>> welcome to booktv every weekd beginning at th time here on c-span2. br y- ou wext 8 hos'l g urms ho d publishing industry. ..

>> amanda believes in the limits of governmental power and tsy bktv er to rest questions and comments live at noon eastern on in depth the. middle east expert on the obama ocsut on booktvesancense to on c-span2. in an event hosted by the m.k. gandhi institute for nonvience paul cppell lays out a plan to create a more peaceful wod. idetwhos. >> my name is kit miller and direct serve as director of rochester,ewk r t

hiti nole trdo honor and privilege to introduce paul chappell. i read all his books and i am an enormous fan. we have had wonderful erwas anrtic of ye in min i raiteitbo him. he was born and raised in alabama. and he servedrean vietnam. all saw his father affected by serving, and he wants to understand more about vice in the world. . nid saw -- that night and

la al. >> can you hear me in the back? now dyour me? if you can't hear me please raise your hand. can you take that out th il andut . loud. geral douglas macarthur wou have become -- he said you cannot control war. you can only abolish it. those who shrugged this f as li ahe rens

rewagers. those who take courage to try a new approach when none others fail the test of leadership. d ie roh wiln r talk about tonight that gandhi pioneered and will continue. another interesting thing about this quote is he talked about abolishing war. boonwahend o ic oize hapor name and a more common name known as world peace. why that? if you sir world peace, what do most people think? ict 50? what else? what comes to mind if you hear world peace? if you werto talk about it?

idealistic? have you seen the movie miss congeniality? there is a beauty pageant and what do people want? world peace. is supposed to be a joke because atwe wut oe a tot. raise your hand if you think world pee is impossible. poibt l. raoha iu isurd you are not sure. hy will talk about that tonight. when i was growing up i didn't grow up in the peace movement. i thought world peace was not a drm. i ed y ith otwan rea during

the korean war. i graduated west point and serve tweet 7 years in baghdad. i lefthe army three years ago so i grow skepticaof world ace d reer erve i'isd ig-wg radio religiously and believed in war, that it makes the save and protect our freedom and protect democracy and makes the world safe. look at president bush or makes the country se. but we have to ask the deeper qution and that question is are people naturallyiont nallef? ouive to aume world peace could happen. if people are peaceful we have to be trained and conditions for violence and world peace might be possible.

world peace might have a chance. easeaiseour hanf y k neis e turay olent. a few hands go up. raise your hand if you think people are naturally peaceful. raise your hand if you think they're naturally violent and naturally peaceful? most hands are on th one. wisk fueio to tohef that. the first question. what is the biggest problem? every army in world history no matter what time period or culture, can any ofouss pem getieoplrecrti that is a big problem. recruiting is a big problem. there are lots of problems. the opposing army. the problem i atainou igr than the opposing

army. great and serve. gettinthe order to kill is a big problem and we will talk about at. easwaner ths rg ob there's a bigger problem than that. the greatest problem of any army in history isn't getting soldiers to kill but getting soldiers to die. the greatt problem with every army in history as one of battl ns h dyoster fr ayouig- flhsponse is more powerful than the flight response. when you try to stab someone with a sword most people's reaction is to run away as fast as they can as far as they can. as anyone whhas eein c twiel tfy gel ons ne a trading, that is lying. if i pulled a knife on somebody most people would be terrified. most people would be terrified. eist tghntant to run frome

okwiull a knif you and we will have a fight. that is not an appealing proposition. your itinct to get away from me is more powerful than the instinct to fight for most wathespeope whwill cut your head off. they outnumber you how do you get them to fight? how do weearn tmake soldiers fight? what ithmo eve odietoak ieigndottreat? propaganda? what kind of propaganda? [inaudible] >> hatred for the enem a lot people won't die for tr. atieor it.u pardon?

conditioning. great answer. it is much simpler than we realize use brotherhood is a eou life or protect err, your family? almost every hand goes up. that is why armies have this band of brothers and camaradee. every war is abouth acin nnaad mi.gingro o e pe trm our families. the chinese said it best when he said being loving we're capable of being brave. the greeks realize its soldiers believe they're fighting to oteceir friends and fil loonhell t r in tectur loved ones is more powerful than our instinct for self preservation. think how y would react t view site of one attacked. ou would try to protect them. eare is a story that

fearo sorry. a few years ago--is it the microphone? pardon? fgo h atoame? aba ane dio being interviewed and told a story. she was walking down the street and there were people running toward her wod your instinct be to fight thopr fm e pe urlit spse imo powerful than your flight response with pple running at you. this woman is walking downhe street with people running for her but she has a pool wither ane le b he pdle nt d and bit the pit bull until it let go. actually bit the pit bull.hio

how at iwhere camaraderie and brotherhood including -- in order to function. at west point i've learned a famous passage which reads we are a band of brothers. al mbrhis d eh p a t famy, t military becomes your family. army training puts the situation where you sacrifice for each other and you can't get anything done without cooperation. that is aonposior

opndco, treat the people who died and fight to protect and care about, ycgitequcomrade is one y tis le saothers? they are best friends. army soldiers love each other and will die for each other. love of konrad is one technique. another psychocaiq ise oury haveou hrd of the battle of thermopylae? have you heard of the movie 300? most young people heard of that movi riheer wbi not the battle of properly, e battle of salamis ready athenian general had to defeat a

parisian navy with a small fleet that is what it is witone person trying to kill y. 1.age g out3: opionsre greatly on numbered. to inspire courage that made it possible the athenians advanced sins of greece to save children and your coury. this is thcausf all an eiveesnyyoul do protect your loved ones. when the athenians heard that, save your lives and your country, they were ready to ght thedeath. h d byve gomeinthen. not word for word but the essence of that battle cry. when the government makes populations go to war to protect our freedom or our loved ones or way of life or some nobde maarve t bn

history? thousands? too many to count. in all of military historyhere has never been a single wor where a national leader said fighfor ney d . rdo y on le ws e about self-defense or fighting for freedom or protecting your way of life or fighting for an ideal or liberating people. who are being oppressed b ne marurat all people want peace. all conscientious people want peace and every country and every tribe people's year ending for peace is so powerful that when a dictator goes to ware acayin cat eupe.n ce e look at the roman emperor as or any government, even democracy. when they go to war they're fighti to create peace or bring back the peace. ckthma emperor, the .

roman emperor says i want you to go to war and the worst case scenario is you die in your life becomes a widoand best case ars u ck f wofighin a wut what if the roman emperor sins if you don't fight these evil people will kill your family and take away your way of life and kill your loved ones. then you will figerioly. dwoo than mi wh dsrolonged exposure do? what is posttraumatic syndrome is trauma.

