next week, facebook ceo mark zuckerberg will testify before a senate and house committee and data privacy. a joint hearing before the senate judiciary and commerce committee. before the house energy commerce committee. and listen live with the free c-span radio app. last night, former mexican president the cente fox and nigel farage come at a former united kingdom independence party leader debated america's nationalism and globalism. the conversation held at the university of maryland and hosted by the steamboat institute is part of a nationwide tour of college campuses.

>> good evening. welcome to what i hope is the most thought-provoking event you have attended and a very long time. i'm the director of the center for enterprise and markets. it is our pleasure to be the host of the steamboat institute campus liberty tour. on globalism versus nationalism. i served as an initial mc and quickly i will get out of the way so we can listen to our esteemed speakers and our moderators eat. the center focuses and promotes research related to enterprise and markets using an interdisciplinary lens to examine how individuals, organizations, and markets can

flourish. we focus on developing curriculum to help future leaders and influencers develop their identity, and we engage in taking our research and curriculum to apply to know what problems. this is part of our initiative to bring reasoned and respectful discourse to campus. i want to introduce the president who has been supportive of these initiatives. i am going to have him not only welcome our guests to the event, but also spend a few minutes providing us the context of why events such as these are so integral to the campus fabric.

so please join me first and foremost in welcoming and giving a big hand to president wallace sloan. [applause] >> welcome, everyone to this , discussion and debate on nationalism and globalism. let me begin by thanking cindy snyder for her support and bringing together the snyder center with the steamboat institute. the steamboat institute's mission is to inspire american greatness. and because of her bringing us together, we are able to present -- the snyder center is able to present this discussion and debate. i would like to welcome very briefly, because the panelists will be introduced at more length later we have the former , president, vicente fox of mexico.

we have nigel farage, a member of the european parliament, and the moderator is a member of the editorial board of the wall street journal. and she is mary kissel. give them a round of applause, please. [applause] >> i'd like to spend five minutes or less try to reflate -- trying to briefly set the context for this debate. i think it's important i do what what you tell me to do. i think it is significant that the professor, she has all sorts of teaching awards and holds an distinguished chair partnership. she is a naturalized american from india.

here i am standing before you, a latinasian, a latino asian, also came to this country, and i am a proud, naturalized american. i say that because that is what is so special about america. that is what makes this debate so special. it is one of the most fraught times, one of the most polarized times in our country and around the world. this incredible amount of distrust, instability, -- incivility, of people not able to listen respectfully, even though they disagree, without demonizing the other side. there is paralysis. in that context, i think it is important to set the stage before this debate. because just yesterday, 50 years

and one day ago, martin luther king was killed. and he was the one who shared with us that vision, that someday, his children and by extension, our children, will someday be judged not by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. [laughter] i apologize for that fundamental mistake. [laughter] and then, about 35 years afterwards, a young senator gave an electrifying speech in which she said, "there is no white america, no black america, no latino america, and no asian america. there is only united states of america." he became our 44th president. and i would think they were both inspired by the writings of over

100 years ago of frederick douglass. and his statue graces the front of the plaza. some of the words are inscribed in the brick of the plaza. especially his immortal oration "a composite nation," and that , being a multicultural and multiracial nation. what he said, "in this composite nation of ours, under law, there is no high, no low, no white, no black. there is only a common country. common citizenship. and a common destiny." i mention those three quarts because they set the stage. this is a form of nationalism. this is called exceptional american nationalism. it is an enlightened patriotism, and it is a civic nationalism. other countries are defined by a common language, common race,

common geography, but to be an american is a matter of heart. it is a state of mind. it is a commitment to fundamental values that define this country and has drawn millions of immigrants around the world such as me to this country. freedom of expression, free press, freedom of association, the right to worship who you want, equality. it is liberal democracy, a tolerant, accepting democracy, accepting of other people regardless if you disagree. ,there is expectation of civility and trust, rather than incivility and distrust that permeates the country today. and as you well know, the model that -- motto that is ingrained in our coins, e pluribus unum,

unity and diversity, and the challenge that faces us. you as the next generation faces this challenge. how to have unity amidst the rich diversity we have. and so, let me conclude by saying, higher education coming to all of this we do a fantastic , job in this university in training you in knowledge and skills to be productive citizens and get a job. i'm not so sure we have been so successful in training you to become responsible citizens who know how to live rightly in a free society. not just us, but all of american higher education. and so, given the fact that my office has gotten to many , many letters and emails asking this debate be canceled. they were outraged that i as

president would allow this to proceed. i simply feel terrible. i feel we have not done our job. the role of a university is not to make ideas safe for students. it is to educate students to be safe for ideas even ideas they , disagree with. and so, today, my measure of success is not whether any minds are changed by this debate. i think our speakers, who have done us a great job, if minds are enlightened today. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you, president.

