with the addition of social media doesn't more and more countries are actively restricting media and a feeling of distress within me. become apposed to reporter when the people i look up to having thrown in jail, savagely beaten and being killed for doing their job. our country come the future of my state and my future depend on these freedoms written in the first amendment. >> we are a better society there are people out there are asking questions and demanding answers. >> to us all the prize-winning documentaries in this years of student cap there are people out there are asking questions compt student can.org. competition, visit studentcam.org. >> next, a debate between nationalism and globalism and this event from the steamboat institute contains language that

some may find offensive. it is about an hour and 15 minutes. you aoes want to tell little bit about the steamboat institute. i know some of you have never heard of us. we are based in colorado. nationwide a repetition were offering high-quality program. this provides ordinary citizens with direct and personal access to our nation's leaders in journalism, government education, the military and even the intended industry. their 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 and gain a better understanding of policy, individual liberty and the problem -- proper role of government. on monday night, just a few days

our anonymous off campus lipitor at the university of colorado campus in border -- folder with an audience of nearly 1000 people despite the ncaathat it was the men's march madness finals. we were very happy to have a good crowd despite that. lipitor of the campus is to bring reason and respectful debate to college campuses while encouraging the development of critical thinking skills. we believe that critical thinking skills can be developed through diligent effort and practices much like learning to play the piano were learning to swim. it is something you have to make an effort to work at. was held atebate the university of colorado's colorado springs campus on tuesday night. we had another 500 people. tomorrow night we will have one final debate at lafayette

college in eastern pennsylvania. i would like to share with you a quote that was in an article which was a student newspaper at cu, a graduate name, schofield said i am a pretty liberal person i would say and i asked if i myself agreeing with a lot of what nigel was saying. he went on to say that they were and havingell spoken sat through both of those debates, i agree totally and you're in for a real treat tonight. our mission with the campus lipitor is to teach students and all who attend how to use critical thinking skills to engage in debate that is robust but always reasons and respectful. in other words, we want to teach you how to think, not want to think. i like to think the title sponsor of the campus lipitor,

the family foundation for sharing our vision for teaching critical thinking skills and encouraging free speech and debate on college campuses all across america, without their , -- ering vision i would like to think as edge not a center for enterprise and markets. also, the snyder foundation and the static family got been incredibly dishing friendly generous in helping to bring stability of. finally, i would like to think the bipartisan policy center in washington dc, they also stepped something to the bipartisan policy center. now for the reason you are all here this evening. the reason move to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports is just as latest policy decision that has disrupted the traditional -- but it order.

as the conservatives between those in favor free trade and those who want to protect manufacturing jobs. liberalsttracted some who are skeptical on the merits of trade. by the paris debate is a microcosm of a broader dispute and that is nationalism versus globalism. we have invited two of its best representatives, nigel farage and vicente fox. cofounder and long serving leader of the independence party. he was the face of the successful campaign to take the brazen referendum, positioning the referendum as a willow populace with against the political establishment. he has been a member of the european parliament for southeast england since 1999 and

cochairs the europe of freedom and direct democracy were. he has been noticed for his sometimes controversial speeches in the european parliament and his drunken schism of the euro currency. the spectator magazine called the moste -- farage important politician in britain and the successful. he was beaten by donald trump for person of the year. let's give a warm maryland welcome to mr. nigel farage. he was born in mexico city and grew up at ranchos and crystal ball. a land where the only difference between him and his childhood friends were the opportunities he had. the only route -- always rendered from his childhood that one of the harms that can be avoided in a country's poverty.

he later received a top management diploma from harvard business school. in 1964, mr. fox joined the coca-cola company in mexico and started from the bottom driving it delivery truck. he became the president of coca-cola. he served as president of mexico one 2000-2006. 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 and organizations he found it. who is with us this evening are also the parents of four adopted children. let's give a warm welcome to president fox.

