having been the assistant secretary of state for national narcotics and law enforcement affairs. a tough one to get out. from 2007-2011 ambassador johnson, will you do the honors? >> it is indeed a pleasure to

introduce gil kerlikowske. gil is a colleague and a friend. he is the director of the office of national drug control policy which makes him responsible for coordination of all our nation's counter narcotics policies and also makes him the coordinator of a disparate range of law-enforcement policy groups, cats in urination's leadership. a career law-enforcement officer having grown up if you will in law enforcement in st. petersburg and subsequently serving as the commissioner of police in buffalo and chief of police for nine years in seattle where he had an extraordinary record of lowering crime engaging with the community. as stee mentioned it was my pleasure to work with him here in washington and to be coordinated by him.

if you will he brought a new breath of leadership to his position and he has one of those signal achievements of a great leader which is he brought what great people with him, is really impressive. it is my pleasure to welcome you to the platform. [applause] >> good morning. a pleasure to be back at the center for strategic and international studies in the americas program. really wonderful to be introduced by a person i have a lot of -- the very difficult task that he undertook and the leadership steven provides. i very much appreciate the opportunity and the relationship. cf cfisis an important leader in

the international community and i am this the delighted to discuss drug policy. some promising new information to share with you about cocaine production and consumption in this hemisphere. before i address that i want to talk to you about the state of drug policy. last month i have a wonderful opportunity to lead the american delegation for the international conference on the global drug problem. hosted by president humala and individuals in 61 countries. i joined those from five continents to share america's approach to reducing drug use and to hear about drug policy in other countries and to discuss it at wang. what works and what the obstacles each country faces and the best path forward in the twenty-first century.

as i sat with drug policy leaders from across the globe by realize our areas of agreement far outweighed our differences. we were all united in pursuing drug policies that are balanced, realistic and focus on public health and safety of our citizens. leading up to the conference there was considerable discussion in the media here and in latin america of about uruguay's move to legalize -- the statements from advocacy groups would have suggested worldwide legalization movement was a foot and before the conference it wasn't clear what kind of tone the peru summit would take. problems caused by drugs in latin america are frustratingly complex but the public discourse on these issues for lives around the simplicity of sound bites. a drug problem is complex and requires a complex solution.

i was pleased to see the world's leaders in drug policy agree on a three pronged approach and although it doesn't when its ultrasound bytes, it is a strategy that will be quite effective. as we have seen in latin america institutional support for alternative development is absolutely critical. on number of trips had the opportunity to meet with many people engaged in fish farming, growing cow of -- working in other alternative crops, the success has been pretty amazing. not only reduces the amount of drugs out of latin america but in shores farmers who make their living from crop production have viable alternatives to support themselves and their families in a way that is safer and better for their families and these farmers have to be protected as they grow alternative legal

crops. that is why this administration has devoted a billion dollars to alternative development programs in the last three years. these provide economic incentives and drug producing regions in western hemisphere. secondly the global drug policy community is committed to reducing supply of drugs that are geographic focus and supply reduction not limited to just wet and america. last week it was reported united states is training counter narcotics enforcement units within other countries for example in gonna to disrupt the flow of cocaine, for nigeria and kenya. we know latin america transnational criminal organizations will exploit political and social unrest in vulnerable countries we have to be nimble in our response. another recent article covered the drug problem in countries traditionally thought of as

force or transit countries. these are clearly artificial distinctions. in these countries drug-trafficking organizations paid their networks in drugs and not in cash increase in drug consumption in those areas is a great concern. increased consumption strains public health services in developing nations that are all too often ill-equipped to handle the influx of people who need treatment for addiction. finally the third prong of the global approach to drug control is reducing demand for drugs. that is an important part of the administration strategy. our 2012 strategy. i know you have all read it and earmarked and have your copies with you but they are still available. the president requested more money for treatment and prevention programs he did for u.s. law enforcement. in the past three years we have spent $31 billion to support

drug education and treatment programs. we are often told the united states and europe are the only areas where drug consumption is a major problem but here in the united states we're engaged in an unprecedented effort to hear -- to reduce drug consumption through prevention, treatment and recovery programs. we routinely see evidence of drug consumption in countries where this problem has not been visible before. in latin american countries in particular have their own produce as countries in africa. just before the summit in peru i visited guatemala where i met with president molina and visited a drug rehabilitation center in guatemala city. the women in the treatment center where for all over the country but it was a small facility and only 12 women were able to stay there and the price of treatment was $200. the treatment center was a small attempt to meet a public health

need not confined by national borders and in many cases women treated at this center me enormous sacrifices to be there and their attempt to find treatment had been woefully ltd. before they are arrived. my point is drug consumption isn't just the u.s. or european problem. is a significant and growing social problem in places we once mistakenly called supply or transit countries. as we look for solutions to the global drug problem we must understand and recognize the united states isn't only capable of exporting helicopters or training counter narcotics units in other countries. we lead the world in evidence based treatment and prevention programs when can and do support that knowledge. through the central american regional initiative, other initiatives helping to create safe streets in latin america, disrupt drug trafficking and

support democratic institutions but funding also goes to gain prevention and social programs for at risk youth to provide healthy alternatives to substance use and during my trip to guatemala i visit a u.s. drug prevention program called my first steps. it was built on the framework of a u.s. program and developed into a program that uniquely reflected the culture in guatemala. the combination of american expertise in guatemala at cultural influence influences created a huge program uniquely suited to the needs of that country's don't people and by exporting u.s. expertise and encouraging partner nations to make programs of their own we can recreate similar drug prevention programs in countries where drug use is increasing. of this points to one conclusion. the international drug control community must find ways to work together and increase cooperation both in cutting the supply of drugs and reducing

demand for them. i am pleased to report there's a significant amount of international solidarity on this matter. earlier i told you i did have some good news and there's much more work to do but i am able to report multiple cross the border indicators show that cocaine production and u.s. cocaine consumption are declining. new estimates we are releasing today show that in 2011 potential cocaine production colombia dropped 72% from 2,011. potential reduction of cocaine in colombia is 195 metric tons down from 700 metric tons in 2001. the lowest production potential levels since 1994 and the first time since 1995 that colombia is producing less cocaine than peru or bolivia. what about our own consumption.

since 2006 in the united states the number of current cocaine users has decreased by 39% and in 2011 a survey of adult males in ten cities show fewer are testing positive for cocaine and all ten of those sites across the country where this is tracked show a significant decrease in 2011 compared to 2,003. let me add context to these. it didn't happen overnight. there was a sustained effort for nearly a decade. steady strategic pressure across more than one administration in the united states and in colombia. it didn't happen solely to efforts made by the united states. this is a partnership between the united states and colombia that didn't happen because the strategy was based on a hard line and a result of a balanced

approach that involved integrated strategic steps. the results are historic and have tremendous indications for the united states and the western hemisphere and globally. the security threat colombia and the united states faced in 1999 is done and has been accomplished without offsetting results elsewhere as we know from our estimates in the entire andy and bridge. we don't have a far safer colombia. we have a vibrant colombia that is active in helping with drug and criminal issues throughout the region. colombia is committing its own resources to help its neighbors through training, information exchanges and regional leadership. these lessons provide a model for dealing with challenges throughout the world particularly in central america. these numbers are hardening but should not distract us from the fact the transnational criminal organizations are clearly a

threat to civil society everywhere. we have seen that in our southern neighbor mexico. the administration condemn the gruesome drug-related violence and committed to partnering with the mexican government to disrupt cartels that commit such brutality. these organizations pose a significant challenge. they don't just play on citizens through drug distribution but diversify their operations through human trafficking, contraband smuggling, financial fraud and extortion, spreading violence. will corruption wherever they operate. newsgroups are in the business for money and power and there is no limit to the schemes that they will employ to extract illegal proceeds from our society is. in an interview with pbs in may the head of groupat a reform put it well, quote, once the dominating cartel establishes territorial cartel it turns to the most profitable part of its

