little compared to hillary clinton orel nor roosevelt who is always the other sort of standard bearer. but the fact that melania trump was doing this in our times, as they are, is -- is -- is almost radical. >> katie rogers with her book "american woman," sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&a." listen to "q&a" and all our podcasts on the free c-span now app. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we're funded by these television companies and more including cox. koolen-de v rirvetion es syndrome is ex-troomly rare. >> hi. >> but good friends don't have to be. >> this is joe. >> when you're connected, you're not alone. >> cox supports c-span as public service along with these other television providers,

giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> the principles first summit held in washington, d.c. brought together conservative centrists and pro-democracy advocates and provided an alternative to the conservative political action conference. in this portion, company taters caulk about what's gone awry in right-wing politics and culture as well as conservative christians 'em brace of dom trump.

heath: all right, if people are standing up, maybe we can filter back into our seats here and i will introduce the next panel. this next discussion -- they can make their way onto the stage, our analysts, while i am introducing them. this next discussion is on a lot of people's minds. the title of the panel is moral leadership in america, principles for state, church, culture and community. i think this is an issue we have seen increased in importance in christian communities, faith communities, what has happened to them in the wake of all this political turmoil we've had in the country and the way that moral leadership matters. telling the truth matters and how we form those morals in our country are important. the panel we have here is really

second to none. this is exactly who you would want talking about these things at principles first summit. hosting the conversation will be the president of the trinity forum. if you are not aware of that organization, it is a fantastic organization. great printed materials. i encourage you to check out all the literature. mr. michael weir, the president at the center of christianity in public life. also tackling these issues head-on. mona sharon of the bulwark. she really needs no introduction. she has been at this a long time and has been focused on social policy and issues of family formation in the united states. a lot of great thoughts on that. then, we are delighted to have i think for our first time, mr. robert a. george, writer and speaker.

you are probably familiar with him from twitter. he's formerly of bloomberg opinion but rights some insights ful commentary about our culture, the state of american life. i am thrilled to hear from all of them today. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much and great to be with you all. i will confess it is a bit intimidating to have to follow the courage of kassidy and sarah and alyssa, as well as the a e brilliance of charlie sykes with moral philosophy. the last few years have proven the incredible importance of this topic. it shows the reason why this topic, moral formation and moral leadership preoccupied so much of history, the historians, the moral philosophers. it shows why this pre-occupies

the mind of the founders and framers. why they wrestled so extensively in the federalist papers with what it meant to check and constrain and channel self interest. to check faction and cultivate the better angels of one's nature. it is why george washington took the opportunity at his farewell address to talk about the indispensable support to political prosperity and freedom itself that moral leadership and moral character in citizens played. it is also why we are at such an important and in many ways unsettling crossroads right now. because while it is certainly true that throughout history, it is not like we had one great moral leader after another. there have been plenty of villains and scoundrels and liars and tyrants and moral mediocrities who are citizens and who have been moral leaders. but, we had retained a sense

that a more perfect union is possible and we as a country have also faced challenged, and overcome some significant moral failings and moral challenges in our past. right now, we are at a point of great challenge and peril. on both ideological and partisan folds, there are real challenges to the idea of moral formation and leadership. whether it is on the left, where character and morality itself is seen largely as a smokescreen for power plays and virtue and blame are seen to be more likely whether you belong to a colonizer class or based on the intersection of your identity. as well as on the hard right, where frankly, evil and nihilistic leader whose worst tendencies of belligerence have not only been tolerated, but valorized in what it means to

win and show strength. so, what does moral formation and moral leadership mean? what does it look like? how can we cultivate it and what difference does it make? it will be hard to get through all of this, but we have a panel who can make a huge dent in our understanding of why this is so important. the attention we should be paying to it and how we can cultivate it for more perfect union. starting off, i want to turn to my federal -- fellow panelists. when we speak about moral formation and moral character in our leaders and citizens, what are we talking about? how is character formed? >> great. i am really happy to be here, really happy to be on this panel. part of the problem here right at the outset is in politics,

