steven hayward how would you describe the purpose of conservative? i'm not sure there's a such a thing as a perfect conservative but i like to stay there are five different kinds of conservatives. i am the ultimate old-school fusionist. everybody i think it's like the old parable the and an elephant with the tree trunk in the snake and it's hard to see the whole picture but someone who is a ability of knowing what they can learn whether physical -- physiological disputes about who is right and who's wrong. you've written much about ronald reagan and several other books. different kinds of conservatives that talk about it and what kind of the conservatives ronald reagan? >> he was not that conservative and a couple of ways. remember reagan was fond of quoting tom paine who is the

radical sympathizer of the french revolution and if the to quote pain thing to have it in our power to make the world over again and george will of the time four years ago now sing anytime anywhere that is nonsense in the most unconservative thing you could possibly say. people say it's part of reagan's optimism and spirit and there's a certain truth to that but on his headstone at the reagan library in simi valley i know in my heart that man is good so reagan was exposed to look at the good side of humans but that leaves out the christian doctrine of that which other conservatives keep at the forefront of their minds. that's why reagan was such an idiosyncratic libertarian. yet traditional sympathy but he was his own special man.

probablyse starting may be in te 40she certainly will when he adopted liberal anti-communism. he was a member of the americans for democratic action but in the 50s when he is touring the country for the general electorate he was reading a lot of the early concert of literature whittaker chambers high act "road to serfdom." those were the big conservative books of the 50s and he read them and he talked himself into being conservative. didn't become a republican until 1962 and he was moving to the right for quite a long time. taught about the change of becoming a republican. quite sure, well he said one somewhere i woke up one day and realize i've been supporting all the people whose ideas i'm orcriticizing now. trying to make a change. i think he part of democrats forrr nixon in 1960.

he not only move to supporting republicans at a veryve early te stepping back from political philosophy to reagan the man to quote from lou cannon in your book ronald reagan was humanly accessible to the people who had never met him and impenetrable to those who try to know him well. why? >> loose theory which i will go with his is headed to partly with reagan's upbringing as the son of an alcoholic. again i will trust lou on this. there's good psychological evidence that people who have an alcoholic parent tend to become more remote. also reagan moved around a lot as a kid. his father struggled to keep a job so he was the kid in school and that tents to make them shy.

these are some explanations for why he has carried this romanus but it's not unique to impact a lot of people said similar things about franklin roosevelt. his own kids didn't get along with him very well. like reagan roosevelt had this great connection with the people.he he understood people intuitively and connect with them and later reagan on radio and television. did that connection come from his acting career? >> part of it was an acting career. reagan often never cared about the review of his movies. he was always denigrated as a b actor and that he understood the box office and he always understood that there are two audiences and don't pay attention to critics.

did he keep that through his entire life? >> in the political area but there were certain issues that were showing up in the polls. when he ran for governor in 1966 he said i think people are mad about the chaos on the campus and the political people around him said nobody saying that in the polls. it turned out to be wildly popular and in 1976 he opposed the panama canal treaty and that up.'t showing when he gave the line about the panama canal the audience just erupted and he nearly sank that treaty under jimmyy. carter. the polls today versus the polls during reagan's time and how much the president. attention to the polls? did ronald reagan care? >> yes he did. this poster was a very good poster. we do a poll every 15 minutes. there's an overload on polls.

if i could wave a magic wand i would polls. reagan. attention to the polls. he was known as the great communicator and the legend is that reagan gave a speech heat -- he gave very good speeches that there were some particularly in south america especially nicaragua that left a big scandal in the second term gave a couple of speeches and 83 and 84 and the poll showed public its opinion didn't move at all and reagan found it very discouraging. he didn't talk about publicly. ronald reagan is the subject of two of his steven hayward's book a 1600 page set of books on the history of ronald reagan. the "the age of reagan" the latter of the two, the age of

reagan the fall of the liberal order 1964 to 1980. just one book by steven hayward and we are talking about all of theme on "in depth" if you want to join the conversation of phone lines eastern central timezones (202)748-8400 and the mountain or pacific timezone (202)748-8201 and sent as a text (202)748-8903 give us your name and where you are from crick alsoro on twitter @booktv. steven hayward will be with us until 2:00 p.m. eastern joining us throughout this entire come -- show of "in depth." gorbachev died on august 30 and what was their relationship like when they were in office and later? >> that's an extraordinary story

because initially they were inclined not to like each other. reagan wrote in his diary after gorbachev took office in 1985 people tell me he's a different kind of soviet leader and reagan said i'm too to believe that however reagan has always said he hopeded some day to sit down with soviet leader and see if they could make a breakthrough. gorbachev turned out to be that person but not initially to gorbachev forou his part. reagan was a dinosaur. that was a phrase that gorbachev used. what was the age difference? >> gorbachev with 55 or 56 and -- there was 20 years difference between them. gorbachev said in the politburo meeting peacefully the creature of the capitalist class of america very orthodox marxism but they came to like each other and my perception is they came to like each other because they argued directly for the first

time in a way that no american president are soviet soviet leader of her head. he argued about fundamental ideological differences between theog two countries and some of the transcripts of those arere fascinating.re we didn't learn about these until the 1990s. the private exchanges between them were very frankra and earnest. where was the setting for these exchanges? >> the most interesting was the reykjavík summit. it looked like they were on the cusp of a deal to eliminate nuclear weapons. unthinkable in the decade before that and it fell apart at the end because reagan wouldn't get rid of the strategic defense plan. that was what everyone concentrate on. i got my hands on the soviet transcript of the face-to-face meetings which was much more complete in the state department notes because their size and notetaker in the room. at times they would have these top arguments h on ideology and

break at one point is arguing we have a two-party system. arbatov said the one party system is marxism and gorbachev says while i respect your system and we have to coexist andco reagan says i might persuade you to become a member of the republican party. gorbachev said an interesting idea and getting back to nuclear weapons now. and there are interesting arguments in that meeting that veered off into arms-control stuff. see it to thehn public know they were having these exchanges? >> dribs and drabs came out especially in that first face-to-face meeting in front of a fireplace in geneva of november of 85. reagan was tough in that meeting but also friendly and reagan came back saying i think he is a different kind of leader. margaret thatcher is right and they started liking each other better and still had sharp

disagreements. one of the things gorbachev brings up himself at reykjavík is all i can tell you still believe in the talk about empire in your speech from 1982 about how the soviet union is going to end up on the ash heap oft history. what am i to believe about that? it sounds like to me you want to wipe us out. reagan said that we have no intention of that and this is what i think an argument went on. >> how did he go about reassuring him? did you find anything from the notes and did he walk back that statement? >> he came back to the main subjects were reagan said we are the only two people who can prevent the destruction ofca the world. once it became clear they were sincere about wanting to do that it broke down not just over the strategic defense initiative that technical details of the whole thing is so complicated. we have never had a fundamental

conversation about this about the differences between the countries and about how we unravel the subject. it makes me think when he described the book i'm fairly certain he was talking about gorbachev at the time reagan wanted to tell gorbachev if the earth was invaded by aliens they would have to work together to fight the aliens. >> right. reagan said that in their first meeting together and it's reagan's little green men speech and his aides and colin powell was working on national security and reagan went and told that story in a speech a couple of weeks later just off the cuff. lou cannon had a great line about that. he said i'm sure gorbachev was wondering what the right marxist line was uncooperative imperialism. it used to be, here's one important difference but it used to be in the summit nixon carter

who ever they were very slow affairs because they would be late delayed translations and the russians including the premier would bring in a big notebook and they'd have a prepared response and they were flipping pages to find it but there are probably no patients -- pages on alien invasions. that's what made it different from everything that i gone before them. "time" magazine select mikhail gorbachev not ronald reagan as man of the decade. what did you steven hayward think about that? >> gorbachev deserves credit. he was said genuine liberal reformer. he did want to end the arms race and he did repudiate the brezhnev doctrine the one that is -- andlism

announced in 1988 unilateral reductions in soviet troops in eastern europe. we thought they were negotiations and he gave them -- part of what's going on is imagine especially as you go forward to your imagine if you had gone to graduate school to study soviet colacci and at the end of 1991 the soviet union didn't exist anymore. now you are back up to the nobel prize that go. chill -- gorbachev got. a lot of that was academic and media establishment couldn't stand it that reagan had been so effective and had been vindicated in many ways against all the criticisms and talbott said this is just a disaster the way he's going on about arms control. i think he embarrassed them and that was one way of getting back atge reagan.