business, selling protection. kidnapping and extortion, piracy, contraband legal sale of organs, prostitution. cartels will turn to anything illegal that makes money and the profitability of drugs is quite low compared to the profitability of these other areas. united states take our responsibility to disrupt and dismantle major drug-trafficking organizations operating in our own borders very seriously. the united states law-enforcement agencies disrupted or dismantled 612 drug-trafficking organizations that were on the attorney general's target list. that focuses and major drug trafficking and violent criminal organizations that offer in our own country. we have interagency task forces operating in every part of this country to identify and disrupt a major drug-trafficking distribution networks within the united states and we welcome the

dialogue on the best tactics to address the threat posed by transnational criminal organizations. we recognize it is appropriate to continue to examine what works best and we recognize transnational criminal networks would not disappear if drugs were made legal. these organizations don't derive all their revenue from drugs as i just mentioned and they would not simply disband if drugs were legalized. institutions like csi s play an important role balancing the approach to the international drug issue. too often we continue to face this polarized debate. legalization that one end of the spectrum and the war on drugs at the other. this administration is committed to the third way forward. legalization is not a policy nor is walking every offender of the. our approach focuses on public health challenge of drug consumption and the science of

addiction and tackling the international security challenge posed by transnational criminal organizations. there is not a simple answer to the global drug issue. is complex and threatens the health and security of people everywhere regardless of their citizenship. i am grateful for the opportunity to provide some insight into the global policy landscape and this administration's approach. thank you very much. [applause] >> now we come to the part of the program by told you about earlier where we have questions and answers. if you have a question raise your hand. we will get a microphone to you. keep your questions short so that we have time for more than just one. i think we had one go up here

and then the next. >> my name is richard kennedy. i am not real -- retired cia analyst who graduated from college before marijuana showed up on campus. i got interested in drug policy when i went back to grad school with you years later so it was pretty clear 40 years ago that marijuana is not more dangerous than alcohol and today we know with certainty that it is a less dangerous drug and alcohol and tobacco. those drug the killing half a million americans every year and a number of marijuana deaths is so low we can't even detect it in epidemiological studies. mr kerlikowske's office is contributing alcohol and tobacco death because you are sending a message to our kids that the only drug in need to worry about is marijuana. i think that is a tragic mistake. >> we have a comment? >> we concentrate on wide array

of drug issues. we clearly don't try to prioritize which is more dangerous than the other. huge mistake to think marijuana is a benign substance because it clearly is not. it is not legalization nor is decriminalization and answer. when a legal substance becomes legal use increases. the infrastructure in this country as well equipped already to deal with the number of people that have alcohol problems, suffered the effects of nicotine. i don't think we are in the position to take care of the people. one in ten and that doesn't include new users who become addicted to marijuana. and we don't think locking everyone up for marijuana is an answer. steven mentioned the war on crime. we talked about that for a long time.

we don't think there's a end in sight. the officers in seattle that reduced crime through their dedicated work never thought they would work themselves out of a job. legalization is not going to solve our drug problem. [applause] >> we have a question here. >> i am from an american couple organization. the strategy substance-abuse and public health and we offer support at a regular organization and 24 offices in different countries of the region to support all be used government to improve the view of this problem. we are very worried about actions in every country that

what is available to -- we are in a better situation to support and give every initiative you are trying to go ahead. >> the public health approach is critical and important to deal with this problem. thank you. we have one here. and two here. >> the presentation, one has to step back and ask given a very optimistic presentation and comprehensive scheme, the heads of state were not convinced, critical of the current policy. many previous heads of states,

similarly had questions. the questions go to each of the three areas. they don't see the alternative development and i was very much involved with that as comprehensive in dealing with world poverty and such. the question of drug production facie the bloom effect and there has -- almost 30 years. they average 180 to 210,000 in the indian rich countries. they question that. the third is in terms of what you are discussing which is quite important which is the question about how you deal with the crime you see in mexico right now. the rising violence. and in some transit countries.

the question is wouldn't it make sense for the u.s. government to support something similar to what latin americans did and bipartisan panel that would essentially provide an independent view of independent issues for the next president and the next administration. second term president obama or a new romney administration, independent review and study that would prevent their findings to the u.s. government? >> a lot there. a couple things are important. the o a s after the peru meeting is taking on this issue in a more comprehensive way. this administration has never been shy about saying we can engage in discussion and debate. the president and vice president have made it clear where they

stand on legalization and decriminalization. what is missed in mexico is often times people want to use colombia as a template. colombia was as you know well over a decade in making these significant changes. if the numbers that are holding out for these dead parts of president calderon administration showing reduction in violence, it gives some proof that this doesn't happen in a very quick fix. unfortunately for americans we are very happy to solve every major problem in a 30 minute television show that exists and we want quick answers but i don't think whether it comes to collecting taxes, treating people or the fact that when i listen to the 61 representatives of those countries and these are people still in office. they are clearly responsible for the health, safety and security

of the people they represent, i did not hear any appetite for legalization. >> good morning. thank you for your reports. csis america program. i want to dig deeper on what you said about alternate development as a solution because one of the things that cannot of the work in colombia and other countries was that in order to be successful you needed security in these regions to promote development to get crops to market or any of these other alternative crops and the success of columbia -- colombia is the security environment. how do you as a coordinator work this through the department of defense and aide to create the environment because of the goal is to reduce drugs you need these kinds of stable area's first.

i was interested in pursuing that. >> i will answer from hear otherwise i won't be able to see. from a along career for four decades as a police chief you didn't change the level of crime in a neighborhood unless you had safety and security going into it and it was the people themselves who felt more safe and more secure that made the changes that were necessary to say crime is not welcome and drug dealing in their neighborhoods. a historic pattern of violence and crime reduction that occurred here in the united states and that pattern would clearly hold in alternative -- in talking to the people there, family members were so pleased because there was safety and security and they were not coming into the neighborhood and even though at times they have

less money in their pockets, the safety, security and the fact they could take care of their families and the crop would eat and not be taken by the government or taken -- made a huge amount of difference. we worked very closely and the best example is the colombia national police very heartened by what i heard about mexico and the fact that general neronho is a key adviser to the new incoming president on safety and security and we want very much to be strong partner in safety and security and moving forward on these other issues. thank you. larry? >> larry lobster, washington diplomat. you highlighted colombia

reducing cocaine production and exports over the last ten years and also touched on mexico -- what could of smaller nations of central america learn from the colombia experience like what milan and honduras which have the world's highest homicide rates and is there a danger some of these countries are taking a heavy handed iron fisted approach military approach that might backfire? >> rather than speak about each of the different countries with a different perspective on this, a couple things that are well worth while in colombia -- colombia is the citizens of colombia were taxed at a novel that was -- they were able to provide infrastructure and safety and security that made a huge difference and when you listen to president calderon's speech, p kissinger electorate, is concern was about that

infrastructure. there are examples in mexico to the north and colombia to the south where these countries could actually make the important dedication that is needed to infrastructure, safety, security, reducing corruption that is the foundation for this and i don't have sufficient detail to comment on your question about is the approach heavy-handed or does it violate human rights. but in talking to a number of people in a variety of my trips the protection of people and protection of human rights is something they have spoken to me about that they are quite proud of in many ways. >> one question here and then we will start working our way to the other side to the other

side. >> mary beth from the washington post. thank you for your talk. since 2006 the number of cocaine users declined by 39%. what part of that is due to government efforts? an epidemic sort of crested and people started to quit because they realize how awful it was. how much of that was due to government efforts? >> if i really knew the exact specific answer to that i would become a highly paid consultant in csis in the future so i think it is two parts. one is clearly reducing supply is incredibly helpful to reducing demand in the united states and when the product is more difficult to obtain that is important. isn't just in colombia but at our border and a number of other

shipment points. the second thing that i think is really important has been the educational efforts that are often not getting the credit for helping reduce that level of consumption here in the united states. .. but if you were to ask me like which actually have the most impact and is it the government,

i just, i wouldn't have that answer. >> in the center. >> speaking of your remarks regarding about mexican general who is advisor to the new administration was one if your office has been in contact with anyone from the new administration in mexico and whether or not more broadly than the specific adviser, what do you think what, how that that administration opinion will begin to change the drug war therefore the drug policy. >> since he doesn't take office now for several months, and any of these things are now still forming and there are a lot of places within the bureaucracy of the united states government for the department of state to the national security staff, that are involved with this, i would only tell you that from all

other statements that i've read in everything i've heard, certainly the generals reputation, that i'm very encouraged that they will continue to look at this. president calderón has often said that these cartels can often become state actors and replaced legitimate government. and he told me specifically at one time, he said there's a strong reason for me to take these on. he said the people of mexico elected people, and i have appointed people to run this country. is a drug trafficking organizations and criminal cartels have no business trying to run the country. and he, in my estimation, he's been an incredibly courageous in taking them on. and his wife has been incredibly strategic about making drug prevention and drug treatment a signature effort during her entire time as first lady.