the sum of what it means to be moral has been taken up with having the right positions or the right answers. i think the way in which that consumption of morality alone, the way that can be misused has become really apparent. when you talk about formation -- i talk about a spiritual formation in part because of that reason. the spirit refers to our character or our will. formation is about the process by which our will takes on a specific defined character. everyone has a formation. there's no getting around it. one of the reasons why i love the name of this gathering, why i love principles first is because it could just be the organization for the right principles. principles first implies that we

want to be the kind of people who can uphold our principles even when it is difficult. kassidy is a wonderful example. she didn't just have the right ideas. a lot of people have those ideas. a lot of people if you ask them in a survey, yeah, rule of law is fantastic. the real test is are we the kind of people that can follow through on our intentions in the moment of crisis? and that's a real issue for us. t.s. eliot once suggested -- by the way, he was not positive about this, it was an observation. the great human endeavor has been to create a system so perfect that people no longer have to be good. and that is the political that we have. that we can have the right answers without being the kind

of people who can back them up and that is why moral formation is so critical. cherie: i want to invite my fellow panelists to jump in as you see fit. if there are other thoughts, feel free. >> before i begin, i want to thank all of you for being here and all of the people i was able to greet and talk with last night and during the day so far. it is so gratifying to see you in the flesh. you are -- i am old enough to remember george h w bush's expression about the great civil society that was out there. he called it 1000 points of light. that is what i see in this group and it is unbelievably moving so thank you for being here. [applause] i love what you said, michael.

i was thinking about moral formation and it is very important, morality is key to a thriving democratic republic. we have all kinds of expressions of this from the founders. for example, john adams said our constitution was made for a religious and moral people. it is wholly inadequate for the governance of any other. and yet, look, we have to be realistic. the people on the maga side and the people on the far left, they also feel they are the moral ones. they think we are evil and they will say that very clearly. kristi noem at cpac said there are two kinds of people in this country. there are people who love america and there are people who hate america.

i want to reflect on this for a minute because it is important to understand, i think, or try to understand the moral reasoning that can lead people to embrace what we think is one of the most wicked, evil forces that has darkened america's doorstep in our lifetimes. so, we have to think about the fact that they argue that the house is on fire. the country is in dire -- it's in a dire emergency and because of that, we have to turn to a strongman like trump. if your house were on fire and your neighbor came along with a garden hose, you wouldn't turn his help away because he was a sex offender, right? you would accept the garden hose, you would accept the help, and then you would thank him

very kindly. of course, in that analogy, you would thank him, but then you wouldn't elect him president of the neighborhood association. and, that is, i think, so key to why they maga people always need to say this is an emergency. the country is burning. biden is destroying america. it is all hands on deck because they know that they have embraced this really morally compromised, horrible leader. so, there is never a time when they could acknowledge that the country is actually just fine. that we are not in any kind of dire emergency.

that is the secret of their -- i don't know if it is a secret but it is my interpretation for their justification. a great science fiction writer once said "man is not a rational, but a rationalizing creature." and they do rationalize their support for trump, so they need to make the other side seem evil. that is why we have all of this nonsense about the biden crime family. biden is many things. a master criminal, he is not. but, that's the key to their moral universe. whether we can puncture that, whether we can appeal as cherie says to the better angels of their nature, i don't know. certainly not for the maga

hard-core, but potentially for people who are not quite at that level, but who are in the more persuadable category. >> mona, i get what you are saying on the robert line. it is a real honor to be on this panel. i should tell everyone here, i signed up for this conference about seven or eight days ago. then, the next day, i got an email saying would you like to be on a panel? what i am saying is, this could also happen to you. whether that is good or bad is up for you to decide. i would slightly disagree with something mona said. while it's true that maga is

saying the country is on fire, and you said ultimately that they overstated the case that the country is fine, i would say the country is not fine. maga and donald trump are reflections of the fact how far the country has gone off course. right. the thing is though, it is not just that. as you were saying before, this view that we pat ourselves on the back and say we are the somewhat sane middle, those on the left and those on the right that call us evil because either we are not woke enough or not maga enough for them.

