>> spinning off like particles, but having an unfortunately galvanizing force for economic

and political and social instability in many more parts of the world. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much, professor shelley. we now from the carnegie endowment, they have a central subject of the book is the role of corruption, how corruption is an enabler, facilitator, and you cannot really understand transnational crime without paying attention to the broader issue of corruption. you have been studying corruption in detail in india and elsewhere. what are your reactions to some of those points that professor shelley raises? >> sure. thanks, everyone, for coming. i first want to thank moises for asking me to comment on this wonderful book, you know? the book is about terrorism, organized crime -- of which i

know nothing about, and only under generous definition do i know anything about corruption, so thank you for including me. i want to make a couple of points on the question that you raised about the link with corruption. before i do that, let me just say something quickly about the book which is that this is an incredible read. it was kind of overwhelming when i was reviewing the manuscript this week how much material is packed into these pages. there were three things that i really enjoyed about this. one is the meticulous research. by my count some of the chapters individually have more than 250 footnotes themselves, so a tremendous amount of work which has gone into this on a wide range of subjects. the second is, i think, one of the most important narratives that louise has presented is this idea that the nexus between criminality and terrorism is not just a problem that one can constrict to weak and/or poorly

governed states. there is often an interaction with the legitimate economy and well functioning states that we need to pay attention to. and as you rightly said, there's a tendency sometimes for those of us in the west to think this is a problem which doesn't involve our systems. and you make a very persuasive case that it does, whether it's our financial system or information technology systems and so on. the second -- the third thing i liked about this book is her focus on, as she put it, the business of terrorism. that she provides an industrial organization of terrorism if you think of it as an economist, and it reminded me a lot of this fabulous study on the siciliano mafia where they're treated as a firm and talks about the way in which it's structured and tries to vertically integrate its operation to take advantage of certain business opportunities. so congratulations to you on all of that.

let me now throw out a couple of points, some of these are questions about corruption. you make a strong case in the book which i think seems totally right on the money which is that corruption is both a facilitator as well as an underlying cause of both crime and terrorism. but it struck me that it's actually much more comply catted -- complicated that even that, because corruption also can impede the response to crime and terrorism we care about. so when you talk about the eight deadliest terrorist attacks of the 2000s, one of those was the attacks which took place in mumbai, which many of us remember watching those famous images of the hotel going up in flames. and i remember when i was in india doing field work, i was struck by some of the investigative reports that came

out of that, why the response of law enforcement was so poor. part of it had to do because of corruption in the procurement processes for bulletproof vests which actually weren't bulletproof. and so it was a sham order for vests that were not of sufficient quality, and police actually felt like they didn't want to put their lives as risk because they didn't have proper gear. so that's a new element, i think, of the story which makes this dirty entanglement even more complicated. the we second is how we think at measurement of corruption. and you make the point that when we get to definitions of corruption, things are quite squishy, which i agree. we tend to go with the very standard definition of corruption being, you know, the abuse of public office for private gain, and that's not always help 68. and we're -- helpful. and we're stymied by the fact that there's no definition or

measure. i think we've actually made some headway here, and it's a matter of thinking outside the box and scaling up some of these out of the box ways of thinking. just to mention a few that academics have come up with in recent years, there is the famous measure looking at unpaid diplomatic parking tickets in new york city by diplomats at the u.n., right? there's no enforcement, you never have to pay, so why is it that the most corrupt countries rack up more tickets than anybody else, right? sweden has very few tickets, and the ones they do get, they pay right away. the second is actually physically measuring corruption in the ground. so there's been some very interesting work by economists who have gone around the world and looked at highways being built and roads being built and taken engineers and dug down to see what the quality of a road

is. one could actually scale up, perhaps our aid agencies should be doing. now, there are lots of caveats that only apply to one measure, but it's a real measure, it's not a perception-based measure. this last interesting measurement, as you mentioned the illicit trade in antiquity. so some very interesting work which has been done looking at the amount of exports of antiquities from countries where those products derive and the imports from those countries which are mainly in the west. now, those two don't often match up, and you can look at the mismatch between importing and exporting countries to figure out what that difference is and dig deeper into those. so i think there are a number of interesting ways that we can track both corruption and crime incidents, but it's just we haven't gotten our act together, those of us who work with

agencies who could fund and support that kind of work. let me make two final points on the kind of so what, what do we do about this. one reason -- on the one hand, your book is quite depressing because a lot of these entanglements are so complicated, and one of the measures that we often fall back on is transparency. that if we shed sunlight, right, which we often think is the best kiss infectant -- disinfectant, we can bring a lot of these dirty entanglements out into the open. while transparency may be a worthy cause to pursue on its own merits, it's not always the panacea we hope it will be. and part of my work looking at politicians and political parties who engage in corrupt activities in india which is, granted, one case but i think there are many other cases which

are very similar is that it's not as if common man or the common voter doesn't have information about the corrupt or illicit activities of these politicians. in many cases they're voting for them or supporting them precisely on those grounds. so in other words, it's not an information failure which is creating this suboptimal outcome or this accountability failure. it's really a governance failure which means that the solution to that is much, much harder. so i think we need to be careful about how much transparency is going to get us in some of these cases. the final point is one about priorities, that the dirty entanglements bring in so many different sectors, attributes, issues. if i were a policymaker thinking about how to tackle this, i would really feel like i want to throw up my hands, because i i

wouldn't know where to start. and i think there are two potential negative outcomes i see. one is that we maybe overplay our hands and engage in threat inflation. so when pakistan really hit the news over the last ten years, there's a lot of attention put on madrassas and how they can be conveyor belts for terrorism. yet there's actually been a lot of work to say that was totally overblown, that less than 1% of schools in pakistan are actually madrassas, that they've been increasing over time, they've actually been increasing -- not been increasing in term obviously their share of the overall education system, both public, private and madrassas have been kind of moving at the same pace. so, you know, are we at danger, at risk of overplaying our hand by seeing all of these linkages? and the second is an issue about mission creep, that if we