even people who support work say war is hell. and t most traumatizing thing. if youreurlyiont y ldhe be mentally healthy? if they are away from war they have mental problems? if naturally violent why does it drive people in sane and why would it cause traum if we a ravit whou ecmo- arid study with two medical doctors, they did a study in world war ii vet found after 60 days ago 98% lt soldi becomtric af60s,of soldiers suffered psychiatric trauma. 60 days of sustained combat is the 20th century phenomenon. prior that soldiersldt

t ig. loase gettysburg. three days. they took the knights of. in world war i and world w ii situations where shoulde ieert,ay hns tt han mind when human beings are in that kind of situation? the street to medical doctors d r ay0%f sorsfepsat tr b% n e f ngiod tim and kill and kill and why is that 2% different? why can 2% of soldiers be exposed to work for a long time and never going to pain d thehem nedriv inse by war is they were insane before they

went to war. according to this study they found the majority of people in that 2% were aggressive pspaan t%, 98%. another question. during world war ii what perctage of soldiers in combat had a chance to shoot at the enemy? dung world war iwhat percgeldrsn at aliredt the ene? exactly. about 15%. how did you know that? okkig d bwer. pp that.ha about 15%. in the vietnam war what percentage of soldiers in combat with a chance to shoot at the enemy --hatyo

youl b r use ding wod war ii we were fighting the nazis. what did the vietnamese ever do to was? most america had nev heard o etnaandhejese dn'th hochheou tnk was? it was about 90%. about 90%. dramatic change in couple decades from 15% to 90%. diers during of the korean war, 55% or the vietnam war, 9% or 100%. dramatic change. what happened? atntaused traichae? toe ra go up so high?

[inaudible] greatnswe noeans teloutne toire weapons. if you look at the weapons from world war ii to vietnam and the infantry soldier there wasn't that much difference. sutics n erki. ad to with training. the training change. the army got better at training people how to kill. the key term is training people to kill. it is not as es st ppl k. ouchlyod it makes killing look very easy but it is much more difficult and the army recognizes that the training. the army got better at training people how to kill. gsbefoor ii

ie l sors 90% of their time loading rifle and you would think the rifle's recovered from soldiersn combat in the civil war most of them would not be loaded b after the btl gsb ne were loaded. 12,000 had one but in a barrl. 6,000 had ten, one of the rifles had 23. youing? wernot ring here is a question. what is it about military training that molerctkis? at is a big part of it. any other answers? dehumanize the enemy. greaand sir.

keep in mind martia artists are trained t lrnng illk. u hithe il on the head. repetition. simple repetition. refl training. i will give you a qckle s. let's say i try to punch some random person in the face and the person has no martial arts training. what are 99% of people going to do? th areoingo fl a ac fncut is your natural reaction. your eyes are vulnerable in your face is vulnerable. you want to protect your eyes. let's say every day i h a

nching bagor ahour every day. what do i do if someoneries to hit me? i am going to flinch. a punching bag never tries to hit back. nc bevri toower butl back. inddition to ading the punching bag and hour a day, what if i have a training partner punching me? musunche a counteraacke and i would be sparring with hat and gloves were you can get realistic aing. w i ctsiha us hecatck reflex. it has overridden the old reflects. you try to reprogram the instinct. here's atory about how powerful the reflex traing is.

itsoowerl here's a s lltre at onli talked about two police officers training of former gunman. the poli officer had his training partner give back to him. rm ge b niars,igd thsand of times until it became a reflex. they went to a convenience store. there was a robber. the police officer went around the corner. without thinking the pic cesa tun ickhi military rlex training is so powerful you can train people to do things that will get them killed. the motto is train like you fight. if youook at polices whheic gto rathisuietween armed threa and unarmed threat.

go to a pistol range as a police officer got popped above the shotgun. guy pops up with ptoan aushldin t is why it jumps from world war ii to vietnam. in world war ii they were firing at around paper targets but there was never country in orta bouap ie tfitarts edeuman beings. you shoot and it goes down. over and over again. it became a reflex. that is what makes soldiers such effeive si rit an defensive martial arts or warrior training. think about that. if human beings are naturally violent what every army in history expend so much effort to train people to kill? most people show up at boot cp

tot t haou r a book on killing? really excellent book. e-book call about killing. is one of the most uplifting book you will never read because it shows kli i l e hocaus ar t kill in war. dave grossman was an army ranger and his book is required reading athe fbi are reg in west point and berkeley and night colleges and the basic premise if you look at military history was it is unnatural for human beings to acies hers human beings and hi. have the innate aversion to killing their own species.

for example a rattlesnake will t.te every othernimal on the esesd o a thonigher. look at king cobra, not only by its other animals but they each other snakes. look at buffalo or deer or any eny htir horns, tr species they fight head head. with that many creditopredatorso fostulation. hy do african buffalo fight a lion with the ribs, why did they fight head to head when they fight each other which is the ribuo d % of rm of co

their time around one animal. african buffalo. if they fought each other they would go extinct. human being spentir time around what animal? human beings. does it make sense we would have a natural aversion to killing of a human beings? what evidence do we have? all military history. of military history. lieunantolon gosanay t raene ia aiynd eryount history has done this. can any of you guess what that way i how do they oppose an opposing group of people? not as human. key r mahe how many wars have there been in history? thousands. too many to count. there has never been a single

war in human history where the ers r ak e sheer side as like them. i learned about these ideas from this book on killing and it blew my mind because i grew up thinking we are violent and rall thuysa wreot an s en t b up. he talks about psychological distance which means training people -- this is done through name calling. at did we call the germans?nt krauts. what do we call the japanese? japs. what did we cl the vietnm go tharlt rl s

foerthro i grew up in alabama beat behalf rean and quarter wte. what do we call people in the middle east? what do you hear in the media what ae hein teis thasaccoation. when you hear the word terrorist do you think of a white christian like timothy mcveigh? they you think of a muslim? you think of muslims. the racial connotation. when the guy shot the congress woman he was called a gunman. when a guy in norway killed all

those people he was called mun oury i er t racial connotation to the word. things you have to think about. the back to ancient greece. what did t clth baia an ywhe t name barbarian came from? [inaudible] >> exactly. during the gek era the greeks evf weea g i le we saying bar bark bar. it was a way of making fun of how people talked. people make fun of the way asian people talk or helmet least in people talk. was a way omangun hoopal

what is the most infamous dehumanization word in history? my father and all his family going back to slavery, the most infamous demonization is the word inigger ouantoppss ppl enslavedeople you can't think they are like your children. if you want segregation and binging you have to think they are not like you. at is what the word nigger thstamsy the word nigger is the most infamous dehumanization word in history. really important for us to think about becaus these are used beoe p manipulate how we think. the second form of distance is moral distance. i am good, you are evil and god is on my side. that is why -- in a civil war you look like the people you are

ghting and have the se languagemsnd ra mpe tnk you are expelling evil from the world. you don't see much -- you saw a lot more moral distance. if you listen to president bush the aqi pele adjuslieyt do r n liurme ant to le in peace and we liberate these people from tyrannical dictator. these evil people. gangsters trying to address the pe heokafisn, wanto g to school, we have to liberat these afghan women. it isarr tde people.