did reagan and gorbachev have a relationship later in life? >> i don't know how much they keptid in touch today don't remember if he was -- he visited reagan at his ranch in santa barbara. they got together and shared jokes. gorbachev said to somebody later he was unimpressed withhe reagas ranch. reagan's houses 1200 square feet. the big ranch. gorbacheve thought the presidet denies that they have a big mansion. not the civil ranch house. those are cultural differences i suppose. ronald reagan and his journey to becoming a conservative, what was your journey? >> all health -- oh hack. i grew up with conservative parents inin a concerted town. everybody goldwater stickers were everywhere and after the

election as a 1st-grader not only did goldwater lose but he lost by a lot and that was my first question my head saying the world must be different to my neighborhood. from there i joked i'm conservative by soap structure. i started reading national review in the eighth grade because i had seen buckley on g firing line. i said on understand a word he's saying that he's fun and interesting and is want to be part of that. step wins to start understanding what he was saying? >> it was pretty early on because as a freshman i recall looking up the words he used both on the show and its magazines which asserted reading a lot. in high school he still had to do vocabulary to link and all the rest ofha that. i was sending him words from national review. he would say where you getting these from w and i would say i'm

getting them from buckley. oh well that's. i was precocious that way i guess. where did you go to college and what did he do after college? >> i went to lewis and clark college in oregon. i didn't want to go to a gigantic university and i was a journalist the opinion editor of the paper. it learned how write off debts and such and after college i wentnt to work as an intern in washington. a hugely formative formative experience by follow that in washington i think it's what anyone notices if you look around capitol hill is run by people from the 20s. all eager and ambitious and i got to thinking i don't think i want to be part of that scene. if i come back to washington my first thought was i need to know more to be as serioused journalm

writer. i then went on to claremont graduate school starting 40 years ago this week in fact. i thought about chicago and a couple of other places but i went there because it was close to home and second it had a number of notable conservative professors there. i thought you know i'm learning from the best. focusing on american politics as you were growing up your first book on churchill. i got stuck one day in one of those leadership seminars that i thought, didn't like it very much but the person the workshop kept mentioning him. he said at the end you know a lot about churchill. you ought to write a book about his leadership style and i thought it was a idea. i thought okay so at claremont graduate school one of the

principle thoughts in the best way toatst learn about politicss throughpe biography. lincoln churchill both roosevelts to golf and in particular churchill. my parents were world war ii generation and talked about it a lot. so that's why ended up writing about churchill. i knew a lot about him already and what i learned about a better way to approach the understanding of critical life. since that book came out in 1997 best for 25 years this year you come out with m. stanton evans conservative whip. you write in the book that this s book is why stan evans matters. why does stan evans met her? >> dearer series of pretty good short biographies on why orwell

matters in a rented matters. although stan died seven or eight years ago and it's unknown but the younger generation if you were of the reagan buckley era and all of us are aging out now stand was a hugely important figure. as a journalist and asrt a thinr of some profundity and as an actor. you combined all those rows that were kept separate and finally as a historian. his last book was a pretty serious vindication of joe mccarthy which is thought to be beyond the pale. he was everybody's favorite type because he was friendly with everybody. he was funny as heck. sell them in his writing and he was aas great teacher for a whoe

generation of conservatives. other people that viewers would be familiar with mike ann coulter and mark tapscott at the "washington examiner." i've a list of names in the book. he influenced a whole generation of conservative journalists. of viewers said what he looked like and sounded like from an archive september 171994. i am a conservative. for c-span viewers i've been on here a number of times and what i mean by that are the things i was just talking about. i'm magicians and serving certain things not just because the status quo. i'm often critical of the status quo up in the moment but a conservativef of freedom and limited government and the

united states in the tradition of western culture in general. and because i believe in those values i'm a a conservative. m. stanton evans from 1994. he is known for the sharing statement. what is bad? bad as the founding document of young americans for freedom which was formed in the fall of 1961 for the short version is coming out to goldwater boom of the 1960 convention but a lot of people settled these young people of goldwater lets capitalize on that enthusiasm and started are in session so we came up with young americans for freedom. stan i think was 28 years old at that point and was asked to write the statement and it was 350 words long something like that in contrast that with the statement of the new left which was 5000 words long and it's a a basic statement of conservative

principals belieft in believe in small government in resisting communism of course which is the one part that is archaic but the rest of it can be repeated today verbatim and never bragged about being the primary drafter of it. if you asked him years later he would say it is correct of course i was just trying toup bl down and express conservative wisdom for the last 2000 years. he never posts about it. we as young conservatives believe foremost among the transcendent values of individual use of the god-given free will derive his rights to be free from her structures of arbitrary force that liberty is indivisible and political freedom cannot long exist without economic freedom and the purpose of government is to protect those freedoms to the

preservation of internal or the provision of national defense and administration of justice and it goes on from there. is that statement relevant today? >> i think so. there are three or four different directions you can analyze parts of that statement. even though their orthodox marxism which says consciousness is determined by material forces dissenting from that in the 1950s with onene of the big intellectual currents was behaviorism. there's all kinds of versions of it but it said individual consciousness is determined by subregional forces and partly pushing back against the idea that human beings are truly free. that we have metaphysical freedom. you can interpret it as much more simply directly political as the view that the government should plan or supervise more aspects of your life for yourli

own good. that's less theological. part of the political divide we see today. have been tour tour interview with david haywood -- david hayward. (202)748-8201 text 202. glenn, go ahead sir. thank you all very much for taking my call. mr. hayward i'd like to ask you about what you think of the overall current state of american history isnt being taut in higher education expressly like the and founding fathers were on the same team

and stuffic like that that has really taken off in a post george floyd national psychosis that happen in 2020 and specifically would you comment on an article and comment add-on it on your web site. it was an american greatness article called america never existed. thank you very much. right. i will do this in order. do we have an extra hour john? it's american history question. goodness i could go on about that for literally days and i won't of course. the short version is the teaching of history for a long time it's fully. but it may be started with older roots of the people sister of the united states nevermind the factual errors that but the interpreter framework essentially is this the defects

in cents of america represent the whole of america. i think that's wrong. the new version like the 1619 project and so forth wanting to root use america to a defect and historical lapses in history. from there you could go on a long time for the second part of your question i may see him later today. when homers homer's rodent article about america thatth was thee provocative title trying to get people's attention but it does connect your question to does what he was trying to suggest was let me put it this way i had been asking questions this week of several people. if all of america's leading cultural and educational institutions shifted the howardd zinn view that our constitution and goingr down the checklist could we provide -- survive in

its present form text is a lot of talk about are we heading to another civil war and that seems unlikely because we don't see classical divisions and so forth but when you are leading cultural institutions teach a country that doesn't respect -- he's trying to save trying to save those he is become widely accepted by american citizens the country may not fall apart as it being at the united states may go on for a couple hundred more years but it won't be the same country that we used to cherish and celebrate. its achievements andfo breakthroughs and the declaration of independence saying all men are created equal what is the powerline? >> it's a blog that are bright for. powerline blog.com. we are still stuck with blog in the line for a number of

reasons. it's a pretty big traffic. it's king most publicly visible 20 years ago when one of my co-writers on the site scott johnson at 11:15 at a night said you know these documents dan rather is using to save george w. bush they look fake to me. he was the first person to start to unravel that story in 24 hours. we have had big traffic ever since. scott johnson made the site famous and i asked him to join several years later and i write for it almost everyday. spake you mention higher education in the criticism of higher education. you've been a visiting fellow or a lecture of plenty of universities as an university georgetown university colorado boulder pepperdine university uc berkley. why continue to do that if you

have such concern about higher education? >> it's precisely because of that concern. it's a mistake if conservatives don't compete to be in these institutions. i'mn currently an inmate at uc berkeley. i say it that way because berkeley gets a bad reputation somewhat deserved it such a big place but there's more intellectual diversity at berkeley that a lot of liberal arts colleges. i will pick on oberlin. i do like university life and it's good for people to hang around people who have different views. i enjoy the challenges of setting rounder from the gang the only conservative in the room at a seminar. i attend a lot of workshops at berkeley in the political science department and i don't disagree with what's being done but i will raise my hand because people say they are glad to have

a challenge from the right. so i enjoy that. i have a disposition for it i think. i tend to be a people person. i tend to like everybody who have different views from me. the whole covid year was just a disaster. i didn't teach for a whole year and it did events and conferences but it's night quite fully back to normal. life is not what it was before the pandemic and it slowly recovering. that's very discouraging. you talk about a book about stan evans. who are today's conservative thinkers and who are the leading conservative thinkers right now? >> oh gosh i mentioned glenn ellmers in his book the soul of politics is really superb. michael anton a very controversial by the author of of -- is a hugely interesting person who i hope will write

serious than theoretical books. .. of what you say about conservative books is, we do not need new books because a lot of our old books hold up just fine. i think some of the older books from 1980's holdup extremely well. a lot of philosophical books. leo strauss's works -- he has been dead for years now and his books are still on the reading list for conservatives. there is a lot of new thought. the impresario of a new thing called national conservatives of conservatism. those two figures are

challenging the liberal tradition itself. which is kind of knew very different than the liberalism that buckley for example brick works focus on one of those names you brought up one of the older thinkers, the book patriotism is not enough in part about him and walter burns. first, who is harry? like his longtime professor of philosophy. most of his career at claremont men's college and the graduate school. he is known for two things above all. one for a multi- rescuing lincoln but for directing attention to abraham lincoln as a much more serious statesman thinkers that a lot of historians treated him for that this famous book in 1959 call crisis of the house divided. and then come more notoriously perhaps he was the principal author of eric goldwater's speech in 1964. including the famous line extremism in defense of liberty is no wise moderation of the sense of justice is no virtue.