that was very inspiring. and at least for me, as a faculty member, very proud to be a part of the university of maryland. i know that i feel the same as many of our faculty and students that at the university of maryland, we do stand for intelligence, reasoned, and respectful of the course -- respectful discourse. i want to introduce jennifer aiken, the director of the steamboat institute and campus liberty tour. and again, a huge thank you, tina, for connecting us together and enabling us to bring this to campus. jennifer is going to have the pleasure to introduce our speakers as well and talk a brief moment about the steamboat institute, and then, we will get this show on the road. thank you. [applause]

jennifer: thank you for that very warm welcome. it is great to be on the maryland campus. i have to tell you, it is an absolute joy working with all of the team at the ed snyder center for enterprise and markets here at the university of maryland. can we have another round of applause? [applause] i would like to thank you, president low, for making me and my husband honorary terps for the evening. we have these very cool pins. very proud to wear these pins on campus. >> unfortunately, the camera is not capturing you. >> do you want me to move earlier? >> if you could just move over. >> here we go. now, we got some good action here.

i just want to tell you a little bit about the steamboat institute. i know some of you have never heard of us. we are based in colorado. in the 10 years since our founding, the steamboat institute has earned a nationwide reputation for offering high-quality programs, which provide ordinary citizens like all of us with direct and personal access to our nation 's leaders in journalism, media, government, education, the military and even the , entertainment industry. through innovative programming and providing direct and personal access to leaders on the national and global stage -- , the steamboat institute inspires ordinary citizens to learn critical thinking skills and to use those skills to gain a better understanding of public policy, individual liberty, and the proper role of government. well on monday night, a few days , ago, we kicked off our inaugural campus liberty tour at the university of colorado campus in boulder with an audience of nearly 1000 people, despite the fact it was the men's ncaa march madness final.

[applause] so we were very happy to have a good crowd despite that. the goal of the campus liberty tour is to bring recent and -- reasoned and respectful debates to college campuses while encouraging critical thinking skills. we believe that critical thinking skills can be developed through diligent effort and practice, much like learning to play the piano or learning to swim. it's something you have to make an effort to work at. our second debate, with president fox and nigel farage, was held at the university of colorado's colorado springs campus on tuesday night, where we had another 500 people. and tomorrow night, we will have one final debate at lafayette college in eastern pennsylvania. but i like to share with you a quote that was in an article in the cu independent, a student newspaper at cu. a student -- actually, a graduate of cu named connor schofield, said, "i am a pretty liberal person, i would say.

and i found myself agreeing with a lot of nigel farage was saying." [applause] jennifer he went on to say they , were both very well spoken. having sat through those debates, i agree totally, and you are in for a real treat tonight. our mission with the campus liberty tour is to teach students and all who attend how to use critical thinking skills to engage in debate that is robust, but always reasoned and respectful. in other words, we want to teach you how to think, not what to think. i would like to thank the title sponsor the michael perino , family foundation, for sharing our vision of teaching critical thinking skills and encouraging free speech and debate on college campuses all across america. without their unwavering vision and support, we would not be able to bring this compelling debate this evening.

and also, very important, i would like to thank that ed snyder center for enterprise and markets, the snyder foundation, and the snyder family for their incredible generosity in helping this evening. finally, i would like to thank the bipartisan policy center in washington, d.c. they stepped up as a supporter and are hosting a breakfast tomorrow for our sponsors and speakers. thank you to the bipartisan policy center. and now the reason you are here this evening. president trump's recent move to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports is just his latest policy decision that has disrupted the traditional political order. support for the decision has but -- split conservatives between those who favor free trade and those who want to protect manufacturing jobs. but it's also attracting some liberals who are increasingly skeptical of the merits of

trade. but the tariff debate is a microcosm of a broader dispute that is currently dominating public policy. and that is nationalism versus globalism. we have invited two of its best representatives, nigel farage and vicente fox, to debate this issue for our liberty tour. nigel farage served from 2001 to 2016. he was the face of the successful campaign to take the u.k. out of the european union and the 2016 brexit referendum, positioning the referendum as a start of a global populist wave against the political establishment.

he has been noted for his sometimes controversial speeches, in european parliament and a strong criticism of the euro currency. spectator magazine has called him the most important british politician of the left decade, and the most successful. he was shortlisted from times magazine person of the year, but was beaten by donald trump. [laughter] warm,er: let's give a maryland welcome to nigel farage. [applause] jennifer: vicente fox was born in mexico city, and was born in a land where the only difference between him and his childhood friends were the opportunities he had. he always remembers from his childhood that one of the harms that can be avoided in a country as poverty. he studied business administration and later received the top management diploma from harvard business

school. joined the. fox coca-cola company in mexico and started from the bottom, driving a delivery truck. through perseverance he became , president of coca-cola for mexico and latin america. he served as president of mexico from 2000 through 2006 and he was the first candidate from an opposition party to be elected president following 71 years of monopoly. mr. fox is actively involved in encouraging leadership and creating opportunities for less fortunate people through central fox, an organization he founded. he and his wife, martha, are also the parents of four adopted children. let's give a warm welcome to president vicente fox. [applause] jennifer: i would like to