[applause] and now i like to introduce our moderator for this evening. marriage is a member of the wall street journal editorial board, specializing in foreign policy and the promotion of free societies. she introduced to the journal's for an pages, host addition which is the foreign policy podcast and is a regular panelist on the journalism as oil report which is a weekly political talk show and for many of you have seen on the fox news channel. mary holds a masters degree in international affairs from john hopkins school of international studies as well as a bachelors degree in government from harvard. put -- please give a warm welcome to mary kessel. [applause] let me just say one last thing

before i turn it over to mary, there will be an opportunity for the audience to ask questions by way of writing your questions on index cards. the index cards have been placed throughout the room and at 6:45 we will have volunteers come around to pick up your questions, they will be given to mary and she will determine which questions she would like to ask our speakers. fill out those cards if you have a burning question that will be picked up at 6:45. mary: is great to be here on campus. i want to thank the university of maryland and the steamboat institute, thank you for the introduction, it is very inspiring to hear the president and his dissent of free speech. the more we get started i should admit my bias, the wall street journal editorial board is a

supporter of free markets and free people and we are not fake news. thee're going to kick off event tonight and by the way, i hope you realize that historic figures sitting in front of you, was the first president to win an election over the pri which was then called the perfect detainer ship. nigel farage, the force behind the exit, many people called brussels perfect dictatorship. so we are going to start this evening with short statements, five minutes, i am timing you, gentlemen. then we will talk about the definitions of nationalism versus globalism. someof the key issues and of the key people that are in the news today. the president fox, the floor is yours, i am timing you. president fox: gracias.

university,is state-of-the-art, to the students and the faculty here who are present. you give us the opportunity to .ome back i can't say how pleasant it is to come back to a university, to come back to the sources of thank you very much for that. concepts that two have driven my life. number one, i am educated. along, when i learned that

shortcut to happiness is doing for others. community, for your doing for urination. that is been my life commitment. that is what i watch for in the corporate world. thisis why we created library outside of the united states. i would complete this concept by on thethe comparison -- andn and listen to listen to being a public later

theirou gain respect , it is whatoves machiavelli would say, you gain respect to exercising power with toughness. that respect you get comes out of fear. that is why they respect you. think it is important -- in this debate. have of whaty that you see here in front of you is american blood. born inather was cincinnati, ohio. 1895,e to mexico back in

part of the family dissipated on the civil war. begin to mexico without a penny in his pocket as an immigrant. he found his american dream. i wanted to mention that because i'm not only part of this nation, i love and respect this nation. i love and respect its citizens. thise and respect compassionate attitude all over the world. i love and respect this nation because of his 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. today, knowledge is present with education, and the last quarter 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 almost 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, that some mention that we should go back to the original state, the nationstate, and forget about what we built? we are to debate about the european union. the most successful lock of -- block of nations right after world war ii.

they have enjoyed the best and highest standards of living today. >> a one minute warning, mr. president. >> more or less? [laughter] incredible incomes. way above even this nation. 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. they got together and decided together to build that region, so powerful and so successful in the world. nobody obliged them, they decided to conform. that is the fiscal block of

nations. >> thank you. mr. farage. [applause] >> thank you. walk in this area so the camera can get you. >> so this is the safe space? >> save space. >> safe space. talking about, good evening, maryland. >> good evening! >> 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 democracy and ruining 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]

i want behave badly rotten universities of country. these narrow zones that 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 technocracy -- 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 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. 2016.n the shocks of

first of course, 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 the united states. to read and hear so much that has been said in our mainstream media since those times -- you would think something dreadful had 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 nationstate. what happened for decades is

people tried to build new false, artificial, supranational structures. and the european union in a sense, the prototype for a new form of government -- the globalists wished to impose on all of us. indeed, 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 your laws, but you could equally sack people that make your laws. like it or don't like it, men and women across this world want an 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. it is the natural, normal human situation. it is the nationstate we pledge our allegiance. it is the nationstates to whom, although reluctantly, pay our taxes. it is the nationstate, to whom if 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 future, there will be governments with the interest of their own countries first, but equally, what it to work with josh wanting it 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 comes in

this 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 come intellectual debate. the world has changed, globalism got a real kick between the legs in 2016, and i will do my best over the next half an hour or so to finish the idea off forever. [applause] >> 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. ok.