counteract them. mechanical distance means drop a bomb on somebody, rifle 300 th00dsat eier to shoot someone e. so ll them. easier to kill people if they look alike and its at 10,000 feet. naledid the nazis use gas o difficult for soldiers. great answer. there is a myth that nazis used the gas chamber because it was efficient but there's nothing more efficient than the firing sqd. whs eieha

oo them? the nazis killed a million people with firing squads prior to switching to the gas chambers. so many soldiers were becoming trtifril wom anhi dis a drs m imagine killing women and children, people can't handle it. some people can. most people can't. if ynrh ledaipe ch of the holocaust their rationale was you have to protect the execution -- executioner. it is about protecting the executioner. people being executed by firing squadg riair r befit, that? the people watching won't become

traumatized. when gangsters execute people where do they almost always shoot them? tehaedmi ad. t leth t ad. that shows you how universal this is. in addition to mechanical distance of the gas chamber the nazis use psychological warfare by calling them subman or alling people il almeireeo l us course not. 8 massacre requires all three forms of dehumanization. psychogical, moral and mechanical. are humabeins rally ol wh wld history without a single exception has to dehumanize the enemy. why would every country in history without a single exception create distancen order to wage war and why is it so hard to kill somody iyou therasum ounkt i le

meisde tki them. you look at someone and think that person feels pain like i do, s a family like i do it i very hard toill. the ea tt wt aliot,dewe are not actually violence which military history supports is also the idea that we are not so bad after all and there is hope for the human race. whers dumizatom fr res --an come from? george orwell said one of the most horrible features of work is the hatred and lies and op w aot fhtg.ays comes from endmefrom. that is a fraction of the evidence that we are not violent.

the question and answer session ask me any argument you can think of because there a lot ceritanca if you were to go back 2,000 years ago to tell someone the earth goes around the sun would that be easy or hard to do? convince somebody that thrt rtesune unhy don't you feel movement? doesn't feel like the earth is moving? if you look at it looks like everything is moving around . even t wsaheris se suesriut s tfr o pecte. if you go back 2,000 years and convince people the earth is round would that be easy or hard? nearly impossible. of the earth is round why don't the people on the bottom fall if w i rou w d thoneslide

off. is counterintuitive. iridium experience tells us we are not moving or falling off, earth is flat and standing still. olisouea we are notaturally e war and murder and genocide? if you look at the u.s. one of the most violent cultures in history what is the murder rate? 400,000. is relativelyare. if many people ask how does a ieectestn peace? as a child -- growing up living with him is frightening. i was thinking about the problem

of work and many people aske t se on people join the army. we need war to end work. think about superman and batman? eyseio hee protectumany? method. we are taught you need violence to stop violence. st soldiers want peace. if you look at worldar ii most ieoithmyin ty er recruiting in to the military is very high. looks at the vietnam war, much more difficult to get people in the military. after septemberhhene rta aca tis wed miryceo spread freedom and democracy, recruitme went

up. when people believe they're fighting for a good caus is much easier to get them into the military. most soldis want pea b ths jee. ho can we create new method? how do we convince people that it has to be not just the jective but their ob rdo aiat inatngr eyes all the world which i will change today. for senate and that changed my attitude was west point taught me in the twenty-first century the nature of war is changing in a way that people don't reali. anat weoiaume that war is about winning hearts and minds. that term came popular but what does it mean? what it means is you can no longer kill youray to victory.

opouina.ars a youilli body count. look at enemy combatants who terrorize their population. it is different now. what has changed? y isffen n whouiltoany pe yak y cnt -- kill too many people you turn more people against? look at technological changes. when thrifle was invented and swords wereo ngus, rwanvte firs-- the trenches in world war i went away. it dramatically changed work so that killing civilians can make you less safe.rd nars ig ange this is a bigger change.

media coverage. great answer. media coverage. media coverage is the dramatic change. something we use every day.phut and s nobody knew about it. look at roman empire. no freed of speech or reporters or media. now you chemicals civilians it is all over the natiol news. ke k bng in t on youtuben tpedg. afghanistan recently. drove up resentment. killing of the scene that 16 afghan civilians. abu ghraib one of the most to acarepo ahis that happened atg 60 minutes a marine colonel in afghanistan said if you kill 1,000 caliban and two y t sa i aos a war.

[inaudible] >> exactly. the way the local population reacts to the death of civilians. what if the afghan war british my came to america and killed twameivia. opon-- oer cltouliur civilian you would lose. from world war until today the majority of peop killed in war are civilians. some conflicts 90% of people killedur cilia. d s tajy is rd twin ts gament and trying to lower civilian casualties. you have too much chaos and

confusion. look at vietnam. lo at the tusdsf ie klebyir comrades in friendly fire. countless friendly fire casualties. soldiers shoot their own comrades fro confusion and chaos annoise unintentionally. your bra doesn't work that . uot t llil that is one reason work is becoming much less able to keep our country safe and keep the planet safe. hard to you hrtnd ? ie o in east? how do you win hearts and minds. you have to admit people have hearts and minds. you have to look at tsds gandhi, nelson

mandela, nelson mandela was able to win hearts and minds of many. these peoe are masters at winning hearts and minds. ga woraccay erdinyer nd was better than alexander the great or hannibal or napoleon. gandhi defeated the most powerful empire on earth without a single bullet. even more impressive gandhi was able to transform hismyo nd would be in awe because he thought strategically. he had been a soldier in the army and use militaristic language. he called his supporters the army of peace. ooet vncd not fighting and cowardice. he with a better strategic way to solve problems and violce. that was peace.

here's a quick example to es tluteth how mh warfarhas an whs dro to the american government? 5,000 taliban fighters or wiki leaks? wiki leaks i a lot more dangerous especially if you don't want people to know what you are in s h dgeus rmn eaedt ntn th twenty-first century wars are fought on cnn and fox news and al-jazra and the internet as much as on the battlefield. listen to admiral mullen. he tks about the future of warfare isll about perpt hoorcti? th is the future of warfare. the battlefield is changing and most people don't realize it. let's talk about waging peace. dthea

hat does that sound like? resistance. active. at ele waging i peace in history? [inaudible] >> empathizing. great expl erciexamles? ciri memt. atanswer. peace marches. sit ins. gandhi and nelson mandela, civil-rights movement and twwad athy there are a thousand possibilities. a thousand possibility and those thousand possibilities are waging peace.

a few misconceptions. wh do eoundg th taut tiotht reenon what does that mean? no taxation without representaon. the revolutionary war was fought over rights. the people who govern get the consent of those theyre dthn? you can't tax unless you give me some participation in the political process. a very reasonable concern. you n't want people teing you what to dof d'tav icio l s or 30s less than 10% of the american population could vote in international -- in national elections. white people could vote in most idul vheownednd property? how did they get the right to

vote or own property? didhey fight a war? did they fight a war with u t e l ciilarepn thscol movement in the 50s and 60s before african-aricans got their human-rights. before they won human-rights it took a peaceful movement later wareslesd t ne european country had a war to free the sles. dramatically impacted by waging peace in ways you don't realize. is a way that history is not ate taught.ap another question. one thing i've learned that west point is how much waging war and waging peace he in mmon.

aom othgs whrewaandag peace have in common? lots of people. recruiting, personnel. strategy. you need strategy whether its a aif wr a nool mt. strategic approach. what else to they have in common? unity and solidarity. what else? with theou are waging war or waging peace you need crngr stra planninor icu o s and minds in vietnam war martin luther king jr. trying to win hearts and minds in america and did a better job. you need to win hearts and minds crucial to votes that there are two different ways ofaging war anpee. iifre betag orinpeace? what is differt? [inaudible]