we cannot rise to the moment that is required. just in the context of where we have gotten to and where this moment of amorality, i sort of see it in a spectrum of a 25-year, quarter-century kind of decline. just so we can get a little bit of old school here, i would bring up a name that is not been mentioned much so far and that is bill clinton. i think when you go back to that moment of well, it depends on what sex is. it was at that moment where you have the president of the united states that is in a sense

putting moral relativism into the public sphere. and while there was bipartisan consensus at the time that the president had done something wrong, the question was what was the solution about that? republicans thought it was impeachment and democrats said censure and move on and so on. but what ultimately came out of that, the democrats, in almost any other moment in our history, the bipartisan consensus, the pressure would have been strong enough to get the president of the united states to resign. but, what we ended up with was a decision by the democrats and allies in the media and so

forth that what he had done was not so bad that it required resignation, and instead, there was a powering through. the first principle, if you will, at that point was kind of power. how can we push through against these usual ethical and moral barriers that historically would have been enough to move the president out of the way and allow the vice president to take over? instead, the president pushed through. he survived, within the question is -- but then the question is at what cost and what lesson was learned? i think one of the residual lessons is that forget about

ethics, forget about actual morality. the number one principal in politics is power. i think that's a lesson that the maga people have learned. their standardbearer has taken the clinton model and amped it up to 10. cherie: just riffing off of that a little bit. i want to ask you each your thoughts on what has gone awry. part of what i mean about this is not just a political analysis. we will hearken way back, thousands of years to saint augustine who talked about how virtue is largely properly ordering your loves and desires. ordering your values that accords with reality, wise and prudent, as well as love. loving things in the right way. when you think about that, you think something has gone on dion

just -- beyond just the political. the former president does not fill stadiums for people looking forward relishing seeing their enemies humiliated because they want to see a win in the next election. there is something that we the people are starting to value the wrong things. starting to love domination and humiliation of our enemies too much. what has gone on? mona, we can start with you. mona: nice, small topic. there are many things that are tearing us apart. we have a radical change in family structure where many people now are living alone. a record number of people are living alone and record numbers of people are lonely, which is

not exactly the same thing in every case. you have lots of kids growing up with very chaotic home environments, where they not only see their parents split up, but then the parents have new relationships and the kids are shunted around two different homes with different stepsiblings and all of that. we know that is not good for the stability and mental health of the kids raised in those environments. this has been going on for several decades. we also have the rise of the internet and the information silo, which gets mentioned a lot but it is crucial. when i was growing up, people say you are what you eat. i think now, we are what news we consume. new can tell everything you need to know about a random, 70-year-old, single man who lives in central pennsylvania by whether you walk into his house

if fox news is on all the time or something else. people have become so insulated and into their own bespoke realities. they create their own realities and it is unbelievably disruptive of a country that is by its very nature large, pluralistic. we have lots of different communities. huge geographic diversity. religious, racial, every kind of diversity. and we need to be able to have certain things that we agree on. we have to have certain facts that we all except as true so we can compromise with one another and we can say, ok, you like more immigration, we like less immigration, let's meet in the middle. that has become practically impossible in our age of bespoke realities where people on the right don't just think that

democrats want more immigration or have more liberal views about it. they think that democrats have a scheme, a plot run by jews to import more dark skinned people into the country in the great replacement. so, how do you compromise with such a terrible -- [laughter] and so, those are -- it's both a technological challenge that was brought to us by the internet and also by cable television. so, the technological challenge is part of our problem and the social challenge, as i mentioned, with more and more people living alone. let's say this last thing about being lonely and being alone. i cannot prove this, but i think people are more easily led into extremism when they are not living face to face with other humans. and having the ability to bounce

off ideas. get a reality check, right? sam saw something on the internet that says there is a scheme to run an underground railroad from mexico through canada. which by the way was on the internet. when he goes online and puts this in, you get all kinds of people who say yes, we heard that too. you are right, we agree. whereas if he said it to his wife or his live-in lover or whoever, she would say what you talk about? no. that does not sound right. there are fewer and fewer of those in real life sort of reality checks for a lot of americans. i think that is part of life we are seeing that the crazy gets more traction.