for the television audience, it was a minority in the audience. i think you have your work cut out for you, mr. frosh. -- farage. let's start with the principal mr farage espoused. that you can be global trade nationstate. is that true, mr. fox? >> absolutely not. i am for a nationstate of course. mexico is a nationstate. brazil, argentina, germany, britain come united states. no conflict with that. but we have discovered joining more than one -- fine, and by joining five, 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. one of them is this nation. this nation was made with 13 states, and today, has well over 30. they worked together for one nation. for one dream, the dream of the founding fathers. him, pretty soon have a brexit here. the california exit. today we have in barcelona and catalonia. it will divide our nations to we all are patriots.

we all believe in our own dream. that's the way it works. but those who have anything to do with dividing or forgetting about uniting the groups. nafta. extremely --n's has been extremely successful. start with the united states. the united states was lacking competitiveness. it was losing markets around the world. and so, the answer was -- let's bring back those corporations to manufacture here. so, general motors, chrysler, ford motor company, there are manufacturing here in the united states 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 are back to life because they found they can be very competitive and productive by working in canada, mexico, and the united states. >> president fox, 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. >> hang on a second, we can talk about nafta and the wto, and united nations and nato. >> stay on trade. >> we can talk about all these things which are examples of nationstates cooperating together on the world stage. while 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 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 they decide who 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 or nation list future is really a battle of bureaucracy versus democracy. the globalists treat democracy with contempt. just look at what they speak about -- those who voted for

brexit or voted for trump. we are all ignorant neanderthals. >> you didn't vote for trump? >> i wasn't allowed to. i would have. voted early and often. i thought it was a change that was needed. >> this is interesting. we have a nuanced argument here, that none of these associations are equal. president fox, i want to ask you about the world trade organization. china was taken in in 2001, it breaks many roles. 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? first of all, -- >> do we have a mic problem?

do we have one in the back. sir? the audio? >> bueno, bueno. >> can we hear him in the back? yes, no? yes, -- no, he cannot. we will bring the boom mic down. continue, sir. i?where was [applause] you said trump and i don't always agree. that was the point we were making. i am all ears. >> this is the main point. he says 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, let's send the jefferson and our best and bright minds went to europe -- to europe to sell our products. this nation developed an economy by trading. training is a key issue. that he believes in trading. but trump does not. he thinks trading is i win, you lose. to hell withnning, nafta, to hell with china, to hell with everybody else. i want to recall to you not long ago global u.s. corporations came out and they forced us to open. so we had to bring coca-cola instead of bringing our great drinks we have, nectar drinks in mexico. we have to eat hamburgers and hotdogs instead of tacos and tor tas.

so we opened it to united states corporations and they conquered markets everywhere. 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. you cannot compete. and now you 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're going to invade the united states. congress, give me money for the wall. jesus christ. [applause] -- [laughter] fortunately today, the president of mexico told trump we are

going to stop negotiating with you if you don't respect us and don't respect our sobriety, we will not deal with you. that is the same thing that china is saying, russia is saying, that europe is saying. if you want to only win yourself in trading, we're not going to accept your tariffs if you start breaking done what we have built. wto has been striving to be a great institution to coordinate and let nations handle their trading. to avoid abuses from any one single nation. yes, that is what happens. 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 by 40 billion u.s. dollars of going to this nation. 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. >> thank you, mr. president. >> i'm going to come back on that, if i can. [applause] 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. >> isn't trade by its definition fair? 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 no international demand. they crashed 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 it dreadful? particularly the european union who themselves but tariffs on chinese steals 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. to should america off from the rest of the world, economically, it is nonsense. 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 -- clear majorities of the populations now and every single country in the west want to have border controls. and wanting border controls does that mean you're anti-migrant, or antiforeigner, it just means you want people to come in who will speak your language, assimilate in your society, respect your values, be an economic benefit the economy, and obey the law. what on earth is wrong with that? [applause] >> walls don't work. the chinese wall failed in avoiding the manchus and the mongols and what they did, they -- and invading them.