justify attacking corruption or inefficiencies in procurement or in permitting or in licensing, are we going to create more problems for ourselves? so, you know, i was thinking about this again coming back to the pakistan example is we've justified a lot of our civilian assistance to pakistan on the basis of security objectives, whether it's nuclear weapons, whether it's terrorism, whether it's crime. but then we expect our civilian aid to help us deliver on some of those outcomes when really we should be conditioning perhaps security aid on security outcomes and civilian aid on more civilian outcomes. so if we go to the mat on everything saying this has a security dimension, this has a security dimension, one could make the case that, you know, the world bank's doing business as a national security dimension, are we at risk maybe of misaligning what we want to

get out of this and the way in which we talk about these in policy circles? so those are just some thoughts and some questions for you overall on the corruption front. but thank you so much for this opportunity. >> great. very good questions. would you like to give it a shot, a quick answer about things? >> i think to look at the unidimensional aspect of corruption on the ground is needed, but it's just part of a larger issue that we need to be talking about which is right with -- [inaudible] who has been such a presence in thinking about global issues financially. what we're also looking at in terms of corruption is the massive movement of funds outside of many of these countries. just as before we came here we were talking about remittances and how much are actually going

on. but we don't have an idea of how much resources -- sometimes we do, but not in its totality -- of how much has left much of the developing world. and i think that that's a very central element of corruption that deserves much more attention, because it's one of the things that is most undermining development. while remittances may be helping promote them or having a countervailing force with money leaving, with incredibly corrupt leadership in much of the world. >> thank you. your questions and comments, please. just tell us who you are and if you have an institution affiliation, please recognize -- >> i'm from bangladesh, and over many years i'm teaching in the madrassas and in the islamic schools. i have a question. you stated about nonstate a

actors -- nonstate actors, they are the elements we should always watch out for, and i agree with you on that point. what about the state actors aiding the nonstate actors? as an example, i give you two. in mumbai, the people who did the massacre, they all came from pakistan, we know, and it has been proven. what can you do about that? talk about osama bin laden had been living in a containment area surrounded by many military installations and intelligence installation, and you think nobody knew about that? so -- [inaudible] the middle east and african countries also, they are the state actors which are facilitating the nonstate actors, and one of the things that we really forget is it's not only bad money, it is also charity money which is allowed in islam like 2.5% of --

[inaudible] as a charity in good faith. where the money goes, we don't know. hadiha can be hunted person, and all around the world -- [inaudible] where does the money go? we tried to do research on this in our country, and we could not locate -- we could locate where 70% of money dose, but beyond that, we could not locate where the money quos. so this is the thing i request you comment on. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. in come pressing my remarks on this incredibly complex book, i did not talk about the relationship between the state and nonstate actors, but that is certainly present. in fact, the example that you gave of the mumbai bombings and the relationship between the state and the terrorists is in the book. and there are many, many other examples of this.

and that's part of what i think of in discussing this corruption, is that it's not just a financial corruption, but it's a corruption of the functions of the state. because in many of the societies and parking lots of the world -- parts of the world, it is not just the state cooperating with terrorists, it's the state cooperating or being co-opted by transnational criminals, drug traffickers and others. and that's one of the factors that is undermining the state and undermining the credibility of the state with many people in the world. and i think there are many topics that need to be explored. i do mention in the book about the requirement of the believing muslims to contribute their contributions. but i'm not in a position to contribute to that research that you're doing, but i think that's very important for many people to be understanding and

following the money trails. >> would you like to -- [inaudible] >> no, i think -- >> louise, let me ask you the following. it's quite obvious, i think, and you make a persuasive case in the book that terrorists fund their operations through their illicit activities, the smuggling and all kinds of criminal activities. the terrorists get the money from illicit deals, it's obvious. what is less obvious is why should illicit traffickers that are in it not -- are in it in the money. as you yourself said, they are business people. and if you are running a business organization, you don't want to amplify your risks by getting entangled with terrorists. you have enough having to play cat and mouse with the authorities and the police and the drug -- law enforcement and

drug enforcement organizationings. so why -- organizationings. so why if you are running a criminal cartel, why would you get entangled with criminals? that would not be a very smart business decision. >> well, thank you for bringing up this point, because it's part of what i discuss in the first part of the book, is how the nature of crime and terrorism has changed and why criminals and terrorists cooperate now more than they did in the past. in the days of the mafia like what you were talking about in your reference to diego gambeta, the mafia grew along with the italian state after world war ii because it got contracts from the state. it didn't just make money doing drug trafficking and extortion, it got a lot of state contracts. and it was not in its interest to collaborate with terrorists. but now many of the transnational organizations, criminal organizations are

operating in states that don't really have the capacity to provide them contracts, that have the capacity to control them. and so they are happy to engage with terrorists because it's good for business. and terrorists that in the post-cold war era have less support from states than in the past, have become much more dependent on criminal activity to support their activities. and it's very interesting, if you're reading a lot of the bios of foreign fighters who are joining isis, how many of them have criminal activities and criminal records in their past. so there's a convergence of these two phenomena which is very much a change in the nature of the state, where transnational crime groups are based and what is the state capacity. as ron was talking about, because of corruption to deal

with these organizations. >> thank you. sir. >> hi. my name is -- [inaudible] thank you for the picture that you drew on the business of terrorism. i would just like to address the matter of foreign fighters that's working today with isis, of course. they seem to not really fall under any category. like, they're not motivated by -- they're not living under corrupt governments, etc., so i really have -- my question basically is, and some don't even have criminal records. my question is what really motivates those people? is it always ideology in terms of globalization, of course? is it always ideologies, or is it something else? thank you. >> i think it's a very complex issue, and it deserves much more study. but part of it is thatmany of

the youth, as i mentioned -- some of them who are living in western europe -- are youth who find themselves because some of them are children of immigrants to be youth without futures, that they don't find themselves having the same opportunity structures as people who are from nonimmigrant families. and this is an enormous source of frustration to them. but as the article in "the new york times" was talking about today on tunisia, tunisia still, like many societies in north africa, has enormous problems of corruption, and that is galvanizing youth who are seeing through prop began ca that this -- propaganda that this islamic state of isis is supposed to be less corrupt. and there's also some of the same element of what has