michael: the state of our politics is a reflection of the state of our souls. this is the beauty and weakness of democracy. there is no getting around the kind of people we are. if our ultimate principles derived from politics, then our ultimate principles will be subject to circumstances. that is a lot of what we've seen . in 2020, a group of social scientists came up for a framework for thinking about the particular kind of polarization we have today. they called it political sectarianism. they said it is a toxic cocktail of three ingredients. first, a version -- aversion. the tendency to dislike and distrust a political opponent. othering.

the tendency to place as other or essentially different from those who are political partisans. and then the tendency of a misplaced moralization. the elevation of political disagreement to that of good and evil. when that is the fuel of our politics, then all kinds of rationalizations can take place, similar to what robert was talking about. the problem is not that we take politics to seriously, but that we take it seriously and all of the wrong ways. if you think politics is not just about power, then that is what is going to guide your political actions. part of what we need to do is provide a vision for a politics that is not solely about who has the power, who can impose their will? that is a chief challenge

because frankly, that is how our politics has operated for quite some time. we need to have a different source. this is the issue with liberalism onboard from a higher philosophy which is that liberalism allows for decisions that are made on the basis of power. but if that is your only construction of reality, yeah, everything becomes you have one opinion about january 6, i have another. there is a truth. there is a reality. it is not just who thinks january 6 was a bunch of patriots fighting for a fair election. it was a disgraceful affront to democracy. there is an actual reality and we don't need to be insecure just because there's a difference of opinion. we actually need to understand

that we can name a truth. robert: exactly. some of us look at this partly in a political context, but we can also see this moral relativistic aspect in other institutions as well. one that i have been part of for 25 years, the media broadly understood there's a large responsibility as well. as mona said, there has been a collapse of media, partly because of the internet and the siloing of news. but, one of the greatest responsibilities that media traditionally has is to inform

and to educate. now, either yesterday or the day before, i forget when these clips ran. at one of his events, the former president was saying i am going to stand for christians because the other side is coming to take your crosses. the first thing that communists do is try to get rid of these religious symbols and so forth. basically, terrifying the base. meanwhile, you have a guest on msnbc who basically said that christian nationalists believe that our rights come from god and this is what the christian nationalists believe. this is what they are trying to do if they get into power. all you have to do is look at

something like the constitution. it has been in the news. it is something people should be able to read. you can find that it says right there, that the rights come from a creator. it is not a christian nationalists sensibility to believe that. but, when a media entity put that out there, it makes it so much easier for people on the other side to say, well, maybe trump's got a point. maybe they are trying to come after us for our religion, for what we actually believe. that sort of thing is happening from the media. meanwhile, if you are watching the house hearings a few weeks

ago and you've got three intelligent, supposedly intelligent academics who can't find it easy for them to say that, oh, if our student body calls for the death of jews, that might violate our free speech codes. when these supposedly mediating institutions also are not able to either, a, educate correctly or, b, make clear moral statements, it is not surprising that the broader society is collapsing as well. cherie: robert, i want to pick up on one of your points just now which is about our media institutions. our mediating institutions have been one of the chief ways of trying to call forth the better angels of our nature, in terms of being morally formative.

institutions can also be morally d formative -- deformative. i think it is fair to say we are at a point right now where many of our most important and formative institutions are weakened, which are true in the political sphere. congress is significantly weaker than it was just a few years ago. but also in our civic sphere, with families and churches and schools facing their own internal challenges. and, mona, maybe we can start with you. what hope do you see for the renewal and reinvigoration of morally formative institutions? mona: at the risk of getting outside my area of comfort, because i am jewish but i am very interested in what goes on in the christian world, which is far more influential obviously

in this country. there's a great book by tim alberta where he outlines -- yes, applaud that book, fantastic. the corruption of the churches and how they have become really sacrilegious. they have replaced a worship of the united states for god. they have replaced, in many cases, they are elevating donald trump to some sort of godly figure and status. and that is profoundly, obviously dangerous, deforming of our national character. the struggle within the church -- of course, they should be morally forming institutions but a lot of the pastors will say,

look, they are watching fox and the are on the internet 12 hours a day, and i've got them for two hours on sunday. it is no contest. so, people come to church now believing in qanon and that sort of thing and they are impatient with pastors who try to dissuade them. that is a huge problem. an institution, the churches which should be a bulwark, if you will, against the forces of nihilism and baseless hatred and demagoguery are instead elevating it. joining in. giving fuel to the fire. the good news is there is pushback and that there are people within that world who are very energetically attempting to roll it back and provide far