>> in someays thera la. nyonv movement they have almost no funding. very little funding, very poor movement. think of it like this. ciri mon tk at the civil-rights y thnm the military and most universities and the institution and almost everything. iuet h. riamanhube and not some human. people say there's no such thing as truth but they are human beings and equal to life. if you look of the women's rights movement there was a huge weru. mentedon

woco'twn property. they controlled the university's, they controlled the institutions and the military. men had almost nothing. all they had was the truth. people said the's no such thing asruth but its true thom antelctl mwafethe vote they will screw everything up. they're not equal to men. there inferior and don't have the mental capacity to vote. africaamericans are subhuman. can't let them participa. they are likearims. ouoffryth that happens, the whole system unravels. they are happy being slaves. in the eighteenth century, you had this idea that han d chevolution and

avbes ntl.n ofde

cty s es safe. there are two differences between -- star to get on that tangent but that was a good point. a really good point. what are the two differences between wang wnd wag e. ifft t odwa werth method of waging peace. [inaudible] >> the aionsre peaceful. hen wagingar yry rpnd'ryio a umeint friend when you are waging peace. a big difference. there is another crucial diffence between waging war and waging peace. vnche of war set han tue all war is based on deception. when you are far you when the enemy to think you are in year. when you're near the enemy should think you are far.

when you are about to atta u.n. the enemy thi you a urmyo inoure intindivyou want the enemy to think you are active. is based on deception entirely. waging peace is based on the truth. it involves exposing truth about raal eit t t ss ar are human beings or african-americans are not born to live in segregation and equal to white people and women are not intellectually inferior. you let women own property y nole. itprinut if you look at religion or methodology or satan or buddhism mms r reecr they have i e rewa not

violence but deception. look at the difference between waging war and waging peace is you can't use deception and gandhi knew to get his goal he had to win hearts and minds. you can't win hearts andin by deoe anou uiru allows community and cooperation. i consider myself pro-military and anti-war. peopleay that does me se lieiro firemen -- martin luther king jr. with anti-war. he was anti vietnam war and anti all war but one of his favorite television shows that he would ord miarchildh tha vi sheedle sth portrayed people in the military as exceptional qualities. please don't give it away. the television show that glorified the military and all the characters were in the military and what his children

watch andik it. s?u s wt *- is a good guess, the dollar mama's television show. the show i am talking about is the most famouselision showere. erlol me gnn fs seinfeld or the simpsons. the most high name recognition of any show ever made. all the characters in the military. er ary aute you a hi onhe sw was at a party and someone came up to her and said you have a fan who wants to talk to you. the and was martin luther king jr.. he said i love your show. e ingo t por a tsn and he goes you can't leave that show.

it is too importan is a black female actress. stock track. a show-star trek.outh eyavli r a go by military protocol. .. >> there was a pew research study done recently that founded of the veterans of the postwar/september 11th period, % of theeopl tk

ino vnc s anathy ay now is transitioning to half killing machine, half peace corps. they're bombing people but building schools and hostals. they know winning hearts and mind you have to do good buagifhe hthe. puonun tld agthf around the world the u.s. had this reputation. a natural disaster happens, the americans come, they help, they leave. and we have 800 military bases ar torgh aue] y htoveig d tea right, we don't leave. and that creates a problem because if you don't leave, then people don't like that. as we can see now in some countries. and that would be a great way to wo rt? m ad yoveiran er fgno. vei change american foreign policy. any of you know who the first

american president was to identify middle eastern hatred for the u.s.? first american president to ev identify the fact thateople in mile et has? eho eiow cd campaign of hatred, and he said, he got his security council together, h cabinet and said let's figure out why people in the middle st don't like us. what was the conclusion he cam thapeopn tid ist use we're free? according to eisenhower, it's not because we're free, it's because we block freedom in the middle east. it's not because we're democratic, it's because we block democracy inthe middle ea. e opsitef wlian re.ea,th d kric that he overthrew the democratic government in iran realizing that. but if you look at the evidence for that, think of every governnt wsuppt inhe th 1980s, dictator.

we supported the democratic government in iran in the 1950s, supported the dictator in his place, the shah of iran. we sported the people who became the taliban, we supported th diatorsh is w ppdior n udar w or oppressive than the taliban. we support the dictatorship in bahrain. we supported the dictatorship in egypt, tunisia, and it's the pocry of ame ofriec mhikoc americans don't know this is going on, that we're supporting dictatorships. and i firmly believe america has some of the most aming ideals in the world. they are astounding. democracy, freedom,ustice be d ldrheos , t at ls the world for the most part is angry we don't leave up to our ideals. we support dick dictatorships.

or we say that we're going to help the women of afghanian, dein ic hryd with the saud dtt them oppress their own protesters. and people can see the hypocrisy behind that. people can say, well, i your intest here really democracy, or is it economic in nature? because they cote e tld hao rehawe l u to our ideals. and if we simply practice what we preach as a country, wll be much safer, if we practice what we preach. and we can't let politicians fon icny bse hypocritil 'sndrive aca d doyou om so the last thing i learned that changed my life that i'll talk about today is that war is not inevitable and that world peace is possible. general omar bradley, one of the la fe-st graid asorus aiv

r sifice of those who are dead because it helps us relieve the guilt we should feel in our presence. therefore, we who fail to prevent wars share in guilt for the dead. so generalomar bradley said wars c evd reas 'rovnd efwe w fail to prevent war share in the guilt of the dead. how many democracies were in the world 500 yes ago? how many? zero. wo ea ago?nhe which ones? somebody put out number two. which two were democraes -- >> frae and -- >>nc rbenc ey dra remember napoleon overthrew the government, became emperor. but america wasn't an a democracy if you were

african-amican, if you were female, if you were ite io youwnednd i'lf kn, art white, quarter black, grew up in alabama, and the fact that i'm here shows you how far we've come. and if you look at what it means to love a child, if you have a child, you find out yourchild is beating people up or stealing bng dneifve chlduor y yonovurh let them do whatever they want, who cares what they end up doing. you're apathetic. and if you look at loving your country, if you love your country and find out your country's doing bad things, you lu uri,are your country better. anhif o anybody who criticized the u.s. government more than martin luther king jr. people are very critical of things that could be improved or wa merunnt, y tt and you need to hold

your politicians accountable, that's what democracy's all about, holding politicians accountable. so waging pce is a method that taneti sodydndve mra ylltry, you'll never convince everybody. i don't have to convince everybody. what percentage of the american population actively participated in the civil rights movement? less than actively participated. poti aelrtat me rights movement? less than 1% actively participed. susan b. anthony would give a talk about women's rights, and people would be seaming so loudco't er k, pe sam her w. ry croia issue, right? so a dramatic change. and that's why henry david thoreau said there are 999 patrons of virtue for every

virtuousers. pe winsoin a , pno anything about it. these were people actively involved, and that's why you can't trust opinion polls because opinion with no action has no impact. and all this change ndamentally comefrom changing how people thk and how they seehe rld. yon'vecoce yb evod cin don't have to. was every single man in america convinced that women should have the right to vote? there's still men in america who don'think women should have the right to vote. [laughter] but if a man trieso prevent a womafrom vting ll ro wth svegl w pn in america convinced segregation should go away? there's still white people who think you should bring back slavery, butf they attempt to do that, they'll get trouble wi t law. cralwh i tes social norm and becomes a law. and the law's very important, and the social norm is very