that was a scandalous align very controversy oh. it was scandalous among us political thought philosophers andd fears. it's liberal anti- communism. versus vote for stevenson for example. he is known for those two things and then later on for a lot of his feuds and his former friends but that's with the book is partly about. including walter burns who i knew. he was a colleague at aei. somewhat a handful of people who knew him pretty well. i always regretted their feud which turned a personal. click start over. >> several things. wrote some pretty stinging attacks on a couple ofsc scholas especially wilmore kendall who had died so were not around to

defend themselves. ewalter took some offense that walter dimond was the other attacked. another political scientist for conservatives. walter took some offense to that and came to their defense. and then spun out of control for the personal insults going on very serious arguments back and forth. next both diane generate 10, 2015. what does the conservative movement lives that day? >> we lost a lot. both had a generation or two of students who love them and learned a ton from them. the fact that they died on the same day i think both aged 95 jefferson done the same day in 1826 i think. i've article saying adams and jefferson put their feud behind them in laterfe years. it died down some, i thought there is a book in them. it's also two things about it.

the book is intended to be for laypeople who are not marinated in political philosophy or academia. it's meant to be an introduction to this unusual book that they both represented. alliterative model for it may be a couple of years and might remember. forty years ago there is a terrific book by william baratz who taught philosophy at nyu for long time called the adventurism of intellectuals. it was a memoir partisan review magazine for the 30s into the 70s. have been alliterative magazine of the left rate stayed on the left. people hannah, a whole bunch of other figures now forgotten shorts, the poet. it was a wonderful memoir press trying to emulate that style. tell it as a story the books of patriotism is not enough came out in 2018. define patriotism. >> yes.

so the title refers to the facts tof this one thing they agreed about, patriotism is not simply an attachment to a live because it'sve where you live. especially in the american case. walter burns a laugh book was patriot. he said patriotism does not happen spontaneously. it has to be taught. has to be deliberate. discus affects the callers questions about how we teach american history thesese days. jaffa used to say we need to have informed patriotism. can't really love this country unless you understand it and understand its principles. >> the difference tween patriotism and nationalism? >> good question. i like to say the critics of nationalism bite definitions patriotism they don't like. nationalism has a baggage from the 20th century of course. germany comes to mind, italy and so forth. and an awful lot of historic

feuds like the former yugoslavia's old nationalist. i do think there is a case for your attachment to your nation because of your history and cultural traits. patriotism is really more connected to the political principles of a regime let's put that way. that may be a little hard to understand for the diction distinction between t those two are hard to work out i think. >> hasn't playing out today? >> first you think about brexit which shocked everybody but then the election of donald trump which shocked everybody. [laughter] i think what is going on especially in europe as a rebellion it's a centralization things like the european union. the european union began as an economic cooperative scheme that will make it one more prosperous but grown by degrees into this veryin ambitious and somewhat culturally smothering organization rethink part of the

nationalism it's one thing to have common currency. maybe. [laughter] will see if that survives in the long term, problems with that. but it'ss another thing to try o impose a cultural uniformity. it's the per riot member of the european union. people say bad things about victor or ben, okay. you not know a lot about the merits of those cases. what the european union is really mad about is they said were going to make traditional marriage heterosexual marriage positive law for the european union is threatening the sanctions and all other kinds of things because they are not on board with what most other countries are doing with same-sex marriage and other aspects of identity politics. why can't they just sleep hungry alone? people can leave or go there if they want. >> you mentioned donald trump. what would ronald reagan think of donald trump?

>> i am not sure. that's a hard question i know they met a few times. they had a way of making their tax on the other party with the twinkle in their eye with some wit about them. they also talk about their friends on the other party. there was always a latent generosity to their disagreements with their opposition. trump seemed to have less of that. trump can be very funny but not in the b same way reagan is fun. it's kind of performance art it's easy to miss it i think. so i think reagan might say it might be effective at rallying your own troops. but i'm not sure it was over the

independence you need. i don't think it leaves the other party who lost an election to consent. i think we saw that the democratic party really did not accept trump selection. they just at the something metaphysically wrong about this happening. which was not true with reagan for they did not like reagan they hated being defeated by him but they accepted his presidency. >> wrote in 2017 take donald trump all carts. >> are not original in saying this. i would have love the trump administration without trump. he kept doing lots things i niapproved of. i say al a carte what he was doing things i liked deregulatory certain foreign policy things. i thought that was unexpected and very pleased with it. i did not expect them to be as conservative as he was buried there are some exceptions there. i think trying to sort out the

trade problem with trying it a mess. grew the impulse i think that's a very difficult problem and they may have encountered productive. we'll see about that in the long term. he did change that i will say one thing about china the public opinion polls here and overseas public regard for china has plummeted in the last seven or eight years. i think trump is a large reason for that. the bidenhi administration is continuing at trump's disposition about china for the not going back to business as usual. you had the bush administration or obama or even clinton picnics umc donald trump run again? >> i don't think so. i don't know. but i did not want to see him run the first time but what do i know i've been wrong about so many things. >> if he runs as a get the republican nomination? >> as we are speaking right now, i think democrats are

successfully goading him into maybe making some mistakes. he is lashing out about the fbi raid on mar-a-lago. i understand that. i don't know but it always worked for him in the past. you cannot seem to lay a glove on the guy. sustaining how resilient he is. it could be and i'll say this in his favor it could be he is still for all of his obvious flaws in his age is an issue, he may be the best vehicle for channeling a lot of populist energy in the country right now. >> in-depth on book tv stephen hayward is our guest. about 45 minutes inward taking your phone calls. david's been waiting in omaha, nebraska for dave good morning. you prolific writer not to have

your podcasts can you describe your writing prices during these last two books? >> i think i know it dave you are. okay. so you mention how to become a conservative. how to become a writer. in the fourth grade short story over and it came back the next is 28 pages singlespaced. i clearly have a problem. i actually try to live by the advice of ray bradbury the famous science fiction author is that everyonewh ought to write a thousand words a day break does not necessarily have to be a manuscript can be in diary, letters whatever. i have lived by that for a very long time. when i am writing a book i make a point of sitting down. stan evans he said the hardest thing about journalism is putting up button a chair and start typing. that isai true.