>> lady in the yellow dress all the way in the back. >> thank you. mr. kerlikowske, some people in columbia consider violence president them is not completely gone. this is related to the narcotraffickers? my second part, how would you see the cooperation with colombia and the neighboring countries? thank you. >> i think the first part, recognizing the reductions in the forces of the farc and what has been done to them is important. they are certainly able to at times operate just certainly as criminal gangs can operate in some of our locales throughout the united states. but i think the fact that the law enforcement initiatives have been so well structured, so

well-thought-out and the training and equipping of the law enforcement, the lumpkin national police is particularly important i think it's probably inappropriate for me to comment on president santos and relationship of columbia, in particular on these issues to other countries. other than to say i believe that the number of countries that clearly admire what has occurred in colombia from a safety, security and economic standpoi standpoint. and both president the rebate and resident santos have made -- and president santos have made important efforts in their administration. along with the fact that they have also clearly embraced so many community-based organizations. we have representatives that are here that have spent inordinate amounts of time saying is that

we have done to strengthen the capacity of local neighborhoods in local communities to reduce this problem. >> director, thank you were those insightful remarks this morning. i am with community coalitions of america. it's a strategy that is about 20 years old that's been certified a united nations. and my comment is that for the last six years we have been working in these countries to build community-based multi-sector organizations, and the reception has been unbelievable. colombia has been one of the real success stories, but we've been also throughout central and south america, brazil, el salvador, honduras, guatemala, you name it, peru.

we are now working in asia, and about six countries in africa, some of the former soviet union countries. and my comment is that the demand strategy, went embraced at the community level, is having tremendous impact, and we're about to have an evaluation that's gone on for the last two years in peru that says when this is in place, you can reduce not only consumption but also crime as well. so my hope would be that the u.s. would continue to have a very strong demand perspective in its policy, both domestically and internationally. >> thank you, general. i think president obama's dedication to community building and strengthening community of lies not just here in the united states, but worldwide, and thank you for the work that you all do. >> i think with a question

directly impact of our last questioner. >> should read wilkins from partner of the americans. again i want to thank you for your remarks and the work you're doing in this area. i have a two-pronged question that is based on the statistic you mentioned and he is specifically that cocaine use has declined 39% since 2006. part a of my question is have you noticed increases in any of the types of drugs, specifically for illegal use of prescription drugs, and also methamphetamines? and with that when you take the aggregate result of that a decrease in cooking with the increase apostle the other drugs has there been a decline over all in use of drugs in the united states? >> it's always frightening summit has a part a and a. part b to the question. but i tell you, spoken as a true diplomat, david. but i think it's important to recognize a couple things. first of all, that in the last

30 years of drug use generally across the nation has declined in the united states. the fact that we've had some increases in the last couple years is important to recognize. i don't know if the research supports people moving away from cocaine and then say gee, i'm going to do something else. and especially when it comes to our prescription drug problem in this country. prescription drugs not come across any border take more lies than cocaine and heroin each year combined. and yet it's been a bit of an unrecognized problem, until particularly over the last three years really tried to highlight it. so there has been progress in the country on reducing drug use, for a whole host of reasons. and i think that switching from one drug to another does happen. we are concerned about people

that are addicted to prescription opiate when -- painkillers, moving to heroin. that information is antidotal and we have to watch it very carefully. it all says though one very important thing, and that is prevention. getting people the tools and information, what they need, whether it's through the media or social media, or role models and parents goes a long way. and you know what, it's a heckuva lot cheaper. >> the gentleman here and then the gentleman over here. >> hi. my name is jesse. she mentioned the consumption side of cocaine. interested in the production sector i think there's a lot of evidence that drug cartels are simply switching to cheaper, easier produced drugs such as methamphetamines. i'm wondering what role that might be playing with the

reduction of cocaine production? >> our methamphetamine use is down by almost 50%, so if i talked about our reduction in cocaine use by 39%, during about the same time period our methamphetamine use in the country has decreased also. so i think that that's important to recognize, but it's also i think the point that you raise, which would be that these cartels are going to continue to make money, they're going to continue to find new markets, whether it is in the poorest and most economically deprived countries in the world, or countries in which the economy seems to be doing significantly better, australia for example, being one that is talking about their own consumption problems. so they are are very smart criminals and they have been now not worry about borders our language or evaluation of any particular currency, and that's what i think it's important for us to continue to recognize that

this is a problem about safety, security. but it's also in the drug area just a huge public health issue, and we really haven't been that good at using the public health tool on this issue. >> the gentleman here. >> it would seem that one useful measure of the success of interdiction efforts would be, say, the median street price, take your drugs sight in the 10 or 20 or 30 largest settings. is that kind of data being collected and what does it look like, overtime? and, of course, in constant dollars so you don't get an inflation affect. >> the drug enforcement administration, through their surveys and purchases, looks at both purity and price your gram

of cocaine in particular and this is often brought up about a reduction in purity and perhaps an increase in price, which i think then leads me to have some concern, particularly from an editorial or a columnist peace in "the new york times," that this is the only measure that's needed about how to look at the drug problem and what we are facing or what we are doing. i think that the more important is to look at this holistically pakistan like the economist in the olympic at the if the only use gdp or only one data point to tell you have the economy is doing, and so we have information. i'm happy to provide not only overtime, but by drug to you. >> we have a question right in front.

>> thank you. good morning. i'm the ambassador of costa rica. thank you for your talk and for the report you circulated among all of our embassies, and for your openness to receive the ambassadors of central america on repeated occasions, you and your staff have really been remarkably communicative, and i appreciate that. i just want to refer to the majors list. as you know, as you have pointed out now, the line between production and transit and consumption have become increasingly very, i think the whole world, not just in hemisphere but in the whole world, and i'm wondering if there's any chance that we can approach a day when the major's list will, in fact, be a limited because it may become irreleva

irrelevant. it certainly is harmful to our countries who have been punished by the success in colombia him and to some extent in mexico. and i know you understand this whole issue very well. i'm just wondering where you think that process is going. it affects investment, promotion strategies. thank you spent the ambassador raises an excellent point on the major's list which is of course something that is required by the president to, by law, to do an annual basis, and it is a fairly narrow definition of some of the issues surrounding, surround the drug problems, and the infrastructure of those particular countries. and there is a question in my mind having met with you and your colleagues now on several occasions, and one in which we want to continue the conversation, that the major's list causes considerable angst,

for a host of reasons. and i think that it is well worth us being able to continue the dialogue and talk about where that should lead in the future. spent i think we had, this gentleman right to your right, and then we have one in the back who will follow. >> i'm jonathan from the institute of world politics. i was wondering if you could comment further on the connections between international terrorist organizations at the drug cartels and how they're learning from each other and adopting each other's techniques, in some cases political stances and what the administration policy on that is? not specifically just with the colombia or some the drug cartels in mexico, but even further down south in the smuggling areas surrounding some of the deep of latin american. thank you. >> i think it's important to recognize that terror cells, terror organizations need the fuel of the money, and in order

to continue, or to operate or to further their particular games, i think it was important that now just a little bit over a year ago the president release the transnational organized crime strategy that talks about this because i believe that for too long we've only talked about drug trafficking organizations as a very narrow viewpoint about this particular problem. what becomes or has become a dig at times even murkier is how organized crime groups make money and then whether, how much of that money goes toward funding terrorist organizations. the difficulty i think we have in particular in the united states is that with a very antiquated system of counting crime, and so we know how many bicycles were stolen last year in the united states. we don't know how many people were the victims of identity theft. we don't know how they people had their credit card or debit

card tap. i'm sure that never happened to anyone here in this room. and then more importantly we don't know where those profits have gone, whether it's to feed a group of people who may be using methamphetamine in a rural part of the united states, or whether some of those profits, how much of those profits may go to fund a terrorist organization or a terrorist cell. so i think that the transnational organized crime strategy, which brings the whole of government approach to this issue, is a great step forward. but as i think we need to recognize that president calderón said recently, the threat to the global economy that corruption and financial crimes actually posed to the world. >> and right in the middle. in the back.