that wonderful, high, 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. that wall.paying for [applause] also, if you paid for it, good for you. >> one second. whoa. moderator privilege. thank you very much. i would just remind both gentlemen, this is a live project. please, let's watch our language. [laughter] president fox? >> i will finish my comment. the way to have border controls is different. 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 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. of course, we mexicans want order and our borders. same as any other nation. but the way to go is not that. the big problem, and the next time you grant me -- it is migration. migration. this nation was built by immigrants. mexico and latin america were built by immigrants. and, against that, building nations with immigrants is the

worst that can happen to the world. we say, those are evil people, those are not welcome nowhere. what is compassion? who thinks you can build a wall so high that the guys are desperate, running away from violence and war, like they end up doing now. they are going to jump any wall. that you could build. it is not the way to go. that is why i compare it with machiavelli. explore the argument about -- [applause] thank you. about competitiveness. i would like you to address the question about britain. britain has high taxes. that areas regulations domestic. not from the european union. >> that depends how you judge it. >> but, the question is, mr. fox has made a compelling argument that competitiveness are the key to wealth, prosperity, making the poor wretch. did you didn't -- did britain

have to leave the european union to make itself competitive? >> the other thing the globalists want as they want conformity. the european single market says everything, it and all those member states must be the same. they want the same rules, regulations on finance. the same environmental rules. ultimately the same taxation. it is not competitive. it is actually, if you think about it, fundamentally anticompetitive. what is happening here is big global politics has been as successful as it has until 2016, aided and abetted by the multinational companies of one of the big wall street banks are we're not living in an age of free market capitalism and competitiveness. we are living in an age of global corporatism. is it it funny that the blessed onlary said to big donors wall street that if she won the election, she was -- wanted america to join a common market,

namely america to join in with the european single markets. no, it is not competitive. it is anticompetitive. it may benefit the rich corporations, who want free movement of labor to get us cheaper, possible people. it does not benefit ordinary middle people in america. britain or anywhere in the west. [applause] >> could britain have made itself more competitive? >> 70% of our laws were not made by us. 70% of our laws were made by the european union. yes, we had a say and that but we could be outvoted. referendumup to the on the previous 50 occasions, the british government had tried to change registration to we have lost on all 50 occasions. is --ly economicly economically is it a liberation, something's matter more than money. you can't put a price on freedom. liberty, democracy, and being

able to run your own country, to be proud about that and be the master of your on destiny. brexit -- i'm delighted. normally you see whatever america does, american music, american food, american fashion, always follow you everything you do a couple years later. in 2016, perhaps for the first time, since the american revolution, you followed something we did. we have brexit. then you had trump. we were your trailblazers. >> ok. we are almost at 7:00. but not quite yet. theseyou for all of questions. many of them are terrific. we will try to get to as many of them as possible. in fact, since we do have so many student questions, let me start actually. president fox, this one is specific to you. does the mexican government approved people from central america to cross the southern mexican border?

>> of course, we have our own regulations for migrating. to your knowledge, mexico sends americansmore central not come into mexico to get to the united states. about half a million people every year. out of that half a million, mexico returns back 400,000. managed to come along and get here. let me tell you that the problem with migration with borders should be discussed on economic terms. -- for what happens instance come at the beginning of nafta, on the mexican side, you would make one dollar and jump walls,w to

then you will be making $10. go for $10would not instead of one dollar? why you don't have a problem between canada and the united states? because it is a 121. that is what europe did. bring the guys who were lagging behind. bring them up to the income of britain and germany. the gap -- that was the situation then peered today, 25 isrs after nafta, the ratio 5-1. this explains why there is so many less people coming from mexico to the united states than the ones going back. has to a fact that nafta accomplish that. let's upgrade mexico to making a solid partner.

let's make mexico a consumer market of 120 million people. that is being accomplished. now mexico is there. we are full employment right now. we have a lead up to 11. huge state-of-the-art manufacturing plant. american companies are there. from all eight come over the world. from japan, europe, korea, from elsewhere. why? we became competitive. we learned our lessons. you have to be competitive to survive in the jungle of the investment. and we did. and the world did. now that the rest of the world and mexico compete -- came -- became competitive, we have to

stop this, we are losing. surplus.ving the now you say mexico took away the jobs. that is an absolute lie. those jobs are lost to technology. those jobs were lost to innovation. ofse jobs were lost because the automobile manufacturing line. they could go to the community college and learn about other things to make it competitive. it will not even be in mexico. way.acturer is a past now it is technology. pretty soon, no more jobs. in five or 10 years. how are we going to do it altogether?