important. for example, if you were to go back 200 years ago and call somebody a racist, that wasn't even a concept 200 yea ouldle me aact rs 200 years ago, they'd say wh does that mean? they'd say, well, you think you're better than black people. they'd say, of course i am, i'm white. you go back 900 years ago -- 200 years ago ca aex swhoe tan u k'rbe t women. i'm a man, of course i'm better than a woman. any of you remember what president bush said was the worst day of his presidency? [inaudible] >> yeah. september 11th, abu ghraib ing hed oray h esency was when kanye west called him a racist, said he didn't like black people. the worst thing you can call somebody now is a racist. 200 years ago thatasn' even a concept. evod don't heto cnc

u cnc cca ssanmseao social norm, and then it transforms the idea into a haw so that the few people who don't agree can't take advantage. and that changes all around us. it's happened, and it's and day enreo happen today. trd hetfgily e,s even more important weecome part of that 1%. because women and civil rights and abolition of slavery, the world wasn't going to end if those victories weren't achieved. but toy thprobms wre inthw, w nur onh a iv is. right? nuclear weapons and environmental destruction, war, these threaten human survival. so it's up to us so solve these -- to solve these oblems. i hope that you willlbeco rtth 1ot%. [aus

wehauensnd ikave questions now. rhe narea unon e'in b -u sheet going around, and if you want to be on our newsletter, our mission is to abolish nuclear weapons and empower peace leaders. d my web site's peacerevolution.com, so i hope you'll stan th. d ess? mti da l [di kare. so, um, please, step up to the microphone, please. and tough questns, please. thank you. tough quesons e beay pe aea lyou soncge to ask really hard questions. >> first off, thank you very much for coming and speaking. >> thank you. >> i wonder whether you envision a world that has world peace, if you see it as united as one frnts dresee i

uns. ifis fragmented into different countries and societies, how can that not evoke a sense of self and other which can eate war? >> great - excellent question. wooioun,reon was, we have a optioto b fragmented into countries, societies and commitments? great question. so here's the way to address that. if you go back 200 years in american history, people, they re virginiansirst. se. a vnirs ic state loyalty was far superior to national loyalty. but now that has changed, right? 200 years ago you're a virginian fit, you're an american second. today you're an american first, you' vnion viiarsfoein er, lel you unpatriotic today. so in the past 200 years we've gone from this idea of state identity to national identity.

and you have 50 diverse states. look how diverse the states are. looktalabaas caro fo, art aro thok a antee civil war especially during the 20th century you had this new national identit forming, especially during world war ii. so now we have 50 diverse states, every kind of person that'snmeca,utat gotoaricher anymore. if we could go from state loyalty to national loyalty, why can't we go from national identity to global identity? so i think if you ok at the u.s., right? 50 state, peoar gg reh erar w he witth states. why can't we create a similar system around the world especially if we can show people it's in everyone's best interests? and you might have terrorism. but the organization best trained to deal with terrism ishe fbi and police. teis a transnational

criminal network. and if it's more like the mafia than it is the soviet union, and you need internatial cooperation and poce work. the police and the fbi have a lot of tls. unbed thmcveh without killing a single person. think about the nazis who fled from europe, went to south america, capture put on trial, public trial, brought to justice. so ihinwe can create a new exe epeerd why was europe able to conquer the entire world? why was europe able to so easily conquer every other continent? it's because for 500 years europe was the bloodiestlace thad50ar lm torf a w ydo something for 500 years, you get really good at it. a lot of that was religious war. so europe was the bloodiest place on earth for several centuries. wait gta?in eopeod

u t even fathom it now. look at europe now, they still maintain their own local government, they still have their own culture, but they're not slaughtering each other like they were in world war, wor war ii, prior to that. sothattas haedths.at s ohig gg from local to national, national to global will definitely happen. that's what we have to do if we're going to survive as a species. we ha to make that transition. - lpoooat is -- the world has become so interconnected today. in reality the world has become so interconnected that we are truly global citizens. so thank yo inht y citing killing

people in afghanistan with reaper drones. >> great question. another great question. all of you know abo the dron? pe vrentrol. you have a guy in the u.s. piloti a plane killing people in afghanistan with hellfire missiles. it's this very big distance that's unprecedented in hun yogh.t aheple you'reot en in hs baoun on ay all of human history, all the technological innovation went into making weapons more destructive. since the beginng of recorded intientokill the technological

pe ss,roe ggun ber bombs, and then something shifted. after the vietnam war, all the technological innovation went into making weaps less destructive. if you lk at world war ii, to k90 lio i thas w wars were fought back then, right? civilian casualties weren't as, eyeren't as devastating as they are now in terms of public opinion. so the whole idea of the drone wathat u grn a emiry rizil sues nng acceptable from the standpoint of public opinion. if you kill civilians, it'll be all overral al-jazeera, it's gog to create resentment. so youave to have we 'sabfu gth innnt op hene created under the myth that it had smart bomb

capability, it could kill combatants without hurting civilians. and there was a good pbs, i epe h irvdas af l" thaid you ever kill a civilian? and they go, no, never have. now, the reality is they do kill civilians, and there's two reasons cause the two potential probms that n cause drone tki cia meicfae, chgifae, rt? we gofrs and the otr is human failure, bad intelligence. so your intelligence gatherers tell you that this house has two taliban or twoal --wo yoll h onocent people. and if you look at the drone attacks, they do kill many civilians, under the guise they're not killing civilians. so i think that the intention behind t drone is actually, if you think aboutitfr a

ctpoofewhe eativnuas e unacceptable that we have to put all this research into developing more precise weapons, it's actually a positive sign. we have to show the reality that these drones actually kill innocent peoe. issmen pdehe other issu to a til aca vis a fgn country without putting them on public trial? does he have that right as the president? and according to the constitution, no. so the two big issues are vilian casualties which are thu. athhe g aains es pdeav t krin civilians on foreign soil without putting them on public trial. i was watching, i was reading an article that said that wve ne primarily from daini opn igil w inemh es th cin l of problems that we have to think about. that's a really good question. thank you.