galvanized youth engagement with terrorism before, is that they are seeking to resolve some inadequacies that they have had in their personal lives, and this is what some of this extremely successful recruitment is based on. it's to fulfill some internal needs, and that's why i talk about this of a marketing that you're not just recruiting anybody to do this kind of video and recruitment, but individuals who know how to do this sort of psychological outreach. >> sir. [inaudible conversations] >> i'd like to come back to the definitional issue and see if either of you have something better than the standard one. but i'm interested in whether in your research as you see these issues play out you think there

are some kind of ideal types of corruption, syndromes of corruption. michael johnson talks about the difference between the way they play out in an authoritarian society versus one in which there's tribal or pluralistic competition, and then you mentioned the democratic financial systems. whether it's important that we identify very different types in order to get at what the causal structure would be and the solutions. what may work in one type may not work so well in another type. thank you. >> i think that's very important. i think that all corruption is not the same. but i think one of the very serious mistakes that we made in going into afghanistan was to perceive that corruption is normal in that society and that people will then be, you know,

tolerant of high levels of corruption and government administration. and i think that that is an ignorance of how corruption operates, that there are, as you say, in some societies tribal traditions of exchange relationships that we may perceive as corrupt and are not perceived as corrupt there. but in many parts of the world citizens perceive what is an excessive level of corruption. and there's some quotes that i use in my book from reading pakistani and afghan -- from leading pakistani and afghan thinkers talking about the excessive level of corruption that we did not understand that turned americans' policies into failures because of our failure to understand repulsion against corruption. >> how would you refine the definition of corruption so it

captures a little bit more of the nuances? >> i mean, i think there's really no one way, right? i mean, i think that, i mean, the way others have thought about it is thinking about magnitude of costs versus, you know, magnitude of costs versus magnitude of risks, you know, thinking about grand versus petty corruption or looking at whether or not it's involving political actors, and one of the points you make in your book is we fall too often on the definition thinking about people that are only on the inside of the state system as opposed to private actions. and also there is this interesting juncture between corruption and criminality in some cases, right? so criminals who are operating in many political systems aren't necessarily corrupt in the narrow sense, although they thrive on the corruption which is going on in their political

system. so i haven't come up with a silver bullet. i don't know if you have a better definition, but i sort of think, you know, one almost has to take an ad hoc approach, because it's very hard to find a universal answer. >> and one of the trends that is making things more complicated is that we used to think corrupt organizations and individuals will eventually influence government officials and take over agencies or bureaucratic structures. and essentially either force them or induce them through incentives to behave in a corrupt way. but what we're seeing in some places in the world today is the arrows move in the opposition direction, and that is governments are taking over criminal organizations not to destroy them, but to run them. and with that we have the e emergence of what i have called

in the paper mafia states. and that is governments that are, in essence, criminal organizations. there is not that they have been taken over or influenced by criminal organizations, but they themselves in their nature have criminal activities as part of, the fundamental part of their ways of working. and so if you add that to the mix, the definition of corruption then gets even more entangled in a very dirty way. any -- yes, please. >> [inaudible] i am wondering if there are any significant differences you might find between different types of corruption in terms of -- [inaudible] opportunities to make a profit -- [inaudible] compared to what might seem

very, very different, taking money from criminals in order to facilitate their criminal activity, and then some variations in between where maybe people are taking money under coercion of threat that something might happen to their families, so they perform an act in collusion with criminals but not necessarily because they wanted to. >> i think all of these problems that you've identified are things that i cite and give examples of. there's just such enormous diversity to this. but i think it's themes and variations, but the consequences of all of these are both an undermining of civil life and an undermining of the capacity of societies, because money is diverted from education, it is diverted from investment. and as we are having an increasing curtful pop --

youthful population in the world, there are not the resources to educate them, to provide them opportunities. and all of these things work in conjunction with each other. >> we have been discussing a book called "dirty entanglements: corruption, crime and terrorism," by louise shelley. thank you very much, louise, and thank you very much, milan, for this very interesting conversation, and thank you all for coming. [applause] >> is there a nonfiction author or book you'd like to see featured on booktv? send us an e-mail to c-span.org, tweet us @booktv or post on our wall, facebook.com/booktv. >> just aen is a fascinating figure -- jason is a fascinating figure, he really is. he gave the speech that i talk

so much about. it was actually the cotton speech when he goes on to say cotton is king and we will win if we ever have a war, but hammond is almost a cartoon character in many number of ways. he was sexually abusive not only to his slaves, but also to his nieces who were extraordinarily well connected. that was part of the wade hampton family. and that's itself a fascinating story. but he had a very different view of america than men like abraham lincoln. he believed that the way a healthy society worked -- and mind you, he was living in one of the wealthiest societies in the world at the time. southern slave owners were enormously wealthy. we were well educated. they owned beautiful paintings that they had on their walls, and i mean rembrandts. i don't mean, you know, ones their daughters did. >> my daughter did painting, i

have to say, professor, it would be the most beautiful possession, but i understand your point. [laughter] >> fair enough. they had reason to believe they had finally gotten it right. and they're not making excuses to say that this is why they got it right, you know? they're not making stuff up. they're really wealthy. they're really well educated. they think they have really good ideas. they live in extraordinarily beautiful homes for the time. and he believed that they had truly come up with the way society should work. and the way society should work according to men like james henry hammond -- and he was only one, but the speech was too good not to use because lincoln famously responds to it in a speech -- what he argued before congress in 1858 was that society was healthiest when a few very well educated, very wealthy men ran things because they were the only ones who had the education and the brains to direct society as it should be done.