people think the writers a life is romantic it's hard work like anyone else. this all times you don't want to do it i'll check twitter i'll check my e-mail again. my general discipline like to write in the morning when i am freshest. sit down i will write a thousand words and i won't quit until it got a thousand words done for on a good day i'll get more done if it is a book. otherwise i'm working on a post online. i work on article short or long. making notes for lectures and seminars. it is usually in the morning. the afternoons i run out of gas after lunch at my age. practice rare we have aa guest o recognize a color. dave hung out. but a friend of yours perhaps? >> i've never met him he is a loyal reader i hear from him a lot i know he is in omaha. >> hammer those you have on

powerline that's not unusual for one of her items we try to do six to eight hours a day. have a couple of guest writers too. it is not unusual to get three or 400 comments on each item. depends on the topic if it is a hot topic sometimes it will be more. >> long island, new york is next, this is john good morning. >> is not unusual. >> john, you got to turn down your a television and just talko your phone. go ahead year old stephen hayward. talks i'll tell you what, will it john work his phone line. we go to dan in brooklyn, new york for the best way to have this conversation just because we're a little delayed me go over the air is determined on your television. dan go ahead. >> hi. i like to give the historical background to my question if i .ay i came to uc barkley in 64 to

study. but i walked right into the crisis which is a matter of providing that university students adulthood status instead of the chancellor being. ended up with a victory for this notion which was 5000, 2000 student body of 27000 for the next semester the left which had been the originator of this whole thing there is a another referendum for the fsu which is the free student union. now the little central committee could rule student activities. we struggled to beat that withth reasoning. with steps in all of this. they were defeated 21002 their

same 5000 as before. clearly there is a great issue of the uninvolved students. i thought very hard to understand why. when i looked into it by stepping out ofy my area and looking especially the history process you learn history is a very important subject. it's a very malign subject. i saw american professors of history they don't see it as a science. they excuse the term and on said cycle a factual and tremendously ego importance twisting of facts, leaving out of facts and massaging as a result i see the next year struggle has

completely died. now the graduate students are alls professors. they're doing exactly the same thing the professors were during the cold or revisionists are still back there but with a third. i wonder what is this holding pattern maybe they felt no one reads them or something for they feel the right to lie, deceive and misrepresent their material. and as a conservative i have to say the conservatives are as bad as the, liberals. it's really a lack of respect for historian. i really would like too know why x gotno the question. there's a lot there for the stupor asked your question in my mind. on the history business i recommend to you and viewers, look into this controversy raising the last 10 days of the

american historical association for the president, james sweet who is a historian at wisconsin, historic and african history and the slave trade and a liberal. he wrote what afflicts the history perfection academically these days is what he calls presentism. i might call historicism. we interpret the past strictly through our current political biases. he thanks that is a mistake reese absolute right about that. the blow back against it was ferocious. and had to apologize to them 48 hours for the harm he caused especially to scholars of color. this is a very familiar apology cycle we have seen now. i think the biggest problem is history has not always been that way. about academic history i could go on a long time about this, one of the things that's odd to me there is a huge hunger in the reading public for biographies. of grants, hamilton and so

forth. they are almost always written by non- academic writers. he almost never see a biography like that from an academic is to read anymore. two exceptions recently of frederick douglass. you go back 75 years, academic historians were people like/ginger at harvard. by late my agent reagan was meant to be a play on age of roosevelt. wonderful books reading wise. he was a great pro stylus make good strong arguments but he had a liberal bias and that's cypress trying to return the favor. that is a very big problem for this speech question you started out with the free speech movement fs and use the old abbreviation from 64 stillwell remembered from barkley. the irony is this. i think you said it, the students they said we want to

grow up we want to have responsibility now. we do not want administrators coddling us. downton ministries that was set atrs barkley. today when we hear about on campuses? hate speech and bias instant response teams. every fall until covid came along,ge is to get asked to be n aon panel for parents homecoming weekend. it's often people graduated four years ago in 50 years ago. some of them come and look they have not left barkley they've got the ponytail, beard, tie-dyed they all said the same thing. what iss the matter was students today? we were for free speech and we meant it. now free speech is dying onn campus. that is something that is true for the second part about how the free speech movement at barkley has metastasize there and elsewhere for more radicalism, that's also true a longer story.

and so it won him the free speech movement is still a great milestone for the principle of free speech. the university was trying to control political speech too much. then blundered every step of that episode. it's a fascinating story on the same thing in the roots of the campus conformism you see today that also grow the bad side of all about. >> in barkley in california for a second business from art via text. given you are a california native, now at barkley what is your view of the current state of one-party governments in california and the reason? and is there potential for reform how would that be accomplished? text him to go in reverse order. the hispanic vote naturally and in california is been shifting to the right. there's a lot of data on this a lot of people writing aboutu this.

until bill clinton inflicted a 92 and is become never been close to flipping back. the economic base completely changed. the cold war and it had a lot to do with it. california i grew up in was big into aerospace. all of the moon rockets are built of the space shuttle was built there. roosevelt shrank that left the statement will replace it with silicon valley which for some reason was very liberal in the entertainment industry always been very liberal. a lot of republican voters have moved to texas. they moved to idaho they moved everywhere else. and as i say the hispanic vote and the asian vote are also trending in the blue republican direction whole bunch of reasons. i don't see democratic control

overthrown anytime soon. but i do think, i've set a lot of controversial things here and i do not shy away from them. i think you be less controversy over state when you have sustained one-party rule that is just bad when you have any political competition. you start getting some corruption i think. and we are going to see. california is losing a population for the first time in history as a state of 18 to 50. and that is just astounding. how could a state with all these assets be losing population? there is something clearly wrong with this picture. next to our conversation in-depth conversation with stephen hayward talking about his books. two of the largest of those books by age of reagan two-volume work one for the 1960s in the 1980s in his election.

118 pension want to come back to the agent reagan. the entertainment industry has always been very liberal. take me through ronald reagan navigating the entertainment industry and what he took from that. >> i may have overstated that a littlele bit. but at least in the 40s, 50s, 60s with directors like john ford, afro-american you could say. now you asked me earlier how reagan became a conservative. what i skipped over the late 40s when his head of the screen actors guild. it was always sought comments influence of hollywood was a comic misadventure. not really true. we later got some documentation the k bg spent some real money trying to infiltrate hollywood. they believe the propaganda value of entertainment. reagan saw all of this.

in fact he carried a gun for a while there been threats on & up to this. he was threatened a few times be to to some of these meetings and realize some of these front groups really were communist front groups. a lot of the so-called hollywood they were dupes i suppose. fast forward to the 1980s, george scholz says shoot reagan, reagan by the way sort of ignored the briefing book in his talking points with first summit in camp david. secretary scholz said to him there are some people in the state department and national securityt council i dealt communist and hollywood i know what they're like. traditional person had heat

meant it. that whole average influence didn't partly because it reagan and some forgotten figures special guy name roy brewer. they worked hard to seal off that threat to the industry. but then it reagan and later years would like to talk but i miss the old hollywood movies there pro- american, one of my favorite reagan line start how quick he was he was on johnny carson. the nation johnny carson 1972. carson said after you leave the governor's office you might go back into making movies. reagan just like that said oh no i'm much too old to take off all of my close. [there he was as good at that sort of thing very. >> you you talk about reagan ratings and briefing notes. you talk in the book about his writing process as a prolific writer. why did have such an affinity

towards winston churchill and quoting winston churchill? >> or my whole books was about how alike they were in some important way. otherwise so different. here is how that came about. compile the usages and it's a canadian writer. quote churchill. bill clinton did, almost all the presidents have. turns out reagan quoted a reference churchill more often than previous presidents put together. he is not some of the famous familiar quotes with churchill or churchill's jokes substantive way, sometimes obscure quote.

three important things at the cold war especially. what separated reagan from other conservatives was the thought the cold war just not have to go on forever. not because by itself it is a bad thing but the soviet union itself was unnatural. everyone else of the soviet union, kissinger, nixon, liberals they off of the soviet unions here to stay but got to figure a way to get along with them. old-fashioned tear needle have to be thrown off or will have to will collapse. one of the many times generate 1981 in his first inauguration speech where they have to say?

>> whom i sell the proms confronting us the answer is unequivocally an emphatic yes did not take the oath of just taken with the intention of a presiding over the t dissolution world strongest economy? >> ieven that moment? >> i was there for that registrant to go to work for stan evans. being from california and grown up with. the original church "what happened anyway. but that is a whole separate story. it reagan you select a quote churchill. he and churchill had parallel thoughts about nuclear weapons. church on the late 40s or the early 50s said, the united states in the west have a

monopoly on nuclear weapons then did not use or to conquer the world is there any doubt of the russians had a monopoly on nuclear weapons their views and the conquest? reagan said exactly the same thing in the mid- 1960s. most fah robert kennedy, whom he clobbered. you can see their thought patterns ran alike. john: we started this tangent on churchill by talking about reagan's writing style. it is one of the things you get into, the similarities between the men. >> one of the similarities between two men, writing the separation the features by moment, like that with the big well explain the parallels. >> yes well, just in the speechmaking, first of all the roadies same speeches the reagan wrote more of a speeches than people think but a speech writers was i was easier to reform because a we would see wt he was said before me updated it. >> bet you would think a lot of changes.