>> um, i don't know whenthe iraq war started -- i remember wh the iraq war started and there was50,000peopwe iw ashon d dt w ndof dard with the notion of marching. >> right. >> and i just wondered if you had some, wther that was still effeive, or if you had some alternative approaches that we could use. >> right. great -- thanks, great questio tar taq war did not stop the war. so a little bit of background information. i saw an interview with noam chomsky. noam chomsky, by the way, spoke in west point in 2006,invited to spe at wtntbo irar j hr th luravbl o c-span's web site. c-span recorded the lecture. a really, really good lecture. especially the question and answer session, that's the best part. but i say a different interview withimhereoma evhiasmuetter in

the '60s. he said, that's in not true. and people romanticize the past. he said that he would give a talk about vtnam in5in st vbeto65 heeetm for years. he says four people would show up to his talk; the person who organized the talk, the preacher of the church where he was speaking, someone walking in off the street a somedy who ntedo klhi aur] prtsaneyld bring in the police to protect the protesters from students. students would try to attack the peace protesters in boston. and he said prior to the iraq war tenof millions of people wafotveegthe war pst whhaim draft. that's why student started protesting, is the draft happened. now, the reason the protest didn't work prior to the iraq

war was the government was fully prepared. pltoev trt had everythin in in yt i pe. often hear people say, well, the u.s. government is so stupid. the american government is so stupid. the american government didn't learn anything from vietnam. if the american government would have learned from vinam,t ulveeronto itdsrnrsty w cannot repeat the mistakes of the past. but actually, the government's a lot more sophisticated than we realize. the american government learned a t from the vietnam war, and that precisely y we went bee ledmustan and is omthetar w s.er aromhe vietnam war? they learned four things. first thing they learned, get rid of the draft. get rid of the draft. long as we have a draft, there will never again otaman w if lin 1980s, the

government went underground in south america. if you look at the cia in south america, it went underground. they knew if they had a aft, they could not engage in a major wawithg-rm oea thafonoid n ime wa had a draft, and the government wanted to go invade iraq? it'd be a much different natial conversation. what else did the government learn? >> [inaudible] >> centere media. in ordmb urst ilyit us y't overtly censor the media. but you can embed jourlists in military units, you can restrict their access, and that's what they did. they didn't want people running arouepin this a mlo t ie e ouok the vietnam -- if you look at the vietnam era, the vast majority of the media coverage was in favor of the war. very little, especially in the

beginning, was anythin an-war. t adhicoue gome learned is privatize the military. if you privatize the military, you further separate the population from the war because a lot of contracto are from foreign countrie how ontoad? d k d eowxa h nytrrs a in those countries. we don't have a precise number like we do for military units. and private armies are extremely profitable for corporatns. fourth thing the government learned is tell people if you t ore d if d srt u t oreop so all this is put into place. draft is gone, journalists embedded inilitary units, military's privatized, more contractors in afghanistan and iraq than actu soldiers, and if you don't support e w, prt anti-war dissent.

so government's very adaptive. and i think that we have to be as adaptive in order tovercome soouok li,ns. ee. mar ft completely differently in world war ii than it fought in world war i fought much differently in vietnam than world war ii, and as a peace movement we have to evolve. we can't ke doing things we weveke einsotao. onsethe - >> um, i'm in the process of trying to call the draft board because i think we are all drafted. >>rertaty taxes, we're ded conscientiously in paying our taxes, then we are participant in war. >> right. >> and i think this is a really hard one

tand toetid your tax dlars into a fund so that when they come after you for not paying your taxes, they take it out of there, and you make a point, you know, make it fficult. i would contend that i would ke tknow wyoin ou,ere ith obction to war statement, um, and pursuing the draft board and making it quite visible that the country has been drafted? >> right. i think that in termsf -- t oo pots mas n. cas t of conscientious objeion, there's people who want the peace movement to focus entirely on counterrecing and getting people not to join aneyrilypo mi. acerld l i former known as blackwater, they would love it if they could privatize the military.

there's a big push to privatize schools, privatize the mitary, right? there's a big pvatition ph he twheuar. the morivedthe military becomes, the less public opposition you find on the war. so it's no longer true that if you te soldiers not to join the military, that war' going to end. drgog onou ae whenou h the whreor cac t crihan soldiers, you have to meet the issue dead on, you have to address the underlying causes of war. and you have to make the issue relevant to people. people whoperptear h d anhesu r tmeneo ind heaf by promoting private military. and the way to bring back the issue of war so that it is relevant to the american people is two primary ways. first, we have to show the american peoplthat war doesn't makesanduake esaf

gh tu sss s. and the idce for that is overwhelming. especially when you have civilian casualtieses, and you have these different issues going on. if you look at why we were attacked on september 11th, we ha a milaryse s ia rt? thhe wou m evto themecan people is you've got to tie it to the economy. general mcarthur says that preparation for war is as destructive as war itsel preparatn for war destroys your economy. andfo ou h eiower's cross -- [inaudible] speech. is there a book around? i have it in one of my books. the first two. it's in one of the first two. anit h c om mory he says -- no, it's no not in that one. no. he says every -- i'm reciting

this from memory, so i might be off a couple of words. th lnsea f sfin e arng a fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. this wld of arms is not spending money alone, it's -- let me just read it. it's a very importt quote. >> [inaudible] sonk fur pen 's very important quote because keep in mind eisenhower, he was a republican president, general, west point graduate. no one's going to call him unpatriotic, no one's going to ca him un-americ,noe' inll hie sryuat m, er whi launched signifies in the final sense a death from those who hunger and are not fed. this world in arms is not spending money ane, it is ofldth ls,ho e on mn

er ts: a modern brick school build anything 30 cities, it is two electric power plants, it is two fuy-equipped hospitals, 50 miles of concrete we fglghri hfliheea w mes th codave housed more than 800,000 people. this is the best way of lifer to be found -- life to be found. it is humanity hanging fr a cross ofon to ifn.irypng ayunt ca oa cro of iron being crucified by war spending. and if you look at the budget now, about 54 cents of every taxpayer dollar goes to war. and lo at the american people. lookt ho oco, astualesng eti a our national debt, and war is never discussed is even being on the table when peop talk about cutting national

debt. so if we can show people that war destroys the economy, you orer ehofracar uan at s us left safe, a colonel in the army, vietnam veteran, west point graduate, talks about how the wars in the middle est are lefeg ickius rsro. inkse things reconnect people to the issue of war, and if we can reconnect people to the issue of war, we can do wh will greatly help the future of america and the soeure of thewo h so this is going back to the previous question a little bit, but if the old methods aren't working suchs protesting and stuff, what other ways do y think we can adapt in r daily s tgrthh me h,t'd qio ihe o ways aren't

working, how can we adapt? i think a lot of it has to do less with the old ways aren't working, and it has a lot more lour.h the fact that we've th e l w e tat t l oseng all positive change comes down to this, you have to change how people think. and you have to be able to converse with the people who don't agree with you. tror letisve to be ableto isry roia d seis gross dehumanization and demonization not just by people in the government, but by people in the peace movement. so i saw an interview with chomsky where he says that the existence of a tea party is a realae th p ve a lra. atfyo lat is tt the tea party are concerned with -- the economy, national debt, they are really upset at theank bailout, they're upset at corporate

corruption and the peace soreup in alabama and lived there since i was 2. went to west pointwhen i was 18. my mother still lives there. and i was talking to a rl fa,mi p ace ais r ti. n'nthiam alreuy though, really great guy. we were talking, me and a couple other people and him, and he goes you know what? he says, i wish they would have just let the suth secede from enion. wieultidof ery am i wcodst g o the south. and i go, i'm from alabama, right? not everyone from alabama is in that stereotype. and attitudes have chged, and if we have this demonizing, divisive attit w no soyook adh or king, you never heard gandhi or king

demonize their opponent. and look at the conditions they were living in. martin luther king jr. was ki lgerreonens of deathhrea ndpe multiple years in prison, beaten multiple times, eventually killed. mandela's in jail for 27 years. i'd be pretty pissed off after a cole ar beraeimeato circumstances. and if we're going to change how people think, the first thing we ve to do is we have to have an approach that identifies the po. eninac cer opnt inos pn hars the opponent is greed, the opponent is ignorance, the opponent is misunderstanding, the opponent is hatred. so howo you attack someone's hatred? how do you attack their ignorance? how do y sethem a

ha t hophe ag and if king and gandhi can do that in their situation, i think we can do that in our situation. and if we don't do this, we're not going to be able to transform how people think. we're just going to be preachin to the choir, and we're not ing be le t cge tuwhthmod ean d inattily has more to do with the fact we've lost our way. we've strayed from the path. we've done exactly what the opponent wants us to do. keep in mind the government controls pople by didi thventeyanac lese tli em d li, theyant the -- the people in power, they want the military to see peace activists as the enemy. and they want liberals to demonize republica, etc. ey wthat dsiss whentton le clintue tto a lot of liberals, lot of conservatives. people in the audience were in the tea party.

