community. >> host: you have been generous with her time today with your thoughts and story. in closing, what should the family is out there watching today, white or black, learn of the story that you share? >> one of the main takeaways as the family you need to come together when faced with adversity. and learn how to navigate through that ever city. the book is very therapeutic , informative, he aling and goes into depth about parents not being perfect. we tell the story how we your not perfect and it treyvon is not perfect. said to have a glance on how

we look at what the book is about it is a great read we hope people will get it. >> host: "rest in power" the enduring life of trayvon martin" thanks for sharing your time with me today. . >> i am delighted to introduce tonights author lifetime professor of

history at harvard and former chair of harvard history department and affiliated professor in the harvard department of government and affiliated faculty member in the honorary fellow from cambridge. the ideological origins with of book of the year award in the history manifesto. this new book civil wars examines the history from the roots to the conflicts over the past two decades. the questions of what makes a conflict not know me a war but a civil war is intensely political into our one side

or the other blood is a model of its kind to be concise and clearly laid out it is hard to imagine a more timely work for today. please help me to welcome david are minted. [applause] >> thanks for that warm introduction and notes to reaffirm everything to not leave with applying at least one book. hopefully mine but at least one.

and the free-market would support every other organization. in with prosperity and rights. into reach the consummation of perpetual peace and how long ago that seems now. in before springing back into action in the historic claim brief alliance is coming apart at the seams. did it all seems a very violent place.

but since 1989 to become the most widespread and also the most characteristic for a of organized human violence indeed with those 40 wars around the world only one is between two states. indiana and pakistan and kashmir. when the major conflicts started with a single community. far from the angels of our nature is under the shadow of civil war. and it is over 25 billion people half of the estimated direct casualties.

even that count does not include civilians or wounded refugees those who did set die from disease or nutrition even though that has been to the economic cost the impact is no less appalling more than half of that population is displays the also remember as well as costing many lives they waste resources and divert spending to disrupt economies for crime and disease for decades in civil war-torn societies. with the annual price tags of $123 billion roughly the equivalent of the budgets of economic aid every year.

is that development in reverse? how do we make sense of such mayhem? so to have social applicable theory but when it comes to civil war or the abolition. and then to dismiss the civil war. and with at modern form. so exist today the theory of four with the theory of peace but to goes on with no

theory of civil war and our own demands that cannot help bin history possibly can and. to have the first long-range history and i will justify that all the way up to the present. in even to be a fool comprehensive intellectual history and in the many cans. but what is utterly unimaginable to be repetitive.

and the important features of the of four over the of long 2,000 years. my little book maybe represents the first attempt over the two millennia been in the larger western tradition and through international law. ; points out the significance and i argued despite that it constructive news throughout history has been did generative in the conception of politics international law and humanitarianism just to name just the few to experience

the civil war to understand and ameliorate in of prevented is sovereignty to this day. so whisperings remedy been doubly division so to call the of war civil is the familiarity of members of the same community. civil war has something atrocious. because it is in a common political unit because those at the same time absolutely affirmed and tonight.

but since then partition with the definition was settled because it was disputed in debated and how many different historical languages. it was always the name of framing in relation to war if it would depend upon the ruler or a rebel with interested house lawn after

they ceased with the italian resistance and fascist government and remains to this day with that seemingly equivalence so how do we tell of civil war apart from others? and other similar complex -- a conflict when it spills over the borders and liberia in the 1990's and can such wars if in a single community if comprised elements like isis or out kinda -- to set against the

state's by proclaiming their communities is every civil war really a specimen of the same species? and that battle of secession. and win local contacts make it impossible to analyze that incidents of violence. and would continue to dodge with the better definition but it was politicized with a large part of the book is

all very complicated within a complex idea and historians can still show the path not taken with the many winding roads and one fashionable term in my own version of it is the history of ideas known history of ideas. independent and only recently with the critiques of it recently have them regain the courage with the

more subtle and complex history. and common sense. and with the book on democracy. my book joins those new histories of the global argument with the three major turning points across the centuries with and then they need to distinguish of the upheaval in that pivotal moment with that conflict we

now know was the civil war of 1961. and with social scientist and economists and others to help the of an alliance with the decolonization but our confusion about the meaning of the application is the product to walled contest a history that the languages still speaking of to separate the amount why

those meanings remain controversial. that was into parties of two chapters but the first part is changing conceptions of civil war chronologically roughly from cicero. with those arguments about civil war and how to recognize from other genesis of civil war.