introduce our moderator for the evening. mary kissel is a member of the wall street journal editorial board, specializing in foreign policy and the promotion of free societies. she contributes to the journals opinion pages, host the foreign policy podcast, and is a panelist on the journal editorial report, which is a weekly political talk show that i am sure many of you have seen on the fox news channel. mary holds a masters degree in international affairs from the john hopkins international studies, as well as a bachelor's degree in government from harvard. please give a warm welcome to our moderator for the evening, mary kissel. [applause] jennifer: let me say one last before i turn it over. there will be an opportunity for the audience to ask questions i

by way of writing your questions on index cards. the index cards are placed throughout the room, and at 6:45 p.m. will have volunteers come around to pick up your questions and you will begin to marry and mary, and she welill determine which questions she would like to ask our speakers. fill out those index cards if you have a burning question. there will be's picked up at 6:45 p.m.. mary: thank you very much for that kind welcome. [applause] mary: i want to thank the university of maryland and the steamboat institute. for the introduction -- it is very inspiring, particularly to hear president lowe and his defense of free speech. before we get started, i should admit my bias. the wall street journal editorial board is a supporter of free markets and free people. we are not fake news. [laughter] mary: we are going to kick off the event tonight -- i hope you

realize the historic figures sitting in front of you. president fox, jennifer referenced was the first president to win an election over the pri, which was called the perfect dictatorship. and nigel farage, the force behind brexit. which many people call the perfect dictatorship. [laughter] mary: we'll start with short statements from each of our panelists, and then we'll talk about the definitions of nationalism versus globalism, some of the key issues, and the key people in the news today. president fox, the floor is yours. i am timing you. mr. fox: gracias. first, thanks to this great university. state-of-the-art. to the students and the faculty here present.

you give us the opportunity to come back to the university. as cicero what say, how blessed it is to come back to a university -- to come back to the sources of knowledge, and to come back in a way to the fountain of youth. thank you very much for that. i will advance two concepts have driven my life, and they are certainly going to be my sustained ideas through this debate. i am jesuit educated. but i know of happiness is doing

for others, doing for your community, doing for your nation. that has been my life commitment. that is why i worked in the corporate world and then moved to politics, because of that one simple reason. that is why we created this first presidential library outside of the united states, right in the heart of mexico. i would complete this concept by saying the comparison on the position in relation to leading and in relation to being a governmenter or a that you give respect to people through dialogue, through

democratic moves, against what machiavelli would say. respect by exercising power with toughness, with a stick. and that respect comes out of fear. that is why the respect you. think this is part of this important debate. second, to say that half of what you see in front of you come is american-built. my grandfather was born in cincinnati, ohio. he can to mexico back in 1845. war.of the civil and, he came to mexico without a penny in his pocket as an

immigrant. he found his american dream, in this small place where we lived , for five generations. i wanted to mention that because i am not only part of this nation. i love and respect this nation. i love and respect its citizens. i love and respect the compassionate aptitude all over the world. i love and respect this nation because of the leadership throughout the world. that is the united states i know, i have known in the past, and i hope i will be seeing in the future. under this part of ideas, my position in relation to globalization and nationalism is the part from having figures at

hand. globalization, technology, democracy, and freedom allows us all over the world to the best ever peak in development and progress. it is absolutely incredible what has happened in the last 30 years. every single human being has progressed, and many have progressed substantially. today we live much more years than we used to from 40 or 50 years ago. present,owledge is together with education, and the last corner of the world. today middle classes are totally dominant around the world, and income has increased substantially, including in

africa and those nations that used to be called poor. progress has been unlimited. yet, we will have to see in the century, many more surprises. my question is, why should we destroy or disrupt the way we have proven to be successful for newer dangers that some call nationalism, that some call -- conservatism. some say we should go back to the original state, the nation state, and forget about what we have built. we are to debate about the european union. the most successful lock of nations right after world war ii. they have enjoyed the best and highest standards of living

today. mary: a one minute warning, mr. president. mr. fox: more or less? [laughter] mr. fox: everybody has access to full medicare and full health attendance. everybody goes to school or university. everybody enjoys income that is outstanding. that is one successful block of nations. i will and by saying that together they decided to build that region, so powerful and so successful in the world. nobody open lodged them -- them. obliged

they decided to build that nation. mary: thank you. mr. farage. [applause] mary: walk in this area so the camera can get you. mr. farage: so this is the safe space? good evening, maryland. this debate is a victory before it begins. the fact is we are having a proper, open debate. boy, there are going to be differences. president fox thinks the european union is a great success. i think it is a anti-democratic monster that is crushing ruiningy and running -- nationstates and taking away liberty. we have fundamentally different points of views on this issues, but you know something? we will be able to debate those issues in a relatively civilized manner. [laughter]

the development of safe space, these narrow zones some of us are confined to. the idea that because somebody else has a different point of view they are basically intrinsically evil, is not what parliamentary democracy is all about. it is not what our great nations fought two world wars and sacrificed so much for. liberty and democracy is an environment in which we express our heartfelt opinions, but we equally respect the other side to have their views too. and we do our best, through logic and reason, to make them see good, common sense. all of this got worse after 2016. first, there was the brexit vote. treated by the entire global