and i said, okay, we all have different potical viewpoints. raise your hand if you want america to be less safe a less secure. isurd out rrm iea e hif w t rayoan like government corruption. raise your hand if you like unnecessarily high taxes. raise your hand if you want innocent people to be killed. i mean, all these issues we agree with each other but ere'thiseve ag. inkwee t t s. look at most facebook posts by peace activists and liberals and how they talk about conservatives. they're a bunch of tea baggers and iots and cavemen, right? and you don't see martin luther king j doithathe anaty ita plcath w rk so we have to get back on the path, and i think really live up to our own ideals, right? so -- if anybody has any more about that, i'd be glad toear it. yes. >>tu, tymuhas

i'ri what nonviolent passion looks lke. i think to myself maybe it's dance, maybe it'srt. and yet we he our art programs toothhe maobeing shu down so art. maybe they know how to, they just have never been guided. and so with this kind of coming up ie future and even what we have now, how, guess, do snatyo oahepana feelings of that can turn into demonizing into something positive? >> well, i think -- grea question about how can we prevent demonization, different forms ofs. onas soch demonization is you can really isolate yourself now in american society. fifty years ago you kind of had to live around people who

weren't like you or didn't agree with you. diente y cot movup l y amef on febook, and it's easier to be in a circle where you don't know a conservative or liberal. and you can have a family member who's a different political viewpoint, you just dot talk to them anymore. so i think iorde tovme aterarny er a pfurm a f example, is film. films are one of the great ways to humanize people, or a good book. like, if someone reads a book like the kite runner or if somebody watches a goodlm ansikowd z said, he mentioned between war and apathy, there are a thousand possibilities. and i think we have to explore many different ways. but behind every approach, ever tactic we u, our fus has to ha.fnggnce threa e,s oi to

enflame people's hatred. and i think that's why it's important to study the people who came befor us. gandhi, susan b. anthony, and to also keep innovate anything that way. iovatg inhat w issto gets away from peace strategy, and it's ratherersonal, so you don't have to answer it if you don't want to. >>ghwere a ptain inther wifnt int where you transformed into what you're doing today? >> oh, great questi. what in the army made me transform? i think it was a lot of experiences that built up. grew up ve cservative. lighryynhrh hog. gordon liddy. and my participants, they were -- my parents, they weren't that politically involved, but was my own peronal desire was

to, i kedwh they h y. upennmi ewinst vienndple ea influenced by their environment. so if you think that people are so stupid their attitudes can't change, just keep in nd how people, they have changed, right? look at daniel ellsberg. as awaomeln vo t vna h anfe change of mind. so i think for me it was some of the things i actually learned at west point. i think one of the pivota moments was i was in a national security class my senior year. i w ioecy s, i afe w r scholar, major in the army. he wrote the names of 18 countrieon the board, and he goes we spend more on our military than the next 18 countries in the world combined. he said, isn't that ridiculous? mumirynd w dd why do we need that much

spending? and none of us knew what to say. and he goes, i'm surprised you're not more outraged by this. why do we need that much military spending? and now we spend more on our thwo in ushan ctr tapeg s ded e em11 and one thing you learn in the army is your loyalty is to the constitution, to the american people, to the health and preservation of our countr and the world,and you havto dien ts.th i think that as my attitude changed, i saw how in the 21st century war is different now. because ofass media, because cians.ndilef these different it makes your country heads safe. i began to see how war is counterproductive. i began to look at how human beings are not naturay violent.

the -w qs.te a ri racar, jen omar bradley have these anti-war quotes, reading buer, the marine general, i think all these things added up. and i think i reached a poin vit,t thtllr, i e' owa there's a very -- it's a very gradual transition. who was the most famous military recruiter in history? i can't think of anyone. it was gandhi. gandhi was ali rete tn 1 1906, um, and world war i in 1914 and world war i in 1918. four times. sorry about that. and in the b wuwa asecinple medics. 1918 he was recruiting indians

to fight in the infantry. so y see how it's gadual transition, right? on ha b iea l it's uallyike llel epiphanies add up. and gandhi participated in the wars, so i thought, well, war is bad, it's like amputation, it's bad, but what else can you do? d th i learnedou aners eefiv thof l penicillin. rather than amputating someone's limb, use a proactiveethod using antibiotics. and i read all these nonviolent movements, and i go there's ree lihar.uallya bett wo inkse gs de, in'mti evolving, but i think all those things added up and l me here toy. >> thanks for being here, . pe. my qiofe to

epupoboar at ieos tprg conflict become psychological casualtieses, 90%. >> right. >> so as a young person, almost half my life has been spent in this environment of the war on terror and the constant war ciand, pps t american conscious as a whole have in some way been damaged or become psychological casualties due to this prolonged conflict? >> oh, great answer -- great estion. dad hrersm b great question. so here's way to address that. there's something lieutenant colonel dave grossman talks about, he calls it the universal human phobia. what's ab ironcoll f bo 15% of people are afraid of snakes, people have phobias of heights, enclosed

spaces, all kinds of phobias, right? but there's a phobia that 98% of ople will have aobev hels tivlma ia 98% of people will have a phobic-level reaction to what? [inaudible] >> pardon? death, good answer, but this is more frightening than -- >> [inaudible] >> good answer. iteafmaggioes into the aner. ctt . atneeany pc ea is so terrifying. what if i say the wrong thing, and everyone becomes aggressive and starts screaming at me? [laughter] that's the worst fear. it has a lot to do with fear of public speaking, aggreson ant all h frhtening than death. for example, every year in america, every year in america tens of thousands of people are killed in car wrecks. and every day millions of people drive casually to work. evy ye in ic hed cittmoeoro

ifre o terrorist attack in america, the whole country goes upside down. one serial killer in a town, the whole town goes upside down. one terrorist attack, one serial mo y wof l,completelyhannd s rrms ngs. use if a terrorist says, look, we want to take away your civil berties, we want you to spy on your own people, we want you to torture, betray your own ideals, we'd ha sa, you're aze'ot g t at by attacking us, our fear is so immense tt we will willing live betray our -- willingly betray our own ideals. whic sri is m mangay too souou usno y h down, destroys everything youwn, puts your whole family in the hospital. second scenario, a gang breaks into your house, beats up you