whiff of a the or to be location for civil war to suffer a new type of conflict so all of those came from rome. with the culture and that was the romans of that period. but to understand the most wrenching conflict was conflict among citizens to

have civilization in rising to a level of four who and internal dissension but added that individually was a paradox oxymoron. os fighting against external enemies that was hostile '04 others or to be members of the same community and those

that were not enemies. in for a long time with great in trepidation with the great civil warrior with the account to use that in in of a title or even in his own voice. and that they dare not speak caesar name. to become a place in the legacy. and then the civil suit decisions in a civilized peaceful the enemies are far

away. with a heart disability and civilization. with the relationship of civilization with they never have a conflict and the romans of the history of the narrative civilization and to be informed later of modern europe and beyond

with the repertoire with the enlightenment of the revolution of the other in the successful civil war with the first usage that i found we don't call on the that conflict with the american revolution in they would deny that they were in gauged with the political conjugation in with the

conceptual heritage down to the on-time. but the simple -- for the first time in from the 18 sixties of the conflict and people that have excluded civil wars from them in their remains down for their own moment.

and subject to the latter part with the asian silvo or with a global civil war into use to describe the projection that are tracing those genealogies. and before i draw some conclusions with the contention on the meaning

what came in to may 2006 through 2007? and at that point after the u.s.-led invasion with other parts of the world is it terrorism? perhaps. but this civil war said that it was. to be interested in the political history. because the debate chimed with my reading of the papers.

to define civil war. and with that battle and listening to the radio. did in realtime those are two things that are connected here we are 10 years later did not try this at home there are many commentators who will say the u.n. secretary general when there was a strike in lebanon in what is happening is much worse. but the prime minister of turkey was asked to the same question.

but this is a civil war. did before congress the fans of political scientists have the rate of killing in a rack that you hesitate of guatemala, peru, colombia, at the same moment to commentators or journalist into another writer to account for what is going on in iraq. so there will be a test on this at the end. in iran through world history with the world

history with the american civil war in the russian civil war. but iraq was not it. lettuce from a much wider debate. into have deployed history. and still about that definition garbage in and garbage out. and then to have five civil wars in world history. why were people deploying them this way? so now with a debate like that they could find only conceptual procedures.

with the historian's sense opportunity. what is the back story? that is the better definition but where did they come from? in for those who have a list from civil war from those in the past. and i believe it encourages humility and complexity and hope. into occur more often more

than any of their kind the romans discovered and afterwards the that is the kennedy and those treasured discoveries have been repeated over time. because our struggles overweening this over the histories of multiple languages and but ponders these with the civil war on the ground with a local population from international lawyers that was not a civil war but i have argued of which feeds

to be carefully excavated to begin how that gap between understanding on the ground in some tempered hope with that humanity that some have argued one beginning with the roman poet to say civil war is part of human nature with a more historical system and then to be terminated and now the

entire western hemisphere is free from or perhaps to mandate of -- to minivan last with the romans first invented to those in years ago and with that long view to assess the prospect in with the current discontent. thanks for your attention. [applause] >> it would be recorded for prosperity it would be endlessly upon early-morning c-span. [laughter]

>> so to speak about international involvement. i once had a conversation with the of vietnamese civil war threat to and to have and the six seats to which i said this is a false choice. the international involvement is critical but yet i am comfortable to call that a conflict a civil war there is a healthy debate right now but it is to generalize of international waters -- actors and.

>> with of decolonization especially since 1945 and is the type of relationship with the anti-colonial struggles in the incidence of civil war that is something that i was a take that all the way back even the 19th century coming out of the empire in spanish america and civil war emerging from their that is not entirely out of the picture with that revolution rather than five years or 10 years.

and so international or trans national. with the roots of civil war in the empire and the definition according to the imperial view or anti-imperial view as a civil war. with of mediterranean and in between so to shift that perspective been known to be called international with those 40 civil wars being fought in the of world that they are either triggered from intervention since the invasion like rwanda in the