i hope when they get here they will come with bright ideas. don't believe what he posts. you have to innovate. create what we will do when there will be no jobs for anybody. >> thank you mr. president. there was net zero immigration whentegration to mexico the u.s. economy went into decline, just to underline one point of fact. competitivep this argument with another question from the audience. it concerns a british politics theresa may. [laughter] based on the snap elections last summer, how much confidence do you have in theresa may to lead brick in in brexit bringations, and to make

-- britain competitive? are abroad you cannot type down your national leader. but she is hopeless. [laughter] >> here is the problem. nicesa may is a perfectly woman but she is a classic or politician. politics of been her life. there has been nothing commercially outside of it. she does not understand real world. she does not understand the army, or working charity. nothing like that. she is a career politician. she did not vote for brexit. is the biggest political change in our country for a very long time. instruction that says to the government, we want you to turn around the ship of state -- by 180180 degrees degrees. you cannot do that and must you

believe in what you are doing. she does not believe in what she is doing. she would not -- she cannot say she would vote leave because she does not need it. the big moment is march the 28 -- 29th exterior. 29th next year. even though she will have us wrapped up in a load of withompetitive linkages european law and the european economy, despite all of it, i think we will go -- get over the life on march the 29th next year under her leadership. it will not be a victorious stretch. we will limp over the line on crutches. despite theresa may, we are leaving the european union of march 29 next year and we will become, once again, a normal country like you guys in america. where we will make our own laws.

after that she can slide off and retire. [applause] specifically to the students. would you like to live within a wall, within four walls? is that what you want? ? einstein and all of the creators, all the microsoft's, we need to enjoy absolute freedom. there are hundreds of thousands of americans that work outside, that work abroad. we welcome them because of talent, because we like to share with other people. that is natural. it is happening all over the world, this exchange. this is why i strongly believe in globalization. i strongly believe in corporate so much america that is

development and so much wealth to the rest of the world. washington is not the swamp. i am here to read is a washington and i have seen no swamp, except from the white house. [laughter] follow along from a student, do you think a nationalist wave could occur in mexico as a has in the united states and in the united kingdom and anti-globalization reaction? in mexico and latin america is historically different. defenses isces -- what we had a mid-20th century. demagogue, populist leaders.

they come with answers that they can fix everything, that they can get the jobs back to you, that they can move the economy to grow 5%, 10%, more than what is growing. all those promises is what made latin america to lag behind. we set down and we believe the dictator. he told us i will give you a job. don't have health, i will give it to you and build hospitals. promises and promises that never were complied with. we believed them and waited sitting there. i go as far as i want, i go as far as i prepare myself in school. if i use my mind, if i am brilliant. only me. i was visiting -- today, what a message.

go ask your nation of your president and what he will give to you. youyourselves at what are going to do for the nation and the world. this is the thinking of this nation. this new narrative, which by the way, we must be very careful because they never tell us the full truth. what america he wants. he wants in america with a wall, or everybody is supervised to do it he thinks is the right thing. he wants everything to -- everybody to be a christian. he wants everybody to be on his philosophy. is that the dream nation? question, i ask him to tell us where he is taking britain.

>> hold on. , a do or do not think populist like him, will he win the election? part of latin .merica he already has solved the problem of the country. everybody will be rich, everybody will have a job and everyone will do well. he is not going to win because i am working for him not to win. [laughter] a fundamental disconnect going on. it is very well and good. speaking an idealized tones about free movement of people, no walls, no borders and we all -- around the world. we must be compassionate to everybody coming from a poor

country that wants to be in our country. it sounds absolutely lovely that that is what mrs. merkel said. you that want to come, we can cope in germany. when you saw the lines of people coming, there were not many women, there weren't many children, there weren't many elderly. 75% were men under the age of 30. nearly all of them came from countries where they would not even qualified to refugee status. i want to be brought into europe. decent,f them are good, hard-working people. sadly, isis and others have used that opportunity to bring terrorism onto the shores of europe. i say to you, whatever your idealized a view of the world, actually, the growth of radical islamic extremism means that what voters across the west want is for their government to protect them. that is what democracy is all about.

