question that is this distinction between left and right and became the defining organizing question of britain and the United States and the democratizing countries afterward and essentially every free society today. Looking in english politics that is the crowd or the parliament is changing already thats an ongoing constant revolutionary process that will liberate us entirely from the burdens of the past and the purpose of the politics is gradual change that keeps us connected to the roots of western civilization allowing us to make the most of our inheritance the former view is the latter of the conservative you in the french revolution has an enormous amount to do is usually consequential. That this is your description of edmund burke and thomas picking as a gradual reformer. Exactly. Burke was a way again came from english politics but the fundamental disposition was is gradual reform and that is not revolution its almost offered in opposition so we dont lose we built up with work and we can change what doesnt work pain had much less patience to say that status quo is we have to overturn and start over we know the principles for politics so throughout what we have at the age of oppression and start over in the right way is a much more radical revolutionary the American Revolution was both a conservative and radical revolution you can see in the declaration of independence is true principles to state to overthrow the governments for shallow reasons and it goes on to list the reasons why americans want to revolt they have been denied their right as an englishman and recourse the American Revolution was both a conservative and of progressive revelation that contain the entire framework. Caller how does he explain the disconnect of the senate and the congress and how we go along with amoral and selfabsorbed dictator like president . Things are not adding up. Just wondering what he would say about that. Thank you for the question least critical love donald trump i dont think hes that for the presidency and was not my choice and i dont think he has done well by our country. That said i think the fact our politics is as polarized as it is is a reason why so many reason doing things even that they disapprove of or should i dont think President Trump is a conservative or has advanced what they should want to see in politics but we reached a point where each party now defines the other party as the biggest problem rather than thinking about the challenges we think of one another as the core problem to be dealt with so that intense partisanship means we prefer the own party over everyone else republicans have found ways to rationalize and justify too much and to be appointed to the judges. So generally speaking and character wages essential it should be people of character im enormously critical. It was reported this morning possibly supporting joe biden. But whenever you think of those policies of pursuit is a man of character and i got to see him in action at the white house and what struck me most is that he lives with the weight of responsibility of presidency on the shoulder know that his decisions mattered that he had to be taken seriously to owe it to the country to approaches job with the gravity required. Thats clearly lacking no way around it. Back to the great debate politics of the principal differences in response to needs and events. And then from the contrary that means well intentioned politicians joined together as honorable compatriots. One of the few people it makes a positive case for parties. And the need for society one is Thomas Jefferson is in another. And then form a broad coalition. And then to if you ha