order -- as some terrible catastrophe. if that wasn't bad enough -- if that doesn't have people choking on their cornflakes. [laughter] when donald j trump did the impossible and became the 45th president of united states. to read and hear so much has been said in the mainstream media since those times -- you would think something dreadful happened to both of our countries. of course, that revolution of 2016 -- something students at the university will be reading about for centuries to come. something happened in 2016, and it was the rebirth of the concept of the nation state. what happened for decades is people tried to build new false,

artificial, super national structures. as the european union in a sense, the prototype for a new form of government -- the globalists wished to impose on all of us. had the blessed hillary won the election in 2016, i reckon you now would be very closer to that european union. and further away from the idea of a democratic system that you could vote for people that make , and could equally laws.eople who make your like it or don't like it, men and women across this world want to buy a massive majority to live in a identifiable unit that is the nation. they want their national flags. they want their national anthems. they want their national soccer teams to win the world cup. that is what people want. is the natural, normal human situation. it is the nationstate we pledge our allegiance.

it is the nationstate to whom we, although reluctantly, pay our taxes. it is the nationstate, to whom things go badly wrong, we are prepared to stand up and defend and fight for. don't be frightened by brexit. don't be frightened by trump. just recognize the world changed in 2016. in the future there will be governments putting the interest of their own countries first, but equally want to work with friends and neighbors across the globe. yes, that does mean we want to control our borders. it does mean we want to be selective about who lives, and comes, and works and settles in our country. in a world with a terrorist

scourge, how can you blame voters who want to do that on their behalf? can we debate these issues of open borders without people simply shouting, racist? which is a substitute of having a proper, intellectual debate. the world has changed, globalism got a real kick between the legs 2016, and i will do my best. [applause] mary: i want to see a show of hands in the audience, is the nationstate obsolete? if you think the answer is yes, raise your hands. for the television audience, it was a definite minority in the audience.

i think you have your work cut out for you, mr. farage. let's start at with the principal mr. farage espoused. that you can be global trade nationstate. is that true, mr. fox? mr. fox: absolutely not. i am for a nationstate, of course. mexico is a nationstate. brazil, argentina, germany, britain, united states. no conflict with that. but we have discovered joining five,han one needs to be so working together, teamwork, as you do in corporations that are successful -- you progress and develop much faster and much higher. no question about nationstate. i don't think it should be questioned -- the great

associations and partnerships we have built together. of them is the station. we got together to work for one nation. for the dream of our founding fathers. if we believe him, pretty soon we might have a california exit, like we have today with barcelona and catalonia exit. we all have a plan, we all are patriots, we believe in our own dream, and that is how we work. but those who don't have anything to do with dividing are forgetting about uniting groups.

nafta has been extremely successful. start with the united states. united states was lacking competitiveness. it was losing markets around the world. and so, the answer was -- let's bring back those corporations and manufacturers here. so, general motors, chrysler, ford motor company, they were manufacturing here and went broke, and you had to pay to rescue them out of bankruptcy. how did they come back to the marketplace? by becoming nafta corporations. that is the only way they can compete with mercedes-benz, nissan, toyota, mazda, and all the rest. and they found they can be very

competitive and productive by working in canada, mexico, and the united states. mary: this is an excellent point. let's go to mr. farage. we'll keep the debate going to quickly so it can ask as many questions as possible. nafta made us competitive. mr. farage: hang on a second, we can talk about nafta and the wto, and united nations and nato. we can talk about all these things, which are examples of nationstates cooperating together on the world stage. while all of those organizations can do with reform, i have no problem with any of them or the concept of countries working together. however, that isn't good enough for the globalists. the real globalists want something much more exciting and far better than that. they did in the european union. you cannot be an independent

democratic nationstate and a member of an organization like the european union. why? because they make the laws you have to obey. their court is supreme to yours, and a disciple is fit and proper to live in your country, not your own people. there is nothing, any government or group of citizens in the european union can do to change european law, because all of that is in the hands of the unelected bureaucrats. actually, this debate of a globalist future or nationalist future is really a battle of bureaucracy versus democracy. the globalists treat democracy with contempt. just look at how they speak about those who voted for brexit or voted for trump. we are all ignorant the end of dolls according to these people.

mary: you didn't vote for trump? mr. farage: i wasn't allowed to. i would have voted early and often. i thought it was a change that was needed. mary: this is interesting because we have a nuanced argument here. president fox, i want to ask you about the world trade organization. china was taken in in 2001, it breaks many rules. no one expected such a large part of the wto would also be a rule breaker. how do you deal with a problem like that? mr. fox: first of all, -- mary: do we have a mic problem? can you hear him in the back? mr. fox: bueno, bueno. can we hear him in the

back? otherwise it will start talking. you will bring the boom mic down. continue, sir. mr. fox: where was i? [laughter] mr. farage: i think you said you and i agree. mr. fox: this is the main point. he argues that trading is good for everybody and we should do it. keeping our nature of being in nationstates, but yet we can trade, like this nation has been trading since the beginning of independence. just remember, when washington became president first, the economic decision he took jefferson and our best and , bright minds went to europe to send our products.