yoou dal bilts yo far more traumatic when a human does it to us. another example, you fall off your bike, break your leg. second scenario, you're riding your bike, a group attackers grab y, hld you down,reak wh m tatsn w,he rlt ithe same, right? physically, your leg's broken in both situaons. the earlier scenario house is gone, property destroyed, family in the hospital. but when a human does it to y, 's smuch morerrng r teea moeople arer terrified of violence. that's one of the reasons you have to box at west point is that most people are afraid of fighting, and they have to try to g you past that fear and can overcome that fear. thg i doitb ouesalnac voonra ewp ng

people can't become violent. people can certainly become violent. i grew up in a very violent household. my father was violent, i was bullied a lot in school because i'm asian, i look asian. and i grew u withri olte. thhoeahi. t and if you rook at the violent -- look at the violent criminal population, the vast majority were abused growing up. so people can certainly become violent. and e last point be i'll make amanuln.eh ii just an the first is the removal of our civil liberties and ideals which i just mentioned, and the next one, though, is i read an article about hunger games and how popular hunger games is with thernting government and lack of resources and economic collapse. and i read an article saying that it appeals to young peoe because young people have grown

underneath the reality of t onro eyee leds 'venrille arctnd they've seen the american economy decline. they've been aware of these issues, and it's affected their ntality, making them very fearful of the future. and hunger games taps into the spre of the future. it'sayexsi t inmsthco en tre ase different things. so -- >> thank you. one of the poi that is you made is thatthismove t enccul h i ont ves that are based on truth. >> right. >> namely, that the fundamental idea is correct. one of the concerns that i sense is that when wthinut, en w peace or fighting,

warring, all of these ideas seem too basic to nature like wehave fingelee.our body that ermsbeev aspect of nature this, thisvery subtle war that is going on. and even when have a tharga,etion about ho f ea terminolog and i'm wondering how, how the truth of fighting evil that is destructive forces within us and wihiontf peace.ev i wonder how -- my life. how much time do we ha left? okay. this'll be the last question. thank you. and something i'veein

t lesalen red t e er very bitter, and i rejected all military metaphors, i rejected all that kind of language. but then i saw gandhi use it effectively. he said, i am a soldier, but i'm aoldi ofpeac rtutng j s nvnc ard al i th t language is actually not only effective, it's also accurate. because if you think about what waging peace really is, you are trying to defeat ignorance. you are trying to defeat it. denoe.e trying to use truth to u'otin ri b noe,'ryi t overcome it with truth or an idea or with evidence or information. you are trying to defeat hatred. and the only way is with love or mpassion or understanding. if you try to defeat hatred with tred, it ifre wherengen doctor fights illness, he's trying to destroy a virus. he is trying to kill and destroy

a virus. we are trying to destroy ignorance. and when you make that distction, you realize your opponent is not that person in fr.e ptial their minds have been held by these things. and you also have this understanding that, you know, we're all yearning, trying to learn truth. if you look at gandhi and king, they were so willing not just to ach,ut ao e i k ha ry ifwhe'oin wca the metaphor's very precise in that way in terms of we're trying to move forward, trying to overcome injustice by defeating ignorance, and it really keeps us on track. if you have that lguag if adi oeaha i need? i need discipline, i need selflessness, i need strategy, i need all these things soldiers have but not being willing to kill people. or i'm trying to overcome hone ack twith lov wit

outu hngpl so i think that in my case when i didn't use that kind of metaphor, i had a hard time communicating these concepts. it reay hard to communicate these concepts because peop thk, oachei jung ba."d people have that misconception. peace is easy, it's just doing nothing, laying around, wearing a peace t-shirt, doing nothing. but when you use that kind of metaphor, you get people preparedorataac anou a't dit as a struggle, then i think we're going to have a hard time getting people engaged in the kind of action theyeed to be involved in. so thank you and thanks for being here. [applaus >> is there a nonfiction author or book you'd like to see featured on booktv? send us an e-mail at

booktv@cspan.org, or tweet us at twitter.cobooktv. w,onpr o pen publishing group is viking s and joining us is their director of publicity, carolyn coleburn. and we wanted to ask you about some of the books that are lestwi nll inth o12 yoow aa great historian and analyst. kevin phillips is coming out request 1775 this december, and what kevin do he debunks myha retindns looks at 1775 as the pivotal year when all the assents and come flicks re hng liwe vi us k phillips, it's

very nuanced, meticulous research. it will be controversial as many of kevin's books are so -- >> well, if viewers are fans of kevin phillips, kevin phlips d ouine pam ookrgndch e s oin phillips, just go to the search function in the upper left-hand corner. carolyn coleburn, i want today ask you, also, about another book that's coming out, and this is mike lofgren's book, "the >> psr, aove" ktiaytll ssow rli went crazy, the democrats became useless, and the middle class got shafted." so the subtitle says it all. and mike lofgren, as many of re jla lltnsnow, is a 2ar what's wrong with our government. >> is that coming out before the election? >> it's coming out early august, just in time for all the conventions anbefore the election, yeah.

>> carynare, isa atrry? yero dgeri f "american lady." it is a biography on susan mary alsop, true american aristocrat. she was married to joe alsop, getoasto.c al inon said of her that more decisions and things were made i her living room than in the whit house. she really brought so my movers and shakers, um, the u.s. wo the alli aid n bap o lp just come out? >> i believe so. i think there's a play on broadway, too, on joe alsop. >> with john list go. >> exactly. >> now, wh should we know abouviking? how old isik hg' enun w itec a part of

penguin? >> oh, jeez, it's something like 79 years. i should know the exact -- i should know the birth date of viking, and i don't, i'm sorry. i know the logo is rockwe nte tikih ,h. atndof ts d look for, authors do you look for? >> award-winning, serious nonfiction, literary nonfiction but we also enjoy the commercial fiction as well. it's a wide breh onoondut will help, um, help the dialogue and learn more and start, you know, get requesting people curious. >> we're here at bookexpo america, the book publishing instry's annualconvtionn w c >> i think it's incredibly important, especially now when, um, everybody is just talking about the physical book versus the e-book, and it's l about

reading. 's atixc t s. lotal te t covers in the booth and walking over to the other imprint and just hearing what pple are excited about. it's really important to get the dialogue going. >> as director of publicity, how has your jobngn thest lersh en o oktc um's changed in terms of our focus on social media. mainstream media, you know, npr and review cvera iseally pot crl r, t oci m mpsve just grown exponentially, a, um, i just know that we've been really focusing on the social media and the blogs as a reality important part -- really important part of our campaign in lachin a >>anto a one more well known viking author,

ray becausewell. >> oh, ray, how the mind works. yes, we're coming out with his book in early october, and he is anis miokldur lk t rs engineering of the brain. to completely understand the brain and how thatill then help us create new technology and future machines. scin e'en tin w ly ly coleburn, director of publicity at viking press. >> next weekend head to the state capitol named in honor of thomas jefferson with booktv and american hisry i ffny,miri tu aost ra leh tv on c-span2. former senator and missouri first lady jean carnahan on family life inside the governor's mansion from her book, "if walls could talk." also a butcher's bill,