and the proof of that was the fact they were so wealthy. god had honored them with extraordinary wealth, they'd figured out a good society, and the way a good society worked was for them to direct the labor of lesser beingings. now, those lessings beings were men and women of color, but james henry hammond believed they should not have education because that would only make them gum my and want more than they could get, they should not have any voice in american society, they shouldn't get much in the way of clothing or food, because that would simply be wasted on then. money should travel upward so it would create this extraordinarily intelligent, powerful class. and that was the way a healthy society would work. and he said to see that i'm right -- and he says this in the speech -- look around you. we're the richest, most educated people in the world. this must be the best way to do things. >> and so, of course, abraham lincoln, as you mentioned, gave the speech i believe in the

wisconsin agricultural fair -- >> yes. >> -- repudiating this tock trip and offering his -- doctrine and offering his open. could you give us a summary of that. >> he argued -- he says -- james henry hammond crawls the majority of the people mud sills, the pieces of wood that are slammed into the ground on which a house rests, so they are the foundation of society, but they literally live in the mud. lincoln says this is not how a healthy society works. a healthy society works the exact opposite way; that is, it's the workers who create value, not the people at the top of the heap. the people at the bottom of the heap create value, and a healthy society works in a way that those people have access to education and resources so that they can produce and rise. and the more that they produce, the more capital they will create, the more they will employ other people. and the way to make a society move and advance is to put government on the side of equality of opportunity for the

average worker. >> you can watch this and other programs online at booktv.org. >> the miami book fair is this weekend. join us both days starting at 10 a.m. eastern for our live coverage on c-span2. you'll see best selling authors talking about their nonfiction books, and we'll take your calls, e-mails and tweets. authors include former counsel to president nixon, john dean, television writer and produce norman lear and cornell west. starting at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span2's booktv. >> los angeles times. at the top of the list are two memoirs, awsmmy poler's yes,

please. the mind craft construction handbook comes in third, and in fourth fox news commentator bill to rile o'reilly's killing patton. then george r.r. martin provides a history of the hbo series "game of thrones." next on the miami herald list, brian martin addresses domestic violence in "invincible." and methods of exploring end of life care in "being mortal." in ninth, walter isaacson in "the innovators." and wrapping up the list is "agents of the apocalypse." for more information visit miamiherald.com and tune in to booktv on c-span2 this weekend for our live coverage of the

miami book fair. >> you're watching booktv. next, jonathan last, editor of the seven deadly virtues, brought together 18 conservative writers to update, in a humorous way, william bennett's book of virtues. during this panel discussion on the book held at the american enterprise institute, mr. last is joined by contributors p.j. o'rourke, jonah goldberg, christine rosen and more. this is a little under an hour. >> hello, everybody. welcome. what a virtuous crowd. got quiet -- so like robert's inseam, i'm going to keep this short. i'm jonah goldberg, i'm a fellow at the american enterprise institute. if that offended you, you might as well leave now. [laughter] i am happier than helen thomas at aha maas rally to be here.

[laughter] i've been using that joke for a long time, but constancy of character is a virtue too. i'm delighted all of you could make it here tonight, at least most of you. but i'm, as a fellow american enterprise institute and host of this event, i want to say thank you all for coming, so thanks. the thesis of this book, "is ten deadly -- seven deadly virtues," is that the virtues have all grown out of fashion. perhaps no greater proof of this thesis comes in any other form than the fact that a book called "the seven deadly virtues" actually contains 18 virtues under discussion. [laughter] kind of reminds me of thoreau's famous dictum about how to live the virtuous life. he said of all things simplicity, simplicity, simplicity. one wonders why he needed three

simplicities. it may well be true that america's going to hell in a handbasket. ..

laws] >> thank you. this publisher of templeton press did this book. writing is hard. ferguson, one of our contributors can tell us that. this book was a blast and it was so much fun doing it. probably a little bit criminal. i will never write a real book again because this is the way to do it. you can to do all the writing yourself and at the end you sit back and say look that this book i wrote when i didn't actually write it.

thanks for hosting this. it is very kind and thanks to jonah for making this happen. jim wright's about virtue the way he writes about super euros, comic books and star trek, with elegant with, and creepy sexual intensity. before that, i will tell you about our book. i don't want to tell you about another book that many of you are probably quite familiar with, bill bennett's great "book of virtues". was published in 1993 and became a national best seller. it spent months on the best-seller list. newsweek said every set of parents leaving with a newborn ought to be given a copy of this. virtue would something you could talk about without being embarrassed. you may have noticed the world has changed since then. in 1993 there was shock and

scandal when somebody asked bill clinton about his brief. today we have naked cellphone pictures of celebrities and politicians. we get them dumped onto the internet every weekend and people go -- is not just that. i think people get tempted to say we have lost our interest in virtues as a society. i don't think that is true. in a lot of ways, there are different types of virtues. i will point to donald sterling. the fulmer owner of the clippers basketball team, back in april, two weeks, became the most reviled man in america. what did he do? he was taped whispering racist thoughts in private to his mistress who like all good mistress's when things went south released the tapes to the media bears a lesson here somewhere. this sparked a national uproar.

he is condemned on television in the radio and newspapers and magazines. the president of the united states takes time out from a foreign trip to hold a press conference on donald sterling. and the mba votes to force him to sell his team and deprive him of property. and remarked on in all of this is carrying on an affair in public and cheating on his wife of 50 years. as i said we have different averages. there's no scarlet a for adultery but there's a scarlets are for racism. punishments are more severe than they ever were. you might even say they're puritanical. maybe that is good, maybe that is bad. racism is a terrible thing. he is certainly a shift and change in virtue. is not just that. mary pointed out we live in a

time when it is gauche to express judgments about sexual matters. you just can't say somebody should makes this part with that part and person x, y or z. at the same time we have a complicated moral framework for talking about something happening here, there's a shift. one of the high points used to the moderation. all things in moderation. to some moderation is not attractive but sustainability is. i compiled a list of the modern virtues and their freedom, convenience, progress, it equality, authenticity, health and nonjudgmental is in. these are not bad things. they are all actually good in their own way but to the extent they supplanted the classical virtues i would argue is a problem because the modern virtues are inherently superficial. a deal with the outer self.

classical recused deal with the internal qualities that allow us to be our best selves and live the most fulfilling lives. is it good to be healthy and authentic? sure. that is really good but it is more important to be prudent and charitable. when it comes to virgin the old ways are the best ways which brings us to tonight's question. which virtue is the best? picking a favorite virtue is something like picking a favorite child, which we pretend we don't do but we do it anyway. each of my friends here has chosen never to to champion. you know my friends already, first we go have james lileks from the "national review" talk about temperance. good luck. following james will be christine rosen, she will champion fellowship. after that will be christine rosen, of ricochet.