this nation developed the economy by trading. trading is a key issue. but trump does not. he thinks trading is, i win, and you lose. if i am not winning, to help l with nafta and china and everybody else. they forced us to open, so we had to bring coca-cola instead of bringing our great, native drinks in mexico. we have to eat hamburgers and hotdogs instead of tacos and tortas. so united states companies conquered everywhere, and now they are not able to compete because of many different reasons. now you say let's build a wall,

because mexico is taking away our jobs. you have lost the job because of manufacturing. you lost competitiveness. now youot compete, and are saying, force mexico to increase salaries. welcome. i hope we do it as much as possible. but economies don't work by executive orders. finally, this guy invents a story, the bad mexicans are coming now, they have bottles of tequila. they're going to invade the united states. congress, give me money for the wall. jesus christ. [laughter] fortunately today, the president of mexico told trump we are going to stop negotiating with you if you don't respect us and our sovereignty.

that is what, russia, and europe is saying. if you want to only win yourself in trading, we're not going to r accept your tariffs if you start breaking down what we built. wto has been striving to be a great institution to coordinate and let nations handle trading. to avoid abuses from any one single nation. if this nation doesn't want any more nafta, good for you. enjoy it. we have 48 trade agreements with 48 economies around the world, and we already started trading with argentina and brazil to buy our corn. we buy 40 billion u.s. dollars of corn to this nation to farmers. where are they going to sell

their corn now? we are going to get it from argentina and brazil, and everybody is reacting to something that is wrong, to a guy who doesn't understand. which is the economy, which is trading, which is harmony among nations. mary: thank you, mr. president. [applause] mr. farage: the idea that trump is against trade is a complete distortion of the truth. of course trump's for trade, but he wants trade to be fair and reasonable trade. mary: isn't trade by definition fair? mr. farage: i spent 20 years in the business before getting involved in politics. i had a proper job before politics, it is pretty rare these days. i know about the metals industry. what the chinese did is increase the production of steel at a time there was no domestic

demand and national demand. they crushed the price of steel, and my country, major steelworks, the did it not to make money, they did it as a big strategic global play. that was not fair trade. and trump puts tariffs on chinese steel, and everyone screams, isn't that dreadful? particularly the european union, who themselves but tariffs on -- put tariffs on chinese deal last year. but they are the good guys because they are the globalists and trump is the bad guy because he is the nationalist. there is gross hypocrisy here.

whether you like the thought of a wall on the mexican border or not, this big beautiful wall that apparently is going to be built -- it is a symbol of one thing to control borders. i can tell you something, their majorities of the population is now in every small country in the west want to have border controls. and having border controls does it meet your anti-foreigner, it just means you want people to come in who speak your language, assimilate in your society, respect your values, be an economic benefit to the economy, and obey the law. what on earth is wrong with that? [applause] mr. fox: walls don't work. the chinese wall failed in avoiding the manchus and the mongols who wanted to innovate them. this wonderful, beautiful wall at a huge cost, and it didn't work. this beautiful thing that is

going to be built here if congress approves -- if you are willing to pay for the wall. 35 billion u.s. dollars. we are not paying for that fucking wall. [applause] also, if you paid for it, good for you. mary: mr. farage, he is privileged. thank you very much. nigel: i got excited. everyone this is a live broadcast, please watch our language. [laughter] mr. fox: i will finish my comment. the way to have border controls is different. it is not with a stick, it is not with the army, it is not with walls. it is using wisdom and intelligence, like president bush and myself did. like mexican congress and to

wo great senators and congressmen, kennedy and mccain, who presented a deal to congress. that bill has been sitting there since 12 years ago. the answer to migration control -- we want order on our borders. we mexicans want order in our borders, same with any other nation. but the way is not through that, and the big problem, and the next time you grant me -- it is migration. this nation was built by immigrants. mexico and latin america were built by immigrants. there are not many natives left around. and, against that, building nations with immigrants is the worst that could happen to the world. we say those are evil people and are not welcome anywhere. where is the compassion? and who is going to own this

world? and you're going to build a wall that is so high? they are going to jump any wall that you can build. it is not the way to go. that is why i compare loyola to machiavelli. you to would like specific question about britain. britain has very high taxes. britain has regulations that are domestic, not from the european union. mr. farage: that depends on how you judge it. mary: the president fox make a compelling argument that competitiveness is the key to prosperity of the thing the poor and making them rich. the britain have to leave the european union make itself competitive? mr. farage: the other thing globalists want is they want

absolute conformity. they want the same rules and regulations on finance. the same environmental rules. the same taxation. that is not competitive. if you think about it, it is fundamentally anti-competitive. what is happening is big global politics has been as successful as it has, until 2016, aided and abetted in multinational companies and one of the big wall street banks. we are not living in a age of free market capitalism. we are living in an age of global corporatism. isn't it funny that if hillary won the election, she wanted america to join a common market, namely america to join in with the european single market. this is not competitive, it is anti-competitive. it may benefit the rich

corporations who want to run the rules around their own industry, , to get as cheap as possible labor. this does not benefit normal, ordinary people in britain or anywhere in the west. some the of our laws will not made by us. laws were not made by us. we had a say in that, but we could be outvoted. in the run-up to referendum on the previous 50 locations, the british government tried to change legislation and we lost on all 50 occasions. not only economically is brexit a revelation. but some things are worth more than money. you can't put a price on freedom, liberty, democracy, and being able to run your own country and be proud of that and be the master of your own country. i am delighted -- normally, you