>> director kerlikowske, there's been controversy in chile, a congressman saying he considers marijuana controversy. there's a congressman in brazil saying that they want to distance themselves from the u.s. model. so there's a lot of things, a lot of events happening right now about america. then we have what's just happened in mexico with hsbc with the bank and an money laundering here in the u.s. using horseback riding. there's a lot of events that can lead to negative perception. what's it take? whatsit the opinion of the administration towards all of these events? >> , i think what's really critical is the kind of recognize that what's often team as the u.s. model is one of interdiction and helicopters and force. and that the u.s. model has only one goal and one purpose.

and that is to keep these drugs out of the hands of people here in the united states. at the accident i think is a real misnomer of out u.s. drug policy, particularly over the last three years. we've done three iterations of president obama's policy begin in 2010, and i don't think that you would find more balance or holistic approach. almost 90% of the world's drug treatment programs are evaluated and the science behind them comes from work done here in the united states. we are happy and have done so many occasions to export those kinds of real-world practical solutions as a longtime police chief, getting something done and having google deeds and making sure that it's practical and understandable, is critical to me. i think if you look at the strategy and you look at it,

it's three years of changes, i think that's exactly where we are headed. there's no silver bullet. there's no magic answer to this complex problem, and we have worked very hard to make sure that the united states is not just seen as our own interest is in keeping this out of the hands of our people. really, our interest is in making a healthier, safer world. >> we have time for two final questions, and this lady with a dark blouse, and then the young man with the dark tie. i guess will be our final one. so if you could both, one right after another, we will take two questions and then we will close out. >> you mentioned the mexican and colombia cases. and those are countries which, of course, are economically and

institutionally much stronger than the smaller countries of central america. i wonder if you could go into more detail, both the united states is and should be day. and not just the united states, the international community, to work with countries that have far fewer resources, much greater problems, poverty, and far higher homicide and violence and crime rates in general right now. >> well, what we should be doing, in these areas in particular is understanding that, i mean, law enforcement here in the united states, the prosecution here in the united states, is really pretty good and it's reflected in the crime rates not always in every city, every year, but it's clearly reflected in decrease crime here in this country which then increases a lot of other things of productivity, et cetera. those kind of capacity building mechanisms need to be exported but it can't just be exported by the united states. it has to be exported by

countries where there has been a success, and i think when i look at colombia in the work that they are doing throughout the hemisphere in training, equipping, and showing how law enforcement capacity can be leveraged in a way that increases safety and security, that's important. the department of justice has an important obligation, and i think works very hard to fulfill the. when it comes to increasing the, not only the rule of law but the ability of prosecutors to be successful, transparent criminal justice systems, et cetera. and i think those things are important to they just don't always get the level of attention and concern as to when someone is extradited or there's a particular large drug bust. it takes time. it's hard work, but i think the successes in this hemisphere that can be used as an example. and countries with less

infrastructure and less ability to provide a tax increase that are needed for security can benefit from some o of the. but in the end result it will still be the leadership of that particular country. >> and our final question. >> director kerlikowske, you have said quote you end of the war on drugs, and with respect, sir, you work with an admission that is currently a resting 1.5 many people in the u.s. annually for drugs. and this policy has been pushed on the mexican government which has led to 60,000 deaths affair, and you can call it a war, you could call it a third way. when you have deaths like this and -- it very much feels and acts like a war. my questions when is the u.s. drug policy going to oxford in the war on drugs? >> i think what i've always mentioned is it's a mistake to call it a war on drugs because

it lends itself to a simplistic solution to what we all know is a very complex problem. multiple enforcement in the united states that is done on drugs is done at the state and local level and is clearly not done by the federal level. and i don't think when you read and listen to the speeches that president calderón has given, that it's because of the united states that these are that his administration has taken on criminal cartels within that country. it's going back to what i originally said in his conversation with me, which was that the safety and security of the country belongs to the people who are elected, and their representatives. it doesn't belong to organized crime groups that are engaged in multifaceted criminal enterprises, not just drug trafficking. spent i want to thank all of you

for being in attendance, audience this would come and especially thank director gil kerlikowske at the office of national drug control policy for being kind enough to join us this morning, and to have a 40 minute dialogue and discussion with you and to flush out the various points of view that we all have in the question that we have in our own minds about the direction of u.s. policy, and also our relationships with close neighbors in the hemisphere. please, if they can't, for director kerlikowske. [applause] -- a big hand, for director kerlikowske. spent we have about one or two minutes if you'd like to come up and meet him, and also i would encourage all of you to exchange business cards. [inaudible conversations] >> coming up here on the c-span networks today at 10, it's even looking at funding for rural

water projects hosted by the senate energy and natural resources committee. that's live on c-span3 today. later, a senate foreign relations subcommittee looks at the business climate in latin america. you can watch that live starting at 2:15 eastern. later today the house rules committee considers legislation to do with the u.s. tax code and job creation. we expect discussion extend the bush-era tax cuts as well. you can watch that live on c-span3.

>> the cato institute hosted its annual conference yesterday focus on economic and political issues surrounding the foundations of liberty. before an exam and economic growth, the origins of state and government has was public policy. decatur institute senior fellow and director of cato university, tom palmer, gave his perspective of freedom starting with the beginning to today. this is just over 90 minutes. >> thank you. i did promise that we're going to begin on time, and we are actually a minute early. we will end on time as well. the previous talk, the fundamental purpose was to see the state in a somewhat different light than what we are

accustomed, seeing it serving the way the leaders of states -- [inaudible] the source of order of the world by our current president, the mentality that you didn't do that somehow government was responsible for the things that we have accomplished in our lives. but to a custom of also seeing the world in a different lens and understanding that there are many social order mechanism for just a part of the state, sometimes they may even run contrary to the states, intentions of purpose, all sorts of things such as credit bureaus, social interaction, reputational mechanisms and so one, that encourage people to behave properly, in a lawful and respectful manner. but that don't rest on blunt instruments of state power, namely physical violence, in gaza ration from putting people

in a cage and so when. and lots of other ways to induce people to behave properly that are voluntary. there's temperance aside, not only prohibition for example, to encourage people to behave differently. what i want to talk about now is looking at the same question for somewhat different perspective. and looking at the growth of institutions that contain power, that can take raw power and somehow subjected to rules of law, looking at freedom in a historical sense as the growth of the institutions of constitutional of the rule of law. let me start with a little bit of background about history. i mentioned earlier that an very skeptical of big philosophies of history that sees as moving inevitably in one direction or another. but i think history is very, very important function, including a moral function, and one of my favorite historians, the great roman historian

thought that history had a moral function as well. not to relate it like every emotion but only such as were conspicuous for excellence and the tories were in for me. history size function them to let know where the action be an commemorated, and to hold out reprobation of posterity as a tear, the evil words indeed. is a certain sense in which remembering the wickedness of tyrant as a punishment, the history can impose on them, and we should remember that people and the bad things they did. and also those people who stood up for justice and for freedom, and honor their memory. that is very important moral function to history but it's not just figuring out what happened also drawing a moral lessons, remembering those who are worthy of being remembered. a little bit of background again, i'm suspicious of these grand philosophies of history and i'll make you some general

remarks about the conditions that i think our profession is more favorable to the emergence of liberty. in the first, some theory of the higher law, namely, the law isn't just whatever i can get away with, or whatever i can impose on other people. it's not an expression of human will. but it's very common in most of the statist or apple looses -- that law is an expression of will. but instead, the tradition in some sense that there is a higher law, and the art to classical formulations of this. we can talk about them using two cities as shorthand, jerusalem, namely revealed religion, a deal that there is some higher power, isn't an expression simply of human power or will, and that's are together in a number of

documents if you think about from the judaic tradition and that is then received by christiana, by islam and other religion. the notion that some higher path. that even the people of israel can be judged by some higher standing, some higher power and found wanting. if you think about the various books of the bible, one of the famous stories is the story of moses. and if we think about this in the context, not merely as a theological account but think of it in the context of a drama, he has led the people out of their slavery in egypt. he goes up to the mountain, has some kind of interaction with god that i think surpasses no human understand that you some kind of receipt of a message from god he's up there for some time and meanwhile, down below, the people are restless.