>> but above all, they both practiced their speeches and sometimes i don't know if they were in front of your were they always went to a speech having reverse that the right of the dragon took some of that from show business ventures oh, came to that while enough because one day is a very young mp, going to say around 1903, or something. he rose monday the house of commons he cannot finish his speech agency step number since anyone came in with notes on for my six cards like reagan used later and he rehearsed his speeches anyways wanted to be prepared and i have to say that i'm very critical of speechmaking by politicians printed it is one thing not a great speaker meghan have all those great voice and acting background. but is 11 politicians who obviously have not really work very hard in the speech or not practices think of it poorly read and due to many of them have washington considerable always excepted limitation to speak to the national association of realtors invention or something was

speeches are pretty bland. >> is that america's greatest peacemaker right now. >> right now, that is hard to say i think in the ordinary sense obama was a good speech maker neat had obviously natural talent at it and i don't know, is not prized the way that it used to be, nixon who was nothing good at it but he worked out into a speeches usually had some effect. >> look on regular and churchill, the title is greatness in the making of the extraordinary and what makes somebody politically great. >> yes so, where my hobbyhorse is about academic conventions these days it. i think they were both statesmen in the sense of that world and that was a term was pretty much disappeared from academic literature recently's in the 1930s you can read an article history political signs talked

about statesmen andta statesmanship about modern would say that there's no objective definition of that. but that is a newew and i think that it was tom's read the famous republican speaker of the house in the 1900 who said, statesmen is just a popular lapolitician safely dead end toe sure that a person passions will often say, ifre you are liberal, you wouldn't call regular statesmen like him and say okay, but i think that when you drill down into his basement is somebody who combines two things, one is that some key principles about how i think the world of the worker what is the most important issues other think about them. and then combined with has a putting the profound grasp of the circumstance another words, a man it is possible here's the world as it is, how am i going to maneuver that world and so that's why that lincoln is such a great case study, and also churchill had also think it reagan. i got a lot about reagan's terms

and i can go on forever but the last thing that i will say is that great a moment in list builder interest over the movie about lincoln which i thank you so a great movie and as lincoln is with i think thaddeus stevens the character played by tommy lee jones. any said and paraphrasing, senator stephen, you are like the northstar and i'm just going to go straight at it in order people thing about politics, that is your goal is socialism or whatever, i lincoln said, not taking into account,to the shalw reef and slumps and things that you have to get around and get through that will require you to think. i think the people that we looked at exalted moniker statesmen are people who understand that it can actually do it. >> this is john el paso texas, you are on with steven hayward.

>> yes, i am concerned that my serve in the military and joined inin 1964. at that time, it was a requirement to be were to serve your country and we don't have the requirement anymore. field draft is gone and nothing has replaceds it. we have politicians who seem to be serving and campaign contributors insteadto of electoral plumbing the popular vote. because the winner takes all of the state electors when they run for president and so the ones who do not get the majority vote really does not count so why don't so my question is, what you think we can do to actually make somebody become a member of the united states other than paying taxes, because it seems to be the only thing that you have to do to be a citizen of the united states.

>> oh boy, walking i asked him before he is on phones, and comment on what you think would be okay requirement. >> are you with us to be a connie siller. >> yes, what you think would be a good requirement, military service against pinnacle i believe that we should have national service and does not have to be military, he could be social services and you could be an engineer hoping to build leveesin or solving water crises and drought stricken states or some form of service to the country because iec know, just seems to be that everybody is just out for o themselves, for their states for the parties and nothing back towards building a love ofe the country to support for the country way that we used to have the draft. >> even the golf. >> at least two really interesting parts to you, and your question.

the idea national service periodically resurfaces had there's a lot in the abstract. i think ine practice, it woulde very difficult for this country to do because of our size of our diversity. rightly understood, and now mixing well it would be hard to manage. i thank you so going to surface again because at the back of it is at the heart of the second part of the requested which is what makes us citizens beyond just a simple legal satisfying legal performance of pain taxes living here and registering to vote so national service would depend on that i think that real meaningful citizenship also inends on what we have common. so one of the things above is me today a lot of people is that we are emphasizing our differences all of the time and is about people say about identity politics, that your identity is primarily determined by your

skin color, gender orientation and so forth. then we start thinking of other americans as alien from each other command is hard have an idea of common citizenship and now they national service myself out by the way military service which not everybody but a huge participation the military in world war ii and afterwards, was not quite a rite of passage for all markets but certainly for a lot of now is down to what 2 percent republican or something, join the military. any ideas national service to get people together with military service used to get people together from different backgrounds and that was good, the old-fashioned idea of the market melting pot having a practice today would you get is all of the special interests saying, you have to join the army but join our environmental lobby or join rifle and pistol club theub nra sets up. i'm a very good at the self

organizing our special interests and i have a hard time seeing how you would avoid that if you say this avoid that by having the government divided one-size-fits-all like miracle resorted voluntary under clinton i don't think it would work very well. i could be wrong, god of hope that i'm wrong if he actually try it someday, what would work. >> i hesitate, he often hear people say this, first on the street will say you know, the country comes together and national crisis like depression or world war ii and i think that we would need to cross is to draw the country back together. that because lots of bad things happen. and with covid-19, and why didn't draw the country together. >> well yes, i mean, yes and no, serious illness but the response i think the mistake me there was

a lot of mistakes made their we will be studying this for years and arguing about it for years with think that you saw a centralization of policymaking. so much uncertainty so much we did not know early on we should been more open to letting local states and health officials experiment with different strategies. the banana so, they started to call him death sentence and it turns out statistically i think this is great to come about their express with covid-19 was no better than anybody else in terms of all of these interventions intervention did not seem to have a lot of effect. people argue about the mass rather but i'm tired of it all but i think that making one person, the oracle for everything, think that he was overexposed is on tv every night of the networks andth i think tt

was probably a mistake we should bad more plurality of voices winged improvised their way through it. >> a certain kind of prices that might bring us together. >> will see, please was on threat to the regime, world war ii was, we were attacked 911, boy, was a shocking event and you know, the first of years, president bush enjoyed 80 percent approval ratings that was the country running runat te commander-in-chief because he certainly got 80 percent of the most rights and he had a lot of cooperation from you earning that all dissipated because will that is a long unfortunate story. so probably u has to be people perceive as a threat to the survival themselves in the country. >> is about getting back to. >> you hate that way but when

something like that happens, people put aside aen lot of ther passions isi think. we can come back to god later and i don't know that we can get back to that inspiration later we may be willing to be this pessimistic that we may be on bbb under beyond the point of a point of beyond return. >> are we more divided than we've ever been since the civil war. >> we are other differences that something graphic or geographic assignment think about that you have ayo civil war whether unifm troops and blowing gray but i couldn't see somee scenarios where the generally six event may be the fire bell. that is one way that it might happen i thought of some pretty crazy scenarios where it might the ring on keeping those myself. >> you runabout january 6th in

the city journal. >> yes. >> republican party nest was on jaary 7, 2020 went on the republican party is just experienced its worst day since the assassination of abraham lincoln, releases the signation of richard nixon and even if lincoln were alive today and agreed with the president trump's claim, the present zero election was right with fraud, he would not count volvo uprising. >> and from therefr go on i do a little part of lincoln's first speech of 1838. >> an awful been aroundli a lite bit, one reason is that was such a disaster think for republicans is remember before the election, washington dc and a lot of other cities board another downtown. but what was the worry there it was that trump was going to win there would be riots from people on the left and trump did it when it took down the cities unbolted themselves, they

realize the people thought the threat of violence and unrest and destruction was going to come from. so then suddenly a generally six, he comes from the right or at least from trump's populist supporters no spectrum of people involved that whole mess and so that muddied theth waters did ad as a shocking a lot of people in washington not just because it was so unprecedentedly, but you heard what i heard secondhand, from reliable sources that aso t of people in the federal bureaucracy said number not sure we can trust our own police force. that's confusing to me had some capitol police opening doors letting people in and on the other corner of the building, there was violence as the police officers and soo when a mask but really shook up people. more than just the shock value that i happened. >> genuine sense of 2022 from the new york post, this was wrote history among the rest of this jim right at the capitol

year ago reveals not only the hypocrisy of the left, but also its deep insecurity and ideological hollowness was psychologist call projection of absence from eating to others what is going on in your own mind. h >> yes, have an article that adopted and ith have not publisd yet, and i think a lot of it you see w today, from democrats has very long roots. stephen douglas is one of the favorite is excellent and was you black republicans, the black republican party and i was just a straightforward appeal to racial bigotry which was very widespread the country the time and maybe people in the north wasre opposed to slavery but tht didn't want any free slaves never did so now, maalox is a perfect mega republicans, that is a phrase president biden is using, thinking you can try to parallel between a there's some others.