'90s or over a particular community with a transnational terrorist organization so also wars know are internationalized. did to be delivered be fermenting the of. -- the marco but for a few days at least that every civil war is a national law. but they have the similar since with the wars against our allies so these boundaries but that is

particularly characteristic especially in the 21st century. >> i am wondering if you could talk about the significance of us states and territories and how actors like nation or religion or environment have a primary influence how they view the world and appropriated the language as the transnational community with a personal war for example, with the of prussian austrian war and i

would imagine the humanities and in terms of of war that does seem like the revolution to the erie climate change without large-scale language but there is no necessary relationship many colleagues and friends to be jerry raid so for that reason there is a necessary connection there

was almost a the metaphysical idea of that foundation to it as well. with that peninsula to become the territory so this is a conflict that takes place in any to be recognized community? and can be the case to create the boundaries batting is evident before we get good example of that. and now what we call the american revolution. to defined of commonality of of british community with

the arena of which the civil war that that affinity i find that again and again what is interesting how that defines the boundaries of commonality that is not necessarily connected but it is to all of those things. >> just a follow-up question do you think it is justifiable for those external forces to intervene at the cost of sovereignty? >> that is one of the most forward questions and kept coming up in the book.

when and whether the use of the language triggers' toward justifies intervention but in some cases effectively to say it is symbiosis' business with the second goal for with the term of the ethnic conflict that is not something we should be involved in princeton's the civil war or the conflict to give belligerent status to open up the possibility of humanitarian aid if you are

asking the of the intervention of civil war to create actual peace that sells like an actual war with that idea in mind our budget talk to about it. >> who can decide the criteria? that we could define it as a civil war to feel that that political unit itself is in the colonial imposition but

the simple way that we can define for those warriors? san the second is regarding how important we see that political unit whiff -- with this long term history. a la the of conclusions that we need a dialogue those endowed with authority from the international community with those who have the ability with those fighting on the ground i use syria in

2012 with six months of people within syria itself. in we are suffering a civil war. but which triggered the application and the possibilities of humanitarian aid. in nine interested in that gap with that baxter no expert of the teeseventeen thousand people have perished in into a power to make that determination but with state could we could be here all night with a modern

invention. has a was erupting from circumstances. with that territory of independence and especially with the colonial context. . .

a that's a good place to start on your question perhaps. >> larry friedman. in the mid-70s the book came out by an historian bernard

stern sure called consensus conflict and american historians in the purpose is different than yours. it was to talk about how the passing of the consensus generation and the government of -- but as you were talking it strikes me that you need an element of consensus and civility to facilitate division conflict particularly as you were mentioning the roman example in the u.s. civil war and so forth. are we doomed in our civility to have conflict? >> i wish i share your confidence with the root of civil war facilitating it. this is something i deliberately didn't touch in the top since

you have asked my editor said originally the book was going to be published in november. last year my editor said leslie that. we don't want to get caught up in the election and all of that. it's much better to do publicity if we do it early in the year and now it's become courageously timely. the one thing i notice that goes back to something we talked about as well one thing i noticed is a ramping up of the language of civil war particular in democratic politics, not just in the u.s. and france the uk brazil in recent months as well. it does indicate something about the way in which we think of politics as the management of fundamental and irreducible difference up to but not only violent. we begin to see that conception of politics come apart at the

seams with an indication of violence, encouragement of violence, increasing violent language and increasing facility i imagine you were shocked as i was with the way that senator warren was treated on the senate floor in the name of stability when she was trying to quote coretta scott king's letter about jeff sessions. the appalling abuse of the language of civility in the court of instability. i don't think it will lead to civil war but it's an extremely bad sign of the breakdown of the facility and the language can become weaponized in such an important and stressful moment as that was. we have time for one more question. to create balance i would like to hear a final female voice if that's possible. please, yes.

>> i have noticed the story of the two brothers was mentioned a few times and is set to be the origin of the civil war syndrome and i would like to know how the people in rome possibly created an establishment of the country based on an unjust act and the fact that this story is not only made up either people but pastors tell us about how --. >> what makes you think it was made up? it's a very good point. one answer to your question is the romans had a story of original fratricide of battling two brothers. think about krishna in the

hebrew bible and going to go on and on with these primal myths of the family often in the metaphors of a battle between brothers. what they tell me about romulus and remus although that story had been around for a couple of centuries before the civil war they really don't give cemented as an origin until during and after rome civil war so it's almost the other way around. the romans think from the very beginning they have been at loggerheads with each other and fratricide without effect becomes more potent as the result of the civil war so i think it does tell us something about that roman idea and the roman city itself when the community was cursed by civil war. this is something primal,

something that couldn't be shaken off that continue to occur in somehow that evolved in the genealogy of work itself. so it's a very significant myth but it to the romans it can be seen in many other primal civilizations around the world as well. thank you so much. thank you everybody. [applause] >> thank you so much for joining us. the books are available in the next room. we we are going to move the podium aside and we will set up the signing right here. the line will go down this middlebrow right here. thank you so much. [inaudible conversations]