>> i chose temperance. [laughter] >> robb is going to defend justice. after that, jonah will defend continents. and the great p.j. o'rourke. identity fend comments or does it depend? >> it is a dirty job. >> the great p.j. o'rourke needs no introduction. each will make a case for his or her virtue and the rest will explain why they are full of it. i encourage you to cheer and jeered them as you see fit and when it is done, use the people will decide to the king of the virtues really is. i feel like richard dawson here. let's play the future. let's play the feud. james, since you are completely soft tell us what is so great about temperance. >> i don't know.

you tell me. that isn't what i read about in the book. what i wrote about in the book was simplicity. it would be in a point to say simplicity is a virtue. give me 36 reasons why in the next week's minutes lose so i wrote about that and chose temperance not because i believe in the anti alcohol grim leapt acts wielding people who want to take the fun away from life but in a sense of moderation. i believe in moderation for a couple reasons. imac repressed lutheran pastor aggressive midwesterners. this is how we keep aggression at bay. 2, isn't it a license for absolutely everything? everything in moderation. stakes in cheese case and brandy and laudanum and dancing girls, just tell little of the. it doesn't always work. you can say when you're accused of cannibalism i just had a

singer. but moderation is otherwise a wonderful way to live your life and i have two manifestations of an hart senate office building which will make my case ironclad. moderation in speech. there have been times in my life when i have been in tolerance and intemperance. i have said things i wish i didn't say. once in writing about michael more, i said i don't wish him harm. but if i was in a room when he backed into a hatpin and popped and flew around a room like a balloon i would kind of like to see it. people said this was cruel, commenting -- the request correct and i felt bad about that even though he resembles a thomas gas nazi plutocrat but let's not make fun of how he looked. at what i feel if people criticize my baldness or shortness? i would say they were jealous of

my success. but i didn't want them to say that to me so i want everybody to get along and i believe in civil dialogue, damn it. the second deck of for moderation would be moderation in opinion, something that is almost antithetical because i used to have a reputation as the guy who got everybody together on a common subject, one thing we can agree on. let's end this contentious debate by agreeing on one thing. it kept me from having to defend my own ideas. at the end of the evening we could say we learned something. to you agree it was not democratic 50 degrees the autobiography is a worthy public infrastructure, and we would agree on something. so what? so what if we found a common agreement because of we don't have common values there is no point to coming to a common agreement.

we would have discussions, and we would not concede anything to the other side. and i want it to be destroyed. we will destroy it but slowly. it works when you are among your peers and something you can share together there's a point. otherwise i will come out in favor of not moderate expression. that leads us to number 3 and this is the most elemental to come. moderation of action. i lived in the east coast for awhile and people are against each other all time and tempers get hot, an unpleasant place to be. i come from a place where people were kind and don't give up in other people's business and generally there is a happy place to live. that brings us to the parable of the airplane reclining seats.

on the way out here, this guy gets on the plane and he is right in front of me and he is about the size of -- he is about the size of used to be. the first thing he does is push the button, into that position with the up and a remote in the other and use it for three hours of football. i am of the dimension of a kind of guy who would greet dorothy after she kills the which. not a big man. i got a table in my sternum and i am typing like this and i can't move. moderation, two things i could do. i could get those little things that keep the seeds from going back but that is wrong. i can't find them on the internet. work 2, i could say if you just saw how little run you need i

understand you are a big fellow but how about we work this out and ride at a moderate solution, you go forward a little, i give you some of my space and we are happy. that is moderate action. he didn't do that. what he did was he didn't do that at all so i waited for him to lower over like this and i took him back to the seat. i don't think he slept a wink and i was happy about that in a moderate sort of way. [applause] >> i got the bumper sticker virgin, phyllis should. james has covered nazi and cannibals, earlier, very nice. i have this virtue of fellowship which is the kind of thing people talk about on corporate retreats, and retirees with a

round of shuffleboard. but i think it is more interesting because unlike chastity which you are either practicing or you are not, fellowship can be taken to extremes. a bunch of people in a situation of extreme danger, what is going to happen? they might display heroic acts of courage, the band of brothers, and so funny you brought up cannibals, and the donner party, both are kind of fellowship and -- one thing we talk about with fellowship today, we use it to ally with groups that are in tolerance so we talk about discrete fellowship of people who are intolerant to a lot of modern things. people who are in tolerance of airport security, gluten, so many the list goes on.

these are all things we can form a group together, and basically hate on something else. what this shows is once you are part of these groups there is a lot of ideological rigor required. i am going to date myself, if anyone has been following the kenny g's situation, thank you. let's bring them into the fold. kenny g, well up, somehow manages to pull off some ale into the 21st century, very big in china, david hassle off in germany, they played going home, going to leave the mall and like anyone turned on and on switch

and they start to leave, like chinese commerce. plays a very important role so kenny g went to hong kong recently and in his words, was taking an innocent walk but happen to take a selfy in front of a group of protesters, pro-democracy protesters. this anger at the chinese government declared him an infidel of one type or another, kenny g has cultivated this fellowship of people who admire him in china, and immediately backpedaled, deleted the selfy, democracy, i was taking my innocent for a walk. the dark side where we start to self police if anyone goes out side the realm. jonathan crowley cut it from my

essay, justin bieber fan sites on the internet, don't do it, don't do it. there is again the self policeing that goes on is pretty rigorous. my argument which will completely fall flat since half of you are probably tweeting to your friends right now is we should reclaim fellowship because we have debased friendship. we have a million friends and followers and spend our lives on line with our friends but those are not real friendships. those are our pals on the justin bieber fan site and we have anonymous handles we use when we posed to them. damn it! my pen is more celibate. i will sum it up by saying there are existing shall questions we should consider. when we think about fellowship than friendship in the real world versus the way we play on a lot of relationships online, what should it look like, we

should show up moderately consume alcohol and talk to each other face-to-face. this is an important part of being a human being. how do we connect in meaningful ways and not just on a justin bieber fan site? this will speak to this issue of fellowship which is if a kardashian falls in the woods and doesn't take a selfy did it really happen. open bracket applause] >> i you guys buying this? a funny bunch from other contributors. do we really want fellowship without real people? then you can't get away from it. >> just say that, me and sunny. >> i am so tired of these events, hearing about kim kardashian and kenny g. >> sort of an unofficial mascot. >> we wonder why we are losing