i forget what some of them are but i think you can see deep russo, a favorite cliché in the liberal writers in a proactive is our democracy, our democracy is under threat edge of that i've uses our democracy trademark stephen douglas and other leading democrats anything 50s in civil war, said they refer to the democratic party did as though democracy for the federal implication was that the democracy was the sole proprietary thing of the democratic party and so the talk these days that if you're for traffic, you just grievedi the democrats or liberals on very election or whatever, it is a threat to democracy and say this to me has a very distinct voice often the democrat party in the 1850s a noticeably strong thing to say. but there's a third thing that i'll mentionth which is the iroy

is nobody seems to suggest things like the 16th 19 projects and founders did not believe in equality and that declarationn of - they 750 years ago and that we seem to know that but the talking points of the left uses today,t the talkg points of thee confederacy in 1960. >> that was a big mess. >> comments in tucson arizona, your next stephen hamer this plan and definitely not. [inaudible]. >> thomas, are you with us. >> yes hi mr. hayward, i went to school at southern illinois university, there was this preaching is a big i there who decided the dome and the geodesic dome uses 16 of building materials one third of the energy to heat and cool. and i think will what a great

time for this idea to come to fruition and howdy think this could be best presented at the world greatest public speaker myself but this idea should be acted upon the think. >> yes, i was a teenager fan boy of his w you know, i forget the exact biography but we he was out interest in futurist is always thomas well i made one in high school with a couple of friends of mine who endured and it actually took all summer because we were ordering because we actually bought aluminum pipe being our parents did we had measure things out lengths and put them together as we made one. so i'm right with you about heather needed concept of the problem is that there is dome and pressing a few houses made in this form but i think there are some design features, kind

of but i don't think the people find them very aesthetically rewarding if you have it widespread pretty on the energy efficiency come i know i used to do a lot of work in energy policy, is measure used electronic you upto a little bit hey we have now got watson was an energy-efficient design features the ring rolled out all of the world. so i think the superiority of the dome that i had 50 years ago, as opposed to conventional building materials then, as much and much less so than. >> energy efficiency and climate change. >> your thoughts. >> oh dear from another hour right and so i think all lukewarm or which is not allowed, the claimant pieces as well as call. them and them and normally moody have to be all in the end of the world was coming we have to head over khakis to al gore, right away and that skeptics a no-no from him to say that this is all natural there's nothing happening here lukewarm or says, i think maybe the

preeminent lukewarm is ridley from his written a lot about this but we thank you so the world is warming, human activity has nothing to do with it, not survive hundred don't know how much more it will warm and the reason to think that the extreme views our way overestimated but and that too is a policy analyst which i also did have the day that i lived in washington wr to analyze policy with uncertainty and risk and certainly come long-term change has some wet sometimes they call a fat tailed rest, small probability of inconsequential threaten you have to it seriously so i just look at what would've been try to do and climate policy the lat 20 or 30 years and so my proposition on this and that allsop is the more serious that think climate change might be in the future, the more you should

be frustrated and with the environmental claimant movement has try to be in the fetus lost 30 years because they want to make carbon voice visit they want to stifle not a special because i understand what you want to phase out coal because it is very emissions. and so it subsidies, it is a lot of happy talk about how we can going completely carbon free in ten years. which for a while, hydrogen was the new thing pretty we do hydrogen in ten years than he later did a 180 on that as we get a lot of frivolous stuff because nobody's really calculating giving effect that actually i think that i was of the first person to dig up read we don't talk about net zero by 2050. we used to, 15 or 20 years ago talk about 80 percent reduction on carbon emissions by the year 2050. they figured out once what that meant going through the energy consumption.

biggest actuary energy possible fuel energy of 1910, when we had hundred billing people no cars and some wonderful have to show me our country roughly with about i think it is 5 billion british units of energy down from a peak of six and i think that's right hand 70s going to have show me how you going to get there with nonfossil fuel sources like wind and fuel and it does not very well. >> in maryland, this is eric, you are next with steven hayward good morning. >> there was an idea known a as fusionism which arose from national authors with unified rotarians and conservatives in the coalition, was in some sense into fusionism is a libertarian i view it is largely devastating conservatives as much more than libertarians would like to hear your thoughts on how the social conservative displace the

fusionist coalition within the republican party and leave the reagan area with you probably started in 84. >> very well put and yes, the fusionism to say a little bit more about the definition of it was trying to bridge the real theoretical and practical difference betweennc libertarias and while maximizing individual freedom and traditionaled conservatives and worryrv about tradition. cultural things, like the family isth a fourth. as social conservatives in the new right come along and there in line with the traditional therapy starting point to things like pornography and erosion of morals and so forth an abortion needless to say. so fusionism used to try and one

of sam evans points was he hated attorneys and fusionism in pleasanton trying to pretty get into things don't go together that are a natural match and he said, you cannot have lebron see any thought liberty rested on some traditions. in the moralal understanding wht human beings are in that respect, frederick hi much the same so there were always these clashes an example is a portion of most of us know her pro choice traditional conservatives obviously are not. and so that splits when you have it but i do think that you want to say this in this social conservatives quiteso aside from the consequences, a lot of them were for the democrats who switched parties i think what ida b said is the abortion was not that national issue before the early 70's it was issue but

on an state-by-state basis anda lot of spectrum of the views about how it should be handled without loss of you so forth once we nationalized it and sudy became front and center in the . it does not matter what you think about this, once it becomes a national issue with your social servant if, to be very hard to keep that coalition together. >> eric is on the line for marilyn, did you have a follow-upp question. >> never said and appreciated. >> michelle, hornet of florida, good morning. >> good morning. i guess my main question is this. the republican party leadership is very confusing, unlike what happened in watergate, where finally, the leadership change from nixon ande said, enough.

your caught, you have a problem and you gotta go. we leadership that on the one hand and one day like january 6 and 7, were criticized trump may criticize him another behaviors and then will turn right around like kevin mccarthy and go down to mira lago ending nice and it just seems to me, that there is so many things that are such spark that he is not held accountable for in the public forum except for people like liz cheney and to and so, how can we accept a person who republicans except the person who has so much misbehavior most recently

now these classified documents nobody comes up and says, your behavior is wrong and get off the public forum, you get away if you wish but this cannot represent the party. and yet they continue to pander to him constantly. >> that aaron michelle michelle sorry, so michelle, i guess we will mark you down as the undecided so i do know i do mean to say that although your first part about the confusion the republican leadership reminds me of will rogers great comment about the difficulty party, and organize political party i'm a democrat meghan said by republicans and i don'tt think there's any mystery what is going on and thatre is trump haa lot of intimidated pretty because he does have old and the energetic of the party hand i think it is true, that the days

and hours after generally six, there were a lot of senior republicans were saying companies gotta go in the rumors the people thought wilbur going to like we did with nixon, but have the white house and tell them to go now and there are some talking i don't know how serious accept of knowledge russ about and someday maybe we'll find out iil don't know their documents and e-mails and were not. i thank you so a simple, look i think a political statement thank you so true. >> is indisputable, he's the dominant political figure in america like in this last decade and my hunch is that the people who do not like him or think that is a dragon party, may include mitchell, kevin mccarthy, have their fingers crossed and they are hoping he will go away or that it looks like ron desantis is gearing up

to run and my opinion back to opinion, join window, people say johnny can wait but i think their moments in politics when you have to do it and i think his moment of sound if he waits another four or eight years come i think that moment might not present itself again solf that could happen. minutes left butter in-depth program with steven hayward the setting joining us to talk about this various box anyone to join the conversation, if you're these versatile times of (202)748-8200 and for the pacific time zones, a 201 and viewers on the close-up shot as you have been saying over your right shoulder, the real jimmy carter, we been talking a lot about reagan and donald trump, probably are wondering, what you think the real jimmy carter is.

