at the great trank i did and a american west movie. >> your newest book is "invisible hand in popular culture" what are you attempting to do? i'm examining the freedom in american -- >> are they looking at larger issues besides just an entertainment vehicle? >> i don't have a simple rule for that. sometimes they are. i discuss david's --

[inaudible] when it comes to debt -- what is the author's motive, do you think? >> the theme is what he calls -- [inaudible] he's very interested in the way social issues develop spontaneously. he was interested because it was a town which -- [inaudible] he's outside any government jurisdiction. and normally think that produce anarchy and produce at love violence and dangerous things. what he wanted to show in that program is how people -- for

example a mining town even in the ab sen of government they are able to establish property rights. very much like john. and trying to bring together the aspect and philosophy and high culture and things i think unjustly think of low culture today. >> well, speaking of -- pardon me, low culture. you have written about "gill gill >> yes. i offered it as microcawfm of american democracy. that examined the various claim to rule or stand out in america the case of how the skipper's military presence, the professor's intelligence, and if shows that the man -- he really was representative of america and the heart of the

show. the producer was really thrilled with the able sincerity, and he confirmed it said that's what he's trying to co. >> was it reflective of the era of the early 'out of. >> absolutely. i was particularly fascinated going back and watching it to see how many cold war themes in it. there was an episode about russia. there were several episodes about the race. it's very interesting to go back and see how many shows do reflect their times. >> back to your newest book, "invisible hand in popular culture "bhop is the director? >> he is one of those guys he

worked with the great european director and ended up working with what of called -- [inaudible] churning out cheap movie with a star with the tight and made something up. made he made something of it. and the french film theaterrist discovered him and made an era out of it. >> we're [inaudible] >> what about "star trek." >> that's a chapter on the tv show have double travel. i made the odd discovery that earlier had written 24 episodes of the wonderful tv --

it turns out a lot of genesis in the series. the hero go around the web and encounter the strange towns didn't know what was going on. they have to straighten them out. it became the property fellowship of the enterprise going to the planets moved by the evil dictators. i was very interested to see the continuity there. >> now, professor cantor, we're here at freedom fest libertarian gathering in las vegas. the subtitle is "liberty versus authority in american film and tv." what is your message here at freedom fest? >> well, my message is that libertarianism can help us understand culture including popular culture. i think for a long time popular culture, the study of popular culture was the preserve of marx

schism and generally the left. i try show the people in the libertarian perspective can have interesting things to say about poplar culture and find libertarian in popular culture in south park is the best example. >> what about the western edge. >> well, there a perfect example of this conflict between liberty and authority. he needs to straighten it out. to me there's a kind of paternalism in that. i would contrast with the sense of people can take care of themselves. they're not -- people can

develop society and people on their own. i find fascinating how the dialogue plays out. >> do you see example in hollywood and popular culture of social and utopianism and authority? >> absolutely and distaupe begannism showing it can be very bad. i talk about the alienization film or tv shows. many of them -- there was one called "vi" that lasted two or three seasons. aliens showed up promising utopia. it got people concerned it was a

comment on the obama administration. that presented this as a kind of bargain that people would giveaway their freedom for the sake of this material you taupe ya. i look at that as a number of friends as well. is it a scholarly book or popular book? >> i'm hoping it's a scholar book and a lot of footnotes and citizenships. and but i have been told that i have the common touch and, you know, basically about webster and about about the south park. i hope both audience can enjoy the book. >> is there a danger you're putting motive to directors and writers that don't exist? >> there's a danger but i don't see the harm that would be

done. i have an introduction that discusses the book method logically and explains why the model of intension is a little naive. often we have a notion there's a single author who must have everything planned out in advance. one thick i learned about television particularly movies as well they are collaborative venture and the -- in fact as the the team write the somehow. they play off each other. they don't go in to it knowing what they're doing or having the full developed attention. by the time they are through, they have developed a work of art intentionality. and of it intensionality without a single person having a intention in creating it. if it hold together, i'm happy.

one of the theme is the popular culture is a self-expression of american freedom. a lot is garbage and ultimately it gets misused. i love american popular culture, i think it's very great art, and reflects just wonderful spirit of independence that america was founded on.