see, whatever america does, american music, american food, american fashion. we nearly follow every think you -- everything you do a couple of years later. but in 2016, perhaps for the first time since the american revolution, you followed something we did. we did brexit, and you followed with trump. we were the trailblazers. mary: thank you for all of these questions. many are terrific and will try to get to as many as possible. since we have so many student questions, let me start with president fox. this is specific to you. does the mexican government approved people from central america to cross the southern mexican border? mr. fox: of course, we have our own regulations for migrating. to your knowledge, mexico sends

back many more central americans that come into mexico and they are shooting to get the united states. it is half a million people every year, and mexico returns back 400,000. the rest managed to come here. the problemyou that with migration and borders should be discussed over economic terms. , at thepens is beginning of nafta, on the mexican side, you would learn how to swim because of the river, and you learn to jump walls, and will be making $10, tenfold.

it is an economic problem we have their. why you don't have a problem between canada and united states? because it is one to one. that is what europe did. britain and germany -- and there is no consistency. situation then, and 25 years after nafta, the ratio is 5 to 1. this explains why there is less people coming from mexico to the united states then going back. it is the fact that nafta has accomplished its goals. let's upgrade mexico to make it a solid partner. makes mexico -- let's mexico a consumer market, and that is becoming accomplished.

mexico is there, we are at full employment, just in my region -- 110 million mexicans state of the art manufacturing plants. three american companies are there. the other eight come from all over the world, japan, korea, elsewhere. why? we became competitive. we learned our lesson, you have to be competitive to survive the jungle of economic development. why? and we did it. now the rest of the world and nowco became competitive, he is saying, no, you cannot compete like this. we have to stop this. you are losing. and and you say, mexico took all of the jobs.

that is no absolute by. those jobs were lost to technology. those jobs were lost to innovation. becausebs were lost workers in aluminum and manufacturing didn't have division to go to a committee college and learn about other things that could make them competitive. manufacturing would not be in this nation in the future. it will not even be in mexico. manufacturing is a past life, now it is technology. intty soon, no more jobs five or 10 years. how will we work together? i hope they will come with and not what he imposes.

you have to think freely to , becauseand create there is not going to be enough jobs for nobody. mary: thank you, mr. president. i will say there is net zero immigration to mexico when the u.s. economy went into a decline. just to underline one point of fact. and another question from the audience concerns british politics and the theresa may. nigel: i was joint myself until then. -- i was an joint myself until then. [laughter] mary: how much confidence do you making theresa may britain competitive? nigel: i was taught that you do not talk down your national leader. [laughter]

here is the problem. a nice woman, but she is a career politician. politics has been her life, there is nothing commercially outside of it. she doesn't understand the real or rather business. nothing like that. she is a career politician. she did not vote for brexit, she voted to remain. politicalthe biggest change in our country for a very long time. for good or bad, it is. it's us to the government want you to turn around by 180 degrees. you cannot do that unless you actually believe in what you are doing. she doesn't believe in what she is doing. howh is asked the question, would you but if there is a referendum today, she can't say she would vote leave because she doesn't mean it.

towards the big moment, and the big moment is march 29 of next year. that is when we argue at 11:00 p.m. to leave the treaty. even though after that, she is going to have us wrapped up in a vote of anti-competitive linkages with european law and the european economy, despite all of it -- i think will get over the line on march 29 next year, under her leadership. will not be a victorious charge. we will limp over the line and crutches. despite the reason i come up leaving the european union on march 29 exterior and will become once again, a normal country, like you guys in america. will make our own laws, and it cap come soon enough -- and it can't come soon enough. and after that she can retire. [applause] specifically to the

students come up with you liked to live within four walls? is that what you want? like einsteinng or other creators -- google or microsoft that we need to enjoy absolute freedom. there is hundreds of thousands -- not to say millions of americans that work abroad, and them.come we like to share with other people. that is natural and is happening all over the world. this exchange. this is why i strongly believe in globalization. i strongly believe in corporate world of america that has brought so much development and walked to the rest of the world. this is why i believe in wall street.

i believe washington is not the swap it appears to be. except in the white house. [laughter] president fox, to follow-up on a question from a student, you think a nationalist wave could occur in mexico as it has united states and united kingdom? and anti-globalization reaction. no, the situation mexico and latin america is different. is, we don't want to have what we had in the 20th century. -- they comeers with answers that they can fix anything and get jobs back to you. that they can move the economy to grow 10% more than it is growing. all of those promises is what

made latin america like way behind -- lag behind. we believed in a dictator, he told us, you don't have a job, i will get it for you. he told us you don't have health, i will do it for you adult hospitals. them,es, and we believed and we were sitting there. what a different spirit you see in this nation. i go as far as i want. i go as far as i prepare myself in school, as i use my mind, as i am brilliant. kennedysiting president today in arlington. what a message. don't ask the nation of what your president is going to give to you, ask yourself what are you going to do for your nation and the world.