... several reasons. he bugged me. but i've warmed to the guy a little bit. i think it should be said his assent to the presidency in the 76 election was a thing of genius that showed some insight. after johnson and nixon and watergate and all the rest, what the american people really wanted in the president was somebody who talked sunday school. he taught sunday school for real. for real. i meant that metaphorically but there is a serious point there. his campaign was imprudently organized. it is as a post- presidency that is the most interesting in some ways. probably half of the book talking -- i think is the first president who took on significant causes after he left office. the tiny exception of herbert hoover the hoover commission and how it restructured the federal governmentnt. hoover was the perfect person for that a lot of ways.

habitat for humanity,y, workingo eradicate worm disease in the developing world great humanitarian gestures. he also interfered with foreign policy a few times. most spectacularly in the gulf war in 1991. actually on the phone to some leaders in the middle east, arab leaders saying you should not go along with what president bush ison trying to get you to do. the book while bush ministration got of this. can we charge him with the logan act or some these other statutes that are vague and have never really been used? and he is also the move to the left as to since he left office. het wrote a book how israel is n apartheid state. it goes way too far from going to tell that story. i think going back to the 70s, he campaign for office in georgia. the traditional southern race

democrat that's open kind forgotten. there is somebody, i forget who but somebody said he's in mayberryme machiavellian. his religious faith, he was a pretty tough guy. you called on the overlook to meddler. >> yes. >> hundred heat metal during ronald reagan? >> wrote that book 15 years ago now i kind forgotten the details of that. also he was saying or communicating with people why reagan should be resisted. most ex-president stay out of the scene. talk to people but he seems little more active than that. it is not just the presidential library, salmon copied by other people too. was an an activist organization he was on human rights, that's fine of course. the different kind of exit president but he is now thehe monolithic ex-president. >> and michael in broward

county, florida good morning, you are next on in depth. >> caller: yes, good morning. you had mentioned senators in history it looks if we can link up both of these together prime broward county were activist school districts. this use issue of keeping schools open or closing them as a matter of life or death. it is usually for the elderly. my question is ik think i'm gog to be able to give both reagan and trump and out here because based on history. first i want to describe what i heard myself it's on video. senior editor, they are on nvidia i wonder if reagan would have been there too. were trump and desantis, they said they wouldti wish to incree disease in the population by using kids basically as smallpox blankets to spread the disease, because they don't get it. amongst the population to increase herd immunity for they said that word for word that the

dictionary definition of genocide that's going to be a problem for desantis if he runs old men be a problem for trout. now, that is not my question. christie out i don't think what they're doing is bad i don't think these people are evil. therefore following science pushed in 1860s to justify slavery based on what they're calling on the natural order. that is from herbert spencer who founded the education system and came up with this false belief in competition and survival of the fittest. somehow relation works evolution works byvo cooperation. >> host: a lot there. >> guest: there is a lot there. i've been trying to stay out of this covid stuff in great detail. let's restate this part which was i think we learned early on that unlike the spanish

influenza 1918, children are very low risk of serious complications from the disease. i think the number of children who died from covid is in the single digits. and even though the other one is look, think more and more people are coming around. the british in the last couple of weeks and said wele should he embraced a focus protection model which is for elderly. look, governor cuomo and new york sendingo the elderly back n nursing homes had not gotten back in the liver spreading in washington state we could do something to the ritz carlton given an ringed room service. i don't mean literally that. the point is we should have much more focus protection for the people who were were most vulnerable to it. the comorbidities in the elderly part of the camorra more people are coming around to the point of view. and so unfortunately, we were hoping we could get around the natural course of the pandemic like with all the spanish influenza likely seen throughout history.

without herd immunity resulting in critical mass. so the idea were going to have to get the herd immunity at some point. how we get to the vaccine turn out to be oversold, right customer and customer question people thought. i think those guys may end up being vindicated the way the color peninsula harsh but that's that.we are all columbus, ohio this is john clark's hello. my question goes back to reagan. do apologize your talk mark carter. after the great depression introduced regulations for the banks. for economic catastrophe. after words we experience seconded age of economic stability. when reagan came into office had to reenter to the economy.

what role/responsibility do you think he played to the eventual 2008 crisis? >> i actually think not much. one particular part, one of the big d regulations part of that was changing the regulation of the loan association of those crashed in the late '80s, 20 years before the 2008 catastrophe. the legislation that deregulate and change the regulation of the savings and loan that passed in the lame-duck congress in 1980 before reagan took office. that was a bipartisan fiasco which is often the case. now, glass-steagall was the main banking regulation that made beecher separating banking from investment banking. the big banks of the arcata. that was not repealed until bill clinton was president. and i think the role of that in the 2008 financial crisis was

overstated. but b it's one of many elements. i don't think reagan is the bad actor in all ofhe that. one last thing it was the middle of the 80s when you had senator mccain, alan cranston comes under from california come a couple others got caught up in lobbying the regulators to go easy on charles keating savings and loan arizona. alright you can blame that on the regulars are buckling under political pressure. i don't think you can blame reagan for that. that is a commonplace problem unfortunately. >> in arlington, virginia good morning you're on the stephen hayward. >> yes, good morning mr. hayward. it is great to talk to you today. i do think that you are exaggerating on the covid-19. the present was executive at a time we should keep that in mind. mungo's question is the american first movement in the 30s. when nazi -ism was spreading throughout germany, they issued

radios to every citizen. and i do believe our cable media, fox, msnbc and cnn are entertainment channels. what is the impact of their misinformation? why wouldn't we defend the country against all enemies foreign and domestic? why wouldn't we want to do that? thank you i will stay on the line. >> you certainly do want to do that. tone problem is the first part f your question put your finger on it. we disagree on who our enemies are. we all make enemies of the other side to put in simple terms. i went said this about the parallels with the 30s and now is it plays into all of this people comment on this a lot. get to pick the information you like procure on the left to watch msnbc if a you watched you are on the right you watch fox.

we lost the comment information channels which i think had an effect but walter was watched by 70 million americans at night. that was a network news broadcasts gives 25 million that's a great day in the ratings. so even if you think fox is better msnbc is better talk radio is bad, they only reach a small portion of the population. there's lots of competing information channels now. i think fox it's top-rated show think is tucker carlson now. i think it's get five or 6 million on a goodd night. that's a lot of people but it's not 300 million is not 70 million like walter cronkite got. >> you watch much television? >> a try to watch network news broadcast avoids me a news junkie price or watching network news in college but people thought it was kind of weird. in college of northerners. and i stillto do i like to see e cover stories.

might one observation i make about network news it's become kind of a a human interest stor. all three networks and with some of environment rescues a puppy documentary it's always heartwarming is not what you'd see on walter cronkite broadcast. cling to the audience it keeps viewers the today show beginning tonight's news also book junkie with every authoro approved program we asked stephenen hayward's favoriteoo books andin what he's reading now. here's his responses to those favorite books paul johnson in modern times. evolution of man strauss the natuight in history, winston churchill we talked a lotbo today but in adventures for aristotle j.r.r. tolkien's, lord of the rings. in terms of what he's currently reading, hungry a short history,

alexander lee machiavelli, his life and time. which of any of those books you want to talk about? >> oh gosh. i can give you 50 bucks is the problem. i could have given in different titles from churchill and so forth. i will say lord in the rings i don't write deduction. my critics say or do it nevermind. paul johnson's modern times i like because not only because it was a great read it's a salad try to emulate with my reagan books and others. an analytical narrative. a citizen for describe others you tell a story and then you got analysis in it what is it mean? so it's not just the facts of what happened. you can go wrong that we of course i thought had an unerring attachment churchill did the same thing in his history books. we tell t mncs have two or e pages and the significance of what they meant. as i say that the style tried to emulate. c.is abolition of man is

just 70 pages long. itind andse. on s the surface about literatue but it is really a restatement of the natural law traditions stretching back to the greeks and romans. a criticism of what modern times the occult moral relativism i don't really care for that term but that's what is known by its really elegant statement. lord of the rings, i have a half djokovic is the early college or fridge a few churches and libertarians and conservatives and i always say you can tell how someone ended up by finding out they read as a teenager. became a raging libertarians if they read lord of the rings and became russell kirk style traditional conservatives. >> hei read lord of the rings. >> also mention c.s. lewis a fantasy series the chronicles of narnia. white won and not the other that's always the debate.