better models. russell moore, david french, david alberta -- tim alberta. we have to give them all the support we can and hope that is somewhat successful. people are drawn to religion because it helps you to see the good and it helps you to see what is right. we have to rely on that part of human nature to prevail in the end. it is a huge struggle to sort of wrap your arms around what's happening in the churches. i turn to you, michael. michael: i will just say certainly, we are seeing -- i have a new book out on the spirit of our politics and i

talk about this concept. some of you may be familiar with the term moral theism. i introduce the idea of political theism, which is supported by beliefs by god is on my political party's side or god has a general approval of my behavior in politics because i hold the right position. and, there has been a development. for number of reasons we will not be able to discuss today, what it means, in the same way, what it means to be to have christian politics means to have the right answers on a few discrete policy issues. there has been a theological development that is almost exclusively in the west that what it means to be a christian is to provide mental assessed to a few lines of doctrine and you

can have the worst kind of character possible, so long as you're willing to nod your head yes. that's it, you're in . that is fundamentally contrary to the gospel. to the christian nationalism point, i am profoundly hesitant both substantively, but also strategically to point at a group of folks who welcome someone like donald trump, to tell them that loving your enemies, that stuff from jesus, maybe try that in your personal life but if you try that in politics, you are going to get steamrolled so let me take care of you. i'm really hesitant to say that is christian anything. [applause] we need to be careful about what

we are willing to give over to donald trump and his branding and his outreach. i feel very confident fundamentally saying if your politics is not oriented towards the good of your neighbors, it is not christian. it is not christian. [applause] robert: who needs a golden castle, when you have golden sneakers? we're running out of time, but really, this particular part of the question is much broader because we also have a large, an increasing percentage of society that no longer sees itself as

religious. it's not just no longer christian. they are completely secular. if not atheist, maybe agnostic. when you have that society that decides to stray away from some version of religion, the lessons that religion can still inform on a broader secular society tends to deteriorate. and the common moral language that kept the country going for 250 years or so starts to fray. we no longer manage to in a sense speak the same language. that is sort of where we are. what's going on with maga and christianity and so forth is certainly a problem, but the

fact we cannot really speak with same language across a society is the far greater problem. mona: could i jump in on that point? for years, i would say it is really a problem that religion is declining and more and more people are not members of congregations and they don't have that sort of community development in their lives, and that's a problem. yet, right now, we are also living in a time where some of the craziest and most destructive voices in this country are the most religious, i am sorry to say. [applause] cherie: we have talked about the kind of moral confusion and different realities that people are occupying, such that we are in a situation where you can have protesters chanting in

support of genocide on one hand, and on the other hand, people invading the capitol and hosting prayer service. we talked about the decline of the morally informative institutions that have helped shape character. we talked about the perversions and distortions of christianity that have enabled an accelerated the decline of character and moral leadership. all this leads us to the big question. what do we do? how do we go about renewing and reinvigorating moral formation and moral leadership in our country? we are going to mix up the order. robert, we will start with you. robert: thanks a lot. the immediate word that comes to mind is pray. but, i'm going to say a phrase

you don't often hear on panels like this, and that is i don't know. because what's going on here is something really fundamental and certainly maga and trump are symptomatic of what's going on. but, it can be somewhat argued that that aspects on the far left, some of the wokeism sometimes elevates itself to almost a pseudo-religion as well . and that is also something that is to be pushed back on. the kind of self-love and identity overall.

this sounds like a little bit of a cliche, but a lot of it has to start with basic education. you are trying to instill civics , moral civics at the earliest ages. that means in a sense, having stronger control of the elementary schools and so forth. that is one place to start. mona: well, i admire you for saying i don't know. you are right, most people say that. i would agree, i am not sure. i would say what i am personally trying to do in this moment, because i do think that the information silos, the two completely different realities that people live in is one of our biggest challenges.