the culture. >> sure, whoever. >> if that is cocaine. some wrestle for it. i am going to begin, which i do whenever i speak publicly, by telling a hollywood anecdote. people who are not from hollywood have no idea if it is true or not but this would actually in the words of henry kissinger have the additional benefit of being true. a few years ago the tv network was the number 4 spot, the lowest spot, number 97, they alone all the intellectual property for the $6 million man which uva are over 90 remembered that show and a friend of mine had a good idea to revitalize the franchise, bring it back, the idea is that a new $6 million man, it would be the $6 billion man and he is an idiot so they had to find the

old $6 million man played by lee majors who wasn't available at the time. and it is a funny twist that he is living in a trailer in the desert because the federal funding for his program had been cut so his arm didn't work and the leg didn't work and the i have a hard time focusing of the government was not -- he was on the of the a plan or something. he gave his pitch and gave it to us and it was great. when the president who was a former actor. at 30 minute pitch, great story, it was funny, they applauded, the president said that will be great, fantastic, but no. here it is why. because when i was an actor i

did an episode of the $6 million man and the majors was a total jerk to me. he didn't use the word jerk by the way. that is justice, just so you know. that is what happens when we have justice. justice is the best of the virtues because it is so mean. it is so -- these are for juice, fellowship, who cares? justice is something you do to somebody else and you can do it hard anytime you want. i am sorry, it is just as. that is kind of justice. justice is its own evil twin which makes it the best. justice is the eyes of the former hollywood assistant who has been abused and maltreated and consulted, by putting up with it rises through the ranks

of the executive is sitting across from his or her former boss in panic as everyone in hollywood is pitching their shabby wears if the person they fought like them. justice put easy terms is the former intern who was never properly thanked for that copy of leaves of grass. that is why justice is the first virtue. it is dirty payback when we won, it is the least virtuous virtue which is why it is the best. it also has its thought. it reminds us to be nice to in turns. justice also reminds the intern's if you stick with it, it will all be worth it.

[applause] >> all right. so. there you go. in my chapter, the cover article of the next issue of "national review". >> to clarify, you get paid twice? >> a room full of writers here, damn him. >> as you know from "national review" that is not going to happen. my chapter was on integrity which i am not talking about today, when -- >> very telling. >> which i hear is a good thing. my colleagues here were prudent and they picked their virtues first and jonathan was like dude, where is your virtue? which is something i heard from lots of people. i get some version of that in an

e-mail everyday which is in all caps which means it has got to be true. he said all we have left is chastity. it was sort of like showing up at the end of the day fire sale and all that is left in the remainder bin is mismatched hot pink socks and the fake velvet track suits. i didn't want chastity. so like this caller in good standing, i poured through the into webs and look for a list of virtues and wikipedia and found continents as in the opposite of incontinence. jonathan last, america's foremost expert on virtues by virtue of having edited this book, he is like is that even really a virtue? already i sort of -- so i was

sort of -- i picked it for a couple reasons. first of all, other than stocks, cigars, perhaps the biggest source of joy in my life along with rob long is star trek references. i would not pull of the kobay h kobayashi maru. continents plays a big part in book 7 of aristotle's book which like most people in this room i spent reading very closely. go actually it is denied as the ability to deny yourself pleasurable bodily functions. hy will make three points about this and they are vital. first, it in this age of ebola,

the ability to control bodily effluvia emanations and discharges has perhaps never been more important. [laughter] >> he is so tiny i could barely years that. 2. unlike chastity or honesty, continence is a multibillion-dollar industry. one need only look at the commercials for nbc's nightly news broadcast to know that is the truth. in japan within the next ten years, adult diapers will outsell baby diapers. yes. >> that depends. always count on lilacs to recycle an adult diapers joke that was already made.

and last, the only serious point i will make is my favorite definition of conservatism is the idea that human nature has no history. we were all built from the crooked timber of humanity and the only thing that separates us from living in the trees is this thing we call civilization. one of my favorite lines is every generation, western civilization is invaded by barbarians. we call them children. the essence of conservatism and civilization is to take these barbarians and turn them into civilized human beings. the first beverage we teach these barbarians is continence. anybody who denies this, is not a parent. war they were really bad parents. the ability to deny bodily pleasures, from nose picking and urination on demand in our youth

to inappropriate sexual gratification such as on any event broadcast on c-span, are the minimum requirements of civilization. >> the minimum requirements of my weekend. >> you fail so often. aristotle says courage is the greatest virtue because without it, this is nonsense. so often is the case, jonah goldberg is right and aristotle is wrong to. without continence the ability to keep our animal desires in check, men are not within, we are all beasts or perhaps charlie sheen. thank you very much. [applause] >> susan was worried about me having jonah goldberg.

>> it will be fine. >> it is on now. hope and change, that pretty much tells us where the virtue has gone, down the of rabbit hole of wishful thinking. hope was not always so faint a word in the english language. the root meaning of hope is a finger sired. the book of common prayer, the order for the burial of the dead when the presiding minister says va -- the sure and certain hope of resurrection, he doesn't mean wouldn't it be nice? this kind of hopeless defending hope, hope been out of artistic fashion for certainly

more than a century. it is hard to think of the great modern novel, play or poem that ends on a hopeful note or even begins on one. the first line of the wasteland, april is the coolest month. excuse me, mr. singh to the anglican converts, did the easter bunny skip the elliott house hold? the great gatsby concludes with f. scott fitzgerald declaring so we beat on, boats against the current board back ceaselessly in the past, smack into the dock no doubt and even when he was alive taking sailing lessons, no hope for scotty. the last words of dialogue in henry miller's death of a salesman are from will lomond's wife is as we are free, we are

free, but miller refutes determinism, speak fashionably ironic, what she's talking about is how the final mortgage payment on the house was made the day of willie's funeral. judging from the number of apocalyptic movies released lately, there is no hope in popular culture either. somebody in hollywood working on the apocalyptic remake of the sound of music. ♪ go endangered species dear ♪ re the eyes with sun ♪ va the only person left ♪ zombies are better run ♪ what am i going to do

♪ ♪ got the shirt too which brings us back to see movies over and over and over again. [applause] >> all right. there we go. you are right and you are wrong. i grew up in the 70s and all the movies were of how bad the feature was going to be. solyndra green --soylent green planet of va, charlton heston--edward g. robinson with applesauce is actually pretty good. cannibalism again. coming in the late 70s comes along a movie that changes everything and has an optimistic can do spirit which was called a new home. the word hope entered back and

paved the way to the bad news bears. we are back to that dystopian future, every piece of popular culture is the collapse of everything. the hunger games, divergent, all predicate on this future which is concrete and has two colors, brown for the bad and blue for the upper-class. the you are right. hollywood loves to feed the most well fed, peaceable, technologically addictive, the latest generation we have been able to produce that they are feeding them nothing but despair. >> one thing about hundred games, was easily the least exciting movie about children fighting to the death that i have ever seen. it is never is that children you want.