this is the thinking of this nation. this new narrative, which must be careful, because they never tell us the full truth. i would like to ask mr. trump to tell me, for years after, what is his dream and what america he wants? wall,ts an america with a where everybody is controlled and does what he thinks is the right thing. he wants everyone to be a christian, he wants everyone to be his own philosophy, not democrat or republican. it is not the dream nation you are thinking of. i ask the question, tell us where you are taking us? us where him to tell are you taking britain? mary: hold on. that ado or do not think populist like mr. frosh will

would -- mr. farage will win the election? evil -- heat was the solved the problem of 120 million people. everybody is going to do well. becauset going to win, i am working for him not to win. [laughter] nigel: there is a disconnect going on here. idealized terms of free movement of people with no walls and borders and we traveled around the world and be compassionate to anybody that is coming from a poor country that wants to live in our country. it sounds absolutely lovely, but, that is what mrs. merkel said. she said as many of you want to come, we can cope in germany.

we saw the lines of people coming, there weren't many women, were there? there were many children or elderly, 75% were men under the age of 30. nearly all came from countries where they would not even qualify a refugee status. plenty of them are good and decent and hard-working people. sadly, isis and others have used the opportunity to literally bring terrorism to the shores of europe. i say to you, president fox, whatever your idealized view of the world -- the growth of radical extremism means voters across the rest want is for the government's to protect them. that is what democracy is all about. i think too much of our mainstream media and traditional political class to not understand the desire and well

to protect our borders to make our future safer. i think the people are right and the politicians are wrong. [applause] that interesting? the idea we stop terrorists coming into our country. by the way, i was the first person in britain to recommend we give syrians fiji status. people who genuinely qualified as refugees. but i am afraid we lost this debate. is, we finished up, the wonder exit happened and trump happened. a golf of what the traditional politicians want and what the people want. mary: thank you for these, these are terrific. a follow-up on that, if your vision is so great, why haven't other european nations voted to

leave the union? nigel: 60% of italians voted for the five-star movement. it was about the storm to victory in hungary. apart from macron getting elected in every country in europe, i call it a populist wave. we believe in our countries and democracy. the european union remains outnumbered. people want nationstate control, and that is right, it is healthy, and it is the future. [laughter] [applause] anotheresident fox, student question. how do we deal with the issue of asylum seekers? point,brought up a good some of them are terrorists.

absolutely for order in the borders. security and safety in the borders. some historic examples of how you can deal with that -- one is nafta. issuebecame an economic -- when we presented to thisdent bush to congress, nation growing at 2.5% per year needs 500 additional labor to import 500,000 labor a year, when you go at 2.5%. that is a fact. how do you regulate that? we did in that initiative to congress. when the economy is growing, you open the path and mbring as

many as you need. womenation took all the and put them into factories and work your so the men could be at war. invited to million mexicans to come and work your. here. and then they kick them in the back.d send them that import works today. china has developed territory. the part that is highly developed 300 million families -- middle class today. they built in 25 years. isy bring people only if it needed in developed areas. if it is not needed, they do not let them come and.

still have to have a passport to come and. you can regulate with wisdom and sense. asylum, jesus christ, i know there are others, but i am happy and i hear a human being. i cannot see one of those syrian boys dying in the iranian sea. that doesn't mean that we cannot absorb everybody. it is growing -- the amount of people looking for a better life. we must regulate, but let's work together. the best answer is the when i exercised in my government. let's go to the root of the problem and solve the problem in their home, and their country, and bring up development. that is what nafta did the mexico. that is why we are navigating so many immigrants coming. we need to do that in central america.

crate a plan to develop central america so we can have jobs there so we can develop that part if we don't get migration. i know it is difficult, but it is worse to use a stick and let people die. something must be done. [applause] president fox says we have to deal with the problem at the source. the obvious source of the problem today, at least in the middle east, as syria. another pertinent question from the audience. and george washington's farewell address he warned against entangling alliances. does the globalist viewpoint go against this view? listened toh he washington and joined the european union. mary: do you need alliances to deal with the issue?

nigel: i talked earlier about nato and the world trade organization and all the structures we have where we had nationstates that can cooperate with friends and neighbors to work together to do with joint problems and make those decisions collectively. that is different to what has happened in the european union and what the blessed hillary and others wanted with globalism. they wanted to give away to ability to make decisions for other people who cap both for and can't remove. by the way, when we are talking about dealing with the problems at the source -- one president fox and i will agree on is the european union has been a disaster for black africa. they put huge tariffs on agricultural goods and flowers and the pillage fishing waters. what we ought to be doing in terms of thinking about the developing world, where the den persuading consciousness by giving foreign aid, which very

little and's up in the right place. if we want to help poor countries in the world, they are the tariffs that need to be cut and they need a way to trade. i like to see independent britain becoming -- leading the world in doing this to genuinely help poor countries. foreign aid is not working, but trade and technology might. [applause] mary: i want to follow up with another excellent question, is no deal better than brexit? nigel: when i go to the street and i say, i have a bad deal for you, you want it? have to people are going to say yes. may had a proper job and work in the real world?