>> the talk on bogus such more epic it's more homeric. note lewis did something very creative he worked in serious theological and religious teaching into a children season. a more partial to lewises was called a space trilogy he wrote three science fiction books last on that hideous strength its t longest and hardest to get through. i think it stands up to oro's 1984 is one of the great anti- utopian novels in the mid-20th century. c.s. lewis writing a lot about religion. but on this particular program but on this network spoke to one of your heroes, said evans back in 1994. and asked him in an interview how much of his religious beliefs were in his books and in his writings. how much of your religiousel beliefs? we haven't talked much about our inre your books and in your

writing? >> not much at all really. i don't quite know why. although funny you should mention it i am currently noodling on a memoir. my best friend who died and decade ago somewhat mysteriously but that's all we talked about was our religious faith. and politics and a lot of other things. same as kelly clark you can look them up the "new york times". we spent a n lot of time talking about all kinds of issues about religious faith reported sabre and figure out when we getou old and sitting out the backyard with the cigar. i've been trying to use this describing our friendship with aristotle's and true friendship is to people the same soul. i feel very blessed. maybe i can finish the story. and so it may will finish doing this and i'll have a book while

talk a lot about theology and religion. i've never. tried something like this before it's a real struggle for. >> when kelly clark someone you could have his conversations with? >> or courage my previous statement was in the house of commons, we thought so much alike about certain things. the same questions are on our mind frequency to grow up with him? >> know we met in college. we were inseparable after we met. when the phone on time is a lawyer in oregon i was all over the place. we kept close touch. we usedri to write in the 80s before e-mailed everything lisa write each other the end of the year longac letters. eight or 10 singlespaced pages i was summarized without was most important in our lives in the previous year. what we read, or the most important things we read, what we're thinking about what exchanges letters for new year's. who do something like that? i can't believe we did that. we got busy later on and dropped it. anyway, i thought there may be a story here may be a place to

workto out something with privae thoughts but we will see. >> he wrote that letter today, what would be the most important thing in your life in the previous year? >> this is a pretty. it's a year ago yesterday i had cancer surgery very minor cancer. and temp notes found on kidney quite by accident later to be presented as a problem. ever since then i have thought don'tt wait. so i just took my family on an extravagant two month vacation to europe which i've been putting off forever. so don't wait. that is also why i am pursuing -- ino cannot start off on a book and script that a contract and prepped too many things to do. i'm two chapters into this memoir i justme described. i'm not going to wait on that either. make the time for. not just the last year but the last several years it's hard

ordinary things like not getting donald trump in thinking he had any chance of winning that marbling how this is all unfolded who could possibly predicted this? it is increasing socratic ignorance the more things i thought i knew that i don't know. so again have to the older i get the less i know. i cumulate more stuff and read more things but it gets more confusing to sort out the world. don't wait, don't wait. >> about tennis lessons conversation.es colors brings a child to schedule some of them, greg north carolina good morning thanks for waiting. >> what a wonderful conversation this has been. of course i'm very familiar with professor hayward written big fan of tower line. i'm aee big fan of his three whiskey hour, happy hour podcast. and listening to him talk about his books and reagan i am not friends with them but i feel like ike could be a friend with

him. when call was from michelle and question. i just want to get professors hayward's thoughts aboutgh this idea which i discovered in the last three or four years about nixon but we haven't talked much about nixing the center area of expertise. there's a judgment in geoff shepard a retired attorney served under nixon his entire presidency. basically he makes a case that nixon was driven out of office as part of a plot by a series of people took advantage of the situation that happened with the plumbers and the break-ins. nixon had no idea what's going on. and spun it up to the place where nixon could not defend himself there was no republicans to defendig him. and he resigns. if the come out in totality there were criminal acts and criminals should have been prosecuted. but it was not nixon who was a criminal in that situation. i will get off the air and

continue to enjoy the last two minutes of this wonderful program. so whenof you mention jeff sheppard a young lawyer in the white house. you can go back and find it on powerline and did a two-part interview with him. on the washington c-span's "washington journal". on the anniversary of the break-in. >> fascinating guy. look a i will just say this. i have often wondered if watergate would have happened differently if we had to environments. fox news would have been defending him, twitter would've been alive with stuff. it might have gone quicker nixon amendment gone in six months or he might've survived. we cannot know. i think in the fullness of time is going to be a lot of histories written about watergate that are going to come to different conclusions about it, i will just sayre that. >> out of new york, good morning

you're an expert. >> good afternoon john goodoo afternoonon professor hayward harry is doing today? >> were doing good go ahead. >> first off it's great news here about the recovery i'm getting a big thumbs up if they can't see them very happy to hear things are going well with that. >> her health records oh yes right. thank you. >> good, good, my first question what hasn't been talked about comes the reagan presidency is the role howard baker plate as chief of staff after the debacle of don regan and iran-contra when it look c like reagan was really in big trouble pretty special questions about his mental capacity. so i would like for you to lay out how baker was chief of staff toward the end of the reagan administration? i'll hang up on the since your answer thanks a lot for. >> were interesting question for the complete answer would take a while because the whole chief of staff cycle and reagan's presidency is interesting.

you could say this. i think one reason reagan shows howard baker asked howard baker had been retired from the sentiment but was a revered figure and worn had t been the n the watergate hearings and 73 remember. reagan wanted someone who in good relations with thee hill. was well respected, a pillar of washington come in and right the ship. don regan was a terrible chief of staff and treasury secretary would turbo chief of staff he knew that was a mistake. that was the main reason. i'm not quite sure if there's undertone in your question was baker bad influence was thought to be at moderate republican like the first baker james baker. and i think that is not true. think reagan is still very much his own man always. there is this widespread view of reagan's critics and his friends he was staffff driven. turns out becomes entirely wrong. >> how do we know that? >> documents that have come out. people telling stories about certain kinds of meetings,

entries in his diary. you've triangulate a lot of source material to come out and you aalize, can give whole lot of examples may the mostst famous one was a famous star wars speech of late march 1983. just about everybody was against it some strong was charlotte secretary of state scholz and one hen did it anyway with maybe only two people on the staff of that is a good idea. >> with just about three minutes left in our program, a big question on reagan. but one that you come back to a couple of times up in a couple of your books including greatness, including the age of reagan for you right reagan was more successful and rolling back the soviet empire that he wasn't rolling back the domestic government empire chiefly because the latter is the harder problem. explain that. >> another request a shortot amount of time too. >> a funny thing is that conclusion second volume got g

some criticism from reagan enthusiast when it cameea out. and now i'm sitting back with ironic satisfaction a lot of the populist state reagan, totally irrelevant to today but we do not need warmed over reaganism. you hear this a lot from pretty smart people people i know it light, usually younger. the point was, this connects to the big problem that will only just mention of the administrative state, the erosion of the constitutional separation of powers for the entrenchment of a permanent government or permanent bureaucracy and reagan battle that some. i think the lesson they learned while they were therern was this is tougher than he thought to reform aau bureaucracy and get control of it. nixon tried as part of the watergate story. but it's out now things have munched on for a while but look back at hindsight state reaganee could've been bolder could've attacked turner here and they're pretty some people said that hindsight. turns out her own homegrown

problems are tougher dealing with the decrepit soviet union for. >> final 30 seconds or so, so thee question about the perfect conservative. was ronald reagan perfect conservative? >> pretty close as a politician. some of the perfect conservatism as the title of the book he was so manacled his views. blackcurrant just came out conservative web apostle of freedom, we have been talking this past year as stephen hayward of eight books from among them the age of reagan, the fall the old liberal order 1964 -- 1980 for the age of reagan and the conservative -- 1989. patriotism is not enough and then most recently the stan evans book. who wouldn't appreciate your time spending it with us for these past two hours we thank you so much request thank you john this is been a real privilege. in american history tv,

saturdays on c-span2 exploring the people in an instant tell the american story. at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures of history. not ronald reagan's inaugural address university kansas political communications professor robert rowland and 9:30 p.m. on the presidency, look at how herbert hoover and the american relief administration provided aid to 10 million russians including those in the ukraine region suffering from famine from 1921 through 19203. the eight included food, medicine and clothing. hoover institution research fellow and hoover biographer george nash talk about the politics of famine in the future president's reputation as a tyrian which helped him get elected in 19208. exploring the american story. watch american history tv saturdays on can2 and finally a full schedule on your program guide or watch online atime at

c-span.org/history. ♪ book tv every sunday on cspan2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonficon books. at 9:15 p.m. etern in his book hold the line, former washington d.c. metropolitan pic officer michael shares his near-death experience in the right of the u.s. capitol and generally 62021. then at 10:00 p.m. eastern on after h fmer u.s. capitol police chief seaman accounts the immense leading up to 20 right at the capitol. in his book courage is interviewed by luca broadwater. westbrook tv every sunday on cspan2. find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime a booktv.org. ♪ high school students assigned to get your phones insert

recording for your chance to win $100,000 in total cash prizes for the grand prize of $5000. entering cspan2 student cam video documentary conduct resistors competition we are asking students newly elected member of congress. tell us top priority would be and why. the mold with your documentary. deadline for entries is to generate 20th, 2023. t ou website student cam.org. lanka weekend on cspan2 are an intellectual feast. every saturday american history tv documents on sundays and book teammate bris you the latest nonfiction books a