>> let me end on the apocalyptic stuff because i am not huge fan of the walking dead. we call it the prime regulatory deceased because we don't want our daughter to find out what we are watching. our vocabulary is much better as she gets older because you have to come of with water phrases she can't understand. if you make the case the walking dead is, a lot of these apocalyptic things are movies about problem solving. show up in time for the will, family and problem solving. like michael keaton with a hatchet. the problem isn't ambulatory creature, the solution is nice for the eyeball. again and again and again. i watch it too sometimes just to say why exactly am i watching this? do i care whether this happens? the recent loss development --

>> you would see what the guy is seeing in front of you on the plane. >> i don't want to spoil it for anybody but it seems to be the group has found themselves a sanctuary which may not be as it seems which was the previous one. >> needs company without a misunderstanding. knows boilers. >> any other shows you want to ruin? >> it is also about fellowship. people will band together against whatever disparate elements they have because they have a common objective. >> until they become hungry. how do these fellowships hold? >> zombies seem to bond together. they get along. they don't eat each other. they don't make those little comments to each other like --

did you just call me fat? they don't say that. they don't say you seem like you look tired. they don't say that. >> there is no zombie twitter. i thought the movie would be more like the hunger games. there might be a time when we appear again and one of us -- >> has to ask each other for a job. >> or any thing and one of us will pay back. >> of blur with this group. >> that is what we have got. that is what keeps us all in line. that is the argument the n r a

makes. that guy might have a gun so please and thank you, put your snickers bar in your cellary and pay and go. >> an armed society is a polite society. >> justice would be meted out immediately. it may not be justice in the capital j sense, but maybe i went too far. >> what is the difference between revenge and justice, just out of curiosity? >> you will make me pay for that. >> a good agent? >> it is -- >> i am not being paid for my appearance here so i don't have to answer that. there isn't one. in the eye of the b holders there isn't one which is why justice is so attractive. very small justice and big justice. small justice was achieved when that guy saying the project. larger justices the world was

denied the $6 billion man read boot which might have been the battlestock galactica. i can't see the $6 billion man. >> both of you will live and have other nerd stuff, trust me. >> this is my argument for concealed carry actually. in the bible it says dog says payback is mine, revenge is mine. meaning you shouldn't wait. because if you wait, that is revenge. if you fall off the face of the earth, that is justice. timing is everything. >> we should say one of the virtues which is courage is not on display.

matt is over unfair. >> shout out to that. >> like a beautiful woman that doesn't come of with a summons. and out of the channel. >> overage they're practicing moderation. >> you have to goes white right on fashion. >> the difference between courage and foolhardiness. >> what? >> enough to answer a 10-year-old boy. that is a very import question. courage is when they know they have done something different and foolhardiness is when they know they don't. watch this. that is foolhardiness. it is interesting watching him grow up. he is not a fool hearty kid because he has grown up in the modern safety conscious world, he worries about everything.

worries about obeying the rules. he feels like a maniac but won't be out of bounds. that would be wrong. watching him develop, i always thought the bravest people i ever met were those who had no imagination whatsoever. he could not figure out what was going to go wrong with them driving through that. >> that is not courage. that is the difference between courage and fearlessness, courage requires knowing the danger. being afraid is smart. being fearless is stupid. >> i have a rational fear of sharks. >> tight is the most rational of all fears. a few you will hurt yourself. >> but plenty of money for felix

baumgartner to jump from space. people talk about how courageous people are to jump out of that, no he wasn't. he was -- >> stupid. >> mercenary. >> i don't know. >> i just wanted -- >> in a world, in a bicycle helmets world in which everything has been litigated fairly well, in which -- i went to costco recently and bought a bucket, and orange bucket covered on all sides, covered with white fringe, all warning and a disclaimer warning not to use the bucket. q could drown in it. >> i am not nearly that flexible. >> i live in l.a. and go to yoga

twice a week. it is inside, i fill the bucket with a little bit of water and try to drown myself in the bucket just to see. and i got a delight headed. >> i am just soaked with the image of the postman coming around the corner with your head in the bucket. >> can't figure out -- >> he is used to it. the question is in that world is there such a thing as courage? in a completely sanitized world's, but it disclaimed world. >> i send my children to school. >> all over the place. >> you could say no, get a few

knocks, that is what the emergency room is 4. >> absolutely. i couldn't agree more. we have in our private school that littler kids go to, there is the table for people who are allergic to groundnuts, people allergic to tree nuts because lactate in tolerance, and gluten in tolerance and you happen to have the rare normal child's. and filling out the papers, they ask what your child is allergic to. they don't ask if. >> when my daughter was younger, she is 11 now. when she was in first or second grade i made a point to come up with another piece of really shocking advice when she walked into the school and i remember

the head of the school, don't smoke crack! the one that -- the one that freaked out the head master, no knife fights. little girl, dora the explorer backpack, it reminds her i am raising my kid in the 1950s and i grew up in a death wish n.y. we weren't -- piles of garbage on 84th street, we are range them and we like a contest to see how elaborate they get and that kind of stuff. and that is completely gone, their kids are growing up unbelievably continence.