and once again they split along the line the movie world war z it suggests people are helpless in the face of zombie outbreak and they have to resort in this case to the u.n. and scientists and to mill fair special forces and brad pitt. all the elitest things. it shows an world in which people when they fall back on their own resources do very well were you able to talk to hollywood directors and writers about the work. >> it's hard to reach the people. i did -- "breaking bad" one of the best

shows. all the knick -- things that are perhapsed out. he was able to tell us what color schemed he planned for the whole season. it's interesting to see that all the predictions about 9/11 prove to be untrue. people at the times said we're going it back world war ii movie. we have patriotism.

we have the old star american hero. there was a little bit of that. but in fact an particular people that we have shows skeptical about the government anymore. now we're talking 2001 people said it was finished and it went on in the spring of 2002. i defend the x file to show the last episode it took a critical fan with regard to the war on terror. the important issue about the erosion of civil liberty and the spin-off it actually predicted 9/11 the most uncanny thing in march 2001 the debut show that it was about terrorists running a world trade center.

the fbi and cia were and in general very quickly shows went back in a healthy way raised questions about the militarization of the police in the united states, the whole homeland security fringe is a great show about that. i discuss it in length in the last chapter. i think it's a fascinating reaction to 9/11. it's like it imagined -- >> could you write an entire book on the harry potter series? >> i suppose i could. but i have to confess i don't

know the harry potter series. i have a certain confidence that i can work something on it. i have to explain you can't do everything. i haven't read every book or watched every television show. a frefned mine did a wonderful essay on the harry potter shows and -- and then we have john wayne and william shatner and minute not erick cartman bear a slight resemblance to him. it's not erick cartman for legal reasons. we thought that captured the

spirit of the book. showing that american popular culture. and paul cantor is the author of this book "the invisibility demand popular culture ." thank you for joining us here. >> thank you for having me here. it's a great pleasure. in and said that government redistribution policy will lead to economic stagnation or worse. booktv talked to mr. borders during freedom fee 2013 for about fifteen minutes. i want to introduce you to max borders. tell us about yourself before you get started. >> sure. i'm the editor of a magazine called the free month. it's one of the flagship publications for the foundation for economic education. which is the nation's oldest

libertarian think tank. >> how did you get started with that? >> well, i've been doing it for about a year now. editing at the freemont, i got mixed up by basically writing about the idea in the movement. they saw someone they liked in me, and been doing it ever since. charlotte, north carolina. and where do you go school. >> as an undergrad appalachian state and did my graduate work at university college in london. >> why are you a libertarian? >> i'm a libertarian ultimately -- i guess there are many facet how one can an that question. for me i see liberty as a the goal. i think people flourish as hiewbls when they are free. i think we're more virtuous people when we are free. and i think cooperative arrangement based not only on

fear and hierarchy but collaboration are healthier relationships and certainly i thinks history is born that out. >> max borders, your book is called "super wealth: why we should stop worrying about the gap between rich and poor. ". why should we stop worrying? >> well, the whole book is devoted to answering the question you posed. let me take couple of examples. fist of all, the gap between rich and poor is not of itself a bad thing. let me put to you in the following sen. -- sense if i torp ask you. play a game with my son. he's six years old. would you rather. it's usually would rather have big ear or a big nose. it's funny for him. in the version of the game, i would want to ask any reader would you rather there be a state favors where the poorest

people -- the poorest people in society are listed up and yet they're being many, many billionaires. would you rather live in a state where we're all equal but the poorest people in society are not as well off. i think that is the i did cot i did cot me -- that's the question we're confronted with. we want to force people in society. it's in of i.t. we -- the concern about inequality per se. we should absolutely be concerned about the lost of the least advantaged. you play that game in your book on the subject of the rich power gap i suggest engage people in a simple thought experiment. if i you were king or queen or a day and choose between two state of affair which would they be a. permanently institute a policy that can reduce the gap and

permanently institute a policy that makes everyone better off including the poor. take your time before jumping to any conclusion, think about the choice scare -- carefully. it's not a logic test. it's designed to unpack our intuition on the subject of rich and poor. what are our intuition? >> i think we have a lot of intuition about rich and poor that come from the caveman instinct. we tend to see somebody with more and maybe want it. we feel indignation when we see someone with less. i think they have to be overcome with the idea of, look with this is a virtuous system. if we torp walk to a rain forest and think about how resources are distributed in a rain forest, we would look around at canopy and the great mahogany tree and say they gobble up the resource. in many people's mind is rat