the man who brought us up out of the land of egypt, what has become of him? and they go and they say, make us god. he says to the people, gather your gold, her jewelry, melted and made a golden calf, and they danced before it and to worship it. these are your gods, o, israel, who brought you up out of the land of egypt. and meanwhile, back at the mountain, moses and god are having some kind of exchange. and god says he told, this is a stiff neck people. he says what is going on there. he says now let me alone so my rants may burn hot against them. i shall completely destroyed in the butt of you, i shall make a great nation. it's a terrible thing to think that this golden thing is god, it's just a piece of gold. or to put a theological terms,

god is transcendent to his own creation god is not just another thing it is a statue. what makes this a unique store or certainly highly unusual, maybe in a sense of distinctively jewish story, is something a little surprising which is moses argues with god, just not in the thing, might perhaps come to your mind. to have an argument with god. he argues with them, with somehow, this is the lord repented of theeth he thought ts people. but again if we think about it in dramatic terms, a very powerful message has been put there. god is not just a part of the world, a golden statue. and this has a really sound significance for politics. what is so many rows claim for themselves. they are god.

then this tradition that's possibly one of the most horrible things that a person could ask we say, stand up and say i am a god. there is one god that rules us, and you are just another human being. subject to the higher law pics of their many different formulations, different religious traditions of the idea of a higher law. then add in which is what we associate with philosophy, with the level of wisdom, with a systematic investigation of the world, to begin to try to look for regularities, behavior, how animals walk, how the heavenly bodies move, what is the regularity involved in that it and science begins and people begin to say is there a pattern there they can begin to understand. when you think about astronomy for example, in greek, to

rationalize the appearances, the goal of the astronomy, to show that there is some regularity. the planets, each, on a case, means the wanderers but those are the heavenly bodies that seem to just zigzag around the sky. how is that possible? and astronomers try to come up with models. then copernicus said we can get the same appearances by displacing the earth from the center and putting the sun at the center. you can get those irregular motion. so he looked for regularly in the world and used the mind to comprehend it. natural philosophy. but also in moral and political philosophy as well. to look at how the world works. and in the tradition comes down to us as the tradition of natural law. is very important confusion that needs to be cleared up at this point. quite often for a variety of

reasons when you mention natural law, people think you're talking about religion. it's not. that's super natural law. natural law is about the law of nature. so i'm puzzled why people associate natural law with religion. it really should not be understood that way. it may be compatible with religion, st. thomas aquinas and many important figures of the church thought that, natural law, and the truths of religion for one, they were compatible. but natural law was not discovered by means of faith as such but it can be known by reason. aristotle talked about, for example, the nature of the human being, the human being was the creature who talks, the rational animal as it is translated into latin and then into english. and there are acts of the features of the human being that are accidental, whether one is

pale or dark, for example, is accidental. not essential characteristics of the human being, and as he makes a very pc statement for his greek readers, he talks about the persians. and if you know, in the greeks world view there are two kinds of creatures who look like us. featherless if you will. there are greeks and barbarians. those are the non-greeks are the barbarians. the barbarians because they can't talk. you go up to one of them and you want to have a conversation, and can you direct me to the amphitheater or something like that, they just say bark, bark, bark, bark, bark. they can't talk. so they are called barber wrote. that people who choose a bar, bar. that's not a comment i would've lots and lots of languages have similar descriptions. if you're in in austria and uses

what is his with speaking nonsense and rubbish,. [inaudible] he was speaking czech. [laughter] because in austin check sounds like gibberish. they can't understand so they're speaking czech. and by the way, history does have some ironies in modern american english if you say something makes no sense to you, you say it's all greek to me. [laughter] so there's a certain kind of cunning and involved there. but he points out that fire does not burn one way in persia and another weight in greece. fire is fire and we can investigate the nature of fire. there's not persian fire and greek fire. so there's some ability of the human mind to understand how the world works, and that applies also to human order as such. so the most highly developed branch of the natural law, which we have today, is called economics. here are a couple of principles

that we feel very confident in asserting. if you print a lot of money, prices will go up. if you impose price controls, you will get shortages. those our cause and effect statements about the world that are grounded in science. they are not just opinion. if you abolish private property in land, and abolish markets for agricultural goods, people will eat each other. we know that. this happened in the soviet union. there in the collectivization and ukraine. it happened in china during the so-called great leap forward, about 45 million people died or were killed during this short during this short period of time, the most horrific crimes of all of human history. that's what happens when you abolish private property and land, and abolish markets and food. people would eat each other.

again, not merely an opinion. now, there are people, however, who dispute that. there are more of them than you might think. distinguished philosophers and writers who argued no, no, no. , there's one rule for this group but that doesn't apply to other groups. let's think of some of those of history have argued this, marxist and fundamentally poly legends, there's different logic, different logic for different periods of human history and different classes. this is one of the reasons why i never ever trust communists. and that might seem trite. there aren't that many in the states but in some countries like nepal there are. data and imagery of the parliament i never trust them. why? they don't believe in truth. that fundamental idea is absent. there's the truth that is useful to them, and that's it. so i tell my friends and nepal and elsewhere, do not trust

these people. if they get power, if you trust them, without power, they will turn on you and they will kill you at some point. the reason is at a deep level they don't even believe in the idea of truth. the national socialist were poly low just. there were areas of logic or to worry about that einstein guy. he thinks i'm jewish physics. don't worry about. we would doing physics already. different logic video for different races or classes and so become even hear echoes of this in some parts of american academia. extreme forms of gender studies, for example, that also argues something women's logic and men's logic cannot sing that there are natural some tips as between men and women, it's fairly obvious, but at some deep level there are logical differences between the genders. i don't buy that. i think that there is one logic

for the universe, if you will, and not one for each one for different gender, race, class, nation, language and so on and so forth. so if we see that law can be either religiously grounded, or understood by the human reason, and it is not just a matter of will or desire or fantasy, is to how the world works but ultimately we can all of against reality. and then related to that, think about human law. appreciation of it can be discovered as well as made. at the very significant. the law is discovered, the legal, a law making process is about discovering the law, not merely inventing and imposing it. those who believe that law can be, that is exclusively imposed,

typically follow john austin in his positives very, law is positive, handed down, and the definition of a law is a command of the superior with the power to enforce obedience to that's what law is. that's the typical definition he would get in many philosophy of law courses. well, it follows from them that the one who makes the law, the one who gives the command isn't subject to a. they can change the commands when they want to. that's a legal theory compatible with absolutism, or the idea of a sovereign state, the state that is above the law. but the classical liberal tradition sees the state itself as it must be brought under the law, must be controlled by the law. everyone should be subject to the law. so if law can be discovered, not merely imposed, it would also be binding on the discover, take a

simple example, sir isaac newton discovers a law, predictable pattern in the physical world that two objects are attracted -- between them, which is the force of law that will suffice to generate the elliptical orbits that have been described by previous astronomers. it doesn't follow from that that he is exempt from it. he's not attracted to other bodies. the difference for slot we just got a really interesting eccentric orbit just for him, if you were to shoot him into space and so on. it's the same law, if you will, applies to him, just the fact that he discovered it somehow doesn't extend you from it. and similarly, if we see long as something that is discovered, then the law institutions themselves that discover it or enforce it are subject to it.