i am tempted to give my daughter a bowie knife, antibiotics and bandages and leave her some place, track her so she doesn't get in trouble but just so she can learn some lessons. antibiotics will spoil that kid. >> i thought it was great when i let my daughter -- >> she moved from the front seat to the back and cinched up like hannibal lector seven eight years. finally we let her sit in the front. an air bag will take care of it. i am not worried about that. and safety demonstration put on by the minnesota highway department, if a kid sits in the front with their legs up like this on the dashboard, if it goes off it will drive their kneecaps into their nose and send bone fragments into their brain and that is all i could think of. when she put her feet up casually, don't do that, kneecaps into the brain. not realizing when i grew up

before the age of singeing in six ways i sat in front of the car, they had a dashboard with a pointed metal edge that had a thin metal veneer of plastic over it but that might appeal in the hot sun, so i was looking at a scalping device that if my mother slammed on the brakes like this i went in and it would be separated and it would appeal but i never worried i would actually hit it because whenever we would stop suddenly, my mother would do this because there were no seat belts and >> she would bring you with your cigarette. >> sit back. >> she is not with us anymore. >> so are we missing a virtue of? >> yes. sense of humor. >> there are a million virtues in the world but there the virtues of air bags, diversity, realizing there is sensitivity. all of these manufactured

secular virtues. i live in a city, minneapolis, very liberal, walking in the bike path, you hear behind you a bicyclist behind you. on your left! and in that i hear every single set of ridges which i may agree is a good thing to do, maybe not an organizing principle for society. it has its attributes but is not a virtue in this sense of what we are talking about. >> i was listening to bob, try not to do but so compelling, you have to. >> you have that npr of voice. >> tales are wonderful. >> tales of nativity. >> bob was talking about the of bucket thing. >> you hear this all the time from politicians. one like is worth it. we don't do public policies that we. if you do it would mean the speed limit would be 5 miles an hour and we would walk around

with anomaly bike helmets but giant sumo suits so we don't fall and hurt ourselves. the reason va but it has that warning is it is tragic and horrible, but something like a half-dozen kids the year drown in buckets. the logical of shots of that, let's sell buckets with holes in them. si fifty-first. >> if you live in a society where any law is justified to save a single life we have to be strapped into barry's like the power sources in the matrix and not move ever because that is the only boy to guarantee a won't cost somebody their life. >> anytime you look at a warning like that it means somebody did that. when your power saw says not for flossing, somewhere in some

strange room some place. >> we are going to draw this to a conclusion. i will let you vote on the winner. >> where is our adviser and mentors? >> the consul? that that lawyer up here. things will be mitigated the >> we should add free cues that are not present. which is courage. we discovered another one, sense of humor. the ability to say something nice to your daughter without saying mr. goldberg, can i talk to you for a minute? we've seen cures humor is marvelous and yet there has been some concern. that person needs to go. >> you want to talk about another virtue? >> i wanted to make up. >> rob is right, tumor is the one thing that keeps all these

other free jews from being sources of terror. you point out in your brilliant introduction that what was it, robespierre considered justice to be the ultimate just to end their 4 terror was the first application of justice which is filled with terrifying. >> i said it better. with a better voice. >> if that is the case i will stop talking because who can add anything to that? >> the art is short, the robb is long. >> second humor is a good free to, keeps the head is in check. keeps rob employed. the d.c. crowd is on familiar with cold-blooded mercenary behavior focused only on cash.

you never seen that here. >> you have to explain that from the ground up. >> you are the reason we did this book the way we did. i promise, you vote on who was slow winner here, the big winner. i won't let you go myself and there will be gratitudes, actually gratitudes and all of you guys and the rest of view work here and did not make a cut because you were not funny enough or brave enough to set up and to all of you for coming out tonight. thank you very much. i hope you enjoyed the book. [applause] >> booktv is on twitter and

facebook. twitter.com/booktv. posed a comment on our face book page, facebook.com/booktv. booktv asked bookstores and libraries about the nonfiction books they must anticipate being published this fall. the title is buy books and books bookstore. the list begins with reflections on medicine at the end of life in being more.

that is a look at some of the nonfiction titles, books and books that are most anticipated being published this fall. visit the bookstore in coral gables, florida or online at books and books.com. >> welcome to herbal tea va's live coverage of the miami book fair. this is the seventeenth year in a row booktv has come to miami and broadcast several of the nonfiction authors to our national audience. 20 hours of live coverage, 25 authors today and tomorrow. some of the office you will hear from and talk to today include cornell west, richard dawkins, norman lear and two of the guards at the benghazi complex. full schedule of coverage is beyond the schedule on booktv.org, the c-span bus is down here, we are passing out book bags as well. if you are in the area come on

down. joining us now on our outdoor and windy sets, the founder of the miami book fair, mr. kaplan, the wind is here, nice and warm. >> will be a beautiful day. i spoke to the weather guys, the sun is going to break, come through the clouds and we have another great clear day. i also want to thank you for coming. hard to believe it has been 17 years. seems like the blink. your support of what we'd do has been immeasurably important to the growth of the book fair as well. >> we are covering 25 authors broadcasting 20 hours this is a small part of the miami book fair. >> we have 600 authors, 300 exhibitors, we run through a full week, sunday through sunday and we have a quarter of a million people that come through, not to mention during

the week we provide authors schools, we bring schools to miami dade community college. so we look deep into the community to further literary culture and help that next generation of readers find themselves as well. >> host: when you came up with this idea, when was that and how big was it? >> it was a group of us, not just me but in 1982 we started talking about it. we had the first book fair in 1984. this is our 31st one. we are about 100 authors in. right off of the beginning it started off with a book fair. we knew their rooms were filled and people were coming out and clamoring for more. there was never a question of the second year. friday, saturday and sunday, the campus building another building

so we decided to fill that up with more and i would like to say, miami dade to billboard buildings. >> it was funded in numerous different ways. we have incredible support for the nights foundation or the society of america, lots of private individuals. and they provide -- miami dade colleges to the community. >> host: you have a full day ahead of the. we appreciate you stopping by. >> guest: thank you for being here. abyss the day for you guys. >> host: also the owner of books

and books from bookstores in the miami area. coming up in a minute our first live panel of the they will be john dean and eric peristein talking about richard nixon and the 70s. john dean's latest book is "the nixon defense," what he knew and when he knew it and eric peristein's most recent book is "the invisible bridge," the fall of the nixon and the rise of reagan. they will be in chapman hall in just a minute talking swift the audience. dirksen senate office building will bit later today, there will be a chance to talk to john dean from our set here at the miami book fair. john dean and eric peristein in just a minute. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]