i think too much of our mainstream media and our traditional political class do not understand there is this desire, this will to protect our borders, to make our future safer. i think the people are right and the politicians are wrong. [applause] grown-up?hat isn't that interesting? the idea that we should stop terrorists from coming into our country. brit the first person in ain to recommend we give give -- we should give syrians refugee status. but i am afraid we have lost this debate. >> a civil debate please. is, we finished up. no wonder brexit happen. no wonder trump happened. you have a goal for year between what the politicians want and

what the people want. >> i want to get to as many student questions as possible. if follow-up on that. if your vision is so great, why haven't other european nations voted to leave the union? of italians under 30 photo for the movement. was about toer storm the victory this weekend in hungary. apart from emmanuel macron getting elected in every country in europe, there is now a populist way because we believe in the people, our country and democracy. super nationalism, nationalisms days are numbered. it is healthy, it is the future. [applause] >> president fox. untill save the clapping the end because i want to get to as many student questions as possible. another student question. deal with the issue of

asylum seekers. he brought up a good point. asylum-seekers like germany. i am totally and absolutely for security and safety in the borders. how you can deal with that is, nafta. issuebecame an economic -- senator kennedy, senator , let's say this nation growing at 2.5% a year needs 500 additional labor to import 500,000 a year. a year when you are growing at 2.5%. that in theegulate

initiative that is in congress when the economy is growing you bring as many as you need. this nation took all the women and put them in factories and work shifts so the men could be at war. they invited to million mexicans .o come and work here once the war was over they kicked them in the but and sent them back. that works today. china is developed territory. developed with 3 million families, middle-class today.

they bring people from the interior only that it is needed on the developed areas. they have to have a passport to come in. you can regulate. i know there are others, but i am happy when i help a human being. syriant see one of those boys dying on the mediterranean sea. that we cant mean absorb everybody. people that are looking for a better life. we must regulate and work together. the best answer is that when i exercise with my government. let's go to the roots of the problem. let's solve the problem in their home, in their country and bring up development. that is what nafta did for

mexico, that is why we are not getting that many immigrants coming. we need to put that in central america. panama to develop central america. so that we can have jobs there, we can develop that part and we don't get the migration. i know it is difficult, but it is worse to let people die on the mediterranean sea or die of hunger. something must be done. president fox says. [applause] you.ank we have to deal with the problem at the source. of course the obvious problem of the source in the middle east is syria. another very purchasing question -- in george washington's farewell address he warned against in tingling alliances. there is a globalist viewpoint that goes against this view. eyewash we wish -- i wish we

listened to washington and had not join the european union. >> but don't you need alliances? about nato earlier and the wto. i talked about all the structures we have where we as nationstates can have our friends and neighbors that work -- to come join with with joint problems. that is different than what has happened to the european union and what praxis, hillary and others wanted to do with globalism. it wanted to give away the ability to make the decisions for people we cannot vote for and cannot remove. while we are talking about , one thing poverty trump and i will agree on is the european union has been a disaster for black africa. they put huge tariffs on agricultural goods.

they pillage their fishing waters. what we ought to be doing in terms of thinking about the thanoping world, rather persuading our consciences by given foreign aid, if we want to help the poor countries of the world, those of a terrorist that need to be cut. we need to give the opportunity to trade their way out of poverty. i would like to see an independent britain lead the world in doing this and -- genuinely help poor countries. trading technology might do this. [applause] anotherl follow-up with question. is no deal better than a bad brexit deal. if i say, ok, i have a bad deal for you, do you want it? [laughter] >> how many people are going to say yes?

may as thed theresa head in order to meet real world. >> having even a parliamentary member for a while? >> i spent 20 years working in business. most of it for american countries -- companies. have more experience and virtually everybody that talks about the european initiative. i feel quite strongly about that. [laughter] the point is, when you go into a negotiation, the other side needs to know that if you don't get what you want, you are walking out of there. they are losing their customer. that is our and ago -- -- that is how the negotiations work. they work through fear. p or that the other side is going to walk out of the door. what teresa has effectively done nasty or appalling simplyl is, we won't

accept it. no deal is better than a bad deal. i'm sick to death of us being talked down to buy french bureaucrats recount not talk to or removed. an outbreak in the european union, we should just simply walk. >> it is misleading. and you exchange something you can go back to the times of the hunter gatherer, each one of the correct trial. i do this very well, i am very competitive, i have three daughters. you decide whether you take it or not. so now somebody forces you. it is convenience to both sides. the same thing i say in the case of european union.