i spent 20 years in business hosting working for megan companies, and i have employed people and paid my taxes. i have more experience than virtually everybody talks about this european issue. i feel quite strongly about that. [laughter] is, when you go to a negotiation, the other side needs to note that if you don't get what you want, you are walking out of there. they are losing their customer. that is how negotiations work. they work through fear, fear that the other side is going to walk out of the door. ist the theresa may has done effectively say, however nasty you are to us, however appalling the deal is, we will of course be good brits. no deal is better than a bad deal, i am sick of being talked down to from french

bureaucrats. unless we get an outbreak of common sense from the european union, we should just simply walk. it is misleading. and you exchange something, you can go back to the times of the hunters and gatherers. i do this pretty well, i am competitive, i want to set it at three dollars, and you decide if you want to take it or not. nobody forces you. of trade isvantage that one, it is a convenience to both sides. the same i say in the case of the european union. he talks about brussels, who created muscles that is being called a monster? england, portugal,

createdermany, they all that body of trading of all the nations. they decided 2% of the gross profit. would be addressed in investing in education. investing in greece and elsewhere. we need to upgrade them. bring the level of the rest to try to be the same. you see the distribution of income in europe and it's like this could the distribution of income in the united states is from here to there.

other nations are very compact. they try to use confession, solidarity, they try to work together. more and more migration is expanding. -- farmers cannot food they have to run away from war feared i don't have the solution but i will take a different approach. selfishness will not allow enough capacity to compete doing everything yourself. chrysler, you not

going to see one car outside of the united states. abroad,s all cars from more.y 30%, 40%, 50% tax and local -- domestic cars are more expensive. trade.go to do not just playing to win. win together by working together. question.cond and follow-up on that of the audience. how is your experience with the pri affected your views?

can you speak on the trade reform tradition from the pre-monopoly to your party. this is a question that revolves around the perfect dictatorship that lasted for 71 years and on taking a different approach. corruption,ore before he became a lousy member -- manager of his country. there, you come with your own ideas or you are not going to be welcome. that is one case that happened in mexico. support the men. i know he has a burden on his

shoulder. he is moving out. i always vote for the person, not the ideology. you visit china, there are no more ideologists. they do not fight like dogs and cats like the democrats and republicans. they are a pragmatic government, they welcome technology. vicente: they are and -- authoritarian and regime. vicente: democracy is not delivering. i have just begun to doubt democracy. britain is not happy. no one is happy with the united states. no one is happy with mexico. it is not democracy itself, it is the people who work in the

democracy. they are not delivering. i see something different being born. there has to be some different way to control government and manage our countries. this parliamentary system is much better than a presidential system. you do not progress and you do not advance because the only politicians have for parliament is to destroy each other. that is the way we are living today and that will not work for the future. we need to come up with innovation on the political and democratic arena. mary: thank you president fox. nigel: i think the globalist cat was just let out of the bag.

he did not even think the brexit result was a fair democratic result. this is what the globalist want. i have no doubt that most of them are terribly educated and well-funded and they think they know better than the ordinary peasants as to how we should live our lives. was not just a short-term kickback against that mentality, what we said in 2016, despite terrible threats of economic said is we have had enough of being talked down to. we just want to live democratically in our own nations. we will to get along with our own neighbors. you talk about referendum and us,cracy, for many of actually, the vote is the most

powerful thing we possess as free human beings. in 2016 it, we showed just how potent and powerful that can be and i am convinced was not a short-term outburst of anger. actually, it marked a fundamental political revolution that will sweep over the west over the next few years. vicente: unfortunately -- mary: unfortunately, we are out of time. we would like to have another vote to see if anybody's mind has been changed. is the nationstate obsolete?/ if yes, holger had. -- hold of your hand. vicente: i think president -- mary: i think president fox may have one. -- won.

true globalist actually do. attending, you for the giver listening. we hope you enjoyed it. [applause] much.nk you very thank you mr. president. thank you sir. ♪ inrecent teacher walkouts kentucky and oklahoma.

journal"shington saturday morning. join the discussion. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] they are interviewed by former south carolina senator. >> rarely is the indication that someone does not stop who is not from here and thank him for his service. it is just an experience that is .lso meaningful and significant you will find very quickly that aile he may be branded

partisan at times, the truth of the matter is, his primary edge of -- objective is truth. city thatrd in a wants to win. have builtnk full to a grand -- great friendship with someone who is interested in the truth. >> frankly, it was libelous. i reached the end. we are not going to put up with us anymore. i walked out to his office and just went right past the scheduler. i said we are going to do something about this. you cannot allow people to say this and do nothing about this. he said, you are right and close the door. i thought it was can be good. he said we are going to pray. said, tim i love you but i am

not going to pray. he asked if i would sit there with him while he did. he sat there and he prayed for him by name. there are not very many people who do that. >> watch afterwords. next week, facebook ceo, mark zuckerberg, will testify before house and senate committees. tuesday at 2:00 eastern. wednesday, 10:00 western. c-span3ve coverage on and c-span.org and listen live on the c-span radio app. >>