very important conceptual difference. so the definition of law given by lon fuller is one i think is both more consistent with the liberal tradition in our commitment, classical liberal amendment to freedom, the rule of law, personal dignity and so on. but also it captures the experience of law as we see it in the world. law is the enterprise of subjecting human conduct to the governance of rule. that means there are all kinds of laws also that every little or nothing to do with the state. laws that govern our neighbors treat one another, all kinds of expectations that people create amongst themselves could and should be described as law. law is not the exclusive preserve of the states. to our multitude of different bodies and institutions that generate law. ebay has its own legal system, for instance, that you deal with

to adjudicate disputes. so if you going ebay, if you buy something or sell something, there's a procedure to adjudicate that. if you have a disagreement on the quality of the merchandise, price that was paid. credit card companies have institutions that generate all kinds of mechanism for adjudicating dispute, and if you will, generating law. contracts, when people make contracts, they go and negotiate sometimes very complicated estimates. but they are not just copping a template from the state. they are making the law in the process of doing tha. they are discovering and generate the law, and they are also subject it. they are not somehow above it. so those are two conditions that i think clark propitious. these are somehow present in the culture. they are more likely to get political system of liberty. i have such a great deal of law but the relationship between law and freedom is also very significant. and i think that this notion of

the rule of law is at the heart of libertarian understanding of what it means to be a free person in a free society. john lott put it so eloquently in the second treaties, the end of law is not to abolish or to restrain, not to preserve and enlarge freedom. where there is no law, there is no freedom. and he focuses on being free, means not to be subject to the arbitrary will of another. but freely follow his own. so to be subject to the law, that same law to which everyone else is subject is part of being a free person. as opposed to those other traditions calling themselves freedom, we can identify them with -- which she's freedom as a condition of personal spontaneity, doing anything you want. sometimes even things that may shock people, that may be harmful to other people.

that's being free. it's just doing whatever you want to do. but that's not the expense of freedom to a free person, a free society is also respectful of other people. doesn't take other people's things. doesn't hit other people. doesn't defraud them, lie to them and she did them. that's part of a free society. all of those things subject to the same set of restrictive and being subject to equal restraints as how we can enjoy our equal freedom. freedom is not lack of restraint, the ability to prevent anyone's house anytime you want. it's not what it means to be a free person. now, this notion of property, a person's action, possessions and his whole property is very, very important to this is a term that has changed its meaning in english. as he put it in regards to property, if you have a power to preserve its property, that is his life, liberty, and his

state. and here it's thinking a bit about what it's worth about thinking how english has changed since john locke's time, and even james madison. locke or madison would not have said for a variety of reasons, this iphone is my property. there were no iphones. but also the phrase would have been nonsensical, doesn't make any sense. property is a right. how could i call the iphone a right? rather, they would say i have a property in this iphone. i have the property to call people on it, to set it down, to use it as a bookmark, to rent it to other people, to give it to someone else, to maintain it. that is what it is to have a property in the phone. the phone is an object. the property is a right. this is important for a variety of reasons. the first one we can mention is it brings about greater clarity

in discussions of law. so if i say this land is my property, as we did in contemporary english, it's not clear what my rights are overly. i might have sold the subsurface mineral rights to other person. my neighbors they have an easement to be able to drive her automobile across a portion of it to get to the road, or have access to the river. could be that the neighborhood association has a right to veto. i couldn't paint my house shocking pink because i have a binding covenant with the other members of my neighborhood association, or to put some gigantic horrible, ugly statute in my front yard. well, it doesn't mean it's my property, but what we would say is i have a property on this land but i could live on a, i could do all of these things, but some of the people of other property in the land, like the right to determine the height of the building. one of the important features to understand the value of property in the rocky mountains is your

view of the mountains determines the value of your property. so how do people deal with that? you buy a piece of land, i buy them one next to and i put up a gigantic skyscraper, you can see the mountains anymore. your property has fallen valley. the people deal with this in advance. there are all kinds of restrictive covenants that say i can't build such a tall building unless i get your permission. you might say you can have my permission but it will cost you $240,000. and if i say what i would only give you 200, that's the most i can afford, then we don't have a deal. that if you towards 600,000 to me, and i can do for 240,000, we can make a deal. we can voluntarily sort this out. that's the first point. the older language was more adequate for understanding property relation. the second deep philosophical question is that property extends to much more than things or objects.

locke focus is on my life, my freedom, and my estate. so for locke, this is a state. now we have shrunk down property just to be a state, but for locke it means life, liberty, and a state. so to sometimes you run into a marxist or leftist critics who say oh, i'll give it is property, you favor property rights, not human rights, somehow property had rights or something. puzzling idea. but the point is a bring property means do favor human rights. as humans we have the rights to their life, their liberty, and, indeed, their stuff, they're a state. that notion of property as a much wider significance, much greater moral enrichment. now, the question of how to attain liberty is fundamentally one about how to limit power. and there are different ways they can do this. the first that should come to

my, particularly for americans in american constitutional history is the idea of offsetting powers, was called in america checks and balances. so let's start that story in the ancient world with one of the most interesting phones of all time, the epic of gilgamesh. as you can see here, this is the image of gilgamesh coming into town, he is riding on the backs of two griffins, and as you can see what he has in each hand by the tail, it is a lion. this is a fairly blunt propaganda instrument that indicates he is a tough guy. he is very powerful person. he can hold two lions each by the tail. just imagine, i couldn't do that to my house cat. and matching it with a gigantic lion. is a very powerful man. as the poems is powerful superb knowledge and expert, gilgamesh would not leave the young girls

alone. the daughters of warriors, the brides of young men. this is not unusual. before they had white house interns or what have you. [laughter] this is a fundamentally similar process. and the gods often heard their complaints to let's be a little more blunt about it. he had the power because he is this powerful figure. he is the great king to sleep with the young brides on the night of their wedding. because this is an adult audience we can understand, he didn't really sleep with them, in such a thing, i'm sleepy, let's fall asleep now. [laughter] he raped these young women. that was his authority. he was the king. he gets to rate these young women. he gets to have met with them, which powerful kings like. and also to humiliate all the rest of the society.

he humiliate him and he humiliates their husbands on the night of the wedding. this is an exercise of this power, domination he has over other people. and the people complain about it and they pray to the god, and one of the gods, creates an artificial man, a very interesting story. he gathered up some clay and some grass and fashions of this artificial man. for godlike, gilgamesh, -- he blocks the door and he would not allow gilgamesh to enter. so they fight. neither one can overcome the other. they leave the city. it's the first story i am aware of in any tradition with a sort of checks and balances. being subject to the unlimited power of another person is

unbearable. the only thing you can do is to create another power to control it. merely complaining isn't enough. there has to be some kind of power that can control that offsetting power. the story is a very interesting one. they end up, they become friends. they have many, many adventures and so on, it goes on, but when gilgamesh returns to the city, he finds that in the absence of the king, the walls have grown taller and the city is more prosperous. and i think there's a subtle story there about the king was not a necessary condition for the prosperity of the city. but solidly expressed. -- subtly express. i'm going to skip rather lightly over the more interesting faces in human history, is from the city of log option which is the pill of contemporary country, and it's a story of a reformer,

if you will, who led a great tax revolt, and established the freedom of the city's, free the markets, eliminate it monopolies that have been imposed on the markets, eliminate it taxes come and establish respect for the property of everyone, whether rich or poor. and from the account of this, which we have from a french archaeologist who discovered that tell the story, is the first written expression of liberty, this were here written, it's very interesting word. it means in the context freedom. in fact, this particular one is drawn freedom from taxes. the form of expression of taxation is particularly delicious, it looks like a giant harpoon. i actually went to the

department at the university in budapest 20 something years ago because i had a tattoo made of that. and i thought i'd better check just to be really sure. [laughter] before i get a tattoo. and the professors said it means liberty in a very robust understanding of that meaning. personal freedom, being a free human being. it comes from two roots. it means return to the mother. an interesting question and people speculate why that would mean liberty. the one theory is because it was a metro len nichols aside, if you become a slave to another person, some debt slavery or the light, when you are liberated you were returned to. -- returned to your family. ..