created brussels? , germany, france, portugal, spain, all of them, and theated that body building of all the nations. they decided willingly to put where theive fund economy provides 2% of the gross fun that that huge they decided together would be addressed investing in education and portugal, investing in italy, investing in greece and elsewhere. what for? to upgrade them. to bring the level of the rest. when you see this distribution is likee in europe, it

this. when you see in the united states it is from there or higher to hear. they are very compact. one is extremely wealthy and the other is poor. they try to use compassion, they tried to work together. , more andpresented more immigration expanding because there is more -- so farmers cannot produce enough to get their food. they go against civilians and they have to run away from more. solution, but i will take a different approach than building a wall. that is selfishness.

you are not going to be enough capacity to compete for doing anything for yourself. cannot imagine another company, gm and chrysler forced to manufacture and the united states. you will not sell one car out the united states and yet you will tax all cars coming from abroad. carwill be paying for your moreore, 40% more, 50% because the imported car has a tax, and the local car has a huge cost. it is not competitive. tradesimple reasoning to and to win and win. you don't want to play golf just to win. is not fors sport me. it is not for me. we went together by working together. him to question and i

will ask you the second question to follow up. again, from the audience. withoes your experience the pri us -- affected your views? tradeu speak on the reform transitions from the ?re-monopoly to your party this is a question that revolves around the perfect dictatorship that lasted for 71 years. it became -- he became corrupt and allows the manager for the company because it was a monopoly. -- ofs the great democracy. a nation of power. you are going to try to stay there, you come with bad ideas or you will not be welcomed. that is one case that happened in mexico. number two, i came back to

support the men. i am supporting a candidate of it. i know he has that burden on his shoulder of corruption. he is moving out. for the person, not for the ideology. im that by saying, you visit china today, you visit the have dogs, they don't and cats here like republicans and democrats do. government.gmatic they work on technology, experts and trade. >> they are and is -- an authoritarian regime. campsut people in labor and torture them. >> democracy is not delivering. you are not happy what is going on here or in brit

ain. we are happy with happening in mexico. it's the people that work in democracy, they are not delivering. see, very soon, something different being born. some other way we are going to conform government, that we will take decisions and how we will manage our countries. this takes me to a parliamentarian system. you always end up like this, and you don't progress or advance because the only reason politicians restore the order, it is not brings who better ideas, -- not cool brings better ideas, but -- we need a come up with innovation on the political realm. >> i think the globalist cat was

just let out of the bag. we heard president fox's contempt for democracy. i heard him say, he did not even think the brexit result was a fair democratic result. most ofo doubt that them are terribly well educated and rightfully clever and well-funded by multinationals and they think they know better for the ordinary peasants as to how we should live our lives. , a was not just a short-term kick back against that mentality. what we said in 2016, despite terrible threats of economic chaos and plains of black locust that will descend upon our countries, what we said is, we have had enough of being talked down to buy the globalists, we actually wanted democratically cooperate with our neighbors. president fox, you talk about

our referendum and democracy. , for many of us, whether in this room or outside, the vote is the most powerful thing we possess as free human beings. , we showed you in 20 how potent and powerful that can be. i am convinced that 2016 was not -- have us believe a short-term outburst of anger, it will give a political revolution i will go on sweeping through the west over the course of the next few years. [applause] , we are out ofy time. we would like to have another vote to see if we have changed any minds. nationstate obsolete. if you think yes, please raise your hand. think president fox may have

won this one. >> sorry, i do not buy that. truthful. even though president fox and i different -- disagree, neither of us want to abolish the state. the true globalist do. >> thank you for attending. thank you for listening. we hope you enjoy. [applause] >> i would like to bring you up, please. thanks very much. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> while giving a speech on brexit, tony blair renewed his call for a second referendum because he believed u.k. cins