one of the reasons why i started my podcast is i wanted to show or model you can have a civilized conversation amongst people who have different points of view. we do happen to agree because we all agree about trump, but other things we do disagree and we model that you can respectfully hear out somebody who has a different point of view and come to some sort -- you may not agree, but at least you can have an airing of views and have an agreed set of facts. i have to believe that the greatest challenge is helping this country to be able to have at least a shared reality instead of separate realities. i would just close by reminding us that we have an unbelievably rich history and tradition to draw from, and that gives us strength. our roots are so deep.

i was reading about john adams sending his first couple -- spending his first couple of nights in the white house, the first president to live in the white house. at the time, it was unfinished, it was drafty, damp, uncomfortable. but, he sat down and wrote a letter to abigail and he closed with these words which have since been inscribed into the mantelpiece in the fireplace in the state dining room. here's what he wrote -- "before i end my letter, i pray he aven the best of blessings in this house and all that shall after. may wise men ever rule under this roof." cherie: michael, bring us home. [applause] michael: fortunately, i do have

the answers. [laughter] no, i'm just kidding. robert: what is the name of your book? michael: it is all there. i gave you just enough of a taste to find the actual answers in the book on amazon. [laughter] look, part of what it means to come to terms with our situation is there is no program or three-point plan for getting us on the right track. we can delude ourselves into thinking there's a technocratic approach here. one thing i would say is, one of the greatest gifts we can give our politics in this moment is not telling it what it is, what it must be, but reminding our politics, reminding our fellow citizens of what politics is not. we need to provide a further horizon than just political outcomes. that means further out than this

upcoming general election. further out than donald trump. we need to help folks understand what is true, that politics is not ultimate, it is penultimate. politics is not the area of the dogmatic, it is the area of the potential. the politics is not pure expression of our will. it is about a conscious of ideas. the palooka parties are not meant to be brands, they are vehicles for mediating difference. these kinds of things helping americans once again or maybe for the first time rightly situate politics would do so much to help the state of our politics. [applause] cherie: michael, mona and robert, thank you so much.

it has been a delight. >> thank you. cherie: i think you all are released for your coffee break. heath: we will observe the 10 minute coffee break and we will get started with the economic panel at 3:20. >> for c-span voices 2024 we're asking voters across the country, what issue is most important to you in this election and why? >> the most important issue this political season is immigration. >> economics and the deficit. >> i think that homelessness is

an issue that needs to be addressed. >> we invite you to share your voice by going to our website, c-span.org/campaign 2024. select the record your voice tab and record a 30-second video telling us your issue and why. c-span's voices 2024. be a part of the conversation. >> book tv, every sunday on c-span 2, features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books at 8:00 p.m. eastern, journalist gaett graff looks at research done by govement agencies and the scientific community into the potential for alien life in his book "u.f.o." then at 10:00 p.m. on "jardz words," kara swisherhared "burn book," a look at her time in the tech industry and key

players. watch book tv, every sunday on c-span2. and find a schedule on your program guide or watch online any time at booktv.org. >> sunday, on c-span's "q&a," "new york times" white house correspondent katie rogers shares her book "american woman" about the modern evolution of first ladies of the united states and the impact and contributions of first ladies of both parties going back to hillary clinton and their changing roles in the 21st century. >> melania trump really highlighted for americans the fact that you dent have to do anything with this role if you don't want to. there have been first ladies throughout history who did, you know, very little compared to hillary clinton orel nor roosevelt who is the other sort of standard bearer. the fact that melania trump was doing this in our times, as they

are, is -- is almost radical. >> katie rogers with her book "american woman," sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&a." you can listen to "q&a" and all our podcasts on our free c-span now app. >> two years ago, democracy faced its greatest threat and today, though bruised our democracy remains unbowed and unbroken. >> thursday, march 7, president biden delivers the annual state of the union address in a joint session of congress to outline his priorities for the country. watch live coverage beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern with our preview program, followed by president biden's state of the union speech. then me the republican response and we'll get your reaction by taking your phone calls, texts and social media comments. watch the state of the union address, live, thursday, march 7, at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.

c-span now, our free mobile video app. or online at c-span.org. >> a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work. when citizens are truly informed, our republic thrives. get informed, straight from the source. on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word-for-word. from the nation's capital to wherever you are. because the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, ♪ >> this