he will take your sons for himself and so on and he will take -- quite an extensive list, and after this description of its 10% tax, it says and you shall be his slave. imagine 10%. the lord will not hear you because of the king whom you

have chosen for yourself. so it's a very powerful warning and this by the way is repeated over and over and over for thousands of years and indeed this particular passage is quoted in thomas payne's very important book commonsense was -- which is the book that launched independence and this was the nature of the king. a very strong warning from that ancient book. think about a greek civilization, and other place we often associate with liberty is athens. write about 500 d.c., they achieved a remarkable high level of wealth and personal freedom. there have been a number of very important contribution of reforms, the offense particularly which is preeminent among these cities and states. the reforms of 594 and then very very important the reforms of 508 which established the constitutional order with very

significant features for our tradition of liberty. he reorganized the voting system so that people who are represented in different ways -- though this is like an early version of what we have in the house in the senate. if you have the same people organized and represented in different ways, you don't have just a mass or a mob but a multitude of ways in which views can be expressed, debated and articulated and people can represent their interests and also the institution of personal freedom of expression of your views. come to the assembly is a free person -- i should make a quick note. one should not romanticize these cases. this is about a free society as we understand that which is much freer than the others at the time and most people did not have personal freedoms. there were lots and lots and lots of slaves and women who did not have the same rights as men. on the other hand, there were independent women.

athens was famous for that. socrates -- was a woman and they were very intellectual influentials who were able to be part of this society so again not romanticizing it as a society of legal equality and freedom, but by the standards of the day, quite advanced. you could go into the assembly, argue for something, lose and not be punished for what you had said in the assembly. on behalf of your ideas. that is one of the very first, possibly the first recorded case of something that later we called freedom of speech. the right to express your views even though it meets with overwhelming disapproval by others. the athenians had supported the greek cities of iota in their revolt against the persians and thierry decided to punish them for the first invasion of greece

by the persians and they are defeated and driven back, the same as the battle of marathon and then the second invasion the battle of thermopylae, the greek mainland are successful in defeating the persians. now the significance of this is that it brings about a tremendous discussion of greece. what is it we were fighting for? the persians did not offer terribly unreasonable terms. they wanted submission. they wanted to have certain tokens sent to the great emperor of submission. had you submitted to them there would have been a persian garretson set up there. you would have paid some taxes, but it wasn't that bad. but the greeks said no, we refuse. we would rather die. and of course, the famous case of the battle of the 30 and one of the most famous last stands

in history led to a great discussion, what is it that we were fighting for, and this discussion of freedom and law, constitutionalism takes place in many greek poets and playwrights and philosophers that leads to an enormous intellectual flourishing to ask why did we do this, what were we fighting about? similarly when sparta and athens goes to war after that, we have two different systems if you will struggling. the spartans are beloved of almost all philosophers and preferred the spartans. you can go down the list of athenians they are spartans, spartans, spartans and they win generally. they are orderly, disciplined, had strong moral code and the athenians, business people. really, business people. merchants, women.

yack adey -- they let women talk in public. they let foreigners lived there. in fact aristotle -- because he is not an athenian. so there are very important foreigners living in athens, the green cardholders if you will. so they allow the green cardholders. they didn't have any obvious national purpose. there was no state educational system, unlike in sparta. it was all private. what kind of civilization is that but as andrew coates and, one of my colleagues at the institute, a wonderful book on the history of education, he says while let's think about it. athens does not have a state educational system. it's all in the market. they are going around selling their instruction for money. and sparta has essentially

planned educational systems. so let's just talk about from athens we get poetry, drama, arithmetic, music, geometry, astronomy, history, biology, nautical sciences. i am missing a few i am sure. and from sparta, we get, and we conclude the names of a lot of american high school football teams. [laughter] that is the primary contribution to human culture as the fighting spartans of whatever high school. so, this athenian society with its relatively high degree of personal liberty produces a remarkable culture. sparta with his socialistic centrally planned, single-purpose society leaves virtually nothing of value to posterity.

this is articulated rather neatly and the funeral iteration of pericles in the history of of the polynesian war. at beautiful speech and essentially a speech about freedom, about the freedom of athenians enjoy in contrast to their enemies of the spartans. each one of our citizens in all the manifest of life is able to show himself the rightful lord and owner of his own person. he says you know we are not afraid to debate things in public. we have discussions about this. we think it's better to talk about them first and then resolve the broad insight of that is what we have to do rather than orders to fight. that is the life of their free person. now, we can then turn to the roman republic and again i have to apologize. a lot of interesting things are happening around the globe but we have limited time. to look at the fundamental

structures of the roman republic. a few important dates that i have put up there. but the key element of the roman republic is their constitution. the romans are not particularly famous as poets. not that many compared to the greeks. they are not defined as sculptors and they basically copy most of the products of the greeks. there are a couple of things they are really good at though. they are good at engineering. anyone who lives in europe or who has been to europe and has seen roman ruins, the best ruins contractors have her. [laughter] they put up ruins right away and they are still there. you can find aqueducts still carrying water that were built by the romans and some of those things they built to last. they were very good military engineers as well. and a few good lawyers and good constitutionalists. the roman law is an enduring process. again roman poetry has some

highlights that they are nothing to rival the greeks. the roman law is something remarkable. the roman constitution is a whole sense of offices and offsetting powers that in effect make it very difficult for any one person to seize the control of the apparatus of government. just think about tribunes and since ours and consuls in all of these different offices, each one with a set of privileged as an powers that can be used to check others in various ways. so the roman constitution is very complex body of offices and powers. almost as if it were designed to make it difficult for someone to seize power. and at last a rather long -- finally gets undermined through many constitutional systems in

history, and sometimes people will dismiss it. those constitutions are not important. it did last longer than the american republic has lasted. we don't know how long that will last. it may go on for a long time and it may not. so we should try to look at these cases and draw what lessons we can as to why the constitution was undone. the republic was destroyed and here we get to mentioned cato. the very indirect main giver to the cato institute, cato the younger. in 46 b.c., after the defeat of the battle of nasa's he knew what would happen. he supported the senatorial forces with his soldiers to fight against julius caesar. he was defeated and he was well aware of what caesar planned to do.

namely, pardon him. and by pardoning him as caesar had done with others, he removed his authority and power as a symbol of resistance. so as a consequence he retired to his chamber and cato the younger is very beautifully written. he goes then, he reads plato's dialogue and meditates on it, thinks about it and then asks for his sword to be brought, with the drama and expectation building and then they don't want to do it. he demands it. it's brought in, he falls on it -- because he is a historical philosopher and expires. income the doctors to push his intestines back in and he impairs them to be sure that he will die. he will die the last free man in rome and he wanted to make a point, very public, has -- the

republic has been undone, the republic has been killed. another one of his allies who was killed a few years later, was, was marcus cicero. cicero had an enormous influence on the subsequent cultures that emerged in europe for a variety of reasons. he was one of the greatest orators and one of the greatest lawyers, but also he wrote beautiful latin. he wrote down his speeches and his letters and exquisite language. and it's a kind of a historical accident. we have these doctrines because people copied them to learn latin. this was the best model, copied cicero over and over and the latin grammar book capillary that way. he was and then a silver pin plunged through his tongue so he

would never make any terrible speeches at he had against marc anthony. marc anthony's wife went up to the head and put a pin through it, a rather testy move. but cicero was quite important because he transmitted classical doctrines of natural law and natural justice to the modern world. we know a great deal of these kinds of ideas of the roman lawyers because of cicero and because of his exit exodus if you will that his works are repeatedly copied. now, it's important to remember that the classical road comes to an end. these civilizations are conquered by outsiders and they collapse. and there is it period of the retreatf urban civilization, the retreat of literacy, the dark ages as it's known, very serious discontinuity in european history. but later, civilization and

urban life begins to come back and i'm going to talk about a number of things that are happening at about the same time and influencing each other. i will make another comment about the philosophy of history. and a complex event, certainly the emergence of liberty or constitutionalism, raise up the cause of the first world war. it is multi-causal. it if you find any cause of axe he should be skeptical. a fax is caught -- complicated probably has a multitude of contributing causes so in this case there were many different events going on. no one is the cause of the other but they influence each other as they happen. so we will start with one of the most important events that distinguishes western europe from the rest of the landmass, and that is what we call the freedom of the church. the christian church is obviously deeply important

institution throughout all of those areas that convert, but at the same time, there are attempts to use the church for political purposes. something quite significant happens. we will move back before the states that i have appear to the year 800 think about rome. the roman empire is gone and the west still persist in the so-called byzantine empires, what they call the roman empire at the time. the last roman emperor was expelled from rome in 476. and rooted out by one of his german general so there is no longer a roman emperor as well but still rome was one of the greatest cities in the world. but there is another person who has taken up residence there, the christian bishop of rome. and in a way, he begins to fill the space that has been left by the roman imperials in terms of

authority and also even title. think about this person known as the pope, the deity of the church. but the pope has this authority of being the bishop of rome, not just the bishop of -- or something but the bishop of rome. among his many titles are pontius. that is actually an ancient roman title, a very significant function in the roman constitutional system, responsible for bridges and so on. and the pope is the one who builds the bridge between earth and heaven. the pontiff as well. many other important titles. i have always been personally fond of universal primates which is something that is really --

[laughter] distinguished, but in effect what happens is the bishop of rome begins to fill the space and that is why it is the roman and catholic, that is what means universal and great. it is the universal and roman church. in the year 800, the pope had he been kicked out of rome by the citizens there, calls on his very loyal followers -- follower and man named corollas magnus, which is a beautiful name. corollas magnus. in latin it means big charles. [laughter] so it's like big tony or something like that. he is a warlord effectively. so because i'm big charles, corollas magnus, a name by the way putsch if you say it for 1000 years, nonstop, it will start to sound like charlemagne. that is where we get charlemagne

he comes to the system and he returns him to his authority and then some conversation takes place and we can ask oliver stone to make a movie about it. we have no factual basis, in which they discuss what to do afterwards since one can imagine an oliver stone movie in which the pope says you know chuck, i am really grateful for what you have done. is there anything you would like? corollas magnus says no, no, come on. no really, come on something. i've always wanted to be a member of the world. [laughter] so he was crowned on christmas day in the year 800 emperor of rome and then returned to our capital of the empire which has a population of little bit larger than the cato institute and that is one of the initial

acts that later becomes the holy roman empire of the german nation, complicated history after that. but the germans now have had the translation of the imperial power of the roman people to the german people. they have now the roman emperor who is a german. and they are claiming the power in germany to invest the bishop with their authority, with a staff in the ring and all the various things that show that they have authority and of bishops. in 10738 german monk becomes -- and he proclaims the freedom of the church and he says to the pope, the bishop of rome is the one who gets to make that decision, not the emperor. and they have quite a dispute over this investors are -- and

vestige or crisis. a few quick documents, there is a document called -- which is a bit puzzling as to what it is. it's a list of statements from the pope. the roman church was founded by god alone. he alone can depose early and stayed bishop. he may depose emperors. a little rough. the pope may absolve subjects of unjust men from their fealty. you get a feeling for how significant this document is? he is saying that any christian i can say you don't have to obey this king anymore as emperor. i am supposed to. this is a very powerful claim of authority. the emperor, henri iv, does not take this lying down. he sends a letter to the pope.

henry, came not by usurpation but by the pious coordination of god. to hildebrand, do you hear the insult? not too gregory the seventh of hildebrand. vowed not pope but false father, and then he rebuts all the arguments and it's quite stirring. i am to be judged by god alone and i'm not to be deposed for any crime. i should deviate from the faith. so you might think whoa, this is a very serious -- between two big egos, the pope in the emperor so who is going to win? well, the emperor does have mountain knight, armies and castles. he can field a great many soldiers and the pope, the pope has belgian monks, nuns, parish

priest. who is going to win? well it's an interesting story, because in 1077 the emperor journey to pineau said to ask for the forgiveness of the pope and read mission to the church. now it's not by the way just because of the forces of personality or excommunication. there also was a norman army that led to a camp nearby and you may recall that the pope had supported in 1076 the roman claim of -- and they were pretty good at keeping accounts and they said you owe us. and norman indeed obliged. this is a complicated story but it establishes a very important principle. the power is not full. it doesn't fill all the space of authority. there is a big crack in it. but later the states in the church and they interpenetrate each other as different sources of authority and law.

there is rural law and there's also church law, canon law. these are bodies of law. well that means the little people like us can play one off against the other. if one is affecting you you go to the other for protection and if that one oppresses you you go back to the first. it creates space if you will for freedom and these jurisdictional cracks. as opposed to again the status mentality, the power has to be singled, indivisible and absolute. what we see as a political system in which power is fragmented, can be checked and is not absolute, and at interpenetrate each other. another element that goes on at about the same time is the growth of independent cities in europe, the medieval come meals. these are very significant. anything commune in american english you might think large amounts of marijuana and barefoot people and so on.

that is not what it meant at the time. it meant these were common bodies of people who came together to form cities. and here i have a little map of the city of colón, the map that was originally a city, colonia if you will, now german and it has been largely abandoned as the urban civilization disappears in the north of europe for a variety of reasons. and later, it is effectively refunded. there was an archbishop there, a lot of cows and that's about it. and then merchants, to the portis, the gate here, and began to set out their wares, tables with things to buy and sell, leather goods, pottery, clothing and so on so more customers come, more customers means more attraction to more merchants. more merchants, more variety and

more customers than you see the trade again and they again to build a palisades around themselves to protect themselves. you can go to colón and visit the archaeological -- very interesting right there near the center of town. they later establish themselves as a commune, self-governing body of persons with a social contract. the slogan of the cities, city air makes you free. if you can go to the city for a year and a day you have run away from your feudal master. you can get into the city and you are there for one year and one day, from starbucks to starbucks in the city. you become a free person. the city air makes you a free person. this is deeply rooted in european culture and civilization and by the way to help us understand the cruelty,

the hatefulness, what was it that the national socialist put over their slave labor camps? work will set you free and then of course they made the enslaved humiliated persons marched over the gravestones looted from the jewish cemeteries as they were going to their deaths. this was calling on an ancient principle in the european civilization to mock and humiliate people who were being enslaved and murdered. but the idea of that city air makes you free, this is the origin of what we call civil society and in english, there's this big vocabulary because it's a mixture of words from every other language, namely anglo-saxon and french but also we pick upwards like pajamas and arrigo and the like. we can hear the words in the

english language. civil society coming from civet tossed means a city. and civil behavior which means you are respectful to other people. this is a culture of businesspeople. one of the things you learn in your first job when he you work for a private business is, do not kill your customers. [laughter] this is a really important lesson. you wouldn't think that from watching american tv shows. where your typical business executive, gets up and a in a staff meeting and says -- we are not killing enough of our customers. i want to see action on this. to many of our products are surviving. that is how you think hollywood portrays business activity. that is what businesspeople do all day long. they dispose the body of the murdered transvestite and prostitute who were picked up the night before which if you

look at the data overwhelmingly on television most murders are committed by business executives don't think that corresponds to the actual statistics but in the case several behaviors what you learn in business. you are polite to people and you are respectful. their customers. you don't drive them away. it doesn't mean they are your best friends. you don't kiss them and hug them and so on. they are not your family members but you respect them. that is the fundamental principle of business and it is what civil behavior in civil society are about. but also from the german word board which means a fortified place because they build walls around themselves. the scary people are outside and we people exist by trading and producing inside the walls where we are safe. from that you get the french